Changes between Version 128 and Version 129 of ppStack_testing_201111

Timestamp:

Jun 27, 2012, 2:38:08 PM (14 years ago)

Author:

Mark Huber

Comment:

--

ppStack_testing_201111

@@ -734 +734 @@
 
 Want to look at not necessarily setting the convolved stack target PSF driven by what appears to be the worst input. Have seen cases when the worse inputs are image rejected so in that case not a good idea to use anyways. 
- * for large N, a rerun would be of little time cost or just reject outright as little input to final stack? Not full run but additional clipping of outliers more before convolving.
+ * for large N, a rerun of PSF evelope/target PSF would be of little time cost or just reject outright as little input to final stack? 
  * for small N may want to reject anyways? Adding poorest image versus dropping 20-30% of possible inputs?
- * instead of a rerun of target PSF, could choose mean/median PSF or an optimal and use poor deconvolution to reject worse images?
-
-What are the convolved stacks used for
-
-TODO
-
- * will need to make a sample distribution of simulated PSFs, currently sample is flat. Need to revise the making of the stack.mdc list of inputs. Or will just be worse/upper limit of possible stack degrading for including deconvolved images.
-
-Previous improvements SYS.ERR=0 etc changes. comes after this stage so not important for picking target, but is important for final photometry/property comparisons.
-
-Same test sets as describe above ([wiki:ppStack_testing_201111#TestSets])
- * Simtest sample
-
+ * instead of a rerun of target PSF with additional image rejection, could choose mean/median PSF or an optimal and use poor deconvolution to reject worse images?
+ * rejecting inputs for convolved stacks is the same for unconvolved stacks (for the pixel rejection method), so excessive rejection not good for either.
+ * expect the rejecting and target to be different for MD (similar good inputs, easy to clip worse seeing tail without significant loss of depth) versus LAP (similar to wildly variable quality inputs, maybe few far outliers or maybe even spread of quality levels).
+
+What are the convolved stacks used for?
+ * staticsky photometry -- convolved stacks have a similar PSF across the field for photometry and morphology measurements. However, also then goes through another round of (de)convolution/smoothing to match the PSF of all input filters.
+ * other?
+
+Test runs (same as defined above [wiki:ppStack_testing_201111#TestSets]): 
+ * previous improvements like SYS.ERR=0 comes after this stage so not important for picking target, but is important for final photometry/property comparisons.
+ * since comparing between different runs will need to use same SEED values for ppStack and psphot at least initially
+ * be sure to note PSF model choices for the two samples, will want to match but also look at when not well matched.
+ * what is the baseline to use for relative comparison? Unconvolved stacks are made at same time, but can depend on the comparison. Simulated set has known values for its creation.
+ * will want to include spatial variations, simtest sample should be uniform but MD04 will not be and may have "strange" inputs.
+ * not sure how to included information rejected images by some IQ or deconvolution limits.
+ * Simtest sample:
+  * may need to make a sample distribution of simulated PSFs, currently sample is flat. Would need to revise the making of the stack.mdc list of inputs, or will just be worse/upper limit of possible stack degrading for including deconvolved images.
+  * start with sample N=20, not clear what N=100 would help to do here.
+  * PSF model is _GAUSS for simulated images, start with matched target model and mpdel in psphot. Will want to look at different matched target models.
  * MD04 sample:
-  * for sub-samples (N=20, 100) of MD04s055 
-  * skycell.055,058 full test samples for deep stacks: Current operating FWHM cut is at 7.5 pixels, generally excluding <10% of all available warps.
-
+  * for sub-samples of skycell.055: N=20 fairly irregular sample, N=100 similar to full sample
+  * skycell.055,058 for full test samples for deep stacks: current operating FWHM cut is at 7.5 pixels, generally excluding <10% of all available warps.
 ||  [[Image(md04deep_g_inputfwhm_histo.png,300px)]] ||  [[Image(md04deep_r_inputfwhm_histo.png,300px)]] ||  [[Image(md04deep_i_inputfwhm_histo.png,300px)]] ||
 ||  [[Image(md04deep_z_inputfwhm_histo.png,300px)]] ||  [[Image(md04deep_y_inputfwhm_histo.png,300px)]] ||  ||
-
+  * PSF model choices? 
 === Manually Set Target PSF ===
 To explore the effect of deconvolution