发表机构
Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology（加州理工学院喷气推进实验室）
机构由 AI 辅助整理，请以论文原文为准。AI 中文总结
该研究为HWO日冕仪建立分析误差预算模型，将光学扰动传播至通量比噪声，证明稳定性分配需基于科学测试，并识别抑制、校准等关键限制机制。
AI 中文摘要
日冕仪稳定性分配必须保护行星测量，而不仅仅是满足对比度目标。残余星光既产生光子噪声，又干扰小视场扰动，将光学稳定性与探测可靠性耦合在一起。我们为宜居世界观测站（HWO）开发了一个模块化分析模型，采用其OS-1场景的简化两次滚动角差分成像实现。复场灵敏度、波前传感与控制、有限观测窗口、偏振和探测器校准均被传播至通量比噪声（FRN）和探测概率。联合访问高斯二次矩保留了差分偏差和交叉协方差；空间重叠/场相位决定了哪些扰动类似行星。一个6米、500纳米的基准测试表明，科学测试必须先于类别分配。对于115.46万亿分率（ppt）的正交行星、30,000个独立高斯搜索统计量以及10^{-3}的族系误报目标，20 ppt的FRN给出64.55%的条件探测功效；99%则需要14.94 ppt。在固定响应下，光子和校准噪声在8.11秒差距、100小时内耗尽了光学余量，因此仅靠更严格的稳定性无法恢复可行性。一个未被识别的、携带20%方差的高方差1%分量将模态容差收紧2.88倍；在相等的条件误报限制和相同平均功率目标下，一个理想且完全已知的状态标签可将该惩罚降至1.29。因此，要求既取决于光学响应，也取决于观测协议保留的信息。该框架识别了抑制、稳定性、校准或状态监测何时针对限制机制。数值容差是受控模型结果；飞行分配需要特定架构的响应和校准的扰动状态估计法则。
英文摘要
A coronagraph stability allocation must protect a planet measurement, not merely satisfy a contrast target. Residual starlight both generates photon noise and interferes with small field perturbations, coupling optical stability to detection reliability. We develop a modular analytic model for the Habitable Worlds Observatory (HWO), using a reduced two-roll angular-differential-imaging realization of its OS-1 scenario. Complex-field sensitivities, wavefront sensing/control, finite observing windows, polarization, detector calibration are propagated to flux-ratio noise (FRN) and detection probabilities. Joint-visit Gaussian quadratic moments retain differential bias, cross covariance; spatial overlap/field phase determine which disturbances resemble a planet. A 6-m, 500-nm benchmark shows why the science test must precede category allocation. For a 115.46-parts-per-trillion (ppt) quadrature planet, 30,000 independent Gaussian search statistics, and a $10^{-3}$ family-wise false-alarm objective, 20-ppt FRN gives 64.55% conditional detection power; 99% requires 14.94 ppt. Photon and calibration noise exhaust the optical remainder at 8.11 pc in 100 h under the fixed response, so tighter stability alone cannot restore feasibility. An unrecognized 1% high-variance component carrying twenty percent of the variance tightens the modal allowance by a factor of 2.88; an ideal, exactly known state label reduces that penalty to 1.29 under equal conditional false-alarm limits and the same average-power objective. Thus, requirements depend on both the optical response and the information retained by the observing protocol. The framework identifies when suppression, stability, calibration, or state monitoring addresses the limiting mechanism. Numerical tolerances are controlled model results; flight allocation requires architecture-specific responses and calibrated disturbance state-estimation laws.
Comments38 pages, 8 figures, and 9 tables
