Added numerical check between agnpy and Finke 2016 for absorption on BLR and DT

[cosimoNigro]

So far we were just producing plots for the crosschecks against the Finke 2016 reference for the case of the gamma-gamma absorption on the BLR and DT.

I added the check_deviation function at the end of the functions checking these absorptions numerically against the reference. These are the automatic plots produced now by the TestAbsorption class

• for the BLR

• and for the DT

Keeping in mind that, thanks to @jsitarek work, we are also checking against the point-source approximation (for the misaligned case) I think we can close both issues #65 and #66. I think for the BLR and DT the absorption is under control.

[codecov[bot]]

Codecov Report

Merging #89 (561cbb5) into master (2a94ebd) will increase coverage by 0.01%. The diff coverage is 100.00%.

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master      #89      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   94.35%   94.36%   +0.01%     
==========================================
  Files          30       30              
  Lines        2054     2059       +5     
==========================================
+ Hits         1938     1943       +5     
  Misses        116      116              

Flag	Coverage Δ
unittests	94.36% <100.00%> (+0.01%)	:arrow_up:

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
agnpy/utils/geometry.py	100.00% <ø> (ø)
agnpy/tests/test_absorption.py	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)

---

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data Powered by Codecov. Last update 2a94ebd...561cbb5. Read the comment docs.

[sourcery-ai[bot]]

Sourcery Code Quality Report

❌  Merging this PR will decrease code quality in the affected files by 1.57%.

Quality metrics	Before	After	Change
Complexity	0.03 ⭐	0.03 ⭐	0.00
Method Length	99.70 🙂	105.15 🙂	5.45 👎
Working memory	13.41 😞	14.23 😞	0.82 👎
Quality	59.47% 🙂	57.90% 🙂	-1.57% 👎

Other metrics	Before	After	Change
Lines	528	545	17

Changed files	Quality Before	Quality After	Quality Change
agnpy/tests/test_absorption.py	55.92% 🙂	54.06% 🙂	-1.86% 👎
agnpy/utils/geometry.py	73.29% 🙂	73.29% 🙂	0.00%

Here are some functions in these files that still need a tune-up:

File	Function	Complexity	Length	Working Memory	Quality	Recommendation
agnpy/tests/test_absorption.py	TestAbsorptionMuS.test_tau_dt_mu_s_far	0 ⭐	285 ⛔	18 ⛔	42.88% 😞	Try splitting into smaller methods. Extract out complex expressions
agnpy/tests/test_absorption.py	TestAbsorption.test_absorption_dt_reference_tau	0 ⭐	180 😞	21 ⛔	47.17% 😞	Try splitting into smaller methods. Extract out complex expressions
agnpy/tests/test_absorption.py	TestAbsorption.test_absorption_blr_reference_tau	0 ⭐	172 😞	20 ⛔	48.47% 😞	Try splitting into smaller methods. Extract out complex expressions
agnpy/tests/test_absorption.py	TestAbsorptionMuS.test_tau_dt_mu_s_simple	0 ⭐	212 ⛔	15 😞	49.67% 😞	Try splitting into smaller methods. Extract out complex expressions
agnpy/tests/test_absorption.py	TestAbsorptionMuS.test_abs_blr_mu_s_vs_on_axis	0 ⭐	167 😞	13 😞	56.01% 🙂	Try splitting into smaller methods. Extract out complex expressions

Legend and Explanation

The emojis denote the absolute quality of the code:

• ⭐ excellent
• 🙂 good
• 😞 poor
• ⛔ very poor

The 👍 and 👎 indicate whether the quality has improved or gotten worse with this pull request.

---

Please see our documentation here for details on how these metrics are calculated.

We are actively working on this report - lots more documentation and extra metrics to come!

Let us know what you think of it by mentioning @sourcery-ai in a comment.