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

Map names #24

Open
damonge opened this issue Nov 24, 2023 · 2 comments
Open

Map names #24

damonge opened this issue Nov 24, 2023 · 2 comments

Comments

@damonge
Copy link
Collaborator

damonge commented Nov 24, 2023

We agreed to establish the following nomenclature for the different types of maps that SOOPERCOOL uses:

  • Atomic maps: a 1-hour or a constant-elevation, single-observation map. SOOPERCOOL may never see these maps, but they define all other maps.
  • Bundles: a map constructed by combining several atomic maps.
  • Tagged-coadded maps: the maps whose power spectra we're interested in. Since the name is a bit verbose, we may refer to them as "TC maps", for example. Each TC map is represented by a set of bundles (e.g. 4 bundles), and the TC map would result from the coaddition of those bundles. The pipeline doesn't really use this coaddition, but constructs the power spectra of the TC maps from the cross-correlations of the bundles.

Let's use this issue to discuss this choice. Once we've converged, the current version of the pipeline does not use this language, so we should fix that.

@kwolz
Copy link
Collaborator

kwolz commented Nov 24, 2023

This looks like a reasonable choice to me.
To see if I got this right, let me give another example of how this would sound in C_ell jargon:

  • The formerly-known "splits" would, in this new convention, be "TC bundles".
  • In the pcler stage, we compute cross power spectra between different TC bundles (auto-bundle correlations would include a noise bias).
  • In the coadder stage, we compute the arithmetic mean of all cross-bundle spectra that correspond to a given TC map pair to avoid the noise bias.

This doesn't sound too strange, although getting used to not talking about "splits" may take a moment.

@kwolz
Copy link
Collaborator

kwolz commented Apr 17, 2024

Right now, the paramfile still uses the notion of splits, we should replace this by bundles to avoid confusion.

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

No branches or pull requests

2 participants