the sky - average , or global , component of the redshifted @xmath0-cm signal represents a direct tracer of the bulk characteristics of the intergalactic medium ( igm ) during cosmic dawn and the epoch of reionization ( eor ) at redshidfts @xmath7 @xcite .
the observable quantity corresponds to a differential brightness temperature that depends on the fraction of neutral hydrogen and the spin temperature of the gas .
this temperature encodes the effects on the igm of uv and x - ray radiation from the first generations of stars and stellar remnants @xcite . for @xmath7 , the large - scale evolution of the igm
is captured as wideband features in the frequency spectrum of the brightness temperature below @xmath8 mhz , with expected absolute amplitudes lower than @xmath8 mk @xcite .
the most direct instrumental approach to attempt the global measurement is the single - antenna , wideband - spectrometer design implemented by edges @xcite , bighorns @xcite , saras @xcite , and sci - hi @xcite .
these ground - based experiments cover differing portions of the redshift domain , targeting specific features of the global @xmath0-cm signal . using a similar approach
, the dare experiment aims to conduct this measurement from the far side of the moon to mitigate the impact of radio - frequency interference and the earth s ionosphere @xcite .
the leda experiment also pursues the global signal through single - antenna total - power measurements , with the addition of interferometric measurements to help estimate instrumental and foreground parameters @xcite .    edges has conducted sky measurements from western australia since 2006 . until 2012
the experiment relied on relative calibration provided by three - position switching at the input of the receiver .
this approach did not fully account for the impedance mismatch between the antenna and the receiver , since reflections from the receiver input were assumed to be zero , and the system gain and antenna reflections were not referenced to the same calibration plane . in addition , the calibration did not consider a correction for beam chromaticity . despite this simplified approach , edges was able to place initial constraints on the duration of the eor and obtain a first - order estimate for the spectral index of diffuse emission in low - foreground regions @xcite .    in 2013 , edges deployed the first instrument that implemented the current end - to - end absolute calibration .
this approach consists of 1 ) converting the noise power measured by the antenna at the receiver input to an absolute antenna temperature scale , properly accounting for impedance mismatches between the receiver and the antenna , 2 ) removing the effect of antenna losses , and 3 ) compensating for the effect of beam chromaticity .
although in its first iteration it did not achieve the sensitivity for a cosmological detection , its high performance enabled quantification of perturbations in the ionosphere @xcite .    starting in 2015 , edges has operated a low - band ( @xmath9 mhz ) and a high - band ( @xmath2 mhz ) instrument .
both share the same design and absolute calibration approach , and target redshifts that nominally correspond to the cosmic dawn ( @xmath10 ) and eor ( @xmath1 ) periods , respectively .
they represent a significant upgrade with respect to previous iterations , with the objective of reducing systematic effects below the cosmological signal . in this revision
, the fourpoint antenna @xcite was replaced with a blade model due to its lower beam chromaticity @xcite .
the antenna reflection is periodically measured in situ to high accuracy .
the receiver is calibrated in the laboratory to higher precision and accuracy than in 2013 , and in the field it operates underground with active temperature control .
these and other upgrades have recently enabled improved long - term ( @xmath11 days ) stable measurements of the spectral index of diffuse foregrounds @xcite .    ) and duration ( @xmath12 ) of reionization.,scaledwidth=48.0% ]    this paper describes the laboratory calibration of the @xmath3 edges high - band receiver , which nominally targets the eor signal . for reference ,
figure  ( [ figure_models_eor ] ) shows three phenomenological models for this signal , parameterized in terms of the redshift ( @xmath13 ) and duration ( @xmath12 ) of reionization @xcite .
our receiver calibration follows the method introduced in @xcite , which involves measuring the spectra , reflection coefficients , and physical temperatures of four absolute calibrators connected externally to the receiver input , in place of the antenna .
these calibration measurements are used to determine the function that converts the noise power measured by the instrument to antenna temperature referenced to the receiver input .
we use this function to calibrate the sky measurements obtained in the field with the receiver operating at the same temperature as in the lab .    as part of the description of our calibration ,
we expand on the methodology presented in @xcite by providing a model for the ambient and hot calibrator used as the absolute temperature reference .
we also introduce two new frequency - dependent parameters  a scale and an offset  that relate the relative calibration obtained through the internal switching to the absolute calibration at the receiver input .
after determining the fiducial receiver calibration , we model the uncertainties encountered in the laboratory measurements and propagate them to the calibrated antenna temperature using a monte carlo approach .
we use simulated sky measurements as inputs in this process , and quantify the impact of potential calibration errors via the number of polynomial terms required to fit the corrupted spectrum and reduce the residuals below a nominal threshold of @xmath4 mk .
robust estimates are obtained for the impact of each source of uncertainty , as well as for their combined effect . in order to focus on receiver uncertainties ,
these simulations assume perfect removal of antenna losses and beam chromaticity .
the paper is organized as follows : section  [ section_edges ] describes the edges instrument and summarizes the receiver calibration strategy and nomenclature , section  [ section_calibration_measurements ] describes the calibration measurements and results , section  [ section_uncertainty_propagation ] describes the propagation of receiver uncertainty to the antenna temperature using monte carlo simulations , section  [ section_results ] presents the results of the uncertainty propagation , section  [ section_discussion ] discusses the limiting factors in the calibration performance and some alternatives for improvement , and section  [ section_conclusion ] summarizes the findings of this work .
figure  [ figure_block_diagram ] presents a conceptual block diagram of the edges instrument .
the receiver that operates in the field corresponds to the actual unit calibrated in the lab and it is part of an identical setup , except for the antenna and ground plane which only exist in the field .        physically , the receiver consists of a metal enclosure that houses the first - stage low - noise amplifier ( lna ) , noise references for relative calibration , additional stages of amplification , filtering , and conditioning , and electronics for remote measurement of the antenna reflection coefficient .
the receiver operates at @xmath14c at all times in order to keep the noise and reflection characteristics of the lna stable during calibration and sky observations
. temperature stability to better than @xmath15c is achieved using a thermal controller that reads out a thermistor mounted inside the receiver .
based on the reading , the controller acts on a hot / cold plate attached to the bottom of the receiver to compensate for temperature drifts .    from the output of the receiver
the rf signal is taken along a coaxial cable into an equipment rack where it is amplified and filtered by back - end electronics .
the signal is then sent to a pc - based @xmath16-ms / s analog - to - digital converter ( adc ) that samples with @xmath17-bit resolution .
finally , blocks of @xmath18 time samples are fourier transformed to the frequency domain to obtain spectra with @xmath19 points and @xmath20-khz resolution using a four - term blackman - harris window function .
the lna input switches continuously between the antenna and an internal calibration position using switch sw2 in figure  [ figure_block_diagram ] .
when in the calibration position , the lna receives sequentially two noise levels : 1 ) load and 2 ) load + noise source . in the load state , the noise comes from the output of a @xmath21-db attenuator , and in the load + noise source state the active noise source connected to the input of the attenuator is turned on for additional noise .
the noise from the antenna only represents a few percent of the total power at the receiver output .
most of the output power is due to out - of - band noise injected below @xmath21 mhz as part of the conditioning stage .
this injected noise remains constant during the input switching and provides a stable signal level to the back - end electronics and digitizer , improving linearity and dynamic range in the measurements .
each of the three input levels are measured for @xmath22 seconds , which corresponds to an antenna duty cycle of @xmath23% .
a total of @xmath24 spectra are accumulated for each position .
an implicit assumption of this switching scheme is that the amplification chain remains stable within each @xmath25-second cycle .    the circuitry for measurement of antenna reflections , shown in figure  [ figure_block_diagram ] , functions as a remote calibration unit for a vector network analyzer ( vna ) .
it is centered around a four - position mechanical rf switch where three of the ports are connected to open , short , and matched calibration standards , and the fourth port serves as a pass - through to the antenna .
the efficiency of the instrument is highest below @xmath26 mhz .
therefore , the calibration described in the rest of this paper was conducted in the range @xmath2 mhz .      here
we summarize the calibration strategy used by edges , which is based on the method introduced in @xcite .
for each three - position cycle of the receiver , the power spectral density ( psd ) from the antenna ( @xmath27 ) , load ( @xmath28 ) , and load + noise source ( @xmath29 ) , are used to compute an initial _ uncalibrated _ antenna temperature ,    @xmath30    where @xmath31 and @xmath32 represent realistic assumptions for the noise temperatures of the load and noise source , respectively .
this computation serves to calibrate out the time - dependent system gain , which includes the complex bandpass of the filters , amplifiers , cables , and adc .
all the parameters in equation  ( [ equation_uncalibrated_temperature ] ) , and in what follows , are frequency - dependent .
we do not explicitly show this dependence for simplicity of notation .    to derive the expression for calibration of @xmath33 it is necessary to write the psds in equation  ( [ equation_uncalibrated_temperature ] ) in terms of the specific instrument response contributions .
the psd for the antenna is given by :    @xmath34 , \label{equation_power_antenna}\end{aligned}\ ] ]    with    @xmath35    here , @xmath36 corresponds to the calibrated antenna temperature .
the quantities @xmath37 and @xmath38 represent the system gain referenced to the receiver input , and the receiver noise offset , respectively .
@xmath39 is the reflection coefficient of the antenna and @xmath40 is the reflection coefficient of the receiver , both referenced to a @xmath41-@xmath42 system impedance .
the temperatures @xmath43 , @xmath44 , and @xmath45 are called noise wave parameters following the formalism introduced by @xcite .
they are associated with the noise emitted by the lna input toward the antenna .
this noise is reflected back due to imperfect impedance match and re - enters the receiver with phase @xmath46 .
the @xmath43 temperature represents the portion of input noise that is uncorrelated with the noise at the lna output , while @xmath44 and @xmath45 are components of the correlated portion .
the psds for the internal load and load + noise source follow the same form as equation  ( [ equation_power_antenna ] ) .
however , at this stage we assume that the reflection coefficients of the load and noise source are zero . in reality , they are not zero but very low ( @xmath47 db ) .
thus , these psds are modeled as :    @xmath48,\label{equation_power_internal_calibrators1}\\ p_{\text{l+ns } } & = g^*\left[\left(t_{\text{l } } + t_{\text{ns}}\right)\left(1-|\gamma_{\text{rec}}|^2\right ) + t_0^*\right].\label{equation_power_internal_calibrators2}\end{aligned}\ ] ]    in these equations , the system gain ( @xmath49 ) and noise offset ( @xmath50 ) are not exactly the same as in equation  ( [ equation_power_antenna ] ) because the noise from the internal references is injected at sw2 instead of at the receiver input itself .
this aspect , in addition to the assumption for the reflection coefficients , is accounted for below with the introduction of two new parameters fitted during calibration that are able to absorb these small effects .    plugging the three psd definitions into equation  ( [ equation_uncalibrated_temperature ] ) results in the following identity :    @xmath51 \nonumber\\ + \ ; & t_{\text{unc}}\left[\frac{|\gamma_{\text{ant}}|^2|f|^2}{\left(1-|\gamma_{\text{rec}}|^2\right)}\right ] \nonumber\\ + \ ; & t_{\cos}\left[\frac{|\gamma_{\text{ant}}||f|}{\left(1-|\gamma_{\text{rec}}|^2\right)}\cos\alpha\right ] \nonumber\\ + \ ; & t_{\sin}\left[\frac{|\gamma_{\text{ant}}||f|}{\left(1-|\gamma_{\text{rec}}|^2\right)}\sin\alpha\right ] .
\label{equation_main_identity}\end{aligned}\ ] ]    this equation establishes the relationship between the uncalibrated antenna temperature @xmath33 , computed with equation  ( [ equation_uncalibrated_temperature ] ) , and the calibrated antenna temperature @xmath36 at the receiver input .
more generically , @xmath36 represents the calibrated noise temperature of any device under measurement at the receiver input . any losses in the device under measurement have to be corrected for externally .
the quantities @xmath52 and @xmath53 introduced on the left - hand side of equation  ( [ equation_main_identity ] ) represent a scale and an offset that correct the first - order assumptions used for @xmath54 and @xmath32 in equation  ( [ equation_uncalibrated_temperature ] )
. they also account for the small path difference between the internal calibration position of sw2 and the receiver input .
finally , they also account to first order for the non - zero reflection coefficient of the internal load and noise source .
unaccounted higher - order effects are expected to be negligible due to the low reflection coefficients of these devices .
the reflection coefficient of the receiver input and the antenna are measured directly with a vna . @xmath55 and @xmath46 ( equations ( [ equation_f ] ) and ( [ equation_alpha ] ) )
are computed from these coefficients .
therefore , the remaining calibration task consists of estimating the scale @xmath52 , offset @xmath53 , and the noise wave parameters @xmath43 , @xmath44 , and @xmath45 , in order to apply equation  ( [ equation_main_identity ] ) . to solve for these five frequency - dependent quantities we conduct laboratory measurements of four absolute calibration standards connected to the input of the receiver in place of the antenna .
following @xcite , the four calibrators are : 1 ) an ambient load , 2 ) a hot load , 3 ) a long ( @xmath56 @xmath57-m ) open - ended coaxial cable , and 4 ) the same long cable but short - circuited at its far end .
the ambient and hot loads provide the main temperature references , while the open and shorted cable produces ripples in its spectra that manifest the noise properties of the receiver and enable the estimation of the noise wave parameters .
