Formal integral documentation

[isaacgsmith]

Description

This creates new, in-depth documentation for the formal integral, and adds physics information to the formal integral docstrings.

How has this been tested?

• Testing pipeline.
• Documentation built locally and on GitHub.

Examples

The new documentation page:
https://smithis7.github.io/tardis/branch/formal_integral_doc/physics/spectrum/formal_integral.html

Type of change

• Bug fix.
• New feature.
• Breaking change.
• None of the above.

Checklist

• My change requires a change to the documentation.
  • I have updated the documentation accordingly.
  • (optional) I have built the documentation on my fork following the instructions.
• I have assigned and requested two reviewers for this pull request.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Merging #1921 (976d447) into master (5d6e229) will increase coverage by 1.37%.
The diff coverage is 66.66%.

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master    #1921      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   58.76%   60.13%   +1.37%     
==========================================
  Files          70       70              
  Lines        7843     8108     +265     
==========================================
+ Hits         4609     4876     +267     
+ Misses       3234     3232       -2     

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
...dis/montecarlo/montecarlo_numba/formal_integral.py	53.87% <66.66%> (ø)
tardis/tardis/plasma/properties/nlte.py
...ontecarlo/montecarlo_numba/formal_integral_cuda.py
tardis/tardis/plasma/standard_plasmas.py
...s/tardis/montecarlo/montecarlo_numba/estimators.py
tardis/tardis/visualization/plot_util.py
tardis/tardis/io/util.py
tardis/tardis/montecarlo/montecarlo_numba/base.py
tardis/tardis/io/parsers/arepo.py
...dis/tardis/visualization/tools/convergence_plot.py
... and 131 more

📣 Codecov can now indicate which changes are the most critical in Pull Requests. Learn more

[tardis-bot]

Before a pull request is accepted, it must meet the following criteria:

• Is the necessary information provided?
• Is this a duplicate PR?
  • If a new PR is clearly a duplicate, ask how this PR is different from the original PR?
  • If this PR is about to be merged, close the original PR with a link to this new PR that solved the issue.
• Does it pass existing tests and are new tests provided if required?
  • The test coverage should not decrease, and for new features should be close to 100%.
• Is the code tidy?
  • No unnecessary print lines or code comments.

[review-notebook-app]

Check out this pull request on 

See visual diffs & provide feedback on Jupyter Notebooks.

---

Powered by ReviewNB