1:
2: \documentclass[12pt,preprint]{aastex}
3:
4: \usepackage{graphicx}
5:
6: \shorttitle{Active Region Loops Observed with EIS}
7: \shortauthors{Warren et al.}
8:
9: \begin{document}
10:
11: %% ----------------------------------------------------------------------
12: %% --- TITLE PAGE -------------------------------------------------------
13: %% ----------------------------------------------------------------------
14:
15: \title{Observations of Active Region Loops with the EUV Imaging
16: Spectrometer on Hinode}
17:
18: \author{Harry P. Warren\altaffilmark{1},
19: Ignacio Ugarte-Urra\altaffilmark{1,2},
20: George A. Doschek\altaffilmark{1},
21: David H. Brooks\altaffilmark{1,2},
22: and David R. Williams\altaffilmark{3}}
23:
24: \altaffiltext{1}{Space Science Division, Naval Research Laboratory,
25: Washington, DC 20375}
26: \altaffiltext{2}{College of Science, George Mason University, 4400
27: University Drive, Fairfax, VA 22030}
28: \altaffiltext{3}{Mullard Space Science Laboratory, University College
29: London, Holmbury St Mary, Dorking, Surrey, RH5 6NT}
30:
31: %% ----------------------------------------------------------------------
32: %% --- ABSTRACT ---------------------------------------------------------
33: %% ----------------------------------------------------------------------
34:
35: \begin{abstract}
36: Previous solar observations have shown that coronal loops near 1\,MK
37: are difficult to reconcile with simple heating models. These loops
38: have lifetimes that are long relative to a radiative cooling time,
39: suggesting quasi-steady heating. The electron densities in these
40: loops, however, are too high to be consistent with thermodynamic
41: equilibrium. Models proposed to explain these properties generally
42: rely on the existence of smaller scale filaments within the loop
43: that are in various stages of heating and cooling. Such a framework
44: implies that there should be a distribution of temperatures within a
45: coronal loop. In this paper we analyze new observations from the
46: EUV Imaging Spectrometer (EIS) on \textit{Hinode}. EIS is capable of
47: observing active regions over a wide range of temperatures
48: (\ion{Fe}{8}--\ion{Fe}{17}) at relatively high spatial resolution
49: (1\arcsec). We find that most isolated coronal loops that are
50: bright in \ion{Fe}{12} generally have very narrow temperature
51: distributions ($\sigma_T \lesssim 3\times10^5$\,K), but are not
52: isothermal. We also derive volumetric filling factors in these loops
53: of approximately 10\%. Both results lend support to the filament
54: models.
55: \end{abstract}
56:
57: \keywords{Sun: corona}
58:
59: %% ----------------------------------------------------------------------
60: %% --- INTRODUCTION -----------------------------------------------------
61: %% ----------------------------------------------------------------------
62:
63: \section{Introduction}
64:
65: High spatial resolution solar observations have shown that coronal
66: loops with temperatures near 1\,MK have properties that are difficult
67: to reconcile with physical models. Loops at these temperatures persist
68: for much longer than a radiative cooling time, suggesting quasi-steady
69: heating. The densities inferred from the observations, however, are
70: much higher than can be reproduced by steady, uniform heating
71: models. The temperature gradients along the loops are also much
72: smaller than predicted by the simple models. (e.g.,
73: \citealt{lenz1999,aschwanden2000b,winebarger2003}).
74:
75: Several models have been proposed to explain the properties of coronal
76: loops at these temperatures. \cite{aschwanden2000b}, for example,
77: suggested that the observed loops were actually composed of smaller
78: scale threads that were steadily heated at their footpoints. Footpoint
79: heating leads to somewhat higher densities and flatter temperature
80: gradients relative to steady heating models. At high densities,
81: however, loops at these temperatures can become thermodynamically
82: unstable (e.g., \citealt{mok2005,muller2004,winebarger2003}), leading
83: to catastrophic cooling. Multi-thread, impulsive heating models have
84: also been suggested (e.g., \citealt{warren2003}). In these models the
85: fact that loops cool much more rapidly than they drain accounts for
86: the high densities. Multiple threads in various stages of heating and
87: cooling are needed to explain the observed lifetimes and temperature
88: gradients. In both cases, these multi-thread models indicate the need
89: for emission formed over a range of temperatures to reproduce the
90: observed intensities (see also \citealt{reale2000}).
