Some results with the sharpinteg-sharp_combine pipeline with various pointing offset corrections (JEV, 2006-May-15)

3 subsets of M82 data

Sharpinteg version 1c with CAZO,CZAO header values and widow pixel fixes (LGK 2006-May-16)

John has put five of our grid tests through the sharpinteg-sharpcombine pipeline. The results are good to within a few degrees. (GN 2006-May-17)

Plots of backsub output of q,u,Q,U,I,I uncorrected for atmosphere,Atmospheric transmission,on and off source #'s of pixels,background, % pol, and pol angle (radians). (LGK 17 May 2006)

Rough comparison of Hertz and SHARP results for the central 20 arcsec of M82 (GN, 2006 May 25)

Beam Shape (HL, 2006 Jun 12)

noise study from M82 (HL, 2006 Jun 22)

Quicklook version 1g (CDD 2006 Jul 5)

• quicklook version 1g
  • Main change is to write images in a format that allows my "fitgauss" to work on them.

fitgauss for polarization scans (JEV 2006 Jul 5)

• fitgausspol.c. For fitting 2D gaussian to double peaked source.

• SCALE for V array = 4.73 (arcsec/bolometer)
• SCALE for H array = 4.78 (arcsec/bolometer)
• DISTORT for V array = 1.030 (x scale = SCALE*DISTORT, y scale = SCALE/DISTORT)
• DISTORT for H array = 1.045 (x scale = SCALE*DISTORT, y scale = SCALE/DISTORT)
• ROTATOR_0 for V array = 2.4 degrees (angle between array and telescope coordinate system)
• ROTATOR_0 for H array = -0.8 degrees (angle between array and telescope coordinate system)

July 2006 beam analysis (MMK, July 18 2006)

July 2006 beam analysis (HL, Sep. 21 2006)

H and V Misalignment Analysis Summary(MA, July 19 2006)

GAP v1.5 Results with Simulated Data (MA, uploaded 22 Feb 2007)

The following files illustrate the amount of artifical polarization generated for a number of 
different gaussian sources with a translational misalignment of 0.1 pixels and a rotational 
misalignment of 2 degrees between the H and V arrays.   
10" by 15" ellipse
10" by 10" sphere
20" by 20" sphere

The following files illustrate the correction error as a function of pointing drifts.
Correction error for the 10" by 15" ellipse
Correction error for the 10" by 10" sphere
Correction error for the 20" by 20" sphere

The following file illustrates the correction error for the 10" by 15" ellipse for 
various degrees of uncertainty in the hardware parameters.  This plot should give 
a feel for the robustness of the program. 
Hardware error file for the 10" by 15" ellipse

Smoothed tau(225GHz) for February 2007 run (CDD, 2007 Mar 7)

• SCALE for V array = 4.81 (arcsec/bolometer)
• SCALE for H array = 4.78 (arcsec/bolometer)
• DISTORT for V array = 1.020 (x scale = SCALE*DISTORT, y scale = SCALE/DISTORT)
• DISTORT for H array = 1.045 (x scale = SCALE*DISTORT, y scale = SCALE/DISTORT)
• ROTATOR_0 for V array = 3.1 degrees (angle between array and telescope coordinate system)
• ROTATOR_0 for H array = -0.3 degrees (angle between array and telescope coordinate system)

• SCALE for V array = 4.75 (arcsec/bolometer)
• SCALE for H array = 4.75 (arcsec/bolometer)
• DISTORT for V array = 1.015 (x scale = SCALE*DISTORT, y scale = SCALE/DISTORT)
• DISTORT for H array = 1.025 (x scale = SCALE*DISTORT, y scale = SCALE/DISTORT)
• ROTATOR_0 for V array = 3.1 degrees (angle between array and telescope coordinate system)
• ROTATOR_0 for H array = 0.0 degrees (angle between array and telescope coordinate system)

Here is the "static" pointing model fit for the Feb. '07 run. If you want to know how to combine the static model and the hourly pointing measurements to predict the pointing for other sources, ask me. This should only be relevant for OMC-3, M82, and OMC-1 during this run.

See zamin:~sharp/Runs/2007feb/calibs/pointing/ and pointing_model/ for analysis details.

Array Misalignment from Feb 07 Run (MA, 2007 Mar 22)

These measurements were made using the engineering files taken during the Feb 2007 run.  
They are all taken with respect to the H array and include:

Translations (x,y) [pixels]: 0.109151 , 0.007041
Stretches (x,y): 1.008679 , 0.995928
Rotation [deg]: 1.446355

Note that the rotation angle is made in a clockwise fashion (ie, the V array is rotated by ~1.45 deg wrt the H array).

Interpretation of ROTATOR_0 rotation and DISTORT distortion (CDD, 2007 Apr 19)

• A positive ROTATOR_0 corresponds to a clockwise rotation of the (sub)array footprint on the sky.
  • I have been finding a ROTATOR_0 for the V subarray which is ~3 degrees larger than for the H subarray, so V is rotated clockwise relative to H. This is in agreement in sign with Mike's result (prior posting, 2007 Mar 22), but not so much the magnitude.
• A value DISTORT > 1 means the footprint of the (sub)array is longer in the X direction (the long direction of the 12x32 array) than in the Y direction.
  • I have been finding a consistently smaller DISTORT for the V subarray compared to the H subarray, at the 1-2% level. That means that relative to the H array, the V array has a footprint longer in the Y direction and shorter in the X direction.

• SCALE for V array = 4.74 (arcsec/bolometer)
• SCALE for H array = 4.74 (arcsec/bolometer)
• DISTORT for V array = 1.030 (x scale = SCALE*DISTORT, y scale = SCALE/DISTORT)
• DISTORT for H array = 1.043 (x scale = SCALE*DISTORT, y scale = SCALE/DISTORT)
• ROTATOR_0 for V array = 2.9 degrees (angle between array and telescope coordinate system)
• ROTATOR_0 for H array = -0.3 degrees (angle between array and telescope coordinate system)

GAP v1.6 Results with January 2006 Jupiter Data (MA, uploaded 03 May 2007)

Uncorrected polarimetry map
Corrected polarimetry map
Performance plot for GAP looking at the edge pixels of the planetary disk

Pointing Model for M82 in April 2007 (CDD, 2007 May 10)

Predicting the pointing for M82 was the goal of the pointing model fits, and here are those predictions, based on measurements of Saturn, IRC10216, and CALLISTO before and after M82. There are three caveats for these predictions: 1) M82 and the pointing sources are more widely separated than I am used to, 2) There is a lack of pointing data, at any time, in the northern sky where M82 is, 3) There were often 2-3 hour intervals between pointings, in comparison to the 1 hour intervals I am used to. I believe it is very important to verify and perhaps tweak the relative alignment of the SHARP images of M82.

See zamin:~sharp/Runs/2007apr/calibs/sharp_pointing/ for analysis details.

Smoothed tau(225GHz) for April 2007 runs (CDD, 2007 May 10)

Results of DG Tau analysis (GN, 2007 May 28)

• Results of DG Tau analysis
• file list corresponding to DG Tau analysis

Document on Instrument Polarization Conventions (JEV, 2007 July 3)

• Text summary
• Plots of 350 μm data
  • 5° bins
  • 10° bins
  • The 2 plots above show weighted averages in 5° and 10° elevation bins. Error bars represent the dispersion (standard deviation) of values within each bin, not standard deviation of the mean. Note that the fit has taken into account the different HWP angles in this plot, but the plotted data points do not; all HWP angles here are within ~ 4° of each other.

