2024-3-28 Working Meeting (DRAFT)

When 8PM GMT, 12PM PST, 1PM MST https://jpl.webex.com/jpl/j.php?MTID=m3c96c22ed8e335e55dbd40c9084e3763

• Cynthia
• Mike
• Jay
• Paul

• Horizontal Datum
  • Recap from a smaller meeting last week.
  • Outstanding question: Is the addition of the Juno data causing the USGS network to shift?
    • Mike is working on adding one observation to the USGS network.
    • Able to process the JunoCam observation to mapprojected form.
    • Spun wheels for a bit how to get map projected to un-projected. How is Paul using these data?
      • JunoCam2ISIS breaks the observations into framelets. Results in ~40 images.
    • Ran a cnet add to get this added to the USGS network, points have been added. Time out at that point.
    • Next steps are clear, so just need some more time.
  • Question: Just 1 image?
    • Yes, not a replication test, just a test to see what adding one, blue filter, observation does.
    • Adding just one to try and reduce the number of variables that can be contributing to the observed shifts.
    • This is solid due diligence.
  • Question: What is the difference between the Gallileo and JunoCam observation resolution?
    • Off the cuff, km per pixel in Gallileo, JunoCam ~1km per pixel to ~3km per pixel.
    • Signal to noise is a lot better in the JunoCam observations.
    • Lots of high sun angles, which is good for feature observation.
    • Needs to have higher density of control point to the edge of the observation. Need good span to either side of the disc so due to observation geometry.
  • Both products are using the exact same kernels - no need to test further.
  • For map projection, the radii need to be carefully specified.
    • Only need to re-run map projection.
  • Paul is verifying his network via manual inspection.
    • This is a work in progress, nothing obviously wrong.
    • It is hard to match the high sun observations to low sun observations with confidence.
      • Mike affirms.
    • Consider: Go ahead and keep the USGS map and publish the JunoCam map with that being labelled as a preliminary product.
      • Nice to have the product out in the world.
      • Makes sense to label as preliminary.
      • Yes on helping get docs for a data release. Yes on releasing these as ARD.
  • Question: Is the JunoCam lense and lense distoration the reason that dense control to the observation edges is needed?
    • Yes.
  • It would be valuable to have a displacement map.
    • Mike can generate a dispalcement map.
  • Discssion on preliminary data releases, general idea what EIS is planning.
• Geologic map is released.
  • Trent working to get symbology so that Jay can release as ARD via our vector API.

• Jay: Send draft docs to the group to start drafting.
• Mike/Paul: Continue working the offset issue.
• Mike: Create a displacement map between Paul’s mosaic and the USGS products.
• Jay: Get draft data generated as ARD and send to the group for review.

4.25.24