As of 2023.04.30, the following dataset was taken (see also https://sumire.pbworks.com/w/page/152988447/Calibration%20Data%20from%20Run%2011 where we can track the processing history of these data):

• ScienceArc (b, m)
  • Ne  (20s) : visit=91414, 92350 - 92352
  • Kr  (60s) : visit=91415, 92353 - 92355
  • Xe  (90s) : visit=91416, 92356 - 92358
  • Ar  (120s) : visit=91417, 92359 - 92351
  • HgCd (30s) : visit=91804 - 91807
• ScienceArc (b, r)
  • Ne  (10s) : visit=92569 - 92571
  • Kr  (30s) : visit=92572 - 92574
  • Xe  (45s) : visit=92575 - 92577
  • Ar  (60s) : visit=92578 - 92580
• ScienceTrace (b, m)
  • ring lamp, 100V (12s) : visit 91427 - 91436
• ScienceTrace (b, r)
  • There were bunch of 60-sec exposure at Home for other experiments
• ScienceTrace
  • 91014 (60-sec), 91015 (60-sec dark), 91016 (60-sec)
•  ditheredFlats
  • from -7pix to 0pix, 1/3pix step : visit=91292 - 91339 , 91958 - 92005
  • from 0pix to +7 pix, 1/3 pix step : visit=92029 - 92080
  • from -0.4pix to +0.4 pix, 0.2 pix step: visit = 92251 - 92257 (set3, 1/4 out), 92272 - 92278 (1/2 out, set3) , 92317 - 92323 (set4, 1/4 out), 92330 - 92336 (set4, 1/2 out)

• fiberProfiles
  • set1
    • fullDensity = [91808]
    • allHidden = [91837, 91838]
    • 1vs4_set0 = [91840, 91841]
    • vs12 = [91843, 91844]
  • set2
    • fullDensity2 = [91907, 91908, 91909]
    • allHidden2 = [91936, 91937, 91938, 91939, 91940]
    • vs14_set1 = [91942, 91943, 91944, 91945, 91946]
    • vs12_2 = [91948, 91949, 91950, 91951, 91952] 
  • set 3
    • fullDensity2 = [92203, 92204, 92205]
    • allHidden2 = [92232, 92233, 92234, 92235, 92236,92242, 92243, 92244]
    • allHidden (m,b)= [92237, 92238, 92239, 92240, 92241]
    • 1vs4_set3 = [92246, 92247, 92248, 92249, 92250, 92263, 92264, 92265] (r,b), [92258, 92259, 92260, 92261, 92262] (m,b)
    • 1vs4_set3 dithered(0.25pix) (r,b) [92251..92257]
    • 1vs2 = [92267, 92268, 92269, 92270, 92271] (r,b),
    • 1vs2 dithered(0.25pix) (r,b) 92272..92278
  • set 4
    • allHidden2 = [92306, 92307, 92308, 92309, 92310]
    • 1vs4_set2 = [92312, 92313, 92314, 92315, 92316]
    • 1vs4_set2 dithered(0.25pix) [92317..92323]
    • 1vs2 = [92325, 92326, 92327, 92328, 92329]
    • 1vs2 dithered(0.25pix) [92330..92336]
  • set5
    • allHidden = [92413..92417]
    • 1vs4_set0 = [92426..92430]
    • 1vs4_set0 dithered(0.25pix) = [92419..92425]
  • set6
    • fullDensity = [92909..92911]
    • allHidden = [92938..92942]
    • 1vs32_set1 = [92944..92946]
    • 1vs16_set1 = [92948..92950]
    • 1vs8_set1 = [92952..92954]
    • 1vs4_set1 = [92956..92958]
    • 1vs2 = [92960..92962]
• Dot penumbra study
  • set2
    • dotPenumbra = 91398
    • atHome = 91401
• PSF modeling
  • Ne, slit=-4mm,0mm,+4mm
    • all hiden: visit=92794 - 92802 , every 10 fiber out: visit = 92804 - 92812
• Uniformity
  • Twilight sky : 
    4/21, InR=0: visit = 91183 - 91187 (note; n1 is missing for 91183)
  • sky_field1, PA=0 (0x1ae6c59babbd5a12)
    • 4/25, : visit = 91881 (450s)
  • sky_field3
    • 4/25, PA=0, visit = 91901 (450s, 0x14a520008e4566e5)
    • 4/28, PA=0 : visit = 92843 - 92844 (450s, 0x14a520008e4566e5) . Note: 92843 is off-focus by -300um.
    • 4/28, PA=-120 : visit = 92646 (450s, 0x2a2086fb133ef1ba)
    • 4/29, PA=0 : visit = 92735 (450s, 0x14a520008e4566e5)
    • 4/29, PA=+120 : visit = 92738 (450s, 0x1fd165b4a96944ae)
    • 4/29, PA=-120 : visit = 92740 (450s, 0x2a2086fb133ef1ba)
    • 4/29, (after 92740 rotator was moved to PA=0) : visit = 92741 (450s)

The fiberProfile sets do not include the requested slit dither. The slit dither is important to measure the sub-pixel profile for the central fibers.

The ditheredFlat set does not include repeats for the dithers, which leaves them vulnerable to CRs. The set needs to be repeated from the start; it is not sufficient to attempt to take new data at the previous slit positions.

Can I request for the future that when a set of arcs is taken, that a quartz also be taken as part of the same set? The quartz contains a lot of information in the spatial dimension that helps with getting a good detectorMap solution.

Thanks for the new fiberProfiles data! I believe it’s allowed us to make the best fiberProfile measurements yet (see attached files). In particular, the problems we used to have with fibers at the center of r1 don’t appear to be present. We had previously attributed those problems to imprecise detectorMaps, but I now believe that it was caused by a lack of sampling, and the inclusion of the slit dithers has solved it. There are some fibers that have weird profiles, which mainly appears due to malfunctioning cobras (84,85,86,114), and some lower-level issues, but I’m very happy with this. I hope that we’ll be able to repeat it with m1, m3 and n1 when the data for those becomes available.

For the record, I used the following datasets:

set5_allHidden, set5_1vs4_set0_dithered, set4_1vs4_set2_dithered, set3_1vs4_set3_dithered, set2_vs14_set1, set3_1vs2_dithered, set4_1vs2_dithered