march 2021 issues #24

Closed
opened 2021-03-11 13:46:10 +01:00 by usov_i · 5 comments
usov_i commented 2021-03-11 13:46:10 +01:00 (Migrated from gitlab.psi.ch)

Created by: zaharko

'generic'

  • how to prevent background and peak-function to compensate each other:
    keep 'intercept' within the scanning range, optimal in the middle of the scan,
    default slope value fixed to zero (example Proposal ID 20200144, file 3803.ccl #47)
  • distinguish buttons which activate a mode and which start a calculation:
    'activating mode' could change the box to bold, color to light blue
    'starting calculation' could change color to dark blue

'ccl integration'

  • automatic merge of scans with same angular parameters, but add possibility to unmerge a scan
    when it is 'away' from others should exist (example Proposal ID 20200144, file 3803.ccl #42,190,338, scan 338 should be un-merged)
  • - upload result of integration in safari (is not of 1st priority, but I can pick up a mac for you on Monday)

'param study'

  • plotting fitted parameters as a function of user defined parameter
  • fitted values should be displayed in parameter table, then they can be easily modified and no 'mouse-clicking option' is needed
  • implement 'param study' for hdf files (example Proposal ID 20201759 files from 2536.hdf to 2563.hdf)
  • - when 2 scan motors are present, use the first one by default, but allow user to choose also the 2nd one
  • - in 'overview map' create contiguous 2D maps interpolating between data points (if this easy and fast to do)

'spind'

  • something is wrong with calculation, can pyzebra give more output during the calculation?
  • UB matrix cannot be copied from the table
*Created by: zaharko* 'generic' - [x] how to prevent background and peak-function to compensate each other: keep 'intercept' within the scanning range, optimal in the middle of the scan, default slope value fixed to zero (example Proposal ID 20200144, file 3803.ccl #47) - [x] distinguish buttons which activate a mode and which start a calculation: 'activating mode' could change the box to bold, color to light blue 'starting calculation' could change color to dark blue 'ccl integration' - [x] automatic merge of scans with same angular parameters, but add possibility to unmerge a scan when it is 'away' from others should exist (example Proposal ID 20200144, file 3803.ccl #42,190,338, scan 338 should be un-merged) - [x] - upload result of integration in safari (is not of 1st priority, but I can pick up a mac for you on Monday) 'param study' - [x] plotting fitted parameters as a function of user defined parameter - [x] fitted values should be displayed in parameter table, then they can be easily modified and no 'mouse-clicking option' is needed - [x] implement 'param study' for hdf files (example Proposal ID 20201759 files from 2536.hdf to 2563.hdf) - [x] - when 2 scan motors are present, use the first one by default, but allow user to choose also the 2nd one - [x] - in 'overview map' create contiguous 2D maps interpolating between data points (if this easy and fast to do) 'spind' - [x] something is wrong with calculation, can pyzebra give more output during the calculation? - [x] UB matrix cannot be copied from the table
usov_i commented 2021-04-07 15:01:55 +02:00 (Migrated from gitlab.psi.ch)

Created by: ivan-usov

One note to the first point in 'generic':
'intercept' is the value of y when x=0, so if the 'slope' is fixed to 0 (as suggested), then the 'intercept' is equal to +-infinity
Thus, I fixed the 'intercept' at 0 too, which is probably what you wanted.

*Created by: ivan-usov* One note to the first point in 'generic': 'intercept' is the value of y when x=0, so if the 'slope' is fixed to 0 (as suggested), then the 'intercept' is equal to +-infinity Thus, I fixed the 'intercept' at 0 too, which is probably what you wanted.
usov_i commented 2021-10-05 16:46:54 +02:00 (Migrated from gitlab.psi.ch)

Created by: ivan-usov

Concerning the last open task ("fitted values should be displayed in parameter table, then they can be easily modified and no 'mouse-clicking option' is needed"), right now we display all fit parameters in the "Export file preview" field. After downloading that text file one could modify any fit parameter with a normal text editor. Does it solve the initial problem?

