[PIPE2D-794] Review recent stability data Created: 25/Mar/21  Updated: 13/Jan/22

Status: Open
Project: DRP 2-D Pipeline
Component/s: None
Affects Version/s: None
Fix Version/s: None

Type: Task Priority: Normal
Reporter: hassan Assignee: arnaud.lefur
Resolution: Unresolved Votes: 0
Labels: None
Remaining Estimate: Not Specified
Time Spent: Not Specified
Original Estimate: Not Specified

Attachments: PDF File PFS_SM1_StabilityData_v3.pdf     PDF File PFS_SM1_StabilityData_v4.pdf    
Issue Links:
Blocks
blocks PIPE2D-711 Coordinate regeneration of CALIB regi... Open
blocks PIPE2D-791 Stability tests: separate visits into... Open
Relates
relates to PIPE2D-727 Regenerate calib for SuNSS Won't Fix
Story Points: 3
Sprint: 2DDRP-2021 A3, 2DDRP-2021 A 4, 2DDRP-2021 A5, 2DDRP-2021 A 6, 2DDRP-2021 A 7, 2DDRP-2021 A 8, 2DDRP-2021 A 10

 Description   

As discussed during the internal Princeton Group telecon 2021-03-22, please go through the recent stability data acquired at Subaru this year, identifying those visits which are 'good' and those which are problematic, due to hardware configuration changes, significant SCR temperature variations, etc. This requires sifting through the relevant logs etc.

The 'good' visits will be passed on to the automatic pipeline for subsequent processing and analysis.

 Comments   
Comment by rhl [ 26/Mar/21 ]

I think we need a bit more than that.  I'd like to label a subset of the data as calibration data and a subset as science data (and this may mean a new way to do the book-keeping).  Then generate calibrations using the calibs (and Mineo-kun's scripts), and look at the results and sort out what's going on.

For example, using the calibs in /scratch/pprice/pipe2d-706/CALIB I see fiberId 464 as consistently offset; why?

Ultimately, we want a set of calibrations produced using the automated tools that are as good as we can produce.

Comment by hassan [ 26/Mar/21 ]

The labelling of the 'good' stability data into calibration data and science data is the subject of PIPE2D-791 (linked). I'm fine to close that ticket and combine both tasks into this single ticket if in practice they cannot be separated easily, and there's less confusion.

Comment by rhl [ 27/Mar/21 ]

Good point, Hassan.  I think we may want to merge the two tickets as exactly how to do PIPE2D-791 will become clearer as part of this work, but let's leave them as-is for now.

Generated at Fri Apr 04 14:05:54 JST 2025 using Jira 8.3.4#803005-sha1:1f96e09b3c60279a408a2ae47be3c745f571388b.