IPAC 2MASS Working Group Meeting #93 Minutes

IPAC 2MASS Working Group Meeting #93 Minutes, 4/30/96

Attendees: N. Chiu, R. Cutri, J. Fowler, L. Fullmer, D. Kirkpatrick, G. Kopan, J. Lampley, B. Light, S. Lo, C. Lonsdale, H. McCallon, G. Money, R. Scholey, J. White, D. Wittman


  1. Computer Purchase Plans
  2. DENIS Meeting Report
  3. Inputs to the QUALITY Subsystem
  4. Position Uncertainty Estimation in PROPHOT


  1. Computer Purchase Plans -- Members of the systems group arranged for Greg Money from Sun to be present for a discussion of upcoming computer hardware that might fit the needs of 2MAPPS. A general overview of 2MAPPS was given to Greg, who described several Sun models soon to be available. The model that seems most appropriate for 2MAPPS is the 3000, which can accomodate six CPUs (we would use four per machine, two machines for the production work). The new machines all run Solaris 2.5. A recent benchmark with an ultrasparc machine running Solaris 2.5 revealed no compatibility problems. An arrangement will be made between Greg and R. Scholey to borrow a 3000 for a day or two in about three weeks, and additional benchmark testing will be done at that time. The 3000 models are scheduled to be available for purchase in July. Greg and Rosanne will work out pricing details.

  2. DENIS Meeting Report -- R. Cutri reported on highlights from the recent DENIS meeting in Tenerife and passed around a bound copy of viewgraph hardcopy from talks given there. The DENIS team members were appreciative of the interaction with team members from 2MASS and other projects. T. Chester, R. Cutri, S. Schneider, and M. Skrutskie gave 2MASS presentations at the meeting. DENIS is proceeding in a manner different from that planned for 2MASS, reflecting the different project structure and available resource utilization. One of the main differences is the much more distributed nature of the data processing.

  3. Inputs to the QUALITY Subsystem -- L. Fullmer distributed a sketch of how to organize the inputs to the QUALITY subsystem from other subsystems for scan oriented data. In addition to the other directories immediately below the scan directory (e.g., "flat", "pos", etc.), a "quality" subdirectory would be added. All subsystems would write their QUALITY information in that directory. Table file format would be used in almost all cases. A consistent file naming scheme would be employed with a template bqsss.sub, b = band, sss = scan number, and sub is the name of the subsystem that wrote the file, preferably abbreviated as in the SIS naming convention. The SIS for each file should include information on how the data should be used to judge quality in addition to the usual parameter definitions. Some indications of priority would also be appropriate in most cases. An important point that came out of this discussion was the need for each file (table format or FITS or other) written by a subsystem to include in the header information the version of the program that wrote the file and the processing date.

  4. Position Uncertainty Estimation in PROPHOT -- B. Light reported that the prototype code for PROPHOT (i.e., not KAMPHOT but not quite yet PROPHOT) was now generating output position uncertainties. He showed a plot of the uncertainties on the scan and cross-scan axes. Some clarification was requested concerning why the size of the error estimates seemed a bit small. Inclusion of the covariance term in future studies was also requested along with information on the relative sizes of the three components of the error covariance matrix for individual detections.