
	SDAST weekly chat meeting #71: Thursday 30th January 2003
	
participants: Peter Kretschmar, Silvia Martinez-Nuez, Sami Maisala, Stefan
	Larsson, Jerome Chenevez, Carol Anne Oxborrow

Subjects discussed: SDAST meeting in Valencia
		Science results: spectral extraction; EXO2030 period analysis;
		Status flag: `4' value
		Dead anodes: none new since Dec 2002
		IMOD group update
		Detailed descriptions for Masha's UM
		ISDC informal review of the analysis status
		
Action Items:

AI030130.1:	ALL	End-Feb 2003	Find travel times to Valencia for
OPEN			SDAST meeting to aid planning of meeting and agenda


**** Logging Started : Thu Jan 30 12:57:45 MET 2003
> Hi Silvia, I think you're the only one who's aware of the 14.00 arrangement
> I haven't heard from any of the others yet - not even Peter, so we may have
> to postpone things til 15.00 anyway. EDN
> I've just got an email from NJW: he can't chat today, and if you and Jerome
> can't make it at 15.00, we may have to cancel till next week. END
<silvia> Hej Carol Anne !  Could you please give a call to Peter, to confirm 
the time ? END
<silvia> I am with Victor ! END
*** peter (~pkretsch@isdcul9.unige.ch) has joined channel #jemxadr
<jerome> Hello Peter and Silvia!
*** larsson (~larsson@tenma.dsri.dk) has joined channel #jemxadr
<peter> Hi all, Sami is here with me and trying to connect. END
> Hello Victor, it's wonderful that you could join us! END
<silvia> Well, Victor is discussing with me real data analysis in EXO 2030 ! 
That is all ! END
<jerome> So have you got more from EXO 2030?
*** smaisala (~smaisala@gemini.astro.Helsinki.FI) has joined channel #jemxadr
> NJW will not be joining us today - but it's great to see so many of you
> here! Wherever `here' is! END
<silvia> Yes, I am working on it ! I will send an email aroud asasp END
<jerome> Following your suggestions of last week, I finally got teh same result
s as you, I guess. END
> Let's get started: Moved to the top of the agenda by popular request: 
> where and when to have the next SDAST meeting? I think we've all got an
> inkling of where. Ideas, comments, restrictions? END
<smaisala> Hi there. END
> Hi Sami! END
<silvia> Do you guys prefer on thursday and friday or monday and tuesday ? 
Last week of March or firts week of April ? END
<silvia> firts = first !
<larsson> Monday-Tuesd. END
<jerome> So 1st week april END
<peter> Weekdays are less of a problem. So would March 31 + April 1 work for 
all of us? The following week I'm booked as duty scientist at ISDC.
<silvia> 31 st March - 1 th April END
<peter> END
<larsson> OK. END
<jerome> Good. END
> Mon-Tues is good for me, as is !st week April END
<silvia> Sami, 31st March - 1st April ? END
<smaisala> I think it's fine. END
> Sounds good Silvia END
<jerome> Is that long enough? When shall we start, on monday?
<silvia> Perfect, I hope NJW is available ! END
<peter> Starting on Monday around noon is probably OK. END
<silvia> Early afternoon, as usual ! O better early morning and then to finish
 on tuesday during the morning ! END
<silvia> Fine ! Firts, check your flights timetables ! END
<jerome> It is fine if we can start early afternoon, so we can fly on the 
morning. END
<peter> I'll try to spend the weekend before in the area, visiting Barcelona 
as well. END
> I cannot find NJW, so we'll have assume he can make it. I assume we'll 
actually
<silvia> I am not sure about that Jerome, I will send to you, CAO && NJW, info
 about flights timetables.END
<jerome> Thank you! END
> have to travel on Sunday afternoon. So do we start at 9.00 on Monday morning?
> END
<peter> Let's see this once we have the timetables. How about an action on ever
yone to find out if they can fly on Monday or have to come on Sunday anyway?END
<peter> In the latter case, we should start Monday morning. END
<jerome> I agree. END
<larsson> I guess the same goes for me (arrival during weekend). END
> So that's when and where settled. The rest depends on our timetables. So
> on to next point: Science results. Who wants to start Silvia? END
<silvia> The work is on progress ( Victor phrase!) . We are getting spectra 
rev. 19 ( from EXO 2030), and trying to do the same with the data from rev. 20!
<silvia> Using the new GAIN CAL IDX tables producced by PK.
<silvia> I will send an e-amil around asasp with more details ! END
<larsson> Be careful with interpretation of the spectra. The extraction is
<larsson> not verified yet. Cyg X-1 showed differences compared to XTE PCA. END
<silvia> Thanks Stefan ! We are just trying to understand the software and the
 data ! END
<larsson> Fine, that is how we will learn. END
<peter> Are you looking into those differences, Stefan? END
<silvia> I whould like to ask something, about the quamtum efficiency table. 
Has been updated ? It seems that the one available in jmx%d_imod_grp.fits ( 13)
 is the old one based on calibration on earth . END
<larsson> I will/should. Right now I prefer to wait for NJs
<silvia> whould = would, sorry ! END
<larsson> update of detector resolution in the detector model.
<larsson> These values affect the spectral slope. END
<peter> OK - Carol Anne, could you check with Niels Jrgen on when he thinks 
we can get better numbers there?
<peter> I'm a bit worried about getting stuck with everybody waiting for 
results from someone else. 
<peter> Obtaining more believable spectra is urgent! END
<larsson> I'll increment my priority flag a few steps for that point... END
> And, I'll check where NJW is with this - I know he's working on a new IMOD
> now END
<peter> Thanks a lot.
<peter> From my side you've seen almost all there is to say. I'll generate 
lightcurve of Cen X-3 with 0.2 sec resolution next so
