Comparison between closure phase and phase referenced interferometric image reconstructions

We compare the quality of interferometric image reconstructions for two different sets of data: square of the visibility plus closure phase (e.g. AMBER like case) and square of the visibility plus visibility phase (e.g. PRIMA+AMBER or GRAVITY like cases). We used the Multi-aperture image Reconstruction Algorithm for reconstructions of test cases under different signal-to-noise ratios and noisy data (squared visibilities and phases). Our study takes into account noise models based on the statistics of visibility, phase and closure phase. We incorporate the works developed by Tatulli and Chelly (2005) on the noise of the power-spectrum and closure phase in the read-out and photon noise regimes,1 and by Colavita (1999) on the signal-to-noise ratio of the visibility phase.2 The final images were then compared to the original one by means of positions and fluxes, computing the astrometry and the photometry. For the astrometry, the precision was typically of tens of microarcseconds, while for the photometry, it was typically of a few percent. Although both cases are suitable for image restorations of real interferometric observations, the results indicate a better performance of phase referencing (V2 + visibility phase) in a low signal-to-noise ratio scenario.

[1]  Karl-Heinz Hofmann,et al.  2008 imaging beauty contest , 2008, Astronomical Telescopes + Instrumentation.

[2]  Françoise Delplancke,et al.  The PRIMA facility phase-referenced imaging and micro-arcsecond astrometry , 2008 .

[3]  Gerd Weigelt,et al.  Phase closure image reconstruction for future VLTI instrumentation , 2008, Astronomical Telescopes + Instrumentation.

[4]  Gerd Weigelt,et al.  Phase referencing in optical interferometry , 2008, Astronomical Telescopes + Instrumentation.

[5]  John D. Monnier,et al.  An interferometry imaging beauty contest , 2004, SPIE Astronomical Telescopes + Instrumentation.

[6]  et al,et al.  The Palomar Testbed Interferometer , 1999 .

[7]  Emiliano Diolaiti,et al.  StarFinder: an IDL GUI-based code to analyze crowded fields with isoplanatic correcting PSF fitting , 2000, Astronomical Telescopes and Instrumentation.

[8]  S. Meimon,et al.  THE PULSATION OF χ CYGNI IMAGED BY OPTICAL INTERFEROMETRY: A NOVEL TECHNIQUE TO DERIVE DISTANCE AND MASS OF MIRA STARS , 2009, 0910.3869.

[9]  Éric Thiébaut,et al.  MIRA: an effective imaging algorithm for optical interferometry , 2008, Astronomical Telescopes + Instrumentation.

[10]  Fiber optic interferometry: statistics of visibility and closure phase. , 2005, Journal of the Optical Society of America. A, Optics, image science, and vision.

[11]  S. Meimon,et al.  Imaging the spotty surface of Betelgeuse in the H band , 2009, 0910.4167.

[12]  A. Glindemann,et al.  PRIMA for the VLTI – Science , 2003 .

[13]  E. Bertin,et al.  SExtractor: Software for source extraction , 1996 .

[14]  Christophe Dupuy,et al.  The VLTI PRIMA Facility , 2008 .

[15]  S. Rabien,et al.  GRAVITY: getting to the event horizon of Sgr A* , 2008, Astronomical Telescopes + Instrumentation.

[16]  John D. Monnier,et al.  2006 interferometry imaging beauty contest , 2006, SPIE Astronomical Telescopes + Instrumentation.