simonsobs / simonsobs/sotodlib

Splits in make_map does the opposite of what is expected

Open
#1,141 2 comments 0 reactions 0 assignees View on GitHub

Nobody has claimed this yet.

good first issue
Dominant language
Python
Stars
19
Forks
23
Avg merge
1d 5h
Merged PRs (30d)
14

Description

I was debugging why for single detector maps setting detector weights to isolate one det shows a different map than using data_splits. @skhrg pointed out that this section of the code does the opposite of what is expected: https://github.com/simonsobs/sotodlib/blob/11ed2ac345ef0a007daef9518007c576ac0ca4eb/sotodlib/coords/planets.py#L744-L759

I.e. it is cutting (group_cuts) samples marked in splits, while we would expect those to be kept and the rest cut.

Can be fixed by just adding an inversion, but unclear if this is how the code is intended to be used and I am just misunderstanding splits vs cuts. Thanks!

Contributor guide

No contributing guide indexed for this repository

First steps

  1. Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
  2. Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
  3. Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
  4. Open a pull request that references the issue number.

Research direction

Inspect sotodlib/coords/planets.py around lines 744-759, focusing on how make_map applies group_cuts to samples marked in splits. Compare that behavior with the issue's expected data_splits semantics and confirm whether an inversion is intended. Done means the split selection matches the documented or agreed expectation for isolating a detector map, with appropriate regression coverage if the project has a relevant test.

Written by the indexing model from the issue text.

Assessment

Tech stack
python
Domain
data
Issue type
Bug
Difficulty
3/5
Estimated time
1-2 days
Activity status
Stale
Clarity
Mostly clear
Newbie friendliness
42/100

Get new issues in your inbox

A short digest of beginner-friendly GitHub issues.