### Checking fit validity

• p values give a probability, so should be normalised to 1.
• Found p value for each pixel, and summed over all pixels
• Found summed values as: 0.999999876234048 1
• Found previously around 80% signal and 20% background,
• Performed back of the envelope calculations to validate this, found s = 80%, b = 20% as was fitted.

### Skewed Gaussian

• Since our stars looked skewed, decided to fit skewed Gaussians.
• The new total function fitted, :
• Below are examples of fitted stars from one of our images:
• Well fitted stars seemed to have at around 1.
• Therefore, we could set our threshold for the boundary between 1 star and 2 stars as .
• It appears that the most bright stars have been fitted terribly and their are even bigger than 2. It seems that although the tails fit nicely, the fit cannot reach the required amplitude.
• Below are histograms for the same stars in the same order of
• This should have produced a Gaussian with mean 0 and standard deviation of 1.

• As one would expect, the bigger the , the further away the histogram is from a normalised Gaussian.

### Parameter errors generated with Monte Carlo

• Generated 40 images (100x100 pixels) of the same BRIGHT star.
• As before generated a star according to:
• Therefore, each pixel had a distinct pixel value.
• Added a background of 160 pixel values.
• Then for each pixel, its pixel value was taken as the mean value of the Poisson distribution and a new pixel value was then generated according to that distribution for the given pixel.
• The 40 images were fitted using our maximum likelihood fitting algorithm.
• For each parameter fitted the following was calculated:
• Bellow are the histograms for the above calculation:

• Decided to take the error on the parameter as the difference between the biggest and smalles fractional errors.
• Here is the fractional errors:
• An example with fitted parameters:
• Generated dimmer star to see how errors scaled:
• For a dim star, fractional errors:
• An example with fitted params:

### Observation 2

• Took a series of bias, dark and flat frames to check for variabilities and to figure out how long it took the cooling ring to disappear.
• Here is the progression of the cooling ring:
• The ring took 1hr50mins to dissapear.
• Took a selection of master frames for later analysis porpoises.
• We had a major problem, for some reason the average pixel value for the bias frame, the dark frame exposure time 30s and 60s were all around 900.

• We tried some initial removal of bias and flat frames:
• Original:
• Bias master frame removed (substracted bias):
• Master flat removed (divided by master flat):

-- DavidHadden - 01 Feb 2016

Topic attachments
I Attachment History Action Size Date Who Comment
png 1124_513.png r1 manage 110.5 K 04 Feb 2016 - 15:31 ElenaCukanovaite
png 1124_513_hist.png r1 manage 73.2 K 04 Feb 2016 - 16:56 ElenaCukanovaite
png 118_219.png r1 manage 103.6 K 04 Feb 2016 - 17:00 ElenaCukanovaite
png 118_219_hist.png r1 manage 69.1 K 04 Feb 2016 - 17:00 ElenaCukanovaite
png 1328_235.png r1 manage 89.8 K 04 Feb 2016 - 15:37 ElenaCukanovaite
png 1328_235_hist.png r1 manage 67.5 K 04 Feb 2016 - 17:02 ElenaCukanovaite
png 1_ring.png r1 manage 1187.4 K 04 Feb 2016 - 21:37 ElenaCukanovaite
png 3.png r1 manage 1054.5 K 04 Feb 2016 - 21:37 ElenaCukanovaite
png 5.png r1 manage 882.8 K 04 Feb 2016 - 21:37 ElenaCukanovaite
png 630_844.png r1 manage 108.7 K 04 Feb 2016 - 15:35 ElenaCukanovaite
png 630_844_hist.png r1 manage 75.1 K 04 Feb 2016 - 16:57 ElenaCukanovaite
png 724_479.png r1 manage 96.6 K 04 Feb 2016 - 17:02 ElenaCukanovaite
png 724_479_hist.png r1 manage 63.6 K 04 Feb 2016 - 17:02 ElenaCukanovaite
png 972_394.png r1 manage 98.8 K 04 Feb 2016 - 17:00 ElenaCukanovaite
png 972_394_hits.png r1 manage 64.1 K 04 Feb 2016 - 17:00 ElenaCukanovaite
png alpha_err.png r1 manage 32.4 K 04 Feb 2016 - 20:12 ElenaCukanovaite
png beta1_err.png r1 manage 28.5 K 04 Feb 2016 - 20:12 ElenaCukanovaite
png bias_1.png r1 manage 45.3 K 04 Feb 2016 - 21:40 ElenaCukanovaite
png bias_100.png r1 manage 43.5 K 04 Feb 2016 - 21:40 ElenaCukanovaite
png bias_removed.png r1 manage 991.1 K 04 Feb 2016 - 22:04 ElenaCukanovaite
png bias_removed_bg.png r1 manage 44.9 K 04 Feb 2016 - 22:09 ElenaCukanovaite
png bright.png r1 manage 94.9 K 04 Feb 2016 - 23:19 ElenaCukanovaite
png dim.png r1 manage 91.5 K 04 Feb 2016 - 23:19 ElenaCukanovaite
png flat_removed.png r1 manage 1008.0 K 04 Feb 2016 - 22:06 ElenaCukanovaite
png flat_removed_bg.png r1 manage 48.9 K 04 Feb 2016 - 22:06 ElenaCukanovaite
png master_bias.png r1 manage 44.5 K 04 Feb 2016 - 21:40 ElenaCukanovaite
png master_dark_30s.png r1 manage 46.7 K 04 Feb 2016 - 21:42 ElenaCukanovaite
png master_flat.png r1 manage 1165.0 K 04 Feb 2016 - 21:42 ElenaCukanovaite
png original.png r1 manage 647.2 K 04 Feb 2016 - 22:03 ElenaCukanovaite
png original_bg.png r1 manage 49.1 K 04 Feb 2016 - 22:03 ElenaCukanovaite
png rho_err.png r1 manage 29.7 K 04 Feb 2016 - 20:13 ElenaCukanovaite
png sigmax_err.png r1 manage 35.2 K 04 Feb 2016 - 20:13 ElenaCukanovaite

Physics WebpagesRHUL WebpagesCampus Connect • Royal Holloway, University of London, Egham, Surrey TW20 0EX; Tel/Fax +44 (0)1784 434455/437520

Topic revision: r6 - 04 Feb 2016 - ElenaCukanovaite

 Home Public Web P P P P P View Edit Account
Copyright © 2008-2022 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