Difference: StewartBoogertPhotometry20171208 ( vs. 1)

Revision 108 Dec 2017 - RebekahChafer1

Line: 1 to 1

Added:

>
>

META TOPICPARENT	name="StewartBoogertPhotometry2017"

Fixed error in the star simulation - were getting pixel values way bigger than 65,000. This was because of the Stot distribution used.

Last week, I used the scipy.skewnorm to vary Stot. Instead, I've made a function so I can use it to fit to the profiles of stars.

This was then used to fit the data taken from the real stars.

However, the sigma seems to be too big, not representative of what was gotten with the unskewed fit. The sigma here is actually xi, so the difference originates from there.

-- BekiChafer - 08 Dec 2017

META FILEATTACHMENT	attachment="SkewedGaussianFunction.png" attr="" comment="Example of Skewed Gaussian Function" date="1512699309" name="SkewedGaussianFunction.png" path="SkewedGaussianFunction.png" size="70848" user="zavc984" version="1"
META FILEATTACHMENT	attachment="Skewed_gaussian.PNG" attr="" comment="Function used for skewed gaussian" date="1512699348" name="Skewed_gaussian.PNG" path="Skewed gaussian.PNG" size="20947" user="zavc984" version="1"
META FILEATTACHMENT	attachment="Skewed_Gaussian_Fit_to_Real_Stars.png" attr="" comment="Skewed Gaussian Fit to real data" date="1512699378" name="Skewed_Gaussian_Fit_to_Real_Stars.png" path="Skewed Gaussian Fit to Real Stars.png" size="46027" user="zavc984" version="1"
META FILEATTACHMENT	attachment="BothFitsonrealstars.png" attr="" comment="Gaussian and skewed gaussian on one graph" date="1512699455" name="BothFitsonrealstars.png" path="BothFitsonrealstars.png" size="62211" user="zavc984" version="1"

View topic | History: r1 | More topic actions...

Copyright © 2008-2023 by the contributing authors. All material on this collaboration platform is the property of the contributing authors.
Ideas, requests, problems regarding RHUL Physics Department TWiki? Send feedback