Atreyee Sinha
Atreyee Sinha
Documentation for handling negative amplitudes added in #5933. For now, I propose that we prevent the estimator from running for negative amplitudes, and then investigate the current behaviour for 2.1.
If I remember correctly, the behaviour in `MapDataset.stack` is intentional. It was the cleanest way to be able to stack maps during the data reduction process while handling the safe...
What is the status here @registerrier ? Do we put this in for 2.0?
Thanks @mizorafa ! Support for asymmetric IRFs is planned, but this needs a defined format for such IRFs first. A corresponding issue is open in the GADF for long https://github.com/open-gamma-ray-astro/gamma-astro-data-formats/issues/73...
Does it work correctly if `models.parameters[xx]` is not passed to `fit.stat_contour` but rather `sky_model.parameters[xx]`?
The decision here is to modify the fitting tutorial (https://github.com/gammapy/gammapy/blob/main/examples/tutorials/api/fitting.py) to always use `model.parameters["par_name"]` instead of going through `datasets.parameters` or `models.parameters`
It will also be nice to add the examples in the docstrings for `fit.stat_profile` , `stat_surface`, `stat_contour` showing the same
- This seems to be an issue with the `binlike.fits` files in GAMMAPY_DATA rather than within the codebase. The `flux_points.stat_scan.geom.axes["norm"].center` lies between 2.26 to 2.48, whereas the best estimates of...
resolved now. closing
Can we put this in for 2.0? @registerrier @QRemy @bkhelifi ?