Logged in as guest
Viewing Calibration/4719 Full headers
Private message: yes no
Notes: Notification:
Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2002 16:31:00 GMT From: nevalaj@email.uah.edu To: xmmhelp@xvsoc01.vilspa.esa.es CC: nevalaj@email.uah.edu Subject: CCD gap and bad pixel corrections
Full_Name: Jukka Nevalainen Submission from: (NULL) (146.229.9.129) What is the logic behind reducing the arfgen produced effective area by the ratio of the dead area within the source region to the good area? I mean, the effective area for given energy is not proportional to the geometric area, but is a weighted mean of the effective area values of the pixels in the area. In the public data sets the bad pixels are set to give 0 counts and thus in arfgen these pixels give no contribution to the effective area. So I think the correct way is not to correct for the bad pixels, as suggested and implemented in SAS.
From: Matthias Ehle <xmmhelp@xmm.vilspa.esa.es> To: nevalaj@email.uah.edu Subject: Re: CCD gap and bad pixel corrections (PR#4719) Date: Wed Feb 27 09:06:59 2002
Dear Jukka Nevalainen, thanks for your question and remarks. I have contacted our arfgen SAS expert and will let you know his anwer asap. Cheers, Matthias. Matthias Ehle XMM-Newton SOC User Support Group
From: Matthias Ehle <xmmhelp@xmm.vilspa.esa.es> To: nevalaj@email.uah.edu Subject: Re: CCD gap and bad pixel corrections (PR#4719) Date: Wed Feb 27 09:26:11 2002
Dear Jukka, please, find below the reply from the arfgen s/w developer: --- The answer to this depends on how you want to use the resulting ARF. If you have a point source you would like to know how much flux was emitted by the source. To find this you have to factor in the point spread function which tells you how much of the flux you have lost by taking a source area of finite size. The chip gaps and bad pixels can be thought of as part of the point spread function. For an extended source, if you are interested in the total flux emitted by the source then the above logic applies. If you want the surface brightness, i.e. the flux per unit area, then it is not correct to take account of the chip gaps or bad pixels because these are already handled in the calculation which gives the area on the sky, i.e. the BACKSCAL keyword. In this case withbadpixcorr=no should be set on the arfgen command line. This is a touch philosophical but if you think of it from the PSF perspective it makes sense. --- I hope this answers your question... Best regards, Matthias.