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.

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

Optimize search of roll_intervals? #148

Open
jeanconn opened this issue Oct 7, 2020 · 2 comments
Open

Optimize search of roll_intervals? #148

jeanconn opened this issue Oct 7, 2020 · 2 comments
Labels
enhancement New feature or request question Further information is requested

Comments

@jeanconn
Copy link
Contributor

jeanconn commented Oct 7, 2020

For the project to perhaps make a specialized yoshi to find "a" passable star catalog given an allowed roll range for a target, it seems like the sparkles roll optimization is 99% of the way there. I think it would need:

  1. an option to stop looping over the intervals after a "passing" catalog as been found.
  2. a speed up to try the roll/roll_intervals with the most-likely-to-succeed stars first. I'm thinking here that in the uniq_ids method, it might not be dreadful to quickly use either magnitude or acq_success_prob on, say, the brightest acq candidates, to pre-sort the roll_intervals before looping over them.

@taldcroft what are your thoughts, if any on ordering/optimizing the roll_intervals for this application (quickest determination of existence of a passing catalog for a target)?

@jeanconn jeanconn added enhancement New feature or request question Further information is requested labels Oct 7, 2020
@taldcroft
Copy link
Member

Idea 1 is easy. Idea 2 will take some work. Maybe there is a low-hanging idea for ordering based on just mags that can help out. I.e. compute P2 based on just mags (ignoring the full p_acq that does spoilers etc) for the 5 brightest stars.

Beyond that I would push back on spending time optimizing this code before we actually have a concrete idea for tool requirements and can do profiling to understand what needs to be improved, and if that is even needed.

@jeanconn
Copy link
Contributor Author

jeanconn commented Oct 17, 2020

Right. I did "idea 1" without much effort. Idea 2 seems doable the only-mags in the acq_success prob and then calculating a "rough P2" or "rough calc p safe", but the star index handling for the acquisition candidates was a little confusing on my first go. I was mostly just trying to evaluate level-of-effort for 2 from you because "it seems like a good idea on paper" to me that could have some bang-for-buck, and this is all your code.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
enhancement New feature or request question Further information is requested
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants