Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

RSR linecheck MWC349a failing #59

Open
teuben opened this issue Dec 2, 2024 · 3 comments
Open

RSR linecheck MWC349a failing #59

teuben opened this issue Dec 2, 2024 · 3 comments

Comments

@teuben
Copy link
Contributor

teuben commented Dec 2, 2024

All ~20 datasets that use MWC349a seem to exhibit extraneous badcb flagging , resulting in essentially no spectrum. For a few of the historic data that was checked , band 5 chassis 2 survived this onslaught and gave a partial spectrum.

Clearly something odd is going on here.

@teuben teuben changed the title RSR linecheck MWC349a RSR linecheck MWC349a failing Dec 2, 2024
@teuben
Copy link
Contributor Author

teuben commented Dec 2, 2024

quoting Min:

On MWC349a linecheck, the RSR data suffers from the limited dynamic range resulting from the strong continuum present. In all cases with a strong continuum (>1 Jy), the RSR will show strong continuum baseline. The line is visible and can be analyzed, but it may not work like the ULIRG CO lines.

@teuben
Copy link
Contributor Author

teuben commented Dec 2, 2024

The keyword shortlags=32,10.0 can help in dealing with a strong continuum source.

@dsancheza
Copy link

Looking into another I05189 linecheck I noticed observations: 104911 and 104912. Online reduction yields ~35 mK for the CO line. However running with SLpipeline.sh flags too many chassis and flux from the line disminishes down to 0.8 mK. Looking to the bad lags I believe the badcb is biasing the statistic in the ACF spike detection.
badlags 104911

In the previous image the priori badcb are 0/0,1/1,2/1,3/5. But the badlags marks as badcb all the boards in chassis 1 but 1/1. This is also the caso with chassis 3. Probably we should send the priori badcb as an input and the ignore those chassis from the sigma calculation in badlags.py

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants