Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

investigate gal sim for realistic source profiles #30

Closed
bnord opened this issue Feb 26, 2020 · 5 comments
Closed

investigate gal sim for realistic source profiles #30

bnord opened this issue Feb 26, 2020 · 5 comments
Labels
enhancement New feature or request

Comments

@bnord
Copy link
Contributor

bnord commented Feb 26, 2020

No description provided.

@rmorgan10
Copy link
Contributor

In the new framework, determining the source profiles will be up to the user. I am planning on providing built in survey defaults, so providing suggested source / lens profiles is not too much of an extension. I don't think this will be essential for the first release.

@rmorgan10
Copy link
Contributor

An additional, perhaps easier framework for realistic source / lens properties is skypy, we could also consider this in the future

@AeRabelais AeRabelais added documentation enhancement New feature or request and removed documentation labels Feb 20, 2023
@bnord
Copy link
Contributor Author

bnord commented Apr 21, 2023

output from skypy is a catalog that can be input to lenstronomy.

@bnord
Copy link
Contributor Author

bnord commented Apr 21, 2023

we're going to pick up this topic viz. skypyproject

@bnord bnord closed this as completed Apr 21, 2023
@jsv1206
Copy link
Collaborator

jsv1206 commented Apr 21, 2023

Rubin simulation pipeline skypy integration with lenstronomy

https://github.com/LSST-strong-lensing/sim-pipeline

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
enhancement New feature or request
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

No branches or pull requests
4 participants
@bnord @jsv1206 @rmorgan10 @AeRabelais