PDS/SBN New Horizons K4 peer review L2/3 liens =============================================== NOTE: (1) For your reference or to clarify liens, all reviewer presentations can be found here: https://sbnreview.astro.umd.edu/202202_NH_KEM/notes-presentations OR linked into the agenda here: https://sbnreview.astro.umd.edu/202202_NH_KEM/agenda.shtml =============================================== Datasets Validated: NH-A-ALICE-2-KEM1-V5.0 NH-A-ALICE-3-KEM1-V5.0 NH-A-LEISA-2-KEM1-V5.0 NH-A-LEISA-3-KEM1-V5.0 NH-A-LORRI-2-KEM1-V5.0 NH-A-LORRI-3-KEM1-V5.0 NH-A-MVIC-2-KEM1-V5.0 NH-A-MVIC-3-KEM1-V5.0 NH-A-PEPSSI-2-KEM1-V5.0 NH-A-PEPSSI-3-KEM1-V5.0 NH-A-REX-2-KEM1-V4.0 NH-A-REX-3-KEM1-V4.0 NH-A-SDC-2-KEM1-V5.0 NH-A-SDC-3-KEM1-V5.0 NH-A-SWAP-2-KEM1-V5.0 NH-A-SWAP-3-KEM1-V5.0 =============================================== Errors for: GLOBAL (all datasets) Remember that when fixing mission-wide or instrument-wide catalog files to update the LABEL_REVISION_NOTE. file: 'catalog/nh.cat' --> RF (swap typos): small typo on line 74 "unlit" => "sunlit" file: 'catalog/nh_kem.cat' --> RF (PEPSSI slide 30) The MISSION_STOP_DATE specifies "2021-09-30" and in the MISSION_DESC just a few lines later the sentence says "the end is TBD." Please make sure these values are correct, and if not correct them. Aug 2022? --> TF (LORRI/MVIC slide 5): Several references to Arrakoth call it MU69. Should be 2014 MU69. --> --> TB: See the MISSION_OBJECTIVES_SUMMARY for all remaining examples. file: 'catalog/ref.cat' --> Ensure that this file is up to date and matches the one found in the derived data sets. file: 'index/index.lbl' --> In the label, the DESCRIPTION for Column 7 TARGET_NAME, has a minor typo. "identifies target" => "identifies the target" =============================================== Additional Errors for: ALICE Certification Status: CERTIFIED, with minor liens. [NONE] =============================================== Additional Errors for: LEISA Certification Status: CERTIFIED, with minor liens. file: 'calib/calinfo.txt' --> MD (slide 20-21): Tried per-pixel calibration formula in calinfo.txt but I get a ridiculously large number 10^12, which doesn't make sense. May be a matter of checking procedure rather than using data. Because calibrated data are much cleaner. --> --> Please check the calibration formula for accuracy. (Cathy Olkin confirms this should be done.) --> --> MD: Could even provide an example like alpha-lyrae. file: 'catalog/dataset.cat' --> In the version history section (perhaps in the "General statement about data set versions after V1.0" assuming this can happen anytime instead of just this particular version), discuss the changes to the data files that was reported in the reported data directory error (later). The user should be made aware that the data files have been adjusted in XYZ manner due to ABC reason for the current version. file: 'catalog/leisa.cat' --> CE (L5 COMP): I was not aware until looking through the documentation that LEISA was officially retitled to the Lisa Hardaway Infrared Mapping Spectrometer. This new name appears in the catinfo.txt document. The leisa.cat document does not mention this new name. --> --> TB: I would not change the INSTRUMENT_NAME (changing this keyword will have a very large cascading affect), but please please please document this new name prominently, and preferably towards the front of the document. --> CE (L5 COMP): typo (line 243) "tranmitting" => "transmitting" directory: 'data/' --> Something odd about some of the LEISA data. I found a file (Ex: data/20181231_040860/lsb_0408605304_0x53c_eng.lbl) that included 2 new extensions since V4.0, "EXTENSION_WINDOW_MISMATCHES_*", yet the file description removes the text saying "This image may be windowed" and replaces it with "This image is not windowed". Why then the inclusion of these two new extensions? I found another instance (ex: nh-a-leisa-3-kem1-v5.0/data/20181231_040860/lsb_0408605304_0x53c_sci.lbl) where the text was changed, but no extensions were added, nor did they exist in V4.0. What is going on? I found similar situations scattered in both the raw and calibrated data sets. --> --> BLE 8/24: suggest NO CHANGE. Looks like this is all working well. The K3 level 2 FITS file was a 254x46x2 'window'. On DOY 2020/284, we played back the entire 256x256x285 file. The latest (full) file version is the one in K4. It is NO LONGER a windowed file. The new EXTENSION_WINDOW_MISMATCHES partition (and its header) get inserted when the pipeline detects some mismatches between the previous (windowed) and new (full) file data, due to compression or whatever. The mismatches partition in the new, non-windowed file allows a LEISA developer to go back and look into the differences if they so desire. It is probably of very little use to external users, but I recently suggested to the LORRI folks that these partitions should be removed from the PDS versions; no dice, they wanted them to remain. --> -> BLE 