-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 40
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
WIP: Adding DHS to PandExo, including front end #89
base: dev
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
…the way of specifying skipped frames
@hover2pi added as a last to-do after testing is complete! thanks for the heads up |
Hi @natashabatalha --- just a note that we are actively working on this. @hover2pi is doing some final tweaks to put the page as it will be seen by users for internal testing, and I have a suite of tests I'll check against the ETC once that's up and running. Will come back with any feedback here. This might happen tomorrow, otherwise early next week at the latest (hopping on a plane back to the US tomorrow on my end, so a bit chaotic over here). One piece of feedback I can already give you is this: I know I suggested to you that So, bottom line: instead of SHALLOW I think RAPID should be the PandExo default given this strategy we suggest in JDox (and on today's JWebbinar as well). Perhaps adding a link to that docs on PandExo would be a nice to have. Will come back with more (likely minor) feedback soon! N. |
"disperser": "dhs0" | ||
}, | ||
"detector": { | ||
"readout_pattern":"shallow2", |
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.
Change shallow2
to rapid
.
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.
fixed
All right @natashabatalha. First of all, very sorry for the delay on testing this. It took 1 software engineer and 2 astronomers to figure out how to set the service in the test server on our side with the new upgrades :). I've tested this branch with a few targets against the JWST ETC, with the modification that I wrote above, i.e., changing 1. The PandExo SNR estimates are slightly off with respect to the JWST ETC. I wonder if this might be because I simply replaced the If I try the very same calculation in PandExo, however, I get this: So the change in precision is a factor of ~2 (with PandExo suggesting a better SNR). I tried doing the same calculation with a known/old instrument (thinking perhaps I did something wrong). Ran the same calculations on NIRSpec/PRISM at 4 groups per integration. The JWST ETC gives me this for the SNR: (Note below 2 microns its saturated, hence not showing that). PandExo gives me: Which are consistent with each other; PandExo only slightly better. So for NIRspec/PRISM, all is good --- but for DHS short-wavelength, it is not. I also tried an experiment with the same DHS setup but looking at the long-wavelength SNR and got an error (see below, number 2). Not sure where the problem might be with the DHS SNR in PandExo. I tried deactivating, e.g., the sky noise in the JWST ETC. This slightly bumps the SNR to ~100 at the peak . Wonder, again, if this is because I just went and changed the readout mode? 2. When trying to check the NIRcam/DHS Long Wavelength results with PandExo, I get an error. I tried the exact same setup as above but selected "Display Simulations For?" -> "Long Wavelength" and got this error:
3. When PandExo is set to 4. In the NIRCam subarray selection button, add the number of spectra. In the selection of the subarrays, just as the frametime is written by hand, it would be perhaps nice to write the number of spectra each subarray imply. This confused me a couple of times. And that's it. Thanks so much for working on this! Happy to hop on a call to figure 1 and 2 above out. N. |
One last comment I forgot to add: it might be beneficial for the future to allow the user to select the readout mode (leave |
@nespinoza great. I resolved your points 3 and 4. In doing so I realized it was pulling the 8 spectra aperture for everything so I resolved that as well. Maybe that was part of issue 1?? Issue 2 might be caused by me not understanding how they want to specify DHS setup with the long wave filter.. maybe I need to switch the mode to |
Ah I found this hiding PandExo/pandexo/engine/utils/plotters.py Line 218 in ba94c83
This might resolve the SNR problem, which would hopefully just make this a visualization error. |
Thanks for all this work @natashabatalha, this is awesome.
Let me know when this is in so I can test. I can get to testing very late today or early tomorrow. N. |
When I run this configuration:
I get this wavelength solution from Pandeia
I dont understand why it is returning a spectrum from 0.7-2.3 with F444. I must be setting up the configuration incorrectly. You can recreate this by doing this with the
|
This PR adds the short wave DHS grism functionality to NIRCam. It includes additional options at the front end to run the short wave simulations. It also allows users to run "NIRCam DHS" via the
run_pandexo
front end.Remaining to-dos: