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

OPSIM-1180: Updates to bring rubin_scheduler in line with v3.5 simulations #93

Merged
merged 9 commits into from
Sep 6, 2024

Conversation

yoachim
Copy link
Member

@yoachim yoachim commented Sep 3, 2024

Updates generated in v3.5 sims.

  • updated default footprint
  • Roman overlap survey
  • ToO surveys

details.append(detailers.DitherDetailer(max_dither=0.5, seed=42, per_night=True))
details.append(detailers.CameraRotDetailer(min_rot=-camera_ddf_rot_limit, max_rot=camera_ddf_rot_limit))

survey = DeepDrillingSurvey(
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Might want to change this to FieldSurvey?

times=[1, 2, 4, 24, 48],
filters_at_times=["gz", "gz", "gz", "gz", "gz", "gz"],
nvis=[1, 1, 1, 1, 6, 6],
exptimes=[30.0, 30, 30, 30, 30, 30],
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

These exposure times should match the times in the main survey for "standard observations".
Wonder if this should be a function, as a result? like with survey_start_mjd, maybe a survey_standard_visit ?

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Also, it's kind of hard to understand how exptimes, nvis, and filters_at_times map together ..
it seems like these set up 1 visit in each of g and z that are 30s each, at time 1 (then similar up to time 24).
More documentation on this would be helpful.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

OK, I set a global variable DEFAULT_EXP_TIME so any ToO follow-ups that want to try and match the standard visit can easily. We'll probably want to further refine where ToO code goes since we'll want more active community input on it, and it is fairly rubin-specific. (So I imagine a lot of this file could go to another repo at some point.)

less than 2 will start rolling too early near Y1. If uniform rolling
is turned off, the lowest value should be 3. Defaults to None which
selects the correct lowest value based on the value of uniform.
less than 2 will start rolling too early near Y1. Defaults to 2.
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

We have a partial season over the whole sky (season -1) and then a full season over most of the sky (season 0) but then rolling starts within the last 3 months of this -- within season 0 in "visibility/proper seasons" but at the start of season 2 if you start counting at 0 and offset by 90 degrees, as the footprint season does. So I guess this is accurate in counting in terms of "footprint seasons", but it would be great to align these at some point (instead of going ramp then constant in the season footprint, doing constant - ramp - constant).

@@ -5,6 +5,7 @@
"SkyAreaGenerator",
"SkyAreaGeneratorGalplane",
"EuclidOverlapFootprint",
"CurrentAreaMap",
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

"Phase3Map"?

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

That'll work.

@rhiannonlynne rhiannonlynne changed the title Tickets/opsim 1180 OPSIM-1180: Updates to bring rubin_scheduler in line with v3.5 simulations Sep 5, 2024
@yoachim yoachim merged commit a62783c into main Sep 6, 2024
7 checks passed
@rhiannonlynne rhiannonlynne deleted the tickets/OPSIM-1180 branch September 11, 2024 23:17
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