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

docs: support surface calibration #697

Draft
wants to merge 3 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from
Draft

Conversation

JoepVanlier
Copy link
Member

@JoepVanlier JoepVanlier commented Oct 2, 2024

Why this (work in progress) PR?
Currently, users cannot reproduce the full surface calibration workflow.

This worked example will allow them to do so, and hopefully see the advantage active calibration brings in that situation.
Docs build here.

A few open questions I still have with this:

  • Touchdown seems to result in a bias of approx 100 nm here.
  • The focal shift seems to be around 0.91 for a water objective, which seems low? I would expect this closer to unity.

@JoepVanlier JoepVanlier force-pushed the surface_example branch 2 times, most recently from 3aba52b to f72e4db Compare October 2, 2024 18:47
Base automatically changed from spaces to main October 7, 2024 11:17
@JoepVanlier JoepVanlier force-pushed the surface_example branch 5 times, most recently from d0456db to 3e16271 Compare October 7, 2024 17:12
Copy link
Collaborator

@aafkevandenberg aafkevandenberg left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Hi Joep, this is super nice, this will be very useful.

I have to read this a couple of times to understand the details. But as a very general initial feedback I would say to splits this notebook in 2:

  1. First just list the steps that a user has to take to start using the activate calibration, in exactly the right order. So, somebody who downloads the notebook just can load his/her own data and quickly go through the steps. (And, link to the page on the pylake docs that explains how to recalibrate the force using the obtained stiffness)
  2. The second part of the docs can explain the background and the mechanisms that are taken into account, and how active and passive calibration are compared.

plt.plot(heights, [calibrations[h]["pc_z"].stiffness for h in keys], 'C2--')
plt.xlabel('Height [um]')
plt.ylabel('Stiffness [pN/nm]');

Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Here it would be helpful to add labels 'active calibration' and 'passive calibration' and a legend

@JoepVanlier
Copy link
Member Author

JoepVanlier commented Oct 10, 2024

Hi Joep, this is super nice, this will be very useful.

I have to read this a couple of times to understand the details. But as a very general initial feedback I would say to splits this notebook in 2:

1. First just list the steps that a user has to take to start using the activate calibration, in exactly the right order. So, somebody who downloads the notebook just can load his/her own data and quickly go through the steps. (And, link to the page on the pylake docs that explains how to recalibrate the force using the obtained stiffness)

2. The second part of the docs can explain the background and the mechanisms that are taken into account, and how active and passive calibration are compared.

Ah yes, 1 is part of the force calibration docs reshuffle. I spun this off from that branch, since the size of it was getting out of hand. This PR really only addresses point 2 for one more advanced use case (surface calibration).

edit: after discussing, it may be a good idea to move this entire notebook to the fundamentals section, as it contains a lot of detail that a typical use case probably doesn't require

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants