PACO Update

[nenasedk]

Major improvements and important corrections to flux estimation

• Using VIP PSF normalisation to ensure correct flux normalisation throughout
• Added off-axis PSF interpolation to have a better forward model (slower, but improves SNR. Optional)
• Sped up FullPACO enough for it to be usable, similar performance to single-core FastPACO
• Corrected flux calculation - no longer crashes and returns expected output.
• Added test coverage for FullPACO - note for maintainers: check to make sure my test_pipeline_adi.py file has the correct tests included, seems some were removed from the master repo, but added back in with this commit.

[codecov-commenter]

Codecov Report

Merging #539 (f161440) into master (314efa3) will increase coverage by 0.57%.
The diff coverage is 59.18%.

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master     #539      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   58.34%   58.92%   +0.57%     
==========================================
  Files          56       56              
  Lines       11385    11414      +29     
==========================================
+ Hits         6643     6726      +83     
+ Misses       4742     4688      -54     

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
vip_hci/invprob/paco.py	61.22% <59.18%> (+15.76%)	⬆️
vip_hci/var/fit_2d.py	55.02% <0.00%> (+0.43%)	⬆️
vip_hci/fm/fakecomp.py	60.44% <0.00%> (+2.21%)	⬆️

📣 Codecov can now indicate which changes are the most critical in Pull Requests. Learn more

[VChristiaens]

Many thanks @nenasedk !
To answer your question: I've split test_pipeline_adi.py into several test files (test_pipeline_adi_paco, test_pipeline_adi_fmmf, ...) for the inverse problem approach algorithms since they are the longest to run. I wanted to have timestamps as output of the testing process to know which ones to further optimize. Will add your addition for a test of full PACO to test_pipeline_adi_paco.