EIS 2023 & 2026 calibration

[andyto1234]

Sorry this might be very dumb on my side.

I briefly remembers the eispac code uses Warren et al. 2014 to calibrate the files? Is there a place this is specified? I think adding the ability/tutorial to use different calibrations (e.g. the latest Del Zanna et al. 2023) could be extremely useful.

Edited (April 3 2024): I created a python implementation of the calibrations (Warren et al. 2014 and Del Zanna et al. 2023 in review). You can find the tutorial in the following link.

Edit 2 (May 27 2026): Young & Mondal 2026 calibration is also available in the same repository.

https://github.com/andyto1234/EISPAC-Tutorial___Calibrations/

[MJWeberg]

Hello Andy,
This is very good question! EISPAC actually currently only has the pre-flight calibration available, unfortunately. However, the one of the goals is to eventually have the level-1 HDF5 files serve as a long-term archive of EIS data and associated metadata. As such, we are planning to update the files in the next few months to include all of the the calibrations currently available. The 2023 calibration is still going through peer-review, so we are waiting a little bit to make sure we do not need to revise or update the methodology further before we reprocess all the header files. Sorry it has taken so long!

[andyto1234]

Hi Micah!
Thank you for the clear reply! :D
I am trying to stick with eispac for my current project. In that case I will think of a way to calibrate data on my side before the official release!
Let me know if I can be of any help!

[andyto1234]

Thought I will keep the thread updated with this.

I translated the IDL calibrations (Warren et al. 2014 and Del Zanna et al. 2023 in review) into Python (pretty much a 1 to 1 translation). You can find the tutorial in the following link.

https://github.com/andyto1234/EISPAC-Tutorial___Calibrations/

[souvikita]

This is very helpful, Andy! Thanks!

[wtbarnes]

@MJWeberg Have the files been updated to include the new calibration or is still necessary to apply this correction after the fact (e.g. as Andy has done)?

[MJWeberg]

Thanks for following up on this! Updating all of the HDF5 files to include all of the available calibrations is near the top of our TO-DO list (it has been a looong process). Applying the calibration after fitting is fine, since the calibration generally does not change on scales small enough to affect the fitting results. Andy's very helpful functions are direct ports of the SSW routines we wrote/updated as part of the recent calibration and I have not noticed any notable differences myself (I should probably just run some formal validation tests and work with Andy to include these functions directly in EISPAC).

[hpwarren]

Sorry for taking so long to add my 2 cents . . . Another nuance: Peter did a very interesting of a full CCD spectrum taken during a flare. There is generally good agreement with the curves in the paper. The notable exception is the region around 265 Ã. The flare spectrum doesn't seem to be consistent with the ripple indicated by the ratio analysis. Harry

…

On Tue, Jan 13, 2026 at 5:54 PM MJWeberg ***@***.***> wrote: *MJWeberg* left a comment (USNavalResearchLaboratory/eispac#91) <#91 (comment)> Thanks for following up on this! Updating all of the HDF5 files to include all of the available calibrations is near the top of our TO-DO list (it has been a looong process). Applying the calibration after fitting is fine, since the calibration generally does not change on scales small enough to affect the fitting results. Andy's very helpful functions are direct ports of the SSW routines we wrote/updated as part of the recent calibration and I have not noticed any notable differences myself (I should probably just run some formal validation tests and work with Andy to include these functions directly in EISPAC). — Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#91 (comment)>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ABYJPCMMF6M743FPU4GP6VT4GVZQ7AVCNFSM6AAAAACFML7UCKVHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43OSLTON2WKQ3PNVWWK3TUHMZTONBWHEZDQMBXHE> . You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.Message ID: ***@***.***>

[wtbarnes]

(I should probably just run some formal validation tests and work with Andy to include these functions directly in EISPAC).

Yes I think that would be great! Even after the most recent calibration is applied to the L1 files, it would be great to have the ability to apply different calibrations to the resulting maps.

[andyto1234]

Sorry for taking so long to add my 2 cents . . . Another nuance: Peter did
a very interesting of a full CCD spectrum taken during a flare. There is
generally good agreement with the curves in the paper. The notable
exception is the region around 265 Ã. The flare spectrum doesn't seem to be
consistent with the ripple indicated by the ratio analysis.

Harry
…

Coming back to this, I have just translated Peter's 2026 calibration to Python. It is hosted in the same repository. As a rough validation, I recreated Figure 7 in Young & Mondal 2026 paper.