1: %%
2: %% This is file `esapub.tex',
3: %% generated with the docstrip utility.
4: %%
5: %% The original source files were:
6: %%
7: %% esapub.dtx (with options: `manual')
8: %% ============================================
9: %% This is the manual describing the usage of
10: %% esapub.cls
11: %% ============================================
12: %% Copyright 1999 Patrick W Daly
13: %% Max-Planck-Institut f\"ur Aeronomie
14: %% Max-Planck-Str. 2
15: %% D-37191 Katlenburg-Lindau
16: %% Germany
17: %% E-mail: daly@linmpi.mpg.de
18: %%
19: %% -------------------------------------------------
20: %% Im.tex - V 9 version 22/02/2001 - Final/for astroph
21: %% -------------------------------------------------
22: \ProvidesFile{Im.tex}
23: [1999/12/02 1.01 (PWD)]
24: \documentclass[a4paper,twocolumn]{esapub} % European paper
25: %\documentclass[letterpaper,twocolumn]{esapub} % American paper
26:
27: %\usepackage{times}
28: \usepackage{natbib}
29: \usepackage{epsfig}
30:
31: \title{Gamma-Ray Imaging with the Coded Mask IBIS Telescope}
32:
33: \author{A. Goldwurm}
34: \author{P. Goldoni}
35: \author{A. Gros}
36: \affil{Service d'Astrophysique /DAPNIA/DSM/CEA - Saclay,
37: 91191 Gif sur Yvette Cedex, France}
38:
39: \author{J. Stephen}
40: \author{L. Foschini}
41: \author{F. Gianotti}
42: \affil{ITeSRE/CNR - Via Gobetti 101, 40129 Bologna, Italy}
43:
44: \author{\\L. Natalucci}
45: \author{G. De Cesare}
46: \author{M. Del Santo}
47: \affil{IAS/CNR , Via del Fosso del Cavaliere,
48: 00133 Roma, Italy}
49:
50:
51: \newcommand{\btx}{\textsc{Bib}\TeX}
52: \newcommand{\filename}{esapub}
53:
54: \begin{document}
55: \keywords{Coded Masks; Imaging; Gamma-Rays}
56: \maketitle
57: \begin{abstract}
58: The IBIS telescope onboard INTEGRAL,
59: the ESA gamma-ray space mission to be launched in 2002,
60: is a soft gamma-ray (20 keV - 10 MeV) device
61: based on a coded aperture imaging system.
62: We describe here basic concepts of coded masks,
63: the imaging system of the IBIS telescope,
64: and the standard data analysis procedures to reconstruct sky images.
65: This analysis includes,
66: for both the low-energy detector layer (ISGRI) and the high energy layer
67: (PICSIT), iterative procedures which decode recorded shadowgrams,
68: search for and locate sources,
69: clean for secondary lobes, and then rotate and compose sky images.
70: These procedures will be implemented in the Quick Look and
71: Standard Analysis of the INTEGRAL Science Data Center (ISDC)
72: as IBIS Instrument Specific Software.
73: \end{abstract}
74: \section{Coded Mask Imaging}
75: Coded aperture systems nowadays find their major application in high
76: energy astronomy, and in particular in the hard X-ray (3-30 keV) and soft
77: $\gamma$-ray (30 keV - 20 MeV)
78: domains where conventional focusing techniques are
79: difficult to implement and where the high and
80: variable background limits the performance of standard on/off monitoring
81: techniques (see review by Caroli et al. 1987).
82: \\
83: In coded aperture telescopes source radiation is spatially modulated
84: by a mask of opaque and transparent elements before
85: being recorded by a position sensitive detector,
86: allowing simultaneous measurement of source and background fluxes.
87: Reconstruction of the sky image
88: is generally based on a correlation procedure between the recorded image
89: and a decoding array derived from the mask pattern.
90: Essential requirements for such systems is that the mask pattern must
91: allow each source in the field of view (FOV) to cast a unique shadowgram
92: on the detector and that projected shadowgrams must be, as much as possible,
93: different to better differentiate the sources.