<peter> Stefan can try period searching. END
> Any other science results? END
<silvia> No END
<larsson> I have sent around some of the EXO2030 period analysis I
<larsson> have done. I still have to do it a little more systematic.
<larsson> I have also looked at the Cyg X-3 data ( rev 23 I think).
<larsson> Osmi Vilhu is comparing with XTE PCA light curves.
<larsson> they agree quite well, except for one of the observations
<larsson> which looks a little strange. (But that was not simultaneous). END
> Thanks for all the interesting science results you've all been sending around
<peter> But the flux levels would also be affected by the problems we seem to 
have with spectra, right? 
> Unfortunately I don't have time to study it in detail but it's nice to know
<peter> END
> someone's looking at this stuff. END
<larsson> To Peter: Yes, the extraction is more or less identical. END
<peter> Next iten?
> Any other science comments? END
<jerome> Nothing new from my part. 
<jerome> I have just analysed parts of rev. 19 during observation of EXO 2030,
 looking
<jerome> at sources detection, light curve and spectrum, as you other I guess.
<jerome> But I would like to ask (Stefan) if it will be necessary to set the 
hidden parameters
<jerome> LCR_rowSelect and SPE_rowSelect with "STTAUS<256"?
<jerome> Sorry "STATUS"
<jerome> END
<larsson> Unless the new STATUS values have been introduced, you should
<larsson> do so. END
<peter> In some sense this is more a problem of j_cor_gain. I've noticed that 
the events are still flagged with '4' - is that expected Carol Anne?
<peter> END
> No that isn't expected, there's going to be a complete overhaul of the
> STATUS flag, with more specific values: some that are trivial, some that
> are important, like uncertain gain correction and NO gain correction (default
> values used) END
> Unfortuately we really have to hurry at this end: our server's being shut 
> down at 14.30 END
<jerome> Well 15 o' clock, finally! END
> Generally, with the new j_cor_gain time variation model I expect the 
ubiquitous
>`4' value to disappear: everything should be able to get some good gain value.
> I'm more confident of this now than I was just a couple of hours ago. END
<peter> Sounds  good. END
<peter> Any news about dead anodes (itm 2 of our agenda)? END
<jerome> Well, I guess it is my turn.
<jerome> Keeping in mind that I have only been able to look at the data until 
the end of 
<jerome> the PV phase, that is 29/12/02, it is seems that the last time an 
anode was
<jerome> dying on JEMX1 was before the 20/12/02 (and it is even not absolutely
 sure it
<jerome> was a real death...).
<jerome> As regards JEMX2 there has not been any more dead anodes since the 
12/11/02.
<jerome> This means that the final reduction of HV on both JEMX seems to have 
solved the
<jerome> problem (until now :-). So the actual status is that there are not 
more than
<jerome> something between 15 and 20 dead anodes on each instrument.
<jerome> That is just a confirmation of what Niels Lund sent earlier this week.
<jerome> END
> Niels is confident there hasn't been a new dead anode in 6 weeks. We have a
> few that are unstable which sort of die and then come back to life:
> 106 and 105 and 151 on JEM-x1 and 150 on JEM-X2. Happily these were anodes
> for which we had a lot of alert messages from j_prp_verify: so the program
> was justified in making a fuss about them. END
> Any more comments? END
<peter> No.
<silvia> No. END 
<larsson> N
> Okay, on to the 16-bit status flag. I've only heard from Peter so far 
expressing
> his ideas on this, which will be implemented tomorrow. Sorry, Peter there
> won't be a delivery of the super-duper j_cor_gain this week. So, if you have
> strong feelings about this point, I suggest you let me know within the next
> 12 hours. END
<larsson> OK Before 02.00 Tonight. END
> Yep. END
> Any more comments? END
<silvia> N 
<peter> N
<larsson> N
<smaisala> N
<jerome> N
> Next on the agenda: IMOD group. NJW is in the course of updating this.
> DETE-MOD will be updated with NL's list of dead anodes, and values mapping
> problems on the detector will be included in a new version of jemx.h. Please
> note the verb tense `will be'. Yes, the old to-do list sure is long! 
> The new ECAL-MOD and CALB-MOD tables have been delivered to him by me, so I
> assume they'll be in the new IMOD, and then there'll be no more ECAL alerts -
> at least for 6 months or so. Any comments? END
<jerome> I am working on spatial gain correction, trying to make a model to 
fit the Xe peak
<larsson> No alerts from me. END
<jerome> from empty fields spectra.
<jerome> END
<peter> OK, we have to remember though that we need to get IMOD data for the 
whole period since launch if we get new versions for any time period.
<peter> Otherwise the IC selection mechanism will tell us that it cannot find 
the current version of these data for the time periods only covered by older 
versions. END
> Yes NJW realises this, and I think he's identified 7 different time zones
> where we need updated IMOD tables with substantially different instrument
> configurations. To the best of my knowledge he's aware of this problem. END
> Any more comments? END
<peter> No
<larsson> n
<jerome> N
<smaisala> N
<silvia> Thanks this discussion answered my previous question ! No more comment
s ! END
> Okay, into the home stretch: AI list. What have you all been doing, or  not
> doing? END
> One for all of you here - is this still open? :
> AI020418_1 ALL	Jan 20 2002  Complete algorithm/limitations/details 
description
OPEN	 for each component for Masha's UM and Peter's 
			presentation

