-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 35
Picht #242
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
Comments
Editor in Chief checksHi there! Thank you for submitting your package for pyOpenSci Please check our Python packaging guide for more information on the elements
Editor commentsHi @rolypolytoy, thanks for submitting the package. Installation hiccupsI'm running into issues installing it as you're using a newer version of NumPy v2.2.z with
Test document here: https://github.com/coatless/pyopensci-eic/blob/main/i242-picht.ipynb DocumentationThe package is missing a user-facing documentation website. Please see our guide here for help on creating docs using https://www.pyopensci.org/python-package-guide/documentation/index.html ActionsPlease address the above points and ping me to restart the EIC checklist once complete. |
Hi @coatless, My test document is here: I've also added a user-facing website using Github pages at: https://rolypolytoy.github.io/picht/ using Sphinx. I've kept in the installation instructions and tutorial examples. I've also added much cleaner documentation in the repository, including significantly more comments and docstrings to enable easy modification of the internals by potential contributors or forkers. Let me know if you find any more bugs or need any more changes to this submission, I'm happy to improve Picht as much as necessary! |
@rolypolytoy thanks for the update. I'm still running into version conflicts on Colab. That may be due to some underlying config or test group I'm in. ![]() Running locally, the new versioned packages work: ![]() Regarding the documentation site, there are still a few ways to go. We need the API documentation: Alongside a package tutorial that differs from the README.md: |
Hi @coatless, As for docstrings- I've added them to my code (https://github.com/rolypolytoy/picht/blob/main/picht/core.py) with better type hints and explanations of what everything does. I've also added 3 new tutorial examples- to better enable people to create complex lens systems out of the box and avoid common design pitfalls, and I've only added it to the documentation website to provide a proper separation between the README.md and the documentation website, which is more in-depth: https://rolypolytoy.github.io/picht/ Let me know if there are any more changes that need to be made! |
@rolypolytoy need docs site to include the API listing and new tutorials. From our docs, you can see an example of the docstrings being converted to a web API: https://www.fatiando.org/verde/latest/api/index.html This requires using an extension: https://www.sphinx-doc.org/en/master/usage/extensions/autodoc.html Lastly, for the new tutorials, you will need to enable Sphinx gallery likely: |
@coatless |
@coatless sorry about the ping, just wanted to follow up to see if this fulfils the pre-review requirements |
@rolypolytoy It would be good to streamline the navigation bar on the left hand side with a "Getting Started" Section first instead of the API. You can see the sidebar example structure here: https://www.fatiando.org/verde/latest/index.html The reason for these asks is both users and the reviewers will need a solid starting place to understand your package. |
Of course, I'll make sure the website's a lot more intuitively structured and make the function and usability of Picht a lot more clear, I'll get back to you with the changes soon. |
@coatless, Added a Computational Physics section that explains the formalism of the library to better understand the computational physics concepts it uses (implicitly functions as both an 'About' section and a 'Contributing' section by explaining its internals to make it easier to contribute out-of-the-box). It explains how it solves for the electric field and gives a bit of background about FDM and why we use it: https://rolypolytoy.github.io/picht/physics.html Manually created API documentation rather than using Sphinx Autodoc, making the API documentation noticeably cleaner: https://rolypolytoy.github.io/picht/api.html Renamed the Tutorials section to Gallery, but otherwise kept it identical or near-identical: https://rolypolytoy.github.io/picht/auto_examples/index.html Let me know about any more changes that'll improve Picht's presentation/appeal and any other pre-review steps necessary |
@rolypolytoy thanks for the updates. I'll switch this to finding an editor. That might take some cycles given the topic. |
Hi, just commenting here for transparency: I have a full changelog at: https://github.com/rolypolytoy/picht/releases |
Submitting Author: (@rolypolytoy)
All current maintainers: (@rolypolytoy)
Package Name: Picht
One-Line Description of Package: Electron and ion optics simulation using the Finite Difference Method (FDM)
Repository Link: https://github.com/rolypolytoy/picht/
Version submitted: v2.1.0
EiC: @coatless
Editor: TBD
Reviewer 1: TBD
Reviewer 2: TBD
Archive:
JOSS DOI: TBD
Version accepted: TBD
Date accepted (month/day/year): TBD
Code of Conduct & Commitment to Maintain Package
Description
Simulates electron and ion trajectories using the finite difference method. Exists as an easy, powerful alternative to commercial electrodynamics tools, and stands apart from existing open-source tools by using the finite difference method instead of the boundary element/finite element method, for better support in Dirichlet boundaries (grounded boundary conditions vs infinite). Uses the more physically accurate Lorentz force equation rather than the paraxial ray equation, computes relativistic corrections using the gamma factor, and calculates electron and ion trajectories through electrostatic lenses like cylindrical lenses and unipotential lenses. Example cases demonstrate physically realistic behaviors of electrons inside einzel lenses and through multi-lens systems, where Picht demonstrates simulations of complex focusing and defocusing behaviors, as well as crossovers, spherical aberration, and spot-size demagnification.
