[APBeta] Observation Database and Plans

Sun Aug 28 08:45:01 PDT 2011

Hi Paul,

Thanks, that's a very clear explanation. I downloaded a couple of additional catalogs and rebuilt the index but there still seems to be a problem, even though I'm pretty sure the cross-reference database ought to have matched things up. Here's a link to a couple of screenshots which show the two plans in question, along with the catalogs I have installed. Both plans are set to highlight observed objects. I believe the ALDS catalog (which is installed) has both Bayer and Flamsteed IDs (in addition to its own obscure ID), which is what the Cambridge Double Star Atlas uses.

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/1727159/ForPaulRodman.png
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/1727159/ForPaulRodman2.png

I'm a bit puzzled as to what I'm doing wrong...

Bob

P.S. I also tried adding synonyms "by hand" in the Observation Database but that doesn't seem to work either.

On 2011-08-28, at 10:39 AM, Paul Rodman wrote:

> The way AstroPlanner works (currently) is it forms a cross-reference database by recursively examining all installed catalogues, and if it finds a match with two IDs between catalogues, then it assumes they are synonyms.
> 
> This means, if you have two observations with IDs x and y, which you know are synonymous:
> 
> a. If you have an installed catalogue containing an object that defines both x and y as IDs for the object, then it will be considered a synonym.
> 
> b. If you have an installed catalogue A containing an object with ID = x and a catalogue B containing an object with ID = y, then it will be considered a synonym.
> 
> c. If you have a "chain" of catalogues A containing ID = x synonymous with ID = p1, B containing ID = p1 synonymous with ID = p2, ... , through to catalogue G containing ID = pn synonymous with ID = y,  then it will be considered a synonym.
> 
> Because of this:
> 
> 1. If you don't have the relevant catalogues installed, it might not recognise a synonym. This I suspect is the main problem.
> 2. This process is independent of RA/Dec coordinates, which means (potentially) plenty of false negatives, and the occasional false positive.
> 3. Some catalogues (e.g. the WDS) also consider the Name field as containing an ID. If you are looking at double stars, I recommend having the WDS installed.
> 4. Only the ID field of the observation is considered. The Name field is ignored.
> 
> If this doesn't help, I can help figure out what catalogues need to be installed.
> 
> Paul R.
> 
> 
> On Aug 27, 2011, at 10:39 PM, Roberto Abraham wrote:
> 
>> I'm using version 2.0fc1 and I'm having some difficulty in getting some data in the Observation Database to propagate through to plans. Could I get some advice on how best proceed? Frankly, I'm not sure if I'm encountering a bug or or my own ignorance here... though I strongly suspect the latter.
>> 
>> Here's my situation. I've got two plans open in front of me right now, one of which is for the Astronomical League Double Star Club (AL_DoubleStarClub.apd), and the other is from the Cambridge Double Star Atlas (Cambridge_Double_Star_Atlas.apd). Both plans were obtained online. I have observed 100% of the objects in the first plan and they're all nicely recorded in the Observation Database. The second plan has strong overlap with the first, but AstroPlanner reports I've only observed 27 of the 132 objects in the plan. However, a quick inspection of the Observation Database shows I've actually observed most of the objects in the second plan too.
>> 
>> I believe this is easily understandable because the same objects in these plans have different IDs. For example, the Astronomical League Double Star Club plan uses IDs like "ALDS58" with the Name field containing the more standard designations (in this case, "Mu Boo,51 Boo, SAO64686,HR5733,HD137391"). The Cambridge Double Star Atlas plan uses the standard designation in the ID field ("Mu Boo") with the Name field containing a Struve catalog designation ("STF 1938"). To try to fix this I've opened up the Observation Database window and in the Settings tab I've entered "ALDS58,Mu Boo" into the Synonyms sub-window. I've rebuilt the cross-references by hitting the Reset button and also pushed the "Rebuild cross references" button in the Observation Preferences window. I've also restarted AstroPlanner several times (as recommended by the program). However, this doesn't seem to have worked, and the Cambridge Double Star Atlas plan still seems to think I've never observed Mu Boo.
>> 
>> Any suggestions as to what I'm doing wrong? In retrospect, I wish I'd recorded the observations in the observation database using the standard designations. Perhaps someday I'll go back and fix all these with a script or something...
>> 
>> Cheers,
>> 
>> Bob
>> 
>> P.S. Don't ask why a professional astronomer has picked looking at double stars from his backyard as a hobby.
>> 
>> 
>> --
>> 
>> Prof. Roberto Abraham             
>> Dept. of Astronomy & Astrophysics
>> University of Toronto           
>> 50 St. George St                
>> Toronto, ON M5S 3H4             
>> Canada                        
>> 
>> Office: Astronomy Building Room 206
>> Phone (direct): 416-946-7289
>> Phone (department): 416-978-2016
>> Departmental FAX:   416-946-7287
>> http://www.astro.utoronto.ca/~abraham
> 
> _______________________________________________
> APBeta mailing list
> APBeta at lists.astroplanner.net
> http://lists.astroplanner.net/listinfo.cgi/apbeta-astroplanner.net
> 

--

Prof. Roberto Abraham             
Dept. of Astronomy & Astrophysics
University of Toronto           
50 St. George St                
Toronto, ON M5S 3H4             
Canada                        

Office: Astronomy Building Room 206
Phone (direct): 416-946-7289
Phone (department): 416-978-2016
Departmental FAX:   416-946-7287
http://www.astro.utoronto.ca/~abraham