94: Assuming a perfect detector (infinite spatial resolution), the
95: angular resolution of such a system is then defined by the angle subtended
96: by one hole at the detector. The sensitive area depends on
97: the number of all transparent elements of the mask viewed by the detector.
98: So, reducing hole size or increasing mask-detector distance
99: while increasing accordingly the number of holes
100: improves the angular resolution without loss of sensitivity.
101: A large field of view can also be obtained since
102: the source radiation is modulated for sources which are within an angle
103: from the axis given by the arctg of the mask plus detector
104: dimensions divided by the mask-detector distance.
105: To optimize the sensitive area of the detector, masks of dimensions
106: greater of or equal to the detector dimensions are employed.
107: Two kind of FOV are defined. The fully coded (FC) FOV for which all
108: source radiation directed towards the detector plane
109: is modulated by the mask and the Partially Coded (PC)
110: FOV for which only a fraction of this source radiation is modulated,
111: while the rest, if detected, cannot be distinguished from the background.
112: If holes are uniformly distributed the sensitivity
113: is constant in the FCFOV and decreasing in the PCFOV.
114: %%
115: \section{Optimum Coded Aperture Systems}
116: %%
117: The System Point Spread Function (SPSF) of coded aperture telescopes,
118: i.e. the final imaging response to a point source after
119: reconstruction, depends critically on the mask pattern.
120: Representing the mask with an array M of 1 (open elements) and 0
121: (opaque ones), the detector array D will be given by the convolution
122: of the sky image S by M plus an unmodulated background array term B,
123: $$D = S \star M + B$$
124: Suppose to find a special array M for which exists a
125: {\it correlation inverse} G such that $M \star G = \delta$-function,
126: then we can reconstruct the sky by
127: %\\
128: $$S' = D \star G = S \star M \star G + B \star G $$
129: $$~= S \star \delta + B \star G = S + B \star G$$
130: %\\
131: and $S'$ differs from $S$ only by the $B \star G$ term,
132: which for a flat array $B$ is a constant level
133: which can be measured and removed.
134: Such special mask patterns, including those called {\it uniformly redundant
135: arrays} (URA), were found in the 70s, and they allow the
136: reconstructed image to be free of secondary lobes (Fenimore \& Cannon 1978).
137: Most of these patterns are built using binary sets called
138: {\it cyclic different sets} which have the remarkable property
139: that their cyclic autocorrelation gives a delta function.
140: The decoding array $G = 2 M - 1$
141: (i.e., G=$+1$ for M=1 and G=$-$1 for M=0) is then a {\it correlation inverse}.
142: \\
143: To have a sidelobe-free response a source must be able
144: to cast on the detector a whole basic pattern (fully coded source).
145: To make use of all the detector area and to allow more than one source
146: to be fully coded, the mask basic pattern is normally taken of
147: the same size and shape of the detector and the total mask made by a cyclic
148: repetition ($<$ 2~$\times$~2 for rectangular mask) of the basic pattern.
149: For such {\it optimum systems} a FCFOV source will always project a
150: cyclically shifted version of the basic pattern and correlating
151: the detector image with the G decoding array will provide sidelobe-free
152: peak with position-invariant shape at the source position.
153: \\
154: A source in the PCFOV will instead cast an incomplete pattern
155: and its contribution cannot be a-priori subtracted and will produce
156: secondary lobes (coding noise).
157: On the other hand the modulated radiation from PC sources can be
158: reconstructed by extending with a proper normalization the correlation
159: procedure to the PCFOV ($\S 4$).
160: The complete field of view of the telescope (FOV)
161: is therefore composed by the central FCFOV of
162: constant sensitivity and optimum image properties
163: (position-invariant and flat sidelobes SPSF)
164: surrounded by the PCFOV of decreasing sensitivity and non perfect SPSF.
165: A source outside the FOV simply contributes to the background level.
166: \\
167: These masks also minimize
168: the statistical errors of the reconstructed peaks.
