New EPL+powerlawmultipole profile (EPL+PLMultipole) #683
Conversation
Powerlaw multipol coupled with EPL
…inst lenstronomy implementation
for more information, see https://pre-commit.ci
|
Thank you very much @eckerl for the PR! @dangilman recently implemented some multipol models in a similar spirit in #682. @dangilman I add you as a reviewer here. I am sure there are things done slightly differently but to avoid too many duplications |
|
@eckerl there seems to be an import statement that is not done fully correctly that make the tests crash |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Thank you for the contribution @eckerl! I left a couple of comments in the new profile class, mainly regarding missing docstrings.
Before merging, can you please add a test in test_numeric_lens_differentials for this profile? Also, I suggest you add this profile to the list of compatible lens models in the Solver4Point class
|
|
||
| class EPL_PMultipol(LensProfileBase): | ||
| """This class contains a EPL+PLMultipole contribution over e1,e2. | ||
| The PLMultipole is an extention to the parametrization of Chu et al.(2013) (https://arxiv.org/abs/1302.5482). The equation is Eq. (8) from Nightingale et al. (2023) (https://arxiv.org/abs/2209.10566) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
please add note here that this is a circular multipole, rather than an elliptical multipole i.e. it introduces a multipole deviation around a circle rather than an ellipse.
| Here, \( k^{\rm mass}_m \) and \( \phi^{\rm mass}_m \) are parameterized as elliptical components: | ||
| \[ | ||
| \left(\epsilon_{\rm 1}^{\rm mp}, \epsilon_{\rm 2}^{\rm mp}\right) | ||
| \] |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Please add note here that notation k_m will be used to denote a multipole strength for a non-isothermal profile, whereas a_m will be used for multipole perturbations to isothermal profiles
| :param gamma: power law slope | ||
| :param e1: eccentricity component | ||
| :param e2: eccentricity component | ||
| :param center_x: profile center |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
add docstrings for m and k_m
| :param gamma: power law slope | ||
| :param e1: eccentricity component | ||
| :param e2: eccentricity component | ||
| :param center_x: profile center |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
missing docstrings for m and k_m
| :param gamma: power law slope | ||
| :param q: axis ratio | ||
| :param phi: position angle | ||
| :param center_x: profile center |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
missing docstrings for m and k_m
| :param theta_E: Einstein radius | ||
| :param gamma: power law slope | ||
| :param q: axis ratio | ||
| :param phi: position angle |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
missing docstrings for m and k_m
| :param theta_E: Einstein radius | ||
| :param gamma: power law slope | ||
| :param q: axis ratio | ||
| :param phi: position angle |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
missing docstrings for m and k_m
A new combined profile of EPL+powerlawmultipole.
The PLMultipole is an extention to the parametrization of Chu et al.(2013) (https://arxiv.org/abs/1302.5482). The equation used is Eq. (8) from Nightingale et al. (2023) (https://arxiv.org/abs/2209.10566)
It scales the contribution of the multipoles with the same power-law as the EPL. It is defined with a prefactor 1/2 and the einstein radius theta_e in order to achieve k = theta_E / 2theta as the m=0 contribution (Reason stated in Chu et al.(2013) (https://arxiv.org/abs/1302.5482) Eq. (3)) The Multipole definition before is only valid in the isothermal case and should only be used with isothermal profiles. This is a profile which is already the combination of an EPL+PLMultipol and not its own multipole profile.