Difference between revisions of "Dragonfly Pulsar analysis CristianPozo"

From my_wiki
Jump to: navigation, search
Line 148: Line 148:
 
* Phaseogram with all data
 
* Phaseogram with all data
  
−
[[File:phaseogram_all_0.7.png|1000px]]
 
  
 
* Phaseogram with zd<35
 
* Phaseogram with zd<35
  
−
[[File:phaseogram_low50.png|1000px]]
 
  
 
* Phaseogram with zd>35
 
* Phaseogram with zd>35
−
[[File:phaseogram_above50.png|1000px]]
 
  
 
* Phaseogram in different energy bins:
 
* Phaseogram in different energy bins:
−
[[File:phaseogram_bin1_1.png|500px]]
+
 
−
[[File:phaseogram_bin2_1.png|500px]]
 
−
[[File:phaseogram_bin3_1.png|500px]]
 
−
[[File:phaseogram_bin4_1.png|500px]]
 
−
[[File:phaseogram_bin5_1.png|500px]]
 
−
[[File:phaseogram_bin6_1.png|500px]]
 
−
[[File:phaseogram_bin7_1.png|500px]]
 
  
 
* Evolution of the signal in time (without zd cut):
 
* Evolution of the signal in time (without zd cut):
  
−
[[File:time_evolution_lst.png|1000px]]
 
 
* Fitting results  
 
* Fitting results  
  
 
* P1/P2 differential ratio (with Fermi-LAT). Until 200 GeV due to large uncertainties
 
* P1/P2 differential ratio (with Fermi-LAT). Until 200 GeV due to large uncertainties
−
[[File:p1p2_differential_2.png|500px]]
 
  
 
* P1/P2 integral ratio (with Fermi-LAT).  
 
* P1/P2 integral ratio (with Fermi-LAT).  
−
[[File:p1p2_ratio_integral_2.png|500px]]
 
  
 
=== LST-1 only fit and SED (zd<50) ===
 
=== LST-1 only fit and SED (zd<50) ===
  
 
*P1
 
*P1
−
[[File:SED_P1_1.png]]
 
−
[[File:LST_fit_only_P1_fine_bin_fermi.png]]
 
−
[[File:LST_fit_only_P1_fine_wide_fermi.png]]
 
  
−
[[File:fitting_sed_p1.png|800px]]
 
  
  
 
*P2
 
*P2
−
[[File:SED_p2_1.png]]
+
 
−
[[File:LST_fit_only_P2_fine_bin_fermi.png]]
 
−
[[File:LST_fit_only_P2_wide_bin_fermi.png]]
 
  
 
[[File:fitting_sed_p2.png|800px]]
 
[[File:fitting_sed_p2.png|800px]]
Line 266: Line 248:
  
 
'''In all the cases the energy factor that minimize the chi2 value is below 5%'''
 
'''In all the cases the energy factor that minimize the chi2 value is below 5%'''
−
 
−
=== Lightcurve ===
 
−
[[File:lightcurve.png|1000px]]
 
−
[[File:lightcurve_together.png|1000px]]
 
−
 
−
=== Systematics tests ===
 
−
 
−
==== Phaseogram and SED for different samples ====
 
−
 
−
 
−
 
−
*Phaseogram Before August 2021
 
−
[[File:histo_preAug.png|600px]]
 
−
 
−
 
−
'''sign(P1)/sqrt(Tobs) = 0.856 h^(-1/2)'''
 
−
 
−
'''sign(P2)/sqrt(Tobs) = 1.059 h^(-1/2)'''
 
−
 
−
 
−
*Phaseogram After August 2021
 
−
[[File:histo_posAug.png|600px]]
 
−
 
−
'''sign(P1)/sqrt(Tobs) = 1.063 h^(-1/2)'''
 
−
 
−
'''sign(P2)/sqrt(Tobs) = 1.183 h^(-1/2)'''
 
  
 
*SED for P1:
 
*SED for P1:
−
[[File:spectra_P1_bothsamples.png|600px]]
 
  
 
'''Difference in spectral index of ~10% and flux 60% (lacking some statistics for first sample)'''
 
'''Difference in spectral index of ~10% and flux 60% (lacking some statistics for first sample)'''
−
 
  
 
*SED for P2:
 
*SED for P2:
−
[[File:spectra_P2_bothsamples.png|600px]]
 
  
 
'''Difference in spectral index of ~2% and flux of 15%'''
 
'''Difference in spectral index of ~2% and flux of 15%'''
  
 
==== Phaseogram and SED with different efficiencies ====
 
==== Phaseogram and SED with different efficiencies ====
−
[[File:phaseogram_different_efficiencies.png|1000px]]
 
  
 
* P1 SED:
 
* P1 SED:
−
[[File:SED_different_efficiencies.png|1000px]]
 
 
'''Relative maximum error of 3.07% in spectral index and 35.4% in flux.'''
 
'''Relative maximum error of 3.07% in spectral index and 35.4% in flux.'''
  
 
* P1 SED:
 
* P1 SED:
−
[[File:SED_different_efficiencies_P2.png|1000px]]
 
 
'''Relative maximum error of 7.36% in spectral index and 29.2% in flux.'''
 
'''Relative maximum error of 7.36% in spectral index and 29.2% in flux.'''
  
Line 318: Line 268:
  
 
** P1:
 
** P1:
−
[[File:P1_energy_factor_SED_2.png|1000px]]
 
  
 
'''Relative maximum error of 1.01% in spectral index and 24.9% in flux.'''
 
'''Relative maximum error of 1.01% in spectral index and 24.9% in flux.'''
Line 324: Line 273:
 
**P2:
 
**P2:
  
−
[[File:energy_factor_LST_P2.png|1000px]]
 
  
 
'''Relative maximum error of 0.45% in spectral index and 16.4% in flux.'''
 
'''Relative maximum error of 0.45% in spectral index and 16.4% in flux.'''
Line 331: Line 279:
  
 
**P1:
 
**P1:
−
[[File:relative_error_index_P1.png|300px]]
+
 
−
[[File:relative_error_flux_P1.png|300px]]
 
−
[[File:total_uncertainty_P1.png|500px]]
 
  
 
**P2:
 
**P2:
−
[[File:relative_error_index_P2.png|300px]]
 
−
[[File:relative_error_flux_P2.png|300px]]
 
−
[[File:total_uncertainty_P2.png|500px]]
 

Revision as of 10:30, 3 July 2024

General information

  • Name of the source: Dragonfly Pulsar (PSRJ2021+3651)
  • Brief description of the source:
- Object type : Pulsar
- RA, Dec in deg (ICRS): 305.27252, 36.85126

People involved in this analysis (LST-1 and new Fermi-LAT analysis)

  • Cristian Pozo González
  • Alvaro Mas-Aguilar
  • Ruben Lopez-Coto
  • Daniel Morcuende

Run selection

  • Run selection with the use of the notebook from Abelardo Moralejo [1]
  • Atmospheric transmission extracted from ELOG
  • In total 48 runs selected, obstime 13.51 hours
  • Summary of selection cuts:
- Zenith < 70 deg and Zenith < 20 deg
- elapsed_time > 2 min
- transmission_cut > 0.60
- pedestal charge std dev < 1.9 p.e.
- Cosmic rate > 3000 ev/s
- Cosmic rate( > 10 p.e.) > 25-15 ev/s (depends on zd)
- Cosmic rate( > 30 p.e.) > 3-4 ev/s (depends on zd)
  • Number of runs with zenith < 70 deg (% is w.r.t. those in Sky region & zenith range):
 + In the requested Sky region and range of dates:	 132
 + zenith in requested range:				 132
 + NSB in requested range:				 131 (99.2%)
 + FF and pedestal interleaved events are present:	 130 (98.5%)
 + Stable pointing:					 129 (97.7%)
 + dR/dI fit P-value ok:				 128 (97.0%)
 + dR/dI LS periodogram ok:				 127 (96.2%)
 + dR/dI index ok:					 121 (91.7%)
 + dR/dI rate ok:					 48 (36.4%)
 + intensity threshold ok:				 48 (36.4%)

Note: about 64% of all *dark-night* observations within ZD<80 deg fulfill all quality cuts. (in the stable, good-quality period 2022-11-18 - 2023-02-14, 92% of *dark-night* observations within ZD<80 deg do).