8/24: The reason we don't see these partitions in the LEISA level 3 files is that the mismatch tables are level-2-only, I.e. window mismatches are a 'raw file' phenomena. --> --> TFB 8/24: Okay, but I said I found similar situations in L3, not just L2. I only provided an example from L2. Here is an example in "nh-a-leisa-3-kem1-v5.0/data/20181231_040860/lsb_0408605304_0x53c_sci.lbl". The data parts appear to be unchanged, yet now the text says it is not windowed as before it said it "may be windowed" and proceeded to give the details of the windowing. See the differences between V4.0 and V5.0: =================== 119,134c119 < - This image may be windowed < - N.B. this may be a sliding window from DARK_SKY compression < and the following parameters may not describe the window < as it progresses through NAXIS3 (BANDS) of the cube. < Refer to the files in the DOCUMENT/ directory with names < like LEISA_WINDOW_*.LBL and LEISA_WINDOW_*.CSV, and to the < Operating Modes section of the LEISA instrument catalog < file CATALOG/LEISA.CAT. < - WINDOWX=46 (offset* to left edge of window) < - WINDOWY=254 (offset* to bottom edge of window) < - WINDOWW=34 (width of window) < - WINDOWH=2 (height of window) < - WIDTH =256 (width of image) < - HEIGHT =256 (height of image) < - * offsets are zero-based < - Pixels outside any windows will be set to arbitrary values --- > - This image is not windowed =================== --> --> TFB 8/24: In either event, these changes are not documented in the version history section in the dataset.cat file. The user should be made aware of such changes, as they are made aware of possible calibrated data changes due to geometry for pipeline re-runs for versions after v1.0. =============================================== Additional Errors for: LORRI Certification Status: CERTIFIED, with minor liens. TARGET_NAME --> TB: The TARGET_NAME = P4856186 is not valid. This has been discussed via email and was recognized as a temporary ID. But we need this fixed in the PDS label by replacing it with the real target (please do not fix the fits header at this time, but in K5). We will also need a target catalog file to go with it. BROWSE/THUMBNAIL images --> Suggest in a future version of these data sets to include a full set browse or thumbnail images of the data. Feel free to talk with SBN about ideas of how to approach this. file: 'catalog/dataset.cat' --> TF (slide 5): Several references to Arrakoth call it MU69. Should be 2014 MU69 --> --> TB: "MU69" is used as a reference to 2014 MU69 or ASTEROID 486958 Arrokoth (2014 MU69). The first mention of MU69 is "MU69 (Arrokoth)" which is not a correct designation of this target. Please update this document to refer to 2014 MU69 by a correct designation ("2014 MU69" is appropriate, but it is worth the first instance including all designations, i.e. "ASTEROID 486958 Arrokoth (2014 MU69)" with or w/o "ASTEROID"). Please note that "MU69" might also refer to (2010 MU69), which is not the target that is being talked about. --> XZ (pg 2 #3): The description about WINDOW_MISMATCHES should be edited to explain what is going on, especially in the cases where Nw = 1 row. --> --> NH Team: Yes, it is meaningless and we should update the description to reflect that. files: 'data/20200606_045371/*' --> TF (slide 7): 68 files in the raw data set are not in the calibrated set. All from one directory (20200606_045371). Most have target "N/A" but some have "2011 JX31". Looks like all pixel values are 0 in each image, except for the 38 header pixels. There is no explanation for what these are, or why they are included in the raw data (is there a plan available somewhere?). Suggest removing them or describing why they are included. --> --> NH:Hal: I agree this seems funny. --> --> It appears that the four 2011 JX31 images will be calibrated later, but the other 64 are DARK files and should have their target name changed to an appropriate calibration target. Many of these dark files appear to be a 1d image, perhaps a bias scan? --> --> TB: Team can use the TARGET_DESC keyword to help clarify any calibration related targets. --> --> NH Team: Need to confirm with Hal what needs to be done with these images. At the time we thought there was some value in keeping the zero darks. --> --> LIEN: Team to discover what they want to do with them. At minimum please correct the TARGET_NAME, and add a TARGET_DESC if needed to help describe what the DARK images are. =============================================== Additional Errors for: MVIC Certification Status: CERTIFIED, with minor liens. files: 'calib/spectra/blue_new_chi.lbl' --> Recommend (but not required) that for each column NAME, that you not start the value on the next line. Currently column 2 still needs to be fixed. file: 'catalog/dataset.cat' --> XZ (pg 2 #3): The description about WINDOW_MISMATCHES should be edited to explain what is going on, especially in the cases where Nw = 1 