91:
92: One limitation of the observational results from \textit{TRACE} is
93: that they are derived from narrowband filtergrams with somewhat
94: limited diagnostic capabilities. The launch of the EUV Imaging
95: Spectrometer (EIS) on the \textit{Hinode} mission provides us with an
96: opportunity to revisit some of these observational results using
97: spectroscopic data. EIS is a high spatial and spectral resolution
98: spectrometer that covers much of the same wavelength range as
99: \textit{TRACE}. EIS has a very broad temperature coverage and can
100: image the solar corona in individual emission lines from the lower
101: transition region to the hottest flares.
102:
103: In this paper we focus on measuring the emission measure distribution
104: in coronal loops near 1\,MK. We have selected 20 relatively isolated
105: loop segments from several different active region observations and
106: computed differential emission measure distributions from the
107: background subtracted loop intensities. For this work we focus on
108: loops that are bright in \ion{Fe}{12} and find that for these loops
109: the distribution of temperatures is almost always narrow, with a
110: dispersion of several times $10^5$\,K. We also find volumetric
111: filling factors of approximately 10\%. These results support the idea
112: that coronal loops are composed of smaller scale filaments that are
113: below the spatial resolution of current solar instruments.
114:
115: \section{Observations}
116:
117: The EIS instrument on \textit{Hinode} produces high resolution
118: stigmatic spectra in the wavelength ranges of 171--212\,\AA\ and
119: 245--291\,\AA. The instrument has 1\arcsec\ spatial pixels and
120: 22.3\,m\AA\ spectral pixels. Further details are given in
121: \cite{culhane2007} and \cite{korendyke2006}.
122:
123: From 2007 December 9 -- 18 \textit{Hinode} followed NOAA active region
124: 10978 from near disk center to the limb. During this time EIS ran a
125: series of large ($460\arcsec\times384\arcsec$) slit raster
126: studies. The exposure time at each position in the raster was 45\,s
127: and each raster ran over a period of about 5 hours. The raster was
128: performed 9 times on this active region.
129:
130: For each observation we processed the data by removing the CCD
131: pedestal, dark current, and hot pixels. We also estimated the
132: magnitude of the wavelength drift as a function of time. For each
133: spectral line of interest we identified line and continuum regions and
134: computed the line intensity, centroid, and width using
135: moments. Finally, we account for any spatial offsets between the two
136: CCDs by cross correlating rasters from emission lines formed at
137: similar temperatures.
138:
139: \section{Emission Measure Analysis}
140:
141: For this initial survey of active loops observed with EIS we inspected
142: each \ion{Fe}{12} 195.119\,\AA\ raster and manually identified
143: relatively isolated portions of coronal loops. We use the spatial
144: coordinates derived from this selection to determine the intensities
145: in the rasters of the other emission lines. Since these loop
146: coordinates are not necessarily aligned to the CCD we have
147: interpolated to determine the intensities along the selected segment
148: (see \citealt{aschwanden2008b} Figure 3) and average the intensities
149: along the loop. Examples of EIS loop segments are shown in
150: Figures~\ref{fig:loop} and \ref{fig:loop2}, where the loop is shown in
151: various strong emission lines.
152:
153: To further isolate the contribution of the loop to the observed
154: emission we identify background pixels in \ion{Fe}{12} 195.119\,\AA\
155: and fit them with a first order polynomial. The sum over the remaining
156: intensity between the background pixels represents the total intensity
157: of the loop. For consistency, these same background coordinates are
158: used to determine the background subtracted intensities in the other
159: emission lines. To determine how co-spatial the emission at the
160: various temperatures is, we also calculate the cross-correlation of
161: the background subtracted intensities with \ion{Fe}{12} 195.119\,\AA.
162: Note that we include 2 lines, \ion{Fe}{12} 186.880\,\AA\ and
163: \ion{Fe}{13} 203.826\,\AA, that form density sensitive line ratios
164: when paired with other lines from the same ion.
165:
166: The observed background subtracted line intensities are related to the
167: differential emission measure in the usual way
168: \begin{equation}
169: I_\lambda = \frac{1}{4\pi}\int\epsilon_\lambda(n_e,T)\xi(T)\,dT.
