US Planck Data Analysis ReviewUS Planck Data Analysis Review

Peter Meinhold US Planck Data Analysis Review • 9–10 May 2006

Where we need to be 2 months before Where we need to be 2 months before launch- Instrument viewlaunch- Instrument view

2 US Planck Data Analysis Review • 9–10 May 2006Peter Meinhold

Planck Instrument GroupPlanck Instrument Group

US instrument scientists have formed a group dedicated to transferring hardware experience and expertise from integration and test to the analysis pipelines

– Membership from both HFI and LFI teams

– Members already heavily involved in planning, executing and analyzing ground test campaigns

– Members with extensive experience in end to end development and analysis of ground and balloon based CMB experiments.

Current members

– Brendan Crill (IPAC)

– Warren Holmes (JPL)

– Bill Jones (Caltech)

– Peter Meinhold (UCSB)

– Rodrigo Leonardi (UCSB)

– Mike Seiffert (JPL)

– Todd Gaier (JPL)

– Sarah Church (Stanford)

3 US Planck Data Analysis Review • 9–10 May 2006Peter Meinhold

PhilosophyPhilosophy

Successful operation of Planck will require:Rapid and accurate feedback of instrument performance, systematics and pathologies to instrument command uplink. – The survey is time limited and it is critical that the instruments be optimized and any problems

identified and resolved rapidly.

– Instrument related analysis tools and clear lines of communication to responsible team members will be invaluable in ensuring Planck fulfils its objectives.

Full exploitation of Planck data will require:Intensive iteration of the pipeline from raw data to power spectra, with an emphasis on detecting, removing and quantifying residuals of systematic errors and foregrounds.Detailed Instrument Models– Extensive data on instrument properties derived from ground and on-orbit tests

– Theoretical and empirical models for how expected systematic effects couple to the data

Software tools– Tools to simulate expected systematic effects using monte carlo or real data and for

removing effects using blind or modeled fitting

– Full nominal LFI and HFI pipelines

Infrastructure– Computer hardware and data availability to allow extensive interaction with the data on daily

(tod and ring bins), weekly (ring sets and submaps) and longer timescales for Instrument scientists.

4 US Planck Data Analysis Review • 9–10 May 2006Peter Meinhold

Specific goals 2 months before launch: dataSpecific goals 2 months before launch: data

We will generate or obtain the following data products

– Full understanding of the ground test data for both instruments Specifically need noise model, gain, 1/f, compression, bandshape and beam

shapes. Parametric models of sensitivity to temperatures and bias settings. For HFI, time constants.

Resolution of inconsistencies in ground tests: for HFI from JPL, UWC IAS and CSL tests, for LFI from JBO, Ylinen, Santander, Laben and CSL (HFI+LFI)

Parameterized Instrument Models (IMO) for both HFI and LFI that can be read by both HFI and LFI pipelines

– Model sky for simulations, tested with local Level S installation

– Tested access to the Planck data in near real time (within 12 hours) through official channel

– Pointing solution results from the (HFI) DPCs

5 US Planck Data Analysis Review • 9–10 May 2006Peter Meinhold

Develop and Test Software ToolsDevelop and Test Software Tools

We Will Develop and Test The Following Software Tools

– Level S modifications /modules for simulating instrument non-idealities Cross polar response of all channels (even spider web bolometers) Temperature drifts Nonstationary noise EMI/EMC generated ‘spikes’ in the PSD Correlated noise

– LFI and HFI nominal pipelines Tools for processing time ordered data to produce ‘cleaned’ TODs for

mapmaking– Will include tools for nonlinear regression, ‘spikes’ (both in power spectra and time

domain)

For LFI a tool to generate ‘on the fly’ polarization differences for mapmaking (to compare with polarization maps made by map differencing).

6 US Planck Data Analysis Review • 9–10 May 2006Peter Meinhold

Make and Use Reporting ToolsMake and Use Reporting Tools

We will build and test an Automated daily internal reporting tool

– For LFI this will be related to LIFE and be done in IDL

– For HFI this will be standalone code

– Reports will be as unified as possible with the same graphic format

– Portions of the reports will include direct TOD cross comparisons

– Some sample report parameters Average, standard deviation of detector DC levels (differences for LFI_ Correlation amplitudes of detector outputs with (FPU temp, time, azimuth,…) White noise and 1/f noise levels and power law slope Line amplitudes and frequencies (microphonic for HFI, EMC/EMI for LFI) Best fit dipole calibration and error Best fit galaxy calibration (csc(b) fit, as Archeops)

We will build and test systematic separation tools using LFI and HFI maps (delivered from DPCs)

7 US Planck Data Analysis Review • 9–10 May 2006Peter Meinhold

Required InfrastructureRequired Infrastructure

Verified, official mechanism for data access and transfer

Secure local server with a large (>10 TB) disk for time ordered data analysis

Tested, up to date, installations of HFI and LFI pipelines

Maintained clear lines of communication for:

– Keeping current with instrument activities in Europe.

– Reporting our analysis results back to the DPCs.

– Influencing commanding decisions for each instrument.