Validation of the EDGES Low-band Antenna Beam Model

The response of the antenna is a source of uncertainty in measurements with the Experiment to Detect the Global Epoch of Reionization Signature (EDGES). We aim to validate the electromagnetic beam model of the low-band (50–100 MHz) dipole antenna with comparisons between models and against data. We...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:The Astronomical journal 2021-08, Vol.162 (2), p.38
Hauptverfasser: Mahesh, Nivedita, Bowman, Judd D., Mozdzen, Thomas J., Rogers, Alan E. E., Monsalve, Raul A., Murray, Steven G., Lewis, David
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext bestellen
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page
container_issue 2
container_start_page 38
container_title The Astronomical journal
container_volume 162
creator Mahesh, Nivedita
Bowman, Judd D.
Mozdzen, Thomas J.
Rogers, Alan E. E.
Monsalve, Raul A.
Murray, Steven G.
Lewis, David
description The response of the antenna is a source of uncertainty in measurements with the Experiment to Detect the Global Epoch of Reionization Signature (EDGES). We aim to validate the electromagnetic beam model of the low-band (50–100 MHz) dipole antenna with comparisons between models and against data. We find that simulations of a simplified model of the antenna over an infinite perfectly conducting ground plane are, with one exception, robust to changes in the numerical electromagnetic solver code or algorithm. For simulations of the antenna with the actual finite ground plane and realistic soil properties, we find that two out of three numerical solvers agree well. Applying our analysis pipeline to a simulated drift-scan observation from an early EDGES low-band instrument that had a 10 m × 10 m ground plane, we find residual levels after fitting and removing a five-term foreground model from the simulated data binned in local sidereal time (LST) average about 250 mK with ±40 mK variation between numerical solvers. A similar analysis of the primary 30 m × 30 m sawtooth ground plane reduced the LST-averaged residuals to about 90 mK with ±10 mK between the two viable solvers. More broadly we show that larger ground planes generally perform better than smaller ground planes. Simulated data have a power that is within 4% of real observations, a limitation of net accuracy of the sky and beam models. We observe that residual spectral structures after foreground model fits match qualitatively between simulated data and observations, suggesting that the frequency dependence of the beam is reasonably represented by the models. We find that a soil conductivity of 0.02 S m −1 and relative permittivity of 3.5 yield good agreement between simulated spectra and observations. This is consistent with the soil properties reported by Sutinjo et al. for the Murchison Radio-astronomy Observatory, where EDGES is located.
doi_str_mv 10.3847/1538-3881/abfdab
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_O3W</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_osti_scitechconnect_23159292</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2548660702</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c378t-3aaae42c29f4c67a0c173f8aebbd478ec9d99a013fcb489c56acb0bff80052363</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kEtLAzEUhYMoWKt7lwNuHXvzmJnMstZahYoLH9twk0nolDapk4j47-0wYleuLhy-c7h8hFxSuOFSVBNacJlzKekEtWtQH5HRX3RMRgAg8pIV5Sk5i3ENQKkEMSL8HTdtg6kNPgsuSyubze8W85dsGb5yjb7Jpj5Z7zG7tbjNnkJjN-fkxOEm2ovfOyZv9_PX2UO-fF48zqbL3PBKppwjohXMsNoJU1YIhlbcSbRaN6KS1tRNXSNQ7owWsjZFiUaDdk4CFIyXfEyuht0QU6uiaZM1KxO8tyYpxmlRs5odqF0XPj5tTGodPju_f0yxQsiyhAp6CgbKdCHGzjq169otdt-KguoFqt6W6m2pQeC-cj1U2rA7bP6L_wBkeHBT</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2548660702</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Validation of the EDGES Low-band Antenna Beam Model</title><source>IOP Publishing Free Content</source><creator>Mahesh, Nivedita ; Bowman, Judd D. ; Mozdzen, Thomas J. ; Rogers, Alan E. E. ; Monsalve, Raul A. ; Murray, Steven G. ; Lewis, David</creator><creatorcontrib>Mahesh, Nivedita ; Bowman, Judd D. ; Mozdzen, Thomas J. ; Rogers, Alan E. E. ; Monsalve, Raul A. ; Murray, Steven