170: \end{equation}
171: Since the density is an important parameter in determining the
172: emissivities of many of these lines, we have precomputed grids of
173: emissivities ($\epsilon_\lambda(n_e,T)$) as a function of temperature
174: and density with the CHIANTI atomic physics database (e.g.,
175: \citealt{landi2006}) and use the density as a free parameter in the
176: fitting. For the emission measure we consider two models, one a delta
177: function in temperature for the isothermal approximation
178: \begin{equation}
179: \xi(T) = EM_0\,\delta(T-T_0),
180: \end{equation}
181: and the other a Gaussian distribution in temperature
182: \begin{equation}
183: \xi(T) = \frac{EM_0}{\sigma_T\sqrt{2\pi}}
184: \exp\left[-\frac{(T-T_0)^2}{2\sigma_T^2}\right],
185: \end{equation}
186: which allows for a dispersion in the temperature distribution.
187:
188: The calculation of the best-fit parameters for the emission measure
189: distributions is relatively simple. The intensities for loops that are
190: well correlated with \ion{Fe}{12} 195.119\,\AA\ are used directly. The
191: averaging generally results in very small statistical errors in the
192: intensities. In an attempt to account for additional uncertainties in
193: the atomic data we have increased the relative errors to 20\% of the
194: observed intensities. The intensities for emission lines that are
195: poorly correlated with \ion{Fe}{12} 195.119\,\AA\ ($r\le0.8$) are set
196: to zero. The uncertainties in these lines are estimated to be 20\% of
197: the measured background. The intensities and uncertainties are used as
198: inputs to a Levenberg-Marquardt algorithm for calculating the best-fit
199: parameters.
200:
201: The results of applying this analysis to 20 loop segments identified
202: in the EIS rasters are summarized in Table~\ref{table:em}. In almost
203: all cases we find that the Gaussian emission measure model has a lower
204: $\chi^2$ than the isothermal emission measure model. The dispersion in
205: temperature, however, is almost always narrow with
206: $\log\sigma_T\lesssim5.4$. This result is consistent with a visual
207: inspection of the data which shows that these \ion{Fe}{12} loops are
208: rarely evident in \ion{Si}{7} or \ion{Fe}{15} at the same time. In
209: only two cases (loops \#5 and \#11) do we see emission over such a wide
210: range of temperatures simultaneously.
211:
212: For comparison with these active region loop measurements we have
213: repeated this emission measure analysis for observations above the
214: quiet limb, where previous work has shown the emission measure to be
215: isothermal (e.g., \citealt{landi2002}). In this case we obtain
216: $\log\sigma_T\simeq5.0$ for the Gaussian DEM model and similar
217: $\chi^2$ values for both the Gaussian and isothermal DEM models. The
218: results of this temperature analysis will be presented in a future
219: paper.
220:
221: The assumption of a Gaussian differential emission measure is highly
222: restrictive. To investigate the temperature dependence of the DEM more
223: generally we have experimented with the Markov-chain Monte Carlo
224: (MCMC) reconstruction algorithm included in the PINTofALE spectroscopy
225: package (e.g., \citealt{kashyap2000}). The MCMC algorithm makes no
226: assumptions about the functional form of the DEM. The DEM computed
227: with this method is generally consistent with the narrow DEM suggested
228: by the Gaussian fits. In a number of cases the MCMC method suggests
229: enhanced emission above the peak temperature in the DEM. Such a
230: component would be consistent with the presence of cooling
231: filaments. However, the magnitude of the high temperature component is
232: sensitive to the errors assumed for the high temperature lines and
233: this analysis will require additional work.
234:
235: For each loop segment we have also computed the loop width from a
236: Gaussian fit to the \ion{Fe}{12} 195.119\,\AA\ emission (see
237: Table~\ref{table:em}). Since we have also measured the density we can
238: estimate the volume of the emitting plasma in the loop. The line of
239: sight emission measure is simply the volume emission measure divided
240: by the area of an EIS pixel
241: \begin{equation}
242: EM_0 = f\frac{n_e^2V}{l^2} = f\frac{n_e^2\pi r^2l}{l^2} =
243: f\frac{n_e^2\pi r^2}{l},
244: \label{eq:filling}
245: \end{equation}
246: where $r$ is the observed radius of the loop, $l$ is the length of EIS
247: pixel (1\arcsec), and $f$ is the volumetric filling factor. Following
248: \cite{klimchuk2000} we relate the observed loop radius to the measured
249: width using $r=2\sigma_w$. The filling factors derived from the
250: Gaussian DEM parameters and Equation~\ref{eq:filling} are given in
251: Table~\ref{table:em}. This analysis suggests that these loops occupy
252: only about 10\% of the observed volume.
