• Scope
• Applicable documents
• External interfaces
• Acronyms and abbreviations
• Introduction
• Overview
• Dependency on the psf star brightness
• Purpose
• Simulation setup
• Simulated raw images
• Results
• Dependency on the strehl deviation
• Purpose
• Simulation setup
• Simulated raw images
• Results
• Dependency on the FFTS performance
• Purpose
• Simulation setup
• Simulated raw images
• Results
• Dependency on the beam overlap
• Purpose
• Simulation setup
• Simulated raw images
• Results
• Dependency on the target and calibrator spectra
• Purpose
• Simulation setup
• Simulated raw images
• Results

1. The reference images of NGC4151 at 10.1mag including sky background for the J-Band (left panel) and the K-Band (right panel).
2. The simulated raw images for position angles of 108, 144, 180, 216, and 252 degree of NGC4151 at 10.1mag including sky background (top row J-Band, bottom row K-Band).
3. Central 128x128 pixels of the generated J-Band images of a psf star at different magnitudes (from top left to bottomright: 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, and 22mag).
4. Central 128x128 pixels of the generated K-Band images of a psf star at different magnitudes (from top left to bottomright: 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, and 22mag).
5. Horizontal profile through the center of the reconstructed galaxy compared to the ideal image (J-Band).
6. Horizontal profile through the center of the reconstructed galaxy compared to the ideal image (K-Band).
7. Central part of the horizontal profile through the center of the reconstructed galaxy compared to the ideal image (J-Band).
8. Central part of the horizontal profile through the center of the reconstructed galaxy compared to the ideal image (K-Band).
9. J-Band reference image (top left panel), coadded image (top right panel), and J-Band reconstructions using a psf star brightness of 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, and 22mag (from top left to bottom right).
10. K-Band reference image (top left panel), coadded image (top right panel), and K-Band reconstructions using a psf star brightness of 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, and 22mag (from top left to bottom right).
11. Central 128x128 pixels of the generated J-Band images of a psf star at 14 mag and different strehl (from top left to bottom right: 0.20, 0.25, 0.37, 0.29, 0.30, 0.31, 0.33, 0.35, and 0.40).
12. Central 128x128 pixels of the generated K-Band images of a psf star at 14 mag and different strehl (from top left to bottom right: 0.20, 0.25, 0.37, 0.29, 0.30, 0.31, 0.33, 0.35, and 0.40).
13. Horizontal profile through the center of the reconstructed galaxy compared to the ideal image (J-Band).
14. Horizontal profile through the center of the reconstructed galaxy compared to the ideal image (K-Band).
15. Central part of the horizontal profile through the center of the reconstructed galaxy compared to the ideal image (J-Band).
16. Central part of the horizontal profile through the center of the reconstructed galaxy compared to the ideal image (K-Band).
17. J-Band reference image (top left panel), coadded raw image (top middle panel), reconstruction with a perfect psf (1.0 strehl, top right panel), and J-Band reconstructions using a psf star strehl of 0.20, 0.25, 0.27, 0.29, 0.30, 0.31, 0.33, 0.35, and 0.40 (from top left to bottom right).
18. K-Band reference image (top left panel), coadded raw image (top middle panel), reconstruction with a perfect psf (1.0 strehl, top right panel), and K-Band reconstructions using a psf star strehl of 0.20, 0.25, 0.27, 0.29, 0.30, 0.31, 0.33, 0.35, and 0.40 (from top left to bottom right).
19. The simulated J-Band raw images for a position angle of 108 degree of NGC4151 at 10.1mag including sky background with a phase error of 0.0, 0.05, 0.1, 0.2, and 0.5 lambda (from top left to bottom right).
20. The simulated K-Band raw images for a position angle of 108 degree of NGC4151 at 10.1mag including sky background with a phase error of 0.0, 0.05, 0.1, 0.2, and 0.5 lambda (from top left to bottom right).
21. Central 128x128 pixels of the generated J-Band images of a psf star at 14 mag and phase errors (from top left to bottom right: 0.0, 0.05, 0.1, 0.2, and 0.5 lambda).
22. Central 128x128 pixels of the generated K-Band images of a psf star at 14 mag and phase errors (from top left to bottom right: 0.0, 0.05, 0.1, 0.2, and 0.5 lambda).
23. Horizontal profile through the center of the reconstructed galaxy compared to the ideal image (J-Band).
24. Horizontal profile through the center of the reconstructed galaxy compared to the ideal image (K-Band).
25. Central part of the horizontal profile through the center of the reconstructed galaxy compared to the ideal image (J-Band).
26. Central part of the horizontal profile through the center of the reconstructed galaxy compared to the ideal image (K-Band).
27. J-Band coadded images (top row) and reconstructions (bottom row) with phase errors of 0.0, 0.05, 0.1, 0.2, and 0.5.
28. K-Band coadded images (top row) and reconstructions (bottom row) with phase errors of 0.0, 0.05, 0.1, 0.2, and 0.5.
29. The simulated J-Band raw images for a position angle of 108 degree of NGC4151 at 10.1mag including sky background with overlap errors of 0.0 to 0.4 (from top to bottom) and a jitter of 0.0, 0.1, and 0.2 (from left to right).
30. The simulated J-Band raw images for a position angle of 108 degree of NGC4151 at 10.1mag including sky background with overlap errors of 0.6 to 1.0 (from top to bottom) and a jitter of 0.0, 0.1, and 0.2 (from left to right).
31. The simulated K-Band raw images for a position angle of 108 degree of NGC4151 at 10.1mag including sky background with overlap errors of 0.0 to 0.4 (from top to bottom) and a jitter of 0.0, 0.1, and 0.2 (from left to right).
32. The simulated K-Band raw images for a position angle of 108 degree of NGC4151 at 10.1mag including sky background with overlap errors of 0.6 to 1.0 (from top to bottom) and a jitter of 0.0, 0.1, and 0.2 (from left to right).
33. Central 128x128 pixels of the generated J-Band images of a psf star at 14 mag and overlap errors of 0.0 to 0.4 (from top to bottom) and a jitter of 0.0, 0.1, and 0.2 (from left to right).
34. Central 128x128 pixels of the generated J-Band images of a psf star at 14 mag and overlap errors of 0.6 to 1.0 (from top to bottom) and a jitter of 0.0, 0.1, and 0.2 (from left to right).
35. Central 128x128 pixels of the generated K-Band images of a psf star at 14 mag and overlap errors of 0.0 to 0.4 (from top to bottom) and a jitter of 0.0, 0.1, and 0.2 (from left to right).
36. Central 128x128 pixels of the generated K-Band images of a psf star at 14 mag and overlap errors of 0.6 to 1.0 (from top to bottom) and a jitter of 0.0, 0.1, and 0.2 (from left to right).
37. Horizontal profile through the center of the reconstructed galaxy compared to the ideal image (J-Band, no jitter).
38. Horizontal profile through the center of the reconstructed galaxy compared to the ideal image (J-Band, a jitter of 0.1).
39. Horizontal profile through the center of the reconstructed galaxy compared to the ideal image (J-Band, a jitter of 0.2).
40. Horizontal profile through the center of the reconstructed galaxy compared to the ideal image (K-Band, no jitter).
41. Horizontal profile through the center of the reconstructed galaxy compared to the ideal image (K-Band, a jitter of 0.1).
42. Horizontal profile through the center of the reconstructed galaxy compared to the ideal image (K-Band, a jitter of 0.2).
43. Central part of the horizontal profile through the center of the reconstructed galaxy compared to the ideal image (J-Band, no jitter).
44. Central part of the horizontal profile through the center of the reconstructed galaxy compared to the ideal image (J-Band, a jitter of 0.1).
45. Central part of the horizontal profile through the center of the reconstructed galaxy compared to the ideal image (J-Band, a jitter of 0.2).
46. Central part of the horizontal profile through the center of the reconstructed galaxy compared to the ideal image (K-Band, no jitter).
47. Central part of the horizontal profile through the center of the reconstructed galaxy compared to the ideal image (K-Band, a jitter of 0.1).
48. Central part of the horizontal profile through the center of the reconstructed galaxy compared to the ideal image (K-Band, a jitter of 0.2).
49. J-Band coadded raw images with overlap errors of 0.0 to 0.4 (from top to bottom) and a jitter of 0.0, 0.1, and 0.2 (from left to right.
50. J-Band reconstructions with overlap errors of 0.0 to 0.4 (from top to bottom) and a jitter of 0.0, 0.1, and 0.2 (from left to right.
51. J-Band coadded raw images with overlap errors of 0.6 to 1.0 (from top to bottom) and a jitter of 0.0, 0.1, and 0.2 (from left to right.
52. J-Band reconstructions with overlap errors of 0.6 to 1.0 (from top to bottom) and a jitter of 0.0, 0.1, and 0.2 (from left to right.
53. K-Band coadded raw images with overlap errors of 0.0 to 0.4 (from top to bottom) and a jitter of 0.0, 0.1, and 0.2 (from left to right.
54. K-Band reconstructions with overlap errors of 0.0 to 0.4 (from top to bottom) and a jitter of 0.0, 0.1, and 0.2 (from left to right.
55. K-Band coadded raw images with overlap errors of 0.6 to 1.0 (from top to bottom) and a jitter of 0.0, 0.1, and 0.2 (from left to right.
56. K-Band reconstructions with overlap errors of 0.6 to 1.0 (from top to bottom) and a jitter of 0.0, 0.1, and 0.2 (from left to right.
57. The simulated J-Band raw images for a position angle of 108 degree of NGC4151 at 10.1mag including sky background.
58. The simulated K-Band raw images for a position angle of 108 degree of NGC4151 at 10.1mag including sky background.
59. Horizontal profile through the center of the reconstructed galaxy compared to the ideal image (J-Band).
60. Horizontal profile through the center of the reconstructed galaxy compared to the ideal image (K-Band).
61. Central part of the horizontal profile through the center of the reconstructed galaxy compared to the ideal image (J-Band).
62. Central part of the horizontal profile through the center of the reconstructed galaxy compared to the ideal image (K-Band).
63. J-Band coadded raw image on the left and the reconstruction on the right.
64. K-Band coadded raw image on the left and the reconstruction on the right.