  • List of selected runs (Zenith < 70 deg):
1  :  2022-06-28  :  [8948 8949 8950 8951 8952 8953 8954 8955 8956 8957 8958 8959]
2  :  2022-06-29  :  [8980 8982 8983 8985 8986 8987]
3  :  2023-05-16  :  [13062 13063 13064 13066 13067]
4  :  2023-05-18  :  [13096 13097 13098 13099]
5  :  2023-06-22  :  [13519 13520 13521 13522]
6  :  2023-06-25  :  [13588 13589 13590 13591]
7  :  2023-10-05  :  [14910]
8  :  2023-10-06  :  [14918 14919 14920 14921 14922 14923 14924]
9  :  2023-11-13  :  [15489 15490 15491 15495 15497]
  • Number of runs with zenith < 20 deg (% is w.r.t. those in Sky region & zenith range):
 + In the requested Sky region and range of dates:	 132
 + zenith in requested range:				 77
 + NSB in requested range:				 76 (98.7%)
 + FF and pedestal interleaved events are present:	 75 (97.4%)
 + Stable pointing:					 74 (96.1%)
 + dR/dI fit P-value ok:				 73 (94.8%)
 + dR/dI LS periodogram ok:				 73 (94.8%)
 + dR/dI index ok:					 72 (93.5%)
 + dR/dI rate ok:					 31 (40.3%)
 + intensity threshold ok:				 31 (40.3%)

Note: about 64% of all *dark-night* observations within ZD<80 deg fulfill all quality cuts. (in the stable, good-quality period 2022-11-18 - 2023-02-14, 92% of *dark-night* observations within ZD<80 deg do).

  • List of selected runs (Zenith < 20 deg):
1  :  2022-06-28  :  [8951 8952 8953 8954 8955 8956 8957 8958 8959]
2  :  2022-06-29  :  [8980 8982 8983 8985 8986 8987]
3  :  2023-05-16  :  [13066 13067]
4  :  2023-05-18  :  [13098 13099]
5  :  2023-06-22  :  [13520 13521 13522]
6  :  2023-06-25  :  [13588 13589 13590 13591]
7  :  2023-10-05  :  [14910]
8  :  2023-10-06  :  [14918 14919 14920 14921]

DL1 data

- DL1a files produced by LSTOSA (lstchain v0.9.9)
- lstchain v0.9 tailcut8-4
- /fefs/aswg/data/real/DL1/{date}/v0.9/tailcut84/

DL2 data

- /fefs/aswg/workspace/cristian.pozo/data/PSRJ2021_3651/DL2

IRFs

- Point-like
- IRFs for each MC node and for each intensity cut
- /fefs/aswg/workspace/cristian.pozo/data/PSRJ2021_3651/IRF

DL3 data

- /fefs/aswg/workspace/cristian.pozo/data/PSRJ2021_3651/DL3

DL3 pulsar data

- Add phases using PINT-pulsar tools for LST-1 (https://github.com/alvmas/PulsarTimingAnalysis)
- Ephemeris file: /fefs/aswg/workspace/cristian.pozo/data/PSRJ2021+3651/J2021+3651_58685_60244_cube.par
- DL3 pulsar data: /fefs/aswg/workspace/cristian.pozo/data/PSRJ2021_3651/DL3_pulsar

