<html><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; ">Hi Eric,<div><br></div><div>Could you review the email below and tell me if you agree with the statements made about the GAIN parameter in SAD?</div><div><br></div><div>-Thanks</div><div><br></div><div>--Glenn<br><div><br><div>Begin forwarded message:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><blockquote type="cite"><div><div style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; "><font face="Helvetica" size="3" color="#000000" style="font: 12.0px Helvetica; color: #000000"><b>From: </b></font><font face="Helvetica" size="3" style="font: 12.0px Helvetica">Eduardo Ibar <<a href="mailto:ibar@roe.ac.uk">ibar@roe.ac.uk</a>></font></div><div style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; "><font face="Helvetica" size="3" color="#000000" style="font: 12.0px Helvetica; color: #000000"><b>Date: </b></font><font face="Helvetica" size="3" style="font: 12.0px Helvetica">August 22, 2008 12:14:20 AM HST</font></div><div style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; "><font face="Helvetica" size="3" color="#000000" style="font: 12.0px Helvetica; color: #000000"><b>To: </b></font><font face="Helvetica" size="3" style="font: 12.0px Helvetica">Glenn Morrison <<a href="mailto:morrison@cfht.hawaii.edu">morrison@cfht.hawaii.edu</a>></font></div><div style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; "><font face="Helvetica" size="3" color="#000000" style="font: 12.0px Helvetica; color: #000000"><b>Cc: </b></font><font face="Helvetica" size="3" style="font: 12.0px Helvetica">Mark Dickinson <<a href="mailto:med@noao.edu">med@noao.edu</a>>, Rob Ivison <<a href="mailto:rji@roe.ac.uk">rji@roe.ac.uk</a>>, Frazer Owen <<a href="mailto:fowen@aoc.nrao.edu">fowen@aoc.nrao.edu</a>></font></div><div style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; "><font face="Helvetica" size="3" color="#000000" style="font: 12.0px Helvetica; color: #000000"><b>Subject: </b></font><font face="Helvetica" size="3" style="font: 12.0px Helvetica"><b>Re: GOODS-N Number Counts</b></font></div><div style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; min-height: 14px; "><br></div> </div><div><br>Hi Glenn,<br><br><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">I have just modified the factor GAIN to =1.0 (it was 0.1 before) in the IMMOD-SAD simulations I explained before. Basically, IMMOD is used to introduce point sources smeared by bandwidth smearing in a residual image and SAD is used to extract them under the same criteria of the catalogues. The GAIN factor is critical to extract faint sources and to not to overestimate the number of gaussian-fits per source. This implies completeness as a function of flux density is higher, which translates in lower LogN.<br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">Are you just inserting point sources or can you also insert a source distribution size (which is more realistic)?<br></blockquote><br>Just point sources but bandwidth smeared as a function of distance from the pointing centre. You are completely right in saying it would be much better to assume a distribution in size, although which one? Windhorst et al. (1990) and Bondi et al. (2003) have provided an angular distribution before but they differ quite substantially. To assume a distribution from the GOODSN sources itself is tricky due to bandwidth smearing too. This is why I decided to introduce point sources only but then applying a resolution bias factor.<br><br><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">The GAIN factor is critical to extract faint sources and to not to overestimate the number of gaussian-fits per source.<br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">What do you mean here about "overestimate the number of gaussian-fits per source" and why GAIN is helpful in this respect?<br></blockquote><br>In previous source extractions I completely missed the importance of GAIN factor. It is one of those parameters by default I prefer not to touch but somehow it was set to 0.1 that time. Look at the attached images which compare different SAD extractions:<br><br>top-left: ICUT = 1.0, GAIN = 1.0<br>top-right: ICUT = 1.0, GAIN = 0.1<br>bottom-left: ICUT = 0.1, GAIN = 1.0<br>bottom-right: ICUT = 0.1, GAIN = 0.1<br><br>Clearly GAIN plays a key role in extended bright sources, but also (surprisingly) in some single sources that are completely rejected.<br><br>On the other hand, it's also clear SAD is fitting significant numbers of sources by two Gaussians (the radio contours in the small image). To be honest, I do not really understand the reasons why it does it, but<br>basically GAIN = 1 does two things:<br><br>1) Less sources are split into multiples<br>2) Less sources are rejected by SAD based on the rms of the fit<br><br>cheers<br><br>edo<img height="734" width="948" src="cid:Pine.LNX.4.64.0808221043040.32003@choire.roe.ac.uk"><img height="734" width="948" src="cid:Pine.LNX.4.64.0808221043041.32003@choire.roe.ac.uk"><img height="245" width="236" src="cid:Pine.LNX.4.64.0808221114200.32003@choire.roe.ac.uk"></div></blockquote></div><br></div></body></html>