论文标题
ALMA高频长基线运动在2017年:频段与波段和内相校准技术和相位校准器分离角的比较
ALMA High-frequency Long-baseline Campaign in 2017: A Comparison of the Band-to-band and In-band Phase Calibration Techniques and Phase-calibrator Separation Angles
论文作者
论文摘要
Atacama大毫米/亚毫米阵列(ALMA)以15至5毫米的空间分辨率(MAS)在275-950GHz(0.87-0.32mm)的15至16km碱基中获得。随着Alma敏感性和类星体密度的降低,高频校准是具有挑战性的。与目标高频相比,带对波段(B2B)技术在较低的频率下观察到可检测到的准频率。校准涉及频率和时间阶段转换为目标频率之间几乎恒定的仪器相的偏移。用差分增益校准(DGC)序列解决了仪器偏移量,该序列由强的类星体的低频和高频扫描组成。在这里,我们使用2-15公里的基准和校准器分离角在$ \ sim $ 0.68和$ \ sim $ 11.65 $^{\ courc} $之间比较了高频($> $ 289GHz)的B2B和带内相引用。分析表明:(1)B2B的DGC产生连贯性损失$ <$ 7%的DGC期RMS残差$ <$ 30 $^{\ circ} $。 (2)使用封闭校准器($ <$ <$ 1.67 $^{\ circ} $)的B2B图像优于使用远方图像($> $> $ 2.42 $^{\ circ} $)。 (3)对于更遥远的校准器,如果提供校准器$ \ sim $ 2 $^{\ circ} $,则优选B2B。 (4)由于天线位置的不确定性和亚最佳相引用,由于相位校准器分离角的增加而降低图像相干性和较差的图像质量。 (5)为了实现$> $> $ 70%的连贯性(16 km)频段7(289GHz)观测值,校准器应在目标的$ \ sim $ 4 $^{\ circ} $之内。
The Atacama Large millimeter/submillimeter Array (ALMA) obtains spatial resolutions of 15 to 5 milli-arcsecond (mas) at 275-950GHz (0.87-0.32mm) with 16km baselines. Calibration at higher-frequencies is challenging as ALMA sensitivity and quasar density decrease. The Band-to-Band (B2B) technique observes a detectable quasar at lower frequency that is closer to the target, compared to one at the target high-frequency. Calibration involves a nearly constant instrumental phase offset between the frequencies and the conversion of the temporal phases to the target frequency. The instrumental offsets are solved with a differential-gain-calibration (DGC) sequence, consisting of alternating low and high frequency scans of strong quasar. Here we compare B2B and in-band phase referencing for high-frequencies ($>$289GHz) using 2-15km baselines and calibrator separation angles between $\sim$0.68 and $\sim$11.65$^{\circ}$. The analysis shows that: (1) DGC for B2B produces a coherence loss $<$7% for DGC phase RMS residuals $<$30$^{\circ}$. (2) B2B images using close calibrators ( $<$1.67$^{\circ}$ ) are superior to in-band images using distant ones ( $>$2.42$^{\circ}$ ). (3) For more distant calibrators, B2B is preferred if it provides a calibrator $\sim$2$^{\circ}$ closer than the best in-band calibrator. (4) Decreasing image coherence and poorer image quality occur with increasing phase calibrator separation angle because of uncertainties in the antenna positions and sub-optimal phase referencing. (5) To achieve $>$70% coherence for long-baseline (16 km) band 7 (289GHz) observations, calibrators should be within $\sim$4$^{\circ}$ of the target.