Not so clear
So, the results of the simulation are not so clear. There might be a problem on the GALFIT modeling or on the way parameters were defined ...
Labels: hi-z morph
Good and bad news
Good news! Simulation is ready, done, over! eeeeeeee
Bad news! Its analysis and interpretation is not as straight as I would like it to be ...
Labels: hi-z morph
Is it almost done?
So! GALAPAGOS finished its task. Now is multicomp who is playing, just making multi-component fit with GALFIT. That is running and should run during the weekend.
Finishing the last objects from the last cluster! Just the worst cases ahead.
Dentist was painful!
Labels: hi-z morph, life
It seems to go ...
Yep! Seems that the GALAPAGOS part of the simulation is running smoothly now and should be done by tomorrow.
Alto a third of the sample is already fitted in multi-components, a second third is running and the third part is the one running in GALAPAGOS.
If I have enough processors, it will be done by monday.
Also a nice MTB ride to test the new/old/renewed bike!! Needs some derailleurs and breaks tuning (cables stretch) and pedals are still not there. But the new cassete solved the chain jumping issue! I know, sports on
Bikes'n'Coffee :-)) It's back alive!!
Tomorrow morning ... dentist, again. After that still 2 appointments to go ... ahhhhh
Labels: hi-z morph, life
Some more jumps
Some more jumps on the simulation, but seems that now it goes. I should have results until the weekend!
Labels: hi-z morph
Still jump starting ...
So, still jump starting my simulation, but seems my walk arounds have worked, so now it's running ... hopefully until the end!
Also fishing failures, now one more is about to go and one is left!
Labels: hi-z morph
Crash and Burn ... bug fixing and jump starting ...
During the weekend I tried to make the simulation run as fast as possible, when I could use a larger number of processors. Well, turns out GALAPAGOS was not meant to run several images with a single object, but several (about a hundred not 20,000) with several objects ... so some issues appeared. Some were solved, some I'm still stuck with.
No new option for Delta_Chi^2. Unfortunately since the variation of Chi^2 is typically larger than the number of parameters ... it gives the same result as pure Chi^2 ...
Also saving failed models around.
Labels: hi-z morph
Simulations
Designing the simulation to estimate the efficiency of the process of multimodeling.
Still happening.
Labels: hi-z morph
Today not much ...
Well, large fraction of the day involved in the dentist and also taking care of Matheus.
One more cluster gone, now there's 2 fields missing ...
The problem is the automatic definition of goodness of the fit of the models. It seems that I'll need to do some simulations to settle this question (and some others).
My MTB is almost ready!
Labels: hi-z morph, life
Bored ... part 137459216
Bored and tired of checking models :-) There's still SOME to go. It will go.
Also the results from Delta_chi_squared need eye ball checking to know if it's what I need ... more eye-ball checking ... aaaaaaaaah :-)
Tomorrow dentist ... aaaaaahh :-)
Labels: hi-z morph, life
Bored ...
There couldn't be anything more boring than checking the catastrophic failure of the models and fix them. The percentage is small but the number is quite large for doing it "by hand" ... anyway, there's still some to go.
By coincidence David Hogg posted on his
science blog about the
IMPRS Summer School on Statistical Inferences from Astrophysical Data what gave me "the light" of asking him about how to choose the best model.
The solution he gave me was a "Delta-chi-squared" (Delta-chi-squared = [chi-squared_A + npar_A] - [chi-squared_B + npar_B]) where a large positive number favors model "A", a large negative number favors model "B" and small numbers (either positive or negative) leave things suspicious. The spirit is the same of the F-test. Now I'll implement it and check the results.
Just reminding that actually David is the father of the idea of this blog, that he suggested me 4 year ago ... and the blog "pays back" :-))
Relaxing from the boring hand work finishing renewing my MTB ... it's getting cool!!!
Labels: hi-z morph, life, statistical tests
One more done ...
So, one field more ... finish modeling the worst cases, but some are really lost.
Tomorrow another field ...
Labels: hi-z morph
Still remodeling
Remodeling express of the more obviously failed models is done (I love fast computers), now inspecting the not-so-obviously failed ones. But before gotta produce some figures on what is done.
Labels: hi-z morph
Remodeling express
Basically automatizing the most typical modeling failure and making it run express on the number cruncher.
My linux PC had a "thing" today. Suddenly I've got a "kernel panic" message and nothing else worked and when rebooting nothing would happen. Then even the rescue disk would mount properly but a message about an error with the libc that was not there. Inspecting, I realized the link which is libc.so.6 was pointing to a weird "lib" (yep, to a file called lib, that doesn't exist). Repairing the link made everything come back to normal, until the next "heart attack".
Also updated the MacOS and not fully happy with Safari 4, somethings got worse, it looks better, and basically Apples condition #1 ... tsc tsc tsc
Labels: hi-z morph, linux
Life goes on :-)
So, seems that no one had additional ideas on how to solve my "goodness of the fit" automatic indicator. So F-Test is implemented. Anyway, if I (or anyone) come with a new idea it's easy to implement.
Run for 2 of the clusters and result looks good. Now running to the other ones. Of course there are other issues, like failed modeling, that I'm dealing with it now.
Also revising Elif's paper. Some comments but there's a lot of work there.
Basically that ... and trying to return to my good shape ... physically and mentally!
Labels: hi-z morph, life
Light at the end of the tunnel?
F-test may be the way to solve the "goodness of the fit indicator issue", any other ideas?
Labels: hi-z morph
Statistical problems
"Simple" problem.
I have three possibilities to model a single object. Those models have different number of free-parameters. Reduced Chi^2 and residua are affected by this different amount of free-parameters in a way that systematically larger number of free-parameters, "better" fits, according to these indicators. Unfortunately this is not true, specially if we consider physical meanings.
Can anyone give me some light on that?? :-))))
Labels: hi-z morph, statistical tests