253:
254: \section{Discussion}
255:
256: Some previous work has suggested that coronal loops, as currently
257: observed, are isothermal. For example, \cite{aschwanden2005b} find
258: that the majority of narrowest loops observed with TRACE are
259: consistent with an isothermal DEM. Since TRACE is limited to
260: observations in only three channels (\ion{Fe}{9}, \ion{Fe}{12}, and
261: \ion{Fe}{15}) it is difficult to distinguish between an isothermal
262: distribution and the narrow distributions that we measure
263: spectroscopically. The general absence of \ion{Fe}{15} emission in the
264: loops that we have studied is consistent with
265: \cite{aschwanden2005b}. \cite{delzanna2003} also found examples of
266: relatively cool ($\sim0.9$\,MK) nearly isothermal loops observed with
267: low resolution spectroscopic data. These results also suggested
268: filling factors near 1. Our filling factor results are smaller than
269: this, but we also find that the filling factor to be inversely
270: proportional to the loop pressure (also see \citealt{warren2008}). We
271: do see some loops with a relatively broad emission measure
272: distribution ($\log\sigma_T\sim5.7$), which is consistent with the
273: results of \cite{schmelz2007} and \cite{patsourakos2007}. Our sample,
274: which is small, suggests that such loops are rare, however.
275:
276: These new observational results lend support to the non-equilibrium,
277: multi-thread models of these ``warm'' coronal loops. It remains to be
278: seen if hydrodynamic models can reproduce the observed loop
279: properties. The combination of high densities and narrow temperature
280: ranges will be difficult to reconcile with nanoflare models (e.g.,
281: \citealt{patsourakos2006}). The narrow
282: temperature distributions suggest that these filaments are evolving
283: coherently.
284:
285: %% ----------------------------------------------------------------------
286: %% --- ACKNOWLEDGMENTS --------------------------------------------------
287: %% ----------------------------------------------------------------------
288:
289: \acknowledgments The authors would like to thank Yuan-Kuen Ko for
290: assistance with the MCMC DEM analysis. Hinode is a Japanese mission
291: developed and launched by ISAS/JAXA, with NAOJ as domestic partner and
292: NASA and STFC (UK) as international partners. It is operated by these
293: agencies in co-operation with ESA and NSC (Norway). This work was
294: supported by NASA and the Office of Naval Research/Naval Research
295: Laboratory basic research program.
296:
297: %% ----------------------------------------------------------------------
298: %% --- REFERENCES -------------------------------------------------------
299: %% ----------------------------------------------------------------------
300:
301: \begin{thebibliography}{}
302:
303: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{{Aschwanden} \& {Nightingale}}{{Aschwanden} \&
304: {Nightingale}}{2005}]{aschwanden2005b}
305: {Aschwanden}, M.~J., \& {Nightingale}, R.~W. 2005, \apj, 633, 499
306:
307: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{{Aschwanden}, {Nightingale}, \&
308: {Alexander}}{{Aschwanden} et~al.}{2000}]{aschwanden2000b}
309: {Aschwanden}, M.~J., {Nightingale}, R.~W., \& {Alexander}, D. 2000, \apj, 541,
310: 1059
311:
312: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{{Aschwanden} et~al.}{{Aschwanden}
313: et~al.}{2008}]{aschwanden2008b}
314: {Aschwanden}, M.~J., {Nitta}, N.~V., {Wuelser}, J.-P., \& {Lemen}, J.~R. 2008,
315: \apj, 680, 1477
316:
317: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{{Cargill}}{{Cargill}}{1994}]{cargill1994}
318: {Cargill}, P.~J. 1994, \apj, 422, 381
319:
320: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{{Culhane} et~al.}{{Culhane}
321: et~al.}{2007}]{culhane2007}
322: {Culhane}, J.~L., et~al. 2007, \solphys, 60