G. ; Lewis, David</creatorcontrib><description>The response of the antenna is a source of uncertainty in measurements with the Experiment to Detect the Global Epoch of Reionization Signature (EDGES). We aim to validate the electromagnetic beam model of the low-band (50–100 MHz) dipole antenna with comparisons between models and against data. We find that simulations of a simplified model of the antenna over an infinite perfectly conducting ground plane are, with one exception, robust to changes in the numerical electromagnetic solver code or algorithm. For simulations of the antenna with the actual finite ground plane and realistic soil properties, we find that two out of three numerical solvers agree well. Applying our analysis pipeline to a simulated drift-scan observation from an early EDGES low-band instrument that had a 10 m × 10 m ground plane, we find residual levels after fitting and removing a five-term foreground model from the simulated data binned in local sidereal time (LST) average about 250 mK with ±40 mK variation between numerical solvers. A similar analysis of the primary 30 m × 30 m sawtooth ground plane reduced the LST-averaged residuals to about 90 mK with ±10 mK between the two viable solvers. More broadly we show that larger ground planes generally perform better than smaller ground planes. Simulated data have a power that is within 4% of real observations, a limitation of net accuracy of the sky and beam models. We observe that residual spectral structures after foreground model fits match qualitatively between simulated data and observations, suggesting that the frequency dependence of the beam is reasonably represented by the models. We find that a soil conductivity of 0.02 S m −1 and relative permittivity of 3.5 yield good agreement between simulated spectra and observations. This is consistent with the soil properties reported by Sutinjo et al. for the Murchison Radio-astronomy Observatory, where EDGES is located.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0004-6256</identifier><identifier>ISSN: 1538-3881</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1538-3881</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.3847/1538-3881/abfdab</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Madison: The American Astronomical Society</publisher><subject>70 PLASMA PHYSICS AND FUSION TECHNOLOGY ; ACCURACY ; ALGORITHMS ; ANTENNAS ; Astronomical instrumentation ; ASTRONOMY ; Beams (radiation) ; Bianchi cosmology ; COMPUTERIZED SIMULATION ; Cosmology ; Dipole antennas ; DIPOLES ; Early universe ; FREQUENCY DEPENDENCE ; Ground plane ; INSTRUMENTATION RELATED TO NUCLEAR SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY ; Ionization ; MHZ RANGE ; Model accuracy ; Neutral hydrogen clouds ; Observational astronomy ; PERMITTIVITY ; PLASMA INSTABILITY ; Radio astronomy ; Radio telescopes ; Reionization ; Robustness (mathematics) ; SAWTOOTH OSCILLATIONS ; Sidereal time ; Simulation ; Single-dish antennas ; Soil conductivity ; Soil properties ; SOILS ; Solvers ; SPECTRA ; VALIDATION</subject><ispartof>The Astronomical journal, 2021-08, Vol.162 (2), p.38</ispartof><rights>2021. The American Astronomical Society. All rights reserved.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c378t-3aaae42c29f4c67a0c173f8aebbd478ec9d99a013fcb489c56acb0bff80052363</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c378t-3aaae42c29f4c67a0c173f8aebbd478ec9d99a013fcb489c56acb0bff80052363</cites><orcidid>0000-0002-3287-2327 ; 0000-0003-2560-8023 ; 0000-0003-3059-3823 ; 0000-0003-4689-4997 ; 0000-0002-8475-2036 ; 0000-0003-1941-7458</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.3847/1538-3881/abfdab/pdf$$EPDF$$P50$$Giop$$H</linktopdf><link.rule.ids>230,314,776,780,881,27901,27902,38845,38867,53815,53842</link.rule.ids><linktorsrc>$$Uhttps://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.3847/1538-3881/abfdab$$EView_record_in_IOP_Publishing$$FView_record_in_$$GIOP_Publishing</linktorsrc><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.osti.gov/biblio/23159292$$D View this record in Osti.gov$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Mahesh, Nivedita</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bowman, Judd D.