Scope
Please indicate which category or categories.
Check out our package scope page to learn more about our
scope. (If you are unsure of which category you fit, we suggest you make a pre-submission inquiry):
Domain Specific
Community Partnerships
If your package is associated with an
existing community please check below:
Data Processing/Munging: Picht allows the initialization of custom electrode geometries and then generates electron trajectory data based on this. This allows a physically accurate analysis of the impact of variable geometries and voltages on charged particle beams of different kinds.
Scientific Software Wrappers: The code is modular enough to be used as a more general electrodynamics tool due to the clean nature of how the ODE solver can integrate with other functions, so I thought to put this in here too, since using scipy's ODE solvers for the niche application of numerical electrodynamics is novel enough to add to the scientific community, but derivative enough to require this category.
Who is the target audience and what are scientific applications of this package?
Researchers, startups, and students in electrodynamics, electron optics, electron microscopy, or nanofabrication. It can be used to simulate or prototype electrostatic lens systems, scanning electron microscopes using predominantly electrostatic lenses, focused ion beam systems, and some varieties of mass spectrometers. It is also useful as an educational tool in the field of electron optics because of how intuitive the syntax is and how intentionally constrained the features are. Its power is in the large amount of electrical and geometric parameterization it allows, rather than a large amount of prebuilt functions.
Are there other Python packages that accomplish the same thing? If so, how does yours differ?
There exists a similar package called Traceon (https://github.com/leon-vv/traceon) but it's distinct enough that it supports a different use case. Traceon assumes the user is fluent in meshing, has more support for 3D particle tracing than the axisymmetric view, and has a larger learning curve. Picht uses no approximations but instead uses the Lorentz force equation for guaranteeably accurate physical behavior, uses better boundary conditions, has much simpler dependency management, and is intentionally constrained in scope to enable rapid prototyping and easy syntax. In addition- commercial software packages like ANSYS Maxwell or COMSOL, as well as most open-source electrodynamics software like Traceon use Neumann boundary conditions natively rather than Dirichlet boundary methods- and the differences in boundary effects are distinct enough that this is an important point of clarification. Dirichlet boundary conditions more accurately simulate finite container conditions- where the electrodes are surrounded by metal grounded containers rather than in an infinitely open space or with insulators surrounding.
If you made a pre-submission enquiry, please paste the link to the corresponding issue, forum post, or other discussion, or
@tag
the editor you contacted:Technical checks
For details about the pyOpenSci packaging requirements, see our packaging guide. Confirm each of the following by checking the box. This package:
Publication Options
JOSS Checks
paper.md
matching JOSS's requirements with a high-level description in the package root or ininst/
.Note: JOSS accepts our review as theirs. You will NOT need to go through another full review. JOSS will only review your paper.md file. Be sure to link to this pyOpenSci issue when a JOSS issue is opened for your package. Also be sure to tell the JOSS editor that this is a pyOpenSci reviewed package once you reach this step.
Are you OK with Reviewers Submitting Issues and/or pull requests to your Repo Directly?
This option will allow reviewers to open smaller issues that can then be linked to PR's rather than submitting a more dense text based review. It will also allow you to demonstrate addressing the issue via PR links.
Confirm each of the following by checking the box.
Please fill out our survey
submission and improve our peer review process. We will also ask our reviewers
and editors to fill this out.
P.S. Have feedback/comments about our review process? Leave a comment here
Editor and Review Templates
The editor template can be found here.
The review template can be found here.
Footnotes
Please fill out a pre-submission inquiry before submitting a data visualization package. ↩
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: