IPP Software Navigation Tools IPP Links Communication Pan-STARRS Links

Changeset 9840


Ignore:
Timestamp:
Nov 3, 2006, 5:11:38 AM (20 years ago)
Author:
eugene
Message:

added notes

File:
1 edited

Legend:

Unmodified
Added
Removed
  • trunk/psphot/doc/notes.txt

    r7758 r9840  
     1
     22006.11.02
     3
     4  Looking into the growth curve problem.  RHL sent his recipe for
     5  correcting to true circular apertures.  I've done a test fix of
     6  interpolating the stellar image to the desired center.  it looks
     7  like bilinear interpolation is insufficient (about 8% error for 2
     8  pixel radius aperture).  Unless I've got the formula wrong, the
     9  effective smoothing of the gaussian is moving flux from the center
     10  out and making small apertures in error that depends on the offset.
     11  Bicubic could be enough to clean this up? 
     12
     13  I think the current code may need to be careful modified to include
     14  the interpolation for every aperture measurement.  there are paired
     15  'pmModelAdd' and pmModelSub steps to add and remove the model flux.
     16  I need to be careful about how the mask affects these steps.
     17
     18  I also need to be careful in interpreting the test results: since
     19  the simulated images create objects by filling in a pixel and then
     20  smoothing, all objects have centroids which are exactly 0.5 pixel
     21  offsets.  These all then have a fixed growth correction error, which
     22  fortunately happens to be substantial (because of a 0.5 pixel offset
     23  in the growth curve reference object!)
     24
     25  I need to double check the 0.5 pixel error issues.  There are
     26  problems with the pslib version of psImageShift and
     27  psImageInterpolate (or at least inconsistencies).  the pmModelAdd
     28  and Sub functions and the centroid functions are probably also
     29  inconsistent.
     30
     312006.11.01
     32
     33  Trying to understand low-level errors in psphot using simulated
     34  data.  the main issue I am concerned with is the bias RHL is seeing
     35  in SDSS-psphot comparisons.  But there are other issues that are
     36  creeping in and probably point at logical errors in the code.
     37
     38  * in pmPSFtry, I measure the first pass on the aperture residual (to
     39    choose between PSF model options, if that is being tested).  This
     40    analysis currently uses a polynomial fit (1st order) for the offset
     41    and the sky bias (using r^2/flux as an independent variable).
     42
     43    Notes:
     44
     45    - is the psf-fit error distribution reasonable?  perhaps a little
     46      on the high side: at 10000 DN, noise is 0.0138, should be
     47      0.0107.
     48
     49    - scatter of ap-fit is surprisingly high.  M_input - M_fit has a
     50      median chisq of 2 (mean of 5), while M_input - M_ap has a median
     51      chisq of 125 (mean of 380).  This is using a radius of 15.  It
     52      cleans up hugely when I go to a radius of 7 and even more so
     53      with radius = 4. (In this case, the PSF sigma is 1.5, so 4 is
     54      well matched and 7 is only slightly large).
     55
     56      * make the initial PSF fitting radius and aperture radius
     57          different? 
     58      * make the initial PSF fitting radius a function of the measured
     59          PSF sigma?
     60
     61    - I have been fitting ap-fit mag without weights; the resulting
     62      ap-fit errors are highly over-estimated since the ap-fit scatter
     63      is too high.  I have added code to carry the weights (error from
     64      the fit only at the moment, ie, not the ap error as well).  This
     65      is good, but not as important if the radius is chosen well above.
     66
     67  * a bias in the psphotEnsemble results depending on the sky level
     68    but not in the PSF model fits?  turning on/off CONST_PHOT_WT has
     69    an equivalent effect, but is quite small.  why is one sensitive to
     70    the sky and the other is not? 
     71
     72  * the error measured by psphotEnsemble was wrong (and inconsistent
     73    for a given weighting situation): fixed the def of the error.
     74
     75  * still trying to understand the corrections being made.  running a
     76    few tests:
     77
     78    keeping PSF_FIT_RADIUS at 4.0
     79
     80    t1 : no growth correction,    constant weights
     81    t2 :    growth correction,    constant weights
     82    t3 : no growth correction, no constant weights
     83    t4 :    growth correction, no constant weights
     84    t5 :    growth correction,    constant weights, constant ap (4)
     85    t6 :    growth correction,    constant weights, integer radius
     86    t7 :    growth correction,    constant weights, integer radius
     87    (for t7, I've fixed the bug that the growth correction include the
     88    min radius).
     89
     90  * psphotGrowthCurve is messed up : the measurement does not correct
     91    for the actual object center, and at small radii this is an
     92    important source of noise.
    193
    2942006.06.28
Note: See TracChangeset for help on using the changeset viewer.