- Timestamp:
- 02/20/05 18:41:58 (20 years ago)
- Location:
- trunk/MagicSoft/TDAS-Extractor
- Files:
-
- 3 edited
Legend:
- Unmodified
- Added
- Removed
-
trunk/MagicSoft/TDAS-Extractor/Calibration.tex
r6635 r6640 821 821 \Delta t \approx \frac{\delta t_{\mathrm{TTS}}}{\sqrt{Q/{\mathrm{phe}}}} 822 822 \end{equation} 823 \item The reconstruction error due to the background noise: This contribution is proportional to the 824 signal to square root of background light intensities. 823 \item The reconstruction error due to the background noise and limited extractor resolution: 824 This contribution is inversely proportional to the signal to square root of background light intensities. 825 \begin{equation} 826 \Delta t \approx \frac{\delta t_{\mathrm{rec}} \cdot R/\mathrm{phe}}{Q/{\mathrm{phe}}} 827 \end{equation} 828 where $R$ is the resolution defined in equation~\ref{eq:def:r}. 829 \item A constant offset due to the residual FADC clock jitter~\cite{florian} 830 \begin{equation} 831 \Delta t \approx \delta t_0 832 \end{equation} 825 833 \end{enumerate} 826 834 827 Additionally to these intrinsic and irreducible contributions to the timing resolutions, the limited precision of the 828 extractors adds an additional time spread. In the following, we show measurements of the time resolutions at different 835 In the following, we show measurements of the time resolutions at different 829 836 signal intensities in real conditions for the calibration pulses. These set upper limits to the time resolution for cosmics since their 830 837 intrinsic arrival time spread is smaller. … … 884 891 \clearpage 885 892 886 887 \begin{figure}[htp] 888 \centering 889 \includegraphics[width=0.47\linewidth]{TimeResVsCharge-Area-21.eps} 890 \includegraphics[width=0.47\linewidth]{TimeResVsCharge-Area-24.eps} 891 \vspace{\floatsep} 892 \includegraphics[width=0.47\linewidth]{TimeResVsCharge-Area-30.eps} 893 \includegraphics[width=0.47\linewidth]{TimeResVsCharge-Area-31.eps} 893 The following figure~\ref{fig:time:dep} shows the time resolution for various calibration runs taken with different colours 894 and light intensities as a funcion of the mean number of photo-electrons -- 895 reconstructed with the F-Factor method -- for four different time extractors. The dependencies have been fit to the following 896 empirical relation: 897 898 \begin{equation} 899 \Delta T = \sqrt{\frac{A^2}{<Q>/{\mathrm{phe}}} + \frac{B^2}{<Q>^2/{\mathrm{phe^2}}} + C^2} . 900 \label{eq:time:fit} 901 \end{equation} 902 903 The fit results are summarized in table~\ref{tab:time:fitresults}. 904 905 \begin{table}[htp] 906 \scriptsize{% 907 \centering 908 \begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|} 909 \hline 910 \hline 911 \multicolumn{10}{|c|}{\large Time Fit Results} \rule{0mm}{6mm} \rule[-2mm]{0mm}{6mm} \hspace{-3mm}\\ 912 \hline 913 \hline 914 \multicolumn{2}{|c|}{} & \multicolumn{4}{|c|}{\normalsize Inner Pixels} & \multicolumn{4}{|c|}{\normalsize Outer Pixels} \rule{0mm}{6mm} \rule[-2mm]{0mm}{4mm} \hspace{-3mm}\\ 915 \hline 916 {\normalsize Nr.