-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 23
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Porting WebSky extragalactic models to PySM 3 #120
Comments
@xzackli do you have an estimate of when the new websky will be available? |
@zonca We have new maps, and I"d like to set a target of Wednesday, August 24. Most of it is on disk at NERSC -- I briefly looked into writing up a pysm PR, do you have suggestions? |
@xzackli we should mostly just port from https://github.com/simonsobs/so_pysm_models/blob/master/so_pysm_models/extragalactic.py also the maps should be in the pysm repository at NERSC:
|
Seems sensible, looking at this now. |
@zonca a quick clarifying question: of course I don't have write permission to |
yes, right |
@xzackli any update on this? |
we have released IQU maps of Radio sources painted onto Websky halos, here |
sure @giuspugl, https://pysm3.readthedocs.io/en/latest/api/pysm3.InterpolatingComponent.html#pysm3.InterpolatingComponent is already in PySM 3. Does this work use the new Websky release? Do newer CIB maps are available yet? |
We have CIB frequency maps at
and radio maps in the directory Giuseppe listed. I'm still porting over the old pysm code to PySM3 by inheriting from the InterpolatingComponent, but I was worried about validating these CIB maps. |
thanks @xzackli, the so-pysm-models code was already based on the PySM3 interpolating component, so changes should be minor. |
@xzackli What are the differences of the new CIB maps you're validating,wrt the ones employed here, which i believe come from WEbsky Stein et al.2020 ?
@zonca ain't sure what you mean here by |
They have a different frequency normalization (as discussed in WebSky-CITA/XGPaint.jl#7), which I believe behave a bit better in terms of redshift evolution. There's not much else, but I also want to check on the frequency map power spectra and maybe adjust some parameters there. |
Thanks @xzackli ! I checked the redshift evolution by including the new normalization and it left kinda the same the redshift evolution, It's the Shang et al. 2012 prescription that is mostly affecting that.. |
ok, thanks @xzackli so I'll wait for a pull request, I can then also copy all the input data to the |
see #129 |
Currently the WebSky models are included in the
so_pysm_models
package:https://so-pysm-models.readthedocs.io/en/latest/models.html#websky
The package is already based on PySM 3, so it should not be too difficult to move the functionality in PySM 3 proper.
However, it would be useful to first check if there is any update in WebSky itself, like maps from new simulations, or maps at resolution higher than N_side 4096.
@marcelo-alvarez has there been any update? or is there an update coming soon we should wait for?
/cc @giuspugl @brandonshensley @seclark
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: