Difference between revisions of "UCSD-2019: Cross-Cut: Simulations for Measurement Requirements"
From CMB-S4 wiki
Jump to navigationJump to search| Line 101: | Line 101: | ||
==== Noise simulations for PWG ==== | ==== Noise simulations for PWG ==== | ||
| − | * SAT | + | * SAT: start from BK data, fit noise model, just scaling NET and observing time, only data from Pole |
| − | * BK | + | * BK NET calculator does not agree with data (in absolute terms), but only relative scaling matters |
* Noise calculator is just used for LAT | * Noise calculator is just used for LAT | ||
| − | * Extrapolating 220 to 270, | + | * SAT: Extrapolating 220 to 270, 95GHz to lower freqs. Will need to be checked when data is available. |
* Check POLARBEAR new released performance, use that to scale? | * Check POLARBEAR new released performance, use that to scale? | ||
Delensing '''LAT''' at Pole needs a noise model, maybe scaling SPT?? | Delensing '''LAT''' at Pole needs a noise model, maybe scaling SPT?? | ||
Latest revision as of 14:14, 19 October 2019
Contents
Charge
- How do we coordinate the production of a unified sky model with enough realism and flexibility for the AWGs?
- What simulations do we need for clusters and what cross-checks will be available with data?
Agenda
Please add your name below the agenda if you plan to participate in the session, contact User:Zonca
- 5 min - Andrea Zonca: PySM 3, simulation tools developed for Simons Observatory
- 5 min - Marcelo Alvarez: Extragalactic modeling integration in PySM 3, Simulations requirements for cluster finding File:Exgal sims.pdf
- 5 min - Reijo Keskitalo: Scanning strategy for S4 Chile deep Chile wide Pole deep Pole wide
- 5 min - Ben Racine: Noise simulations for PGW analysis Sims for PGW
- 30 min - Discussion:
- Unified sky model
- How to gather requirements from AWG
- Clusters
- Plans for map-based simulations
Other participants: Raphael Flauger, Kimmy Wu
Remote attendance
Notes
Collaborative note taking on hackMD
Cross-Cut: Simulations for Measurement Requirements
Agenda and notes
- 5 min - Andrea Zonca: PySM 3, simulation tools developed for Simons Observatory
- 5 min - Marcelo Alvarez: Extragalactic modeling integration in PySM 3, Simulations requirements for cluster finding
- 5 min - Reijo Keskitalo: Scanning strategy for S4
- 5 min - Ben Racine: Noise simulations for PGW analysis
- 25 min - Discussion:
Unified sky model
Galactic
- PySM (
so_pysm_models) NSIDE 8192 Planck + Gaussian - MHD: Dust + Synch small patches
- d7 - implement in PySM 3 and increase resolution
- Currently used model up until DSR by the r-forecasting group:
- 00 - Simple Gaussian Sync/Dust with uniform amplitude across the sky
- 01 - PySM base (@zonca has higher nside than 512, to 4096? will get to 8192)
- 02 - PySM extended (@zonca has higher nside than 512, to 4096? will get to 8192)
- 03 - Same as 02 but Hensley/Draine dust model
- 04 - HiDPol dust model (by Tuhin Ghosh)
- 05 - Strong decorrelation model
- 06 - MHD based model from Flauger/Hensley (should swap in "08": one with more correct synchrotron)
- 07 - Amplitude modulated Gaussian
- 08 - MKD multilayer model from arxiv/1706.04162
- 09 - Vansyngel model as described in arxiv/1611.02577 with multi-frequency extension
- For delensing, we need small scale polarized non-Gaussian Galactic foregrounds. Currently, only 09 has small scale NG.
- discuss: 00 should be replaced with 07? 00 won't be meaningfully used by the large area survey. But it is useful for the deep survey for sanity checks.
- To generalize 08 and 09 into PySM, @zonca has to ask the creator of these models for code/info.
- Q: are there other Galactic models used in S4 outside of the r-forecasting group?
- Check consistency with Planck
- CO lines?
How to gather requirements from AWG
Extragalactic + Clusters
- Websky, 1 realization
- validated against planck
- lensing: 1 realization
- radio galaxy sources, catalog input, PySM component could generate map on the fly
- tSZ from Planck, CIB from Herschel and Planck, dusty galaxy count compared to Herschel, stack clusters
Noise
Scanning strategy
- https://cmb-s4.org/wiki/index.php/Deeper_SAT_from_Chile_II
- https://cmb-s4.org/wiki/index.php/High_cadence_LAT_from_Chile
High cadence LAT gives lot of f_sky and daily scans for transients
Below only done in case of r detection from Deep SAT:
Jan & Feb we could remove
Clem has already noise pipeline
Delensing LAT from Pole??
Noise simulations for PWG
- SAT: start from BK data, fit noise model, just scaling NET and observing time, only data from Pole
- BK NET calculator does not agree with data (in absolute terms), but only relative scaling matters
- Noise calculator is just used for LAT
- SAT: Extrapolating 220 to 270, 95GHz to lower freqs. Will need to be checked when data is available.
- Check POLARBEAR new released performance, use that to scale?
Delensing LAT at Pole needs a noise model, maybe scaling SPT??
