[daip] Re: AIPS FRING

[Yuri Y. Kovalev]

Eric,

Thank you. I do not have any more questions.

I still believe that this "silly message" need to be
reworded or dropped.

Yuri.

On Wednesday 06 July 2005 04:20 pm, Eric Greisen wrote:
> Yuri Y. Kovalev writes:
> 
>  > 1. Could you explain
>  > why FRING is not reporting this in case if I set aparm(9)=0
>  > and keep all the other parameters including SNR cutoff the same?
>  > It does not make sense to me.
>  > Possibly, I do not understand something.
> 
>    In the normal search, only baselines to REFANT are searched.  In
> that case, when it fails it just does not give you a message about it
> - but the results will be flagged in the SN table.  It is possible
> that the apparent SNRs may be higher in the simple search.
> 
> This message occurs only in the subroutine that is used for exhaustive
> searches and then only because that method allows for more than one
> possible reference antenna.
> 
>  > 
>  > 2. Could you explain why in case of 
>  > "many baselines to the REFANT are flagged and then there
>  > is no way to reference the phases to that REFANT"
>  > FRING is not using other ANTs from SEARCH?
> 
> What the message is saying is that there are two sets of antennas with
> no baselines between the two sets.  With a lower SNR cutoff, more
> solutions are allowed and the two sets become joined.
> 
>  > 
>  > 3. In my view, this comment
>  > fourie> FRING1: Sorry, the data has partitioned into multiple
>  > fourie> FRING1:    disjointed subarrays. Flagging some good
>  > fourie> FRING1:    solns. silly, aint it?
>  > confuses a general AIPS user.
>  > Could you change it to something more helpfull?
> 
> Actually - I do not like the flippant tone of the 2nd part either, but
> the first part is a rather well worded description of what has
> happened.
> 
> Eric Greisen
> 
>