1. Applicable documents
2. External interfaces
3. Acronyms and abbreviations
4. Common test setup
5. List of all test cases.
6. Setup for the simulation in J-Band and K-Band, for the common test setup see .
7. Errors depending on the psf star brightness (J-Band).
8. Errors depending on the psf star brightness (K-Band).
9. Setup for the simulation in J-Band and K-Band, for the common test setup see .
10. Errors depending on the psf star strehl (J-Band).
11. Errors depending on the psf star strehl (K-Band).
12. Setup for the simulation in J-Band and K-Band, for the common test setup see .
13. Errors depending on the phase error (J-Band).
14. Errors depending on the phase error (K-Band).
15. Setup for the simulation in J-Band and K-Band, for the common test setup see .
16. Errors depending on the overlap error (J-Band).
17. Errors depending on the overlap error (K-Band).
18. Setup for the simulation in J-Band and K-Band, for the common test setup see .
19. Errors depending on the spectra (J-Band).
20. Errors depending on the spectra (K-Band).

This document describes a series of tests which uses computer simulated data to evaluate the performance of the LINC-NIRVANA Data Reduction Software (LN DRS).

This document describes a series of tests which uses computer simulated data to evaluate the performance of the LINC-NIRVANA Data Reduction Software (LN DRS). Each test focuses on an instrument/observation specific aspect regarding the data which are later on available for the reconstruction task. In addition possible actions are described which assist in dealing with some raw data properties.

Each test section is split in a short description of the purpose of the test, a detailed specification of the setup, a list of the simulated input data, a presentation of the reconstruction results, and a short discussion of recommended actions (optional)

All test described in this document follow a common scheme which includes:

1. Purpose: Description of the purpose of a specific test. This can be mapped to a specific observation condition.
2. Simulation setup: Complete test setup specification including a link to the (online available) generated imput data for the data reduction pipeline.
3. Simulated raw images: The input data is presented.
4. Results: All reconstruction results are presented including images, profiles through the reconstructions, and error measurements..
5. Actions: This section contains a description of possible actions which give the user hints how to deal with the test specific conditions..

Since the LINC-NIRVANA Data Reduction Software implements an instrument specific pipeline, all test share a common setup (see table 4).

The raw data for all tests were generated with a set of C-programs and a test specific Bash-scripts. These Bash-scripts additionally generates the parameter files which are later used by the LN DRS pipeline implemented in IDL. The principle steps for generating the input raw data files used by the pipeline are:

1. Generate the reference pupil, psf, sky background, target, and psf-star images. The reference images are based on an ideal 22.8m single dish telescope (no center hole!).
2. Generate for each position angle an atmospheric psf where the properties of the atmosphere (including strehl) are given by the test setup. In the simulation of the raw images, the fringes are always vertical and the object is rotated.
3. Generate a raw image of the target for each position angle:
   1. Convolve the target (no background) with the psf for that position angle.
   2. Rotate that image about the position angle to achieve vertical fringes.
   3. Add the flat sky background to that image.
   4. Apply poisson noise to the final image.
   At the end, all images are combined to an image cube.
4. Generate for each psf-star magnitude and position angle a raw psf-star image:
   • Convolve the psf-star (no background) with the psf for that position angle.
   • Rotate that image about the position angle to achieve vertical fringes.
   • Add the flat sky background to that image.
   • Apply poisson noise to the final image.
   At the end, all images for one brightness level are combined to an image cube.
5. For each brightness level a pipeline parameter file is generated.

