- Timestamp:
- May 5, 2019, 11:39:31 AM (7 years ago)
- Location:
- trunk/doc/release.2015/ps1.detrend
- Files:
-
- 2 added
- 1 edited
-
detrend.tex (modified) (9 diffs)
-
images/N157.v1.png (added)
-
images/N157.v2.png (added)
Legend:
- Unmodified
- Added
- Removed
-
trunk/doc/release.2015/ps1.detrend/detrend.tex
r40708 r40710 476 476 A-mode dark instead results in the third (blue) curve, which shows 477 477 a significant increase in gradients across the cells. The fourth 478 (red) curve is the result of applying the PATTERN.CONTINUITY478 (red) curve is the result of applying the \nocode{PATTERN.CONTINUITY} 479 479 correction along with the B-mode dark model. Although this 480 480 creates a larger gradient across the mosaicked images, it … … 1461 1461 \tablecolumns{3} 1462 1462 \tablewidth{0pc} 1463 \tablecaption{Cells which have PATTERN.ROWcorrection applied}1463 \tablecaption{Cells which have \nocode{PATTERN.ROW} correction applied} 1464 1464 \tablehead{\colhead{OTA} & \colhead{Cell columns} & \colhead{Additional cells}} 1465 1465 \startdata … … 1510 1510 correction cannot fully remove this structure from the images, and the 1511 1511 noisemap value only indicates the level of the average variance added 1512 by these bias offsets. Therefore, we apply the PATTERN.ROWcorrection1512 by these bias offsets. Therefore, we apply the \ippmisc{PATTERN.ROW} correction 1513 1513 in an attempt to mitigate the offsets and correct the image values. 1514 1514 To force the rows to agree, a second order clipped polynomial is … … 1528 1528 \centering 1529 1529 \includegraphics[width=0.9\hsize,angle=0,clip]{images/pattern_row_edit.png} 1530 \caption{Diagram illustrating in red which cells on GPC1 require the PATTERN.ROW correction to be applied. The footprint of each OTA is outlined, and cell xy00 is marked with either a filled box or an outline. The labeling of the non-existent corner OTAs is provided to orient the focal plane.} 1530 \caption{Diagram illustrating in red which cells on GPC1 require the 1531 \nocode{PATTERN.ROW} correction to be applied. The footprint of 1532 each OTA is outlined, and cell xy00 is marked with either a filled 1533 box or an outline. The labeling of the non-existent corner OTAs 1534 is provided to orient the focal plane.} 1531 1535 \label{fig: pattern row cells} 1532 1536 \end{figure} … … 1535 1539 the \gps{} filter, as the read noise is the dominant noise source in 1536 1540 that filter. At longer wavelengths, the noise from the Poissonian 1537 variation in the sky level increases. The PATTERN.ROWcorrection is1541 variation in the sky level increases. The \ippmisc{PATTERN.ROW} correction is 1538 1542 still applied to data taken in the other filters, as the increase in 1539 1543 sky noise does not fully obscure the row-by-row noise. … … 1569 1573 \includegraphics[width=0.9\hsize,angle=0,clip]{images/o5379g0103o_wpt_XY57_sm.png} 1570 1574 \end{minipage} 1571 \caption{{\bf Correlated Noise:} Example of the PATTERN.ROW correction on exposure o5379g0103o OTA57 cell xy01 (\ips{} filter 45s). The left panel shows the cell with all appropriate detrending except the PATTERN.ROW, and the right shows the same cell with PATTERN.ROW applied. The correction reduces the correlated noise on the right side, which is most distant from the read out amplifier. There is a slight over subtraction along the rows near the bright star.} 1575 \caption{{\bf Correlated Noise:} Example of the 1576 \nocode{PATTERN.ROW} correction on exposure o5379g0103o OTA57 1577 cell xy01 (\ips{} filter 45s). The left panel shows the cell with 1578 all appropriate detrending except the \nocode{PATTERN.ROW}, and 1579 the right shows the same cell with \nocode{PATTERN.ROW} applied. 1580 The correction reduces the correlated noise on the right side, 1581 which is most distant from the read out amplifier. There is a 1582 slight over subtraction along the rows near the bright star.