Page History

• ms_v21.pdf,

• emailed

• to

• him

• on

• 2012-08-01

• Catherine work out an analytic model (what does all this mean?!?)
• ALL think about MWB comment about frame-to-frame

• variations

• in

• background

• effect

• the

• FWHM;

• CI

• overwhelms

• the

• variation;

• Eric maintain action items page

• characterize non-IA-CTI

• gain

• changes

• in

• XIS

• with

• Perseus
  • Eric send Bev Perseus event lists for PHA/PI

• • reconstruction
  • Bev reconstruct Perseus PHA/PI

• • values

• • and

• • send

• • back

• • to

• • Eric

• • 20120209

• • -

• • check

• • out

• • the

• • plots

• • in

• • the

• • Data

• • Products

• • page
  • come up with some metric for constraining non-CTI

• • gain

• • changes

• • (in

• • IA);

• • intercept

• • of

• • central

• • pixel

• • PH

• • vs.

• • y
  • Bev fit central pixel PHAs for Perseus data
    • like Catherine predicted, it's looking awfully hopeless (14feb12)
    • actually, it's not looking hopeless after all and Bev will keep working on it (1mar12)
    • still might be hopeless, but Bev believes it's possible to calculate CTI, but might not be interesting (might not constrain non-CTI gain changes); Bev will keep working on it (10apr12); perhaps we don't need this, summed pulseheight is better (31may12)
  • Bev fit summed pulseheights in perseus data for a few Y regions, intercept of fit line should be ~ non-CTI gain change (actually non-CTI-in-IA

• • change)

• • • Bev will overplot FI/BI,

• • • CI

• • • on/off

• • • intercepts

• • • on

• • • single

• • • plot,

• • • in

• • • terms

• • • of

• • • fractional

• • • change
    • Bev will get linear fit to trend for CI on; this will be upper limit to non-CTI-in-IA

• • • change
    • use Gehrels weighting
    • Bev will change the y-axis
    • Catherine will incorporate into the paper

• Bev recompute XIS gain/FWHM vs. COR2 fits for Catherine, but using COR2 and Gehrels weighting
  • Bev check the COR2 = 11,12,13

• • fits

• • visually

• • to

• • see

• • if

• • they

• • are

• • acceptable

• • chi-by-eye-wise

• • Eric will figure out the COR2 value during the XIS raw frame observations
    • 20120716 – COR2 = 12.0-14.1

• • • during

• • • the

• • • 10

• • • raw

• • • frames;

• • • frame

• • • 2

• • • is

• • • the

• • • one

• • • in

• • • the

• • • paper,

• • • and

• • • that

• • • has

• • • COR2=12.8

• • Eric will try to estimate the error in CTI/FWHM

• • values

• • in

• • COR

• • bins

• • (Bev

• • will

• • send

• • him

• • spectra)

• • • IDL

• • • gets

• • • about

• • • the

• • • correct

• • • uncertainties

• • • if

• • • weighted

• • • by

• • • 1/cts

• • • Bev will do this for all of the COR2 bins
    • Catherine put errorbars on COR2 figures, and say that they're small if they are
    • all think about why FWHM at COR2 10-14 are significantly different

• Catherine and Bev will refit everything using Gehrels weighting
  • ACIS cal source gain and FWHM vs. time
  • XIS cal source gain and FWHM vs. time and COR2
  • XIS Perseus for non-IA-CTI measure

• Eric see if there is change in XIS BG with time on longer baseline than Tawa, modulo COR2
  • 2012-09-14 seems to be for XIS1, count rate is decreasing @ 3% per year - see Data Products
  • try all COR, extend energy to 5 keV, look at COR histogram w/ time
  • BI different from FI, looking at hot pixels and charge injection trailing rows, look at Ni-K line ???

• Bev make example spectra for XIS BI, ACIS BI early in mission on one plot (or whatever she thinks is good).
  • don't overlay fits. try on same plot or as multiple panels.
  • use energy as x-axis, range 1-10 keV, linear X and Y axes.
  • 2012-09-06 Bev showed samples and Catherine and Eric made suggestions for changes

• Catherine continue to write
  • still need a general reference for radiation damage in CCDs
  • "gain" decrease could include framestore CTI, confess
  • use percent or fraction to express CTI and gain changes (not ADU or eV) (2012-07-27)
  • more warnings, not representative of user data, unprocessed/uncorrected
  • all look at Fig 8 and think about interesting features to point out/annotate (rocket ships, framestore wackiness, etc.)--wait to see if this is appropriate in context of final text
  • Bev and Eric read what Catherine has written so far and comment, suggest places that need references (comments incorporated through 2012-05-22)
  • Eric read paper and comment; especially section on changing XIS bg, and provide numbers for change (no figures)

• Eric make particle background spectrum plot
• Catherine incorporate particle background spectrum plot into paper

• future work
  • think about ways to construct ground experiment to test on-orbit results
  • use Co-60, tritium/e- source
  • Bev will ask Steve about using CI to mimic particles
    • can charge level be set on a pixel-by-pixel basis?

Completed Action Items

• ALL have an outline for Mark
  • outline is sent to Mark (2011-01-28)
  • here is a link to an attachment: Outline PDF
  • 20100210--comments from Mark here
• Eric combine outlines
• Eric convert action items page
• ALL decide on common CTI metric (which grades, which pixels in island, which rows)
  • use center pixels
  • XIS cal source regions-
  • both use all telemetered grades (minus 255 for XIS, minus 5 Bev grades for ACIS, S3 only uses g02)
  • Bev will try restricting grades, esp. for BI
  • 2011-05-05 decision to not pursue CTI metric for XIS
• Bev make CTI plots for XIS upper rows (1 month bins)
  • 20110210Bev has IDL script set up, pixel fits (center pixel pulseheight and trailing pixel) are working for all detectors/quads, CTI calculation is not working completely
  • Catherine replicate same plots for ACIS, pending Bev's results
  • 2011-05-05 decision to not pursue CTI metric for XIS
• Catherine replicate existing Bev plot (monthly plots of FWHM, summed pulseheight centroid)
  • 20110210--CEG has framework set up, waiting on flaky disk
  • 20110217--CEG posted plots to Data Products
  • 20110407--CEG made plots for IACHEC, For paper, want just combined plots, peaks (eV)/5894 eV – same y-range, widths in FWHM (eV)
• Eric add space for Leaky Buckets presentations (posters, talks slides) to Publications page (20110620--CEG)
• 20110407--CEG a few slides for IACHEC, summarizing our goals and what we're doing IACHEC slides
• We should talk about the mechanics of writing the paper. Does Eric keep a master copy and we send text and revisions to him? Do we post a master copy here that we can check-out to edit ourselves?
  • Eric will keep master version of tex file, update wiki on occasion
  • Bev and Catherine can borrow tex tarball for big jobs
• Catherine's Suzaku poster wishlist:
  • Peak & FWHM vs COR for early (CI off) and late (CI on) for XIS1 and XIS3 (Thank you Bev!)
• Catherine send to Bev copy of her line fitting (20110607, and the forgotten bits on 20110620)
• Catherine show that line centroid is good proxy for CTI (20110621--CEG posted to Data Products)
  • then we can just use that and not worry about XIS CTI metric
• Catherine spot check line fits (20110621--CEG convinced that results are consistent between different bkg levels and src count rates)
• Catherine convince herself that ACIS QE drop goes away with CTI correction (20110622--mostly goes away. QE drop goes from ~12% to ~3% over 11 years)
• Catherine find the cut-and-paste text from previous ACIS papers, send to Eric (20110705--sent some text from SPIE2007 paper)
• Catherine make half-life plots
  • 20110324--CEG posted plots to Data Products
• Bev find the cut-and-paste text from previous XIS papers, send to Eric
• Catherine make XIS half-life plots using Bev's data which use Catherine's fitting method (20111018)
  • 20111028--CEG doesn't make much difference, XIS1 line flux is still weird
• Bev make new plots of line center and FWHM vs. COR using Catherine's fitting method
  • from 2008 paper, will look for script that made them and verify that it's still flat; revisit with non-XIS2 devices
  • 20110504--bev posted xis1 & xis3 plots for 201101 to Data Products
  • Catherine will think about equivalent for ACIS, flat FWHM, but are FI wiggles due to background wiggles? compile bkg data in same time bins
    • 20110816--actually confirmed this a while ago and forgot to update, the FI wiggles are not correlated with the background, ACIS FWHM is not strongly sensitive to sacrificial charge
• Eric begin latex document for A&A (downloaded A&A template)
• Eric look for pictures of XIS for schematic
• Eric look into A&A photo and color policies
  • color figures are E250 each for 1 or 2, E180 each for 3 or more; should be in CMYK, not RGB; online (PDF?) color figures are free, but will be greyscaled in print version
  • page charges are E100 per printed page
  • no specific photo policy
• Eric look into figure format (titles, fonts, etc.) policy
  • no specific policy about title, but looking at several papers, none of the figures have them
  • no specific policy about fonts, we should just be consistent
• ALL think about whether to include trailing charge info for both instruments
  • not very fruitful; XIS is limited to the top of the array, so hard to separate trailing charge from normal event splitting; also SCI will complicate this
  • Catherine. Look at Bev's plots (http://space.mit.edu.ezproxyberklee.flo.org/XIS/monitor/ccdperf

• • ),

• • get

• • a

• • sense

• • how

• • ACIS

• • would

• • look

• • on

• • the

• • same

• • kind

• • of

• • plot.

• • Qualitatively,

• • how

• • much

• • does

• • trailing

• • charge

• • matter.

• • (20111031--CEG,

• • plots

• • on

• • data

• • products

• • page)

• Bev make gain/FWHM

• vs.

• COR

• plots

• for

• XIS3,

• Oct+Nov

• 2006

• (20111028--done)

• • see

• • if

• • it's

• • as

• • good

• • as

• • XIS2

• • previous

• • plots

• • send

• • data

• • to

• • Catherine

• • for

• • paper

• • figures

• • (20111028--done,

• • figures

• • to

• • be

• • added

• • to

• • tar

• • ball

• • shortly)

• Catherine change fig captions for gain/FWHM

• vs.

• COR;

• data

• are

• for

• ~

• 1

• month

• (or

• 2)

• straddling

• CI

• turning

• on,

• and

• for

• XIS2

• (or

• XIS3)

• Catherine send paper appropriate figures to Eric (20111031--CEG

• In

• progress.

• See

• Data

• Products

• for

• new

• versions

• and

• one

• new

• one)

• and

• recipe

• to

• bev.

• bev will give catherine pre-launch

• CTI

• values

• for

• xis.

• • from http://space.mit.edu.ezproxyberklee.flo.org/XIS/about/lamarr_spie_5501_385.pdf

• • Figure

• • 4;

• • BI

• • (8c2)

• • =

• • 0.55,

• • FI

• • =

• • 0.30-0.35

• Eric make schematic diagrams (20111121--EDM,

• see

• Data

• Products

• Item

• 9

• )
  • Eric edit ACIS schematic to make cal source regions squares (for XIS too?)
  • Eric add CI rows and coord axes and move S3 aimpoint
  • Eric fix crappy lines and circles (20111220--EDM

• • done)

