arXivDaily arXiv每日学术速递 周一至周五更新
arXiv 1303.2107astro-ph.COastro-ph.IM
收藏

再电离早期前景模式的精确度和准确度:比较MWA和PAPER 32天线源星表

The precision and accuracy of early Epoch of Reionization foreground models: comparing MWA and PAPER 32-antenna source catalogs

Daniel Jacobs, Judd Bowman, James Aguirre

摘要:

作为观测的再电离时代(EoR)在红移21厘米发射开始,我们评估的精度阵列探测再电离时代(PAPER)和默奇森宽场阵列的早期目录结果的准确性。MWA EoR方法的大部分灵敏度来自减去前景,精度<1%,而PAPER方法依赖于初级束的稳定性和对称性。两者都需要精确的通量校准来设置测量功率谱的幅度。这两种仪器在分辨率、灵敏度、天空覆盖范围和光谱范围方面非常相似,并从几乎同时的数据中产生目录。我们使用贝叶斯MCMC拟合方法来估计这两个仪器在相同的通量尺度上在20%以内,并发现图像大多是一致的。然后,我们通过比较两个重叠的MWA小平面来调查误差的来源,我们发现这些差异主要与初级光束的不准确模型有关,但也与由于CLEAN而导致的明亮光源中的相关误差有关。最后,我们建议减轻和更好地描述这些影响。

英文摘要:

As observations of the Epoch of Reionization (EoR) in redshifted 21cm emission begin, we asses the accuracy of the early catalog results from the Precision Array for Probing the Epoch of Reionization (PAPER) and the Murchison Widefield Array. The MWA EoR approach derives much of its sensitivity from subtracting foregrounds to <1% precision while the PAPER approach relies on the stability and symmetry of the primary beam. Both require an accurate flux calibration to set the amplitude of the measured power spectrum. The two instruments are very similar in resolution, sensitivity, sky coverage and spectral range and have produced catalogs from nearly contemporaneous data. We use a Bayesian MCMC fitting method to estimate that the two instruments are on the same flux scale to within 20% and find that the images are mostly in good agreement. We then investigate the source of the errors by comparing two overlapping MWA facets where we find that the differences are primarily related to an inaccurate model of the primary beam but also correlated errors in bright sources due to CLEAN. We conclude with suggestions for mitigating and better characterizing these effects.

机构、总结、中文摘要均由AI分析而来,可能存在错误,请以论文正文为准。

↑