Signal inference with unknown response: calibration-uncertainty renormalized estimator

The calibration of a measurement device is crucial for every scientific experiment, where a signal has to be inferred from data. We present CURE, the calibration-uncertainty renormalized estimator, to reconstruct a signal and simultaneously the instrument's calibration from the same data withou...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inPhysical review. E, Statistical, nonlinear, and soft matter physics Vol. 91; no. 1; p. 013311
Main Authors Dorn, Sebastian, Enßlin, Torsten A, Greiner, Maksim, Selig, Marco, Boehm, Vanessa
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published United States 01.01.2015
Online AccessGet more information

Cover

Loading…
More Information
Summary:The calibration of a measurement device is crucial for every scientific experiment, where a signal has to be inferred from data. We present CURE, the calibration-uncertainty renormalized estimator, to reconstruct a signal and simultaneously the instrument's calibration from the same data without knowing the exact calibration, but its covariance structure. The idea of the CURE method, developed in the framework of information field theory, is to start with an assumed calibration to successively include more and more portions of calibration uncertainty into the signal inference equations and to absorb the resulting corrections into renormalized signal (and calibration) solutions. Thereby, the signal inference and calibration problem turns into a problem of solving a single system of ordinary differential equations and can be identified with common resummation techniques used in field theories. We verify the CURE method by applying it to a simplistic toy example and compare it against existent self-calibration schemes, Wiener filter solutions, and Markov chain Monte Carlo sampling. We conclude that the method is able to keep up in accuracy with the best self-calibration methods and serves as a noniterative alternative to them.
ISSN:1550-2376
DOI:10.1103/PhysRevE.91.013311