Closed wincowgerDEV closed 9 months ago
If you think that we won't regret that in the future, I'm in :grinning:
Tight :). One of the big things I want to work on when I get back to Open Specy is getting all the raw spectra from the libraries we have into a standardized format, that way if this rounding thing (it probably should be a linear interpolation now that I think of it, not rounding) doesn't work out for whatever reason, then we can easily manipulate all the raw spectra to some other form.
On Mon, Sep 6, 2021 at 8:28 AM Zacharias Steinmetz @.***> wrote:
If you think that we won't regret that in the future, I'm in 😀
— You are receiving this because you authored the thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/wincowgerDEV/OpenSpecy/issues/96#issuecomment-913728642, or unsubscribe https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AGMUJU6KVQZIQBXSIKLYKHLUATMZJANCNFSM5CPPTEHQ . Triage notifications on the go with GitHub Mobile for iOS https://apps.apple.com/app/apple-store/id1477376905?ct=notification-email&mt=8&pt=524675 or Android https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.github.android&referrer=utm_campaign%3Dnotification-email%26utm_medium%3Demail%26utm_source%3Dgithub.
--
·.¸¸.·´¯
·.´¯·.¸¸.·´¯
ツ ------------------------------Win Cowger, PhD Pronouns: he/him Research Scientist Moore Institute for Plastic Pollution Research
Contact Info
515-298-3869 | @.*** | @Win_OpenData https://twitter.com/Win_OpenData
Done
Right now we are rounding spectra to 0.1 wavenumbers. I think this is overkill based on the resolution of most spectra I have seen 3 + wavenumbers. I don't think there is a utility to going below 1 wavenumber, that gives the user 4000 bands to search with which should be more than enough for distinguishing between material types. If we change to rounding everything to 1 wavenumber, we will speed up processing by an order of magnitude and decrease database size by a similar amount which should allow us to adopt multispectra upload faster.