Changes between Version 45 and Version 46 of ppSub_testing_201201

Timestamp:

Feb 13, 2012, 3:02:14 PM (14 years ago)

Author:

Mark Huber

Comment:

--

ppSub_testing_201201

@@ -9 +9 @@
 
 
-General tasks (no particular order and by no means complete, concise or clear):
+General tasks (no particular order and by no means complete, concise, clear or quantitative):
  * need to establish a baseline to verify against any past/future changes in code and with reprocessing including a test set of real+simulated images that is '''readily''' inter-comparable (avoid having to pull values from logfiles etc)
   * IPP/ppSub: current ops tag ipp-20111222, branches/meh_branches/ppsub_test [available]
@@ -15 +15 @@
   * datasets:
    * MD04: for S-S and S-refstk (may want W-refstk later) [in progress, image selection with some known events finished but need to "bundle" and push into photpipe]
-   * sim: for all cases W-W, W-S, S-S, S-refstk [in progress, mostly created from past testing with ppStack but again "bundle"]
-   * 3PI/other:  for W-W and W-S cases [still need to select images to use, then "bundle"]
+   * sim: for all cases W-W, W-S, S-S, S-refstk [in progress, mostly created from past testing with ppStack but again "bundle"? not really need to]
+   * 3PI/other:  for W-W and W-S cases [still need to select images to use, then "bundle"? not really need to]
 
  * wrap up and re-test the convolution direction choice in ppSub (see monitor)
   * does it still work as it did when tested a few months ago with MD10.V2? [to test for the baseline sample MD04.V3 S-refstk and S-S, sim]
-  * does it affect the dual convolution [need 3PI/other sample still]
+  * does it affect the dual convolution [need 3PI/other sample still, need forced photometry setup]
   * if it chooses to convolve the input, is it poorer (see recent monitoring) with greater false detections, larger/messy residuals
 
- * verify the PSF matching, convolution and diffims - test as expected, self-comparison, cross-comparison (will need translation map for different outputs)
+ * verify the PSF matching, convolution and diffims - test as expected, self-comparison, cross-comparison (need add a translation map for different outputs)
   * PSF shape - is it equivalent to the target before convolution and subtraction (is there a scaling/normalization issue?) 
   * appears solution fairly insensitive to input kernel params -- 
   * return to stamp choices - need a check for "poor" not being rejected
-  * forced photometry measurements on sky and selected sources (stats and residuals)
+  * forced photometry measurements on sky and selected sources (stats and residuals) -- 
   * the "no-conv" case - what is limiting ppSub -- have many cases of "close" inputs in test sets, what are the resulting kernels and output convolution params