SDAST weekly chat meeting #71: Thursday 30th January 2003 participants: Peter Kretschmar, Silvia Martinez-Nuñez, Sami Maisala, Stefan Larsson, Jerome Chenevez, Carol Anne Oxborrow Subjects discussed: SDAST meeting in Valencia Science results: spectral extraction; EXO2030 period analysis; Status flag: `4' value Dead anodes: none new since Dec 2002 IMOD group update Detailed descriptions for Masha's UM ISDC informal review of the analysis status Action Items: AI030130.1: ALL End-Feb 2003 Find travel times to Valencia for OPEN SDAST meeting to aid planning of meeting and agenda **** Logging Started : Thu Jan 30 12:57:45 MET 2003 > Hi Silvia, I think you're the only one who's aware of the 14.00 arrangement > I haven't heard from any of the others yet - not even Peter, so we may have > to postpone things til 15.00 anyway. EDN > I've just got an email from NJW: he can't chat today, and if you and Jerome > can't make it at 15.00, we may have to cancel till next week. END Hej Carol Anne ! Could you please give a call to Peter, to confirm the time ? END I am with Victor ! END *** peter (~pkretsch@isdcul9.unige.ch) has joined channel #jemxadr Hello Peter and Silvia! *** larsson (~larsson@tenma.dsri.dk) has joined channel #jemxadr Hi all, Sami is here with me and trying to connect. END > Hello Victor, it's wonderful that you could join us! END Well, Victor is discussing with me real data analysis in EXO 2030 ! That is all ! END So have you got more from EXO 2030? *** smaisala (~smaisala@gemini.astro.Helsinki.FI) has joined channel #jemxadr > NJW will not be joining us today - but it's great to see so many of you > here! Wherever `here' is! END Yes, I am working on it ! I will send an email aroud asasp END Following your suggestions of last week, I finally got teh same result s as you, I guess. END > Let's get started: Moved to the top of the agenda by popular request: > where and when to have the next SDAST meeting? I think we've all got an > inkling of where. Ideas, comments, restrictions? END Hi there. END > Hi Sami! END Do you guys prefer on thursday and friday or monday and tuesday ? Last week of March or firts week of April ? END firts = first ! Monday-Tuesd. END So 1st week april END Weekdays are less of a problem. So would March 31 + April 1 work for all of us? The following week I'm booked as duty scientist at ISDC. 31 st March - 1 th April END END OK. END Good. END > Mon-Tues is good for me, as is !st week April END Sami, 31st March - 1st April ? END I think it's fine. END > Sounds good Silvia END Is that long enough? When shall we start, on monday? Perfect, I hope NJW is available ! END Starting on Monday around noon is probably OK. END Early afternoon, as usual ! O better early morning and then to finish on tuesday during the morning ! END Fine ! Firts, check your flights timetables ! END It is fine if we can start early afternoon, so we can fly on the morning. END I'll try to spend the weekend before in the area, visiting Barcelona as well. END > I cannot find NJW, so we'll have assume he can make it. I assume we'll actually I am not sure about that Jerome, I will send to you, CAO && NJW, info about flights timetables.END Thank you! END > have to travel on Sunday afternoon. So do we start at 9.00 on Monday morning? > END Let's see this once we have the timetables. How about an action on ever yone to find out if they can fly on Monday or have to come on Sunday anyway?END In the latter case, we should start Monday morning. END I agree. END I guess the same goes for me (arrival during weekend). END > So that's when and where settled. The rest depends on our timetables. So > on to next point: Science results. Who wants to start Silvia? END The work is on progress ( Victor phrase!) . We are getting spectra rev. 19 ( from EXO 2030), and trying to do the same with the data from rev. 20! Using the new GAIN CAL IDX tables producced by PK. I will send an e-amil around asasp with more details ! END Be careful with interpretation of the spectra. The extraction is not verified yet. Cyg X-1 showed differences compared to XTE PCA. END Thanks Stefan ! We are just trying to understand the software and the data ! END Fine, that is how we will learn. END Are you looking into those differences, Stefan? END I whould like to ask something, about the quamtum efficiency table. Has been updated ? It seems that the one available in jmx%d_imod_grp.fits ( 13) is the old one based on calibration on earth . END I will/should. Right now I prefer to wait for NJs whould = would, sorry ! END update of detector resolution in the detector model. These values affect the spectral slope. END OK - Carol Anne, could you check with Niels Jørgen on when he thinks we can get better numbers there? I'm a bit worried about getting stuck with everybody waiting for results from someone else. Obtaining more believable spectra is urgent! END I'll increment my priority flag a few steps for that point... END > And, I'll check where NJW is with this - I know he's working on a new IMOD > now END Thanks a lot. From my side you've seen almost all there is to say. I'll generate lightcurve of Cen X-3 with 0.2 sec resolution next so Stefan can try period searching. END > Any other science results? END No END I have sent around some of the EXO2030 period analysis I have done. I still have to do it a little more systematic. I have also looked at the Cyg X-3 data ( rev 23 I think). Osmi Vilhu is comparing with XTE PCA light curves. they agree quite well, except for one of the observations which looks a little strange. (But that was not simultaneous). END > Thanks for all the interesting science results you've all been sending around But the flux levels would also be affected by the problems we seem to have with spectra, right? > Unfortunately I don't have time to study it in detail but it's nice to know END > someone's looking at this stuff. END To Peter: Yes, the extraction is more or less identical. END Next iten? > Any other science comments? END Nothing new from my part. I have just analysed parts of rev. 19 during observation of EXO 2030, looking at sources detection, light curve and spectrum, as you other I guess. But I would like to ask (Stefan) if it will be necessary to set the hidden parameters LCR_rowSelect and SPE_rowSelect with "STTAUS<256"? Sorry "STATUS" END Unless the new STATUS values have been introduced, you should do so. END In some sense this is more a problem of j_cor_gain. I've noticed that the events are still flagged with '4' - is that expected Carol Anne? END > No that isn't expected, there's going to be a complete overhaul of the > STATUS flag, with more specific values: some that are trivial, some that > are important, like uncertain gain correction and NO gain correction (default > values used) END > Unfortuately we really have to hurry at this end: our server's being shut > down at 14.30 END Well 15 o' clock, finally! END > Generally, with the new j_cor_gain time variation model I expect the ubiquitous >`4' value to disappear: everything should be able to get some good gain value. > I'm more confident of this now than I was just a couple of hours ago. END Sounds good. END Any news about dead anodes (itm 2 of our agenda)? END Well, I guess it is my turn. Keeping in mind that I have only been able to look at the data until the end of the PV phase, that is 29/12/02, it is seems that the last time an anode was dying on JEMX1 was before the 20/12/02 (and it is even not absolutely sure it was a real death...). As regards JEMX2 there has not been any more dead anodes since the 12/11/02. This means that the final reduction of HV on both JEMX seems to have solved the problem (until now :-). So the actual status is that there are not more than something between 15 and 20 dead anodes on each instrument. That is just a confirmation of what Niels Lund sent earlier this week. END > Niels is confident there hasn't been a new dead anode in 6 weeks. We have a > few that are unstable which sort of die and then come back to life: > 106 and 105 and 151 on JEM-x1 and 150 on JEM-X2. Happily these were anodes > for which we had a lot of alert messages from j_prp_verify: so the program > was justified in making a fuss about them. END > Any more comments? END No. No. END N > Okay, on to the 16-bit status flag. I've only heard from Peter so far expressing > his ideas on this, which will be implemented tomorrow. Sorry, Peter there > won't be a delivery of the super-duper j_cor_gain this week. So, if you have > strong feelings about this point, I suggest you let me know within the next > 12 hours. END OK Before 02.00 Tonight. END > Yep. END > Any more comments? END N N N N N > Next on the agenda: IMOD group. NJW is in the course of updating this. > DETE-MOD will be updated with NL's list of dead anodes, and values mapping > problems on the detector will be included in a new version of jemx.h. Please > note the verb tense `will be'. Yes, the old to-do list sure is long! > The new ECAL-MOD and CALB-MOD tables have been delivered to him