Changes between Version 25 and Version 26 of ppSub_testing_201201
- Timestamp:
- Feb 1, 2012, 11:05:30 AM (15 years ago)
Legend:
- Unmodified
- Added
- Removed
- Modified
-
ppSub_testing_201201
v25 v26 3 3 [[PageOutline]] 4 4 5 Primary purpose is to wrap up and activate the convolution direction choice in ppSub. (pseudo-primary, purpose really to reduce number of false diffim detections) 5 The primary purpose has been expanded and redirected. While it appeared that the fixed convolution direction may have been the likely cause of an overabundance of false detections from residuals of bright sources in the field, issues in the convolved stack with a resulting larger than selected target PSF has illustrated there may also be issues with the PSF matching/convolution itself. 6 6 7 Secondary purpose is to monitor if working as expected and address any additional issues (convolution troubles) and baseline to verify against any future changes in code (test set). 7 * is the code doing what we want 8 * is the code doing what we think 9 * has something changed in the data or what the code is doing 8 10 11 General tasks (no particular order): 12 * wrap up and activate the convolution direction choice in ppSub for general use option 13 * test and verify the PSF matching/convolution, include the "no-conv" case as well for close matches 14 * investigate options for the false detections (may be flags2 use, may be solved with PSF matching or convolution direction) 15 * monitor if working as expected and address any additional issues found 16 * establish a baseline to verify against any past/future changes in code and with reprocessing (a test set of real+simulated images) 17 * 9 18 10 19 == Background == … … 24 33 25 34 26 = Convolution Issues = 35 = Setup = 36 Operations tag for testing base diffims is ipp-20111220 (since local tests could/should fix at some r since the tag has revisions added to it? ) 27 37 28 == Convolution direction choice == 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). 30 31 Current tag for testing base diffims is ipp-20111220 (since local tests should stay at some r) 32 33 Current branch for testing the choice of convolution direction and is updated to r33098 (from 1/11/2012) 34 * http://svn.pan-starrs.ifa.hawaii.edu/trac/ipp/browser/branches/meh_branches/ppsub_test 38 Branch for originally testing the choice of convolution direction but now full development testing is also updated to r33098 (from 1/11/2012) -- http://svn.pan-starrs.ifa.hawaii.edu/trac/ipp/browser/branches/meh_branches/ppsub_test 35 39 36 40 37 == Selected Test Samples ==38 41 39 === MD04 primary samples === 42 = PSF Matching/Convolution = 43 44 == Poor PSF-matching? == 45 46 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. 47 48 == No-convolution? == 49 50 Reports from other surveys that diffims are poorer with images having similar PSFs, convolution isn't well matched? Is this for dual only? 51 52 53 54 = Convolution direction choice = 55 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 (need to add specific condition test). 56 57 MD04 sample: 58 59 Simulated sample: 60 61 62 63 = Test Sets = 64 65 == MD04 primary samples == 40 66 41 67 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. … … 124 150 125 151 126 === Others Samples ===152 === Others Samples (in progress) === 127 153 128 154 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: … … 140 166 141 167 142 == Poor PSF-matching? ==143 144 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.145 146 == No-convolution? ==147 148 Reports from other surveys that diffims are poorer with images having similar PSFs, convolution isn't well matched? Is this for dual only?149 150 168 151 169 = Monitoring = 152 170 153 == Nightly tests of convolutions ==171 == Nightly Tests of Diffims == 154 172 155 173 Is there any conflict with the expected desired direction? Compare to CfA photpipe, detection counts. … … 158 176 Is the convolution not optimal? 159 177 160 == HOTPANT s comparisons ==178 == HOTPANT Diffim Comparisons == 161 179 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. 162 180 * for select night samples should setup and run locally. still on the todo list.
