地面望远镜数据处理方法: 频域vs.时域
Processing Ground-Based Asteroseismic Photometric Data: Frequency Domain vs. Time Domain
-
摘要: 地面望远镜的时域观测因昼夜交替和天气影响常导致数据空缺, 占空比较低(典型值约为0.30), 对时域天文研究造成显著影响. 为了对比基于频域分析与时域分析的方法在处理含间隙时域数据时的表现及其在星震学研究中的适用性, 采用了Lomb-Scargle算法和Inpainting插值法作为频域分析方法以及高斯过程(Gaussian Process, GP)方法作为时域分析方法, 对具有类太阳振动特征且占空比介于0.20至0.50之间的模拟时域测光数据进行了分析. 结果显示, 高斯过程方法在还原真实值的准确性和稳定性方面均表现最佳, 优于Lomb-Scargle方法和Inpainting方法. Inpainting方法在处理低占空比数据时可能引入大量假信号, 对信号测量造成干扰. 因此, 高斯过程方法是分析地面望远镜低占空比数据的首选, Lomb-Scargle方法次之, 而Inpainting方法不推荐.Abstract: Time-domain observations with ground-based telescopes are often affected by the day-night cycle and weather conditions, leading to data gaps and a relatively low duty cycle (typically around 0.30), which significantly impacts time-domain astronomical studies. To compare the performance of frequency-domain and time-domain analysis methods in handling time-domain data with gaps and their applicability in asteroseismology, the Lomb-Scargle algorithm and the Inpainting interpolation method were employed as frequency-domain approaches, while the Gaussian Process (GP) method was used as a time-domain approach. These methods were applied to simulate light curves exhibiting solar-like oscillations with duty cycles ranging from 0.20 to 0.50. The results indicate that the Gaussian Process method outperforms both the Lomb-Scargle and Inpainting methods in terms of accuracy and stability in recovering the true values. The Inpainting method, in particular, tends to introduce significant false signals when applied to low-duty-cycle data, leading to potential measurement distortions. Therefore, the Gaussian Process method is the preferred choice for analyzing low-duty-cycle data from ground-based telescopes, followed by the Lomb-Scargle method, while the Inpainting method is not recommended.
下载: