Skip to content

GAIA: new simplified cross match method #3320

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

Open
wants to merge 11 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

cosmoJFH
Copy link
Contributor

@cosmoJFH cosmoJFH commented May 16, 2025

Dear astroquery team,

The current implementation of the astroquery.gaia built-in cross-match tool relies in a sub-optimal intermediate ADQL query. Furthermore (and after uploading a table to the user space), it requires a 3-step approach involving different functionalities (each of them requiring multiple "user clicks"):

  1. Update the user table metadata to flag the positional (ra & dec) fields using a dedicated method ("update_user_table" - see Sect 2.5 in the astroquery.gaia documentation)
  2. Launch the built-in cross-match method ("cross_match" - see Sect 2.6 in the astroquery.gaia documentation)
  3. Launch a sub-optimal and complicated ADQL query using the "launch_job" or "launch_job_async" method (see Sect 2.6 in the astroquery.gaia documentation).

We propose to streamline this procedure to improve the user experience and hopefully promote the usage of this functionality by updating the current implementation.

The proposed mechanism:

  1. allows to obtain a basic cross-match using a single step (versus three steps currently).
  2. allows to perform cross-matches between: user_table X user_table, user_table X GACS_table, and GACS_table X GACS_table (as in the current implementation).

We have developed the new method cross_match_basic as well as new tests. This change is backward compatible with the present implementation of the cross-match method.

cc @esdc-esac-esa-int

jira: GAIASWRQ-25

@bsipocz bsipocz added this to the v0.4.11 milestone May 16, 2025
@cosmoJFH cosmoJFH force-pushed the ESA_gaia_GAIASWRQ-25_improve_cross-match branch 2 times, most recently from b401d75 to 3442e97 Compare May 16, 2025 17:27
@cosmoJFH cosmoJFH force-pushed the ESA_gaia_GAIASWRQ-25_improve_cross-match branch from a80c138 to dc0fac9 Compare May 16, 2025 17:32
Copy link

codecov bot commented May 16, 2025

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 69.97%. Comparing base (823e49f) to head (e63ae6b).
Report is 16 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #3320      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   69.88%   69.97%   +0.08%     
==========================================
  Files         232      232              
  Lines       19761    19814      +53     
==========================================
+ Hits        13810    13864      +54     
+ Misses       5951     5950       -1     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
  • ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

@cosmoJFH cosmoJFH force-pushed the ESA_gaia_GAIASWRQ-25_improve_cross-match branch 2 times, most recently from 16f6ca6 to cedfc7e Compare May 17, 2025 06:27
@cosmoJFH cosmoJFH force-pushed the ESA_gaia_GAIASWRQ-25_improve_cross-match branch 5 times, most recently from 63a18b0 to 2278697 Compare May 18, 2025 06:13
@cosmoJFH cosmoJFH force-pushed the ESA_gaia_GAIASWRQ-25_improve_cross-match branch from 37ed467 to a8b1654 Compare May 19, 2025 08:57
@cosmoJFH cosmoJFH force-pushed the ESA_gaia_GAIASWRQ-25_improve_cross-match branch from 49dbbfe to 34b324d Compare May 19, 2025 09:24
@cosmoJFH cosmoJFH force-pushed the ESA_gaia_GAIASWRQ-25_improve_cross-match branch from 7fb5b9d to e63ae6b Compare June 2, 2025 09:43
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants