[yt-dev] (HaloProfiler) Best way to handle Dark_Matter_Density?

[Matthew Turk]

Hi Britton,

I've issued a PR:

https://bitbucket.org/yt_analysis/yt/pull-request/511/switching-both-uses-of-dark_matter_density/diff

but because of how particle_density uses particle_mass , I am not 100%
sure that it's correct yet.  Whenever John ZuHone gets a chance to
look at this, I think it's ready, but we should figure out whether or
not this actually solves the issue before accepting.

-Matt

On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 3:54 PM, Britton Smith <brittonsmith at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Matt,
>
> I think so, yes.  Dark_Matter_Density as named exactly like that is an Enzo
> field that was written directly to disk by Enzo and includes star particles.
> It should be identical in value to particle_density, but it's probably
> better to use particle_density as it would be less confusing.
>
> Britton
>
>
> On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 3:47 PM, Matthew Turk <matthewturk at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Hi Britton,
>>
>> In that case, wouldn't it make sense instead of using
>> Dark_Matter_Density, to use the full particle density, which is
>> particle_density ?  That would also (for instance) include star
>> particles.
>>
>> -Matt
>>
>> On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 3:26 PM, Britton Smith <brittonsmith at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> > Ok, I see what the issue is.  The ActualOverdensity field, which is used
>> > to
>> > calculate virial quantities, requires the TotalMassMsun field, which
>> > adds
>> > the density and dark_mater_densities.  So, yeah, the Dark_Matter_Density
>> > field is getting used there.
>> >
>> >
>> > On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 2:57 PM, Matthew Turk <matthewturk at gmail.com>
>> > wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Hi Britton and Cameron,
>> >>
>> >> Okay, perhaps a D_M_D that's universal is the way to go.  Here's the
>> >> script that threw the D_M_D error on a FLASH dataset:
>> >>
>> >> http://paste.yt-project.org/show/3499/
>> >>
>> >> Does this call upon standard_fields at all?  Or is there somewhere
>> >> else it might, perhaps in ActualOverdensity?
>> >>
>> >> -Matt
>> >>
>> >> On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 2:49 PM, Britton Smith <brittonsmith at gmail.com>
>> >> wrote:
>> >> > I like defining a new yt field that is dark matter density for all
>> >> > frontends.  I also think it would be a good idea to be checking
>> >> > against
>> >> > the
>> >> > available field list when adding fields since dark matter density is
>> >> > just
>> >> > one of many fields that may only be defined by one of a few codes.
>> >> > I'm
>> >> > curious to know if anyone is using the standard_fields defined in the
>> >> > HaloProfiler.  This was an attempt to recreate the functionality of
>> >> > an
>> >> > old
>> >> > Enzo radial profiling tool called enzo_anyl that never really got
>> >> > finished.
>> >> > Is this being used now?  If so, I'd be interested to know how and how
>> >> > we
>> >> > can
>> >> > make it more usable.
>> >> >
>> >> > Britton
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 1:53 PM, Cameron Hummels <chummels at gmail.com>
>> >> > wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> I'd be inclined to change the field we examine from
>> >> >> Dark_Matter_Density
>> >> >> to
>> >> >> a different field that is defined by yt.  It's easier than creating
>> >> >> a
>> >> >> Dark_Matter_Density for each frontend.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Cameron
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >> On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 10:26 AM, Matthew Turk
>> >> >> <matthewturk at gmail.com>
>> >> >> wrote:
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> Hi all,
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> This came up after a discussion on #yt; I've CC'd the person who
>> >> >>> brought this up.
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> In the halo profiler, there's a list of standard fields.  In this
>> >> >>> we
>> >> >>> have Dark_Matter_Density, which to my understanding is an
>> >> >>> Enzo-specific field.  It's not the same as the CIC_Deposit3
>> >> >>> (defined
>> >> >>> in yt) field that does a similar thing, but it's very similar.  I
>> >> >>> am
>> >> >>> wondering what the best way to handle this, particularly since any
>> >> >>> frontend that wants to use the HaloProfiler will need this field
>> >> >>> unless standard_fields is amended not to include it.
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> Should we:
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>>  * Define a Dark_Matter_Density for each frontend?
>> >> >>>  * Define a universal field that defines Dark_Matter_Density
>> >> >>> globally?
>> >> >>>  * Change the field we examine from Dark_Matter_Density to a
>> >> >>> different
>> >> >>> field that is defined by yt, not assumed to be in the output file?
>> >> >>>  * Should we check if every standard_field is in the output
>> >> >>> (pf.h.derived_field_list) before adding it?
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> Britton, I think you might have the best idea of how to fix this,
>> >> >>> but
>> >> >>> Sam Leitner I know has been working on using Halo Profiler on other
>> >> >>> datasets.
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> Thanks,
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> Matt
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> PS Please hit "reply all" so that Meghann, who reported this in
>> >> >>> #yt,
>> >> >>> sees the response.
>> >> >>> _______________________________________________
>> >> >>> yt-dev mailing list
>> >> >>> yt-dev at lists.spacepope.org
>> >> >>> http://lists.spacepope.org/listinfo.cgi/yt-dev-spacepope.org
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >> --
>> >> >> Cameron Hummels
>> >> >> Postdoctoral Researcher
>> >> >> Steward Observatory
>> >> >> University of Arizona
>> >> >> http://chummels.org
>> >> >>
>> >> >> _______________________________________________
>> >> >> yt-dev mailing list
>> >> >> yt-dev at lists.spacepope.org
>> >> >> http://lists.spacepope.org/listinfo.cgi/yt-dev-spacepope.org
>> >> >>
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > _______________________________________________
>> >> > yt-dev mailing list
>> >> > yt-dev at lists.spacepope.org
>> >> > http://lists.spacepope.org/listinfo.cgi/yt-dev-spacepope.org
>> >> >
>> >> _______________________________________________
>> >> yt-dev mailing list
>> >> yt-dev at lists.spacepope.org
>> >> http://lists.spacepope.org/listinfo.cgi/yt-dev-spacepope.org
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > yt-dev mailing list
>> > yt-dev at lists.spacepope.org
>> > http://lists.spacepope.org/listinfo.cgi/yt-dev-spacepope.org
>> >
>> _______________________________________________
>> yt-dev mailing list
>> yt-dev at lists.spacepope.org
>> http://lists.spacepope.org/listinfo.cgi/yt-dev-spacepope.org
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> yt-dev mailing list
> yt-dev at lists.spacepope.org
> http://lists.spacepope.org/listinfo.cgi/yt-dev-spacepope.org
>