The basis of the simulations is an image of NGC4151 with an overlayed dust torus. In figure 1 the images in J-Band and K-Band, convolved with the ideal 22.8m telescope psf are shown.

Figure 1: The reference images of NGC4151 at 10.1mag including sky background for the J-Band (left panel) and the K-Band (right panel).

For some tests, the images for the target and psf-star are generated separately and sometimes later combined before the poisson noise is applied.

In the section discussing the reconstruction results, an error measurement is used which calculates the global difference between the ideal image and a reconstruction convolved with the ideal psf (both 23m psf). This measurement is described in the paper "K-H. Hofmann, T. Driebe, M. Heininger, D. Schertl and G. Weigelt, 2005, A&A, 444, 983-993".

A list of all test described in this document is given in table 5

This simulation should give an answer to the question how the quality of the reconstruction depends on the magnitude of a psf star. The difficulties arising from a non constant sky background due to an object halo, or an imperfect AO are ignored.

The setup of the simulation is described in table 6. The experiment uses a target which consists of a scaled down image of NGC4151 and an overlayed image of a simulated dust torus. This object is observed (we assume this) in J-Band and K-band five times at different position angles. The image contains exactly one star which can be used as a psf star. It was additionally assumed, that the background around this star could be perfectly compensated (no inhomogenious sky background or target halo).

The raw data were generated according to the common scheme described in section Overview. In addition the images for the target and psf-star are generated separately which means, that the psf-star image is not influenced by the target (no halo, etc.).

All simulated input data for the LN DRS pipeline are available as a tar-file (ex1_j_input.tar.gz (16MB) and ex1_k_input.tar.gz (18MB)). The corresponding results are also available as tar files (ex1_j_results.tar.gz (4.8MB) and ex1_k_results.tar.gz (5.2MB)).

The basis of the simulation is an image of NGC4151 with an overlayed dust torus (see figure 1. The simulated raw images are shown in figure 2 (top row J-Band, bottom row K-Band).

Figure 2: The simulated raw images for position angles of 108, 144, 180, 216, and 252 degree of NGC4151 at 10.1mag including sky background (top row J-Band, bottom row K-Band).

The simulated raw LBT interferograms used for the deconvolution are ideal images, they are not influenced by detector effects like different pixel gain or bad pixels. In figure 3 (J-Band) and figure 4 (K-Band) the psf-stars for some stellar brightness levels are shown.

Figure 3: Central 128x128 pixels of the generated J-Band images of a psf star at different magnitudes (from top left to bottomright: 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, and 22mag).

Figure 4: Central 128x128 pixels of the generated K-Band images of a psf star at different magnitudes (from top left to bottomright: 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, and 22mag).

The results of the reconstructions of the raw data with the IDL SW are processed by a script. It extracts the error measurements and profiles as plots. In figure 5 (J-Band) and figure 6 (K-Band) a horizontal cut slightly above the intensity maximum of the reconstructions compared with the ideal reference image is shown, in figure 7 (J-Band) and figure 8 (K-Band) and only the central part of the profile is shown.

Figure 5: Horizontal profile through the center of the reconstructed galaxy compared to the ideal image (J-Band).

Figure 6: Horizontal profile through the center of the reconstructed galaxy compared to the ideal image (K-Band).

Figure 7: Central part of the horizontal profile through the center of the reconstructed galaxy compared to the ideal image (J-Band).

Figure 8: Central part of the horizontal profile through the center of the reconstructed galaxy compared to the ideal image (K-Band).

A comparison of the reconstructions depending on the psf star brightness is presented in figure 9 for the J-Band. For the K-Band the results are presented in figure 10.

Figure 9: J-Band reference image (top left panel), coadded image (top right panel), and J-Band reconstructions using a psf star brightness of 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, and 22mag (from top left to bottom right).

Figure 10: K-Band reference image (top left panel), coadded image (top right panel), and K-Band reconstructions using a psf star brightness of 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, and 22mag (from top left to bottom right).

In table 7 (J-Band) and table 8 (K-Band) the errors depending on the psf star brightness is presented.

In some observation conditions the psf of the target is not equal to the psf of the psf-star. Several reasons for the discrepancies do exist. For this test case different AO-performances for the target and psf-star are assumed which result in different strehl values. Unequal spectra of the target and the psf-star or other sources for discrepancies are not coverd by this test case.

