Add conical aperture support in the spectral extraction plugin

[javerbukh]

Description

This pull request adds support for fractional pixels using NDData as well as using that feature to create conical apertures in cubeviz using the spectral extraction plugin.

Cone mask at different slices:

Cone mask at slice 100

Cone mask at slice 1000

Cone mask at slice 3000

Not wavelength dependent, wavelength dependent, wavelength dependent at a different slice

cubeviz_cone_aperture_demo_02052024.mp4

TODO:

• Connect functionality to front-end
• Extend aperture support to other shapes
• Add tests
• Add docs

Change log entry

• Is a change log needed? If yes, is it added to CHANGES.rst? If you want to avoid merge conflicts,
  list the proposed change log here for review and add to CHANGES.rst before merge. If no, maintainer
  should add a no-changelog-entry-needed label.
• Add conical aperture support to cubeviz in the spectral extraction plugin[2679]

Checklist for package maintainer(s)

This checklist is meant to remind the package maintainer(s) who will review this pull request of some common things to look for. This list is not exhaustive.

• Are two approvals required? Branch protection rule does not check for the second approval. If a second approval is not necessary, please apply the trivial label.
• Do the proposed changes actually accomplish desired goals? Also manually run the affected example notebooks, if necessary.
• Do the proposed changes follow the STScI Style Guides?
• Are tests added/updated as required? If so, do they follow the STScI Style Guides?
• Are docs added/updated as required? If so, do they follow the STScI Style Guides?
• Did the CI pass? If not, are the failures related?
• Is a milestone set? Set this to bugfix milestone if this is a bug fix and needs to be released ASAP; otherwise, set this to the next major release milestone.
• After merge, any internal documentations need updating (e.g., JIRA, Innerspace)? 🐱 🐱 🐱

[codecov]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 88.86%. Comparing base (b89d91f) to head (7816905).
Report is 52 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #2679      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   90.89%   88.86%   -2.04%     
==========================================
  Files         163      108      -55     
  Lines       21391    15916    -5475     
==========================================
- Hits        19444    14144    -5300     
+ Misses       1947     1772     -175     

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

[kecnry]

Suggested change

	<v-row>
	<v-row v-if="aperture_selected !== 'Entire Cube'">

We should also include an in-line warning if !aperture_selected_validity.is_aperture conflicts with the selection here (for example a composite subset and "subpixel"), disable clicking the extract button, and have checks in the python method that raise an error.

[javerbukh]

As it currently stands, if you have Subset 1 selected and then you make it a composite subset, the option to make a cone wavelength dependent is removed and you see the following message in the UI: "Subset 1 does not support wavelength dependence (cone support): composite subsets are not supported." Is that sufficient or do you mean to cover another case with this?

[kecnry]

oh right - I forgot I did that 😝 That's probably fine for now, and I'll make a note of this in the final UI/UX review (we might instead want to continue showing the dropdown and have an error so that there is a consistent workflow from the API perspective).

[pllim]

I am no good with the vue stuff but now that cylindrical also use the same algorithm as cone, any checks here need updating?

[kecnry]

I think this should work with #2684. If anything there needs updating, please open a ticket.

[rosteen]

The cone extraction appears to work really well, impressive! I checked that the displayed aperture scales as expected, and below you can see that the extracted spectrum is lower at the smaller aperture and and higher at the large end compared to the naive sum over the subset, as you would expect:

However, it looks like whatever is populating the aperture masking method menu items is failing:

Once that is fixed (and the failure with no uncertainty as mentioned above) I think this will be ready or at least close - I'll do a little more detailed reading through the code now.

[pllim]

Questions about the test.

[rosteen]

I still see "[object Object]" in the masking method menu. Additionally, the "Slice to Reference Wavelength" button's text should probably wrap, currently a lot of the text is cut off at the default width of the plugin for me.

[javerbukh]

@rosteen That's strange, I'm not seeing that anymore. Are you sure you have the latest commit?

[pllim]

@bmorris3 , since you requested changes, can you please re-review? Thanks!

[bmorris3]

This looks great, thank you!

[pllim]

I was hoping all this would happen inside NDData somewhere. Kinda defeats the purpose of using NDData if we still have to do it ourselves here, no, @bmorris3 ?

[javerbukh]

@pllim Did you mean to remove all this?

[pllim]

Yes, it is not used anywhere.

[pllim]

I basically co-wrote this PR now, so naturally I am now happy where it stands, so approving. But you should revisit if any vue rules need updating for the GUI checks, see https://github.com/spacetelescope/jdaviz/pull/2679/files#r1506335282

Thanks for your patience, Jesse!