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

HLA-1352: Description of JSON files #1901

Conversation

s-goldman
Copy link
Collaborator

@s-goldman s-goldman commented Oct 22, 2024

Resolves HLA-1352

Closes #1898

This PR adds a description of the json files. It also adds an entry into the architecture design comments.

Checklist for maintainers

  • added entry in CHANGELOG.rst within the relevant release section
  • updated or added relevant tests
  • updated relevant documentation
  • added relevant label(s)
  • ran regression tests, post a link to the Jenkins job below.
    How to run regression tests on a PR

jenkins test


.. run_hap_processing
.. identified in json files.
.. identified in json files.

Copy link
Collaborator

@mdlpstsci mdlpstsci Nov 11, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

The discussion here seems out of context. If you are describing the contents of a configuration file, provide the name of the specific file, and then the contents. Note each numbered section maps to a corresponding section of the NameOfConfigurationFile. Perhaps this would be more obvious to me if I were looking at the formatted output. Having said this, I will look at this with a phased approach in that more and clarifying information can added later once the basics are described.

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Sounds good. I've added the example filename to the docs.

The fit_quality (see above) flag values that are allowable for a successful fit.
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I think you should add section headings where the discussions of the catalog configuration file and the quality control (of the catalog information) configuration file will eventually be written.

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I created a ticket for working on those. I tentatively assign you, as you know more about the catalogs, but I can also add empty sections in this PR.

Copy link
Collaborator

@mdlpstsci mdlpstsci left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I think this is a much needed start to the discussion of the important configuration parameters. While the discussion needs to be expanded, this PR forms the fundamental basis for the additional information which will be added later.

There are only a few changes requested at this time.

@@ -410,7 +446,7 @@ generate_source_catalogs (*primarily in align_utils.py*)
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
Copy link
Collaborator

@mdlpstsci mdlpstsci Nov 14, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

The "fit quality categories" title seems out of place here.

Add a note so the user is reminded...The generate_source_catalogs section is used for alignment purposes only. This has nothing to do with the output HAP catalog products.

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I've added them as a note now. I agree that it's not the ideal place, but I couldn't find a better place. With a "note", it seems to flow better now.


.. run_hap_processing
.. identified in json files.
.. identified in json files.
Copy link
Collaborator

@mdlpstsci mdlpstsci Nov 14, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

It is a bit confusing below as there are sections of the configuration file, wfc3_ir_astrodrizzle_any_n1.json which I though were skipped, but they are just out of order. This needs to be corrected to avoid confusion.

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I've reorganized the sections.


MAX_FIT_LIMIT: int (*default=150*)
Not currently in use.

mosaic_catalog_list: list of strings (*default=["GAIAeDR3", "GSC242", "2MASS"]*)
List of available catalogs for aligning for both pipeline and SVM products. The code will go through each catalog in this order.
List of available catalogs for aligning for both pipeline and SVM products. The code will go through each catalog in this order.

mosaic_fit_list: list of strings (*default=["match_relative_fit", "match_2dhist_fit", "match_default_fit"]*)
List of available fit algorithms for aligning for both pipeline and SVM products; match_default_fit relative alignment without using 2dhist and different throusholds (see json configuration files).
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Fix spelling: throusholds

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

fixed.


mosaic_fit_list: list of strings (*default=["match_relative_fit", "match_2dhist_fit", "match_default_fit"]*)
List of available fit algorithms for aligning for both pipeline and SVM products; match_default_fit relative alignment without using 2dhist and different throusholds (see json configuration files).

mosaic_fitgeom_list: dict (*default={"rshift": 10, "rscale": 10, "general": 6}*)
The different fit geometries tried in alignment as well as their minobj value which specifies the number of matched sources required for a successful fit. For pipeline products, the fitgeometry value is ignored and defaults to a fit geometry of ``rscale``. The fitgeom for the pipeline products is specified as a default in *align_utils.perform_fit*. The value for minobj specified here, however, is used for the pipeline products.
The different fit geometries tried in alignment as well as their minobj value which specifies the number of matched sources required for a successful fit. For pipeline products, the fitgeometry value is ignored and defaults to a fit geometry of ``rscale``. The fitgeom for the pipeline products is specified as a default in *align_utils.perform_fit*. The value for minobj specified here, however, is used for the pipeline products.
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Change "minobj" to minimum number of objects. Fix this description regarding the type of products and the minimum number of objects.

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

fixed.

@@ -459,7 +495,7 @@ perform_fit (*primarily external in tweakwcs.matchutils.XYXYMatch*)
For match_relative_fit, match_default_fit, and match_2dhist_fit, the following parameters are used:

fitgeom": "rscale",
As used above, this is ignored for pipeline products.
As used above, this is ignored for pipeline products.
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Since you are discussing three categories at once for brevity, I would not quote the "default" values as they are not the same for all categories.

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

default values removed.

Copy link
Collaborator

@mdlpstsci mdlpstsci left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

A few more changes to avoid confusion and provide context.

Copy link
Collaborator

@mdlpstsci mdlpstsci left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

A lot of work has been done on this topic. Adding more information should be captured by other PRs.

@s-goldman s-goldman merged commit 685e46d into spacetelescope:main Nov 18, 2024
18 checks passed
@s-goldman s-goldman deleted the hla-1351_document_json_parameter_files_10_22_24 branch November 18, 2024 14:28
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Drizzlepac/HAP: Document the JSON parameter files
2 participants