Closed ethankruse closed 3 years ago
Good catch! I think that what you want is set_u([1, u1, u2])
for now, but let me do a few tests. It's related to the definitions from the limbdark paper.
I can confirm that this works. In the main code base, it actually is defined as [-1, u1, u2]
but I think that since it gets normalized the actual value of the first entry does not enter (it would only matter for the baseline in the more general starry case, I think). It would be good to update this op to automatically add the -1
so that the behavior is as expected.
Yes, that looks correct: just after equation (2) in the paper, it states that u_0 = -1
.
@dfm @ethankruse Is this method now working? Do you need my help with anything?
Yep, my tests are passing and it seems to be working once I add in the -1 as the first parameter.
Hey Dan,
Now that 0.4 is out, I'm trying out your suggestion from our conversation in starry. It looks like SimpleLimbDark is fast and exactly what I want, but your code example isn't working.
set_u
doesn't seem to care what you feed in asu1
, the output is always the same.u2
does have an effect though. Was your example wrong? Any idea what's up?Here's the example code and outputs I'm getting: