Uploaded image for project: 'Data Management'
  1. Data Management
  2. DM-3896

Provide values for photometric repeatability KPMs in FY15

    Details

    • Type: Story
    • Status: Done
    • Resolution: Done
    • Fix Version/s: None
    • Component/s: None
    • Labels:
      None
    • Story Points:
      4
    • Sprint:
      Science Pipelines DM-W16-1
    • Team:
      Data Release Production

      Description

      Should produce the numeric values required (or an explanation of why they aren't available) together with a description of the process for generating them (incl. the data processed, scripts used for plotting, etc).

        Attachments

          Issue Links

            Activity

            Hide
            jbosch Jim Bosch added a comment -

            I'll be making some small modifications to the script I created in DM-3490 here, to address some problems discovered by Lauren MacArthur and make the outlier rejection a little more similar to what the SRD specifies. After that I'll put the plots and my final writeup on DM-3338.

            Show
            jbosch Jim Bosch added a comment - I'll be making some small modifications to the script I created in DM-3490 here, to address some problems discovered by Lauren MacArthur and make the outlier rejection a little more similar to what the SRD specifies. After that I'll put the plots and my final writeup on DM-3338 .
            Hide
            jbosch Jim Bosch added a comment -

            Updated notebook is ready for review on branch tickets/DM-3896 of afw.

            I've also added some text and a link to the notebook in DM-3338, containing my summary of the measurement.

            Show
            jbosch Jim Bosch added a comment - Updated notebook is ready for review on branch tickets/ DM-3896 of afw. I've also added some text and a link to the notebook in DM-3338 , containing my summary of the measurement.
            Hide
            jbosch Jim Bosch added a comment -

            Just pushed one more commit to convert to using aperture magnitudes, as we've discussed.

            Show
            jbosch Jim Bosch added a comment - Just pushed one more commit to convert to using aperture magnitudes, as we've discussed.
            Hide
            jbosch Jim Bosch added a comment -

            And there's another commit, to address a modelMag vs. psfMag bug I thought I'd fixed already, but apparently hadn't. That changes the final answer again, so I'll post a new complete description on DM-3338 later tonight.

            Show
            jbosch Jim Bosch added a comment - And there's another commit, to address a modelMag vs. psfMag bug I thought I'd fixed already, but apparently hadn't. That changes the final answer again, so I'll post a new complete description on DM-3338 later tonight.
            Hide
            swinbank John Swinbank added a comment -

            Marking as Done, since these numbers are shipping with the release. The related epic will still require Mario's approval before we close it down.

            Show
            swinbank John Swinbank added a comment - Marking as Done, since these numbers are shipping with the release. The related epic will still require Mario's approval before we close it down.
            Hide
            wmwood-vasey Michael Wood-Vasey added a comment -

            Jim Bosch Do you intend to merge this ticket branch back into master?

            The repeatability.ipynb script is a useful example and is better in this ticket than in current master (7c5ed66).

            There's also the change in python/lsst/afw/table/multiMatch.py that seems good:

                 def __iter__(self):
                     """Iterate over group field values"""
            -        return self.ids
            +        return iter(self.ids)
            

            Thanks to John Swinbank for pointing me to this work.

            Show
            wmwood-vasey Michael Wood-Vasey added a comment - Jim Bosch Do you intend to merge this ticket branch back into master? The repeatability.ipynb script is a useful example and is better in this ticket than in current master (7c5ed66). There's also the change in python/lsst/afw/table/multiMatch.py that seems good: def __iter__(self): """Iterate over group field values""" - return self.ids + return iter(self.ids) Thanks to John Swinbank for pointing me to this work.
            Hide
            jbosch Jim Bosch added a comment -

            Michael Wood-Vasey I can merge this into master if that's helpful for you, but please feel free to just cherry-pick the commits you want to a new branch if that's easier. I see from the other issue that you may have already done that. Sorry for the delayed response.

            Show
            jbosch Jim Bosch added a comment - Michael Wood-Vasey I can merge this into master if that's helpful for you, but please feel free to just cherry-pick the commits you want to a new branch if that's easier. I see from the other issue that you may have already done that. Sorry for the delayed response.
            Hide
            wmwood-vasey Michael Wood-Vasey added a comment -

            Ah, yes, I've already picked this in to DM-4848. It was the iPython notebook stuff that I replicated, so it wasn't exactly git cherry-pick but conceptually yes. It was very helpful to see this written out.

            My point was more that the stuff in that improved notebook looks better than what was in master, so it just seemed like for general improved utility of afw/examples, merging this made sense. A relatively small thing.

            Show
            wmwood-vasey Michael Wood-Vasey added a comment - Ah, yes, I've already picked this in to DM-4848 . It was the iPython notebook stuff that I replicated, so it wasn't exactly git cherry-pick but conceptually yes. It was very helpful to see this written out. My point was more that the stuff in that improved notebook looks better than what was in master, so it just seemed like for general improved utility of afw/examples, merging this made sense. A relatively small thing.

              People

              • Assignee:
                jbosch Jim Bosch
                Reporter:
                swinbank John Swinbank
                Reviewers:
                John Swinbank
                Watchers:
                Jim Bosch, John Swinbank, Michael Wood-Vasey
              • Votes:
                0 Vote for this issue
                Watchers:
                3 Start watching this issue

                Dates

                • Created:
                  Updated:
                  Resolved:

                  Summary Panel