Paper detail

Effects of Intermittent Emission: Noise Inventory for Scintillating Pulsar B0834+06

We compare signal and noise for observations of the scintillating pulsar B0834+06, using very-long baseline interferometry and a single-dish spectrometer. Comparisons between instruments and with models suggest that amplitude variations of the pulsar strongly affect the amount and distribution of self-noise. We show that noise follows a quadratic polynomial with flux density, in spectral observations. Constant coefficients, indicative of background noise, agree well with expectation; whereas second-order coefficients, indicative of self-noise, are about 3 times values expected for a pulsar with constant on-pulse flux density. We show that variations in flux density during the 10-sec integration account for the discrepancy. In the secondary spectrum, about 97% of spectral power lies within the pulsar's typical scintillation bandwidth and timescale; an extended scintillation arc contains about 3%. For a pulsar with constant on-pulse flux density, noise in the dynamic spectrum will appear as a uniformly-distributed background in the secondary spectrum. We find that this uniform noise background contains 95% of noise in the dynamic spectrum for interferometric observations; but only 35% of noise in the dynamic spectrum for single-dish observations. Receiver and sky dominate noise for our interferometric observations, whereas self-noise dominates for single-dish. We suggest that intermittent emission by the pulsar, on timescales < 300 microseconds, concentrates self-noise near the origin in the secondary spectrum, by correlating noise over the dynamic spectrum. We suggest that intermittency sets fundamental limits on pulsar astrometry or timing. Accounting of noise may provide means for detection of intermittent sources, when effects of propagation are unknown or impractical to invert.

preprint2011arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access4 authors1 topic

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.