*Created by: ivan-usov* Concerning the last open task ("fitted values should be displayed in parameter table, then they can be easily modified and no 'mouse-clicking option' is needed"), right now we display all fit parameters in the "Export file preview" field. After downloading that text file one could modify any fit parameter with a normal text editor. Does it solve the initial problem?
usov_i commented 2021-10-06 11:28:51 +02:00 (Migrated from gitlab.psi.ch)

Created by: zaharko

It is not very comfortable,
But okay if modifying parameter table in Pyzebra is a tedious task

On 5 Oct 2021, at 16:47, Ivan Usov @.@.>> wrote:

Concerning the last open task ("fitted values should be displayed in parameter table, then they can be easily modified and no 'mouse-clicking option' is needed"), right now we display all fit parameters in the "Export file preview" field. After downloading that text file one could modify any fit parameter with a normal text editor. Does it solve the initial problem?


You are receiving this because you authored the thread.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHubhttps://github.com/paulscherrerinstitute/pyzebra/issues/24#issuecomment-934479627, or unsubscribehttps://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AMBMFVGET5NPTPJWDSOKOF3UFMFWTANCNFSM4ZAGZZ3Q.
Triage notifications on the go with GitHub Mobile for iOShttps://apps.apple.com/app/apple-store/id1477376905?ct=notification-email&mt=8&pt=524675 or Androidhttps://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.github.android&referrer=utm_campaign%3Dnotification-email%26utm_medium%3Demail%26utm_source%3Dgithub.

[ { @.": "http://schema.org", @.": "EmailMessage", "potentialAction": { @.": "ViewAction", "target": "https://github.com/paulscherrerinstitute/pyzebra/issues/24#issuecomment-934479627", "url": "https://github.com/paulscherrerinstitute/pyzebra/issues/24#issuecomment-934479627", "name": "View Issue" }, "description": "View this Issue on GitHub", "publisher": { @.": "Organization", "name": "GitHub", "url": "https://github.com" } } ]

*Created by: zaharko* It is not very comfortable, But okay if modifying parameter table in Pyzebra is a tedious task On 5 Oct 2021, at 16:47, Ivan Usov ***@***.******@***.***>> wrote: Concerning the last open task ("fitted values should be displayed in parameter table, then they can be easily modified and no 'mouse-clicking option' is needed"), right now we display all fit parameters in the "Export file preview" field. After downloading that text file one could modify any fit parameter with a normal text editor. Does it solve the initial problem? — You are receiving this because you authored the thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub<https://github.com/paulscherrerinstitute/pyzebra/issues/24#issuecomment-934479627>, or unsubscribe<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AMBMFVGET5NPTPJWDSOKOF3UFMFWTANCNFSM4ZAGZZ3Q>. Triage notifications on the go with GitHub Mobile for iOS<https://apps.apple.com/app/apple-store/id1477376905?ct=notification-email&mt=8&pt=524675> or Android<https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.github.android&referrer=utm_campaign%3Dnotification-email%26utm_medium%3Demail%26utm_source%3Dgithub>. [ { ***@***.***": "http://schema.org", ***@***.***": "EmailMessage", "potentialAction": { ***@***.***": "ViewAction", "target": "https://github.com/paulscherrerinstitute/pyzebra/issues/24#issuecomment-934479627", "url": "https://github.com/paulscherrerinstitute/pyzebra/issues/24#issuecomment-934479627", "name": "View Issue" }, "description": "View this Issue on GitHub", "publisher": { ***@***.***": "Organization", "name": "GitHub", "url": "https://github.com" } } ]
usov_i commented 2021-10-06 14:18:47 +02:00 (Migrated from gitlab.psi.ch)

Created by: ivan-usov

Alternatively, you could fix an initial value in parameter table to a desired value and set it to non-variable. This might be even a better practical solution. What do you think about it?

*Created by: ivan-usov* Alternatively, you could fix an initial value in parameter table to a desired value and set it to non-variable. This might be even a better practical solution. What do you think about it?
usov_i commented 2021-10-08 15:54:59 +02:00 (Migrated from gitlab.psi.ch)

Created by: zaharko

fitting separately a single scan with some parameters fixed and displaying the parameters afterwards in parameter plot work, so the 'issue' was not valid.

*Created by: zaharko* fitting separately a single scan with some parameters fixed and displaying the parameters afterwards in parameter plot work, so the 'issue' was not valid.
Sign in to join this conversation.
1 Participants
Notifications
Due Date
No due date set.
Dependencies

No dependencies set.

Reference: zebra/pyzebra#24
No description provided.