323:
324: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{{Del Zanna} \& {Mason}}{{Del Zanna} \&
325: {Mason}}{2003}]{delzanna2003}
326: {Del Zanna}, G., \& {Mason}, H.~E. 2003, \aap, 406, 1089
327:
328: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{{Kashyap} \& {Drake}}{{Kashyap} \&
329: {Drake}}{2000}]{kashyap2000}
330: {Kashyap}, V., \& {Drake}, J.~J. 2000, BASI, 28, 475
331:
332: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{{Klimchuk}}{{Klimchuk}}{2000}]{klimchuk2000}
333: {Klimchuk}, J.~A. 2000, \solphys, 193, 53
334:
335: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{{Korendyke} et~al.}{{Korendyke}
336: et~al.}{2006}]{korendyke2006}
337: {Korendyke}, C.~M., et~al. 2006, \ao, 45, 8674
338:
339: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{{Landi} et~al.}{{Landi}
340: et~al.}{2006}]{landi2006}
341: {Landi}, E., {Del Zanna}, G., {Young}, P.~R., {Dere}, K.~P., {Mason}, H.~E.,
342: \& {Landini}, M. 2006, \apjs, 162, 261
343:
344: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{{Landi}, {Feldman}, \& {Dere}}{{Landi}
345: et~al.}{2002}]{landi2002}
346: {Landi}, E., {Feldman}, U., \& {Dere}, K.~P. 2002, \apj, 574, 495
347:
348: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{{Lenz} et~al.}{{Lenz} et~al.}{1999}]{lenz1999}
349: {Lenz}, D.~D., {Deluca}, E.~E., {Golub}, L., {Rosner}, R., \& {Bookbinder},
350: J.~A. 1999, \apjl, 517, L155
351:
352: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{{Mok} et~al.}{{Mok} et~al.}{2005}]{mok2005}
353: {Mok}, Y., {Miki{\'c}}, Z., {Lionello}, R., \& {Linker}, J.~A. 2005, \apj,
354: 621, 1098
355:
356: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{{M{\"u}ller}, {Peter}, \&
357: {Hansteen}}{{M{\"u}ller} et~al.}{2004}]{muller2004}
358: {M{\"u}ller}, D.~A.~N., {Peter}, H., \& {Hansteen}, V.~H. 2004, \aap, 424, 289
359:
360: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{{Parker}}{{Parker}}{1983}]{parker1983}
361: {Parker}, E.~N. 1983, \apj, 264, 642
362:
363: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{{Patsourakos} \& {Klimchuk}}{{Patsourakos} \&
364: {Klimchuk}}{2006}]{patsourakos2006}
365: {Patsourakos}, S., \& {Klimchuk}, J.~A. 2006, \apj, 647, 1452
366:
367: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{{Patsourakos} \& {Klimchuk}}{{Patsourakos} \&
368: {Klimchuk}}{2007}]{patsourakos2007}
369: {Patsourakos}, S., \& {Klimchuk}, J.~A. 2007, \apj, 667, 591
370:
371: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{{Reale} \& {Peres}}{{Reale} \&
372: {Peres}}{2000}]{reale2000}
373: {Reale}, F., \& {Peres}, G. 2000, \apjl, 528, L45
374:
375: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{{Schmelz} et~al.}{{Schmelz}
376: et~al.}{2007}]{schmelz2007}
377: {Schmelz}, J.~T., {Nasraoui}, K., {Del Zanna}, G., {Cirtain}, J.~W., {DeLuca},
378: E.~E., \& {Mason}, H.~E. 2007, \apjl, 658, L119
379:
380: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{{Warren}, {Winebarger}, \& {Mariska}}{{Warren}
381: et~al.}{2003}]{warren2003}
382: {Warren}, H.~P., {Winebarger}, A.~R., \& {Mariska}, J.~T. 2003, \apj, 593,
383: 1174
384:
385: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{{Warren} et~al.}{{Warren}
386: et~al.}{2008}]{warren2008}
387: {Warren}, H.~P., {Winebarger}, A.~R., {Mariska}, J.~T., {Doschek}, G.~A., \&
388: {Hara}, H. 2008, \apj, 677, 1395
389:
390: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{{Winebarger}, {Warren}, \&
391: {Mariska}}{{Winebarger} et~al.}{2003}]{winebarger2003}
392: {Winebarger}, A.~R., {Warren}, H.~P., \& {Mariska}, J.~T. 2003, \apj, 587, 439
393:
394: \end{thebibliography}
395:
396: %% ----------------------------------------------------------------------
397: %% --- FIGURES ----------------------------------------------------------
398: %% ----------------------------------------------------------------------
399:
400: \clearpage
401:
402: \begin{figure*}[t!]
403: \centerline{%
404: \includegraphics[clip,scale=0.76]{f01.eps}}
405: \caption{\small The emission measure analysis of a coronal loop segment
406: observed with EIS. The region of interest is indicated with the
407: white lines. The intensities averaged along the loop segment are
408: also shown. For comparison the \ion{Fe}{12} 195.119\,\AA\
409: intensities are repeated in each plot with the dotted line. The
410: background is indicated with the dashed line. The upper right panel
411: shows the EM loci for each line as well as the computed emission
412: measure distribution. The dotted EM loci curves indicate that the
413: intensities for these lines are not well correlated with
414: \ion{Fe}{12} 195.119\,\AA. The correlation ($r$) between the
415: intensity in the displayed loop intensity and the loop intensity in
416: \ion{Fe}{12} 195.119\,\AA\ is given in the legend. The displayed
417: images have been filtered to emphasize the contrast between the
418: loops and the background emission. This is loop \# 1 in
419: Table~\protect{\ref{table:em}}.}
420: \label{fig:loop}
421: \end{figure*}
422:
423: \clearpage
424:
425: \begin{figure*}[t!]
426: \centerline{%
427: \includegraphics[clip,scale=0.76]{f02.eps}}
428: \caption{A loop segment observed with EIS on 2007 December 12. The
429: display is similar to what is shown in
430: Figure~\protect{\ref{fig:loop}}. This loop, however, appears over a
431: broader range of temperatures. The field of view shown in
432: $64\arcsec\times64\arcsec$. This is loop \# 5 in
433: Table~\protect{\ref{table:em}}.}
434: \label{fig:loop2}
435: \end{figure*}
436:
437: \clearpage
438:
439: \begin{deluxetable}{rrrrrcrrrcrrrrrcrrr}
440: \tabletypesize{\scriptsize}
441: \tablehead{
442: \multicolumn{6}{c}{} &
443: \multicolumn{3}{c}{Isothermal} &
444: \multicolumn{1}{c}{} &
445: \multicolumn{4}{c}{Gaussian} &
446: \multicolumn{4}{c}{} \\
447: [.3ex]\cline{7-9}\cline{11-14} \\[-1.6ex]
448: \multicolumn{1}{c}{\#} &
449: \multicolumn{1}{c}{Date} &
450: \multicolumn{1}{c}{$t_{start}$} &
451: \multicolumn{1}{c}{$t_{end}$} &
452: \multicolumn{1}{c}{$\sigma_w$} &
453: \multicolumn{1}{c}{} &
454: \multicolumn{1}{c}{$EM_0$} &
455: \multicolumn{1}{c}{$n_0$} &
456: \multicolumn{1}{c}{$T_0$} &
457: \multicolumn{1}{c}{} &
458: \multicolumn{1}{c}{$EM_0$} &
459: \multicolumn{1}{c}{$n_0$} &
460: \multicolumn{1}{c}{$T_0$} &
461: \multicolumn{1}{c}{$\sigma_T$} &
462: \multicolumn{1}{c}{} &
463: \multicolumn{1}{c}{$\chi^2_I$} &
464: \multicolumn{1}{c}{$\chi^2_G$} &
465: \multicolumn{1}{c}{$f$(\%)}
466: }
467: \tablewidth{0pt}
468: \tablecaption{Emission Measure Analysis of Active Region Loops Observed with EIS\tablenotemark{a}}
469: \startdata
470: 1 & 10-Dec-07 & 03:36:43 & 03:37:25 & 1.18 & & 26.52 & 9.25 & 6.16 & & 26.63 & 9.29 & 6.19 & 5.45 & & 1.71 & 0.79 & 9.1 \\
