Skip to content

Conversation

@jeffcarlin
Copy link
Collaborator

No description provided.

@review-notebook-app
Copy link

Check out this pull request on  ReviewNB

See visual diffs & provide feedback on Jupyter Notebooks.


Powered by ReviewNB

@GloriaFA GloriaFA self-requested a review January 26, 2026 22:19
@@ -0,0 +1,800 @@
{
Copy link
Contributor

@GloriaFA GloriaFA Jan 27, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

(by using, e.g., [f]_psfFluxSigma, or some combination of the flux value percentiles from [f]_psfFluxPercentile05, 25, 50, 75, 95). We will also use r_psfFluxStetsonJ, which reports the Stetson J-index, an indicator of periodic variability.

Maybe move the first sentence to be outside of parenthesis, to be consistent with the Stetson J-index sentence.


Reply via ReviewNB

@@ -0,0 +1,800 @@
{
Copy link
Contributor

@GloriaFA GloriaFA Jan 27, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Maybe also add "applied in TAP query" to the line on r_scienceFluxMean, to be consistent with the point above it. Or remove both conditions from the list since they were already applied.


Reply via ReviewNB

@@ -0,0 +1,800 @@
{
Copy link
Contributor

@GloriaFA GloriaFA Jan 27, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Describe how we measure the period via Lomb-Scargle, and how the LC is phased.

Seems like this got left behind as a self-reminder


Reply via ReviewNB

@@ -0,0 +1,800 @@
{
Copy link
Contributor

@GloriaFA GloriaFA Jan 27, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The light curve that appears the least periodic, for diaObjectId 614435616184074318 seems to be classified as a quasar. I was hoping it would be obviously different within the 4 highlighted objects in the plots in section 2.3, but not sure how to exclude it yet.


Reply via ReviewNB

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants