Difference between revisions of "Fast Offline Analysis GRB240805B August 2024 P067"
m (→Light curve) |
(→Data-taking information) |
||
(2 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
Line 23: | Line 23: | ||
*Joint observations with MAGIC?: yes | *Joint observations with MAGIC?: yes | ||
*Information on data-taking (observations summaries): https://www.lst1.iac.es/datacheck/observation_overview/2024/08/run_summary_2024_08_05.pdf | *Information on data-taking (observations summaries): https://www.lst1.iac.es/datacheck/observation_overview/2024/08/run_summary_2024_08_05.pdf | ||
+ | |||
+ | From Seiya Nozaki (via Slack): The last part of observations was significantly affected by MAGIC LIDAR, then rate control was not properly working and the rates were very low (~1 kHz). It seems this also affected the camera homogeneity, so I think that's why the background level is different between ON/OFF. | ||
+ | http://www.lst1.iac.es/elog/LST+commissioning/3512 | ||
+ | |||
+ | This seems to be causing spurious excess due to ON/OFF mismatch in one of the latest GRB data runs (18448) | ||
+ | |||
+ | [[File:Run_summary_20240805.png | 600 px]] | ||
+ | |||
+ | |||
+ | [[File:Camera_inhomogeneity_run_18447_grb.png | 400 px]] | ||
+ | [[File:Camera_inhomogeneity_run_18448_grb.png | 400 px]] | ||
+ | |||
+ | Those last runs of GRB observations present a much higher camera average rate. | ||
+ | |||
+ | [[File:Camera_avg_rate_20240805_grb_observations.png | 900 px]] | ||
==General analysis information== | ==General analysis information== | ||
Line 122: | Line 137: | ||
=== Light curve === | === Light curve === | ||
− | Note: Run 18448 has excess of events in theta2 plot, likely because camera homogeneity was affected by MAGIC LiDAR and ON/OFF counts were different. See explanation here: https://www.lst1.iac.es/elog/LST+commissioning/3512 . | + | Note: Run 18448 has an excess of events in theta2 plot, likely because camera homogeneity was affected by MAGIC LiDAR and ON/OFF counts were different. See explanation here: https://www.lst1.iac.es/elog/LST+commissioning/3512. |
+ | |||
+ | [[ File:Lc_grb240805b_ryuji_FOA.png | 500 px]] |
Latest revision as of 17:20, 7 August 2024
Contents
General information[edit]
- Name of the source: GRB240805B
- Brief description of the source:
- Object type : GRB
- Redshift (z) : ?
- Other relevant information
- RA, Dec in deg (ICRS): 254.2391, 18.3233
- Analysis by:
- Irene Jiménez Martínez (MPI - irenejm@mpp.mpg.de)
Data-taking information[edit]
- Dates of data-taking:
- Date: 2024-08-05 (3.8 h)
- ZD range (deg): 10 - 60
- Observations:
- Date: 2024-08-05 (3.8 h)
2024-08-05: [18438, 18439, 18440, 18441, 18442, 18443, 18444, 18445, 18446, 18447, 18448, 18449]
- Data quality selection: no run survives the data quality selection (max NSB std: 2.3).
- Joint observations with MAGIC?: yes
- Information on data-taking (observations summaries): https://www.lst1.iac.es/datacheck/observation_overview/2024/08/run_summary_2024_08_05.pdf
From Seiya Nozaki (via Slack): The last part of observations was significantly affected by MAGIC LIDAR, then rate control was not properly working and the rates were very low (~1 kHz). It seems this also affected the camera homogeneity, so I think that's why the background level is different between ON/OFF. http://www.lst1.iac.es/elog/LST+commissioning/3512
This seems to be causing spurious excess due to ON/OFF mismatch in one of the latest GRB data runs (18448)
Those last runs of GRB observations present a much higher camera average rate.
General analysis information[edit]
- source-independent analysis
- lstchain version: v0.10.9
- DL1b standard production (v0.10/tailcut84), run-wise merged files in:
/fefs/aswg/data/real/DL1/20240805/v0.10/tailcut84/dl1_LST-1.Run18438.h5 /fefs/aswg/data/real/DL1/20240805/v0.10/tailcut84/dl1_LST-1.Run18439.h5 /fefs/aswg/data/real/DL1/20240805/v0.10/tailcut84/dl1_LST-1.Run18440.h5 /fefs/aswg/data/real/DL1/20240805/v0.10/tailcut84/dl1_LST-1.Run18441.h5 /fefs/aswg/data/real/DL1/20240805/v0.10/tailcut84/dl1_LST-1.Run18442.h5 /fefs/aswg/data/real/DL1/20240805/v0.10/tailcut84/dl1_LST-1.Run18443.h5 /fefs/aswg/data/real/DL1/20240805/v0.10/tailcut84/dl1_LST-1.Run18444.h5 /fefs/aswg/data/real/DL1/20240805/v0.10/tailcut84/dl1_LST-1.Run18445.h5 /fefs/aswg/data/real/DL1/20240805/v0.10/tailcut84/dl1_LST-1.Run18446.h5 /fefs/aswg/data/real/DL1/20240805/v0.10/tailcut84/dl1_LST-1.Run18447.h5 /fefs/aswg/data/real/DL1/20240805/v0.10/tailcut84/dl1_LST-1.Run18448.h5 /fefs/aswg/data/real/DL1/20240805/v0.10/tailcut84/dl1_LST-1.Run18449.h5
Monte Carlo information[edit]
Write below the MC production ID among the existing MC
- All-sky MC production used: 20240131_allsky_v0.10.5_all_dec_base
- Declination line (training): dec_2276
Random forest[edit]
Path to the models used:
/fefs/aswg/data/models/AllSky/20240131_allsky_v0.10.5_all_dec_base/dec_2276
DL2 data[edit]
Config file:
/fefs/aswg/data/models/AllSky/20240131_allsky_v0.10.5_all_dec_base/dec_2276/lstchain_config_2024-01-31.json
Files in:
/fefs/aswg/workspace/irene.jimenez/FOA/GRB240805B_20240805/DL2
DL3 data & IRF[edit]
"EventSelector": { "filters": { "intensity": [50, Infinity], "width": [0, Infinity], "length": [0, Infinity], "r": [0, 1], "wl": [0.01, 1], "leakage_intensity_width_2": [0, 1], "event_type": [32, 32] } }, "DL3Cuts": { "min_event_p_en_bin": 100, "min_gh_cut": 0.1, "max_gh_cut": 0.98, "min_theta_cut": 0.1, "max_theta_cut": 0.32, "fill_theta_cut": 0.32, "allowed_tels": [1] }
- 70 % efficiency for both gammaness and theta gamma-ray selection cuts
- Point-like IRF
High-level analysis and results[edit]
Analysis settings[edit]
- Gammapy version: 1.1
- 1D analysis (point-like IRF)
Theta2 plot[edit]
Settings:
- Theta2 cut for signal extraction: 0.04 deg2
- Normalization range: 0.1 - 0.4 deg2
- Number of off positions: 3
- Energy range: 0.01 - 10 TeV
Daily results[edit]
- 2024-08-05: No detection
Stacked observations[edit]
Significance and Excess sky maps[edit]
Spectral results[edit]
Light curve[edit]
Note: Run 18448 has an excess of events in theta2 plot, likely because camera homogeneity was affected by MAGIC LiDAR and ON/OFF counts were different. See explanation here: https://www.lst1.iac.es/elog/LST+commissioning/3512.