the specific quantities that need to be measured for receiver calibration are :    1 .   the uncalibrated temperature spectra for each calibrator @xmath58@xmath59 , @xmath60 , @xmath61 , @xmath62@xmath63 via equation  ( [ equation_uncalibrated_temperature ] ) , 2 .   the physical or noise temperature of the calibrators @xmath58@xmath64 , @xmath65 , @xmath66 , @xmath67@xmath63 , and 3 .   the reflection coefficient of the calibrators @xmath58@xmath68 , @xmath69 , @xmath70 , @xmath71@xmath63 .
the subscripts @xmath72 , @xmath73 , @xmath74 , and @xmath75 correspond to the ambient load , hot load , open cable , and shorted cable , respectively .
and [ equation_available_power_gain ] ) .
the nomenclature given in the figure corresponds to the device operating as a hot load.,scaledwidth=48.0% ]    in this section we report details of the laboratory measurements .
we begin by describing the calibrator used as ambient and hot load .
we then discuss the measurements of spectra , physical temperature , and reflection coefficient of the calibrators .
we also introduce the main sources of uncertainty for each calibration measurement , but defer detailed discussion to section  [ section_uncertainty_propagation ] .
we conclude the section with the calculation and modeling of the five frequency - dependent receiver calibration quantities .      the ambient and hot loads used for receiver calibration
are implemented as a single device , depicted in figure  [ figure_hot_load_device ] .
it consists of an rf termination of @xmath41-@xmath42 nominal impedance connected to an @xmath57-cm semi - rigid cable inside a thermally insulated metal enclosure .
when acting as an ambient load the device operates at room temperature ( @xmath56 @xmath76  k ) and when used as a hot load the termination is heated up to @xmath56 @xmath16  k by powering a resistor that is thermally connected to the termination .
the effective noise temperature of the device when operating as a hot load ( @xmath77 ) is related to the physical temperature of the termination ( @xmath78 ) and the physical temperature of the cable ( @xmath79 ) by    @xmath80    where @xmath81 is the available power gain of the assembly , defined as @xcite :    @xmath82    in this equation , @xmath83 and @xmath84 are two of the s - parameters of the cable , with port  1 attached to the rf termination and port  2 corresponding to the output connector of the device .
@xmath85 is the reflection coefficient of the termination alone and @xmath69 is the reflection coefficient of the device as a whole .
the uncalibrated temperature spectra of the absolute calibrators are measured by connecting each calibrator to the receiver input in place of the antenna .
these measurements involve the same internal three - position switching as with the antenna , where in each @xmath25-second cycle the setup measures the psd of the calibrator and the two internal noise references .
after the measurements , equation  ( [ equation_uncalibrated_temperature ] ) is applied offline to produce the uncalibrated temperature spectra .
the noise temperatures assumed for the internal load and noise source at this step are @xmath86  k and @xmath87  k , constant across frequency .
the final uncalibrated spectra , @xmath59 , @xmath60 , @xmath61 , and @xmath62 , are obtained by averaging @xmath88 hours of data from each calibrator .
this is done in order to reduce thermal noise .
residual noise is the main source of uncertainty in these quantities .    the physical temperatures , @xmath64 , @xmath78 , @xmath66 , and @xmath67 , are measured using thermistors attached to the termination of the ambient / hot load and to the long cable .
these measurements are conducted in parallel to the spectra measurement of each calibrator and with a similar time resolution .
they are averaged in time to have a direct correspondence with the spectra averages .
uncertainties in these measurements are dominated by potential inaccuracies in the resistance - to - temperature model used for the thermistors and unaccounted thermal gradients in the calibrators .
the reflection coefficients and s - parameters required in the calibration are measured with a vna . in each measurement , hundreds of traces
are averaged to reduce the noise to levels so that they are an insignificant source of uncertainty .
the calibrators are passive devices and , thus , they are measured using a typical vna power of @xmath89 dbm ( @xmath4 mw ) .
in contrast , the receiver input has to be measured at @xmath90 dbm to avoid saturating the active electronics designed for low - level signals .
lower vna power results in higher measurement noise , but we compensated through averaging .
we calibrate the vna immediately before every measurement and , thus , do not assume long - term vna stability .
the main uncertainty associated with these measurements arises from imperfect vna calibration .    the isolation between the inputs of each of the mechanical switches ( sw1 and sw2 in figure  [ figure_block_diagram ] ) is about @xmath91 db .
however , we assume that the isolation is perfect , which has a negligible impact on the calibration .
the switching repeatability is assessed through high - precision s - parameter measurements and the scatter is found to be within the measurement uncertainties .