The setup of the simulation is described in table 9. The input data for the test uses a raw target image with a strehl of 30 percent and the strehl of the psf-star covers a range from 20 percent up to 40 percent. In addition an artificial perfect psf (strehl 100 percent) is used for the reconstruction. In this experiment a bright psf star is chosen (14 mag), so that the reconstructions are not influenced by the photon noise of the calibrator.

The raw data were generated according to the common scheme described in section Overview. In addition the images for the target and psf-star are generated separately which means, that the psf-star image is not influenced by the target (no halo, etc.).

All simulated input data for the LN DRS pipeline are available as a tar-file (ex2_j_input.tar.gz (18MB) and ex2_k_input.tar.gz (21MB)). The corresponding results are also available as tar files (ex2_j_results.tar.gz (5.5MB) and ex2_k_results.tar.gz (5.7MB)).

The basis of the simulation is an image of NGC4151 with an overlayed dust torus (see figure 1). The simulated raw images are shown in figure 2.

The simulated raw LBT interferograms used for the deconvolution are ideal images, they are not influenced by detector effects like different pixel gain or bad pixels. In figure 11 (J-Band) and figure 12 (K-Band) the psf-stars for some strehl values are shown.

Figure 11: Central 128x128 pixels of the generated J-Band images of a psf star at 14 mag and different strehl (from top left to bottom right: 0.20, 0.25, 0.37, 0.29, 0.30, 0.31, 0.33, 0.35, and 0.40).

Figure 12: Central 128x128 pixels of the generated K-Band images of a psf star at 14 mag and different strehl (from top left to bottom right: 0.20, 0.25, 0.37, 0.29, 0.30, 0.31, 0.33, 0.35, and 0.40).

The results of the reconstructions of the raw data with the IDL SW are processed by a script. It extracts the error measurements and profiles as plots. In figure 13 (J-Band) and figure 14 (K-Band) a horizontal cut slightly above the intensity maximum of the reconstructions compared with the ideal reference image is shown, in figure 15 (J-Band) and figure 16 (K-Band) and only the central part of the profile is shown.

Figure 13: Horizontal profile through the center of the reconstructed galaxy compared to the ideal image (J-Band).

Figure 14: Horizontal profile through the center of the reconstructed galaxy compared to the ideal image (K-Band).

Figure 15: Central part of the horizontal profile through the center of the reconstructed galaxy compared to the ideal image (J-Band).

Figure 16: Central part of the horizontal profile through the center of the reconstructed galaxy compared to the ideal image (K-Band).

A comparison of the reconstructions depending on the psf star strehl is presented in figure 17for the J-Band. For the K-Band the results are presented in figure 18.

Figure 17: J-Band reference image (top left panel), coadded raw image (top middle panel), reconstruction with a perfect psf (1.0 strehl, top right panel), and J-Band reconstructions using a psf star strehl of 0.20, 0.25, 0.27, 0.29, 0.30, 0.31, 0.33, 0.35, and 0.40 (from top left to bottom right).

Figure 18: K-Band reference image (top left panel), coadded raw image (top middle panel), reconstruction with a perfect psf (1.0 strehl, top right panel), and K-Band reconstructions using a psf star strehl of 0.20, 0.25, 0.27, 0.29, 0.30, 0.31, 0.33, 0.35, and 0.40 (from top left to bottom right).

In table 10 (J-Band) and table 11 (K-Band) the errors depending on the psf star strehl is presented.

This simulation investigates the influence of the FFTS performance on the quality of the reconstructions. This means that the AO will give a strehl of 0.30 and the FFTS will give a residual OPD error.

The setup of the simulation is described in table 12. The input data for the test uses a strehl value of 0.30 for the target and a psf star which has a magnitude of 14. In addition the target and psf star images are influenced by a gaussian distributed phase error with the same standard deviation, resulting in a fringe contrast loss. This error is modelled as a phase error on the second pupil and for each phase screen (the properties of the atmosphere will result in about 600 phase screens per position angle) a random phase error is introduced. This phase error is specified as a gaussian error with a standard deviation of the OPD between 0.0 (perfect FFTS) and 0.5 lambda (worst case, no FFTS available).

The raw data were generated according to the common scheme described in section Overview. In addition the phase screens for the psfs are influenced by a phase error on the second pupil, and the images for the target and psf-star are generated separately which means, that the psf-star image is not influenced by the target (no halo, etc.).

All simulated input data for the LN DRS pipeline are available as a tar-file (ex3_j_input.tar.gz (18MB) and ex3_k_input.tar.gz (20MB)). The corresponding results are also available as tar files (ex3_j_results.tar.gz (2.7MB) and ex3_k_results.tar.gz (2.8MB)).

The basis of the simulation is an image of NGC4151 with an overlayed dust torus (see figure 1. The simulated raw images for a position angle of 108 degree are shown in figure 19 (J-Band) and figure 20 (K-Band).

Figure 19: The simulated J-Band raw images for a position angle of 108 degree of NGC4151 at 10.1mag including sky background with a phase error of 0.0, 0.05, 0.1, 0.2, and 0.5 lambda (from top left to bottom right).

Figure 20: The simulated K-Band raw images for a position angle of 108 degree of NGC4151 at 10.1mag including sky background with a phase error of 0.0, 0.05, 0.1, 0.2, and 0.5 lambda (from top left to bottom right).

The simulated raw LBT interferograms used for the deconvolution are ideal images, they are not influenced by detector effects like different pixel gain or bad pixels. In figure 21 (J-Band) and figure 22 (K-Band) the psf-stars for the different phase errors and one position angle are shown.

Figure 21: Central 128x128 pixels of the generated J-Band images of a psf star at 14 mag and phase errors (from top left to bottom right: 0.0, 0.05, 0.1, 0.2, and 0.5 lambda).

Figure 22: Central 128x128 pixels of the generated K-Band images of a psf star at 14 mag and phase errors (from top left to bottom right: 0.0, 0.05, 0.1, 0.2, and 0.5 lambda).

The results of the reconstructions of the raw data with the IDL SW are processed by a script. It extracts the error measurements and profiles as plots. In figure 23 (J-Band) and figure 24 (K-Band) a horizontal profile of the reconstructions compared with the ideal reference image is shown, in figure 25 (J-Band) and figure 26 (K-Band) and only the central part of the profile is shown.

Figure 23: Horizontal profile through the center of the reconstructed galaxy compared to the ideal image (J-Band).

Figure 24: Horizontal profile through the center of the reconstructed galaxy compared to the ideal image (K-Band).

Figure 25: Central part of the horizontal profile through the center of the reconstructed galaxy compared to the ideal image (J-Band).

Figure 26: Central part of the horizontal profile through the center of the reconstructed galaxy compared to the ideal image (K-Band).

A comparison of the reconstructions depending on the phase error is presented in figure 27 for the J-Band. For the K-Band the results are presented in figure 28.

Figure 27: J-Band coadded images (top row) and reconstructions (bottom row) with phase errors of 0.0, 0.05, 0.1, 0.2, and 0.5.

Figure 28: K-Band coadded images (top row) and reconstructions (bottom row) with phase errors of 0.0, 0.05, 0.1, 0.2, and 0.5.

In table 13 (J-Band) and table 14 (K-Band) the errors depending on the phase error is presented.

This test investigates the dependency of the reconstruction error on overlap errors (flexure). For this test, the beam position error is composed of a fixed offset and a gaussian distributed jitter.

The setup of the simulation is described in table 15. The input data for the test uses a strehl value of 0.30 for target and calibrator. The psf star has a magnitude of 14. In addition, the target and psf star PSF are influenced by a beam position error (overlap error).

Each beam position error is described by two values: a fixed offset and a small jitter given in airy disc radii (1.22 \lambda / D). For the offset error values from 0.0 (no offset) up to 1.0 in steps of 0.2 and for the jitter 0.0 (no jitter), 0.1, and 0.2 are used.

In order to generate a PSF (target and calibrator), for each position angle, a random angle (uniform distribution) is calculated. The first beam is shifted along this angle from the nominal position by the specified offset. The second beam is shifted into the opposite direction. Therefore the total overlap error is doubled. For each phase screen, a small additional jitter is calculated by generating a random angle (uniform distribution) and a random deviation (gaussian distribution with the standard deviation given as jitter). This means, that for a PSF the average beam position is fixed, but for each phase screen a small random deviation is calculated.

The raw data were generated according to the common scheme described in section Overview. In addition the phase screens for the psfs are influenced by a beam position error on both pupils, and the images for the target and psf-star are generated separately which means, that the psf-star image is not influenced by the target (no halo, etc.) and shows a different position error.

All simulated input data for the LN DRS pipeline are available as a tar-file (ex5_j_input.tar.gz (91MB) and ex5_k_input.tar.gz (101MB)). The corresponding results are also available as tar files (ex5_j_results.tar.gz (9.8MB) and ex5_k_results.tar.gz (11MB)).

