Skip to content

Add high resolution sources for all ESS instruments#139

Merged
nvaytet merged 6 commits intomainfrom
more-ess-sources
Apr 7, 2026
Merged

Add high resolution sources for all ESS instruments#139
nvaytet merged 6 commits intomainfrom
more-ess-sources

Conversation

@nvaytet
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

@nvaytet nvaytet commented Mar 30, 2026

Add sources generated with McStas notebook for all 16 instruments.
The new default ess source is created as the average of all sources.

The high-resolution binning will then enable us to use uniform noise during the sample instead of gaussian noise, which would fix issues in sampling optimization in #136

We also add the notebook that was used to generate the sources. It is not ran as part of the docs, as it is too expensive to run in CI.

Updated default ESS source profile:
Figure 1 (45)

Figure 1 (46)

@nvaytet nvaytet requested a review from YooSunYoung April 7, 2026 07:09
"path": "ess/ess-nmx.h5",
"hash": "md5:dca26e529f01b8e8f55b5611802d36a5",
},
"ess-odin": {
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Note that I kept the original odin source as it is already high-resolution and was sampled ~2-3 m from the moderator where cold and thermal neutral are well mixed.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

@YooSunYoung YooSunYoung left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Are they all that different so that we would need different source per instrument...?
Or will it be generally okay to use the average ess source for most cases...?

@YooSunYoung
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

wavelength-diff-ess-instruments

This particular region in the wavelength distribution has a bit of difference between instruments.

@nvaytet
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

nvaytet commented Apr 7, 2026

They are generally close enough that the standard ESS source will be ok for most cases.
I guess your question was: "do we need all these new sources, if they are mostly all identical anyway"?

I guess that's a fair point...

@nvaytet
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

nvaytet commented Apr 7, 2026

I guess for now, it does not hurt to have the files in there, even if they are not used much.
I imagine in the future the sources per instrument might be optimized further, or sampled at a different distance.
Keeping all sources in this PR would mean that the infrastructure is already in place, and future changes would be minimal.
Based on this, I think I will keep them in.

@nvaytet nvaytet merged commit ccb42cf into main Apr 7, 2026
4 checks passed
@nvaytet nvaytet deleted the more-ess-sources branch April 7, 2026 14:14
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants