[evlatests] Antenna slews in AH1004

[David Harland]

The script generation code is *not* trying to figure out the best wrap, 
but is only communicating the user's wishes.  So your item #1 will be 
true only if the user has specified the wrap -- which for this example 
they have not.  All i'm saying is that the code changes i made based on 
the other emails do nothing useful here.  User action would be required 
to force the wrap for the 1st scan.


Bryan Butler wrote:
>
> no, that conclusion is flawed.
>
> what the SB *should* have is:
>
> 1. first scan has subarray.setWrap(1)  (or -1 if that's the right wrap)
> 2. second scan has subarray.setWrap(0)
> 3. subsequent scans have no call to subarray.setWrap()
>
> i.e., the more fundamental flaw was the lack of a specified wrap on 
> the first scan (item 1).  if you make the fix that i sent out earlier, 
> that will fix item 2, and you're already making the fix to implement 
> item 3.
>
>     -bryan
>
>
> David Harland wrote, On 3/8/10 11:44:
>> In the 3rd paragraph i said that i don't think what we're doing w/ 
>> the setWrap generation should result in any different behavior for 
>> this example.
>>
>> One of AH1004's SBs has 29 scans.  Here's what we're changing:
>>
>>    Old code: all 29 scans have "subarray.setWrap(0)"
>>
>>    New code: 1st scan has "subarray.setWrap(0)", none of the other 
>> scans trigger a call to setWrap.
>>
>> Based on Ken's statement, old code and new code should give same 
>> behavior for this particular SB.  So, i'm asking if the conclusion 
>> that "this is excited by the OPT-generated script" and its handling 
>> of wraps can really be the reason that things went fluey on several 
>> antennas.
>>
>>
>>
>> Bryan Butler wrote:
>>>
>>> not sure which conclusion you mean.  the fact that the script was 
>>> generated by the OPT doesn't affect anything other than the wrap 
>>> calculation, which we're solving now...
>>>
>>>     -bryan
>>>
>>>
>>> David Harland wrote, On 3/8/10 11:12:
>>>> Is that a firm conclusion?
>>>>
>>>> Based on the other emails in this thread, i'll be making changes to 
>>>> the script generation code, but i don't see how these changes would 
>>>> have an impact on this particular situation.
>>>>
>>>> The script for AH1004 had had a subarray.setWrap(0) ("no 
>>>> preference") on each scan. Based on the new code it will have 
>>>> subarray.setWrap(0) on only the first scan and will be silent on 
>>>> the matter on all subsequent scans (assuming there's been no change 
>>>> by the user in the meantime on the issue of wraps). Since Ken 
>>>> indicated that being silent on a scan is equivalent to repeating 
>>>> the instruction of the previous scan^, it seems to me the behavior 
>>>> will be the same.
>>>>
>>>> Might the differences seen between the OPT-generated script and 
>>>> whatever else was run be more a matter of the starting positions & 
>>>> wraps of the individual antennas prior to the executions?
>>>>
>>>> ^"The way the executor works, once a a wrap hint is supplied it is 
>>>> used for every scan thereafter."
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Vivek Dhawan wrote:
>>>>> I believe I can confirm that this is excited by the OPT-generated
>>>>> script: pointing/baselines use a (non-OPT?) dwell-time script and go
>>>>> all over the sky, but miss only 1 or 2 scans out of a 100, with 
>>>>> little
>>>>> difference between antennas.
>>>>>
>>>>> This behaviour has not changed at all in recent weeks so it is 
>>>>> fixable
>>>>> in AH1004; Though I am unsure how to edit the scripts myself.
>>>>>
>>>>> On Fri, March 5, 2010 11:23 pm, Bryan Butler wrote:
>>>>> |
>>>>> | the OPT definitely allows one to set the wrap if desired.
>>>>> |
>>>>> |     -bryan
>>>>> |
>>>>> |
>>>>> | Ken Sowinski wrote, On 3/5/10 17:45:
>>>>> |> On Fri, 5 Mar 2010, Vivek Dhawan wrote:
>>>>> |>
>>>>> |>> I just got done with a cursory look at the C55258.434 (AH1004)
>>>>> |>> chunk, it looks good on the targets; but the flux cal scan 
>>>>> 1331+3030
>>>>> |>> is fringeless on 6 (otherwise good) antennas even though it is 
>>>>> 4:15 long
>>>>> |>> and most antennas got 1:30 or so dwell time. This should be 
>>>>> repeated
>>>>> |>> with 1331 adequately scheduled, perhaps by moving it a bit 
>>>>> later in the
>>>>> |>> schedule
>>>>> |>
>>>>> |> The fringeless antennas are clearly a wrap problem.  Whether
>>>>> |> it is an observer oversight or a loss of information in
>>>>> |> script generation I cannot tell.  The OPT allows wrap hints?
>>>>> |> The scripts in question had every scan marked as 'dont-care-
>>>>> |> about-wrap'.
>>>>> |>
>>>>> |> I suggest the script generator not include setWrap() calls
>>>>> |> unless the observer has supplied an explcit hint to the OPT.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> evlatests mailing list
>>>>> evlatests at listmgr.cv.nrao.edu
>>>>> http://listmgr.cv.nrao.edu/mailman/listinfo/evlatests
>>>>>   
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> evlatests mailing list
>>>> evlatests at listmgr.cv.nrao.edu
>>>> http://listmgr.cv.nrao.edu/mailman/listinfo/evlatests