Date - 2001.02.16
Tester - S.T. Myers (AOC)
Platform - Linux (kernow)

Note: bugs are denoted by lines with prefix:
>>>BUG:
and queries are denoted by lines with prefix:
>>>QUERY:
while comments are prefixed by:
>>>COMMENT:
Some enhancement requests are given after
>>>REQUEST:

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

GOAL: Test Athol's PCAL emulation on the test data
Script: /aips++/daily/code/trial/apps/synthesistester/cals00feb.g
Data: /aips++/daily/data/demo/CALS00FEB.fits

1. Date - 2001.02.16
   Version - Stable (1.5 build 57)
   Script - /home/sandrock/smyers/Testing/Feb01/test1/2001-02-16-myers.g

   Ran to completion, with many errors such as
   
"calutil.g", line 205: warning, operand to .query is not a record
"calutil.g", line 205: error, F is not a function value
"calutil.g", line 206: warning, operand to .getcol is not a record
"calutil.g", line 206: error, F is not a function value
"calutil.g", line 213: warning, operand to .putcol is not a record
"calutil.g", line 213: error, F is not a function value
"calutil.g", line 214: warning, operand to .close is not a record

   Clean up files.  Note that the filename for aips++.log has an extra
   space on the end, eg. aips++.log\ / which is kind of a pain
   -> had extra space in .aipsrc file after aips++.log

2. Date - 2001.02.16
   Version - Weekly (1.5 build 200)
   Script - /home/sandrock/smyers/Testing/Feb01/test1/2001-02-16-myers.g

1331+305 I=   7.451 Q=  -0.547 U=  -0.642 P=   0.843 chi=   33.00 AIPS
1331+305 I=   7.455 Q=  -0.560 U=  -0.626 P=   0.840 chi=   33.00 AIPS++

0854+201 I=   2.395 Q=   0.032 U=   0.109 P=   0.114 chi=  -44.92 AIPS
0854+201 I=   2.397 Q=   0.034 U=   0.114 P=   0.119 chi=  -44.28 AIPS++

1337-129 I=   5.506 Q=   0.016 U=  -0.135 P=   0.136 chi=   56.51 AIPS
1337-129 I=   5.512 Q=   0.027 U=  -0.140 P=   0.142 chi=   59.42 AIPS++

1751+096 I=   2.061 Q=  -0.134 U=   0.065 P=   0.149 chi=   -4.65 AIPS
1751+096 I=   2.062 Q=  -0.137 U=   0.063 P=   0.151 chi=   -3.41 AIPS++

   There is apparently good agreement here, though in my automatic 
   reduction database I get for 20000224, IF1 raw (unrotated)

1331+305 I=   7.393 P=   0.845 chi=   43.97 cor=   33.00 AIPS 
0854+201 I=   2.403 P=   0.113 chi=  -30.46 cor=  -41.43 AIPS 
1337-129 I=   5.542 P=   0.120 chi=   70.47 cor=   59.49 AIPS 
1751+096 I=   2.065 P=   0.142 chi=    7.66 cor=   -3.31 AIPS 
1310+323 I=   1.870 P=   0.052 chi=   -1.47 cor=  -12.45 AIPS
0927+390 I=  10.702 P=   0.107 chi=   47.93 cor=   36.96 AIPS

   which are still in good agreement.  

   Now we need to generalize the script a bit more.

3. Date - 2001.02.19
   Version - Stable (1.5 build 200, was weekly)
   Script - /home/sandrock/smyers/Testing/Feb01/test1/2001-02-19-myers.g

   This gave the same set of errors as #1 above

"calutil.g", line 120: warning, operand to .getcol is not a record
"calutil.g", line 120: error, F is not a function value
"calutil.g", line 121: warning, operand to .getcol is not a record
"calutil.g", line 121: error, F is not a function value
error non scalar parameter
etc...

   But running the in-system 'cals00feb.g' did work.  What is the difference?

   Found bug in script, try again...

   Works OK now

4. Change script to do both IFs and use setup variables for sources etc.

   From flux density transfer

Flux density for 0713+438 (spw=1) is:     1.551 +/-  0.000 Jy
Flux density for 0713+438 (spw=2) is:     1.562 +/-  0.000 Jy
Flux density for 0854+201 (spw=1) is:     2.397 +/-  0.001 Jy
Flux density for 0854+201 (spw=2) is:     2.402 +/-  0.001 Jy
Flux density for 0927+390 (spw=1) is:    10.663 +/-  0.002 Jy
Flux density for 0927+390 (spw=2) is:    10.609 +/-  0.002 Jy
Flux density for 1252-336 (spw=1) is:     0.437 +/-  0.000 Jy
Flux density for 1252-336 (spw=2) is:     0.437 +/-  0.000 Jy
Flux density for 1310+323 (spw=1) is:     1.868 +/-  0.000 Jy
Flux density for 1310+323 (spw=2) is:     1.869 +/-  0.000 Jy
Flux density for 1337-129 (spw=1) is:     5.519 +/-  0.001 Jy
Flux density for 1337-129 (spw=2) is:     5.472 +/-  0.001 Jy
Flux density for 1534-354 (spw=1) is:     0.569 +/-  0.000 Jy
Flux density for 1534-354 (spw=2) is:     0.569 +/-  0.000 Jy
Flux density for 1743-038 (spw=1) is:     4.490 +/-  0.001 Jy
Flux density for 1743-038 (spw=2) is:     4.498 +/-  0.001 Jy
Flux density for 1751+096 (spw=1) is:     2.063 +/-  0.000 Jy
Flux density for 1751+096 (spw=2) is:     2.057 +/-  0.000 Jy

   Output

0927+390 IF1 I=  10.656 P=   0.062 chi=   71.80
0927+390 IF2 I=  10.599 P=   0.048 chi=   79.88

0713+438 IF1 I=   1.551 P=   0.005 chi= -126.23
0713+438 IF2 I=   1.562 P=   0.004 chi=  157.34

0854+201 IF1 I=   2.397 P=   0.119 chi=  -88.55
0854+201 IF2 I=   2.401 P=   0.076 chi=  -87.78

1310+323 IF1 I=   1.866 P=   0.055 chi=  -30.97
1310+323 IF2 I=   1.868 P=   0.034 chi=  -30.01

1331+305 IF1 I=   7.455 P=   0.840 chi=   66.00
1331+305 IF2 I=   7.505 P=   0.551 chi=   66.00

1337-129 IF1 I=   5.512 P=   0.142 chi=  118.84
1337-129 IF2 I=   5.465 P=   0.089 chi=  116.96

1252-336 IF1 I=   0.436 P=   0.020 chi=  -24.09
1252-336 IF2 I=   0.437 P=   0.013 chi=  -20.71

1534-354 IF1 I=   0.569 P=   0.008 chi=  164.24
1534-354 IF2 I=   0.569 P=   0.005 chi=  160.88

1743-038 IF1 I=   4.489 P=   0.112 chi=  -11.58
1743-038 IF2 I=   4.498 P=   0.073 chi=  -12.95

1751+096 IF1 I=   2.062 P=   0.151 chi=   -6.82
1751+096 IF2 I=   2.055 P=   0.096 chi=   -7.84

   Seems to work!

   Next: get out D-terms, uncertainties and rms in maps,
   and try on a different dataset.

   The script can be found as 2000-02-19-myers.g