• (Note: GN made an update to the Table below just after the Dec. 2007 run)
• Table of V-nulls

Smoothed tau(225GHz) for August 2007 run (CDD, 2007 Aug 22)

Smoothed tau(225GHz) for June 2007 run (CDD, 2007 Aug 29)

• SCALE = 4.73 (arcsec/bolometer)
• DISTORT = 1.031 (x scale = SCALE*DISTORT, y scale = SCALE/DISTORT)
• ROTATOR_0 = 1.5 degrees (angle between array and telescope coordinate system)

• SCALE = 4.71 (arcsec/bolometer)
• DISTORT = 1.028 (x scale = SCALE*DISTORT, y scale = SCALE/DISTORT)
• ROTATOR_0 = 0.5 degrees (angle between array and telescope coordinate system)

outline of scheme for computing reduced-chi-squared (GN, 2007 Sept. 12)

Quicklook of 2007 August data reduced at summit (HS, 2007 Sep 18)

• Quicklook of I20126 data

Summary of discussion on RGM taken in 2007 August run (HS, uploaded on 2007 Sep 23)

• Summary (PDF)

Chop-nod analysis for M82 data taken in Feb 2007 (MA, 2007 Oct. 19)

• Report (PDF)

Pointing changes of 2007 Aug data (HS, 2007 Oct 23, updated on Oct 30)

• Plots (PDF)

Preliminary Analysis of NGC 1333 4A from Nov 07 Run (MA, 2007 Nov 22)

• NGC 1333 4A Polsharp3 Plot (Figure)

Slides for CSO TAC (GN, 2007 Dec 11)

• powerpoint slides for NGC 1333 and IRAS 201

Test of sharp_combine i.p. subtraction (GN, 2008 Jan 16)

• comparison of i.p. subtraction results from sharpcombine with those done by hand

Analysis of NGC 1333 4A from Nov & Dec 07 runs (MA, 2008 Jan 18)

• Description of data analysis (README)
• 3-sigma NGC 1333 4A Polsharp3 Plot (Figure)

Best guess i.p. for Jan. 2006 (350), Dec. 2006 (450), June 2007 (450). (GN 2008 Jan. 30; updated March 10)

• Jan. 2006; 350 micron polarimetry: -ip 0.0003 -0.0046 -0.0018 0.0031
• Dec. 2006; 450 micron polarimetry: -ip 0.0 0.0 0.0010 0.0011
• June 2007; 450 micron polarimetry: -ip 0.0 0.0 -0.0015 0.0003
• Note: For these runs, the i.p. correction has an estimated 1-sigma uncertainty of 0.2%. This should be taken into account when interpreting results.
• Here is a detailed discussion

Excel Spreadsheet for Feb 07 Pointing Analysis (MA 2008 Feb 4)

• Here is the spreadsheet

• SCALE = 4.61 (arcsec/bolometer)
• DISTORT = 1.020 (x scale = SCALE*DISTORT, y scale = SCALE/DISTORT)
• ROTATOR_0 = 1.5 degrees (angle between array and telescope coordinate system)

Consistency Test for NGC1333 Data (MA, 2008 March 17)

• Here is the memo

Status Report on L 1527 Data Reduction (GN, 2008 May 20)

Another status Report on L 1527 Data Reduction (GN, 2008 May 25)

Status Report on M82 Data Reduction (GN, 2008 May 30)

• The README file
• The tiff file
• The pdf file
• The fits file

Analysis memo draft for the IRAS 20126 data (June 16) (HS, uploaded on 2008 June 16)

Analysis memo for the IRAS 20126 data (June 27) (HS, uploaded on 2008 June 27)

Calculating the average value of the reduced chi squared across a map (GN, 2008 July 17)

chi2 can do outlier rejection, but it doesn't help for L1527 (GN, 2008 July 29)

DG Tau analysis - subtracting offsets in Q and U (TM, 2008 Sept 11)

Smoothed tau(225GHz) for September 2008 run (CDD, 2008 Sep 24)

• SCALE = 4.75 (arcsec/bolometer)
• DISTORT = 1.026 (x scale = SCALE*DISTORT, y scale = SCALE/DISTORT)
• ROTATOR_0 = 1.25 degrees (angle between array and telescope coordinate system)

"Mostly undigested" rgm ascii files from Sept. run, sent to me by Darren recently (GN, 2008 Oct 1)

Calibration notes on 2008-July run. (JEV 2008-Oct-15)

• RGM
  • The RGM file was created using scan-mode data from CAL_W3OH, CAL_OCETI, Uranus, and W3IRS5.
  • Details (README file) and separate files can be found on zamin:Runs/2008july/calibs/rgm/
  • This rgm.dat file has 203 unflagged pixels.
• Pointing Model
  • A pointing model was generated using scan-mode data from CAL_CRL618, CAL_OCETI, Uranus, and W3IRS5.
  • Details (README file) and separate files can be found on zamin:Runs/2008july/calibs/pointing/
  • The first sheet in this spreadsheet file has interpolated pointings for W3 and NGC253. Note rms uncertainty in pointing mode is ~ 2.5 arcsec (half a pixel) so this should be used with caution.
• HWP Zero Angle --> -hwp input is 92 degrees.

