Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

--- tests:sphtri [2015/09/03 14:41] – justin
+++ tests:sphtri [2022/10/24 12:10] (current) – external edit 127.0.0.1
@@ Line 8: / Line 8: @@
 **Key working group coordinator:** Justin Read
+**Summary of 2015 Gaia Challenge:** {{:tests:summary_sphericaltriaxial.pdf|Summary GCIII}}
 ----
@@ Line 23: / Line 24: @@
   * [[:tests:sphtri:triaxial|Triaxial models]]
   * [[:tests:sphtri:tidal|Tidally stripped models]]
+  * [[:tests:sphtri:axion|Axion DM model]]
 ====== Priority order of runs ======
@@ Line 82: / Line 83: @@
   *   * half-projeted-mass radius <latex>$R_{1/2}$</latex> (<latex>$R_{\rm eff}$</latex> in ellitpical galaxy parlance) and uncertainty (although one could numerically estimate it by fitting <latex>$\nu(r)$</latex> and projecting).
   * Should we provide maximum likelihood estimation (MLE) values of the profiles as well? This seems relevant for the DM density profiles of <latex>$\gamma_{\rm DM}$</latex> (core DM) models, for which the median slope is not 0, but the MLE slope is.
-  * Could add <latex>$J_{\rm LOS}$</latex> and <latex>$J_{\rm ap}$</latex> (line-of-sight and aperture terms for the γ-ray emission from DM annihilation.
+  * Could add <latex>$J_{\rm LOS}$</latex> and <latex>$J_{\rm ap}$</latex> (line-of-sight and aperture terms for the γ-ray emission from DM annihilation).
 //Questions on comparisons of methods//