-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 4
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
lsm predict requires SPI fit #31
Comments
Case in point is the narrow band subset I'm testing with |
I am not totally convinced. I think I put this check in because I don't want things to be assumed. That is how mistakes get made. If users want everything to be flat spectrum, I don't think it is unfair to expect them to put that in the model. I am open to counter-arguments though. |
It is not standard though @JSKenyon. Unless you explicitly fit for spis with bdsf the the reference frequency is left to None and the spi column just does not exist for any of the components. Therefore a flat spectrum is implicitly assumed by the model. I agree that if at least one component has an spi either the global frequency or the component frequency must be set. |
You already assume spi = 0 if the attribute does not exist so (nu / refnu) ^ (0.0) == 1 so the reference frequency can be set to anything non-zero - I've updated the commit to reflect this |
This will likely be addressed/improved when #113 is in place. |
Flat spectrum sources (and models) should now be handled correctly. |
If the SPI is not present (ie. flat spectrum assumed) the following error is generated:
I think it is much better to assume a constant spectrum than not to allow the user to predict from non-SPI-fitted models
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: