Changeset View
Changeset View
Standalone View
Standalone View
src/LauKMatrixProdPole.cc
Show First 20 Lines • Show All 78 Lines • ▼ Show 20 Lines | LauComplex LauKMatrixProdPole::amplitude(const LauKinematics* kinematics) | ||||
thePropagator_->updatePropagator(kinematics); | thePropagator_->updatePropagator(kinematics); | ||||
// Sum the pole denominator terms over all channels j, multiplying by | // Sum the pole denominator terms over all channels j, multiplying by | ||||
// the propagator terms. Note that we do not sum over poles, since we | // the propagator terms. Note that we do not sum over poles, since we | ||||
// only want one of the production pole terms. | // only want one of the production pole terms. | ||||
Int_t nChannels = thePropagator_->getNChannels(); | Int_t nChannels = thePropagator_->getNChannels(); | ||||
Int_t jChannel; | Int_t jChannel; | ||||
for (jChannel = 0; jChannel < nChannels; jChannel++) { | for (jChannel = 0; jChannel < nChannels; jChannel++) { | ||||
johndan: @jback, here I assume the 0th channel is the one for which the amplitude is requested. This… | |||||
Done Inline ActionsWell, you could have the case where the first channel has L = 0, but others have L > 0. So we should check if the propagator has any non-zero L channels, perhaps by returning a cached boolean that keeps track of this condition at initialisation. Do we need to include the resBWFactor? I thought this was already in the "D" matrices (denominator terms involving q, a and R). jback: Well, you could have the case where the first channel has L = 0, but others have L > 0. So we… | |||||
Done Inline ActionsOn the first point, I don't think it matters if other channels have L>0 does it? Why do we need to track it? On the second, I think you're spot on - the resBWFactor has been dropped as you say. johndan: On the first point, I don't think it matters if other channels have L>0 does it? Why do we need… | |||||
Done Inline ActionsYes, we don't need to track this since we have changed how the angular dependence is included. jback: Yes, we don't need to track this since we have changed how the angular dependence is included. | |||||
Double_t gj = thePropagator_->getCouplingConstant(poleIndex_, jChannel); | Double_t gj = thePropagator_->getCouplingConstant(poleIndex_, jChannel); | ||||
LauComplex prodTerm = thePropagator_->getPropTerm(jChannel); | LauComplex prodTerm = thePropagator_->getPropTerm(jChannel); | ||||
prodTerm.rescale(gj); | prodTerm.rescale(gj); | ||||
amp += prodTerm; | amp += prodTerm; | ||||
} | } | ||||
Double_t poleDenom = thePropagator_->getPoleDenomTerm(poleIndex_); | Double_t poleDenom = thePropagator_->getPoleDenomTerm(poleIndex_); | ||||
// Include Adler zero factor if requested | // Include Adler zero factor if requested | ||||
Double_t adlerZero(1.0); | Double_t adlerZero(1.0); | ||||
if (useProdAdler_) {adlerZero = thePropagator_->getAdlerZero();} | if (useProdAdler_) {adlerZero = thePropagator_->getAdlerZero();} | ||||
amp.rescale(poleDenom*adlerZero); | amp.rescale(poleDenom*adlerZero); | ||||
return amp; | return amp; | ||||
} | } | ||||
const std::vector<LauParameter*>& LauKMatrixProdPole::getFloatingParameters() | |||||
{ | |||||
this->clearFloatingParameters(); | |||||
Int_t nChannels = thePropagator_->getNChannels(); | |||||
for (int jChannel = 0 ; jChannel < nChannels ; jChannel++) | |||||
{ | |||||
LauParameter& par_gj_ = thePropagator_->getCouplingParameter(poleIndex_, jChannel); | |||||
if ( !par_gj_.fixed() ) | |||||
this->addFloatingParameter( &par_gj_ ); | |||||
} | |||||
return this->getParameters(); | |||||
} | |||||
Done Inline ActionsBraces have gone missing tlatham: Braces have gone missing | |||||
No newline at end of file |
@jback, here I assume the 0th channel is the one for which the amplitude is requested. This assumption has precedence in your code, right?