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

Improve fitting #293

Closed
peterfpeterson opened this issue Jan 21, 2020 · 4 comments · Fixed by #327
Closed

Improve fitting #293

peterfpeterson opened this issue Jan 21, 2020 · 4 comments · Fixed by #327
Assignees

Comments

@peterfpeterson
Copy link
Member

peterfpeterson commented Jan 21, 2020

Current peak fitting does not give terribly good results in the general case. Certain things can be done to make it better:

  1. Improve initial guess of peak location through either starting with the position of the maximum, or by calculating the first moment of the function
  2. Modify mantid's FitPeaks to better set initial guesses for pseudo-Voigt. The issue is that it sets things using effective parameters and pseudo-Voigt needs the mixing parameter set first.
@peterfpeterson peterfpeterson self-assigned this Jan 21, 2020
@JeanBilheux
Copy link
Contributor

Values and error return by get_effective_params() are identical, except for the Height.

Values
Screen Shot 2020-01-22 at 11 04 24 AM

Errors
Screen Shot 2020-01-22 at 11 04 30 AM

@peterfpeterson
Copy link
Member Author

The issue Jean is pointing out is specifically for the pseudo-Voigt. Gaussian is fine.

@peterfpeterson
Copy link
Member Author

A separate issue has been created for the pseudo-Voigt uncertainties #303

@peterfpeterson
Copy link
Member Author

mantid PR27809 fixes the last bits of this issue.

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 a pull request may close this issue.

2 participants