169: Since $V = G^2 \star D = \Sigma D $ the variance associated with
170: each reconstructed sky image pixel is constant in the FCFOV
171: and equal to total counts recorded by the detector,
172: therefore the source signal to noise is simply
173: $$S/N = { C_S / \sqrt{C_S + C_B}} $$
174: % = { C_S / \sqrt{Total~Counts}}$$
175: where $C_S$ and $C_B$ are source and background counts.
176: These masks also have nearly equal number of transparent and opaque elements
177: and therefore offer minimum statistical error in condition of
178: high background (typical of the $\gamma$-ray domain).
179: However the sensitivity also depends on the detector spatial resolution
180: and an {\it imaging efficiency} factor must be applied to this
181: maximum S/N to account for this effect.
182: %%
183: \section {System Point Spread Function}
184: To perform discrete operations the counts are binned in detector pixels
185: and, to avoid loss due to coarse sampling, pixels are of much smaller size
186: than the mask elements.
187: The correlation can take the form of {\it fine cross-correlation\/},
188: for which the array
189: $G$ is itself divided in finer elements with the same sampling
190: and then correlated \citep{FC81}.
191: The SPSF is then given by a pyramidal function whose width
192: (FWHM) is 1 mask element.
193: However the spatial resolution of real detector is not infinite and
194: this induces an intrinsic loss in peak reconstruction
195: and makes fine sampling (sampling-pixels small) useless.
196: In this case, and in particular when detector resolution
197: is not negligible with respect to the mask element size,
198: it can be shown that the best point-source signal to noise is obtained
199: by convolving the detector image with the $G$ array convolved by
200: the detector point spread function.
201: For a pixellated detector the blurring function is just a block function
202: of width 1 pixel.
203: Convolving $G$ with this function and performing the correlation
204: we obtain a final SPSF which is the convolution of 2 pyramidal functions
205: one of width 1 mask element and the other of width 1 pixel.
206: \\
207: Due to finite pixel size, the peak of the SPSF will be
208: reconstructed in the best case with an average efficiency given by the
209: relation $ (1 - {1 \over 3R})$ \citep{GS95},
210: where R is the ratio of the mask element size to pixel size.
211: This gives the average loss in sensitivity when the flux is estimated
212: by {\it fitting} the image with the SPSF function at fixed source position.
213: On the other hands when performing the SPSF deconvolution with given sampling
214: the reconstructed peak height will be even lower, due to the fact
215: that the source will not be at the center of the sampled pixel.
216: In average this ({\it imaging}) efficiency will be given by
217: $(1 - {1 \over 4R})^2$.
218: In the case of continuous detectors, like the SIGMA telescope,
219: the detector blurring can be described by a bi-dimensional Gaussian,
220: and the SPSF by an analytical function
221: (e.g. appendix A in Bouchet et al. 2001), which depends
222: on the detector spatial resolution (width of the Gaussian).
223: To precisely evaluate source parameters and their errors
224: we compare reconstructed image sectors with the system PSF
225: by means of the chi-square fitting technique.
226: %
227: \section{Deconvolution and Analysis}
228: %
229: Discrete cross-correlation to compute sky and variance images
230: can be written
231: $$ S_{ij}= \sum^{}_{kl} G_{i+k,j+l}D_{kl} ~~;~~
232: V_{ij}= \sum^{}_{kl} G^2_{i+k,j+l}D_{kl} $$
233: where Poisson statistics was assumed.
234: This standard deconvolution in FCFOV can be extended in the PCFOV
235: by extending the correlation of the decoding array $G$ with the detector
236: array D in a non-cyclic form, padding G with 0 elements.
237: Since only the detector section modulated by the PC source is
238: used to reconstruct the signal, the statistical error at the
239: source position and significance of the ghost peaks are minimized.
