1. Team Parkes
PSC 2011

2. Introduction
Team Parkes folded the experiences and information imparted by PSC instructors, scientists, and mentors to establish a method of attacking the data most efficiently and to answer the question, “Is it a pulsar or is it Memorex?” Team Parkes’ members determined the most effective approach to analyze data sets. During this initial phase of the data analysis process, team members rated plots. When a plot scored two or higher, the entire team was assembled for input. Team Parkes studied the interesting plots making a final determination. Team members shared data sets to speed the process. Of all the data sets analyzed, five plots were flagged as worthy of further investigation.

3. Divide and Conquer Dunc’s Rule of Thumb reduced x2 < 1 bad
The Man, the Myth, the Legend…
Every team member used Duncan’s Pulsar technique (or some form of it)
Dunc’s Rule of Thumb
reduced x2 < 1 bad
reduced x2 < 2 (≈ pulsar/RFI)
reduced x2 > 3 (pulsar/RFI)
Image taken from :
Duncan Lorimer

4. “Recipe” for Pulsars Time Domain Plot: Are there average pulses?
2. Integrated Pulse Profile: Do the pulses match the Time Domain Plot?
3. Sub-band Plot: Vertical or Horizontal line? (Vertical = possible pulsar, Horizontal = RFI)
4. DM curve: look for a peak > 0
5. Reduced x2 and Period
Reduced x^2 greater than 1
Make sure not a harmonic.
Image taken from:

5. 1. RA/Dec:
Was listed in 350 drift scan survey but not ANTF catalog = known pulsar

6. 2. RA/Dec:
Unknown in either catalog, possible pulsar at this point pending conformation scan conducted last night DM 62ish, Signal – Noise 12, 5 good circles on time-dm graph

7. 3. RA/Dec:
Unknown in either catalog, possible pulsar candidate, needs follow up due to GBT malfunction, DM – 4.126, period ms, X^2 – 8.962, vertical bands at 0.6 and 1.6 in phase domain and corresponding banding in sub-band plot. Unknown in either catalog, possible pulsar candidate, needs follow up due to GBT malfunction, DM – 4.126, period ms, X^2 – 8.962, vertical bands at 0.6 and 1.6 in phase domain and corresponding banding in sub-band plot

8. 4. RA/Dec: (P = ms)
Unknown in either catalog, possible pulsar candidate, needs follow up due to continuing GBT malfunction, DM – 1.547, period ms, X^2 – vertical bands at 0.25 and 1.25 and corresponding banding in sub-band plot

9. 5. RA/Dec: (P = ms)
Unknown in either catalog, interesting plot related to previous example, needs follow up due to extended continuation of GBT malfunction, DM – , period – , X^2 – 2.242

10. Data Distribution Judy 30 3 87 120 David 15 53 68 Bonnie 17 51 Rick 10
Member
RFI
Candidates
Das Poop
Total data sets
Judy 30 3 87
120
David 15 53 68
Bonnie 17 51
Rick 10 2 90
102
Lee Ann 12 5 52 69
Total 84
333
427

11. Top Right – Vertical band at DM of 22, 25, 42, and 45
Top left – error bar larger than amplitude of peaks, DM – 759, X^
Top Right – Vertical band at DM of 22, 25, 42, and 45
Bottom Left – diagonal banding in sub-band plot, period of = harmonic of 16.6
Bottom Right – missing bins in phase-time diagram, DM 128.7, numerous horizontal bands in sub-band plot
Pictures taken from Google images

12. undetermined versus data
Images from:
and

13. Discussion Points Certain Uncertain
Sift through “stuff” to get to a possible candidate
GBT malfunctioned
GBT was working some of the time
Good potential candidates
Ton of noise
Uncertain
If any of our candidates are pulsars
Data would have been gathered
When malfunction began during our scan
Confirmation
Causes other than RFI?

14. Questions do you have…hmmm?
Are the plots that we didn’t get to run pulsars?
Will they/when will they be followed up? If so, we will be notified.
In the future, time permitting, we would run all of our candidates.
Image taken from:

15. Parkes…. the team that made the Kessel run in less than 12 parsecs
Taken from: