QUIET First Season Result

On this page, we present supplemental materials for the QUIET first season results (arXiv:1012.3191). See also QUIET Web Page.

Last update: Jan. 25th, 2011.

Bandpowers

Here we tabulate the bandpowers for the EE, BB, and EB power spectra for both pipelines (which are in good agreement). We remind the reader that the lowest multipole bin in EE has foreground contamination. And that since the systematic studies were done in the framework of Pipeline A, its values are reported as the official QUIET result.
Pipeline A: QUIET_first_season_bandpowers.txt
Pipeline B: QUIET_first_season_bandpowers-pipeline_B.txt

Figures

For further explanation, please see the paper.
Descriptionpng fileseps files
Overview of QUIET instrument Figure 1 [Fig1]
CMB and Galactic patches observed by QUIET, in equatorial coordinates, superimposed on a Q-band all-sky WMAP 7-year temperature map (Jarosik et al. 2010). Figure 2 [Fig2]
Polarimeter responses from the central feed horn to the polarization of Tau A at four parallactic angles. Figure 3 [Fig3]
Map of the polarization of the Moon from one detector diode. Figure 4 [Fig4]
Fig 5a: Polarization beam profile from Tau A observations with the central feed horn. Fig 5b: Beam window function with errors shown by the gray band. Figure 5a Figure 5b [Fig5a][Fig5b]
EE and BB power spectra for the patch CMB-1 null test between Q and U detector diodes Figure 6 [Fig6]
Power spectra differences between the final data selection and six of the 32 earlier data-selection iterations. Figure 7 [Fig7]
Null-suite statistics. Fig 8a: Histogram of the χnull values. Fig 8b: Histogram of PTEs calculated from the χnull2 statistic. Figure 8a Figure 8b [Fig8a][Fig8b]
EE, BB, and BB power spectra from each QUIET pipeline, all four patches combined. Figure 9a Figure 9b Figure 9c [Fig9a][Fig9b][Fig9c]
Maps of patch CMB-1 in Galactic coordinates. Figure 10 [Fig10]
Fig 11a: EE results with 68% C.L. error bars. Fig 11b: BB 95% C.L. upper limits. For comparison, we also plot results from previous experiments (Brown et al. 2009; Chang et al. 2010; Larson et al. 2010) Figure 11a Figure 11b [Fig11a][Fig11b]
CMB power spectra for each individual patch. Figure 12a Figure 12b [Fig12a][Fig12b]
Fig 13a: Temperature maps from QUIET and WMAP 7-year Q-band map (Jarosik et al. 2010). Fig 13b: CMB temperature power spectra: TT, TE, and TB. Figure 13a Figure 13b [Fig13a][Fig13b]
Systematic uncertainty estimates for EE, BB, and EB power spectra. Figure 14 [Fig14]

Table of Parameters

The values are for the first season (Q-band) results, unless otherwise specified.
CategoryNameValueDescription
Instrumentation Array Sensitivity 69 μK√s For polarization sensitive elements
Per Module Sensitivity 280 μK√s Q & U combined sensitivity
1/f knee frequency 5.5 mHz Median
Phase-switch frequency 4 kHz / 50 Hz Primary / Secondary
Number of Elements 19 (17) Total (polarization sensitive)
Center Frequency 43.1 ± 0.4 GHz Average
Bandwidth 7.6 ± 0.5 GHz Average
Primary Mirror Diameter 1.4 m
Field of View 7° Diameter on the sky
Beam size 27.3' FWHM
Site Coordinates 67°45'42"W, 23°01'42"S Chajnantor plateau, Atacama desert, Chile
Altitude 5080 m
Observation First Season October 24, 2008 − June 13, 2009 With Q-band receiver
Second Season July 2009 − December 2010 With W-band receiver
First Season Observing Hours 3458 hours Including calibration and galactic observations
Number of CMB Patches 4
Observed Area 1000 square degrees All four patches combined
Scan Speed 5°/s Average, in azimuth
Scan Period 10−22 seconds
Patch Location CMB-1 12h04m, −39°00' Central equatorial coordinates
CMB-2 05h12m, −39°00' Central equatorial coordinates
CMB-3 00h48m, −48°00' Central equatorial coordinates
CMB-4 22h44m, −36°00' Central equatorial coordinates
Result Range of Multipoles (ell) 25 − 475
Tensor-to-Scalar Ratio r=0.35+1.06-0.87   (r<2.2) 68% C.L. interval   (95% C.L. upper limit)

List of Null Tests

42 Null Tests of Pipeline A

CategoryNull test
Nine Instrumental Effects 3 Divisions of modules by the bias and readout electronics boards they are connected to
The central seven modules vs. the peripheral modules
Modules with high vs. low instrumental polarization
Modules with high vs. low average 1/f knee frequencies
Modules with high vs. low bandpass center frequencies
Q vs U diodes (the example shown in the paper)
Diodes whose TP level sometimes shifts abruptly vs. diodes not having such shifts
10 Pointing Effects CES at high vs. low elevation
CES with the patch rising vs. setting
3 Divisions of CES by deck angle
3 Divisions of CES by Parallactic Angle
Data from left vs. right-moving telescope scan motion
Data from accelerating vs. deccelerating telescope scan motion
Five Sources Sun proximity to the main beam
Moon proximity to the main beam
Far sidelobe elevation high vs. low (note that because of the orientation of the two far sidelobes a test for one's sidelobe elevation is degenerate with a test for the other's sidelobe elevation)
2 Divisions based on proximity of the two far sidelobes to the Galaxy
Eight TOD Contamination Tests CES-diodes with more vs. less excess noise power near the scan frequency
CES-diodes with more vs. less excess noise power at high frequencies (2--15 Hz)
Division of CES by average responsivity (high vs. low)
Division of CES-diodes by responsivity of each diode compared to its average
Division by CES-diodes with high vs. low non-linearity of double-demodulated vs. TP data
2 divisions by weather quality based on 10-s timescale TP RMS statistics
CES-diodes with high vs. low white noise amplitudes
10 Environmental Conditions Division of CES with high vs. low ambiant temperatures
Division of CES with high vs. low ambiant humidity
Division of CES with large vs. small humidity changes
Division of CES with high vs. low bias electronics temperatures
Division of CES with large vs. small bias electronics temperature change
Division of CES with fast vs. slow electronics temperature changes
Division of CES with high vs. low cryostat temperature
Division of CES with large vs. small cryostat temperature changes
The first half of the season vs. the second half of the season
Division of CES based on whether the scan period is an integral multiple of the cryostat cold head pumping period

21 Null Tests of Pipeline B

CategoryNull test
Nine Instrumental Effects *Three Divisions of modules by the bias and readout electronics boards they are connected to
*The central seven modules vs. the peripheral modules
*Modules with high vs. low bandpass center frequencies
Two divisions of top and bottom halves of the focal plane
Left and right halves of the focal plane
Alternatively-numbered modules
Four Pointing Effects *CES at high vs. low elevation
*CES with the patch rising vs. setting
*2 Divisions of CES by deck angle
One Source *Far sidelobe elevation high vs. low (note that because of the orientation of the two far sidelobes a test for one's sidelobe elevation is degenerate with a test for the other's sidelobe elevation)
Seven Environmental Conditions *Division of CES with high vs. low ambiant humidity
*Division of CES with high vs. low bias electronics temperatures
*The first half of the season vs. the second half of the season
Alternating CESes
Middle season vs. extremes
Alternate quarters of the season
High vs. low precipitable water vapor
Null tests with asterisk (*) are common with pipeline A.