Skip to content
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

Remove renormalization scale mentions in the code #166

Closed
alecandido opened this issue Nov 21, 2022 · 2 comments · Fixed by #222
Closed

Remove renormalization scale mentions in the code #166

alecandido opened this issue Nov 21, 2022 · 2 comments · Fixed by #222
Labels
refactor Refactor code

Comments

@alecandido
Copy link
Member

alecandido commented Nov 21, 2022

The first obvious place is fac_to_ren_ratio, that has been terrible for quite some time, and finally identified as wrong.

Renormalization scale is only affecting the process side, so it does not enter at all DGLAP evolution.

We should replace all occurrences with the process scale $Q^2$, possibly after replacing all occurrences of Q2 as factorization scale, as described in #157

At the beginning, we had the problem on how to split the yadism and evolution settings in the database, but this is no longer a problem: the variations are only fact and ren, there is no further degree of freedom. Whether this affects evolution or processes depends on the scheme choice, and it is resolved by Pineko.
There is no need to split them in separate theory options, simply EKO and yadism (w/ generator friends) will potentially receive two different theories, because only one of them should implement fact scvar.

This is already an improvement on its own. E.g. since EKO does not implement ren scvar, it should never receive the option in the first place.
So, we will trim theory cards that we are passing around NNPDF/pineko#61

@giacomomagni
Copy link
Collaborator

giacomomagni commented Feb 21, 2023

This should be closed by solving #215

@giacomomagni giacomomagni linked a pull request Mar 6, 2023 that will close this issue
@giacomomagni giacomomagni linked a pull request Mar 14, 2023 that will close this issue
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
refactor Refactor code
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

3 participants