The compression rate of on board EIS data may vary depending on a few factors such as the observing target (QS, AR, CH, etc), slit/slot selection, exposures, etc.

The purpose of this study is trying to investigate how different compression schemes effect EIS data volume on board and work out a better estimation of compression rate for compression scheme (eg. DPCM, JPEG98, JPEG95, etc.)

The approach:#

1. to get actual data volume from MDP status information: the inclined curve means data packets from EIS on MDP, the vertical curve means data packets dumped to ground station. So in general, known a raster's start and end time can calculate actual data volume, and then compare it with the designed data volume of this raster to get data compression rate.

2. to get related information from planning database/eis catalogue/fits header, for example: raster ID, compression scheme, designed data volume, SCI_OBJ, TARGET, slit/slot, exposures, etc.

3. prepare plots based on various factor combinations: compression rate vs. slit/slot, rate vs. target, rate vs. exposures


Some preliminary results (plots):
#

(The investigation here is for dates between 2007-Sep-15 and 2007-Dec-15, as EIS is operationally stable over this duration. The other data sets is in 2008-Mar (for JPEG85), and 2006-Dec (for JPEG75))




Table is here!#

Scheme Total QS AR CH 1" 2" 40" 266" 10s 15s 20s 30s 60S
DPCM 2.7572.8262.6572.6762.9002.9472.5382.6203.1052.9502.6292.5862.578
JPEG982.5532.6722.4493.4362.8032.3652.553 3.2052.528 2.401
JPEG955.8095.9905.451 5.3426.077 4.8524.131 1.273
JPEG908.2737.3873.5337.7902.753 3.6788.329 3.6782.293
JPEG855.5285.5784.9226.148 5.539
JPEG75

There is difference between the number shown here and other previous results, for example, Hara'san work:

> 40" SLOT
> DPCM      2.36
> JPEG98    2.70
> JPEG95    3.47
> JPEG92    4.22
> JPEG90    4.63
> JPEG85    5.74
> JPEG75    7.63
> JPEG65    9.43
> JPEG50    12.0
> For 10s exposure time. 

As I mentioned above, this is a preliminary study on EIS compression factor. The method and results shown here need to check, confirm and compare with other number. There are still mystery hide behind these numbers. It is really just a start, so more contributions are very welcome!#


For target selection, in this case, uses value of SCI_OBJ keyword instead of TARGET keyword as the later is only for (study/raster) design stage, the actual targets are decided during the EIS planning.

However, there is not always having value for SCI_OBJ in EIS fits header, also the range of value of SCI_OBJ keyword is varying, (SCI_OBJ_Example), sometimes we have to throw away some EIS data as it's hard to judge the SCI_OBJ belong to QS,AR or CH, eg. LMB, or FIL.

There is a compensation for paused (and aborted) raster. This is implemented by comparing NEXP and RAST_REQ and times the ration of two values
The related information for investigated EIS data set has been stored in a structure array, which has elements with the following format:
compFactor={compression_factor, $
          study_ACR     :'', $  ;string
          study_id      :'', $  ;string
          rast_ACR      :'', $  ;string
          rast_id       :'', $  ;string
          ll_ACR        :'',$   ;string
          ll_id         :'',$   ;string
          start_time    :'', $  ;string
          end_time      :'', $  ;string
          fitsname      :'',$   ;string
          target        :'',$   ;string
          sci_obj       :'',$   ;string
          slit          :'',$   ;string
          def_volume    :0LL,$  ;long64 int, unit: bits
          mdp_volume    :0.0,$  ;float, unit: kbits
          comp_scheme   :0,$    ;int
          nexp          :0,$    ;int
          rast_req      :0,$    ;int
          exposures     :fltarr(8) $    ;float, unit: sec
        }

I attached the IDL sav file here. Please download it and play it with your self, for example, I use:

if (str1[i].SCI_OBJ eq 'QS') && (str1[i].COMP_SCHEME eq 1) && (str1[i].MDP_VOLUME gt 0.) then ind[i]=1

to find those records having 'QS' SCI_OBJ and using DPCM compression scheme.