lvcnrpy issueshttps://git.ligo.org/waveforms/lvcnrpy/-/issues2020-03-08T13:44:08Zhttps://git.ligo.org/waveforms/lvcnrpy/-/issues/13python 3 compatibility2020-03-08T13:44:08ZSerguei Ossokinepython 3 compatibilitySince most environments now use python 3, it would be awesome if the scripts here could also become python 3 compatible. I can help if needed.Since most environments now use python 3, it would be awesome if the scripts here could also become python 3 compatible. I can help if needed.https://git.ligo.org/waveforms/lvcnrpy/-/issues/10Check that Lmax is being checked properly in lvcnrcheck2018-03-16T10:34:32ZSebastian KhanCheck that Lmax is being checked properly in lvcnrcheckThe NR injection infrastructure specifies that the `Lmax` attribute must
be the largest value of \ell than contains *all* `m` modes from `-\ell to \ell`
Double check that this is implemented and if it's not implement it!The NR injection infrastructure specifies that the `Lmax` attribute must
be the largest value of \ell than contains *all* `m` modes from `-\ell to \ell`
Double check that this is implemented and if it's not implement it!Sebastian KhanSebastian Khan2018-03-28https://git.ligo.org/waveforms/lvcnrpy/-/issues/7Add Omega-vs-time and f_lower_at_1MSUN check2018-02-16T15:14:08ZEdward Fauchon-JonesAdd Omega-vs-time and f_lower_at_1MSUN checkFrom https://dcc.ligo.org/G1700336 (Presented on [NR20170309](https://www.lsc-group.phys.uwm.edu/ligovirgo/cbcnote/NRCallMinutes/NR20170309))
> In SXS waveforms we see sometimes that Omega-vs-time’s lowest Omega value is
> not the sa...From https://dcc.ligo.org/G1700336 (Presented on [NR20170309](https://www.lsc-group.phys.uwm.edu/ligovirgo/cbcnote/NRCallMinutes/NR20170309))
> In SXS waveforms we see sometimes that Omega-vs-time’s lowest Omega value is
> not the same value as f_lower_at_1MSUN (after fixing units). A small discrepancy
> can be dealt with, but the sanity checker should catch a large difference
>
> \- @patricia-schmidt, @ian-harryhttps://git.ligo.org/waveforms/lvcnrpy/-/issues/6Add check that eccentricity should not be negative2018-01-27T10:33:46ZSebastian KhanAdd check that eccentricity should not be negativeFound 'SXS:BBH:0324', u'SXS:BBH:0276', u'SXS:BBH:0223'
all have eccentricities = -44444444.44444444
clearly wrongFound 'SXS:BBH:0324', u'SXS:BBH:0276', u'SXS:BBH:0223'
all have eccentricities = -44444444.44444444
clearly wronghttps://git.ligo.org/waveforms/lvcnrpy/-/issues/5Check -l<=m<=l for 2<=l<=Lmax exist2018-01-27T10:33:46ZEdward Fauchon-JonesCheck -l<=m<=l for 2<=l<=Lmax existCurrently `lvcnrcheck` does not verify that all the m-mode datasets exist for `-l<=m<=l` for `2<=l<=Lmax`.
A candidate solution to this is to replace [`lvcnrpy/format/specs.py#L595-597`](https://git.ligo.org/edward.fauchon-jones/lvcnrpy...Currently `lvcnrcheck` does not verify that all the m-mode datasets exist for `-l<=m<=l` for `2<=l<=Lmax`.
A candidate solution to this is to replace [`lvcnrpy/format/specs.py#L595-597`](https://git.ligo.org/edward.fauchon-jones/lvcnrpy/blob/14beeedf46a43be2d1905d53e2f0682f83b007a4/lvcnrpy/format/specs.py#L595-597) with a cross-key dependant list (dependant on `Lmax`) of the expected mode datasets rather than a glob of the datasets that exist. As such, this will raise an `err.Missing` when format spec mandated modes are missing.
I believe this is the shortest solution that reuses existing code to solve this issue.https://git.ligo.org/waveforms/lvcnrpy/-/issues/3Add integration tests for missing fields2018-01-27T10:33:47ZEdward Fauchon-JonesAdd integration tests for missing fieldsCurrently `lvcnrpy` is not tested against missing fields.Currently `lvcnrpy` is not tested against missing fields.