[Radioig] voltage UCD?

[BONNAREL FRANCOIS]

Hi Markus x2,
    Does that relate to the point raised last fall by Alessandra and 
Vincenzo in their discussion of the ObsCore extension for radio data ?
I copy pate the discussion here
> The use of o_ucd=phot.flux.density for raw single dish data does not 
> seem appropriate, since the single dish measured quantity is expressed 
> in raw counts. These counts come from the digitisation of a voltage 
> signal generated in the receiver chain by the incoming electromagnetic 
> field.
> 	
>
>
>       François Bonnarel
>
> • 19:26, 3 janv. (CET)
> there is phot.count : wouldn't that be ok for raw single dish data ?
>
> 	
>
>
>       Marco Molinaro
>
> • 07:45, 11 janv. (CET)
> I think it doesn't because it's not photons that are recorded by the 
> ADC conversion of the EM field. This looks semantically different. But 
> I need @alessandra.zanichelli at inaf.it to check if my comment is right.
>
> 	
>
>
>       Baptiste Cecconi
>
> • 13:25, 28 janv. (CET)
>
>
>         Nouveau
>
> there might indeed be some semantics issue here. We had this 
> discusssion a few years ago in the Semantics WG, and the proposed 
> solution was to use "phot.flux.density" for both photometric flux 
> density and EM wave flux density, since there would be no sense to 
> have 2 terms in this case. I would say that the raw counts issue is 
> different: "phot.count" means "Flux expressed in counts" (and this is 
> really counting photon hits), whereas the output of an RF ADC is not 
> photon hit counts. I'm submitting a new term for ADU (i.e., analogue 
> to digital converter units) to the UCD group.
>
I think Baptiste already submitted his proposal to the UCD group.

Cheers
François

Le 30/03/2023 à 13:21, Markus Demleitner a écrit :
> Hi Markus,
>
> On Tue, Mar 28, 2023 at 06:30:55AM +0000, Markus Dolensky wrote:
>> Can somebody suggest a UCD for complex voltage data, please?
>>
>> Context is the Obscore o_ucd for PSRFITS data.
> Hm... it would seem nobody has an immediate solution, and reviewing
> the current UCD list make me suspect there's nothing remotely
> matching -- although I have to admit that I've no clue of PSRFITS...
> Does what you'd like to annotate have a complex part because of phase
> information in a fourier transform?  If so, perhaps stat.fourier
> could remotely work?
>
> With that caveat, I suppose the Right Thing™ to do would be to
> propose a new UCD.  This is less of a hassle than it might sound like
> -- see
> https://ivoa.net/documents/UCDlistMaintenance/20191007/REC-UCDlistMaintenance-2.0-20191007.pdf.
>
> However, I suppose it would be a good idea to discuss the RFM here
> first before handing it over to Semantics.
>
>           -- Markus

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.ivoa.net/pipermail/radioig/attachments/20230330/b065114a/attachment.htm>