| Version 1 (modified by , 13 years ago) ( diff ) |
|---|
Summary of MOPS_IASC20130319_tests130422
Comparison of MOPS diffim discoveries to IASC visual chip inspection for OSS.20130319
Related summary pages:
MOPS/IASC sample exposures to compare to (162.OSS.O.Q.w ps1_14_2124 visit 1-4, quad):
| exp_id | exp_name | dateobs | comment | +--------+-------------+---------------------+-----------------------------------+ | 590994 | o6370g0351o | 2013-03-19 11:37:26 | 162.OSS.O.Q.w ps1_14_2124 visit 1 | | 591016 | o6370g0373o | 2013-03-19 11:59:29 | 162.OSS.O.Q.w ps1_14_2124 visit 2 | | 591038 | o6370g0395o | 2013-03-19 12:21:39 | 162.OSS.O.Q.w ps1_14_2124 visit 3 | | 591060 | o6370g0417o | 2013-03-19 12:43:52 | 162.OSS.O.Q.w ps1_14_2124 visit 4 |
need to add related warp_id, diff_id table
Related MOPS czar pages: http://mopshq2.ifa.hawaii.edu/czar/psmops_ps1_mdrm152/tracklets.html?sort=d&limit=100&nn=56369&minv=0.1&sm=162.OSS.O&run_id=831
Datastore products:
pub.791526.diff.406579 2013-03-19T14:01:22Z IPP-MOPS 162.OSS.O.Q.w ps1_14_2124 visit 1 o6370g0351o o6370g0373o pub.791568.diff.406688 2013-03-19T15:17:53Z IPP-MOPS 162.OSS.O.Q.w ps1_14_2124 visit 3 o6370g0395o o6370g0417o 3330813323.gpc1_IPP-MOPS-TEST_IPP-MOPS-TEST.791526.pos.mops 3330814731.gpc1_IPP-MOPS-TEST_IPP-MOPS-TEST.791526.neg.mops 3331155060.gpc1_IPP-MOPS-TEST_IPP-MOPS-TEST.791568.pos.mops 3331158431.gpc1_IPP-MOPS-TEST_IPP-MOPS-TEST.791568.neg.mops
MOPS to IASC object comparison
Missed IASC objects within ~2" in the diffims: ~30% !!
o6370g0351o o6370g0373o 3330813323.gpc1_IPP-MOPS-TEST_IPP-MOPS-TEST.791526.pos.mops = 147/514 3330814731.gpc1_IPP-MOPS-TEST_IPP-MOPS-TEST.791526.neg.mops = 168/523 o6370g0395o o6370g0417o 3331155060.gpc1_IPP-MOPS-TEST_IPP-MOPS-TEST.791568.pos.mops = 170/519 3331158431.gpc1_IPP-MOPS-TEST_IPP-MOPS-TEST.791568.neg.mops = 169/505
Need MOPS diffim object list to reverse compare..
IASC Objects Missed in Diffims (Manual Inspection)
Cases for missing matches:
- (s/n) S/N too low for detection (will need additional match to SMF for photerr measurement)
- edge or masked -- really two cases
- (edge) edges and masks have growth factor from convolution
- (mask) non-target image has mask so diffim has mask (why WS diffim should be better in addition to S/N)
| Object | diffim | mode | skycell | ra dec | comment |
| TVPS480 | 791526.pos | 1 | 1278.021 | 185.470925 -3.000194 | not visual in diffim, smudge in warp. SMF detect? |
| K11UO3A | 791526.pos | 1 | 1279.019 | 186.089088 -3.404686 | cell edge and mask |
Re-run tests
diffim stats
For full OSS.20130319 diffim exposure/skycell sample:
- convolve input = 1393
- convolve template/reference/input 2 = 968
- dual convolution = 179
-- need cam stage stat summary Input FWHM: 4.949776 Reference FWHM: 5.265106
Only IASC exposures:
- convolve input =
- convolve template/reference/input 2 =
- dual convolution =
reruns with dual convolution and no-dual convolution (issue is typically no-dual case has different kernel params)
