Changeset 14652 for trunk/psModules/src/objects/models/pmModel_SERSIC.c

Timestamp:

Aug 23, 2007, 2:11:02 PM (19 years ago)

Author:

magnier

Message:

• added function pointers to pmModel to provide class-dependent functions
• dropped pmModel*_GetFunction functions (use pmModel->func functions instead)
• added modelParamsFromPSF functions to model classes
• changed pmModelGroup to pmModelClass
• added pmSourceFitSet.[ch]
• updated pmSourceFitSet to allow variable model classes
• added functions to add/sub and eval models & sources with an offset between image and chip
• added function to set a pmModel flux
• added function to instatiate a pmModel from a pmPSF at a coordinate
• moved pmPSF I/O to chip->analysis from readout->analysis
• changed pmPSF I/O function names from *ForPSFmodel to pmPSFmodel*
• changed pmModel.params_NEW back to pmModel.params
• changed pmFind*Peaks to pmPeaksIn* (* = Image,Vector)
• dropped pmCullPeaks (deprecated)
• changed pmModelSetType to pmModelClassGetType
• changed pmModelGetType to pmModelClassGetName
• fixed PGAUSS implementation of modelRadius function

File:

• trunk/psModules/src/objects/models/pmModel_SERSIC.c (modified) (5 diffs)

trunk/psModules/src/objects/models/pmModel_SERSIC.c

@@ -23 +23 @@
    *****************************************************************************/
 
-# define PM_MODEL_FUNC       pmModelFunc_SERSIC
-# define PM_MODEL_FLUX       pmModelFlux_SERSIC
-# define PM_MODEL_GUESS      pmModelGuess_SERSIC
-# define PM_MODEL_LIMITS     pmModelLimits_SERSIC
-# define PM_MODEL_RADIUS     pmModelRadius_SERSIC
-# define PM_MODEL_FROM_PSF   pmModelFromPSF_SERSIC
-# define PM_MODEL_FIT_STATUS pmModelFitStatus_SERSIC
+# define PM_MODEL_FUNC            pmModelFunc_SERSIC
+# define PM_MODEL_FLUX            pmModelFlux_SERSIC
+# define PM_MODEL_GUESS           pmModelGuess_SERSIC
+# define PM_MODEL_LIMITS          pmModelLimits_SERSIC
+# define PM_MODEL_RADIUS          pmModelRadius_SERSIC
+# define PM_MODEL_FROM_PSF        pmModelFromPSF_SERSIC
+# define PM_MODEL_PARAMS_FROM_PSF pmModelParamsFromPSF_SERSIC
+# define PM_MODEL_FIT_STATUS      pmModelFitStatus_SERSIC
 
 psF32 PM_MODEL_FUNC (psVector *deriv,
@@ -360 +361 @@
 
     // we require these two parameters to exist
-    assert (psf->params_NEW->n > PM_PAR_YPOS);
-    assert (psf->params_NEW->n > PM_PAR_XPOS);
-
-    for (int i = 0; i < psf->params_NEW->n; i++) {
-        if (psf->params_NEW->data[i] == NULL) {
+    assert (psf->params->n > PM_PAR_YPOS);
+    assert (psf->params->n > PM_PAR_XPOS);
+
+    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]);
         }
@@ -382 +383 @@
     // 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;
 
@@ -400 +401 @@
 }
 
+// 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 (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->n > PM_PAR_YPOS);
+    assert (psf->params->n > PM_PAR_XPOS);
+
+    PAR[PM_PAR_SKY]  = 0.0;
+    PAR[PM_PAR_I0]   = Io;
+    PAR[PM_PAR_XPOS] = Xo;
+    PAR[PM_PAR_YPOS] = Yo;
+    
+    // supply the model-fitted parameters, or copy from the input
+    for (int i = 0; i < psf->params->n; i++) {
+        if (i == PM_PAR_SKY) continue;
+        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);
+    }
+
+    // the 2D PSF model fits polarization terms (E0,E1,E2)
+    // convert to shape terms (SXX,SYY,SXY)
+    // XXX user-defined value for limit?
+    if (!pmPSF_FitToModel (PAR, 0.1)) {
+        psError(PM_ERR_PSF, false, "Failed to fit object at (r,c) = (%.1f,%.1f)", Xo, Yo);
+        return false;
+    }
+
+    // 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->n; i++) {
+        // apply the limits to all components or just the psf-model parameters?
+        if (psf->params->data[i] == NULL)
+            continue;
+
+        bool status = true;
+        status &= PM_MODEL_LIMITS (PS_MINIMIZE_PARAM_MIN, i, PAR, NULL);
+        status &= PM_MODEL_LIMITS (PS_MINIMIZE_PARAM_MAX, i, PAR, NULL);
+        if (!status) {
+            psTrace ("psModules.objects", 5, "Hitting parameter limits at (r,c) = (%.1f, %.1f)", Xo, Yo);
+            model->flags |= PM_MODEL_STATUS_LIMITS;
+        }
+    }
+    return(true);
+}
+
 bool PM_MODEL_FIT_STATUS (pmModel *model)
 {
@@ -428 +481 @@
 # undef PM_MODEL_RADIUS
 # undef PM_MODEL_FROM_PSF
+# undef PM_MODEL_PARAMS_FROM_PSF
 # undef PM_MODEL_FIT_STATUS