8 Nov. 2013, 17:30
Chair: Luca Conversi

In the call: Luca Conversi, Ivan Valtchanov, Ram Kesh, Silentrash, vero, Javier Diaz, Alvar García, Bruno Merín

Agenda for the webinar:

  • Effect of the updated Neptune model used in HCSS 11 onward: from ESA2 model to ESA4
  • SPIRE map-making workshop report summary
  • Description of new level 2.5 and 3
  • How to reprocess the cross-calibration with Planck for parallel mode observations (so-called new level 2.5)
  • Q&A

For the second to last point, we plan to run a demo script (attached below). Needed setup:


Presentation
And here is the PDF of the presentation:

Video-recording of the webinar:



Contents of the webinar:

Minute 0:00 : Effect of the updated Neptune model used in HCSS 11 onward: from ESA2 model to ESA4
Minute 6:50 : Description of new level 2.5 and 3
Minute 10:25 : SPIRE map-making workshop report summary
Minute 19:07 : Demo script introduction
Minute 23:05 : How to reprocess the cross-calibration with Planck for parallel mode observations (so-called new level 2.5)
Minute 38:20 : Q&A


Questions and answers:


Q - Silentrash: which map maker should we use?

A - Luca Conversi: there is no such a thing as a mapper that works for every observations, but slide 6 of the presentation gives you the advantages of each of them and a link to the full report discussing the test comparison.



Q - Silentrash: can both all map makers used for point sources and for extended sources.

A - Luca Conversi: Yes, although for doing photometry the user might need to make a few further post-processing to the images before he/she can do e.g. aperture photometry. A whole description of how to do photometry in SPIRE scan maps was presented in the previous webinar of this series (http://hipecommunity.wikispaces.com/SPIRE+Photometry+Data+Processing+webinar+4).



Q - Bruno Merín: can you use Planck data directly from the Planck Science Archive to run this demo?

A - Luca Conversi: Not directly from the archive. The simplest reason is that the full resolution Planck FITS file from the archive have different structure from those in the archive (HDU_x's have different layout). There is also another scientific reason: the 500 and 350 micron have non-gaussian beams of 4.5-4.7 arcmin, so we needed to convolve them to a 8 arcmin gaussian beams. Tests with the full-res Planck data are not yet being successful. The demo script just calculates an off-set constants for each band.