Uploaded image for project: 'Data Management'
  1. Data Management
  2. DM-23248

Draft changes to DPDD to bring in line with current DRP plans

    Details

    • Story Points:
      8
    • Team:
      DM Science
    • Urgent?:
      No

      Description

      Create a branch of the DPDD that incorporates DRP leaderships current best guesses at what we will actually do. This is primarily the removal of multifit and galaxy Monte Carlo sampling, along with what we expect to replace them; it will not attempt to address more fine-grained issues with particular columns, as I believe others have already made progress addressing those elsewhere.

        Attachments

          Issue Links

            Activity

            Hide
            tjenness Tim Jenness added a comment - - edited

            Also the latex class does allow you to pull out commentary like this so that it appears in the PDF for people to think about (and they get turned off when not in draft mode). No-one is ever going to see the comments in the latex but they will ponder them if they are visible in the draft PDF. There is a draftnote environment and also \XXX for short text.

            Show
            tjenness Tim Jenness added a comment - - edited Also the latex class does allow you to pull out commentary like this so that it appears in the PDF for people to think about (and they get turned off when not in draft mode). No-one is ever going to see the comments in the latex but they will ponder them if they are visible in the draft PDF. There is a draftnote environment and also \XXX for short text.
            Hide
            jbosch Jim Bosch added a comment -

            I've switched my code comments to draftnode environment comments.  Leanne Guy, I'll defer to you on whether you'd like me to make them into tickets - they're mostly about the associated changes to the DRM requirements that we discussed on the PR (with the one John Swinbank quoted above the only exception), and I'm not sure if they're useful to you here as a reminder of those or redundant with some other list you might already have.

            Show
            jbosch Jim Bosch added a comment - I've switched my code comments to draftnode environment comments.  Leanne Guy , I'll defer to you on whether you'd like me to make them into tickets - they're mostly about the associated changes to the DRM requirements that we discussed on the PR (with the one John Swinbank quoted above the only exception), and I'm not sure if they're useful to you here as a reminder of those or redundant with some other list you might already have.
            Hide
            lguy Leanne Guy added a comment -

            Agree we need to create tickets to update the DMSR

            Draft comment 1: "Changes on DM-23248 above intentionally do not conform to DMS-REQ-0280, which puts an upper bound of 1 year"

            • As noted also on the PR, this requirement on the templateMaxTimespan on the range of input exposures that can contribute to coadds was removed in LCR 2273, 2020-04-10, so this update is now consistent with the DMSR.
            • As also noted on the PR, lets update to say ""minimize false positives due to high proper-motion stars (favoring shorter ranges)."
            • Availability window of templates – let's defer this and discuss further. I'll make a ticket

            Draft comment 2:

            • Update DMS-REQ-0334 to remove remove the mention of “best-seeing” coadds; per-band deep coadds will be archived.
            • Update DMS-REQ-0281 -0330 to state that DM will deliver software to produce these and not archive them.
            Show
            lguy Leanne Guy added a comment - Agree we need to create tickets to update the DMSR Draft comment 1: "Changes on DM-23248 above intentionally do not conform to DMS-REQ-0280, which puts an upper bound of 1 year" As noted also on the PR, this requirement on the templateMaxTimespan on the range of input exposures that can contribute to coadds was removed in LCR 2273, 2020-04-10, so this update is now consistent with the DMSR. As also noted on the PR, lets update to say ""minimize false positives due to high proper-motion stars (favoring shorter ranges)." Availability window of templates – let's defer this and discuss further. I'll make a ticket Draft comment 2: Update DMS-REQ-0334 to remove remove the mention of “best-seeing” coadds; per-band deep coadds will be archived. Update DMS-REQ-0281 -0330 to state that DM will deliver software to produce these and not archive them.
            Hide
            lguy Leanne Guy added a comment -

            I will make separate tickets to address the DMSR changes and for the time availability of templates

            Show
            lguy Leanne Guy added a comment - I will make separate tickets to address the DMSR changes and for the time availability of templates
            Hide
            lguy Leanne Guy added a comment -

            A further point on 4.2 Data Release Data Processing , step 8: Object post processing It currently states that photometric redshifts are computed in this step. The Dm Science team is still working with the community to decide the best approach for computing photometric redshifts so I would prefer to remove reference to computing photometric redshifts from this step and instead add the following after description of the DRP steps:

            "Data Release data processing will include the computation of photometric redshifts for all detected \Objects \dms-req

            {0046}

            . We are still investigating the best approach to take; the DM Science team is working with the community to decide on the most appropriate algorithm and the format for the results. When an algorithm and data product format has been choosen, the exact manner in which it will be incorporated into the Data Release data processing will be described here. "

            Show
            lguy Leanne Guy added a comment - A further point on 4.2 Data Release Data Processing , step 8: Object post processing It currently states that photometric redshifts are computed in this step. The Dm Science team is still working with the community to decide the best approach for computing photometric redshifts so I would prefer to remove reference to computing photometric redshifts from this step and instead add the following after description of the DRP steps: "Data Release data processing will include the computation of photometric redshifts for all detected \Objects \dms-req {0046} . We are still investigating the best approach to take; the DM Science team is working with the community to decide on the most appropriate algorithm and the format for the results. When an algorithm and data product format has been choosen, the exact manner in which it will be incorporated into the Data Release data processing will be described here. "

              People

              • Assignee:
                jbosch Jim Bosch
                Reporter:
                jbosch Jim Bosch
                Reviewers:
                Leanne Guy
                Watchers:
                Jim Bosch, John Swinbank, Leanne Guy, Robert Lupton, Tim Jenness, Yusra AlSayyad
              • Votes:
                0 Vote for this issue
                Watchers:
                6 Start watching this issue

                Dates

                • Due:
                  Created:
                  Updated:
                  Resolved:

                  Summary Panel