From: Robert A. Knop Jr. (robert.a.knop@vanderbilt.edu)
Date: Sun May 12 2002 - 11:34:27 PDT
> Most of these are the new ones from yesterday; anything else has been
> deemed to be extremely unlikely. I will try and go through and rate the
> unrated Subaru supernovae. Indeed, that's what I had hoped to be doing
> for most of the last two days, but somehow the search of SDFe fell
> through the floor and I basically lost the last 24 hours to that.
Since I made it sound like those of us doing the subtractions (i.e. Alex
C. and myself) dropped the ball on this, I thought I'd explain. In all
previous searches, we've used dithers small enough that we could just
subtract the images of one chip in the search run from the images of the
same chip in the reference run. (This is also how the FROGS work, I
believe.) The dithers on the Subaru fields were much larger than
anything we've used in the past. We were not fully prepared for the
implications of this (i.e. the large lost area due to the intersectino
of the dithers on one chip), and developing the hacks to our subtraction
procedures to properly handle the large dithers without losing too much
area is what ended up taking me out the last couple of days.
As always, when we're developing the methods of dealing with things
during the search it's much more stressful than when we're fully
prepared for the search we're doing ahead of time. There was a
fundamental difference this time around that we hadn't thought through
going in.
-Rob
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sun May 12 2002 - 11:34:43 PDT