get smarter about how we use the pixel masks about annieslasso HOT 7 CLOSED

@andycasey and @davidwhogg - important: make sure you train your model using the apstar spectra for all tests on apstar spectra, don't use the model trained on the aspcap star spectra - these are not equivalent.

from annieslasso.

More specifically, we can't treat all mask bits equally; what should we care about?

from annieslasso.

@mkness doing that now.

from annieslasso.

@davidwhogg: good. I use everything in the mask itself not set to 0 and set the error value to LARGE everywhere were the mask is !=0. Other things may work e.g. taking only a subset of the mask that one should care about, but I did not experiment a lot with different combinations here, I found just excluding everything not set to 0 gave smaller scatter than not using the mask altogether and worked well.

from annieslasso.

@mkness we did this at first (before stacking the spectra ourselves) but we found that a lot of spectra had persistence in the entire blue chip and part of green,... we were loosing a lot of information that we could see was actually there. did you experiment by setting a different error value for just persistence-flagged pixels?

from annieslasso.

Just recording here that @mkness said perhaps just to consider mask bits 0, 12, 13. The current code version considers every mask bit except 9, 10, 11.

from annieslasso.

What we have now seems to work, so I am closing this issue.

from annieslasso.