Summary of DSRI JEM-X Meeting, Thurday 19th march 2004 Those present: Niels Lund, Jerome Chenevez, Carl Budtz-Jørgensen, Carol Anne Oxborrow, Ib Lundgaard Rasmussen, Soeren Brandt, Niels Joergen Westergaard -This was an ad hoc meeting called by SB to discuss one aspect of why our spectral flux determinations are consistently too low, and why spectra below 7 KeV are generally unreliable - SB showed that folded into our data is the effect of the on-board rejection criteria. - Currently our corrected spectra are conconstructed thus: S(PI) = INTEGRAL{ RDM(E,PI). ARF(E). f(E).dE} where f(E) is the actual spectrum of the source we want to observe. RDM(E,PI) is the ReDistribution Matrix that makes the PHA->PI conversion ARF(E) is the Response Matrix that gives the instrument sensitivity at each energy - However, on-board there are rejections that are performed according to the PHA (or even pre-PHA signal) value of the event. On-board this appears as a nice smooth cutoff that's easily descernible as such. However, what actual energy this appears as depends on the gain of the detector at the time of the individual event. Hence the `clear' cutoff becomes a smeared out artifact of indeterminate shape. The attrition of events is therefore both energy and gain dependent - NL suggests that spectra should be determined using both the PHA and PI values of each event, rather than just the PI values as is currently the case. CAO thinks this is a good suggestion since both these quantities are readily available in the ISDC science window groups, and would not require new output from the j_cor_gain, or j_calib_gain_fitting routines, the latter of which would be hard to accomodate in the current ISDC architecture. - The status of instrument calibration in general was discussed, though with no specific outcome. Rudin and co. are clearly worried about the lack of good calibration for JEM-X - NJW is currently writing a document to discuss calibration in general and it will be available from this page soon. CAO 22/3/04