In article <200112192327.SAA18962_at_email.domain.hiddendavis writes: >> I suspect that the treatment of the errors in the data are not the >> same. I found that ISIS assinged the error of 1.866 to zero count channels, while XSPEC assigned 1.0 to them. I corrected the ISIS error values of the zero counts channels to 1.0 by put_data_counts, and then compered ISIS and XSPEC again by fitting the same spetrum with the absorbed brems model. Here are the best-fit values: ISIS XSPEC NH(cm^-2) 10^22 (fix) 10^22 (fix) kT(keV) 10 (fix) 10 (fix) N(He)/N(H) 0.085 (fix) 0.085 (fix) norm 4.30e-4 4.13e-4 data bin 651 651 chi^2 596.5 607.86 If I use the XSPEC best-fit value for ISIS, ISIS XSPEC norm 4.13e-4 4.13e-4 chi^2 598.5 607.86 If I use the ISIS best-fit value for XSPEC, ISIS XSPEC norm 4.30e-4 4.30e-4 chi^2 596.5 609.92 Thus, there is still a difference in the best-fit chi^2 values. Why? I think the difference of ~10 may be serious. thanks, ============================================================== Hironori MATSUMOTO Center for Space Research Massachusetts Institute of Technology NE80-6045 77 Massachusetts Avenue Cambridge, MA02139-4307, USA TEL: USA(1)-(617)253-8008 FAX: USA(1)-(617)253-8084 e-mail : matumoto_at_email.domain.hidden==============================================================Received on Fri Dec 21 2001 - 16:58:33 EST
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Fri May 02 2014 - 08:35:44 EDT