Changeset 14612 for branches/eam_branch_20070817/psModules/src/objects/models/pmModel_GAUSS.c

Timestamp:

Aug 22, 2007, 2:55:49 PM (19 years ago)

Author:

magnier

Message:

adjusted pmModel.h to allow pmModel to use functions which use pmModel
as an argument.

adjusted the order of the pmPSF.h entries to allow that as an argument
as well

changed pmPSF I/O functions to load/save the psf on the
chip->analysis, not the readout->analysis

fixed the modelRadius function for PGAUSS

File:

• branches/eam_branch_20070817/psModules/src/objects/models/pmModel_GAUSS.c (modified) (11 diffs)

branches/eam_branch_20070817/psModules/src/objects/models/pmModel_GAUSS.c

@@ -28 +28 @@
 # define PM_MODEL_FIT_STATUS      pmModelFitStatus_GAUSS
 
+// the model is a function of the pixel coordinate (pixcoord[0,1] = x,y)
 psF32 PM_MODEL_FUNC(psVector *deriv,
                     const psVector *params,
@@ -39 +40 @@
     psF32 py = Y / PAR[PM_PAR_SYY];
     psF32 z  = PS_SQR(px) + PS_SQR(py) + PAR[PM_PAR_SXY]*X*Y;
+    assert (z >= 0.0);
+
     psF32 r  = exp(-z);
     psF32 q  = PAR[PM_PAR_I0]*r;
@@ -62 +65 @@
 # define AR_MAX 20.0
 # define AR_RATIO 0.99
+
 bool PM_MODEL_LIMITS (psMinConstraintMode mode, int nParam, float *params, float *beta)
 {
@@ -94 +98 @@
             break;
         case PM_PAR_SXX:
-            beta_lim = 0.5;
+            beta_lim = 2.0;
             break;
         case PM_PAR_SYY:
-            beta_lim = 0.5;
+            beta_lim = 2.0;
             break;
         case PM_PAR_SXY:
@@ -186 +190 @@
 
 // make an initial guess for parameters
-bool PM_MODEL_GUESS (void *inModel, void *inSource)
-{
-    pmModel *model = inModel;
-    pmSource *source = inSource;
-
+bool PM_MODEL_GUESS (pmModel *model, pmSource *source)
+{
     pmMoments *moments = source->moments;
     psF32     *PAR  = model->params->data.F32;
@@ -259 +260 @@
 
 // construct the PSF model from the FLT model and the psf
-bool PM_MODEL_FROM_PSF (void *inModelPSF, void *inModelFLT, void *inPSF)
-{
-    pmModel *modelPSF = inModelPSF;
-    pmModel *modelFLT = inModelFLT;
-    pmPSF *psf = inPSF;
-
+bool PM_MODEL_FROM_PSF (pmModel *modelPSF, pmModel *modelFLT, pmPSF *psf)
+{
     psF32 *out = modelPSF->params->data.F32;
     psF32 *in  = modelFLT->params->data.F32;
 
     // we require these two parameters to exist
-    assert (psf->params_NEW->n > PM_PAR_YPOS);
-    assert (psf->params_NEW->n > PM_PAR_XPOS);
+    assert (psf->params->n > PM_PAR_YPOS);
+    assert (psf->params->n > PM_PAR_XPOS);
 
     // supply the model-fitted parameters, or copy from the input
-    for (int i = 0; i < psf->params_NEW->n; i++) {
-        if (psf->params_NEW->data[i] == NULL) {
+    for (int i = 0; i < psf->params->n; i++) {
+        if (psf->params->data[i] == NULL) {
             out[i] = in[i];
         } else {
-            psPolynomial2D *poly = psf->params_NEW->data[i];
+            psPolynomial2D *poly = psf->params->data[i];
             out[i] = psPolynomial2DEval(poly, in[PM_PAR_XPOS], in[PM_PAR_YPOS]);
         }
@@ -296 +293 @@
     // apply the model limits here: this truncates excessive extrapolation
     // XXX do we need to do this still?  should we put in asserts to test?
-    for (int i = 0; i < psf->params_NEW->n; i++) {
+    for (int i = 0; i < psf->params->n; i++) {
         // apply the limits to all components or just the psf-model parameters?
-        if (psf->params_NEW->data[i] == NULL)
+        if (psf->params->data[i] == NULL)
             continue;
 
@@ -315 +312 @@
 // construct the PSF model from the FLT model and the psf
 // XXX is this sufficiently general do be a global function, not a pmModelClass function?
-bool PM_MODEL_PARAMS_FROM_PSF (void *inModel, void *inPSF, float Xo, float Yo, float Io)
-{
-    pmModel *model = inModel;
-    pmPSF *psf = inPSF;
-
+bool PM_MODEL_PARAMS_FROM_PSF (pmModel *model, pmPSF *psf, float Xo, float Yo, float Io)
+{
     psF32 *PAR = model->params->data.F32;
 
     // we require these two parameters to exist
-    assert (psf->params_NEW->n > PM_PAR_YPOS);
-    assert (psf->params_NEW->n > PM_PAR_XPOS);
+    assert (psf->params->n > PM_PAR_YPOS);
+    assert (psf->params->n > PM_PAR_XPOS);
 
     PAR[PM_PAR_SKY]  = 0.0;
@@ -332 +326 @@
     
     // supply the model-fitted parameters, or copy from the input
-    for (int i = 0; i < psf->params_NEW->n; i++) {
+    for (int i = 0; i < psf->params->n; i++) {
         if (i == PM_PAR_SKY) continue;
-        psPolynomial2D *poly = psf->params_NEW->data[i];
+        if (i == PM_PAR_I0) continue;
+        if (i == PM_PAR_XPOS) continue;
+        if (i == PM_PAR_YPOS) continue;
+        psPolynomial2D *poly = psf->params->data[i];
         assert (poly);
         PAR[i] = psPolynomial2DEval(poly, Xo, Yo);
@@ -349 +346 @@
     // apply the model limits here: this truncates excessive extrapolation
     // XXX do we need to do this still?  should we put in asserts to test?
-    for (int i = 0; i < psf->params_NEW->n; i++) {
+    for (int i = 0; i < psf->params->n; i++) {
         // apply the limits to all components or just the psf-model parameters?
-        if (psf->params_NEW->data[i] == NULL)
+        if (psf->params->data[i] == NULL)
             continue;
 
@@ -368 +365 @@
 // this test is invalid if the parameters are derived
 // from the PSF model
-bool PM_MODEL_FIT_STATUS (void *inModel)
-{
-    pmModel *model = inModel;
-
+bool PM_MODEL_FIT_STATUS (pmModel *model)
+{
     psF32 dP;
     bool  status;