Validate_drp output complete (had to rerun a few of them due to out of memory problems running 5 per node), and summarized in the attached tarball. I modified the plotting script to make three sets of plots: single->jointcal, single->mosaic, mosaic->jointcal, to help with the overall comparison, and I tried to keep the plot limits easily comparable between the two jointcal plots so you can easily flip between them.
According to validate_drp, only one jointcal astrometric result on these data exceeded an outlier metric (AF1 on HSC-R 9559), and none exceeded the repeatability metrics. For this run, I used the config defaults, which means the visit polynomial is 5th order for astrometry and 7th order for photometry: is it worth running with higher order for either of those to see if we can improve further?
I'll try to compute the final summary statistics described on the acceptance test page. John Swinbank: should I make a ticket to do that work on?
I've put this "in review": Jim Bosch, please look at the attached plots and tables. It's up to you whether you want to review the changes I made to the slurm and plotting scripts on the associated PR to jointcal_compare.