row. --> --> NH Team: Yes, it is meaningless and we should update the description to reflect that. --> TF (slide 13,5): Several references to Arrakoth call it MU69. Should be 2014 MU69 --> --> TB: "MU69" is used as a reference to 2014 MU69 or ASTEROID 486958 Arrokoth (2014 MU69). The first mention of MU69 is "MU69 (Arrokoth)" which is not a correct designation of this target. Please update this document to refer to 2014 MU69 by a correct designation ("2014 MU69" is appropriate, but it is worth the first instance including all designations, i.e. "ASTEROID 486958 Arrokoth (2014 MU69)" with or w/o "ASTEROID"). Please note that "MU69" might also refer to (2010 MU69), which is not the target that is being talked about. file: 'catalog/mvic.cat' --> TH (L5 COMP): typo (line 45) "Intgration" => "Integration" --> MC (L5 GEOPHYS): Clean up the missing spaces and tabbing on lines 292-296. =============================================== Additional Errors for: PEPSSI Certification Status: CERTIFIED, with minor liens. file: 'catalog/pepssi.cat' --> RF (slide 31): The statement at the end of the Data validity section (lines 339-341), talk about referring to the Primary HDU and extensions of the data products for more details. The problem is that this is only relevant for the L2 and L3 products, not the L4 product (which has only csv files). Suggest to remove the statement or clarify that this is for the L2 and L3 products only. files: 'data/.../*.lbl' --> RF (slide 9): Regarding the quick look spectrograms. Why doesn't version 5 new data look like version 4 data? Why so different from other time periods? The difference appears with the heavy ions but not others. Please double check this. =============================================== Additional Errors for: REX Certification Status: CERTIFIED, with minor liens. file: 'document/codesamples/codesamples.lbl' --> Please add to this document the language version of the code used for each of these code sets in the corresponding object DESCRIPTION. This point was specifically raised for the Python script. For instance, adding the line "this code was written with version XYZ of python." file: 'document/codesamples/newrex_py.py' --> Not required, but an update to this code would be nice. As documented in codeinfo.txt, and SBN policy, the code is only for example/documentation purposes, and so is not required to be updated. --> --> AV (slide 6): Some of the functions are depreciated. --> --> AV (slide 7): Some minor updates needed to read the data. =============================================== Additional Errors for: SDC Certification Status: CERTIFIED, with minor liens. file: 'document/sdc_on_off_cmd_v0003.tab' --> AP (slide 9): This file has not been updated to 2021-02-06 (the last entry is ~2020-01-06). Can we update this file? If a more recent version is already in this directory, we should remove this file. =============================================== Additional Errors for: SWAP Certification Status: CERTIFIED, with minor liens (after 7 files removed). file: 'catalog/swap.cat' --> RF (slide 44): On line 103, it says "as of 20.April, 2007" for a weblink to the SSR. It still works today; recommend updating the date. --> RF (slide 45): The "Note on Reading the Data and Extensions" (lines 248-264) only apply to the L3 data and not the L5 data. files: 'data/' --> RF (slides 29-30,41): Please remove the last seven Histogram Data (0x856) files that are formatted differently and *not* described in the ICD. They should be included in the next delivery with their descriptions: =================== swa_0476064032_0x586_sci.fit swa_0476068192_0x586_sci.fit swa_0476150432_0x586_sci.fit swa_0476236832_0x586_sci.fit swa_0476323232_0x586_sci.fit swa_0476409632_0x586_sci.fit swa_0476496032_0x586_sci.fit =================== files: 'document/data_summary_plots/*' --> RF (slide 53): There is still a concern about the empty plots (ex: swap_001day_201903102359.png). This looks like the plotting package software failed where you really want to convey that there is no data for the time frame covered by the plot. Empty plot frames with the words “no data” are much better because you see right away that the reason for the empty frame is that there was no data to plot and it was not due to a failure in the plotting software. file: 'document/traj/traj*.tab/fmt' --> Three MISSING_CONSTANT values changed from "-1000000.000" to "-0000000.000" for columns 7 thru 9. Why? It wasn't a problem before. I could imagine a negative zero might cause some problems on some systems, but it validates well. Also worth noting that these columns have values both less than and greater than 0, so it could be a problem. Please fix. file: 'document/swap_cal.pdf' --> RF (slide 6): Please indicate which curve is which response (primary, secondary, and coincidence) for the cem voltage graph on pg9. file: 'document/soc_inst_icd.pdf' --> RF (slide 7): There is an error in Equation 3 (see page 149).