Skip to content

fix: conjugation error in matvis wrapper - #301

Open
r-pascua wants to merge 1 commit into
mainfrom
fix_vis_conj
Open

fix: conjugation error in matvis wrapper#301
r-pascua wants to merge 1 commit into
mainfrom
fix_vis_conj

Conversation

@r-pascua

@r-pascua r-pascua commented Mar 4, 2024

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

I don't think this is finished, but I wanted to at least get a start on it since I had kept punting on it. There are a few issues I'd still like to address, but I'm a bit too tired today to write good code, so I'll just note the things here:

  • I think the default blt_order may have changed from ('time', 'ant1') to something like ('time', 'baseline'). This is functionally the same, but the different name means the big if clause (~line 420 in matvis.py) will be skipped when it shouldn't.
  • I think we can also populate the visibility matrix quickly with ('time', 'ant2') ordering by taking the upper triangular indices of the visibility matrix.
  • I would like to write some tests that appeal to the simulated visibilities to ensure the conjugation convention is correct. Here are two relatively simple ideas I have:
    • Single frequency, roughly an hour or so obstime with a small array, with a single source transiting zenith. Check that the fringe-rate transform (using a FFT and not an iFFT) peaks at positive fringe-rates.
    • Single time, roughly ten-ish MHz with a small array, with a single source somewhere overhead. We should be able to analytically calculate the delay spectrum peak for a given antenna conjugation.

@r-pascua
r-pascua requested a review from steven-murray March 4, 2024 18:35
@r-pascua r-pascua self-assigned this Mar 4, 2024
@steven-murray

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Hey @r-pascua just checking if you have any thoughts/updates to this. It would be nice to have this error fixed before running of IDR3 sims (potentially with matvis due to the mutual coupling)

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