Skip to content

Conversation

@jsitarek
Copy link
Collaborator

@jsitarek jsitarek commented Dec 3, 2025

It is determined depending on the number of bins in camera offset

It is determined depending on the number of bins in camera offset
@jsitarek
Copy link
Collaborator Author

jsitarek commented Dec 3, 2025

@juanjq this should fix #314, but I did not have any diffuse DL2 files at hand, so couldn't test it yet

@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Dec 3, 2025

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 75.79%. Comparing base (719f39c) to head (90a47a1).
⚠️ Report is 4 commits behind head on master.

Additional details and impacted files
@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##           master     #315   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   75.79%   75.79%           
=======================================
  Files          22       22           
  Lines        2739     2739           
=======================================
  Hits         2076     2076           
  Misses        663      663           

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
  • ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

@aleberti aleberti added enhancement New feature or request fix For fixes labels Dec 5, 2025
…imuth is from the whole run so it will be somewhat different than the value for the first event
@Elisa-Visentin
Copy link
Collaborator

Probably we could also add a diffuse DL2 file (one MC run: do we need any green light for that?) to automatic CI tests, to 'preserve' the desired behaviour also in the next PRs? @aleberti, @jsitarek, Let me know what you think about that

@aleberti
Copy link
Collaborator

@Elisa-Visentin for me it is fine to add it if it helps in testing a real case scenario, which is the case. Regarding the approval, I think we need it (probably by both MAGIC and LST since the MC run is a joint one), but just via email to the EBs should be enough. Then I can put it in the webserver with the other test datat.

@jsitarek
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Hi, don't we have already a diffuse file for the training? We could misuse it for an IRF (in regular analysis of course we would not do it, but for testing the software it is perfectly fine)

@Elisa-Visentin
Copy link
Collaborator

We have a couple of diffuse runs for training. I can check if nothing complains when using the same events both for training and for test, and if we need also electrons (it depends on the 'internal checks' of the code)

@Elisa-Visentin
Copy link
Collaborator

I just have to check l 209 dl2-dl3 on a test file, just to bbe sure it does what we are expecting it to do, then everythin else is fine

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

enhancement New feature or request fix For fixes

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants