using quasar physics to improve the vlbi reference frame · −300 −200 −100 0 100 200 300...
TRANSCRIPT
Using quasar physics to
improve the VLBI reference frame
with: Lucia Plank, Jamie McCallum, Rob Schaap (UTAS) Johannes Böhm, Hana Krásná (TU Wien) Jing Sun (Shanghai Astronomical Observatory)
Stas Shabala University of Tasmania
Outline
① What are these radio sources we look at ?
② Quantifying the effects of quasar structure
③ VieVS structure simulator § Simulation strategy § Effect on the reference frame (Station positions : mm level)
④ Mitigation strategies Stas Shabala -‐ REFAG14
Uncooperative quasars What you want them to be ² Bright point sources ² Fixed in space and Sme
Image: N. Reid
What they are ² Supermassive black holes ² Jets è structure ² Evolve on human Smescales
Image: NASA
Image: C. Mueller
Lister et al. (2009) Stas Shabala -‐ REFAG14
Inner regions of an Active Galactic Nucleus
Stas Shabala -‐ REFAG14
Image: BU / A. Marscher
core jet jet origin
One jet towards us (Doppler boosted) -‐> seen One jet away from us (D. deboosted) -‐> unseen
1 mas @ z=1
uv plane
separation
² interferometers measure correlated amplitude and phase
u (Mh)v
(Mh)
−300 −200 −100 0 100 200 300−300
−200
−100
0
100
200
300
−10
−8
−6
−4
−2
0
2
4
6
8
10
distances measured in units of wavelength λ=c/ν
N-E plane projected in source direction
Visibility phase
uv plane
separation
² interferometers measure correlated amplitude and phase ² image çFourierTransformè
amplitudes/phases in uv plane
u (Mh)
v (M
h)
−300 −200 −100 0 100 200 300−300
−200
−100
0
100
200
300
−10
−8
−6
−4
−2
0
2
4
6
8
10
N-E plane projected in source direction
Lister et al. (2009)
Simulated source
Right Ascension (mas)
Dec
linat
ion
(mas
)
−2 −1 0 1 2−2
−1.5
−1
−0.5
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1
Stas Shabala -‐ REFAG14
Visibility phase
u (Mh)
v (M
h)
−300 −200 −100 0 100 200 300−300
−200
−100
0
100
200
300
−10
−8
−6
−4
−2
0
2
4
6
8
10N-E plane projected in source direction
distances measured in units of wavelength λ=c/ν
different location in uv plane depending on frequency and baseline
Source structure in geodetic VLBI ² Group delay = (1 / 2π) (Δ phase / Δ frequency)
ª phase depends on projected structure as seen by a given baseline
ª function of: • baseline • observing time • amount and direction of structure
ª effect is different at each of 8 sub-bands at X-band (because frequencies are slightly different)
² Hence group delay (= slope across band) changes
Stas Shabala -‐ REFAG14
Visibility phase
u (Mh)
v (M
h)
−300 −200 −100 0 100 200 300−300
−200
−100
0
100
200
300
−10
−8
−6
−4
−2
0
2
4
6
8
10N-E plane projected in source direction
distances measured in units of wavelength λ=c/ν
different location in uv plane depending on frequency and baseline
Structure phase on 9000 km baseline
8200 8300 8400 8500 8600 8700 8800 8900 9000−8
−7
−6
−5
−4
−3
−2
Frequency (MHz)
Phas
e (d
egre
es)
slope = structure delay
Stas Shabala -‐ REFAG14
Visibility phase
u (Mh)
v (M
h)
−300 −200 −100 0 100 200 300−300
−200
−100
0
100
200
300
−10
−8
−6
−4
−2
0
2
4
6
8
10N-E plane projected in source direction
distances measured in units of wavelength λ=c/ν
different location in uv plane depending on frequency, baseline and time
-0.04
-0.02
0
0.02
0.04
8.2 8.4 8.6 8.8
phas
e / r
adia
ns
frequency / GHz
structure delay = 11 ps(3.3 mm light travel time)
structure delay = 6.9 ps(2.1 mm light travel time)
jet orthogonal to baseline
Hobart - HartRAOHobart - Katherine
Jet – baseline orientation
How a source is observed is important
slope = extra (structure) delay
Stas Shabala -‐ REFAG14
1. Measure incorrect posiSon • PosiSon offset (X, Y, Z) from “correct” value
2. Measure different posiSons for different schedules
• Scaier in staSon posiSons for different baseline/schedule combinaSons (even with same quasars)
è increased rms for posiSons derived from different schedules
3. MulSple observaSons inconsistent with each other
• Larger formal uncertainSes, within a single session
3 effects of quasar structure
slope changes with projected structure
slope ≠ 0
Stas Shabala -‐ REFAG14
Vienna VLBI Solware (VieVS) • Simulate geodeSc observaSons • Process simulated observaSons è staSon / source posiSons, EOPs
Quasar structure simulaSons • Quasars ≠ point-‐like • Extra structure delay per observaSon • (mostly) Mock source catalogues
VieVS source structure simulator
VIEVS
Stas Shabala -‐ REFAG14
Simulated catalogues
² Structure indices è mock quasar images SI = 1 + 2 log (τ / ps) u Choose SI (none, 1, 2, 3, 4, ICRF2 distribution) u 2-component sources u Also one “real” CONT11 catalogue
² Simulate realistic schedules with VieVS u CONT11
o 15 – 29 September 2011 o 13 stations o 30 realizations of each day
u Additional delay term due to source structure
Stas Shabala -‐ REFAG14
SI 3 = 10 ps
CONT11
Stas Shabala -‐ REFAG14
-0.3
-0.2
-0.1
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
Bd Hh Hb Zc Wf Wz On Ts Ny Ys Kk Tc Ft
med
ian
X po
sitio
n of
fset
/ cm
real structureno structure
Real sources – X coord
Stas Shabala -‐ REFAG14 Shabala+14, J. Geod. submitted
-0.3
-0.2
-0.1
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
Bd Hh Hb Zc Wf Wz On Ts Ny Ys Kk Tc Ft
med
ian
Y po
sitio
n of
fset
/ cm
real structureno structure
Real sources – Y coord
Stas Shabala -‐ REFAG14 Shabala+14, J. Geod. submitted
-0.3
-0.2
-0.1
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
Bd Hh Hb Zc Wf Wz On Ts Ny Ys Kk Tc Ft
med
ian
Z po
sitio
n of
fset
/ cm
real structureno structure
Real sources – Z coord
Stas Shabala -‐ REFAG14 Shabala+14, J. Geod. submitted
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
Bd Hh Hb Zc Wf Wz On Ts Ny Ys Kk Tc Ft
med
ian
posi
tion
offs
et /
cmreal structureno structure
Real sources – 3D coord offset
Stas Shabala -‐ REFAG14 Shabala+14, J. Geod. submitted
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
Bd Hh Hb Zc Wf Wz On Ts Ny Ys Kk Tc Ft
med
ian
posi
tion
offs
et /
cmreal structureno structure
Offset > 2 mm
Real sources – 3D coord offset
Stas Shabala -‐ REFAG14 Shabala+14, J. Geod. submitted
0
0.05
0.1
0.15
0.2
0.25
0.3
none 1 2 3 4ICRF2 real
posi
tion
/ cm
structure index
median offsetrms
uncertainty
How important is quasar structure ?
SI = 1 + 2 log (τ / ps) Stas Shabala -‐ REFAG14 Shabala+14, J. Geod. submitted
0
0.05
0.1
0.15
0.2
0.25
0.3
none 1 2 3 4ICRF2 real
posi
tion
/ cm
structure index
median offsetrms
uncertainty
How important is quasar structure ?
SI = 1 + 2 log (τ / ps) Stas Shabala -‐ REFAG14 Shabala+14, J. Geod. submitted
Higher SIs give worse positions
0
0.05
0.1
0.15
0.2
0.25
0.3
none 1 2 3 4ICRF2 real
posi
tion
/ cm
structure index
median offsetrms
uncertaintytheory
How important is quasar structure ?
SI = 1 + 2 log (τ / ps) Stas Shabala -‐ REFAG14 Shabala+14, J. Geod. submitted
0
0.05
0.1
0.15
0.2
0.25
0.3
none 1 2 3 4ICRF2 real
posi
tion
/ cm
structure index
median offsetrms
uncertainty
How important is quasar structure ?
SI = 1 + 2 log (τ / ps)
0.5 – 1 mm error
Stas Shabala -‐ REFAG14 Shabala+14, J. Geod. submitted
0
0.05
0.1
0.15
0.2
0.25
0.3
none 1 2 3 4ICRF2 real
posi
tion
/ cm
structure index
median offsetrms
uncertainty
How important is quasar structure ?
SI = 1 + 2 log (τ / ps)
Rms and σ underes1mate how wrong the soluSon really is
Stas Shabala -‐ REFAG14 Shabala+14, J. Geod. submitted
0
0.01
0.02
0.03
none 1 2 3 4ICRF2 real 0
0.001
0.002
pol r
ms
/ mas
(UT1
-UTC
) rm
s / m
s
structure index
xpolypol(UT1-UTC)
EOP rms
Stas Shabala -‐ REFAG14 Shabala+14, J. Geod. submitted
What happens if we include troposphere ?
Stas Shabala -‐ REFAG14
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
none 1 2 3 4 ICRF2 real
posi
tion
/ cm
structure index
median offsetrms
uncertainty
Station positions (with trop.)
SI = 1 + 2 log (τ / ps)
Troposphere dominates
Stas Shabala -‐ REFAG14 Shabala+14, J. Geod. submitted
0
0.02
0.04
0.06
0.08
0.1
0.12
none 1 2 3 4ICRF2 real 0
0.001
0.002
0.003
0.004
0.005
0.006
0.007
0.008
pol r
ms
/ mas
(UT1
-UTC
) rm
s / m
s
structure index
xpolypol(UT1-UTC)
EOP rms (with troposphere)
Stas Shabala -‐ REFAG14 Shabala+14, J. Geod. submitted
Source structure : effects on CRF
SIMULATED
Simulation (Cont11), with troposphere & measurement noise
NO STRUCTURE STRUCTURE, SI=3
Stas Shabala -‐ REFAG14
Source structure : effects on CRF
SIMULATED
Simulation (Cont11), with troposphere & measurement noise
NO STRUCTURE STRUCTURE, SI=3
MEDIAN ESTIMATED POSITION
JET DIRECTION
Systematic displacement ~ 100 µas
2.5
3.0
3.5
Structure Index
log
eµ
as
(0,1.5
)
(1.5,1
.75)
(1.75
,2)
(2,2.5
)
(2.5,3
)
(3,3.5
)
(3.5,4
)
(4,4.5
)
(4.5,5
)(5,
6)
less stable
posiS
ons
more structure
Source structure : effects on CRF
OBSERVED
More structure = worse source posiSons
Schaap et al. 2013, MNRAS, 434, 585
Problem summary ² Quasar structure simulations with VieVS
² mock + real quasar catalogues
² Station positions u offset from true values u larger formal uncertainties u increased rms u important at mm level
² EOPs and source positions also get worse with increasing structure
Stas Shabala -‐ REFAG14
Good news ① We can image quasar structure
(and make corrections)
How do we improve the Reference Frames ? (with quasar physics)
Stas Shabala -‐ REFAG14 Lister et al. (2009)
Good news ① We can image quasar structure
(and make corrections)
Bad news Quasars evolve (need to to this often)
How do we improve the Reference Frames ? (with quasar physics)
Stas Shabala -‐ REFAG14 Lister et al. (2009)
Good news ① We can image quasar structure
② Jet direction remains constant (avoid unfavourable baseline – jet orientation)
Bad news Quasars evolve
How do we improve the Reference Frames ? (with quasar physics)
Stas Shabala -‐ REFAG14
Good news ① We can image quasar structure
② Jet direction remains constant
③ Quasars evolve ! (observe quasars when they are “well behaved”)
Bad news Quasars evolve
✗ ✓
How do we improve the Reference Frames ? (with quasar physics)
How do we improve the Reference Frames ? (with quasar physics)
Good news ① We can image quasar structure
② Jet direction remains constant
③ Quasars evolve !
Strategies ① Use real sources to correct observations
② Minimize projected structure through clever scheduling
③ Include / exclude sources at appropriate times
Bad news Quasars evolve
Stas Shabala -‐ REFAG14
baseline length [103 km]
1. Quasar structure corrections
Impr
ovem
ent
Raw observaSons rms
Corrected using available images
OBSERVED
CONT11 OBSERVATIONS
Stas Shabala -‐ REFAG14
baseline length [103 km]
difference in mm !
1. Quasar structure corrections
Impr
ovem
ent
Raw observaSons rms
Corrected using available images
Improvement = raw -‐ corrected
OBSERVED
Stas Shabala -‐ REFAG14
baseline length [103 km]
difference in mm !
1. Quasar structure corrections
Impr
ovem
ent
OBSERVED
Problems • Dominated by
troposphere • Many quasars don‘t
have images • Quasars evolve Future • Imaging from
geodeSc VLBI data
Small improvement • 45 bl beier: +0.22 mm 33 bl worse: -‐0.12 mm < 1 mm ... but promising...
Stas Shabala -‐ REFAG14
baseline length [103 km]
difference in mm !