we model and fit the uncalibrated temperature spectra , the reflection coefficients , and the s - parameters , to avoid propagating measurement noise to the fiducial calibration quantities and to bring all the measurements to the same frequency resolution . due to the smooth frequency behavior of the ambient and hot load spectra , and of the s - parameters of the semi - rigid cable , we model these measurements as polynomials in frequency . on the other hand , we use fourier series in frequency to model the spectra of the open and shorted cable , as well as all the reflection coefficients .
fourier series are more efficient than polynomials at capturing the higher frequency structure encountered in these measurements .
the model parameters are computed through least squares using qr decomposition for better numerical stability .
the fit residuals for the spectra are noise - like .
they are accounted for as a source of uncertainty in the mc analysis of section  [ section_uncertainty_propagation ] . for the reflection coefficients and s - parameters , the rms residuals are @xmath92 db in magnitude and @xmath93 in phase
their effects are negligible compared to that from the uncertainty in vna calibration , addressed in section  [ section_uncertainty_propagation ] .      : scale , @xmath53 : offset , @xmath43 : uncorrelated noise wave , and @xmath94 , @xmath95 : components of the correlated noise wave .
they satisfy equation  ( [ equation_main_identity ] ) when it is evaluated using the lab measurements of the absolute calibrators .
all the quantities in this figure are used as the fiducial quantities in the uncertainty propagation analysis discussed in section  [ section_uncertainty_propagation].,scaledwidth=48.0% ]    the frequency - dependent calibration quantities ( @xmath52 , @xmath53 , @xmath43 , @xmath44 , and @xmath45 ) are computed from the modeled laboratory measurements through an iterative process .
specifically , in each iteration the scale and offset are computed as    @xmath96    here , @xmath77 is the noise temperature of the hot load from equation  ( [ equation_cable_loss ] ) , @xmath64 is the physical temperature of the ambient load , and @xmath97 are @xmath98 are the calibrated temperature spectra of the ambient and hot loads from equation  ( [ equation_main_identity ] ) evaluated at the @xmath99 iteration .
the initial values are @xmath100 and @xmath101 .
the noise wave parameters ( @xmath43 , @xmath44 , and @xmath45 ) also take an initial value of zero , and in subsequent iterations they are modeled as polynomials in frequency .
the polynomial coefficients are computed through a least squares fit to equation  ( [ equation_main_identity ] ) evaluated using the measurements of the open and shorted cable and the current values of @xmath52 and @xmath53 .
this process converges in three iterations , after which @xmath52 and @xmath53 are also modeled as polynomials in frequency .    to find the optimum number of terms in the polynomials ,
the calibration quantities are modeled with increasing number of terms until the rms difference between the physical temperature and the calibrated temperature spectra of the calibrators themselves reaches a minimum .
it is found that seven terms are needed to model each of the five calibration quantities .
figure  [ figure_calibration_quantities ] presents the derived calibration quantities , computed as just described , along with the reflection coefficient of the receiver input .
section  [ section_calibration_measurements ] presented the computation of the receiver calibration quantities from laboratory measurements and introduced potential sources of uncertainty . in this section , we discuss these uncertainties in more detail and assess their impact on the final calibrated antenna temperature spectrum through a set of monte carlo ( mc ) simulations .
we begin by outlining our mc uncertainty propagation pipeline and then motivate our choices for the measurement uncertainties used in it .
figure  [ figure_mc_diagram ] presents a diagram of our uncertainty propagation simulation scheme . from left to right , first , an ideal simulated input antenna temperature @xmath102 is computed by convolving a sky model with an antenna beam model .
then , this antenna temperature is _ uncalibrated _ by solving equation  ( [ equation_main_identity ] ) for @xmath33 using the fiducial derived calibration quantities and receiver reflection coefficient from section  [ section_calibration_measurements ] , as well as a model for the reflection coefficient of the antenna .
next , inside the block labeled mc , the antenna temperature is recalibrated with equation  ( [ equation_main_identity ] ) but using calibration quantities and reflection coefficients that potentially differ from their fiducial values due to simulated errors or noise estimated from our measurement uncertainties .
this step is conducted for thousands of mc realizations of the perturbed calibration measurements .
the output antenna temperatures are labeled @xmath103 .
finally , for each simulated output spectrum , we fit and subtract a polynomial to match the foreground subtraction procedure applied to actual measurements .
we use the resulting residuals to quantify the magnitude of the propagated calibration errors .
our present interest is in understanding the role of the receiver in the experimental error budget .
