IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

 
Reply to this topicStart new topic
Matched Filter Processing
moozoo
post Jul 29 2011, 02:25 AM
Post #1


Newbie
*

Group: Members
Posts: 5
Joined: 28-July 11
Member No.: 6088



I'm no expert on this, so please ignore this if its not relevant. I had this idea and then went hunting for it on the internet and found this (which is pretty close to what I had in mind)

Would this be relevant for KBO detection?

http://iopscience.iop.org/1538-3881/130/4/1951
"This includes extending detection ranges to fainter magnitudes at the noise limit of the imagery and operating in dense cluttered star fields as encountered at low Galactic latitudes."

The basic idea as I understand it is to stack (add) images in all possible combinations based on expected movement of the targets and then look for them as round blobs. i.e. imagine if you already knew where and how the KBO was moving, you could then get the telescope to track it and do a long exposure of just the KBO (enhance its SNR?). Stars, which would be streaks would not add. I'm guessing they could also be suppressed by subtraction. i.e. move and stack 1-0,2-1,3-2,4-3 etc
I'd imagine you would need a lot of short exposures adding up to the same result as a long exposure but filtered on the expected movement of the target.

The paper mentions this is computationally intense, but they where talking about using a 2 Ghz Pentium 4. I'd imagine something a bit more powerful (GPGPU based?) could be throw at the problem today.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
NGC3314
post Jul 29 2011, 07:09 PM
Post #2


Junior Member
**

Group: Members
Posts: 86
Joined: 9-November 07
Member No.: 3958



QUOTE (moozoo @ Jul 28 2011, 08:25 PM) *
The basic idea as I understand it is to stack (add) images in all possible combinations based on expected movement of the targets and then look for them as round blobs. i


...snip...

QUOTE
The paper mentions this is computationally intense, but they where talking about using a 2 Ghz Pentium 4. I'd imagine something a bit more powerful (GPGPU based?) could be throw at the problem today.


I think this is essentially the approach taken by Cochran et al. in an early Hubble search for smallish TNOs (although the details of statistics have proven controversial as to what exactly they detected). For computational and field-of-veiw reasons, they had to take fairly restricted orbital parameters to search, which might be relaxable now. I've wondered whether one could do something similar to search for Vulcanoids in SOHO data, since stability considerations restrict the ranges of semimajor axis, inclination , and eccentricity one would need to search.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
moozoo
post Aug 1 2011, 10:38 PM
Post #3


Newbie
*

Group: Members
Posts: 5
Joined: 28-July 11
Member No.: 6088



QUOTE (NGC3314 @ Jul 30 2011, 03:09 AM) *
I think this is essentially the approach taken by Cochran et al. in an early Hubble search for smallish TNOs (although the details of statistics have proven controversial as to what exactly they detected). For computational and field-of-veiw reasons, they had to take fairly restricted orbital parameters to search, which might be relaxable now. I've wondered whether one could do something similar to search for Vulcanoids in SOHO data, since stability considerations restrict the ranges of semimajor axis, inclination , and eccentricity one would need to search.


Thank you, a very interesting paper. I found a detailed response to it Michael Brown et al..

It seems to me that a simple test would have been to randomly re-order their 34 images, fully process it and then compare the results. Perhaps repeating that several times in order to check that the in-order images had different properties.

I was thinking of some thing more like video astronomy where there would be something like 340 images or even 3400 images taken over the same time period with a corresponding shorter exposure. The logic being that this might decrease the chances of noise randomly adding up to something (moving).
Anyway its great that this method is know about and has been tried before in some form.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
john_s
post Aug 2 2011, 04:21 PM
Post #4


Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 530
Joined: 3-December 04
From: Boulder, Colorado, USA
Member No.: 117



Yes, we'll be doing similar tricks with our automated object search (which we're running in parallel with the KBO Zoo search- we don't know yet which will be most effective). Our job for New Horizons is a bit simpler in that we know the rate of motion of the objects we're interested in- they have to be going at a particular speed and direction or New Horizons can't reach them! So we don't need to try a large number of rates to just find the accessible guys.

John

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

Reply to this topicStart new topic

 



RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 1st September 2014 - 11:24 PM
RULES AND GUIDELINES
Please read the Forum Rules and Guidelines before posting.

IMAGE COPYRIGHT
Images posted on UnmannedSpaceflight.com may be copyrighted. Do not reproduce without permission. Read here for further information on space images and copyright.

OPINIONS AND MODERATION
Opinions expressed on UnmannedSpaceflight.com are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of UnmannedSpaceflight.com or The Planetary Society. The all-volunteer UnmannedSpaceflight.com moderation team is wholly independent of The Planetary Society. The Planetary Society has no influence over decisions made by the UnmannedSpaceflight.com moderators.
SUPPORT THE FORUM
Unmannedspaceflight.com is a project of the Planetary Society and is funded by donations from visitors and members. Help keep this forum up and running by contributing here.