Data Fixed?

I wanted to see if the changes I made to the declination distribution of the randoms fixed the problem with the Sloan data 3D correlation function. It appears it has not.

The correlation function is going negative ~5 Mpc/h:

As per Nic Ross's advice I am printing out the individual elements of the correlation function:

bin dd dr rd rr

0 317762.000000 216879.000004 217092.400004 226377.000004
1 1438272.000000 1190313.799866 1189213.999867 1244237.199854
2 2708480.000000 2477950.600010 2481026.000013 2551443.400078
3 3778250.000000 3627401.601080 3635341.801088 3668580.801119
4 4493904.000000 4437785.801835 4441650.801839 4424500.401823
5 4827204.000000 4858547.602227 4850951.402220 4790191.802163
6 4832844.000000 4926666.002291 4915620.202280 4845375.602215
7 4632790.000000 4742744.802119 4739360.602116 4702071.602081
8 4356652.000000 4461201.001857 4459481.601855 4483517.001878
9 4157056.000000 4233592.001645 4233477.601645 4276671.401685
10 4014424.000000 4070859.001493 4070540.001493 4105703.401526
11 3903134.000000 3944458.201376 3945670.001377 3970457.201400
12 3811114.000000 3847011.401285 3849257.601287 3867510.001304
13 3745984.000000 3769143.601212 3771384.201215 3788595.401231
14 3684692.000000 3707139.601155 3706282.401154 3723841.201170
15 3632222.000000 3651903.001103 3652026.201103 3667982.201118
16 3582504.000000 3600661.601056 3600676.801056 3617006.401071
17 3541194.000000 3554850.401013 3556219.601014 3567875.401025
18 3505996.000000 3511868.800973 3511927.400973 3523757.600984
19 3464186.000000 3468078.800932 3468489.800932 3482728.600946
20 3418956.000000 3425039.800892 3424701.000892 3442556.200908
21 3376304.000000 3386133.600856 3386409.600856 3406330.600875
22 3348124.000000 3351585.600824 3351850.400824 3371267.600842
23 3312086.000000 3319740.000794 3317782.400792 3335477.000809
24 3278338.000000 3285228.400762 3283852.800761 3299746.600775
25 3237588.000000 3252288.800731 3251628.800731 3266714.800745
26 3207848.000000 3220719.400702 3217525.800699 3234663.000715
27 3184346.000000 3189389.600673 3187092.600670 3199858.800682
28 3154432.000000 3160154.200645 3157859.200643 3168571.000653
29 3127406.000000 3131088.200618 3127228.000615 3137800.800625
30 3093844.000000 3098019.600587 3096805.400586 3105624.200595
31 3064538.000000 3064802.600557 3064300.800556 3072282.600563
32 3036138.000000 3035210.800529 3032522.400526 3040139.800534
33 2999470.000000 3000089.200496 3000837.800497 3008239.000504
34 2962448.000000 2968977.200467 2970271.600468 2979345.000477
35 2927012.000000 2934725.000435 2935492.800436 2946856.400447
36 2901310.000000 2903968.800407 2902961.000406 2913088.800415
37 2863636.000000 2869294.400374 2869514.600375 2881526.600386
38 2821798.000000 2833074.200341 2834320.800342 2847371.800354
39 2796586.000000 2803686.200313 2803161.600313 2813829.200323

Because the dr an rd are being subtracted from rr and dd in the calculation of the correlation function, it is possible for the correlation function to go negative if the objects are more correlated with the random data than with themselves. This seems very strange to me, but it is possible that because we don't trust the photo-z's from the data set I am using that maybe this is causing the problem?

I think the next step is to run the reconstruction purely on the mock data to see if that works, and this should isolate if this is a bad data issue or a bad code issue.