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

Systematic uncertainties #88

Open
HealthyPear opened this issue Oct 1, 2020 · 3 comments
Open

Systematic uncertainties #88

HealthyPear opened this issue Oct 1, 2020 · 3 comments
Labels
discussion Issues that open a discussion without any planned modification to the code enhancement New feature or request

Comments

@HealthyPear
Copy link
Member

Context

This issue will focus on the management of systematic uncertainties.
If you are instead interested in implementing statistical uncertainties, please refer to issue #87

Current status

Within the CTA-ASWG-IRF working group, there is already a sub-task group that works on this aspect (link to IRF WG main page).

I think @FrancaCassol manifested interest in this and she is already using the IRF bracketing code present under the organization account.

I think a point to clarify is if such code (or any similar one developed from it) should be part of pyirf in form of a dedicated module (if its authors agree of course) or if this task should be performed using directly the science tools since it requires only output from pyirf.

This was referenced Oct 1, 2020
@HealthyPear HealthyPear added enhancement New feature or request discussion Issues that open a discussion without any planned modification to the code labels Oct 1, 2020
@FrancaCassol
Copy link

Hi @HealthyPear,
indeed, I confirm my interest for this task. I am at present adding to the bracketing code the possibility to independently shift the energy bias and the energy resolution (at present the shift of the pdf, which depends on the ratio E_reco/E_true, shifts them together). I will push soon this code in the original repository and then try to move it pyirf

@FrancaCassol
Copy link

Hi,

I developed some scaling functions. The idea is to give as input the irf to scale in gammapy format (e.g. EffectiveAreaTable2D, EnergyDispersion2D) and to get as return the scaled irf. I propose to add a module systematics.py containing these functions. Is this compliant with the present pyirf code?

@HealthyPear
Copy link
Member Author

Hi!
Yes, it seems a good place to start!

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
discussion Issues that open a discussion without any planned modification to the code enhancement New feature or request
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants