Closed GervitKT closed 7 months ago
The input mass accumulates all particles/cells in the input file, regardless of their position. Your input file may thus contain particles/cells outside the grid boundary that are counted towards the input mass but are not gridded. Another possibility is that the input file contains extremely tiny (or even zero sized) particles/cells that are not resolved by the grid and thus "missed" by the random sampling mechanism.
SKIRT does not offer a way to visualize the residual, but you can easily write a python script to plot a histogram of the mass distribution in your input file as a function of radius (allocating all mass of each particle/cell to its center). This plot should tell you whether any large masses appear in unexpected areas, and whether SKIRT has captured the relevant mass or not.
If such an analysis does not resolve your issue, let us know., and we'll look into it further.
Thanks for the quick response. As you said, my input file does have cells outside the specified domain for the grid. I did not expect it and probably is due to some error in reading the cell positions from the simulation snapshot. Thanks for the help.
Description I am getting 99% discrepancy between the input and the gridded medium mass. I have tried doing this with both particle media and cell media but the problem persists. The distribution of cells as indicated by the log files seems pretty reasonable. Is there any way to judge why the mass is getting lost, and can SKIRT also produce the residual maps for medium density directly, so as to see the regions in which the mass is lost.
Data I upload here log file for cell media as that is my preferred choice and also the convergence plots for both particle and cell media. gal503_standard_cell_media_log.txt gal503_standard_dns_dust_cell_media.pdf gal503_standard_dns_dust_particle_media.pdf
and this is the ski file: