Provide option to calculate Luminosity as done currently or as Luminosity per log neutrino energy

[apizzuto]

"Waxman and Murase (https://arxiv.org/abs/1607.01601) use effective luminosity. It’d be nice to have the option to use one or the other (N.B. no change needed for density vs. effective density)"

[renereimann]

The question is which Luminosity would you quote if not the effective.
When we calculate in SC mode the luminosity is an effective luminosity.
The conversion to a non effective luminosity is model dependent and depends on the source class.
In the Waxman and Murase paper you can have a look at Table 1 for a translation from effective luminosity to luminosity for specific source classes.
An more detailed explanation of the same is given in Mertsch et al (http://arxiv.org/abs/1612.07311) in Appendix C. There they detail all the assumptions and calculations that go into the calculations.

As this is all very model dependent I think it is better to stay with an effective luminosity. What we have to make clear in the documentation is on how to interpret the luminosity that is output by FIRESONG.

[renereimann]

Another thing is that Waxman and Murase give luminosity as "The muon neutrino luminosity is defined
as the luminosity per logarithmic neutrino energy bin".
In general Luminosity depends on an energy range. I think in our case we take it to be in the 1TeV to 1PeV region which is the detected energy. However due to red shift this is not emitted luminosity.
For an E^-2 spectrum conversion to luminosity per logarithmic neutrino energy bin is relative straight forward. However we also want to be able to take other spectra into account.
We should clearly define what our luminosity is (and we can add an option to return luminosity per log neutrino energy).

[itaboada]

Thanks René, this is useful. I agree that having an option to go for either Luminosity per log neutrino energy or using the current Firesong method is good. So, I'll rename the issue.