hence , we restrict our analysis here to only the effects of uncertainties from calibration of the receiver .
our uncertainty propagation simulations assume perfect removal of antenna losses and beam chromaticity .
in addition , the simulations do not address potential changes in receiver performance during field operations due to , for instance , unaccounted temperature gradients or component aging .
field performance will be discussed in forthcoming papers that present the analysis of sky measurements .
the rest of this section provides details of the simulations .
the input antenna temperature is modeled by the convolution of a sky model with an antenna beam model :    @xmath104    where @xmath105 is the sky model , @xmath106 is the beam model , @xmath107 and @xmath108 are the zenith and azimuth angles respectively , and @xmath42 represents coordinates above the horizon . below @xmath109 mhz , the sky brightness temperature is dominated by foregrounds that are more than four orders of magnitude stronger than the expected cosmological signal @xcite . since the dominant effects of receiver mis - calibration and uncertainty operate on the total sky signal , it is acceptable to neglect the cosmological @xmath0-cm signal in our sky model and only include the foreground contribution .
we model the foregrounds using the global sky model ( gsm ) described in @xcite .    for the antenna beam model , we use the simple frequency - independent azimuthally - symmetric expression used by @xcite ,    @xmath110    real beams are known to be more complex than this expression , introducing spectral structure into the antenna temperature that could limit the detection of the cosmological signal @xcite .
however , in these simulations it is assumed that the chromatic effects of the beam are perfectly known and removed .
the sensitivity of the instrument to errors in receiver calibration is a function of the antenna temperature .
ground - based instruments such as edges observe the sky , and thus foregrounds , continuously drifting over the antenna instead of conducting deep integrations on a single sky region .
therefore , the strength of the antenna temperature used for science analysis will vary as different parts of the sky drift through the beam . to account for the different foreground levels ,
we explore two scenarios in the simulations : with the 1 ) lowest and 2 ) highest foreground contamination available at the edges observation latitude .
these cases are labeled _ quiet _ and _ loud _ sky , respectively , and their convolution with the beam is shown in figure  [ figure_antenna_temperature ] .    ) ) with the foreground sky model ( gsm , from @xcite ) .
the quiet and loud skies correspond to high galactic latitudes and the galactic plane transit , respectively.,scaledwidth=48.0% ]      since we are mainly interested in understanding the effect of errors in receiver calibration , we assume a simple model for the antenna reflection coefficient . our model for the reflection magnitude is flat in frequency with a level of @xmath111 db .
we model the phase as a linear decrease by @xmath112 between @xmath113 and @xmath114 mhz .
this is realistic and corresponds to a delay of @xmath115 ns .
this model reproduces , to first order , the measured edges antenna properties and is generally consistent with the performance achievable from a dipole - based antenna operating over an octave bandwidth .
clcc + & & +   + @xmath59 & ambient load & 66 mk & + @xmath60 & hot load & 66 mk & ( i ) + @xmath61 & open cable & 95 mk & + @xmath62 & shorted cable & 95 mk & +   + & & +   + @xmath64 & ambient load & & + @xmath78 & hot load termination & @xmath116 mk & ( ii ) + @xmath66 & open cable & & + @xmath67 & shorted cable & & +   + & & +   + @xmath117 & ambient load & & + @xmath118 & hot load & & + @xmath119 & open cable & 0.0001 & ( iii ) + @xmath120 & shorted cable & & + @xmath121 & receiver & & + @xmath122 & antenna & & +   + & & +   + @xmath123 & ambient load & & + @xmath124 & hot load & & + @xmath125 & open cable & 0.015@xmath126 & ( iv ) + @xmath127 & shorted cable & & + @xmath128 & receiver & & + @xmath129 & antenna & & +   + & & +   + @xmath130 & semi - rigid cable & 0.015 & ( v ) +      here , we describe the uncertainties assigned to each of the calibration measurements from section  [ section_calibration_measurements ] , as well as the antenna reflection coefficient .
these uncertainties are applied inside the mc block of the uncertainty propagation , to create slightly perturbed realizations of the calibration parameters .
a summary of the nomenclature and values is presented in table  [ table_nomenclature ] .    in the top block of table  [ table_nomenclature ]
, we show the @xmath131 uncertainties associated with each of the uncalibrated spectra of the absolute calibration loads ( @xmath59 , @xmath60 , @xmath61 , @xmath62 ) .
the uncertainties are set equal to the rms of the residuals from polynomial or fourier series fits to the actual measured spectra . in all cases ,
the residuals are noise - like .