M82 polsharp4 plots using 55 files or cycles from Feb and Apr 2007 SHARP runs (LL, 2008 Oct 24)

M82 reduced chi square results of 4 and 2 bins using 55 files or cycles from Feb and Apr 2007 SHARP runs (LL, 2008 Oct 24)

M82 reduced chi square fits output file for 4 bins using 55 files or cycles from Feb and Apr 2007 SHARP runs (LL, 2008 Oct 24)

M82 reduced chi square fits output file for 2 bins using 55 files or cycles from Feb and Apr 2007 SHARP runs (LL, 2008 Oct 24)

Analysis of NGC1333 4A & 4B data from Sept. 08 run (MA Nov. 08)

Analysis of NGC1333 4A & 4B data from Sept. 08 run take 2 (MA Dec. 02)

Analysis of NGC1333 4A & 4B data from Sept. 08 run take 3 (MA Dec. 04)

Instrument Polarization Data & Analysis (JEV posted 2008-Dec-4)

• SCALE = 4.73 (arcsec/bolometer)
• DISTORT = 1.024 (x scale = SCALE*DISTORT, y scale = SCALE/DISTORT)
• ROTATOR_0 = 1.25 degrees (angle between array and telescope coordinate system)

Analysis Update for NGC6334 I(N) (MA, 2009 Feb 19)

Analysis Update for NGC6334 I(N) (MA, 2009 Mar 10)

Study of Subarray Misalignment (MZ, 2009 Mar 13)

Preliminary Analysis of L1527 (JEV, 2009 Apr 6)

Analysis of reduced-χ² addition to sharp_combine (JEV, 2009 Apr 14)

Multi-wavelength data from W3 (JEV, 2009 Apr 17)

How I got sharp_combine working on my mac (GN, 2009 April 20)

• Jupiter & Saturn data, 2006-July -- 2007-June
  • sharp_combine command-line inputs: 0.0039 -0.0004 0.0026 0.0000
• Jupiter data only, 2006-July -- 2007-June
  • The solid line is the best fit to the Jupiter-only data. The dotted lines show the best fit and uncertainties to the Jupiter + Saturn data.
  • sharp_combine command-line inputs: 0.0038 0.0003 0.0037 0.0001
• Jupiter data, 2009-September
  • The solid line is the best fit to the 2009-Sept. Jupiter data. The dotted lines show the best fit and uncertainties to the 2006-July -- 2007-June Jupiter-only data.
  • sharp_combine command-line inputs: 0.0026 -0.0003 0.0016 0.0000
• The 3 plots above show weighted averages in 10° elevation bins. Error bars represent the dispersion (standard deviation of the mean) of values within each bin. Note that the fit has taken into account the different HWP angles in this plot (88°-91° degrees for the 2006-7 data, 91° for the Sept.-2009 data)
• The Saturn+Jupiter data are in fairly good agreement with the Jupiter-only data for the 2006-2007 data. The 2009 data shows considerably lower IP.
  • The fit of the q_i parameter (instrument polarization) is driven mostly by the offset in the q-plot near elevation ~ 45°. This seems fairly well determined in both data sets, so to me the diffence w.r.t the 2006-2007 data looks real.
  • The telescope polarization (q_t') is driven mostly by the amplitudes in the q- and u-plots. These are not well constrained in the 2009 data given the scatter and limited elevation range sampled. It would appear to be consistent with the 2006-2007 dataset. Although I will note that it is difficult to separate the u-amplitude term from the u-offset term (u_i).