Skip to content

compute mu #278

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

Merged
merged 15 commits into from
Dec 30, 2024
Merged
Show file tree
Hide file tree
Changes from 8 commits
Commits
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension


Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
23 changes: 23 additions & 0 deletions news/mu.rst
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
@@ -0,0 +1,23 @@
**Added:**

* function to compute x-ray attenuation coefficient (mu) using XrayDB

**Changed:**

* <news item>

**Deprecated:**

* <news item>

**Removed:**

* <news item>

**Fixed:**

* <news item>

**Security:**

* <news item>
1 change: 1 addition & 0 deletions requirements/conda.txt
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
@@ -1 +1,2 @@
numpy
xraydb
1 change: 1 addition & 0 deletions requirements/pip.txt
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
@@ -1 +1,2 @@
numpy
xraydb
30 changes: 30 additions & 0 deletions src/diffpy/utils/tools.py
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -3,6 +3,8 @@
from copy import copy
from pathlib import Path

from xraydb import material_mu


def clean_dict(obj):
"""Remove keys from the dictionary where the corresponding value is None.
Expand Down Expand Up @@ -206,3 +208,31 @@ def get_package_info(package_names, metadata=None):
pkg_info.update({package: importlib.metadata.version(package)})
metadata["package_info"] = pkg_info
return metadata


def compute_mu_using_xraydb(sample_composition, energy, density=None, packing_fraction=1):
Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

added packing fraction. does this make sense or should we use None instead? I think if we set the default to 1 the code can be more concise

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I think setting to None is clearer here. The logic from the perspective of the user is that we either have a packing fraction or we don't. If it is None, you can set it to 1 in the code.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Also, didn't we discuss to change the name to sample_mass_density?

"""Compute the attenuation coefficient (mu) using the XrayDB database.

Computes mu based on the sample composition and energy.
User can provide a measured density or an estimated packing fraction.
Specifying the density is recommended, though not required for some pure or standard materials.
Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

edit docstring

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I think using xrayDB functionality here is not useful. The number of materials is so small, so there is no point to offer this to users as an option. It will just confuse them.

We could offer other approaches:

  1. given a composition, try and get density from COD or Materials Project. For different polymorphs the densities will be different for the same composition, so we would have to handle that.
  2. as a fallback, use a "best effort" atomic density (most tightly packed materials are around 5x10^22 cm^-3)? This would be "magic" which we don't normally like, but if we use this fallback we could give a warning.

Reference: https://xraypy.github.io/XrayDB/python.html#xraydb.material_mu.

Parameters
----------
sample_composition : str
The chemical formula or the name of the material.
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

not the name, just chemical formula.

energy : float
The energy in keV.
Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

change unit to keV

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

"The energy of the incident x-rays in keV"

density : float, optional, Default is None
The mass density of the packed powder/sample in gr/cm^3.
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

g/cm*3, not gr/cm^3

packing_fraction : float, optional, Default is 1
The fraction of sample in the capillary (between 0 and 1).

Returns
-------
mu : float
The attenuation coefficient mu in mm^{-1}.
"""
mu = material_mu(sample_composition, energy * 1000, density=density, kind="total") * packing_fraction / 10
return mu
69 changes: 68 additions & 1 deletion tests/test_tools.py
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -5,7 +5,12 @@

import pytest

from diffpy.utils.tools import check_and_build_global_config, get_package_info, get_user_info
from diffpy.utils.tools import (
check_and_build_global_config,
compute_mu_using_xraydb,
get_package_info,
get_user_info,
)


@pytest.mark.parametrize(
Expand Down Expand Up @@ -160,3 +165,65 @@ def test_get_package_info(monkeypatch, inputs, expected):
)
actual_metadata = get_package_info(inputs[0], metadata=inputs[1])
assert actual_metadata == expected


@pytest.mark.parametrize(
"inputs, expected_mu",
[
# Test whether the function returns the correct mu
( # C1: No density or packing fraction (only for known material), expect to get mu from database
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

"C1 composition and wavelength provided, known material. Expect to get mu for fully dense material"

{
"sample_composition": "H2O",
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

water is probably not a good "illustrative" choice. Maybe use quartz instead?

"energy": 10,
},
0.5330,
),
( # C2: Packing fraction (=0.5) provided only (only for known material)
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

reuse my pattern from C1 here.

{
"sample_composition": "H2O",
"energy": 10,
"packing_fraction": 0.5,
},
0.2665,
),
( # C3: Density provided only, expect to compute mu based on it
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

reuse my pattern above.

# 1. Known material
{
"sample_composition": "H2O",
"energy": 10,
"density": 0.987,
},
0.5330,
),
( # 2. Unknown material
Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

add unknown material for testing

{
"sample_composition": "ZrO2",
"energy": 17,
"density": 1.009,
},
1.252,
),
( # C4: Both density and packing fraction are provided, expect to compute mu based on both
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

this doesn't make any sense. It will result in two numbers, not one number. We probably want to raise an exception if both are provided.

# 1. Known material
{
"sample_composition": "H2O",
"energy": 10,
"density": 0.997,
"packing_fraction": 0.5,
},
0.2665,
),
( # 2. Unknown material
{
"sample_composition": "ZrO2",
"energy": 17,
"density": 1.009,
"packing_fraction": 0.5,
},
0.626,
),
],
)
def test_compute_mu_using_xraydb(inputs, expected_mu):
actual_mu = compute_mu_using_xraydb(**inputs)
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

this is beautiful. thanks! @yucongalicechen

assert actual_mu == pytest.approx(expected_mu, rel=0.01, abs=0.1)
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

this seems a bit too loose?

Loading