• Bev confirm that ACIS and XIS are using the same high energy reject metric; time units and spatial area? what is being rejected on-board?
  • XIS uses only cal source area, ~ 9-10% of full 1024x1024
  • Bev rejects summed event PHA of >= 3750 on ground to match ACIS rejection; but some single pixels are rejected on board XIS, possibly below 3750
  • seems no way to compare XIS rejection to ACIS
  • also dependence on input energy spectrum
  • Bev will look for XIS frame data to see how well the background metric matches that of ACIS
  • Bev will grab raw frames for the paper to show background, and bias-correct; XIS BI & FI, CI on & off, ACIS BI & FI
  • Bev add labels to colorbar (horizontal), add frames around each FOV, fix ACIS bias levels
  • Bev will upload final frame EPS files and colorbar to wiki
  • Eric choose best Bev frame images
  • Eric help Catherine with latex layout of raw frames and colorbar
• Catherine change A4 formatting to Letter in dvips
  • 2012-01-10 probably actually an A&A issue
• Eric tell Bev which raw frames to annotate
• Bev add "ACIS FI" etc. to upper right corner of the four raw frame PS files
• Bev search for reference on XIS Lesser process for thinning BI
  • Section 4 of Mark's 2004 spie paper (available locally at http://space.mit.edu.ezproxyberklee.flo.org/XIS/about/bautz_5501_14_4june.pdf

• • )

• • discusses

• • this

• • improvement.

• •  He references  M. Lesser and V. Iyer, “Enhancing the back illuminated performance of astronomical CCDs,” Proc. SPIE 3355, pp. 446--456,

• • 1998.

• •   B. E.

• • Burke,

• • J.

• • A.

• • Gregory,

• • A.

• • H.

• • Loomis,

• • M.

• • Lesser,

• • M.

• • W.

• • Bautz,

• • S.

• • E.

• • Kissel,

• • D.

• • D.

• • Rathman,

• • R.

• • M.

• • Osgood,

• • M.

• • J.

• • Cooper,

• • T.

• • A.

• • Lind,

• • and

• • G.

• • R.

• • Ricker,

• • “CCD

• • soft-X-ray

• • detectors

• • with

• • improved

• • high

• • -

• • and

• • low-energy

• • performance,”

• • IEEE

• • Trans.

• • Nuclear

• • Science

• • in

• • press,

• • 2004.

• • Catherine add comment in paper or Table 1 about different BI processes. 2012-02-01

• • added

• • comment

• • in

• • v11.

• • it's

• • pretty

• • vague

• • but

• • it's

• • there,

• • still

• • needs

• • an

• • XIS

• • reference
• Catherine add paragraph to end of Section 2.2?

• on

• how

• we're

• only

• analyzing

• parallel

• CTI,

• serial

• CTI

• (define

• them)

• is

• low

• except

• for

• ACIS

• BI,

• because

• of

• different

• BI

• process;

• therefore

• we're

• not

• talking

• about

• serial

• CTI

• cause

• it

• hasn't

• changed

• • 2012-02-01

• • added

• • to

• • Sec.

• • 2.1

• • in

• • v11

Retired

2012-09-13

• Bev will plot and understand HE rejects for XIS vs time and COR; do BI first
  • will probably not help for paper; use cumulative charge above 100 ADU instead
• Bev check whether she used COR or COR2; will try to get COR2 via ehk files
• Catherine continue to think about temperature dependence of CTI (finish writing up)
• Catherine (with Bev input) write text explanations of data processing to all figures in paper
• Catherine rename bibtex file to leaky bucket specific
  • 2012-02-02 v12 of paper uses leakb.bib
• Bev look bright Earth data O line w/ time to look for non-CTI gain changes
  • decided it's the wrong energy, not sure about light leak, use Perseus instead
• Bev will count particle events on raw frames (or rather pixels above some threshold that she will choose)
  • Bev showed cumulative charge vs. threshold; will determine value for 100 ADU threshold for all frames, and that will give estimate of how BG varies
• Bev will make plots of spectra around Mn Kalpha for XIS3, SCI off and on, 2006-10 to 2006-11
• Catherine look at Tawa et al 2008 paper to see time- (COR-) dependence of XIS background