Refactor `BaseM`

[EarlMilktea]

Context (if applicable):

Related to #178 .

Description of the change: (WIP)

• Respect the original intention to introduce BaseM

[codecov[bot]]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests :white_check_mark:

Project coverage is 78.99%. Comparing base (7da2095) to head (70cd3d4).

Additional details and impacted files

```diff @@ Coverage Diff @@ ## master #237 +/- ## ======================================= Coverage 78.99% 78.99% ======================================= Files 40 40 Lines 6113 6114 +1 ======================================= + Hits 4829 4830 +1 Misses 1284 1284 ```

:umbrella: View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
:loudspeaker: Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

---

🚨 Try these New Features:

• Flaky Tests Detection - Detect and resolve failed and flaky tests

[EarlMilktea]

@jemappellesami

I opened this PR to respect your initial motivation to introduce BaseM (add a way to simply specify the node subject to measure and nothing else), which is not properly reflected in the current code due to refactoring in process.

In addition to that, I have the following suggestion:

• Remove MeasureMethod and related things

I feel it's clearer to use BaseM (or something derived from this) to specify everything about measurements, as the data required to perform measurement are essentially the same (angle, plane) though they can be missing at first. I would like to know in detail how you are trying to utilize the simulators without specifying the details, even while the simulators are initially designed for non-blind measurements.