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

Undefined binaries in flow: ('H-rich_Core_H_burning', 'H-rich_Core_H_burning', 'RLO2', 'oRLO2') #419

Open
celiotine opened this issue Oct 22, 2024 · 6 comments
Assignees
Labels
v2 feature should go in v2 wontfix This will not be worked on

Comments

@celiotine
Copy link
Contributor

Binaries with the parameters ('H-rich_Core_H_burning', 'H-rich_Core_H_burning', 'RLO2', 'oRLO2') are failing because they are not handled in the flow. An example of one such binary:

ini_filepath_IF = "/projects/b1119/cliotine/pulsar_dev/pulsar_pops/runs/oct_2024/Sukhbold+16/grid_reruns_final/params.ini"
sim_kwargs_IF = simprop_kwargs_from_ini(ini_filepath_IF)
sim_prop_IF = SimulationProperties(**sim_kwargs_IF)
sim_prop_IF.load_steps(verbose=True)

star_1 = SingleStar(**{'mass':   6.263565862272097, 'state': 'H-rich_Core_H_burning',
                'natal_kick_array': [None, None, None, None]})
star_2 = SingleStar(**{'mass': 4.042250364920023, 'state': 'H-rich_Core_H_burning',
                'natal_kick_array': [None, None, None, None]})
binary_IF = BinaryStar(star_1, star_2, **{'time': 0.0,  'state': 'detached',  'event': 'ZAMS', 
                        'orbital_period':  2.3130949924692237, 'eccentricity': 0.0}, properties = sim_prop_IF)
binary_IF.evolve()
Screen Shot 2024-10-22 at 9 38 00 AM
@celiotine celiotine self-assigned this Oct 24, 2024
@celiotine
Copy link
Contributor Author

Per discussion 10/24: this is most likely a bug with labeling the star type, should go to CC1 and form WD?

@celiotine
Copy link
Contributor Author

These binaries should be handled by PR #430.

@celiotine
Copy link
Contributor Author

In addition, I am wondering if something wonky is happening with the interpolation for these binaries? It is still unclear to me why they are entering RLO after HMS-HMS to begin with. This is the interpolation information for the binary above:

Screen Shot 2024-11-19 at 2 41 35 PM

So not sure if these systems should be entering CE?

@maxbriel
Copy link
Collaborator

@celiotine Yep. That looks like another classifier inconsistency to me. I've seen similar things in this issue #402

@celiotine
Copy link
Contributor Author

From discussion on 11/21: We think this is an interpolator issue, as the binary interpolation class and MT history do not match (former is unstable, latter is stable). @philipp-rajah and @mkruckow plan to discuss possible solutions in more detail.

For now, we agreed we can create a separate POSYDON error to handle these binaries, but keep the issue open until the underlying issue is resolved.

@celiotine
Copy link
Contributor Author

celiotine commented Jan 17, 2025

PR #430 was merged, which includes a ClassificationError catch for these binaries in the detached step.
I am leaving the issue open since the underlying problem still exists.

@celiotine celiotine added wontfix This will not be worked on and removed bug Something isn't working labels Jan 17, 2025
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
v2 feature should go in v2 wontfix This will not be worked on
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants