Find FWHM: Pixel Values, Gaussian Curve, Standard Deviation

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter bugra
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Fwhm
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the calculation of Full Width at Half Maximum (FWHM) from pixel values, specifically in the context of Gaussian curves. Participants explore methods for determining FWHM, including direct calculations from standard deviation and fitting Gaussian models to the data.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Technical explanation, Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant suggests calculating FWHM directly from the standard deviation of pixel values using the formula FWHM = stdev * 2.355.
  • Another participant questions the reliability of the fitting algorithm if different methods yield different FWHM values.
  • A participant inquires whether FWHM should be consistent for multiple sources within the same frame.
  • Another viewpoint emphasizes that the rate of change near perfect focus may be more significant than the actual FWHM value.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing opinions on the methods for calculating FWHM and its significance, indicating that multiple competing views remain without a consensus.

Contextual Notes

There are potential limitations regarding the assumptions made in the calculations and the dependence on the fitting algorithm used, which remain unresolved.

bugra
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
Hi,
I've been searching on google for minutes but couldn't find out a consistent way so far. I mean, it seems everybody has something to say about it :)

My data consists of pixel values (ADU's). I am writing a script to obtain fwhm of seeing disk.

By definition of the gaussian curve, i should only calculate the standart deviation of these values theni get fwhm=stdev*2.355 .
Am I correct?

Or should i obtain a gaussian fit then i calculate fwhm as its name suggests?

Thanks in advance,
bugra
 
Astronomy news on Phys.org
If you do it both ways, and the answers are different, what does that tell you about the fitting algorithm that you used?
 
for multiple sources on the same frame, should fwhm be same?
 
I would think the actual value of FWHM is less important than the rate of change near perfect focus.
 

Similar threads

Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
Replies
28
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K