> I know Peter's presentation is long passed but what about the work for the 
UM
> guys? END
<peter> I'm 100% sure it is still open and slowly it is becoming urgent as 
well - we need this for the analysis user manuals!
<peter> May I propose that all of us affected try to reserve 2 h next week to 
write up at least a short summary of the algorithms and their limitations? END
> I still have to do something on Dead time - and I'm not even sure NL and SB
> know how they want to deal with the double triggers yet! END
<silvia> Am I affected, Peter ? I guess so ! END
> Any comments? END
<silvia> Peter, do you need the help files of the scripts for this AI ? END
<peter> Think of explaining to a new student what is happening. So for the 
scripts we should explain that they will look at the data and sometimes skip 
steps if they make no sense for the available data. END
> So it looks like we've all got something to do, including Silvia. END
<silvia> Thanks Peter, I will try to find more than two hours next week to 
work on it ! END
<peter> Thanks. What about you Stefan? END
> Next on the AI list 
> AI24.7 ALL	Feb 2003 Complete all tasks listed in the timeline 
OPEN

> How's it coming along people? I'd say I'm making steady progress, but not
<larsson> Sorry, I was distracted by the cen X-3 data Peter sent me.
<peter> I onluy sent you the path - you got it yourself ... :-)
<larsson> You are just receiving the power spectrum (yes it oulsates).
<larsson> END
> as fast as I hoped (progress never is!). Please remember to check the
> timeline from the meeting - it's like a second AI List - you can see it in
> Peter's minutes from the meeting which can also be downloaded from the DSRI
> document page ( astrophysics->jemx->documents). END
> That's it for AI's (most of them are on NJW), so it looks like we're finished
> in good time. Any other business? END
<peter> Not from me (for once). END
<larsson> N
<jerome> Yes.
<peter> Ahem - I _do_ have something, sorry!
<jerome> OK, you 1st. END
<peter> I had filed it away already because NJW is not listening in ...
<peter> ISDC would like to do an informal review of the analysis status for 
all instruments, preferably still in February before we are all deep in Crab 
analysis. 
<peter> We thought we would do that on NJW's next visit, with no documents 
being prepared just a presentation by myself and NJW and then discussion with 
Roland, Thierry, Mathias ... on how we will progress.
> Stefan: thanks for the CenX-3 analysis - it looks good. Real-people 
convincing,
<peter> Does one of you see a problem with this? (When is Niels Jrgen coming 
here next?). END
> not just astronomer-convincing. END
<jerome> Peter, it was actually what I was trying to say.
<jerome> I think NJW will confirm that, but we cannot have a room at Hotel 
des Balances
<jerome> between 1st and 16th March, so that means no instrument 
representative at ISDC
<jerome> (NJW and me) during this period.
<jerome> So i do not know if NJ has in mind to change the schedule...
<jerome> END
<peter> OK, will clraify that by mail. END
> I think the informal review with NJW at ISDC sounds fine. END
> Any more comments? END
<larsson> n
<peter> No
<silvia> N ! Ok, chat with you next week ! I am running to take lunch ...
 Victor will be back soon ! END
<jerome> N
<silvia> Bye ! END
<jerome> Good lunch Silvia :-)
> Have a good weekend Silvia! END
> Have a good weekend all you guys too! END
<silvia> Thanks ! Nice weekend everyone ! END
*** silvia has left channel #jemxadr : (silvia)
<larsson> The same to you! END
<jerome> Good bye everybody!
> I really have to run, the j_cor_gain calls alluringly  yet again. END
