Changeset 6415 for trunk/MagicSoft/TDAS-Extractor

Timestamp:

02/12/05 18:54:32 (20 years ago)

Author:

gaug

Message:

*** empty log message ***

Location:

trunk/MagicSoft/TDAS-Extractor

Files:

• Algorithms.tex (modified) (1 diff)
• Calibration.tex (modified) (5 diffs)

trunk/MagicSoft/TDAS-Extractor/Algorithms.tex

@@ -854 +854 @@
 \item[MExtractTimeAndChargeDigitalFilterPeakSearch]: with the following initialization:
 \resume{enumerate}
-\item SetWeightsFile(``calibration\_weights\_UV.dat''); SetRange(0,20,0,14); \\ 
+\item SetWeightsFile(``calibration\_weights4\_UV.dat''); SetRange(0,20,0,14); \\ 
    SetOffsetLeftFromPeak(3); SetOffsetRightFromPeak(3); \\
    SetPeakSearchWindowSize(2);

trunk/MagicSoft/TDAS-Extractor/Calibration.tex

@@ -1 @@
-\section{Calibration \label{sec:calibration}}
+
 
 In this section, we describe the tests performed using light pulses of different colour, 
@@ -81 +81 @@
 
 We used data taken on the 7$^{th}$ of June, 2004 with different pulser LED combinations, each taken with 
-16384 events. The corresponding MAGIC data run numbers range from nr. 31741 to 31772. These data was taken 
+16384 events. 19 different calibration configurations have been tested. 
+The corresponding MAGIC data run numbers range from nr. 31741 to 31772. These data was taken 
 before the latest camera repair access which resulted in a replacement of about 2\% of the pixels known to be 
 mal-functionning at that time.
@@ -128 +129 @@
 Moreover, the number of events are counted which have been reconstructed outside a 5 sigma region 
 from the mean signal. These events are called ``outliers''. Figure~\ref{fig:outlier} shows a typical 
-outlier obtained with the digital filter applied to a low-gain signal.
+outlier obtained with the digital filter applied to a low-gain signal and figure~\ref{fig:unsuited:all}
+shows the average number of all excluded pixels and outliers obtained from all 19 calibration configurations.
+One can already see that the largest window sizes yield a high number of un-calibrated pixels, mostly 
+due to the missing ability to recognize the low-intensity pulses (see later). One can also see that 
+the amplitude extracting spline yields a higher number of outliers than the rest of the extractors.
+The global champion in lowest number of un-calibrated pixels results to be 
+{\textit{\bf MExtractTimeAndChargeDigitalFilter}} with the correct calibration weights over 4 FADC slices 
+(extractor \#31). The one with the lowest number of outliers is 
+{\textit{\bf MExtractFixedWindowPeakSearch}} with an extraction range of 2 slices (extractor \#11). 
 
 \begin{figure}[htp]
@@ -140 +149 @@
 \end{figure}
 
+\begin{figure}[htp]
+\centering
+\includegraphics[height=0.75\textheight]{UnsuitVsExtractor-all.eps}
+\caption{Uncalibrated pixels and pixels outside of the Gaussian distribution averaged over all available 
+calibration runs.}
+\label{fig:unsuited:all}
+\end{figure}
+
 The following figures~\ref{fig:unsuited:5ledsuv},~\ref{fig:unsuited:1leduv},~\ref{fig:unsuited:2ledsgreen}
 and~\ref{fig:unsuited:23ledsblue} show the resulting numbers of un-calibrated pixels and events for 
@@ -183 +200 @@
 of the inner pixels (fig.~\ref{fig:unsuited:1leduv}). This is an expected behavior since big windows 
 add up more noise which in turn makes the search for the small signal more difficult.
-\par
-\ldots {\bf WHICH EXTRACTOR HAS THE LEAST NUMBER OF EXCLUDED PIXELS ???}
 \par
 In general, one can also find that all ``sliding window''-algorithms (extractors \#17-32) discard