arXivDaily arXiv每日学术速递 周一至周五更新
arXiv周末暂无论文更新,休息一下吧,周末愉快~~
arXiv 2004.09328astro-ph.GA
收藏

λ21-cm星际HI剖面的高斯分解

Gaussian Decomposition of λ21-cm Interstellar HI profiles

G. L. Verschuur, J. T. Schmelz

摘要:

按照既定的科学协议,结果必须是可重复的,我们检查了高斯拟合银河系21厘米发射轮廓获得两个看似互补的方法:半自动化的方法,基于Verschuur(2004)使用的方法和Nidever等人的自动化技术。这两种方法都使用莱顿/阿根廷/波恩全天空巡天的数据。自动化程序的吸引力是巨大的,如果没有其他原因比半自动化的时间节省。然而,陷阱往往是不可预见的,任何算法最重要的方面是结果的可重复性。通过比较,Nidever等人(2008年)的分析发现了四个问题:(1)计算约化卡方测量拟合优度的不同方法;(2)发现一个超宽分量桥接低速和中速气体之间的差距;(3)缺乏强加的空间相干性,从而允许不同的分量在由光束宽度的一部分分离的轮廓中出现和消失;(4)银河系南北两极的剖面有多种根本不同的解。两步法将改进算法,其中自动拟合之后是质量保证目视检查。从这项研究中出现了一个普遍的组件,线宽为34公里/秒,这可能是由氦的临界电离速度(CIV)解释的证据。由于Nidever等人(2008)的论文包含了参考文献中唯一与CIV模型相矛盾的结果,因此理解导致这种矛盾的分析缺陷是很重要的。

英文摘要:

Following an established protocol of science, that results must be reproducible, we examine the Gaussian fits to Galactic 21-cm emission profiles obtained by two seemingly complementary methods: the semi-automated approach based on the method used by Verschuur (2004) and the automated technique of Nidever et al. (2008). Both methods use data from the Leiden/Argentine/Bonn all-sky survey. The appeal of an automated routine is great, if for no other reason than the time saved over semi-automated fits. The pitfalls, however, are often unanticipated, and the most important aspect of any algorithm is the reproducibility of the results. The comparisons led to the identification of four problems with the Nidever et al. (2008) analysis: (1) different methods of calculating the reduced chi-squared measuring the goodness of fit; (2) an ultra-broad component found bridging the gap between low and intermediate velocity gas; (3) the lack of an imposed spatial coherence allowing different components to appear and disappear in profiles separated by a fraction of a beam width; and (4) multiple, fundamentally different solutions for the profiles at both the North and South Galactic Poles. A two-step method would improve the algorithm, where an automated fit is followed by a quality-assurance, visual inspection. Confirming evidence emerges from this study of a pervasive component with a line width of order 34 km/s, which may be explained by the Critical Ionization Velocity (CIV) of helium. Since the Nidever et al. (2008) paper contains the only result in the refereed literature that contradicts the CIV model, it is important to understand the flaws in the analysis that let to this contradiction.

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。

↑