The basis of the simulation is an image of NGC4151 with an overlayed dust torus (see figure 1. The simulated raw images for a position angle of 108 degree are shown in figure 29 and figure 30 for the J-Band and in figure 31 and figure 32 for the K-Band.

Figure 29: The simulated J-Band raw images for a position angle of 108 degree of NGC4151 at 10.1mag including sky background with overlap errors of 0.0 to 0.4 (from top to bottom) and a jitter of 0.0, 0.1, and 0.2 (from left to right).

Figure 30: The simulated J-Band raw images for a position angle of 108 degree of NGC4151 at 10.1mag including sky background with overlap errors of 0.6 to 1.0 (from top to bottom) and a jitter of 0.0, 0.1, and 0.2 (from left to right).

Figure 31: The simulated K-Band raw images for a position angle of 108 degree of NGC4151 at 10.1mag including sky background with overlap errors of 0.0 to 0.4 (from top to bottom) and a jitter of 0.0, 0.1, and 0.2 (from left to right).

Figure 32: The simulated K-Band raw images for a position angle of 108 degree of NGC4151 at 10.1mag including sky background with overlap errors of 0.6 to 1.0 (from top to bottom) and a jitter of 0.0, 0.1, and 0.2 (from left to right).

The simulated raw LBT interferograms used for the deconvolution are ideal images, they are not influenced by detector effects like different pixel gain or bad pixels. In figure 33, figure 34 (J-Band), figure 35, and figure 36 (K-Band) the psf-stars for the different overlap errors and one position angle are shown.

Figure 33: Central 128x128 pixels of the generated J-Band images of a psf star at 14 mag and overlap errors of 0.0 to 0.4 (from top to bottom) and a jitter of 0.0, 0.1, and 0.2 (from left to right).

Figure 34: Central 128x128 pixels of the generated J-Band images of a psf star at 14 mag and overlap errors of 0.6 to 1.0 (from top to bottom) and a jitter of 0.0, 0.1, and 0.2 (from left to right).

Figure 35: Central 128x128 pixels of the generated K-Band images of a psf star at 14 mag and overlap errors of 0.0 to 0.4 (from top to bottom) and a jitter of 0.0, 0.1, and 0.2 (from left to right).

Figure 36: Central 128x128 pixels of the generated K-Band images of a psf star at 14 mag and overlap errors of 0.6 to 1.0 (from top to bottom) and a jitter of 0.0, 0.1, and 0.2 (from left to right).

The results of the reconstructions of the raw data with the IDL SW are processed by a script. It extracts the error measurements and profiles as plots. In figure 37, figure 38, and figure 39 (J-Band) and figure 40, figure 41, and figure 42 (K-Band) a horizontal profile of the reconstructions compared with the ideal reference image is shown. In figure 43, figure 44, and figure 45 (J-Band) and figure 46, figure 47, and figure 48 (K-Band) and only the central part of the profile is shown.

Figure 37: Horizontal profile through the center of the reconstructed galaxy compared to the ideal image (J-Band, no jitter).

Figure 38: Horizontal profile through the center of the reconstructed galaxy compared to the ideal image (J-Band, a jitter of 0.1).

Figure 39: Horizontal profile through the center of the reconstructed galaxy compared to the ideal image (J-Band, a jitter of 0.2).

Figure 40: Horizontal profile through the center of the reconstructed galaxy compared to the ideal image (K-Band, no jitter).

Figure 41: Horizontal profile through the center of the reconstructed galaxy compared to the ideal image (K-Band, a jitter of 0.1).

Figure 42: Horizontal profile through the center of the reconstructed galaxy compared to the ideal image (K-Band, a jitter of 0.2).

Figure 43: Central part of the horizontal profile through the center of the reconstructed galaxy compared to the ideal image (J-Band, no jitter).

Figure 44: Central part of the horizontal profile through the center of the reconstructed galaxy compared to the ideal image (J-Band, a jitter of 0.1).

Figure 45: Central part of the horizontal profile through the center of the reconstructed galaxy compared to the ideal image (J-Band, a jitter of 0.2).

Figure 46: Central part of the horizontal profile through the center of the reconstructed galaxy compared to the ideal image (K-Band, no jitter).

Figure 47: Central part of the horizontal profile through the center of the reconstructed galaxy compared to the ideal image (K-Band, a jitter of 0.1).

Figure 48: Central part of the horizontal profile through the center of the reconstructed galaxy compared to the ideal image (K-Band, a jitter of 0.2).

