An improved treatment of the linearity correction of IR detectors
description
Transcript of An improved treatment of the linearity correction of IR detectors
![Page 1: An improved treatment of the linearity correction of IR detectors](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022081513/56816437550346895dd5ff73/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
An improved treatment of the linearity correction of IR detectors
Massimo RobbertoJWST/NIRCam
STScI TIPS – Sep. 16, 2010
![Page 2: An improved treatment of the linearity correction of IR detectors](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022081513/56816437550346895dd5ff73/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
OUVERTURE
![Page 3: An improved treatment of the linearity correction of IR detectors](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022081513/56816437550346895dd5ff73/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
IR detectors are non linear
![Page 4: An improved treatment of the linearity correction of IR detectors](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022081513/56816437550346895dd5ff73/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
Linearity is assumed at the beginning of the ramp
linear fit to the first 20 samples
![Page 5: An improved treatment of the linearity correction of IR detectors](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022081513/56816437550346895dd5ff73/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
The “true” slope depends on the range of the assumed linear regime
![Page 6: An improved treatment of the linearity correction of IR detectors](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022081513/56816437550346895dd5ff73/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
In fact, the angular coefficient of the true slope is hard to find…
![Page 7: An improved treatment of the linearity correction of IR detectors](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022081513/56816437550346895dd5ff73/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
ACT 1CURRENT STATUS
![Page 8: An improved treatment of the linearity correction of IR detectors](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022081513/56816437550346895dd5ff73/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
How we do it now
In the case of NICMOS and WFC3, we apply the following correction
F are the measured counts Fc are the true counts. The calibration process assumes that they are known (fit to the first part of the ramp). Known both F’s, we derive the correction coefficients c2, c3 and c4 used for general linearity correction.
![Page 9: An improved treatment of the linearity correction of IR detectors](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022081513/56816437550346895dd5ff73/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
Problems with this approach
1) We do not really know what is the real slope of the calibration frame, and our estimate depends on the samples we use.
2) Physically, one has a linear true flux which is converted in a non-linear measured count rate by the detector. This is not what we model!
We modulate the observed data to get the real flux; instead, we should modulate the real flux to get the observed data.
![Page 10: An improved treatment of the linearity correction of IR detectors](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022081513/56816437550346895dd5ff73/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
A controlled experiment using simulated data
THIS IS THE WEIRD (NON POLYNOMIAL)NON-LINEARITY TERM
![Page 11: An improved treatment of the linearity correction of IR detectors](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022081513/56816437550346895dd5ff73/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
Let’s plot our baseline…
![Page 12: An improved treatment of the linearity correction of IR detectors](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022081513/56816437550346895dd5ff73/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
… and derive the correction “a’la HST”
I will assume that we know perfectly the true slope, i.e. problem 1 has been solved. I therefore get the best possible c coefficients.
THIS IS THE POLYNOMIALCORRECTION TERM
![Page 13: An improved treatment of the linearity correction of IR detectors](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022081513/56816437550346895dd5ff73/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
The result is:
![Page 14: An improved treatment of the linearity correction of IR detectors](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022081513/56816437550346895dd5ff73/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
Residuals
![Page 15: An improved treatment of the linearity correction of IR detectors](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022081513/56816437550346895dd5ff73/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
ACT 2A DIFFERENT APPROACH
![Page 16: An improved treatment of the linearity correction of IR detectors](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022081513/56816437550346895dd5ff73/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
Let’s look at the equationInstead of
We can try with the physically more correct expression:
i.e. we modulate the real flux Fc to get F, not viceversa
Fc × 1+ c2 × Fc + c3 × Fc
2 + c4 × Fc3( )=F
Fc =F× 1+ c2 × F+ c3 × F2 + c4 × F3( )
![Page 17: An improved treatment of the linearity correction of IR detectors](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022081513/56816437550346895dd5ff73/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
MethodIn Equation
the Fc and c2,c3,c4 values are unknown. I use IDL/curvefit.pro to derive them from the set of known ti and measured Fi:
having defined the function:
Fc × 1+ c2 × Fc + c3 × Fc
2 + c4 × Fc3( )=F
0.3% error on the slope!
![Page 18: An improved treatment of the linearity correction of IR detectors](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022081513/56816437550346895dd5ff73/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
Linearity correctionFrom the values of c2, c3, an c3 one can derive Fc by solving the equation:
Need to use an iterative method:
Fc =
F1+ c2 × Fc + c3 × Fc
2 + c4 × Fc3( )
![Page 19: An improved treatment of the linearity correction of IR detectors](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022081513/56816437550346895dd5ff73/html5/thumbnails/19.jpg)
Results
i=0
1
2
4
![Page 20: An improved treatment of the linearity correction of IR detectors](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022081513/56816437550346895dd5ff73/html5/thumbnails/20.jpg)
Check: different flux rate
Same “detector”, i.e. exponential non-linearity term
![Page 21: An improved treatment of the linearity correction of IR detectors](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022081513/56816437550346895dd5ff73/html5/thumbnails/21.jpg)
Correction: old vs. new method
Old
New
![Page 22: An improved treatment of the linearity correction of IR detectors](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022081513/56816437550346895dd5ff73/html5/thumbnails/22.jpg)
ConclusionThe current strategy we implement to correct for non-linearity seems less than ideal.1) Problems with the estimate of the coefficients, which depend
on the assumed “linearity” region of the detector2) Problems with the equation, which does not correctly
describes the non-linearity effect
The new method has two advantages3) Coefficients are estimated without any assumption on the
true, linear flux4) The correct equation, with an iterative solve, seems to
provide a much better estimate of the true linear flux.
Check on real data is in progress