Find FWHM: Pixel Values, Gaussian Curve, Standard Deviation

  • Thread starter Thread starter bugra
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Fwhm
AI Thread Summary
To find the Full Width at Half Maximum (FWHM) from pixel values, the standard approach involves calculating the standard deviation of the Gaussian curve, with FWHM derived as FWHM = standard deviation * 2.355. However, obtaining a Gaussian fit may yield different results, prompting questions about the fitting algorithm's accuracy. When analyzing multiple sources in the same frame, consistency in FWHM values is expected, but the focus should also be on the rate of change near optimal focus rather than the absolute FWHM value. Discrepancies between methods can indicate issues with the fitting process. Understanding these nuances is crucial for accurate measurements in imaging data analysis.
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.
 
Publication: Redox-driven mineral and organic associations in Jezero Crater, Mars Article: NASA Says Mars Rover Discovered Potential Biosignature Last Year Press conference The ~100 authors don't find a good way this could have formed without life, but also can't rule it out. Now that they have shared their findings with the larger community someone else might find an explanation - or maybe it was actually made by life.
TL;DR Summary: In 3 years, the Square Kilometre Array (SKA) telescope (or rather, a system of telescopes) should be put into operation. In case of failure to detect alien signals, it will further expand the radius of the so-called silence (or rather, radio silence) of the Universe. Is there any sense in this or is blissful ignorance better? In 3 years, the Square Kilometre Array (SKA) telescope (or rather, a system of telescopes) should be put into operation. In case of failure to detect...
This thread is dedicated to the beauty and awesomeness of our Universe. If you feel like it, please share video clips and photos (or nice animations) of space and objects in space in this thread. Your posts, clips and photos may by all means include scientific information; that does not make it less beautiful to me (n.b. the posts must of course comply with the PF guidelines, i.e. regarding science, only mainstream science is allowed, fringe/pseudoscience is not allowed). n.b. I start this...
Back
Top