search

epic-astronomy / LWA_EPIC

The LWA-specific implementation of the EPIC correlator
http://livetv.epic-astronomy.org
MIT License
3 stars 3 forks source link

Add support for TBN data from LWA1 #16

Closed jaycedowell closed 3 years ago

jaycedowell commented 3 years ago

Like the title says, this PR adds support for TBN data from LWA1.

jaycedowell commented 3 years ago

It's untested!

jaycedowell commented 3 years ago

TBN data from Sevilleta processed as Sevilleta looks good.

jaycedowell commented 3 years ago

TBN data from Sevilleta processed as LWA1 fails. Not surprising given that they have different numbers of dipoles.

jaycedowell commented 3 years ago

TBN data from LWA1 processed as LWA1 looks sort of like the sky. I need better test data from LWA1.

jaycedowell commented 3 years ago

New TBN data from LWA1 processed as LWA1 looks good. That's at least some basic testing but it doesn't include the online side of the pipeline.

adampbeardsley commented 3 years ago

Ruh-Roh, we need to incorporate this into the new master, after Matt merged LWA_bifrost.py and LWA_bifrost_DFT.py.

adampbeardsley commented 3 years ago

@mkolopanis will handle merge conflicts, then @HaraKrish will check for any online performance red flags.

jaycedowell commented 3 years ago

MOFF_DFT_CorrelatorOp returns a slightly different an image with a different shape where it looks like the pixel dimensions have been collapsed into a 1-D array. Has it always been this way?

jaycedowell commented 3 years ago

And the image is transposed/flipped?

mkolopanis commented 3 years ago

hmm I just looked for "sameness" of DFT with itself, when merging the two scripts together. but @KentJames would know for sure

jaycedowell commented 3 years ago

I've tested again with TBN data from LWA1 and LWA-SV and the images look as expected, modulo the DFT shape/orientation difference.

mkolopanis commented 3 years ago

sounds sufficiently tested for this repo to me ¯_(ツ)_/¯ Should we just make an issue about the DFT thing I think? Definitely outside the scope of this PR.

jaycedowell commented 3 years ago

The only other thing that needs to be looked at is its online performance which @HaraKrish was going to do. Otherwise, yes, I think we should start an issue to look into the DFT thing. Maybe after understanding it we will also be able to drop down to a single save block.