} & {\normalsize Name } & {\normalsize A} & {\normalsize B } & {\normalsize C }& {\normalsize $\chi^2$/NDF } 917 & {\normalsize A } &{\normalsize B} & {\normalsize C} &{\normalsize $\chi^2$/NDF} \rule{0mm}{6mm} \rule[-2mm]{0mm}{4mm} \hspace{-3mm} \\ 918 \hline 919 21 & Sliding Window (8,8) & 3.5$\pm$0.4 & 29$\pm$1 & 0.24$\pm$0.05 & 10.2 &6.0$\pm$0.7 & 52$\pm$4 & 0.23$\pm$0.04 & 4.3 \\ 920 25 & Spline Half Max. & 1.9$\pm$0.2 & 3.8$\pm$1.0 & 0.15$\pm$0.02 & 1.6 &2.6$\pm$0.2 &8.3$\pm$1.9 & 0.15$\pm$0.01 & 2.3 \\ 921 32 & Digital Filter (6 sl.) & 1.7$\pm$0.2 & 5.7$\pm$0.8 & 0.21$\pm$0.02 & 5.0 &2.3$\pm$0.3 &13 $\pm$2 & 0.20$\pm$0.01 & 4.0 \\ 922 33 & Digital Filter (4 sl.) & 1.7$\pm$0.1 & 4.6$\pm$0.7 & 0.21$\pm$0.02 & 6.2 &2.3$\pm$0.2 &11 $\pm$2 & 0.20$\pm$0.01 & 5.3 \\ 923 \hline 924 \hline 925 \end{tabular} 926 \caption{The fit results obtained from the fit of equation~\ref{eq:time:fit} to the time resolutions obtained for various 927 intensities and colours. The fit probabilities are very small mainly because of the different intrinsic arrival time spreads of 928 the photon pulses from different colours. } 929 \label{tab:time:fitresults}. 930 } 931 \end{table} 932 933 The low fit probabilities are partly due to the systematic differences in the pulse forms in intrinsic arrival time spreads between 934 pulses of different LED colours. Nevertheless, we had to include all colours in the fit to cover the full dynamic range. In general, 935 one can see that the time resolutions for the UV pulses are systematically better than for the other colours which we attribute to the fact 936 the these pulses have a smaller intrinsic pulse width -- which is very close to pulses from cosmics. Moreover, there are clear differences 937 visible between different time extractors, especially the sliding window extractor yields poor resolutions. The other three extractors are 938 compatible within the errors, with the half-maximum of the spline being slightly better. 939 940 \par 941 942 To summarize, we find that we can obtain a time resolution of better than 1\,ns for all pulses above a threshold of 5\ photo-electrons. 943 This corresponds roughly to the image cleaning threshold in case of using the best signal extractor. At the largest signals, we can 944 reach a time resolution of as good as 200\,ps. 945 \par 946 The expected time resolution for inner pixels and cosmics pulses can thus be conservatively estimated to be: 947 948 \begin{equation} 949 \Delta T_{\mathrm{cosmics}} \approx \sqrt{\frac{4\,\mathrm{ns}^2}{<Q>/{\mathrm{phe}}} + \frac{20\,\mathrm{ns}^2}{<Q>^2/{\mathrm{phe^2}}} + 0.04\,\mathrm{ns}^2} . 950 \label{eq:time:fitprediction} 951 \end{equation} 952 953 \begin{landscape} 954 \begin{figure}[htp] 955 \centering 956 \includegraphics[width=0.24\linewidth]{TimeResFitted-21.eps} 957 \includegraphics[width=0.24\linewidth]{TimeResFitted-25.eps} 958 \includegraphics[width=0.24\linewidth]{TimeResFitted-32.eps} 959 \includegraphics[width=0.24\linewidth]{TimeResFitted-33.eps} 894 960 \caption{Reconstructed mean arrival time resolutions as a function of the extracted mean number of 895 961 photo-electrons for the weighted sliding window with a window size of 8 slices (extractor \#21, top left), 896 the half-maximum searching spline (extractor \#24, top right),897 the digital filter with UV calibration-pulse weights over 6 slices (extractor \#30, bottom left)898 and the digital filter with UV calibration-pulse weights over 4 slices (extractor \#31, bottom rigth).962 the half-maximum searching spline (extractor~\#25, top right), 963 the digital filter with correct pulse weights over 6 slices (extractor~\#30 and~\#32, bottom left) 964 and the digital filter with UV calibration-pulse weights over 4 slices (extractor~\#31 and~\#33, bottom rigth). 