[evla-sw-discuss] Amplitudes greater than 1 in TelCal

[Keith Cummings]

At our meeting this morning we determined that I should use numChannels 
* 10 for the upper limit of the amplitude (power) check done in antsol.  
Michael and Ken both agreed that using numChannels * 20 would work/be 
better.  I have made it so and the test version of TelCal is now running 
with this new upper limit.  The next release of TelCal to production 
will likely come next week.

Thanks,
Keith

Michael Rupen wrote:
>> As MIchael said, it is not a correlation but a "correlated power".
>> Autocorrelation come out to be about 2.7**2 if everything is set right.
>>
>> Example:  3c273 has about 0.1 correlation at many bands and the fringe
>> disaply provedes numbers between 0.5 and 0.8 for most antennas.
>>
>> The number would more resemble a correlation coefficient if devided
>> the the requeanter RMS sqaured.
>>
>> Ken
>
> If we want to take a middle route, we could change the max amp from 1 to
> 10 (> 2.7**2), which should be get rid of crazy values while allowing 
> silly observers to call Cygnus (or whatever) a calibrator.
>
>             Michael
>
>>
>> > Michael Rupen wrote, On 11/1/11 15:29 PM:
>> > > But this is NOT a raw correlation coefficient -- why should it be 
>> <=1 ?
>> > >
>> > > Michael
>> > >
>> > > >
>> > > > it should never be > 1.0, since it is a correlation.
>> > > >
>> > > > -bryan
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > Keith Cummings wrote, On 11/1/11 15:02 PM:
>> > > > > Michael caused problems today by running
>> > > > > Lsysstart.55866.792821435185
>> > > > > which produced amplitudes greater than 1. TelCal's Antsol 
>> routine
>> > > > > does
>> > > > > not approve of amplitudes (actually amplitudes squared) 
>> greater than
>> > > > > 1
>> > > > > or less than 1e-20. If five integrations within a
>> > > > > baseline-baseband-polarization-subband are out-of-range, antsol
>> > > > > marks
>> > > > > this data as flagged for both antennas in this baseline
>> > > > > (antenna-baseband-polarization).
>> > > > >
>> > > > > The low side (less than 1e-20) is probably fine. Michael is
>> > > > > suggesting
>> > > > > that the high side restriction (greater than 1) might need to be
>> > > > > removed.
>> > > > >
>> > > > > Thoughts?
>> > > > >
>> > > > > -Keith
>> > > > > _______________________________________________
>> > > > > evla-sw-discuss mailing list
>> > > > > evla-sw-discuss at listmgr.cv.nrao.edu
>> > > > > http://listmgr.cv.nrao.edu/mailman/listinfo/evla-sw-discuss
>> > > > _______________________________________________
>> > > > evla-sw-discuss mailing list
>> > > > evla-sw-discuss at listmgr.cv.nrao.edu
>> > > > http://listmgr.cv.nrao.edu/mailman/listinfo/evla-sw-discuss
>> > > >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > evla-sw-discuss mailing list
>> > evla-sw-discuss at listmgr.cv.nrao.edu
>> > http://listmgr.cv.nrao.edu/mailman/listinfo/evla-sw-discuss
>> >
>