Repository navigation
changing for q_mass in inclination definition - #65
Merged
Merged
Conversation
sibirrer
approved these changes
Aug 26, 2026
sibirrer
left a comment
sibirrer
left a comment
Collaborator
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Thank you @martin-millon!
If you want. you can also make it optional such that you could control the choice from a user's point of few.
Collaborator
|
That's an interesting question. If there were triviality, then even at low inclinations, we could expect some projected light ellipticity. In that sense I would change the inclination angle to be computed from q_mass in that case |
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
q_m < q_light rises Jampy exception: hierarc/LensPosterior/kin_constraints.py:239 gets it's inclinaison from the light, even if q_mass is provided: cos_i² = (q_light² - q_intrinsic²) / (1 - q_intrinsic²) .
This raises an error in jampy at low q_intrinsic since q_pot < 0.05. Should we change the definition of the inclination relative to q_mass, when it is provided?