240: However to ensure a flat image in the absence of sources, detector pixels
241: which for a given sky position correspond to mask opaque elements
242: must be balanced, before subtraction, with the factor
243: $b = {n^+ \over n^-}$ where $ n_+ $ is the number of pixels
244: corresponding
245: to transparent elements and $ n_- $ to opaque ones for that given sky
246: position. This can be written
247: $$ S_{ij}= \sum^{ }_ kG^+_{i+k,j+l}W_{kl}D_{kl} - B_{ij}
248: \sum^{ }_{kl}G^-_{i+k,j+l}W_{kl}D_{kl} $$
249: where the decoding arrays are obtained from the mask M by $ G^+=M $ and $
250: G^-= 1-M $,
251: then padded with 0's outside mask region, and where the sum is performed
252: over all detector elements.
253: In the FCFOV we obtain the same result of the standard cross-correlation.
254: To consider effects such as satellite drift corrections (see Goldwurm 1995),
255: dead areas or other specific conditions,
256: a weighting array $ W $ is used to weigh properly
257: the detector array before correlating it with the $G$ arrays.
258: The balance array is
259: $$ B_{ij}= { \sum^{ }_ kG^+_{i+k,j+l}W_{kl}
260: \over \sum^{ }_ kG^-_{i+k,j+l}W_{kl}} $$
261: %\\
262: The variance, which is not constant outside the FCFOV,
263: is computed accordingly
264: $$ V_{ij}= \sum D_{kl} \left( G^+_{i+k,j+l}W_{kl}
265: \right)^2$$
266: $$+ ~B^2_{ij} \sum D_{kl} \left( G^-_{i+k,j+l}W_{kl} \right)^2 $$
267: since the cross-terms $G^+ G^-$ vanish.
268: Note however that when the weights $ W_{kl} $ refer to the same pixel
269: in D, the terms $G~W$ must be summed before squaring (see Goldwurm 1995).
270: The varying effective area can be calculated by similar formula
271: and used to renormalize, after background subtraction to FCFOV count rates.
272: All this can be performed for sampling finer than 1 pixel per mask element
273: and using a G array convolved with detector PSF in order to optimize S/N
274: for point sources, with corresponding normalizations.
275: This procedure can be carried out with a fast algorithm by
276: reducing previous formulae to a set of correlations
277: computed by FFT.
278: \\
279: The on-axis SPSF on the whole FOV for an optimum system
280: (IBIS/ISGRI configuration with MURA mask and R = 2.43, $\S$ 5)
281: and PSF deconvolution is shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:MuraExfovPsf}.
282: Note the peak and flat level in the central FCFOV,
283: the secondary lobes (coding noise) in the PCFOV
284: and the 8 main ghosts of the source peak in the PCFOV
285: located at distances, from the source, which are multiple of the
286: basic pattern.
287: %%
288: \begin{figure}
289: \centering
290: {\epsfig{figure=figure1.ps ,width=85mm, height=60mm}}
291: \caption{SPSF for the IBIS/ISGRI telescope.\label{fig:MuraExfovPsf}}
292: \end{figure}
293: %%
294: \section{IBIS imaging system}
295: The IBIS coded mask imaging system is composed by a replicated
296: Modified URA (MURA) mask of tungsten elements (Fig.~\ref{fig:Mura})
297: and 2 pixellated detector planes of the same size,
298: ISGRI for the low energy band (20-1000 keV) and
299: PICSIT for the higher band (150 keV - 10 MeV) disposed about 10 cm
300: below \citep{PU98}.
301: The MURA \citep{GF89} are nearly-optimum masks and previous discussion
302: for such system is valid for the IBIS telescope.
303: The detector planes can be divided in a regular grid of square pixels where
304: each detector element occupies a pixel of the array.
305: %Due to mechanical
306: %structures some zone of the detector plane (dead zones)
307: %are empty of elements but the pitch between array pixels is constant.
308: Essential imaging characteristics and performances are reported in
309: Table~\ref{tab:table1}, including value of efficiency for fitting
310: procedure and imaging.
