List of features:
- ICRU 49 date tables for protons and Helium ions (PSTAR, ASTAR)
- MSTAR for heavy ions
- ICRU 73 with and without the erratum for water target
- A Bethe implementation for any ion, including Linhard-Sørensen equation for low energies
- Support for 278 ICRU target materials, i.e. the complete ESTAR material table, all with default I-values for the Bethe equation
- I-values can be overridden for elements
- Automatic application of Bragg's additivity rule, if requested target material does not exist in default table for e.g. MSTAR.
- Detailed documentation, and multiple example files
- CMAKE based installer, with uninstall target.
- getdedx as a frontend command line program for querying the library
- Two modes of operation: simple for lazy programmers and fast for e.g. MC codes.
- GPL license (non-GPL versions available upon request)
 | ||
| How to use libdEdx, simplest possible example. |
Demonstration of command line program getdedx. 100 MeV protons using PSTAR on water:
Usage: getdedx program_id Z icru_target_id energy. bassler@kepler:~$ getdedx 2 1 276 100 100.000000 MeV/u HYDROGEN ions on WATER target using PSTAR dEdx = 7.286E+00 MeV cm2/g
Carbon ions on alanine target, using ICRU 73:
bassler@kepler: getdedx 5 6 105 400 400.000000 MeV/u CARBON ions on ALANINE target using ICRU73 Bragg's additivity rule was applied, since compound ALANINE is not in ICRU73 data table. dEdx = 1.068E+02 MeV cm2/g
For reporting bugs and feature request, you can use our trac ticket system or drop us an email.
So why GPL and not LGPL?
ReplyDeleteThe reason why we avoided LGPL is essentially described here:
ReplyDeletehttp://www.gnu.org/licenses/why-not-lgpl.html
This does not preclude commercial use as long as the copyright is maintained by us. Principally we can distribute with a dual licensing scheme, similar as MySQL or QT.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dual_license
But in the long run it may end as LGPL, e.g. if external authors contribute to the code.
It is my impression that it is more safe to release code as GPL. One can always change to LGPL without loosing audience, but the other way round is IMHO potentially more troublesome.