Re: A New Record

[Patrick Wils <patrickwils@yahoo.com>]

> I have no objection to adding one or more quality factors.  As I keep
> saying, in tass you get to just do it.  There is presently a V and I
> flag
> bit in all the tables that could be used.  At the present time I am
> deleting all the flagged measurements before doing my analysis as
> these are
> mostly saturated stars. Patrick, did you do this for your analysis?

Yes, I did.  But it doesn't change much, because these flags appear
only for the brightest stars, and the fainter stars have these large
deviations as well.

> I would welcome someone to take on this problem and propose how to
> use
> quality fields to make the tass data more useful.  What I would hope
> for is
> some discussion of this on the list and a few TN's that propose
> schemes,
> try them out, and present results.  Then we can pick one or more and
> do the
> necessary processing to include them in the data in the data base.  I
> can
> then add the processing to the pipeline (if possible - one may need
> the
> whole data set) so that the newer data contains quality factors.  

One possible indication is the quality of the photometric fit (the RMS
value from the photom.coeff file, see
http://spiff.rit.edu/photom/photom-latest/photom.html).  Adding this to
the final output would probably be a good thing (or perhaps include
this factor in the uncertainty of each measurement itself), because you
then don't need the whole dataset.

Patrick


__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
The New Yahoo! Shopping - with improved product search
http://shopping.yahoo.com