4.7 Article

AN EMPIRICAL METHOD FOR IMPROVING THE QUALITY OF RXTE HEXTE SPECTRA

Journal

ASTROPHYSICAL JOURNAL
Volume 819, Issue 1, Pages -

Publisher

IOP PUBLISHING LTD
DOI: 10.3847/0004-637X/819/1/76

Keywords

instrumentation: detectors; space vehicles: instruments; X-rays: individual (Crab, XTE J1752-223, GX 339-4)

Funding

  1. CGPS grant from Smithsonian Institution
  2. NASA Hubble Fellowship [HST-HF-51315.01]
  3. NASA Einstein Fellowship [PF5-160144]
  4. NASA through Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory (SAO) [SV3-73016]
  5. NASA [NAS8-03060]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

We have developed a correction tool to improve the quality of Rossi X-ray Timing Explorer (RXTE) High Energy X-ray Timing Experiment (HEXTE) spectra by employing the same method we used earlier to improve the quality of RXTE Proportional Counter Array (PCA) spectra. We fit all of the hundreds of HEXTE spectra of the Crab individually to a simple power-law model, some 37. million counts in total for Cluster. A and 39. million counts for Cluster. B, and we create for each cluster a combined spectrum of residuals. We find that the residual spectrum of Cluster. A is free of instrumental artifacts while that of Cluster B contains significant features with amplitudes similar to 1%; the most prominent is in the energy range 30-50 keV, which coincides with the iodine K edge. Starting with the residual spectrum for Cluster. B, via an iterative procedure we created the calibration tool HEXBCORR for correcting any Cluster. B spectrum of interest. We demonstrate the efficacy of the tool by applying it to Cluster. B spectra of two bright black holes, which contain several million counts apiece. For these spectra, application of the tool significantly improves the goodness of fit, while affecting only slightly the broadband fit parameters. The tool may be important for the study of spectral features, such as cyclotron lines, a topic that is beyond the scope of this paper.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available