add flag to disable point source mask in analysis #124
Conversation
| ps_mask = so_window.create_apodization(ps_mask, "C1", apod_pts_source_degree, use_rmax=True) | ||
| survey_mask.data *= ps_mask.data | ||
|
|
||
| if disable_ptsrc_mask == False: |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Default should be False then you can write
if not d.get("disable_ptsrc_maks", False):You can then remove line 54
There was a problem hiding this comment.
or maybe it's even clearer
if d.get("enable_ptsrc_mask", True):There was a problem hiding this comment.
@xzackli what do you think about the above changes ?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@thibautlouis are you ok with adding enable_ptsrc_mask to every param file?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Hi Zack, the only issue I see with this is the fact that we use the point source mask in other part of the analysis, for example in get_alms.py ( ps_map.data *= ps_mask.data) where we add back sources that are below the flux cut threshold. I think this will lead to strange behavior compared to what is expected by the user when he set enable_ptsrc_mask=False. Since this option is only important for a very specific test case, what I would do if I were you would just be to create a unity template (all value set to 1) and pass this as an argument in the dictfile instead of a point source mask. It might look ugly and wasteful, however not using a point source mask in pspipe is such a specific test case that I don't think it's problematic.
For the reproducibility of the noise sim paper PS analysis, I'd like to add this optional flag
disable_ptsrc_maskfor DR6 analysis. If it's in the param file and is set to true, then it disables the use of the point source mask.