Skip to content
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

Deconvolution routines and example (in progress) #47

Open
wants to merge 8 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

LinErinG
Copy link
Member

I'd like to make the method I use for image deconvolution available to everyone. This will probably take some iteration to get it usable by someone who didn't write the code, so I would appreciate if you can start trying it out. Please try the example in the IDL "docs" folder. If it works, please also try it for some other FOXSI simulated image that you might produce. Let me know what works and what breaks, and what is opaque and confusing. Thank you! @ehsteve @ayshih @aringlis @DanRyanIrish @PascalSH


; Define the elements of the transformation matrix.

matrix = fltarr( w_dim^2, h_dim^2 )
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

These squares overflow when one of the dimensions provided is a non-long integer greater than 181, resulting in bad behavior. While you can typecast here, it probably makes more sense to typecast in lines 48 and 49.

@ayshih
Copy link
Contributor

ayshih commented Aug 1, 2016

Here's my playing around with it (original/through-PSF/10-iteration-deconvolution):
example

@ayshih
Copy link
Contributor

ayshih commented Aug 1, 2016

Regarding the docs example, to my eye, ~10 iterations is way too many for the coronal source. ~5 iterations seems more appropriate.

@LinErinG
Copy link
Member Author

LinErinG commented Aug 4, 2016

@ayshih Thanks for trying this out! I'm pleased to see this recovered the original morphology quite well. This was probably a high-statistics case. In the future I think we can probably come up with some ad-hoc rule of max#iterations/#photons, though the tricky cases will be when we have somethings faint and bright together. For that, eventually, we'll need better stopping rules, but it's probably not necessary for the proposal.

I assume you generated a custom instrument response matrix; did this take a long time? I have designs on speeding this up for a future version.

@ayshih
Copy link
Contributor

ayshih commented Aug 4, 2016

I assume you generated a custom instrument response matrix; did this take a long time?

The 256x64 matrix took about half an hour to generate (and the save file is a beefy ~1 GB).

@LinErinG
Copy link
Member Author

LinErinG commented Aug 4, 2016

Wow! Impressive. I've never tried it over such a large FOV (3 arcmin x 3 arcmin) before, on the thinking that it would never be necessary. There are certainly ways the transform calculation can be optimized, if people think FOVs larger than ~1 arcmin are something they'd like to do.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants