You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Currently, because of the one-to-one relationship set up by digitizer_sensor_pairs.json, a setup with more than one sensor attached to a single digitizer uses the same sensor sensitivity for all three sensors. For example, imagine a three-element array configuration where digitizer AEX is attached to SN49, SN50, and SN51. With the current code, the sensitivity for SN49 would be used for all three sensors.
A possible fix for this is to allow for lists (which are valid JSON) to be used in the pairs file. E.g., the top line in digitizer_sensor_pairs.json could be
"AEX" : ["SN49", "SN50", "SN51"]
and we could put some logic here in the script to select and apply the correct sensitivity to each element.
————————
However — is this even possible? Because we would need to know the correspondence between the .pri0, .pri1, and .pri2 files and the sensor. Is it possible to know this, e.g. from noting how the sensors are attached to the breakout box? If not, then there's no use in implementing the above, and users should instead use something like:
"AEX" : "any_made_up_id"
Which will result in a KeyError when looking up the sensitivity, and use DEFAULT_SENSITIVITY for all elements, which seems like the most logical behavior. Of course, this would need to be documented!
And speaking of documentation, non-UAF users who don't have their own sensor naming convention like us will want to do the above anyways — pinging @leighton-watson. 😃
Currently, because of the one-to-one relationship set up by
digitizer_sensor_pairs.json
, a setup with more than one sensor attached to a single digitizer uses the same sensor sensitivity for all three sensors. For example, imagine a three-element array configuration where digitizer AEX is attached to SN49, SN50, and SN51. With the current code, the sensitivity for SN49 would be used for all three sensors.A possible fix for this is to allow for lists (which are valid JSON) to be used in the pairs file. E.g., the top line in
digitizer_sensor_pairs.json
could beand we could put some logic here in the script to select and apply the correct sensitivity to each element.
————————
However — is this even possible? Because we would need to know the correspondence between the
.pri0
,.pri1
, and.pri2
files and the sensor. Is it possible to know this, e.g. from noting how the sensors are attached to the breakout box? If not, then there's no use in implementing the above, and users should instead use something like:Which will result in a
KeyError
when looking up the sensitivity, and useDEFAULT_SENSITIVITY
for all elements, which seems like the most logical behavior. Of course, this would need to be documented!And speaking of documentation, non-UAF users who don't have their own sensor naming convention like us will want to do the above anyways — pinging @leighton-watson. 😃
————————
Pinging @davidfee5, @jegestrich, and @amiezzi as UAF DATA-CUBE3 users.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: