Changes between Version 21 and Version 22 of ppSub_testing_201201
- Timestamp:
- Jan 27, 2012, 3:41:54 PM (15 years ago)
Legend:
- Unmodified
- Added
- Removed
- Modified
-
ppSub_testing_201201
v21 v22 24 24 25 25 26 = Convolution direction choice = 26 = Convolution Issues = 27 28 == Convolution direction choice == 27 29 We want to avoid large deconvolution in PSF-matching image subtraction. As the image quality of the images continues to improve, always convolving the reference stack will not produce the best difference image and convolving the input image is desired. The quality of the difference image is evaluated in both directions and the better is chosen for the output (add specific details). 28 30 … … 35 37 == Selected Test Samples == 36 38 39 === MD04 primary sample === 40 37 41 Initial test for if choosing the proper direction in stack-stack diffims now using MD04. Was initially done using MD10, but we want to continue to build up test samples over other IPP codes using MD04. 38 42 … … 40 44 41 45 055 --> 077.V2 -- center - 42 * http://telescopes.rc.fas.harvard.edu/ps1/alerts2011/2010-C-020101/2010-C-020101.html - AGN@0.345 46 * http://telescopes.rc.fas.harvard.edu/ps1/alerts2011/2010-C-020101/2010-C-020101.html - AGN@0.345 (xy?) 43 47 * http://telescopes.rc.fas.harvard.edu/ps1/alerts2011/2010-D-030288/2010-D-030288.html - poor sub/var? 44 48 * http://telescopes.rc.fas.harvard.edu/ps1/alerts2011/2011-A-120103/2011-A-120103.html - alert … … 59 63 (add when time.. difficult to search the new crossmatch page..) 60 64 61 Sample for both skycells with same obsdate to look at variation of PSF center and edge (0.25 "/pixel), limited to r-band for now and a sample size that can be manually rerun with some ease.65 Sample nightly stacks for both skycells with same obsdate to look at variation of PSF center and edge (0.25 "/pixel), limited to r-band for now and a sample size that can be manually rerun with some ease. 62 66 63 67 || '''obsdate''' || '''stack_id''' || '''FWHM_MAJ (pixel)''' || '''IQ_FW1 (pixel)''' || 64 68 || || || || || 65 69 || || skycell.055 || || || 66 || refstack.20111012 || 450933 || 5.206454 ( 0.6-0.8) || 4.08811 (0.3-0.4)||70 || refstack.20111012 || 450933 || 5.206454 (+-0.6-0.8) not the 4.5 on the MD.GR0 page.. || 4.08811 (+-0.3-0.4)|| 67 71 || 20100110 || 444020 || 4.878624 || 3.891729 || 68 72 || 20100121 || 444079 || 5.843588 || 4.574009 || … … 75 79 || 20120115 || 622752 || 5.805826 || 4.622056 || 76 80 || 20120121 || 646801 || 6.346761 || 5.359003 || 77 81 || (swap 20120126 for 20120115?) || 676389 || 4.443175 || 3.475093 || 78 82 || || || || || 79 83 || || skycell.058 || || || 80 || refstack.20111012 || || || || 81 || 20100110 || 444023 || || || 82 || 20100121 || 444082 || || || 84 || refstack.20111012 || 450936 || 4.616929 || 3.926292 || 85 || 20100110 || 444023 || 4.777016 || 3.687181 || 86 || 20100121 || 444082 || 5.567342 || 4.243489 || 87 || 20110129 || 444254 || 3.976701 || 3.100284 || 88 || 20110201 || 644879 || 5.023516 || 4.421264 || 89 || 20110312 || 446661 || 5.114515 || 3.701454 || 90 || 20110315 || 645117 || 4.58284 || 3.376984 || 91 || 20110423 || 446718 || 4.358292 || 3.138227 || 92 || 20110429 || 645477 || 6.088856 || 5.447231 || 93 || 20120115 || 622755 || 5.300241 || 4.337034 || 94 || 20120121 || 646804 || 5.627441 || 5.058287 || 95 || (swap 20120126 for 20120115?) || || || || 83 96 || || || || || 84 97 … … 87 100 Difficult to use past examples of wrong convolution direction since refstacks remade, so select sample to just test current choices. 88 101 89 QUB ex mples of wrong convolution choice:102 QUB examples of wrong convolution choice: 90 103 * http://star.pst.qub.ac.uk/ps1/psdb/userlist/10/ 91 104 * http://star.pst.qub.ac.uk/ps1/psdb/userlist/5/?sort=-followup_flag_date … … 93 106 * http://star.pst.qub.ac.uk/ps1/psdb/candidate/1095456431022404400/ 94 107 95 Not all seem to be due to convolving in the wrong direction and need to identify and separate the cases/causes if can. 108 109 Not all seem to be really due to convolving in the wrong direction and need to identify and separate the cases/causes if can. Running samples forced in both direction useful to see. 110 111 CfA photpipe/HOTPANTs direction: using single template/reference stack so locally get keyword CONVOL00 from header except slight issue with amps. '''All are convolving the TEMPLATE only''' so also backs up the issue seems not a convolution direction issue. 96 112 97 113 98 CfA photpipe/HOTPANTs direction: using single template/reference stack so locally get keyword CONVOL00 from header except slight issue with amps.99 '''Problem has been seems all good nightly stack samples still choose a convolved the template rather than image so nothing to test. the refstacks are very good''' 114 Sample diffims with direction forced and detections marked (note both stack-refstack and stack-stack cases). The stack-stack case is the really the only way to test the convolution direction choice now unless go back to the MD04.V2 sample. 115 (easiest to use event stamps from pages, but may want image photpipe diffim..) 100 116 101 Sample diffims with direction forced and detections marked (note both stack-refstack and stack-stack cases) 117 || '''event (auto direction)''' || '''TARGET2 (convolved ref)''' || '''TARGET1 (convolved stk)''' || '''photpipe automatic (direction)''' || comment || 118 || X (TARGET2) || [[Image(test.png,300px)]] || [[Image(test.png,300px)]] || [[Image(test.png,300px)]] (TEMPLATE) || conv refstk better, || 102 119 103 || '''event (auto direction)''' || '''TARGET2 (convolved ref)''' || '''TARGET1 (convolved stk)''' || '''photpipe automatic (direction)''' ||104 || X (TARGET2) || [[Image(test.png,300px)]] || [[Image(test.png,300px)]] || [[Image(test.png,300px)]] (TEMPLATE) ||105 120 106 Photometry/detection comparison: 121 Photometry/detection comparisons: 122 107 123 108 124 … … 110 126 111 127 Need tests to verify changes will not break diffims for other surveys (MOPS etc) but do not need to worry about magic now. Not for testing if they will choose the right direction (only if using AUTO), but changes involved part of the normalization and will need to verify doesn't change flux/variance values: 112 * simulated image set WW,WS,SS 128 * simulated image set WW,WS,SS, SSref -- since SSref for MD04 seem to prefer convolving the deeper refstack still, will need to generate 113 129 * warp-warp diffim: MD and 3PI TTI 114 130 * warp-stack diffim: MD and LAP stack 115 131 116 132 133 == Poor PSF-matching? == 134 135 Not sure yet what to classify this as other than the PSF not being matched well. Suspect similar to issue with convolved stacks in ppStack. 136 137 == No-convolution? == 138 139 Reports from other surveys that diffims are poorer with images having similar PSFs, convolution isn't well matched? Is this for dual only? 140 117 141 118 142 = Monitoring = 119 143 120 == Nightly tests of convolution direction == 144 == Nightly tests of convolutions == 145 121 146 Is there any conflict with the expected desired direction? Compare to CfA photpipe, detection counts. 122 * having IQ/FWHM keywords in stack images or at least the gpc1 DB would be helpful here since are calc for the PSF matching in the diffim 147 * having IQ/FWHM keywords in stack images or at least the gpc1 DB would be helpful here since are calculated for the PSF matching in the diffim process, doing manually here takes a good amount of time. 148 149 Is the convolution not optimal? 123 150 124 151 == HOTPANTs comparisons == 125 Difficult to automate and may want to force both directions for comparison . Are the diffims continuing to produce similar results.152 Difficult to automate and may want to force both directions for comparison as well as shallower reference stacks to use. Are the diffims continuing to produce similar results. 126 153 * for select night samples should setup and run locally. still on the todo list. 127 154 155