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mozdzen, Thomas J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rogers, Alan E. E.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Monsalve, Raul A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Murray, Steven G.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lewis, David</creatorcontrib><title>Validation of the EDGES Low-band Antenna Beam Model</title><title>The Astronomical journal</title><addtitle>AJ</addtitle><addtitle>Astron. J</addtitle><description>The response of the antenna is a source of uncertainty in measurements with the Experiment to Detect the Global Epoch of Reionization Signature (EDGES). We aim to validate the electromagnetic beam model of the low-band (50–100 MHz) dipole antenna with comparisons between models and against data. We find that simulations of a simplified model of the antenna over an infinite perfectly conducting ground plane are, with one exception, robust to changes in the numerical electromagnetic solver code or algorithm. For simulations of the antenna with the actual finite ground plane and realistic soil properties, we find that two out of three numerical solvers agree well. Applying our analysis pipeline to a simulated drift-scan observation from an early EDGES low-band instrument that had a 10 m × 10 m ground plane, we find residual levels after fitting and removing a five-term foreground model from the simulated data binned in local sidereal time (LST) average about 250 mK with ±40 mK variation between numerical solvers. A similar analysis of the primary 30 m × 30 m sawtooth ground plane reduced the LST-averaged residuals to about 90 mK with ±10 mK between the two viable solvers. More broadly we show that larger ground planes generally perform better than smaller ground planes. Simulated data have a power that is within 4% of real observations, a limitation of net accuracy of the sky and beam models. We observe that residual spectral structures after foreground model fits match qualitatively between simulated data and observations, suggesting that the frequency dependence of the beam is reasonably represented by the models. We find that a soil conductivity of 0.02 S m −1 and relative permittivity of 3.5 yield good agreement between simulated spectra and observations. This is consistent with the soil properties reported by Sutinjo et al. for the Murchison Radio-astronomy Observatory, where EDGES is located.</description><subject>70 PLASMA PHYSICS AND FUSION TECHNOLOGY</subject><subject>ACCURACY</subject><subject>ALGORITHMS</subject><subject>ANTENNAS</subject><subject>Astronomical instrumentation</subject><subject>ASTRONOMY</subject><subject>Beams (radiation)</subject><subject>Bianchi cosmology</subject><subject>COMPUTERIZED SIMULATION</subject><subject>Cosmology</subject><subject>Dipole antennas</subject><subject>DIPOLES</subject><subject>Early universe</subject><subject>FREQUENCY DEPENDENCE</subject><subject>Ground plane</subject><subject>INSTRUMENTATION RELATED TO NUCLEAR SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY</subject><subject>Ionization</subject><subject>MHZ RANGE</subject><subject>Model accuracy</subject><subject>Neutral hydrogen clouds</subject><subject>Observational astronomy</subject><subject>PERMITTIVITY</subject><subject>PLASMA INSTABILITY</subject><subject>Radio astronomy</subject><subject>Radio telescopes</subject><subject>Reionization</subject><subject>Robustness (mathematics)</subject><subject>SAWTOOTH OSCILLATIONS</subject><subject>Sidereal time</subject><subject>Simulation</subject><subject>Single-dish antennas</subject><subject>Soil conductivity</subject><subject>Soil properties</subject><subject>SOILS</subject><subject>Solvers</subject><subject>SPECTRA</subject><subject>VALIDATION</subject><issn>0004-6256</issn><issn>1538-3881</issn><issn>1538-3881</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2021</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNp1kEtLAzEUhYMoWKt7lwNuHXvzmJnMstZahYoLH9twk0nolDapk4j47-0wYleuLhy-c7h8hFxSuOFSVBNacJlzKekEtWtQH5HRX3RMRgAg8pIV5Sk5i3ENQKkEMSL8HTdtg6kNPgsuSyubze8W85dsGb5yjb7Jpj5Z7zG7tbjNnkJjN-fkxOEm2ovfOyZv9_PX2UO-fF48zqbL3PBKppwjohXMsNoJU1YIhlbcSbRaN6KS1tRNXSNQ7owWsjZFiUaDdk4CFIyXfEyuht0QU6uiaZM1KxO8tyYpxmlRs5odqF0XPj5tTGodPju_f0yxQsiyhAp6CgbKdCHGzjq169otdt-KguoFqt6W6m2pQeC-cj1U2rA7bP6L_wBkeHBT</recordid><startdate>20210801</startdate><enddate>20210801</enddate><creator>Mahesh, Nivedita</creator><creator>Bowman, Judd D.