Expanding the documentation

[karllark]

Hopefully making things better.

[coveralls]

Pull Request Test Coverage Report for Build 44

• 0 of 0 changed or added relevant lines in 0 files are covered.
• No unchanged relevant lines lost coverage.
• Overall coverage remained the same at 55.963%

---

Totals
Change from base Build 32:	0.0%
Covered Lines:	61
Relevant Lines:	109

---

💛 - Coveralls

[karllark]

WG00 fit to C00 model is working for me when I build this on my computer. We'll see if it works on readthedocs (no idea why it did not embed originally).

Here is the figure as I have updated it. Note I removed the normalization of the fitted models as they are being fit unnormalized. So to show the best fit there should be no normalization. I also added the input A(V) to the legend).

[karllark]

@dcorre : can you review this?

[karllark]

Will merge this in a day or two. Trying to keep the momentum going.

[dcorre]

Hi Karl, I agree that plotting the unnormalised curves makes more sense. The y label is not correct as the C00 dots are A(x)/1.086 the WG00 attenuation curves are tau(x). However as you mentioned in one of the issues, I also prefer that each module returns A(x) per default. So the y label should remain Att(x). Can you multiply the output of the WG00 model by 1.086 to go from tau(x) to A(x)? And then delete the y /= 1.086 at line 98 in fit_attenuation.rst ? It will not change the new documentation you have written as you already use Att(x) as the y label.

[karllark]

Done. Good catch on the C00!

[karllark]

Might solve #20.

[karllark]

Note that the WG00 does not need to be multiplied by 1.086 since we are fitting to the C00 model in Att units. Thus, the fitted value reported at tau_V is actually the best fit Att(V) and the best fit model is then effectively in Att(x) units. This is because the scaling between tau_V and Att(V) is a constant.