High-level analysis

1D Spectral analysis

  • Performed with gammapy-v0.20.1
energy_geometry: #Geometry on true energy and reco energy for gammapy. True energy should be larger
 real:
   emin: 0.003
   emax: 1
   units: 'TeV'
   nbinning: 40
 reco:
   emin: 0.01
   emax: 0.5
   units: 'TeV'
   nbinning: 20

spectral_points_binning 
   e_min, e_max = 0.02, 0.7
   nbins = 8 
   logspace
   sqrt_ts>1.5
  • Phase Regions:
 Bkg: [0.73,1]
 P1: [0.105,0.13]
 P2: [0.57,0.615]
 P1+P2: [0.105,0.13,0.57,0.615]
 P3: None
  • Spectral fitting of stacked LST dataset
  • Performed for point-like assumption
  • Stacked analysis
  • LST-1 data alone: Power-law spectral model
  • Fermi + LST-1 data: Power-Law Spectral Model, ExponentialCutOff, LogParabola


Results

Phaseogram

  • Phaseogram with all data


  • Phaseogram with zd<35


  • Phaseogram with zd>35
  • Phaseogram in different energy bins:


  • Evolution of the signal in time (without zd cut):
  • Fitting results
  • P1/P2 differential ratio (with Fermi-LAT). Until 200 GeV due to large uncertainties
  • P1/P2 integral ratio (with Fermi-LAT).

LST-1 only fit and SED (zd<50)

  • P1


  • P2


Fitting sed p2.png

P1 LST-1 + Fermi-LAT joint fit

    • Using a SubExponentialCutOffPL model:

P1 exponential model 3.png Exponential result fit P1.png

Total stat: -2logL = 32.56

    • Using a SmoothBrokenPowerLaw model

SmoothBrokenPL P1 2.png SmoothBPL results fit P1.png

Total stat: -2logL = 24.44

  • P1 for E>10 GeV:
    • Using a LogParabola model

P1 logParabolaModel 2.png LogParabola results fit P1.png

Total stat: -2logL = 7.34

    • Using a PowerLaw model

P1 PLmodel 2.png PL results fit P1.png

Total stat: -2logL = 7.83

P2 LST-1 + Fermi-LAT joint fit

    • Using a SubExponentialCutOffPL model:

P2 Exponential model.png Exponential results fit P2.png

Total stat: -2logL = 51.40

    • Using a SmoothBrokenPowerLaw model

SmoothBrokenPL P2.png SmoothBPL results fit P2.png

Total stat: -2logL = 34.74


  • P2 for E>10 GeV:
    • Using a LogParabola model

P2 logParabolaModel.png LogParabola results fit P2.png

Total stat: -2logL = 17.85

    • Using a PowerLaw model

P2 PLmodel.png PL results fit P2.png

Total stat: -2logL = 19.35

LST-1+ Fermi-LAT energy calibration

  • P1 in left and P2 in right (Using SmoothBrokenPowerLaw model in all energy range)

Energy factor fermi LST P1 3.png Energy factor LST fermi P2 3.png

  • P1 in left and P2 in right (Using PowerLaw model at E>10 GeV)

Energy factor fermi LST P1 PL 3.png Energy factor LST fermi P2 PL 3.png

In all the cases the energy factor that minimize the chi2 value is below 5%

  • SED for P1:

Difference in spectral index of ~10% and flux 60% (lacking some statistics for first sample)

  • SED for P2:

Difference in spectral index of ~2% and flux of 15%

Phaseogram and SED with different efficiencies

  • P1 SED:

Relative maximum error of 3.07% in spectral index and 35.4% in flux.

  • P1 SED:

Relative maximum error of 7.36% in spectral index and 29.2% in flux.

Effect on SED due to shift on MC true energy =

    • P1:

Relative maximum error of 1.01% in spectral index and 24.9% in flux.

    • P2:


Relative maximum error of 0.45% in spectral index and 16.4% in flux.

Final uncertainties

    • P1:


    • P2:
Retrieved from "https://www.lst1.iac.es/wiki/index.php?title=Dragonfly_Pulsar_analysis_CristianPozo&oldid=10871"