Match Target and Secondaries by Index Rather Than Distance #65
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Hey Ian,
This is an idea (feel free to decline it). Oxkat (in a few cases) wound up matching the wrong secondary to the source due to some secondaries being closer in distance, but not the secondaries that bracket the target. Here is an alternative scheme where instead of using the distance on the sky it calculated the distance between target and secondary indexes, and uses the smallest difference in index as the secondary.
I can really think of a case where this wouldn't work, unless the observations have some bizzarre setup where the secondary you want to match isn't the closest in time to the target.