-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 0
Allow bonus faint guide stars for dyn bgd enabled #372
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Conversation
@jeanconn - ready for final review |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I am still running one of the proseco notebooks, just to check. I ran all tests and looked at the code and things seem reasonable. The only thing was that the test only verifies whether the functions do not fail and I was wondering whether there is some consistency test one could do.
One test one could do is to verify that with default arguments it returns the catalogs as in previous versions.
proseco/tests/test_catalog.py
Outdated
acar_leg = aca_leg.get_review_table() | ||
acar_dyn = aca_dyn.get_review_table() | ||
print(np.isclose(acar_leg.guide_count, 4.46, rtol=0, atol=0.1)) | ||
print(np.isclose(acar_dyn.guide_count, 4.92, rtol=0, atol=0.1)) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This test only tests that there are no exceptions.
Is it possible to check that it did something reasonable?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Good point. I just thought of a way to functionally test the proseco bit here where it will get a different number of stars, showing that the star selection is improved.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
BTW, I had not originally noticed the print
statements and this was the genesis of your issue. I had meant those to be asserts. But you stumbled on a real coverage problem which was that the catalogs being picked by proseco for leg
and dyn
were actually the same.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
See 9ad97b8. I should not have let myself fall into the trap of using an obsid, instead do a synthetic stars test that exactly tests the code. Bad Tom, good catch.
@javierggt - can you Approve the PR? |
yes, I was going over the output of the notebook that was running. My plots look slightly different, but I am guessing that's because I have not updated ska data in a while. |
Description
Per discussion at SS&AWG on 2022-Apr-27 (see the presentation there for full details), this adds two new parameters to the base
ACACatalogTable
and theget_aca_catalog
function to allow specifying the parameters of the bonus stars.Requires:
Interface impacts
Adds
dyn_bgd_n_faint
anddyn_bgd_dt_ccd
arguments toget_aca_catalog
. The default settings (in particulardyn_bgd_n_faint = 0
) have behavior that is identical to current flight star selection.Testing
Unit tests using above-mentioned branches
Independent check of unit tests by Javier
Functional tests