First off let me preface this by saying great code! I have been utilizing your scripts to generate a MATLAB GUI equivalent to calculate direct and indirect bandgap energy values of imported absorption/T-R data using the MARS method. Instead of the PyEarth package I have resorted to using the ARESLab toolbox. Anyway, I noticed a discrepancy among your weighting_factor expression in the bandgaps.py script (line 287) compared to what is presented in your paper ("Automated algorithms for band gap analysis from optical absorption spectra", pg. 45 half-way down the first paragraph). I have chosen to use what is stated in the paper, which is why I am submitting this issue and would also like to know if this is in fact correct. Testing between the two options does change the sorted list in which the highest weighted line segment is chosen and subsequently the final bandgap energy value. Any clarity on this subject would be appreciated!
Dear Marcus Schwarting and Caleb Phillips,
First off let me preface this by saying great code! I have been utilizing your scripts to generate a MATLAB GUI equivalent to calculate direct and indirect bandgap energy values of imported absorption/T-R data using the MARS method. Instead of the PyEarth package I have resorted to using the ARESLab toolbox. Anyway, I noticed a discrepancy among your weighting_factor expression in the bandgaps.py script (line 287) compared to what is presented in your paper ("Automated algorithms for band gap analysis from optical absorption spectra", pg. 45 half-way down the first paragraph). I have chosen to use what is stated in the paper, which is why I am submitting this issue and would also like to know if this is in fact correct. Testing between the two options does change the sorted list in which the highest weighted line segment is chosen and subsequently the final bandgap energy value. Any clarity on this subject would be appreciated!
Cheers, Haris V.