Pippi — Painless parsing, post-processing and plotting of posterior and likelihood samples

Technical Report

Abstract.

Interpreting samples from likelihood or posterior probability density functions is rarely as straightforward as it seems it should be. Producing publication-quality graphics of these distributions is often similarly painful. In this short note I describe pippi, a simple, publicly available package for parsing and post-processing such samples, as well as generating high-quality PDF graphics of the results. Pippi is easily and extensively configurable and customisable, both in its options for parsing and post-processing samples, and in the visual aspects of the figures it produces. I illustrate some of these using an existing supersymmetric global fit, performed in the context of a gamma-ray search for dark matter. Pippi can be downloaded and followed at http://github.com/patscott/pippi.

Supplementary material

13360_2012_269_MOESM1_ESM.pdf (59 kb)
Supplementary material
13360_2012_269_MOESM2_ESM.pdf (29 kb)
Supplementary material
13360_2012_269_MOESM3_ESM.pdf (86 kb)
Supplementary material
13360_2012_269_MOESM4_ESM.pdf (97 kb)
Supplementary material

References

  1. 1.
    B.C. Allanach, C.G. Lester, Phys. Rev. D 73, 015013 (2006) arXiv:hep-ph/0507283 DOI:10.1103/PhysRevD.73.015013 ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    R. Trotta, F. Feroz, M. Hobson et al., JHEP 12, 24 (2008) arXiv:0809.3792 DOI:10.1088/1126-6708/2008/12/024 ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    P. Scott, J. Conrad, J. Edsjö et al., JCAP 1, 31 (2010) arXiv:0909.3300 DOI:10.1088/1475-7516/2010/01/031 ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Y. Akrami, P. Scott, J. Edsjö et al., JHEP 4, 57 (2010) arXiv:0910.3950 DOI:10.1007/JHEP04(2010)057 ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Y. Akrami, C. Savage, P. Scott et al., JCAP 4, 12 (2011) arXiv:1011.4318 DOI:10.1088/1475-7516/2011/04/012 ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Y. Akrami, C. Savage, P. Scott et al., JCAP 7, 2 (2011) arXiv:1011.4297 DOI:10.1088/1475-7516/2011/07/002 ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    P. Bechtle, T. Bringmann, K. Desch et al., JHEP 6, 98 (2012) arXiv:1204.4199 DOI:10.1007/JHEP06(2012)098 ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    A. Lewis, S. Bridle, Phys. Rev. D 66, 10, 103511 (2002) arXiv:astro-ph/0205436 DOI:10.1103/PhysRevD.66.103511 Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    R. Easther, H. Peiris, Phys. Rev. D 85, 103533 (2012) arXiv:1112.0326 DOI:10.1103/PhysRevD.85.103533 ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    A. Putze, L. Derome, D. Maurin, Astron. Astrophys. 516, A66 (2010) arXiv:1001.0551 ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    R. Trotta, G. Jóhannesson, I.V. Moskalenko et al., Astrophys. J. 729, 106 (2011) arXiv:1011.0037 DOI:10.1088/0004-637X/729/2/106 ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    W.H. Press, S.A. Tuekolsky, W.T. Vetterling, Numerical Recipes, 3rd edition (Cambridge University Press, 2007)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    J. Skilling, in American Institute of Physics Conference Series, edited by R. Fischer, R. Preuss, U.V. Toussaint, Vol. 735 (2004) pp. 395--405Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    F. Feroz, M.P. Hobson, M. Bridges, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 398, 1601 (2009) arXiv:0809.3437 DOI:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2009.14548.x ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    P. Charbonneau, Astrophys. J. Suppl. Ser. 101, 309 (1995) 10.1086/192242ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    R. Storn, K. Price, J. Global Optimization 11, 4, 341 (1997) 10.1023/A:1008202821328MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    P. Scott, C. Savage, J. Edsjö, to be published in JCAP (2012) arXiv:1207.0810
  18. 18.
    L. Moneta, K. Belasco, K. Cranmer et al., PoS ACAT2010, 057 (2010) arXiv:1009.1003 Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Società Italiana di Fisica and Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of PhysicsMcGill UniversityMontréalCanada

Personalised recommendations