311: %
312: \begin{figure}
313: \centering
314: \centerline{\epsfig{figure=figure2.ps ,width=25mm}}
315: \caption{The 53 $\times$ 53 MURA basic pattern.\label{fig:Mura}}
316: \end{figure}
317: %
318: %
319: \section{IBIS Point Source Location Error}
320: %
321: The average Point Source Location Error (PSLE) for an optimum coded aperture
322: system with a defined System Point Spread Function depends
323: on source signal to noise ratio (S/N) as following
324: $$ PSLE \div {1 \over R~(S/N)} $$
325: This can be demonstrated by computing, through the covariance matrix,
326: the errors on the parameters
327: (source position and intensity and background level)
328: derived by the chi-square fitting of a deconvolved image sector with the SPSF.
329: We calculated this error, averaged over a large number of uniformly
330: distributed source positions,
331: for an optimum coded aperture system where mask elements
332: are an integer number of detector pixels for different values
333: of mask/pixel sizes and S/Ns.
334: In Fig.~\ref{fig:PSLA} are reported these theoretical location errors
335: for mask to pixel ratios R = 2 and 3,
336: which are respectively upper and lower limits for the IBIS/ISGRI
337: configuration which has an intermediate ratio of $R$ = (11.2/4.6) = 2.43.
338: %
339: \begin{table}
340: \begin{center}
341: \caption{IBIS Imaging System and Performances}
342: \begin{tabular}{ll}
343: \hline
344: MURA basic; total mask & 53 $\times$~53 ~;~ 95 $\times$~95 \\
345: Mask element size & 11.2 $\times$ 11.2 $\times$ 16~$mm^3$\\
346: ISGRI-Mask distance & 3200 $mm$ ~$(top-top)$\\
347: ISGRI active pixels & 128 $\times$ ~128 \\
348: ISGRI pix size & 4. $\times$ ~4. $\times$ ~2.~$mm^3$ \\
349: ISGRI pixel pitch & 4.6 $\times$ ~4.6~$mm^2$ \\
350: ISGRI pixels & 130 $\times$ ~134 \\
351: PICSIT-Mask distance & 3300 $mm$ ~$(top-top)$\\
352: PICSIT Active Pixels & 64 $\times$ ~64 \\
353: PICSIT pix size & 8.66 $\times$ ~8.66 $\times$ 30 ~$mm^3$ \\
354: PICSIT pixel pitch & 9.2 $\times$ ~9.2 ~$mm^2$\\
355: PICSIT total pixels & 65 $\times$ ~67 \\
356: \\
357: ISGRI effic. ({\it Fit-Imag}) & 0.86 - 0.81 \\
358: ISGRI ang.res.(FWHM) & 12.0$'$ \\
359: ISGRI pixel angle & 5.0$'$ \\
360: PICSIT effic. ({\it Fit-Imag}) & 0.73 - 0.63 \\
361: PICSIT an.res.(FWHM) & 11.7$'$ \\
362: PICSIT pixel angle & 9.6$'$ \\
363: EXFOV (0 $\%$ sens.) & 30.6$^\circ$ $\times$ 31.0$^\circ$ \\
364: FCFOV (100 $\%$ sens.) & 8.3$^\circ$ $\times$ 8.6$^\circ$ \\
365: \hline
366: \end{tabular}
367: \label{tab:table1}
368: \end{center}
369: \end{table}
370: %
371: In the same plot are reported location errors obtained from analysis of
372: simulated observations with IBIS/ISGRI system of an on-axis point source.
373: 200 ISGRI images for a point-like nearly-on-axis source of given S/N
374: (the S/N is here reduced by {\it imaging efficiency} as defined in $\S 3$)
375: are simulated, deconvolved and analyzed to search for the most
376: significant peak which is then
377: fitted to the analytical SPSF to derive source position.
378: Background (uniform distribution) was kept fixed to a value of 1000 cts
379: and S/N was made varying
380: by reducing input source counts from $\approx$ 2000 to $\approx$ 500.
381: The standard deviation of the observed offsets between the
382: best fit positions and the input positions represent then the 1~$\sigma$
383: error in 1 parameter of the estimated position.
384: These results show that the estimated location error, as expected,
385: varies with S/N and R as predicted and can therefore be for bright sources
386: a small fraction of the angular resolution,
387: even for small values of the ratio mask element size to pixel size.
