GLAST Standard Analysis Environment (SAE) Evaluation Questionnaire
Checkup 3
Sept 6, 2005 - Sept 27, 2005
Reviewer: Masaharu Hirayama
Software Component: exposure_map
Summary of Tests Performed:
Created exposure maps from an output of exposure_cube
application and browsed the exposure maps with ds9.
Observation about tool:
Executable name "exposure_map" doesn't start with "gt" unlike other
SAE tools, and I don't know why.
User Interface
1. What, if anything, about the choice and meaning of parameters
could be improved? Are there new parameters which need to be
added? Are the current parameters sensible?
Some parameter names don't conform parameter interface standard by James.
http://lheawww.gsfc.nasa.gov/~peachey/glast/STParameterStandards.html
- infile should be renamed to scfile.
- table should be renamed to sctable.
2. Are there any prompts you would suggest rewording?
Poor explanations of parameters for exposure_map. The meaning of
"layers", "emin", and "eratio" are not clear. Explain them
somewhere, e.g., in their prompts, on the web page(s), or in its
user guide.
3. Are there any hidden parameters which you think should be
prompted for or vice versa?
No.
4. Would you like the prompts to appear in a different order?
No.
5. Would you suggest changes to the default values of any
parameters? Changes to min, max fields?
No.
Tool Behavior
6. In what way, if any, did the tool perform unexpectedly?
The version number was not displayed. It said:
"exposure_map: INFO: This is exposure_map version unknown"
7. Were there any aspects of the tool's output which seem
scientifically suspicious to you? (e.g. fluxes too large,
number of events selected too small, etc.)
No.
8. Was there information (i.e. output) the tool did not provide
which you think it should?
No.
9. Was there information (i.e. output) the tool provided which
you think it should not?
No.
Future Development
10. List new features you would like to see implemented, in
descending order of importance. Please flag any which you
think are critical for DC2.
None.
11. Are there any aspects of this tool you would change in order
for it to work more smoothly with other parts of the SAE?
No.
General Notes
Please include here any comments about this tool which do not
fit into one of the categories above.
None.