the residual rms for the ambient and hot load measurements is @xmath132  mk , while for the open / shorted cable measurements it is @xmath133  mk . for our mc realizations of the perturbed spectra ,
we begin with the models for the fiducial spectra and add to each frequency channel realizations of gaussian noise , uncorrelated from channel to channel , drawn from the assigned uncertainties .
the second block of table  [ table_nomenclature ] shows the uncertainties associated with the physical temperatures ( @xmath64 , @xmath78 , @xmath66 , @xmath67 ) of the calibrator sources .
we measure all the physical temperatures with thermistors and a resistance - to - temperature model .
the accuracy of the setup is estimated to be @xmath116  mk , hence we use that value for the uncertainty of all physical temperature measurements . for the mc realizations of the calibrator temperatures ,
we draw from gaussian distributions centered at the fiducial values with a @xmath131 width of @xmath116 mk .
the third and fourth blocks of table  [ table_nomenclature ] summarize the uncertainties applied to the amplitudes and phases of reflection coefficients , respectively .
our mc modeling propagates the reflection coefficient uncertainties for : 1 ) the absolute calibration loads ( @xmath68 , @xmath69 , @xmath70 , @xmath71 ) , 2 ) the receiver input ( @xmath40 ) , and 3 ) the antenna ( @xmath39 ) .
although the antenna reflection coefficient is not measured as part of the receiver calibration , it is tightly coupled to final receiver performance and we account for its uncertainty here .
we also consider the uncertainty ( listed in the fifth block in table  [ table_nomenclature ] ) on the transmission coefficient , @xmath130 , of the semi - rigid cable inside the hot load because it is relevant in the computation of the effective noise temperature from the device ( equation  ( [ equation_available_power_gain ] ) ) .    the main uncertainties in reflection coefficient measurements arise from uncertainty in vna calibration .
vna calibration involves measuring three reflection standards at the vna measurement plane : an open standard , a short standard , and a @xmath41-@xmath42 standard . as part of the edges efforts to increase the accuracy in calibration measurements
, we improved upon the manufacturer - specified vna tolerances through more accurate modeling of the @xmath41-@xmath42 standard @xcite . with the improved model for the standard
, the additive uncertainty in the magnitude of measured reflection coefficients was reduced to a @xmath131 linear voltage ratio of @xmath134 , which is equivalent to @xmath135 db for a reference reflection of @xmath111 db .
in addition to residual modeling errors , sub - dominant effects that contribute to this uncertainty include vna drifts and imperfect connection repeatability .
thus , the uncertainties assumed in the mc simulation for the reflection magnitudes are modeled as an additive contribution , fully correlated across the band , with an amplitude drawn from a gaussian with a @xmath131 width of @xmath134 .
figure  [ figure_reflection_accuracy ] presents a verification of the magnitude accuracy of our vna measurements using open - ended rf attenuators . in the figure
, we show reflection coefficient measurements of an attenuator compared to forecasts based on a direct dc measurement of the attenuator resistance . in particular , for @xmath136-db reflection
, the direct agreement is better than @xmath137  db and remains better than @xmath138  db even if we assume a pessimistic error in the resistance measurement .
we model reflection phase uncertainty using the form @xmath139 found in typical vna specifications . here , @xmath140 is a constant that represents the uncertainty value for the special case of a total reflection ( @xmath141 ) .
this model captures the fact that it is more difficult to determine the phase for smaller reflections than for larger reflections . in our simulations , we use @xmath142 and model phase uncertainty as an additive contribution with a @xmath131 width given by @xmath139 . for reference , this corresponds to a @xmath143 range of @xmath144 at the @xmath111-db magnitude of our antenna reflection coefficient model .
as was the case for the reflection magnitude , the additive contribution to the phase is modeled as fully correlated across the band .
this is a realistic first - order approximation for our vna measurements of @xmath116-mhz bandwidth .
the uncertainty of transmission coefficient ( @xmath130 ) measurents also benefits from the improvements in the measurement of reflection coefficient .
we assign @xmath131 uncertainty of @xmath145 to the transmission coefficient of the semi - rigid cable in the hot load calibrator and model it in the same way as the reflection magnitudes .    - and @xmath146-db respectively ) after a high - accuracy vna calibration ( black line ) , and comparing these measurements with the expectations for the attenuators from their dc resistance ( solid red line ) .
