Changeset 14544 for branches/eam_branch_20070817/psModules/src/objects/models/pmModel_GAUSS.c

Timestamp:

Aug 17, 2007, 11:01:59 AM (19 years ago)

Author:

magnier

Message:

substantial cleanups of APIs:

changed pmModelGroup to pmModelClass

dropped the _GetFunctions, and moved the modelClass-specific functions
to functions pointers in the pmModel structure. These are assigned
when the model is allocated, based on the model type. Now, instead of
calling, for example,

modelFunc = pmModelFunc_GetFunctions(model->type)
modelFunc();

you just do:

model->modelFunc()

moved some of the support functions into pmModelUtils and
pmSourceUtils.

changed pmIsFooBar to pmFooBarTest for better api listing.

added functions to evaluate and add/subtract models applying an offset
between the image coordinate frame and the chip frame (required frame
for model parameters)

added function(s) to instatiate a pmModel from a pmPSF based on a
given coordinate and peak flux.

added a function to set the model normalization based on a source flux
value.

File:

• branches/eam_branch_20070817/psModules/src/objects/models/pmModel_GAUSS.c (modified) (5 diffs)

branches/eam_branch_20070817/psModules/src/objects/models/pmModel_GAUSS.c

@@ -19 +19 @@
  *****************************************************************************/
 
-# define PM_MODEL_FUNC       pmModelFunc_GAUSS
-# define PM_MODEL_FLUX       pmModelFlux_GAUSS
-# define PM_MODEL_GUESS      pmModelGuess_GAUSS
-# define PM_MODEL_LIMITS     pmModelLimits_GAUSS
-# define PM_MODEL_RADIUS     pmModelRadius_GAUSS
-# define PM_MODEL_FROM_PSF   pmModelFromPSF_GAUSS
-# define PM_MODEL_FIT_STATUS pmModelFitStatus_GAUSS
+# define PM_MODEL_FUNC            pmModelFunc_GAUSS
+# define PM_MODEL_FLUX            pmModelFlux_GAUSS
+# define PM_MODEL_GUESS           pmModelGuess_GAUSS
+# define PM_MODEL_LIMITS          pmModelLimits_GAUSS
+# define PM_MODEL_RADIUS          pmModelRadius_GAUSS
+# define PM_MODEL_FROM_PSF        pmModelFromPSF_GAUSS
+# define PM_MODEL_PARAMS_FROM_PSF pmModelParamsFromPSF_GAUSS
+# define PM_MODEL_FIT_STATUS      pmModelFitStatus_GAUSS
 
 psF32 PM_MODEL_FUNC(psVector *deriv,
@@ -185 +186 @@
 
 // make an initial guess for parameters
-bool PM_MODEL_GUESS (pmModel *model, pmSource *source)
-{
+bool PM_MODEL_GUESS (void *inModel, void *inSource)
+{
+    pmModel *model = inModel;
+    pmSource *source = inSource;
+
     pmMoments *moments = source->moments;
     psF32     *PAR  = model->params->data.F32;
@@ -255 +259 @@
 
 // construct the PSF model from the FLT model and the psf
-bool PM_MODEL_FROM_PSF (pmModel *modelPSF, pmModel *modelFLT, pmPSF *psf)
-{
+bool PM_MODEL_FROM_PSF (void *inModelPSF, void *inModelFLT, void *inPSF)
+{
+    pmModel *modelPSF = inModelPSF;
+    pmModel *modelFLT = inModelFLT;
+    pmPSF *psf = inPSF;
 
     psF32 *out = modelPSF->params->data.F32;
@@ -306 +313 @@
 }
 
+// construct the PSF model from the FLT model and the psf
+// XXX is this sufficiently general do be a global function, not a pmModelClass function?
+bool PM_MODEL_PARAMS_FROM_PSF (void *inModel, void *inPSF, float Xo, float Yo, float Io)
+{
+    pmModel *model = inModel;
+    pmPSF *psf = inPSF;
+
+    psF32 *PAR = model->params->data.F32;
+
+    // we require these two parameters to exist
+    assert (psf->params_NEW->n > PM_PAR_YPOS);
+    assert (psf->params_NEW->n > PM_PAR_XPOS);
+
+    PAR[PM_PAR_SKY]  = 0.0;
+    PAR[PM_PAR_I0]   = Io;
+    PAR[PM_PAR_XPOS] = Xo;
+    PAR[PM_PAR_YPOS] = Yo;
+    
+    // supply the model-fitted parameters, or copy from the input
+    for (int i = 0; i < psf->params_NEW->n; i++) {
+        if (i == PM_PAR_SKY) continue;
+        psPolynomial2D *poly = psf->params_NEW->data[i];
+        assert (poly);
+        PAR[i] = psPolynomial2DEval(poly, Xo, Yo);
+    }
+
+    // the 2D PSF model fits polarization terms (E0,E1,E2)
+    // convert to shape terms (SXX,SYY,SXY)
+    // XXX user-defined value for limit?
+    if (!pmPSF_FitToModel (PAR, 0.1)) {
+        psError(PM_ERR_PSF, false, "Failed to fit object at (r,c) = (%.1f,%.1f)", Xo, Yo);
+        return false;
+    }
+
+    // apply the model limits here: this truncates excessive extrapolation
+    // XXX do we need to do this still?  should we put in asserts to test?
+    for (int i = 0; i < psf->params_NEW->n; i++) {
+        // apply the limits to all components or just the psf-model parameters?
+        if (psf->params_NEW->data[i] == NULL)
+            continue;
+
+        bool status = true;
+        status &= PM_MODEL_LIMITS (PS_MINIMIZE_PARAM_MIN, i, PAR, NULL);
+        status &= PM_MODEL_LIMITS (PS_MINIMIZE_PARAM_MAX, i, PAR, NULL);
+        if (!status) {
+            psTrace ("psModules.objects", 5, "Hitting parameter limits at (r,c) = (%.1f, %.1f)", Xo, Yo);
+            model->flags |= PM_MODEL_STATUS_LIMITS;
+        }
+    }
+    return(true);
+}
+
 // check the status of the fitted model
 // this test is invalid if the parameters are derived
 // from the PSF model
-bool PM_MODEL_FIT_STATUS (pmModel *model)
-{
+bool PM_MODEL_FIT_STATUS (void *inModel)
+{
+    pmModel *model = inModel;
 
     psF32 dP;
@@ -339 +399 @@
 # undef PM_MODEL_RADIUS
 # undef PM_MODEL_FROM_PSF
+# undef PM_MODEL_PARAMS_FROM_PSF
 # undef PM_MODEL_FIT_STATUS