A comparison of the reconstructions depending on the phase error is presented in figure 49, figure 50, figure 51, and figure 52 for the J-Band. For the K-Band the results are presented in figure 53, figure 54, figure 55, and figure 56.

Figure 49: J-Band coadded raw images with overlap errors of 0.0 to 0.4 (from top to bottom) and a jitter of 0.0, 0.1, and 0.2 (from left to right.

Figure 50: J-Band reconstructions with overlap errors of 0.0 to 0.4 (from top to bottom) and a jitter of 0.0, 0.1, and 0.2 (from left to right.

Figure 51: J-Band coadded raw images with overlap errors of 0.6 to 1.0 (from top to bottom) and a jitter of 0.0, 0.1, and 0.2 (from left to right.

Figure 52: J-Band reconstructions with overlap errors of 0.6 to 1.0 (from top to bottom) and a jitter of 0.0, 0.1, and 0.2 (from left to right.

Figure 53: K-Band coadded raw images with overlap errors of 0.0 to 0.4 (from top to bottom) and a jitter of 0.0, 0.1, and 0.2 (from left to right.

Figure 54: K-Band reconstructions with overlap errors of 0.0 to 0.4 (from top to bottom) and a jitter of 0.0, 0.1, and 0.2 (from left to right.

Figure 55: K-Band coadded raw images with overlap errors of 0.6 to 1.0 (from top to bottom) and a jitter of 0.0, 0.1, and 0.2 (from left to right.

Figure 56: K-Band reconstructions with overlap errors of 0.6 to 1.0 (from top to bottom) and a jitter of 0.0, 0.1, and 0.2 (from left to right.

In table 16 (J-Band) and table 17 (K-Band) the errors depending on the overlap error is presented.

This test investigates the dependency of the reconstruction error on the spectra of the target and calibrator. For this test, the PSFs are generated using several (10) monochromatic PSFs.

The setup of the simulation is described in table 18. The input data for the test uses a strehl value of 0.30 for target and calibrator. The psf star has a magnitude of 14. In addition, the target and psf star PSF are generated by using 10 monochromatic PSFs.

Tme multi-monochromatic PSFs are created by generating a monochromatic OPD screen for the shortest wavelength \lambda_0. The OPD values are rescaled for a given wavelength \lambda (we used 10 discrete wavelength to sample a spectral band) by \lambda_0 / \lambda. The result was put into an array which was enlarged by \lambda / \lambda_0. A PSF for a specific wavelength was the calculated by |FFT^{-1}|^2, weighted by the spectral intensity and all summed up to the final multi-monochromatic PSF.

The raw data were generated according to the common scheme described in section Overview. In addition, the target and psf star PSF are generated by using 10 monochromatic PSFs.

All simulated input data for the LN DRS pipeline are available as a tar-file (ex6_j_input.tar.gz (3.9MB) and ex6_k_input.tar.gz (4.3MB)). The corresponding results are also available as tar files (ex6_j_results.tar.gz (552KB) and ex6_k_results.tar.gz (546KB)).

The basis of the simulation is an image of NGC4151 with an overlayed dust torus (see figure 1. The simulated raw images for a position angle of 108 degree are shown in figure 57 for the J-Band and in figure 58 for the K-Band.

Figure 57: The simulated J-Band raw images for a position angle of 108 degree of NGC4151 at 10.1mag including sky background.

Figure 58: The simulated K-Band raw images for a position angle of 108 degree of NGC4151 at 10.1mag including sky background.

The results of the reconstructions of the raw data with the IDL SW are processed by a script. It extracts the error measurements and profiles as plots. In figure 59 (J-Band) and figure 60 (K-Band) a horizontal profile of the reconstructions compared with the ideal reference image is shown. In figure 61 (J-Band) and figure 62 (K-Band) and only the central part of the profile is shown.

Figure 59: Horizontal profile through the center of the reconstructed galaxy compared to the ideal image (J-Band).

Figure 60: Horizontal profile through the center of the reconstructed galaxy compared to the ideal image (K-Band).

Figure 61: Central part of the horizontal profile through the center of the reconstructed galaxy compared to the ideal image (J-Band).

Figure 62: Central part of the horizontal profile through the center of the reconstructed galaxy compared to the ideal image (K-Band).

A comparison of the reconstructions depending on the spectra is presented in figure 63 for the J-Band. For the K-Band the results are presented in figure 64.

Figure 63: J-Band coadded raw image on the left and the reconstruction on the right.

Figure 64: K-Band coadded raw image on the left and the reconstruction on the right.

In table 19 (J-Band) and table 20 (K-Band) the errors depending on the spectra is presented.