---+++ I reran the Bullet maps with the current APEX-SZ pipeline.

After scaling the old Bullet map (20090216c) to match our calibration and beam size corrections, the two maps agree.
Conclusion: The current pipeline is consistent with the pipeline from February
Figure1

Figure2

Figure3

NOTE This is the error map from the published Bullet after it is scaled to match our new calibration corrections. Not included is the extra error from that scaling.

Now I've run the XMMJ1230 Scans with the Bullet Reduction used above. The resulting map has a low map error as expected, since it has ~4hours more integration time. There remains some large scale features in the map.

Figure4

Figure5

I've put a high-redshift cluster into the Bullet timestreams and inverted every-other scan timestream. The amplitude of the filtered simulation drops by ~2.
\DeltaT = -500\muK_{CMB}
\Beta = 0.7
\Theta_{Core} = 1'
Figure6

Figure7

NEW: I've radially-binned the simulated cluster maps before they are put into the timestream. This is just a simulated signal only simulation, convolved with the APEX-SZ composite beam. If the APEX-SZ composite beam is a gaussian (which its not), it should resemble the green line in figure 7.

When I look at the radially-binned simulated cluster maps put into the XMMJ1230 maps, I see a big problem.

I'm now looking at the composite beams for these scans. The two channels with a central amplitude are both calibrated from RCW38. One is with reference channel 102 and one is with reference channel 201.

---

Jackknifes Below are a number of different jackknifed maps for the XMMJ1230 using the Bullet reduction.

-- JamesKennedy - 06 Oct 2009

* eo_no_cirlces_jackkinfe_1008a.png:

---

This topic: APEX_SZ > WebHome > XMMJ1230 > ComparisonWithTheBullet Topic revision: r6 - 2009-10-14 - JamesKennedy

---