SC Event Study For 2008 Filter Configuration

We propose to use calibration option 1 than option 0

Calibration mode 1 is to use the lowest channel which is not saturated, in stead of merging different channels. Smooth merging between different channels (calib mode 0) are more advanced than the mode 1. Both 2006/2007 SC data show that there is difficulties in merging processes.
Below here are 2 plots from year2007 standard candle ATWD waveform of the DOM closest to SC. Exactly the same events with calib option 1 and 0. It is obvious, the merging is not properly occurred with option-0.
Also similar but different discontinuity issue was observed from year2006 SC data This issue was discussed about a year ago http://www.icecube.wisc.edu/pipermail/ice3cascade/2007-January/000592.html http://www.icecube.wisc.edu/pipermail/ice3cascade/2007-January/000602.html etc.

With Calibration Option-1, ATWD waveforms, x-axis [nsec], y-axis [V], a line represents a waveform. 650 waveforms are superimposed.

With Calibration Option-0, ATWD waveforms, x-axis [nsec], y-axis [V], a line represents a waveform. 650 waveforms are superimposed.

Correct interpretation of the fADC data doesn't exactly request the use of the droop correction, as long as we can simulate droop in MC simulation. To simulating droop is easier than to assume that the same droop correction work perfectly for all the DOMs, thus the interpretation is straightforward.
Below are plots from the exactly the same file with and without droop correction.
These waveforms with droop correction are really hard to interpret and hard to recover the original information in the end.

WITHOUT droop correction, FADC waveforms, x-axis [micro-sec], y-axis [mV], a line represents a waveform. 650 waveforms are superimposed.

WITH droop correction, FADC waveforms, x-axis [micro-sec], y-axis [mV], a line represents a waveform. 650 waveforms are superimposed.