} 1572 1583 \label{fig: pattern row example} 1573 1584 \end{figure*} 1574 1585 1575 1586 \subsubsection{Pattern Continuity} 1587 1588 \begin{figure*}[htpb] 1589 \centering 1590 \includegraphics[width=0.9\hsize,angle=0,clip]{images/{N157.v1}.png} 1591 \caption{These four panels illustrate the impact of the 1592 \nocode{PATTERN.ROW}, \nocode{PATTERN.CONTINUITY}, and background 1593 subtraction steps on a large galaxy. Upper-left: all detrends 1594 except \nocode{PATTERN.ROW}, \nocode{PATTERN.CONTINUITY}, and background 1595 subtraction applied to a single GPC1 image of NGC 157. 1596 Upper-right: same image as upper-left with \nocode{PATTERN.ROW} applied. 1597 Lower-right: same image as upper-right with 1598 \nocode{PATTERN.CONTINUITY} applied. Lower-left: same image as 1599 lower-right with background subtraction.} 1600 \label{fig:ngc157.with.pattern} 1601 \end{figure*} 1602 1603 \begin{figure*}[htpb] 1604 \centering 1605 \includegraphics[width=0.9\hsize,angle=0,clip]{images/{N157.v2}.png} 1606 \caption{These two panels illustrate the impact of the 1607 \nocode{PATTERN.CONTINUITY}, and background subtraction steps on a 1608 large galaxy, without \nocode{PATTERN.ROW}. Left: all detrends 1609 and \nocode{PATTERN.CONTINUITY}, but not \nocode{PATTERN.ROW} and 1610 background subtraction, applied to a single GPC1 image of NGC 157. 1611 Right: same image as left with background subtraction. Without 1612 the \nocode{PATTERN.ROW} correction, the background is much less affected.} 1613 \label{fig:ngc157.without.pattern} 1614 \end{figure*} 1576 1615 1577 1616 The background sky levels of cells on a single OTA do not always have … … 1586 1625 the cell boundaries. 1587 1626 1588 The PATTERN.CONTINUITYcorrection, attempts to match the edges of a1627 The \ippmisc{PATTERN.CONTINUITY} correction, attempts to match the edges of a 1589 1628 cell to those of its neighbors. For each cell, a thin box 10 pixels 1590 1629 wide running the full length of each edge is extracted and the median … … 1612 1651 effect of this correction on an image profile is shown in Figure 1613 1652 \ref{fig:dark switching}. 1653 1654 \subsection{Background (``Sky'') Subtraction} 1655 1656 During the \IPPstage{chip}-stage processing, after the detrending 1657 steps are done but before source detection begins, a model of the 1658 background light is subtracted from each chip image. The decision to 1659 subtract a background model is somewhat tricky as the trade-offs are 1660 not clear in all possible cases. It is helpful to consider the types 1661 of sources which contribute to the background light in astronomical 1662 images. 1663 1664 First, there is ``scattered light'', which means flux that reaches the 1665 detector from a path that is different from the path through the 1666 optics taken by the light from the imaged stars. In an ideal 1667 telescope, no light could ever reach the detector without being imaged 1668 by the optics. However, in a real telescope, especially in wide-field 1669 systems such as the Pan-STARRS telescopes, it is impossible to 1670 sufficiently baffle the optical path to prevent ``scattered'' 1671 light\footnote{We put the term ``scattered'' in quotes because this 1672 background may include light which reaches the detector directly 1673 from the sky or other light source rather than scattering off 1674 elements of the optical system.} from reaching the detector without 1675 blocking the main optical path. This class of background light may 1676 include sharp features such as the glints discussed 1677 above(Section~\ref{sec:glints}), but in this discussion we are 1678 primarily concerned with large-scale structures. Another type of 1679 ``scattered'' background light source would be the large out-of-focus 1680 pupil image observed in \eg, the NOAO and CTIO wide-field imagers 1681 \citep{2007ASPC..376..269S}. 