</creator><creator>Mozdzen, Thomas J.</creator><creator>Rogers, Alan E. E.</creator><creator>Monsalve, Raul A.</creator><creator>Murray, Steven G.</creator><creator>Lewis, David</creator><general>The American Astronomical Society</general><general>IOP Publishing</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7TG</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>H8D</scope><scope>KL.</scope><scope>L7M</scope><scope>OTOTI</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3287-2327</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2560-8023</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3059-3823</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4689-4997</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8475-2036</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1941-7458</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20210801</creationdate><title>Validation of the EDGES Low-band Antenna Beam Model</title><author>Mahesh, Nivedita ; Bowman, Judd D. ; Mozdzen, Thomas J. ; Rogers, Alan E. E. ; Monsalve, Raul A. ; Murray, Steven G. ; Lewis, David</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c378t-3aaae42c29f4c67a0c173f8aebbd478ec9d99a013fcb489c56acb0bff80052363</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2021</creationdate><topic>70 PLASMA PHYSICS AND FUSION TECHNOLOGY</topic><topic>ACCURACY</topic><topic>ALGORITHMS</topic><topic>ANTENNAS</topic><topic>Astronomical instrumentation</topic><topic>ASTRONOMY</topic><topic>Beams (radiation)</topic><topic>Bianchi cosmology</topic><topic>COMPUTERIZED SIMULATION</topic><topic>Cosmology</topic><topic>Dipole antennas</topic><topic>DIPOLES</topic><topic>Early universe</topic><topic>FREQUENCY DEPENDENCE</topic><topic>Ground plane</topic><topic>INSTRUMENTATION RELATED TO NUCLEAR SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY</topic><topic>Ionization</topic><topic>MHZ RANGE</topic><topic>Model accuracy</topic><topic>Neutral hydrogen clouds</topic><topic>Observational astronomy</topic><topic>PERMITTIVITY</topic><topic>PLASMA INSTABILITY</topic><topic>Radio astronomy</topic><topic>Radio telescopes</topic><topic>Reionization</topic><topic>Robustness (mathematics)</topic><topic>SAWTOOTH OSCILLATIONS</topic><topic>Sidereal time</topic><topic>Simulation</topic><topic>Single-dish antennas</topic><topic>Soil conductivity</topic><topic>Soil properties</topic><topic>SOILS</topic><topic>Solvers</topic><topic>SPECTRA</topic><topic>VALIDATION</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Mahesh, Nivedita</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bowman, Judd D.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mozdzen, Thomas J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rogers, Alan E. E.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Monsalve, Raul A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Murray, Steven G.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lewis, David</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Meteorological &amp; Geoastrophysical Abstracts</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>Aerospace Database</collection><collection>Meteorological &amp; Geoastrophysical Abstracts - Academic</collection><collection>Advanced Technologies Database with Aerospace</collection><collection>OSTI.GOV</collection><jtitle>The Astronomical journal</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext_linktorsrc</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Mahesh, Nivedita</au><au>Bowman, Judd D.</au><au>Mozdzen, Thomas J.</au><au>Rogers, Alan E. E.</au><au>Monsalve, Raul A.</au><au>Murray, Steven G.</au><au>Lewis, David</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Validation of the EDGES Low-band Antenna Beam Model</atitle><jtitle>The Astronomical journal</jtitle><stitle>AJ</stitle><addtitle>Astron. J</addtitle><date>2021-08-01</date><risdate>2021</risdate><volume>162</volume><issue>2</issue><spage>38</spage><pages>38-</pages><issn>0004-6256</issn><issn>1538-3881</issn><eissn>1538-3881</eissn><abstract>The response of the antenna is a source of uncertainty in measurements with the Experiment to Detect the Global Epoch of Reionization Signature (EDGES). We aim to validate the electromagnetic beam model of the low-band (50–100 MHz) dipole antenna with comparisons between models and against data. We find that simulations of a simplified model of the antenna over an infinite perfectly conducting ground plane are, with one exception, robust to changes in the numerical electromagnetic solver code or algorithm. For simulations of the antenna with the actual finite ground plane and realistic soil properties, we find that two out of three numerical solvers agree well. Applying our analysis pipeline to a simulated drift-scan observation from an early EDGES low-band instrument that had a 10 m × 10 m ground plane, we find residual levels after fitting and removing a five-term foreground model from the simulated data binned in local sidereal time (LST) average about 250 mK with ±40 mK variation between numerical solvers. A similar analysis of the primary 30 m × 30 m sawtooth ground plane reduced the LST-averaged residuals to about 90 mK with ±10 mK between the two viable solvers. More broadly we show that larger ground planes generally perform better than smaller ground planes. Simulated data have a power that is within 4% of real observations, a limitation of net accuracy of the sky and beam models. We observe that residual spectral structures after foreground model fits match qualitatively between simulated data and observations, suggesting that the frequency dependence of the beam is reasonably represented by the models. We find that a soil conductivity of 0.02 S m −1 and relative permittivity of 3.5 yield good agreement between simulated spectra and observations. This is consistent with the soil properties reported by Sutinjo et al. for the Murchison Radio-astronomy Observatory, where EDGES is located.</abstract><cop>Madison</cop><pub>The American Astronomical Society</pub><doi>10.3847/1538-3881/abfdab</doi><tpages>16</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3287-2327</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2560-8023</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3059-3823</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4689-4997</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8475-2036</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1941-7458</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext_linktorsrc
identifier ISSN: 0004-6256
ispartof The Astronomical journal, 2021-08, Vol.162 (2), p.38
issn 0004-6256
1538-3881
1538-3881
language eng
recordid cdi_osti_scitechconnect_23159292
source IOP Publishing Free Content
subjects 70 PLASMA PHYSICS AND FUSION TECHNOLOGY
ACCURACY
ALGORITHMS
ANTENNAS
Astronomical instrumentation
ASTRONOMY
Beams (radiation)
Bianchi cosmology
COMPUTERIZED SIMULATION
Cosmology
Dipole antennas
DIPOLES
Early universe
FREQUENCY DEPENDENCE
Ground plane
INSTRUMENTATION RELATED TO NUCLEAR SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY
Ionization
MHZ RANGE
Model accuracy
Neutral hydrogen clouds
Observational astronomy
PERMITTIVITY
PLASMA INSTABILITY
Radio astronomy
Radio telescopes
Reionization
Robustness (mathematics)
SAWTOOTH OSCILLATIONS
Sidereal time
Simulation
Single-dish antennas
Soil conductivity
Soil properties
SOILS
Solvers
SPECTRA
VALIDATION
title Validation of the EDGES Low-band Antenna Beam Model
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-20T20%3A03%3A26IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_O3W&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Validation%20of%20the%20EDGES%20Low-band%20Antenna%20Beam%20Model&rft.jtitle=The%20Astronomical%20journal&rft.au=Mahesh,%20Nivedita&rft.date=2021-08-01&rft.volume=162&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=38&rft.pages=38-&rft.issn=0004-6256&rft.eissn=1538-3881&rft_id=info:doi/10.3847/1538-3881/abfdab&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_O3W%3E2548660702%3C/proquest_O3W%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2548660702&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true