899 965 Error bars denote the spread (RMS) of time resolutions of the investigated channels. 900 966 The marker colours show the applied … … 902 968 \label{fig:time:dep} 903 969 \end{figure} 904 905 \subsubsection{An Upper Limit for the Average Intrinsic Time Spread of the Photo-multipliers} 906 907 908 909 \begin{figure}[htp]910 \centering911 \includegraphics[width=0.32\linewidth]{TimeResVsSqrtPhe-Area-24.eps}912 \includegraphics[width=0.32\linewidth]{TimeResVsSqrtPhe-Area-30.eps}913 \includegraphics[width=0.32\linewidth]{TimeResVsSqrtPhe-Area-31.eps}914 \caption{Reconstructed arrival time resolutions as a function of the square root of the915 extimated number of photo-electrons for the half-maximum searching spline (extractor \#24, left) a916 and the digital filter with the calibration pulse weigths fitted to UV pulses over 6 FADC slices (extractor \#30, center)917 and the digital filter with the calibration pulse weigths fitted to UV pulses over 4 FADC slices (extractor \#31, right).918 The time resolutions have been fitted from919 The marker colours show the applied920 pulser colour, except for the last (green) point where all three colours were used.}921 \label{fig:time:fit2430}922 \end{figure}970 \end{landscape} 971 972 The above resolution seems to be already limited by the intrinsic resolution of the photo-multipliers and the staggering of the 973 mirrors in case of the MAGIC-I telescope. 974 975 %\begin{figure}[htp] 976 %\centering 977 %\includegraphics[width=0.32\linewidth]{TimeResVsSqrtPhe-Area-24.eps} 978 %\includegraphics[width=0.32\linewidth]{TimeResVsSqrtPhe-Area-30.eps} 979 %\includegraphics[width=0.32\linewidth]{TimeResVsSqrtPhe-Area-31.eps} 980 %\caption{Reconstructed arrival time resolutions as a function of the square root of the 981 %extimated number of photo-electrons for the half-maximum searching spline (extractor \#24, left) a 982 %and the digital filter with the calibration pulse weigths fitted to UV pulses over 6 FADC slices (extractor \#30, center) 983 %and the digital filter with the calibration pulse weigths fitted to UV pulses over 4 FADC slices (extractor \#31, right). 984 %The time resolutions have been fitted from 985 %The marker colours show the applied 986 %pulser colour, except for the last (green) point where all three colours were used.} 987 %\label{fig:time:fit2430} 988 %\end{figure} 923 989 924 990 -
trunk/MagicSoft/TDAS-Extractor/Criteria.tex
r6621 r6640 38 38 \end{equation} 39 39 40 has the mean $B$ and the Variance$R$ defined as:40 has the mean $B$ and the resolution $R$ defined as: 41 41 42 42 \begin{eqnarray} 43 43 B \ \ \ \ = \ \ \ \ \ \ <X> \ \ \ \ \ &=& \ \ <\widehat{S}> \ -\ S\\ 44 R^2 \ \ \ \ = \ <(X-B)^2> &=& \ Var[\widehat{S}] \\44 R^2 \ \ \ \ = \ <(X-B)^2> &=& \ Var[\widehat{S}] \label{eq:def:r}\\ 45 45 MSE \ = \ \ \ \ \ <X^2> \ \ \ \ &=& \ Var[\widehat{S}] +\ B^2 46 46 \end{eqnarray} -
trunk/MagicSoft/TDAS-Extractor/MAGIC_signal_reco.bbl
r6562 r6640 84 84 \newblock http://wwwmagic.mppmu.mpg.de/publications/theses/David\_thesis.ps.gz. 85 85 86 \bibitem{florian} 87 F.~Goebel, 88 \newblock private communication. 89 86 90 \end{thebibliography}
Note:
See TracChangeset
for help on using the changeset viewer.