1682 1683 Second, there are direct terrestrial contributions to the background 1684 light. This source of light follows the same path as the light from 1685 the stars to the detector, but has an origin much closer to the 1686 telescope. This may include glow from emission lines in the 1687 atmosphere, light from the moon or terrestrial sources scattered off 1688 thin (or thick!) clouds or just scattered in the clear atmosphere via 1689 Rayleigh off dust particles and gas molecules in the atmosphere. Both 1690 ``scattered'' and direct terrestrial contributions to the background 1691 light are not expected to be consistent for a given location on the 1692 sky, though the pupil ghost image may well be the same for a fixed 1693 telescope pointing and night sky brighness. 1694 1695 Finally, there are astrophysical contributions to the background 1696 light. These range from the nearby zodiacal light to the 1697 extragalactic background. Depending on the context and the source 1698 being measured, astrophysical background sources may even include the 1699 diffuse flux from large galaxies. When measuring the flux of point 1700 sources, it is necessary to subtract (or otherwise model) any 1701 large-scale diffuse background component. When measuring a larger 1702 object, e.g., a well-resolved galaxy, it is necessary to make a 1703 decision what portion of the large-scale flux is a background and what 1704 is part of the flux of the object being measured. 1705 1706 When one measures the flux of an object in an image, two approaches to 1707 the background light are possible. On the one hand, one could attempt 1708 to include the background as part of the model-fitting parameters at 1709 the time of the analysis. Alternatively, one could attempt to model 1710 and subtract the background first and not include it in the per-object 1711 model fit. For the IPP analysis, we choose the later method for two 1712 reasons. First, in tests of the former method, we find that the 1713 photometry of fitted objects is more inconsistent if the sky is fitted 1714 for each object than if it is determined in a separate step 1715 (presumably due to the extra degree of freedom in the model fitting). 1716 Second, by subtracting a background model, we remove varying 1717 backgrounds from the image so that the resulting pixels can later be 1718 combined to make a deep stack. 1719 1720 The details of the background model are discussed in Paper IV. 1721 Briefly, the background subtraction is performed on each chip 1722 independently. The image is divided into a grid of points with a 1723 spacing of 400 pixels. A superpixel of size $800 \times 800$ pixels 1724 is used to measure the background corresponding to each point. 1725 Bilinear interpolation is used to estimate the background value at any 1726 point in the full image. This approach works well to follow the 1727 large-scale background structures from the terrestrial and scattered 1728 sources, and to subtract the background light of large-scale 1729 astronomical feasures for the analysis of point sources or small-scale 1730 feasures such as small galaxies. However, this process acts as a 1731 high-pass filter, with the result that galaxies larger than a certain 1732 size will have a significant portion of their light subtracted. In 1733 addition, the \ippmisc{PATTERN.ROW} and \ippmisc{PATTERN.CONTINUITY} 1734 corrections described above (Section~\ref{sec:pattern}) also 1735 over-subtract large galaxies, and interact badly with the background 1736 model. Figures~\ref{fig:ngc157.with.pattern} and 1737 \ref{fig:ngc157.without.pattern} illustrate the impact of the 1738 background subtraction on a large galaxy both with and withouth the 1739 \ippmisc{PATTERN.ROW} correction. 1740 1741 % \note{give examples with simulations and show examples of over-subtraction} 1614 1742 1615 1743 \section{GPC1 Detrend Construction} … … 2372 2500 2373 2501 Finally, a large number of issues arise due to the row-to-row bias 2374 issues. The PATTERN.ROWcorrection is used on a limited number of2502 issues. The \ippmisc{PATTERN.ROW} correction is used on a limited number of 2375 2503 cells, to minimize any possible distortion of bright stars or dense 2376 2504 fields by the fitting process. As the row-to-row bias changes very
Note:
See TracChangeset
for help on using the changeset viewer.
