Skip to content

Conversation

@rekomodo
Copy link
Collaborator

@rekomodo rekomodo commented Jul 9, 2024

referenced this implementation
solves #21 .

Oddly enough, this implementation appears to have half the fluence present in the original paper. Please have a look.

@RemDelaporteMathurin
Copy link
Contributor

Can't inspect this as the docs don't compile

@RemDelaporteMathurin
Copy link
Contributor

We need to get others input on this since in theory you wouldn't have two completely different models for this. The architecture of this complete validation case should be:

def run_festim_model(fluence):
    ...

for fluence in [1e22. 1e23]:
    result = run_festim_model(fluence)
    plot_tds(result, label=fluence)

@rekomodo
Copy link
Collaborator Author

rekomodo commented Jul 10, 2024

Completely agree, I'll try something out later but I'll have this as low priority until they respond.

@RemDelaporteMathurin RemDelaporteMathurin added the help wanted Extra attention is needed label Jul 12, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

help wanted Extra attention is needed

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants