From sung@phys.lsu.edu Wed Aug 24 19:15:36 2005 Date: Wed, 24 Aug 2005 18:15:32 -0500 From: Myungkee Sung To: Keith Riles Cc: John T. Whelan , LSC Detector Characterization Working Group Subject: Re: [ligo-dc] zero alphas and betas for S4 Hello, I finally found where it went wrong and this will be fixed for the next release of the calibration for sure. Fortunately it affected only L1, which I found one more segment with the same problem. In summary, the following two segments in L1 are zeroed with this problem; 793517653 793527013 9360 794822293 794837233 14940 Sorry for the inconvenience, Myungkee On Aug 22, 2005, at 10:56 PM, Keith Riles wrote: > Would you go through the alpha/beta file and see if there > are other examples of zeroed coeffiecients? I can add more > CALIB_LINE_V03_60_SEC flags for use until the V04 calibration > is released. > > On Mon, 22 Aug 2005, Myungkee Sung wrote: > >> On Aug 22, 2005, at 10:16 AM, John T. Whelan wrote: >> >>> There seem to be some times for which the alpha and beta coefficients >>> in the S4 calibration files (for L1 at least) are zero, but which are >>> not marked by any relevant DQ flag that I know of. A non-exhaustive >>> list is: 794822293 794822353 794822413 794822473 794822773 794822833 >>> 794822893 794822953 794823013 794823073 794823133 794823193 >>> ... 794836813 794836873 794836933 794837053 794837113 >> >>> So I have several questions: >>> >>> -- Will these times be filled in in a later calibration version? If >>> not, are there plans to add a DQ flag marking them to the S4 >>> segments? >> >> These times seem to have good calibration with L1. >> I can not find why those were filled with zeros in V3 calibration. >> Those will be included in the V4 calibration. (Not likely in DQ list) >> >>> -- What is the appropriate thing to do with these times: not analyze >>> them, use DARM_ERR and assume alpha*beta = 1, or something else? >> >> Assuming alpha*beta=1 might be okay for now. >> If I find any reason to drop these, then I will let you know.