-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 2
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Numerical FONLL #195
Numerical FONLL #195
Conversation
For now I just went with a quick-and-dirty implementation where the output are just the asy terms as implemented, this implementation is mainly for my own understanding. I get some qualitative agreement with apfel though in most of the kinematic domain at least ~10% off. Before I proceed though, @alecandido @felixhekhorn, do you know if the definition of the FFN0 scheme in apfel is the same as what we need? And if so, what is the level of agreement I should find? |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Most of the files have small modifications, and the correct ones.
Now I'm on the phone, so I'm not really comfortable with the large files. But I'll try to finalize later today the review for the combiner and kernels. Apparently they look good as well.
@giacomomagni thanks for your comments, I hope I addressed all of them adequately.
It was quite dirty when I found it. However, since FONLL won't be benchmarked against apfel again (at least using this runner) I'd also be happy to undo the changes to the |
We could stop benchmarking FONLL, since it requires quite different operations. But it might be worth to benchmark instead |
Co-authored-by: Giacomo Magni <[email protected]>
I realized something (tell me if you agree): when we ask yadism to do renormalization scale variations to the 7 subgrids of nFONLL for FONLL-B, it is using a different |
@@ -116,11 +116,12 @@ def compute_local(self): | |||
if self._computed: | |||
return | |||
cfc = cf.Combiner(self) | |||
full_orders = [(o, 0, 0, 0) for o in self.orders] | |||
# prepare scale variations | |||
sv_manager = self.info.configs.managers["sv_manager"] | |||
if sv_manager is not None: | |||
full_orders = sv.build_orders(self.info.configs.theory["pto"]) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
as @andreab1997 pointed out: this should be "pto_evol"
. Since FONLL-B is a NLO scheme we also need to have NLO scale variations. Actually, this means that also the massive
grids need to have that setting!
Thanks for pointing this out - I did not think about SV, but indeed if SV is NLO for all contributions (i.e. similar to FONLL-A) instead of the same order as FONLL-B for the central scale, then for SV the runcards will need to be updated to have PTO=1. If it were only FFN0 it would indeed have been possible to replace So I suppose this should be fixed in pineko? |
I believe at this point we should just have a |
Your proposal is exactly what yadism already does for the central scale, though I'm not exactly sure what you mean here:
I'd have to look at how SV is implemented to see if it requires any changes, but from what I understood SV at NLO corresponds to both PTO=1 and PTODIS=1? |
As far as I understood PTODIS is used for the |
Just to be clear (and as @RoyStegeman already pointed out, it can be confusing): there are only two (2) couplings powers in the game - and no more. Unfortunately there names are ambiguously:
the fallback for 2 is 1
|
As @felixhekhorn said, Concerning SV, I'm not sure I understand the point: they should be computed with the exact same settings of the central one, just varying the scale. |
The question is to which order are you generating the logs? (inside the coeff fnc <=> inside the as expansion) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I didn't check everything super carefully, but all in all it looks good (and I trust in the benchmarks ;-) )
This reverts commit 2360c21.
Accidentally pushed here...sorry |
Implements numerical FONLL - supersedes #175