====== Telecon 20180404 ====== Attending: Kris,Brian, Toki, Tom, Jeff, Shaul, Karl, Qi Notes by : Qi === Agenda=== * SPIE Papers * {{::sutinspie_pico_v8.docx|Sutin Abstract}} * {{::kyoung_abstract_pico_spie_2018_v2.doc|Young Abstract}} * TeamX * {{::finalfocalplane_20180404.pptx|Final Focal Plane configuration}} * {{::banddefinitions_v3.2.xlsx|Latest noise budget V3.2}} * Setting Margins * {{::pico_sensitivity_calculations_teamx.pptx|PICO Noise Assumptions}} * {{::picoscienceprogram2.pdf|Any suggestions for workshop?}} === Notes === * SPIE * in June, mostly technical * Apr 9, deadline for finalizing the author list and material * TeamX meeting * 2nd Instrument meeting; Mission meeting * Overall cost is the the most important product * no significant revelation * Focal plane * converged to one configuration; most compact, proper strehl ratio for high frequency * the other two, we have to change the optical design, to accommodate with high frequency * this focal plane has largest number of detectors; the difference compared to other two is very small though. * Noise budget * V3.2: very little change from V3.1; noise 0.63 uK arcmin before, now 0.61 uK arcmin * compare values with CORE and LiteBird calculation, single detector * we are using two independent codes to calculate. Karl at UMN; Roger at JPL. Agree within 5%, slightly difference. Reasonable confidence. * various assumptions * to what extend our assumptions agree with other experiments * in some bands, noise lower than LIteBird, some bands higher than LiteBird. * everything seems consistent, no major change * Psat, safety factor of 2, we haven chosen a factor of 2, it’s used by JPL folks, also by SPIDER AND KECK. We thought it’s reasonable. * Quantitative calculations will be done by next week: what T of elements (mirros) could bring us to a factor of 2 * Efficiency * It varies between the bands * Detector: lenselet + antenna + bolo, 70% * Edge Taper: center 10 db, lower band and higher band have different values; low, center, high: 70%, 90%, 99%. * End to end, 50-70% * Optical efficiency can mess up the estimate on safety factor * Emissivity * We are using measured emissivity from Planck. We already know, for highest bands, we may need to change to be more conservative * Margins * Space Mission, “current best estimate”, e.g. 100% yield; we are not likely to do better than 0.61 uK arkmin * What margin is the judge, successful or not. * Two paths: * 1. start with assumptions * each one assumption * "worst case" * 2. We can propagate backs from sigma_r 2*10^-5. * 3. maybe a 3rd one, some factors on NET. * Kris: instrument is one thing, how to get data to science is another * Raphael used mapping speed, assuming delensing on our own resolution. 1*10^-4 is the limit that Shaul said in AAS, which has margins from calculated value 2*10^-5. * It's not a trivial calculation * LiteBird * does have margins * "large sections", different categories, based on what's typically achieved in lab and by ground experiments * quote r with margin in it * nominal performance and worst performance. Give both to science team. Worst case did not give too much science. Lately, increase number of detectors to improve “worst case” * Shaul is going to check with Planck team * Workshop * suggestions: * Kris: 1) without modulator 2) arguments on margins