Figure 9.
In the left-hand column, we show the ratio cs/cs+fg for the 0.1 and 1 per cent LOS varying foreground models (top and bottom, respectively). In the right-hand column, we show the same ratio but with the foreground fitting errors as a result of performing GMCA on the new foreground cubes with LOFAR noise. We see that foreground avoidance is affected badly by introducing a 1 per cent LOS variation, while GMCA is still able to make a good recovery, under the assumption of common resolution channels. Linestyles are as in Fig. 4.

In the left-hand column, we show the ratio cs/cs+fg for the 0.1 and 1 per cent LOS varying foreground models (top and bottom, respectively). In the right-hand column, we show the same ratio but with the foreground fitting errors as a result of performing GMCA on the new foreground cubes with LOFAR noise. We see that foreground avoidance is affected badly by introducing a 1 per cent LOS variation, while GMCA is still able to make a good recovery, under the assumption of common resolution channels. Linestyles are as in Fig. 4.

Close
This Feature Is Available To Subscribers Only

Sign In or Create an Account

Close

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

View Article Abstract & Purchase Options

For full access to this pdf, sign in to an existing account, or purchase an annual subscription.

Close