Sergio and Fabio,
I like to encourage you to use STEREO EUVI data, which would
provide
you the ultimate test to subtract the correct background,
because you
see a loop from two different directions and have two independent
backgrounds. You can test the self-consistence of background
subtraction,
if you obtain the same EM of the loop from two spacecraft.
If you look into my recent STEREO paper, you see that one can
subtract the background with an accuracy of about 10%.
See Fig.8 therein.
Cheers,
Markus
Aschwanden,M.J.,
Nitta,N.V., Wuelser,J.P., and Lemen,J.R. 2008, The Astrophysical
Journal, 680, 1477-1495
URL1="http://www.lmsal.com/~aschwand/eprints/2008_stereo2.pdf"
First 3D reconstructions of coronal loops with the
STEREO A and B spacecraft: II. Electron Density and Temperature
Measurements
On Feb 11, 2010, at 3:02 AM, Fabio Reale wrote:
Dear friends
let me inform you about the following preprint on Astro-PH,
http://arxiv.org/abs/1002.2121
regarding:
the importance of background subtraction in the
analysis of coronal loops observed with TRACE
by Sergio Terzo and Fabio Reale, accepted for publication on A&A
Abstract
In the framework of TRACE coronal observations, we compare the analysis
and
diagnostics of a loop after subtracting the background with two
different and
independent methods. The dataset includes sequences of images in the
171 A, 195
A filter bands of TRACE. One background subtraction method consists in
taking
as background values those obtained from interpolation between
concentric
strips around the analyzed loop. The other method is a pixel-to-pixel
subtraction of the final image when the loop had completely faded out,
already
used by Reale & Ciaravella 2006. We compare the emission
distributions along
the loop obtained with the two methods and find that they are
considerably
different. We find differences as well in the related derive filter
ratio and
temperature profiles. In particular, the pixel-to-pixel subtraction
leads to
coherent diagnostics of a cooling loop. With the other subtraction the
diagnostics are much less clear. The background subtraction is a
delicate issue
in the analysis of a loop. The pixel-to-pixel subtraction appears to be
more
reliable, but its application is not always possible. Subtraction from
interpolation between surrounding regions can produce higher systematic
errors,
because of intersecting structures and of the large amount of
subtracted
emission in TRACE observations.
<reale.vcf>_______________________________________________
Loops mailing list
Loops@solar.physics.montana.edu
https://mithra.physics.montana.edu/mailman/listinfo/loops
____________________________________________
Dr. Markus J. Aschwanden
Solar & Astrophysics Laboratory
Lockheed Martin Advanced Techology Center
Org. ADBS, Bldg. 252
3251 Hanover St., Palo Alto, CA 94304, USA
Phone: 650-424-4001, FAX: 650-424-3994
_______________________________________
____________________________________
_______________________________________________
Loops mailing list
Loops@solar.physics.montana.edu
https://mithra.physics.montana.edu/mailman/listinfo/loops