1. Quasar structure corrections
Impr
ovem
ent
OBSERVED
Problems • Dominated by
troposphere • Many quasars don‘t
have images • Quasars evolve Future • Imaging from
geodeSc VLBI data
Small improvement • 45 bl beier: +0.22 mm 33 bl worse: -‐0.12 mm < 1 mm ... but promising... Long baselines most improved
Stas Shabala -‐ REFAG14
• Jet direcSon is constant • Worst case: parallel, long baselines
Stru
ctur
e de
lay
in p
s
Angle + length of baseline
Stru
ctur
e de
lay
in p
s
Angle between jet & baseline [°]
R1/R4 of Oct 2013, SI=3
%... median value & % of observations
2. Re-analysis using source structure
Stas Shabala -‐ REFAG14
• Jet direcSon is constant • Worst case: perpendicular, long baselines
Stru
ctur
e de
lay
in p
s
Angle + length of baseline
Stru
ctur
e de
lay
in p
s
Angle between jet & baseline [°]
R1/R4 of Oct 2013, SI=3
%... median value & % of observations
2. Re-analysis using source structure
Half the data is ok
¼ of data downweighted
Stas Shabala -‐ REFAG14
Stru
ctur
e de
lay
in p
s
Angle + length of baseline Half the data is ok
¼ of data downweighted
Simula1on test • Downweight 23% of
observaSons • Structure only simulaSons Improvement • StaSon posiSons by 22% • Formal uncertainSes by 30%
Problem Need these observaSons to resolve troposphere !
2. Re-analysis using source structure
SIMULATED Stas Shabala -‐ REFAG14
Scheduling • Complex task • OpSmizing for max. number of scans,
sky coverage, etc. Strategy • Schedule w.r.t. relaSve orientaSon
and baseline length • Simulate
First results appear promising
2. Re-scheduling w.r.t source structure
SIMULATED
R1/R4 (re-scheduled) of Oct 2013
Impr
ovem
ent
Stas Shabala -‐ REFAG14
2
2.5
3
3.5
1995 2000 2005 0
0.5
1
1.5
stru
ctur
e in
dex
flux
dens
ity /
Jy
Year
SIX-band
3. Quasar evolution ! NEW ! • Structure anS-‐correlates with flux
density è Observe sources when flux density is high (and so structure is small)
Source 1357+769
Stas Shabala -‐ REFAG14
3. Quasar evolution
2
2.5
3
3.5
1995 2000 2005 0
0.5
1
1.5
stru
ctur
e in
dex
flux
dens
ity /
Jy
Year
SIX-band
! NEW ! • Structure anS-‐correlates with flux
density è Observe sources when flux density is high (and so structure is small) • PosiSon scaier decreases for sources
with high flux density
−2 −1 0 1 2
−2−1
01
2
RA Deviation (mas)
Dec
Dev
iatio
n (m
as)
−2 −1 0 1 2
−2−1
01
2
RA Deviation (mas)
Dec
Dev
iatio
n (m
as)
−2 −1 0 1 2
−2−1
01
2RA Deviation (mas)
Dec
Dev
iatio
n (m
as)Low flux density Medium flux density High flux density
Source 1357+769
Summary q Quasars are not point sources
o extra group delay ² Baseline-, time-, frequency- dependent
o systematic error è simply more observations won’t help
q Quasar structure simulations with VieVS 2.2 ² new source structure simulator module ² mock + real quasar catalogues ² station positions affected at mm level ² troposphere dominates (for now)
u Mitigation strategies v corrections using source images in analysis v not scheduling unfavourable jet / baseline combinations
§ avoid long baselines parallel to jet v source selection
§ radio sources vary in structure on year timescales § more compact when flaring (bright)
Stas Shabala -‐ REFAG14
Inner regions of an Active Galactic Nucleus
Stas Shabala -‐ REFAG14
Image: BU / A. Marscher
Image: Kovalev et al. (2008)
core jet jet origin
Synchrotron self-‐absorpSon è core locaSon depends on frequency è “Core ShiN”
One jet towards us (Doppler boosted) -‐> seen One jet away from us (D. deboosted) -‐> unseen
1 mas @ z=1
2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
phas
e (a
rbita
ry u
nits
)
frequency / GHz
total
ionosphere
non-dispersive
Quasar structure in VGOS
How do we connect phases across 10 GHz?