388: The IBIS/ISGRI telescope, assuming
389: no error in pointing axis reconstruction or other systematic effects, can
390: locate a 30 $\sigma$ point-like source at better than $\pm$ 30$''$.
391: Absolute error in attitude reconstruction for INTEGRAL
392: is expected to be $<$ 20$''$.
393: %
394: \section{Iterative Image Reconstruction}
395: %
396: In a standard analysis, IBIS events or histograms
397: are binned in detector images, which are then
398: corrected for detector and background non-uniformity \citep{AG95}
399: and then processed by an iterative algorithm which decodes,
400: cleans and composes sky images.
401: For each detector image a sky image and its variance are obtained
402: using the deconvolution procedure of $\S 4$,
403: and then iteratively searched for sources and cleaned of the source side
404: lobes.
405: In this iterative process the source peaks
406: are fitted with the proper system PSF
407: and finely located. Then the source contribution
408: to the image is modeled in detail and subtracted.
409: The images are rotated, projected and summed after beeing
410: weighted with the variance, and then searched for further contributions.
411: Note that the search for significant excesses must be performed taking
412: into account that these are {\it correlation images} and
413: the critical level at which an unknown excess is significant
414: increases typically from 3~$\sigma$ to 5~-~6~$\sigma$ \citep{C87}.
415: This procedure was used in simulations to assess capability of IBIS/ISGRI
416: telescope for a number of specific scientific cases
417: (see e.g.
418: Goldwurm et al. 1999, 2000, and Goldoni et al. 2000 these proceedings),
419: and it is now being implemented in software modules to be integrated
420: into the ISDC scientific analysis pipelines.
421: %
422: %
423: \begin{figure}
424: \centering
425: \centerline{\epsfig{figure=figure3.ps ,width=85mm, height=55mm}}
426: \caption{
427: Position errors (at 90$\%$ confidence level in 2 parameters)
428: for the IBIS/ISGRI telescope from simulations of a nearly on-axis source at
429: different S/N compared to predicted theoretical limits.
430: Solid line is a function $(S/N)^{-1}$ normalized at S/N=9.5.\label{fig:PSLA}}
431: \end{figure}
432: %
433: %\section*{Acknowledgments}
434: \begin{thebibliography}{}
435: \bibitem[Bouchet et al. 2001]{B01}Bouchet L., et al. 2001, {\it Ap.J.}, in press.
436: \bibitem[Caroli et al. 1987]{C87}Caroli E., et al., 1987, {\it Space Sci. Rev.}, 45, 349.
437: \bibitem[Fenimore \& Cannon 1978]{FC78}Fenimore E.E. \& Cannon T.M., 1978, {\it Appl. Opt.}, 17(3), 337.
438: \bibitem[Fenimore \& Cannon 1981]{FC81}Fenimore E.E. \& Cannon T.M., 1981, {\it Appl. Opt.}, 20(10), 1858.
439: \bibitem[Goldwurm 1995]{AG95}Goldwurm A., 1995, {\it Exper. Astron.}, 6, 9.
440: \bibitem[Goldwurm et al. 1999]{G99} Goldwurm A., et al., 1999, {\it Astro.Lett.}\&{C.}, 38, 333.
441: \bibitem[Goldwurm et al. 2000]{G00} Goldwurm A., et al., 2000, {\it AIP}, 510, 703.
442: \bibitem[Gottesman \& Fenimore 1989]{GF89}Gottesman S.R. \& Fenimore E.E., 1989, {\it Appl. Opt.}, 28, 4344 .
443: \bibitem[Skinner 1995]{GS95}Skinner G.K., 1995, {\it Exper. Astron.}, 6, 2.
444: \bibitem[Ubertini et al. 1998]{PU98}Ubertini P., et al., 1996, {\it SPIE}, 2806, 246.
445: \end{thebibliography}
446: %
447: %
448: \end{document}
449: %%
450: %%
451: %% <<<<< End of generated file <<<<<<
452: %%
453: %% End of file
454:
455:
456:
457:
458:
459:
460:
461:
462:
463:
464:
465:
466:
467:
468:
469:
470:
471: