Friday, March 31, 2006

Latest systematics tests and the inversion paper


I ran a bunch of test, none of which
were conclusive, but I did see something
connected to the resolution parameter. This
isn't surprising. I saw a bigger effect
however when I just limited the smallest radius
in arcsec that sources would be used. This again
suggests deblending problems.

So I looked at the flags and in fact deblended
objects are included in the Princeton catalog,
when I thought they had been cut in what Rachel
gave me.

So now I'm remaking the postgres table to include
the flags so I can test this.

Dave's Inversion Paper

I read Dave's new draft. The content is excellent;
it holds much of what we have learned over the
last few years about weak lensing and stacking
in particular. I hope people read it because it
is sort of the Bible for stacking from the theory
point of view.



Hogg said...

What do you mean by "systematics"? Is there something obviously wrong with your current results?

Erin Sheldon said...

For both the LRG sample and the high
Ngals bins for the clusters I'm seeing
what I would call an unphysical
measurement, which is a strong dip
for r < 100 kpc and then a strong rise at the smallest bin at 25 kpc. So I'm looking for trends with variables
that should not be physically
correlated with the signal but I might
expect to be correlated with problems with the processing in high density environments, such as deblending.