There are now three Python packages for HepMC3 on PyPI, https://pypi.org/project/HepMC3/ and https://pypi.org/project/pyhepmc-ng/ and https://pypi.org/project/pyhepmc. It looks like there is still an agreement to merge pyhepmc-ng into pyhepmc, so there will be two competing packages.
The HepMC3 bindings are based on pybind11, but autogenerated with binder. They do not offer a Pythonic interface, just a plain mapping of the C++ interface.
Anyway, my plan is still to continue pyhepmc for the time being.
Will try to revert this...
Looks like it can be reinstalled here: https://github.com/apps/wip
But I will wait for some feedback before messing up more
We can actually add it for select Scikit-HEP repositories. It’s not ideal (since it has to be enabled one-by-one, rather than opt-out, which would be better). I have never liked that it adds a check to the list of checks; “draft” mode in GitHub is better but cannot be enabled after the fact. When working with someone else’s PR (like a summer of code student), it can be useful to add a WIP after the fact.
If yet another admin uninstalls it, we need to set up a proper club. :)
Has anyone played with this and can share experience?
In my understanding, you can auto-generate the gradient for a score function with this.
It looks like normal numpy code, so I don't have to learn tensorflow to use it
It also jit-compiles the Python code and can run it on the GPU
Yes, I did, It is in fact very nice and works quite well for some things (yes, gradient, gpu etc) but is not yet production ready. E.g. using it with scipy does often not work, also you cannot do certain things syntax wise (AFAIR). So it's a really nice tool, mostly for existing code. But since TF and PyTorch are very similar, I personally prefer one of those, they seem more explicit to me and are built from ground up for this kind of things.
FYI the package
scikit-stats has just been renamed hepstats :D https://github.com/scikit-hep/hepstats
@marinang I'm glad: giving the right impression about the scope will save complaints later. I know we took a Scikit name for Scikit-HEP, but that one seemed appropriate because the HEP community is a well-defined scope. Some have complained that "HEP" doesn't describe neutrino experiments and direct detection dark matter searches—I agree; I think that "particle physics" is a better-defined group of related interests—but there isn't a nice acronym for "particle physics." I hope the neutron magnetic moment guys forgive us for using "HEP" everywhere!
Indeed we've always said "...aim of providing Particle Physics at large..." :-)
on the website..
As many of you know, Giordon, Lukas, and I are happy to announce that
pyhf has now joined Scikit-HEP. Our new home is over at https://github.com/scikit-hep/pyhf :)
Hi All. Can all the project maintainers please add the #scikit-hep topic tag to their GitHub repos? I think it would be quite nice to have this topic become more discoverable on GitHub: https://github.com/topics/scikit-hep
I'm asking around to see if I can get someone to submit a PR for us to
github/explore to get the tag recognized. We can't submit one as one of the checks is "I have no affiliation with the project I am suggesting (as a maintainer, creator, contractor, or employee)."
I was thinking it would be nice if we designed a Scikit-HEP badge that would link to the project webpage that all projects would have in their READMEs. While this might first seem redundant as they are all under the Scikit-HEP GitHub org, as the READMEs end up getting put up on PyPI during publishing it could be a useful way to get a curious user from PyPI to the project quickly.
Thoughts? Also, as I rely on GitHub Issues to get anything done if there are no complaints from @henryiii I'll open an Issue on the website repo to further discuss this.
