Open mareuter opened 8 years ago
Step 1: Pulling out opsim field IDs which should have field centers between -12 and +12 degrees from the ecliptic, I find 1102 fields which match. For field centers between -15 and +15 degrees from the ecliptic, I find 1382 fields which match. (this is without counting fields which would be part of the WFD or NES).
to be continued..
I'm wondering if we should just revisit the original set of requested runs, as it seems like the ecliptic band should always take precedence, even over NES.
Having plotted the actual fields, I think I understand why NEO6 != NEO5 - NES .. because more was dropped than just the overlap with the NES (+15 degrees is further north above the ecliptic plane than we were going with the NES).
The description just had to be updated for neo/run07 -- it has the NES + it has the +/- 15 degree band (where this time the band goes all the way around the sky).
We need to make sure the correct number of user regions in the Ecliptic Band (EB) proposal in the NEO configurations are being used. The base lines are as follows:
NEO3/4 : ~+/-12 degree band around ecliptic NEO5/6 : ~+/-15 degree band around ecliptic
Looking at the EB number of user regions in each configuration: NEO3: 1034 NEO4: 511 NEO5: 1380 NEO6: 749 NEO7: 1380
The number of user regions in the NES proposal is 523. So, comparing the configurations:
NEO4 == NEO3 - NES NEO6 != NEO5 - NES
Also, NEO7 was supposed to look like NEO6 but only with r&i band observations. However, the number of user regions in NEO7 matches NEO5 not NEO6.
Please use this issue to discuss how these differences can be reconciled. Any work on changing the actual configuration files will get captured into JIRA items.