IRAS Explanatory Supplement
V. Data Reduction
C. Source Detection
Table of Contents  Index  Previous Section  Next Section
The calibrated raw data for each of the 59 operating detectors were examined for point sources and small extended sources. The detection of the latter is described in Section V.E.1. For each observation the accepted point source detections were passed, with detector number, time of detection (and uncertainty), flux (and uncertainty), signaltonoise ratio (SNR), and the correlation coefficient with the point source template (CC, see below), to the secondsconfirmation processor (Section V.D.2). A noise history was also created for each detector. If a detection occurred in a onesecond period in which the analogtodigital converter was saturated, then the detection was flagged.
C.1 Square Wave Filter
Figure V.C.1 a) An eightpoint zerosum,
squarewave filter was applied to the data streams (top panel);
b) The detection processor looked for positive square wave peaks
between zero crossings in the filtered data stream (bottom panel). larger largest 
The first step in the detection process was to search for potential sources by applying a narrow bandpass digital filter to the detector data streams. This filter consisted of an eightpoint zerosum squarewave function. The effect of the filter was to subtract the first two and last two points from the sum of the middle four points; more formally, for a sequence of data points x_{i} (Fig. V.C.1a), the amplitude of the squarewave of x at the point i is defined as:
(V.C.1)
This squarewave filter was applied at each point in the data stream,
and a search was made for positive squarewave excursions between zero
crossings, defined as a pair of data points (i,j) such that
(see Fig. V.C.1b):
E(x,i) > 0; E(x,k) >/ 0 for i </ k </ j; E(x,j+1) < 0; and for some n, E(x,n) < 0 and E(x,n),....., E(x,i1) < 0. 
C.2 Noise Estimator
The noise N_{x} for a data stream was defined as the median of all E(x,p) for squarewave peaks p. Such positive squarewave excursions occurred about once every 6 samples. It was found from prelaunch simulations and from analysis of inflight data that this median noise estimator gave a reasonable representation of the rms noise, in the sense that
(V.C.2)
The enormous volume of data meant that determination of a running estimate of the rms noise would have involved a prohibitive computational run time.
The initial value of N_{x} was the median of the first
50 squarewave peaks. N_{x} was then updated at every
squarewave peak E(x,p) as follows:
The parameter controlled the stability of the noise estimator. As approached 1, the noise estimator became very stable, but it also lagged behind any change in the noise by about 5/(1  ) samples. In tuning the value of great importance was attached to achieving a stable noise estimate at high Galactic latitudes, where the noise was mainly due to detector noise, and a value = 0.95 was set at 12, 25 and 60 µm, and 0.90 at 100 µm. This meant that the noise estimate lagged by about 25', 25', 50', 50' at 12, 25, 60 and 100 µm. Regions with steep gradients in the density of point sources, such as the Galactic plane, had large gradients in the noise amplitude. Hence the noise was underestimated as the plane was approached and overestimated after it was passed (Sections V.C.7, VIII.D.6). This error was very large, and since sources were thresholded partly on signaltonoise ratio (Section V.C.4, below), the effective threshold was raised to very large values after passing the Galactic plane, resulting in a shadow zone in which few sources were accepted. To keep the extent of the 100 µm shadow zone no larger than that at 60 µm, was set to 0.90 at 100 µm compared with 0.95 at 60 µm. However, this adversely affected the stability of the 100 µm noise estimate in the presence of cirrus at higher Galactic latitudes, resulting in the rejection of some detections that should have been accepted and hence a reduction in completeness of the catalog at 100 µm (Section VIII.D).
The noise estimate was maintained in a noise history file for each detector after multiplication by the factor to convert it to an estimate of the rms noise on a single sample. To compress the size of this file, an entry was made only if linear extrapolation of the previous two entries would lead to an error greater than 35%.
C.3 Timing Estimate
The time of the squarewave peak at E(x,p) was estimated from the maximum of the parabola passing through the three points (p  1,E(x,p  1)), (p,E(x,p)), (p + 1, E(x,p + 1)). The delay between a source in the unfiltered data and its peak in the squarewave function was subtracted from the estimate to give the detection time. A small offset to account for electronic delay and the sampling time of the detector was included. The timing uncertainty was taken from a lookup table as a function of the values of signaltonoise ratio and correlation coefficient for the source.
C.4 Correlation with Point Source Template
The heart of the point source detection processor was the comparison of the data for candidate sources selected by the squarewave filter with the profile, or template, expected for an ideal point source. For this purpose the 11 samples centered on the candidate detection time, Y_{i}, i = 0...10, were compared with the appropriately shifted template R_{i} superimposed on a linear baseline. The amplitude A of the detection was determined from fitting the 11 data values Y_{i} to the function
(V.C.3)
where B is the baseline height and M is its slope, A, M, and B were determined by the method of least squares, i.e., by minimizing(V.C.3.2)
where stands for(V.C.3.3)
Thus,
(V.C.4.1)
The correlation coefficient of y_{i} with R_{i} is given by
(V.C.5)
A candidate detection was accepted only if
(i)
(V.C.6.1)
and(ii) ,
(V.C.6.2)
where the factor 1.2 converts the median noise estimate to an rms noise estimate (see Section V.C.2).
The total rms uncertainty in amplitude, A, over the 11 data samples can be shown to be
(V.C.7)
Thus the correlation coefficient is a measure of the local signaltonoise ratio and a threshold of 0.87 corresponds to a signaltonoise ratio of about 5.7. In regions where the noise was roughly independent of time, the main thresholding was therefore provided by the correlation coefficient. The squarewave filter threshold (Section V.C.1 above) was set low so that as few acceptable detections as possible were rejected, within the constraints of the available computer time. It should be noted that a low correlation coefficient for a bright pointsource is probably an indication that the source is slightly extended. In regions of high source density (see Section V.H.6), where extended structure is a considerable problem, the correlation coefficient threshold was increased to 0.97.
C.5 Determination of Templates
The templates for each wavelength band were stored with a sampling frequency 64 times that of the survey data. The candidate detection time in sampling was determined, rounded off to the nearest 1/64th of a sample and the appropriate 11point template selected by taking every 64th point from the template array.

Figure V.C.2 Detections found by the squarewave filter
were compared with the response of the telescopedetectorelectronics
combination to a true point source. Representative point source
templates are shown for one detector in each wavelength band. larger largest 
Immediately after launch, predicted detector responses to an ideal point
source were used. Composite templates were constructed for each detector
using sources detected with high correlation coefficient and signaltonoise
ratio. The a priori templates were replaced with the composite templates
and the analysis repeated, using 12 hours worth of data. Convergence was
achieved after only a few iterations. Figure V.C.2
shows representative
point source templates for one detector in each wavelength band. Since
no evidence for detectortodetector variation within a band was found,
the results for all the detectors in each band were averaged together to
produce the final composite templates.
C.6 Low SignaltoNoise Detections
A secondary class of detections called low signaltonoise detections was defined as those with signaltonoise ratios between 3 and the threshold required for a valid detection. Because the threshold for valid detections was itself set at 3, no low signaltonoise detections should have been generated. However, due to the roundoff errors in the computation of the signaltonoise ratio, a few were created. These were only used to provide upper limits for sources confirmed in other bands.
C.7 Source Shadowing
When two sources crossed the same detector within 6 samples of each other, i.e., within 1.4', 1.4', 2.9', 5.9' of each other in the scan direction at 12, 25, 60 and 100 µm, respectively, the detection of one or both of the sources may have been inhibited. Generally, the brighter source was detected without mishap, but the fainter source may have had its baseline so modified by the brighter source that it failed to be detected at all. This is the phenomenon of source "shadowing". A source may have been shadowed in a longer wavelength band but detected perfectly at shorter wavelengths. To warn of the possibility of this effect, sources were tagged at a later stage in the processing (see Section V.H.3) If they had near neighbors. The fluxes of such flagged sources should be regarded with caution. No significance should be attached to the absence of a detected flux in a shadowed band. The completeness figures given in Chapter VIII do not apply to the shadow zone around a source.
Table of Contents  Index  Previous Section  Next Section