-0.04
-0.02
0
0.02
0.04
2 4 6 8 10 12
phas
e / r
adia
ns
frequency / GHz
max structure delay = +/- 26 ps(7.6 mm light travel time)
max structure delay = +/- 8.2 ps(2.4 mm light travel time)
Expected delay accuracy 2-‐4 ps
Quasar structure > 20 ps
Quasars What you want them to be ² Bright point sources ² Fixed in space and Sme
Image: N. Reid
What they are ² Supermassive black holes ² 106 Smes more distant than stars
Image: NASA
Image: C. Mueller
• Quasars are really far away (z >=1 ) (z = 1 is half the age of the Universe) • Use quasars because… D(z = 1 quasar) = 6.7 x 109 pc D(stars at GalacSc centre) = 8 x 103 pc è quasi-‐iner1al reference frame
Structure delay (ps)
Stas Shabala -‐ REFAG14
0
0.01
0.02
0.03
none 1 2 3 4ICRF2 real 0
0.001
0.002
pol f
orm
al e
rror /
mas
(UT1
-UTC
) for
mal
erro
r / m
s
structure index
xpolypol(UT1-UTC)
EOP formal error (structure only)
Stas Shabala -‐ REFAG14
0
0.02
0.04
0.06
0.08
0.1
0.12
none 1 2 3 4ICRF2 real 0
0.001
0.002
0.003
0.004
0.005
0.006
0.007
0.008
pol f
orm
al e
rror /
mas
(UT1
-UTC
) for
mal
erro
r / m
s
structure index
xpolypol(UT1-UTC)
EOP formal error (with trop.)
Stas Shabala -‐ REFAG14
0.001
0.01
0.1
1
10
6000 7000 8000 9000 10000
med
ian
posi
tion
offs
et /
cm
average distance to other stations / km
OnWzYsNyZc BdWf FtTs Hb Kk Tc Hh
no structure
Median position offset median of 15 x 30 realizations
Stas Shabala -‐ REFAG14 Shabala+14, J. Geod. submitted
0.001
0.01
0.1
1
10
6000 7000 8000 9000 10000
med
ian
posi
tion
offs
et /
cm
average distance to other stations / km
OnWzYsNyZc BdWf FtTs Hb Kk Tc Hh
SI=1no structure
Median position offset
Stas Shabala -‐ REFAG14 Shabala+14, J. Geod. submitted
0.001
0.01
0.1
1
10
6000 7000 8000 9000 10000
med
ian
posi
tion
offs
et /
cm
average distance to other stations / km
OnWzYsNyZc BdWf FtTs Hb Kk Tc Hh
SI=1SI=2
no structure
Median position offset
Stas Shabala -‐ REFAG14 Shabala+14, J. Geod. submitted
0.001
0.01
0.1
1
10
6000 7000 8000 9000 10000
med
ian
posi
tion
offs
et /
cm
average distance to other stations / km
OnWzYsNyZc BdWf FtTs Hb Kk Tc Hh
SI=1SI=2SI=3
no structure
Median position offset
Stas Shabala -‐ REFAG14 Shabala+14, J. Geod. submitted
0.001
0.01
0.1
1
10
6000 7000 8000 9000 10000
med
ian
posi
tion
offs
et /
cm
average distance to other stations / km
OnWzYsNyZc BdWf FtTs Hb Kk Tc Hh
SI=1SI=2SI=3SI=4
no structure
Median position offset
Stas Shabala -‐ REFAG14 Shabala+14, J. Geod. submitted
0.001
0.01
0.1
1
10
6000 7000 8000 9000 10000
med
ian
posi
tion
offs
et /
cm
average distance to other stations / km
OnWzYsNyZc BdWf FtTs Hb Kk Tc Hh
SI=1SI=2SI=3SI=4
ICRF2no structure
Median position offset
Stas Shabala -‐ REFAG14 Shabala+14, J. Geod. submitted
0.001
0.01
0.1
1
10
6000 7000 8000 9000 10000
med
ian
posi
tion
offs
et /
cm
average distance to other stations / km
OnWzYsNyZc BdWf FtTs Hb Kk Tc Hh
SI=1SI=2SI=3SI=4
ICRF2real structureno structure
Median position offset
Stas Shabala -‐ REFAG14 Shabala+14, J. Geod. submitted
0.001
0.01
0.1
1
10
6000 7000 8000 9000 10000
med
ian
posi
tion
offs
et /
cm
average distance to other stations / km
OnWzYsNyZc BdWf FtTs Hb Kk Tc Hh
SI=1SI=2SI=3SI=4
ICRF2real structureno structure
Median position offset
Stas Shabala -‐ REFAG14 Shabala+14, J. Geod. submitted
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.5
1.0
2.0
6000 7000 8000 9000 10000
med
ian
posi
tion
offs
et /
cm
average distance to other stations / km
OnWz YsNyZc BdWf FtTs Hb Kk Tc Hh
SI=1SI=2SI=3SI=4
ICRF2real structureno structure
Median position offset
Stas Shabala -‐ REFAG14 Shabala+14, J. Geod. submitted