Difference between revisions of "UCSD-2019: Analysis/Pipeline Working Group: Maps to C ell"

From CMB-S4 wiki
Jump to navigationJump to search
Line 50: Line 50:
  
 
1. How are we calibrating beams to meet high-ell science requirements? Can we use high S/N point sources alone?
 
1. How are we calibrating beams to meet high-ell science requirements? Can we use high S/N point sources alone?
* TC (I did an early study on this and can resurrect it for discussion) [https://dummylink slides]
+
* TC (I did an early study on this and can resurrect it for discussion) [https://cmb-s4.org/wiki/images/Neff_beams_v1.pdf slides]
  
 
Questions regarding how much sky we could possibly observe without hitting some systematic or noise floor? (what is limiting fsky?)
 
Questions regarding how much sky we could possibly observe without hitting some systematic or noise floor? (what is limiting fsky?)

Revision as of 14:48, 11 October 2019

Link back to agenda

Charge

Note that "Maps to Cl" is actually shorthand for "Maps to Cl to Parameters" or "Maps to Parameters from (non-low-ell-BB) Power Spectra." This is important for understanding the charge and defining the responsibilities of this group.

The charge from the meeting SOC is twofold (see https://docs.google.com/document/d/1KtRif7_BPi3gACMkIA7__AWK63iUJiljN6UlKI41MS0/edit for the exact charge). One part is a set of general instructions for all analysis working groups:

  • Identify key decisions that must be made (and justified) prior to CD-1,
  • Make progress on (or actually make) those decisions,
  • Lay out a timeline and process for making each decision, consistent with the post-decision work and internal reviews that will be needed to complete preparations for CD-1,
  • Ensure that those timelines and processes are understood and supported by the collaboration, and that we (together) believe we can follow them.

The other part is a set of specific questions to support other working groups / WBSs as we move to the next level of design. Our questions are:

  • How are we calibrating beams to meet high-ell science requirements? Can we use high S/N point sources alone?
  • How does the galaxy impact Neff inference?
  • Does this drive frequency coverage?
  • Is there a path to realistically achieve both the necessary cadence for transients and the necessary sky coverage for light relics goals?
  • What are the necessary analysis tools to answer these questions?

Agenda

I (TC) think the AWG conveners (ML & CR) and the session co-lead (TC) should start the session with the general charge. I guess CR is not going to be able to attend the meeting, so ML & TC will have to split this. Then I (TC) envisioned asking specific non-convener people to lead sessions on the session-specific charge questions.

General charge:

1. Identify key decisions that must be made (and justified) prior to CD-1

Maybe TC, ML, and CR can put together a few examples of decisions to guide discussion, with TC focusing on maps to cl, ML focusing on cl to parameters, and CR thinking about both. Then ML & TC can present these at the session and use them as a stepping-off point for broader discussion and suggestions. Recall that CD-1 does not require a finished maps to cl pipeline (neither does the finished project--that work is all assumed to be done outside of DOE funding), but a coherent set of tools to go from maps to parameters will make forecasting and feedback to instrument design much more robust and efficient.

2. Make progress on (or actually make) those decisions

Presumably this is done collectively by all session attendees.

3. Lay out a timeline and process for making each decision, consistent with the post-decision work and internal reviews that will be needed to complete preparations for CD-1

I imagine this will not be done in real time.

4. Ensure that those timelines and processes are understood and supported by the collaboration, and that we (together) believe we can follow them.

We can talk in the session about the best ways to ensure this.

Individual charge questions:

0. First an overview of N_eff forecasting from the Dark Universe session. (Ben Wallisch, on behalf of Dan Green and Joel Meyers and others) slides

  • Most of the individual charge questions deal with N_eff goals and requirements, so it's useful to remind ourselves what matters for N_eff and why we are pushing on the particular things we're pushing on.

Questions regarding systematics:

1. How are we calibrating beams to meet high-ell science requirements? Can we use high S/N point sources alone?

  • TC (I did an early study on this and can resurrect it for discussion) slides

Questions regarding how much sky we could possibly observe without hitting some systematic or noise floor? (what is limiting fsky?)

2. How does the galaxy impact Neff inference and does this drive frequency coverage? (Colin Hill) slides

  • also think about ground pickup?

3. Is there a path to realistically achieve both the necessary cadence for transients and the necessary sky coverage for light relics goals? (Reijo Keskitalo) slides

4. What are the necessary analysis tools to answer these questions? (all, discussion)

Remote attendance

Zoom link


Notes