source: trunk/MagicSoft/TDAS-Extractor/Criteria.tex@ 6410

\section{Criteria for the Optimal Signal Extraction (STILL TO DO!!)}

\subsection{Resolution and Bias} 
\ldots {\textit{The jitter to identical input pulses is measured, for times, amplitudes, 
high-gain and low-gain pulses and different signal and background levels }}

\subsection{Stability}
\ldots {\textit The stability of an extractor to slightly varying pulse shapes is examined. }

\subsection{Linearity}
\ldots {\textit The Nuria plots ... }

\subsection{Treatment of Calibration Pulses}
\ldots {\textit In this section, the question of the different pulse shapes between calibration pulses, its 
secondary pulses, possible secondary pulses from hadronic showers and the typical Cherenkov 
pulses are extracted by the different extractors and typical dependencies examined, like the 
Razmik plot, the number of photo-electrons with number of slices, comparisons between different colours, etc.}

\subsection{Low Gain Extraction}
\ldots {\textit The stability of the low-gain extraction w.r.t. the high-gain extraction}

\subsection{Applicability for Different Sampling Speeds / No Pulse Shaping.}
\ldots {\textit Some comments by Hendrik ...}

\subsection{CPU Requirements}
\ldots {\textit The needed CPU time for each extractor}




\subsection{Pulpo Pulses}
\subsection{Cosmics Data?}
The results of this subsection are based on the following runs taken
on the 21st of September 2004.
\begin{itemize}
\item{Run 39000}: OffCrab11 at 19.1 degrees zenith angle and 106.2
azimuth.
\item{Run 39182}: CrabNebula at 19.0 degrees zenith angle and 106.0 azimuth.
\end{itemize}


%%% Local Variables: 
%%% mode: latex
%%% TeX-master: "MAGIC_signal_reco"
%%% End: