MLnz20 Original calibration - table and reference

[salichon]

Provisional entry for magnitude calibration (MLnz20)

[salichon]

WIP - will update with the station correction

[salichon]

Need an entry in README

[staylorofford]

Barring one comment to consider and assuming the corrections are pulled straight from the Table S3.csv, LGTM.

[elidana]

just a comment as I bumped into this. In delta, we already have a calibration folder, that is used to upload instrument-specific laboratory calibrations (currently for GNSS antennas and fluxgates).
I wonder if we should use a different terminology for site-specific magnitude calibration factors?

[staylorofford]

Good call @elidana. They are not calibrations in a true sense but corrections used to improve magnitude scale model fit. Can we just use corrections terminology @salichon ?

[salichon]

@staylorofford Okay
I ll use the same terminology as the paper

[salichon]

@staylorofford @Thomas-Benson Up we go .
Changed the file names and add citation - and do it for real

[ozym]

This is probably not how I would have laid out this file.

I'd think:

(a) Is the notes field really necessary? I'd much prefer a "lookup table" if there was something to say, free form fields are hard to validate, and is it needed.
(b) I tend to want to put the dates at the end of the list of columns (the notes tend to end up there due to external forces).
(c) The citations should ideally be done in alphabetical order, which is deterministic (e.g. A2023 B2024 vs B2024 A2023 is the same but different).

In the past there wasn't really any concept of a location code when it came to station corrections, do you therefore need to keep track of all variations, and magnitude differences related to boreholes would be very hard to isolate. Jury is out on this one, as it really limits when these corrections can be applied.

[salichon]

Hello @ozym !
thanks :)
fair enough, will keep working on that one indeed,
FYI @staylorofford
and Follow up on the ticket