471: 2 & 11-Dec-07 & 13:11:02 & 13:11:43 & 1.42 & & 27.18 & 9.77 & 6.11 & & 27.28 & 9.86 & 6.15 & 5.44 & & 2.13 & 0.88 & 2.0 \\
472: 3 & 11-Dec-07 & 12:57:50 & 13:01:18 & 1.35 & & 26.90 & 9.56 & 6.13 & & 27.06 & 9.66 & 6.16 & 5.55 & & 2.86 & 1.44 & 3.3 \\
473: 4 & 12-Dec-07 & 06:31:29 & 06:36:21 & 1.36 & & 26.72 & 9.58 & 6.06 & & 26.79 & 9.57 & 6.07 & 5.44 & & 2.14 & 1.49 & 2.6 \\
474: 5 & 12-Dec-07 & 06:29:24 & 06:30:47 & 0.97 & & 27.66 & 9.61 & 6.07 & & 27.90 & 9.84 & 6.01 & 5.70 & & 5.49 & 1.52 & 19.6 \\
475: 6 & 12-Dec-07 & 14:52:33 & 14:53:56 & 1.17 & & 27.25 & 9.28 & 6.07 & & 27.34 & 9.43 & 6.08 & 5.54 & & 4.68 & 1.49 & 24.2 \\
476: 7 & 12-Dec-07 & 15:01:34 & 15:07:08 & 1.54 & & 26.62 & 9.20 & 6.08 & & 26.64 & 9.24 & 6.08 & 5.18 & & 1.42 & 1.31 & 6.8 \\
477: 8 & 13-Dec-07 & 15:35:17 & 15:36:41 & 1.19 & & 27.47 & 9.71 & 6.20 & & 27.49 & 9.65 & 6.20 & 5.28 & & 1.69 & 1.58 & 12.0 \\
478: 9 & 13-Dec-07 & 13:45:32 & 13:46:55 & 0.97 & & 26.68 & 9.34 & 6.16 & & 26.83 & 9.32 & 6.12 & 5.45 & & 3.91 & 1.65 & 18.4 \\
479: 10 & 15-Dec-07 & 03:40:08 & 03:41:31 & 1.03 & & 26.44 & 9.29 & 6.12 & & 26.45 & 9.31 & 6.12 & 4.99 & & 0.79 & 0.85 & 7.0 \\
480: 11 & 15-Dec-07 & 01:44:07 & 01:44:49 & 1.20 & & 26.64 & 9.50 & 6.13 & & 26.80 & 9.62 & 6.20 & 5.62 & & 3.73 & 3.59 & 2.8 \\
481: 12 & 15-Dec-07 & 21:17:07 & 21:23:22 & 2.30 & & 26.72 & 9.27 & 6.17 & & 26.77 & 9.27 & 6.16 & 5.31 & & 2.69 & 1.48 & 3.5 \\
482: 13 & 15-Dec-07 & 19:50:59 & 19:52:22 & 1.69 & & 26.17 & 9.39 & 6.16 & & 26.35 & 9.41 & 6.16 & 5.55 & & 1.46 & 0.85 & 1.3 \\
483: 14 & 18-Dec-07 & 02:15:51 & 02:17:14 & 1.07 & & 27.53 & 10.98 & 6.19 & & 27.55 & 10.50 & 6.18 & 5.44 & & 2.98 & 1.52 & 0.3 \\
484: 15 & 18-Dec-07 & 01:11:14 & 01:14:43 & 1.57 & & 26.51 & 9.15 & 6.19 & & 26.68 & 9.13 & 6.16 & 5.55 & & 3.16 & 1.66 & 11.5 \\
485: 16 & 18-Dec-07 & 01:39:43 & 01:44:35 & 2.73 & & 27.05 & 9.43 & 6.15 & & 27.14 & 9.50 & 6.17 & 5.42 & & 1.85 & 1.12 & 2.1 \\
486: 17 & 18-Dec-07 & 19:51:37 & 19:55:05 & 1.16 & & 26.75 & 9.86 & 6.20 & & 26.84 & 9.76 & 6.17 & 5.52 & & 1.86 & 1.34 & 1.7 \\
487: 18 & 10-Dec-07 & 03:27:00 & 03:32:33 & 1.28 & & 26.89 & 9.39 & 6.22 & & 26.92 & 9.34 & 6.21 & 5.36 & & 1.36 & 1.18 & 11.6 \\
488: 19 & 11-Dec-07 & 13:13:48 & 13:15:53 & 0.90 & & 26.60 & 9.99 & 6.19 & & 26.69 & 10.02 & 6.20 & 5.40 & & 1.00 & 0.42 & 0.6 \\
489: 20 & 13-Dec-07 & 16:08:38 & 16:10:01 & 1.04 & & 26.49 & 9.47 & 6.10 & & 26.58 & 9.51 & 6.09 & 5.33 & & 2.13 & 1.20 & 3.7 \\
490: \enddata
491: \tablenotetext{a}{The date and times given indicate when EIS was
492: rastering over the loop segment. The paramter $\sigma_w$ is the loop
493: width in pixels measured in Fe\,\textsc{xii} 195.119\,\AA. The base-10
494: logarithm of the emission measure parameters are given.}
495: \label{table:em}
496: \end{deluxetable}
497:
498:
499: \end{document}
500:
501: