Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

fit for the doublet ratio as a free parameter (with physical priors) #39

Closed
moustakas opened this issue Aug 30, 2021 · 4 comments
Closed
Assignees
Labels
enhancement New feature or request

Comments

@moustakas
Copy link
Member

The [OII] and [SII] doublet ratios depend on the electron density of the medium producing those lines, while the MgII doublet ratio can vary over a not-arbitrary range (for example, if one line is positive, the other line must be positive, too).

To integrate these physical priors into fastspecfit, consider using the ratio of these lines as one of the free parameters (with a sensible prior range) rather than either fixing the ratio or letting the individual line-amplitudes to be optimized independently.

Credit for this idea to Ben Weiner.

@moustakas
Copy link
Member Author

I generated some figures to this notebook using pyneb to help establish the appropriate physical priors:
https://github.com/desihub/fastspecfit/blob/fuji-dev/doc/nb/nebular-lines.ipynb

[OII] 3726,29

For extreme (but not unphysical) ranges of electron temperature and density, this ratio varies between 0.66300 and 1.38312, with a typical value of 0.74107.

Screen Shot 2022-01-22 at 10 42 32 AM

[SII] 6730,16

This ratio varies between 0.67794 and 1.19105, with a typical value of 0.74011.

Screen Shot 2022-01-22 at 10 45 50 AM

(This notebook also shows, for completeness, that the [NII] 6584,48, [OIII] 5007/4959, and [OII] 7330,20 doublet ratios are independent of density and temperature, as expected from atomic physics. Yay!)

@moustakas
Copy link
Member Author

Initial fitting results with this more physically flexible (and robust!) model can be seen in the screenshot below, which should be compared with the Everest version of the code:
https://data.desi.lbl.gov/desi/users/ioannis/fastspecfit/everest/tiles/cumulative/80613/fastspec-80613-cumulative-39633345008634465.png

Nothing crazy here and, in fact, I get an [SII] and [OII] doublet ratio of 0.76658603 and 0.73103347 (very close to the nominal values of 0.74), which correspond very closely to a nominal electron density of 100/cm3. Neat!

Screen Shot 2022-01-22 at 4 07 44 PM

@moustakas
Copy link
Member Author

BTW, the preceding fitting results were generated with

fastspec /global/cfs/cdirs/desi/spectro/redux/everest/tiles/cumulative/80613/20210324/redrock-4-80613-thru20210324.fits \
  -o fastspec.fits --targetids 39633345008634465 --specprod everest
fastspecfit-qa --fastspecfile ./fastspec.fits -o /global/homes/i/ioannis/desi-users/ioannis/tmp

Here's another example, an ELG at z=0.82, which is also quite well-behaved. (Here, the doublet ratio is 0.7071845, which is again very close to nominal electron density.)

fastspec /global/cfs/cdirs/desi/spectro/redux/everest/tiles/cumulative/80606/20201219/redrock-1-80606-thru20201219.fits \
  -o fastspec2.fits --targetids 39627658597767916 --specprod everest
fastspecfit-qa --fastspecfile ./fastspec2.fits -o /global/homes/i/ioannis/desi-users/ioannis/tmp

Screen Shot 2022-01-22 at 4 22 26 PM

@moustakas moustakas self-assigned this Jan 22, 2022
@moustakas moustakas added the enhancement New feature or request label Jan 22, 2022
@moustakas
Copy link
Member Author

Done in #55 and #69.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
enhancement New feature or request
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

1 participant