Page History
...
| Pipeline step | NIRISS status | NIRISS comments | NIRCam status | NIRCam comments | MIRI status | MIRI comments | NIRSpec status | NIRSpec comments | |||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| group_scale |
| The step is supossed to do nothing for NIRISS/SOSS (here, a group = 1 frame). Indeed, nothing changes when running this step, except for the length of the ASDF element in the HDU list object, which is normal. |
| N/A |
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| dq_init |
| This step correctly initializes the data-quality flags, as it is supposed to do, according to the reference mask in CRDS. |
|
| (high-level test) |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||
| saturation |
| This step does what is expected to do: it captures saturated pixels and flags them in the GROUPDQ masks. The simulations used for this validation had saturated pixels and they were correctly identified (flagged) by the pipeline. |
|
| (high-level) |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||
| superbias |
| Tested my own bias substraction using reference files and got exact same results. |
| N/A |
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| reset | N/A | N/A |
| This was tested on a TSO imaging file separately since this step does not currently run by default. The test passed with no issues. | N/A | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| linearity |
| Tested linearity correction using reference files and got exact same results. |
|
|
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| rscd | N/A | N/A |
| N/A | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| dark_current |
| Dark frames perform expected corrections on the data. |
|
|
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| refpix |
| Currently, does not do anything to NIRISS/SOSS simulations, as reference pixels there are set to zero. When injecting a fake strain of reference pixels got some deviations that most likely have to do with DMS-detector frame rotations. |
|
| This step is sufficiently tested in unit tests. It is skipped for MIRI subarray data so only applies to FULL array imaging TSOs, and note that MIRISim's implementation of Refpix is different from the pipeline step, so may give unexpected results. |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||
| jump |
| Step produced no errors. Detected jumps are consistent with pipeline specificationsHowever, currently detecting more jumps than it should — will revisit once some errors on the SOSS simulator are addressed (see below). |
|
| high level testing is done. Inserted cosmic rays of varying strengths were detected (based on threshold) and flagged neighboring pixels (based on level above background) |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ramp_fitting |
| The pipeline was tested against an OLS ramp fit, and pipeline does exactly as intended*rateints files show small spikes that do not show on my own ramps, even when being careful with GROUPSDQ (see notebook). |
| produced rateints with 7.5 and independent linear fits; substantial difference in a subset of data. |
|
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||
| gain_scale |
| This step only applies to NIRSpec data. Because no GAINFACT is found in the headers, this step is properly skipped by the pipeline. |
|
| Documentation states 'This currently only applies to NIRSpec exposures that are read out using a subarray pattern, in which case a gain setting of 2 is used instead of the standard setting of 1.' This step is properly skipped for MIRI data. |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||
Extended comments by instrument branch:
- NIRISS: For the jump detection algorithm, the pipeline seems to be detecting a large fraction of jumps (~20% per integration). This is most likely due to a mismatch between reference files used to generate the simulations and the ones used to reduce the data, which ultimately leads to badly calculated errorbars, which might be giving rise to bad jumps. Will re-check this step once this is solved by the simulator, but the jump step seems to be doing what is intended to do.
- NIRCam
- MIRI:
- NIRSpec:
Stage 2: Spectroscopic processing TSO testing
...
