Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Missing support for most current IRB fields & retrieval of CRPropa2 data tables for ElectronPairProduction #282

Open
MHoerbe opened this issue Apr 18, 2020 · 1 comment
Assignees

Comments

@MHoerbe
Copy link
Contributor

MHoerbe commented Apr 18, 2020

Hi everyone,

for the future custom photon fields to properly work on the ElectronPairProduction module, I need to be able to reproduce the data files being read in by this module. There is supposed to be one background photon file for each background, however, with only the CMB and the IRB_Kneiske04 existing for this module.

A look into the CRPropa3-data repo where there is a script calc_pairproduction.py responsible for generating data related to the ElectronPairProduction module revealed:

# Reformat CRPropa2 tables of differential spectrum of secondary electrons
# This should be reimplemented for extension to the other backgrounds,
# cross-checking and documentation.
# -------------------------------------------------
d1 = np.genfromtxt('tables/EPP/pair_spectrum_cmb.table', unpack=True)
d2 = np.genfromtxt('tables/EPP/pair_spectrum_cmbir.table', unpack=True)

The tables which are loaded to exist in the data repo yet I could not find any script producing these (and in particular not in the CRPropa2 repository). Hence, I see two ways to proceed here:

  1. Does anyone know where these scripts are and how they work?
  2. Does anyone have an idea what exact data these tables contain beyond "spectra of secondary electrons"? Since then we could try and construct our own, new ones?

Cheers,
Mario

@lukasmerten
Copy link
Member

Hi @Froehliche-Kernschmelze
For the moment I can just add to this discussion, that I alos stumbled over these lines a couple of month ago. I mentioned this briefly during the discussion of #255. However, I will help to investigate this.

@lukasmerten lukasmerten self-assigned this Apr 19, 2020
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants