You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
{{ message }}
Repository navigation
A/B: BLEND_HANDLING = uberseg vs noisefill — do the FLAGS=2 B-modes go away? #814
noisefill (the default) zeroes and noise-fills only pixels flagged in the mask/weight; light from neighbouring detections stays in the stamp. uberseg masks pixels the segmentation map assigns to a neighbour, plus sky pixels nearer to a neighbour than to the object; it needs the segmentation stamp from vignetmaker run 3, which should only run when uberseg is on.
Fabian's hypothesis: the B-modes seen in FLAGS=2 (deblended) objects come from unremoved neighbour light.
Test: both settings on the blended image sims (m-bias, shape noise) and on a data patch (FLAGS=2 subset B-modes). A blended-sims uberseg run from July exists, uninspected.
Before running: under uberseg, flagged pixels get zero weight but are not noise-filled (ngmix.py:1647–1665), so this A/B currently also switches off the defect fill. Keep noise-filling flag≠0 / weight==0 pixels under uberseg so the two arms differ only in neighbour handling.
changed the title [-]A/B: uberseg vs noisefill — does UberSeg remove the FLAGS=2 B-modes?[/-][+]A/B: `BLEND_HANDLING = uberseg` vs `noisefill` — do the FLAGS=2 B-modes go away?[/+]on Sep 17, 2026
Activity
[-]A/B: uberseg vs noisefill — does UberSeg remove the FLAGS=2 B-modes?[/-][+]A/B: `BLEND_HANDLING = uberseg` vs `noisefill` — do the FLAGS=2 B-modes go away?[/+]