by me, so I > assume they'll be in the new IMOD, and then there'll be no more ECAL alerts - > at least for 6 months or so. Any comments? END I am working on spatial gain correction, trying to make a model to fit the Xe peak No alerts from me. END from empty fields spectra. END OK, we have to remember though that we need to get IMOD data for the whole period since launch if we get new versions for any time period. Otherwise the IC selection mechanism will tell us that it cannot find the current version of these data for the time periods only covered by older versions. END > Yes NJW realises this, and I think he's identified 7 different time zones > where we need updated IMOD tables with substantially different instrument > configurations. To the best of my knowledge he's aware of this problem. END > Any more comments? END No n N N Thanks this discussion answered my previous question ! No more comment s ! END > Okay, into the home stretch: AI list. What have you all been doing, or not > doing? END > One for all of you here - is this still open? : > AI020418_1 ALL Jan 20 2002 Complete algorithm/limitations/details description OPEN for each component for Masha's UM and Peter's presentation > I know Peter's presentation is long passed but what about the work for the UM > guys? END I'm 100% sure it is still open and slowly it is becoming urgent as well - we need this for the analysis user manuals! May I propose that all of us affected try to reserve 2 h next week to write up at least a short summary of the algorithms and their limitations? END > I still have to do something on Dead time - and I'm not even sure NL and SB > know how they want to deal with the double triggers yet! END Am I affected, Peter ? I guess so ! END > Any comments? END Peter, do you need the help files of the scripts for this AI ? END Think of explaining to a new student what is happening. So for the scripts we should explain that they will look at the data and sometimes skip steps if they make no sense for the available data. END > So it looks like we've all got something to do, including Silvia. END Thanks Peter, I will try to find more than two hours next week to work on it ! END Thanks. What about you Stefan? END > Next on the AI list > AI24.7 ALL Feb 2003 Complete all tasks listed in the timeline OPEN > How's it coming along people? I'd say I'm making steady progress, but not Sorry, I was distracted by the cen X-3 data Peter sent me. I onluy sent you the path - you got it yourself ... :-) You are just receiving the power spectrum (yes it oulsates). END > as fast as I hoped (progress never is!). Please remember to check the > timeline from the meeting - it's like a second AI List - you can see it in > Peter's minutes from the meeting which can also be downloaded from the DSRI > document page ( astrophysics->jemx->documents). END > That's it for AI's (most of them are on NJW), so it looks like we're finished > in good time. Any other business? END Not from me (for once). END N Yes. Ahem - I _do_ have something, sorry! OK, you 1st. END I had filed it away already because NJW is not listening in ... ISDC would like to do an informal review of the analysis status for all instruments, preferably still in February before we are all deep in Crab analysis. We thought we would do that on NJW's next visit, with no documents being prepared just a presentation by myself and NJW and then discussion with Roland, Thierry, Mathias ... on how we will progress. > Stefan: thanks for the CenX-3 analysis - it looks good. Real-people convincing, Does one of you see a problem with this? (When is Niels Jørgen coming here next?). END > not just astronomer-convincing. END Peter, it was actually what I was trying to say. I think NJW will confirm that, but we cannot have a room at Hotel des Balances between 1st and 16th March, so that means no instrument representative at ISDC (NJW and me) during this period. So i do not know if NJ has in mind to change the schedule... END OK, will clraify that by mail. END > I think the informal review with NJW at ISDC sounds fine. END > Any more comments? END n No N ! Ok, chat with you next week ! I am running to take lunch ... Victor will be back soon ! END N Bye ! END Good lunch Silvia :-) > Have a good weekend Silvia! END > Have a good weekend all you guys too! END Thanks ! Nice weekend everyone ! END *** silvia has left channel #jemxadr : (silvia) The same to you! END Good bye everybody! > I really have to run, the j_cor_gain calls alluringly yet again. END