comp.lang.idl-pvwave archive
Messages from Usenet group comp.lang.idl-pvwave, compiled by Paulo Penteado

Home » Public Forums » archive » Re: yet another 2d matching question
Show: Today's Messages :: Show Polls :: Message Navigator
E-mail to friend 
Return to the default flat view Create a new topic Submit Reply
Re: yet another 2d matching question [message #72039 is a reply to message #71975] Tue, 03 August 2010 13:53 Go to previous message
JDS is currently offline  JDS
Messages: 94
Registered: March 2009
Member
On Jul 31, 7:47 am, Gray <grayliketheco...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Jul 30, 6:23 pm, JD Smith <jdtsmith.nos...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> Paulo spotted the issue.  What determines whether a given point in the
>> search list "is not matched to a closer point"?  Your 1-to-1 match
>> will be sensitive to the input ordering of the target list.  The
>> intention of match_radius is to specify the maximum separation beneath
>> which all matches are "equally good".   For example, the statistical
>> uncertainty in the position itself.  Multiple matches would then imply
>> either is an equally good match.  If you still wanted to do this (for
>> example if you are conducting a match for which sub-match_distance
>> separations are still meaningful), it will have to be a pre- or post-
>> processing step, since all matches are performed in parallel (which is
>> what gives MATCH_2D its speed).
>
>> JD
>
> Hmm... if all matches are equally good within the match_distance, then
> how does match_2d prioritize matches when there is more than one
> source in list b within the match radius of list a?  This could happen
> when, for example, the positional accuracy of the sources in each list
> is low, but there is a possible shift (translation+rotation+etc.)
> between the members of the two lists which necessitates a larger match
> radius.

This is only true if your match_distance represents some positional
uncertainty; i.e. it's not meaningful to say a given star is 50
milliarseconds closer when the precision with which you know your
search list is 2 arcseconds. It does simply return the closest point
within match_distance if there are multiple matches. You could
certainly alter this to return *all* matches within match_radius, then
use post-processing to enforce a 1-to-1 matching. IDL 8's new LIST
type would make this much easier than before (when I've used
REVERSE_INDEX style arrays for the same purpose).

JD
[Message index]
 
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Previous Topic: Log histogram = FAIL
Next Topic: lon-lat coordinates for Geotiff images?

-=] Back to Top [=-
[ Syndicate this forum (XML) ] [ RSS ] [ PDF ]

Current Time: Fri Oct 10 10:30:28 PDT 2025

Total time taken to generate the page: 0.31876 seconds