Enables empty contrast models for domains calculations#442
Merged
Conversation
StephenNneji
approved these changes
Jun 9, 2026
StephenNneji
left a comment
StephenNneji
left a comment
Collaborator
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Thanks for fixing this, works as advertised.
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Following from #424, the PR enables RAT to run with contrasts containing empty models for domains calculations. As before this calculation is then the interface between two bulk phases. By definition, the domains have no effect on the calculation, since there are no domain-containing layers between the bulk phases. Hence, the two domain curves will always be identical in this case.
I have confirmed on testing that the results of a zero-layer calculation for the
normalanddomainscalculation types are the same.