the vna calibration requires the dc resistance of the @xmath41-@xmath42 calibration load . this resistance , as well as
that of the attenuators , can be measured to better than @xmath147 @xmath42 . for reference , in the figure , the gray lines represent a pessimistic @xmath138-@xmath42 error in the calibration load resistance and the dashed red lines represents a @xmath138-@xmath42 error in the attenuator resistance . even when assuming this pessimistic resistance error , the accuracy is better than @xmath148 db at a reflection level of @xmath149 db , and better than @xmath150 db at @xmath151 db.,scaledwidth=48.0% ]    crrrrrrrr + @xmath59 & 5 & 4 & 4 & 4 & 3 & 3 & 2 & 2 + & 25 & 22 & 20 & 18 & 15 & 12 & 6 & 1 +   + @xmath60 & 5 & 5 & 4 & 4 & 3 & 2 & 1 & 1 + & 23 & 22 & 20 & 19 & 17 & 14 & 9 & 2 +   + @xmath64 & 381 & 357 & 56 & 1 & & & & + & 1852 & 340 & 63 & & & & & +   + @xmath78 & 398 & 258 & 40 & 1 & & & & + & 1958 & 240 & 47 & 1 & & & & +   + @xmath66 & 1 & 1 & 1 & 1 & 1 & & & + & 2 & 1 & 1 & 1 & 1 & & & +   + @xmath67 & 1 & 1 & 1 & 1 & & & & + & 1 & 1 & 1 & 1 & 1 & & & +   + @xmath117 & 19 & 19 & 7 & 5 & 1 & & & + & 94 & 27 & 26 & 4 & 2 & & & +   + @xmath123 & 60 & 43 & 41 & 9 & 3 & 1 & & + & 228 & 136 & 27 & 22 & 2 & 1 & & +   + @xmath118 & 22 & 16 & 9 & 5 & 1 & & & + & 136 & 42 & 36 & 3 & 2 & & & +   + @xmath124 & 74 & 38 & 35 & 10 & 2 & 1 & & + & 320 & 198 & 27 & 26 & 2 & 1 & & +   + @xmath119 & 5 & 4 & 4 & 2 & 1 & 1 & 1 & 1 + & 5 & 3 & 3 & 2 & 1 & 1 & 1 & 1 +   + @xmath125 & 2 & 2 & 2 & 2 & 1 & 1 & 1 & + & 2 & 2 & 2 & 2 & 1 & 1 & 1 & +   + @xmath120 & 4 & 4 & 3 & 2 & 2 & 1 & 1 & 1 + & 4 & 4 & 3 & 2 & 2 & 1 & 1 & 1 +   + @xmath127 & 1 & 1 & 1 & 1 & 1 & 1 & 1 & + & 1 & 1 & 1 & 1 & 1 & 1 & 1 & +   + @xmath121 & 15 & 15 & 15 & 14 & 10 & 5 & 5 & 1 + & 58 & 57 & 57 & 56 & 42 & 23 & 19 & 5 +   + @xmath128 & 47 & 41 & 35 & 27 & 25 & 20 & 6 & 6 + & 176 & 160 & 138 & 118 & 105 & 81 & 27 & 24 +   + @xmath130 & 104 & 68 & 11 & & & & & + & 520 & 63 & 13 & & & & & +   + @xmath122 & 32 & 12 & 12 & 12 & 9 & 6 & 3 & 1 + & 112 & 33 & 33 & 32 & 26 & 15 & 10 & 3 +   + @xmath129 & 36 & 33 & 29 & 28 & 23 & 16 & 7 & 4 + & 100 & 92 & 79 & 73 & 63 & 46 & 19 & 12 +   + all & 549 & 443 & 94 & 42 & 36 & 26 & 12 & 8 + & 2803 & 504 & 178 & 146 & 128 & 96 & 37 & 27      final cosmological parameter estimation for edges and similar experiments is performed by simultaneously fitting a signal model with a parametrized foreground model . in this step ,
the foreground model consists of a low - order polynomial or set of basis functions .
these functions are able to fit the foreground and beam chromaticity structure in the measured spectra , but also tend to absorb some of the expected @xmath0-cm signal
. calibration errors that are similar to foreground structures  i.e .
those that exhibit large spectral coherence  will be associated with the foreground model terms during the final parameter estimation and will have little additional impact on the @xmath0-cm signal estimation .
calibration errors that vary relatively rapidly in frequency , on the other hand , will not be fit by the foreground model and will yield more interference with the signal estimation . in order to take this effect into account in our analysis here
, we characterize the output antenna temperatures from our uncertainty propagation after fitting and removing a foreground model .
we use the polynomial model given by :    @xmath152    this model was introduced in @xcite as an efficient expression for removing foreground and beam effects . in the context of this paper
, it shares the flexibility of a generic polynomial but is more efficient for residuals with a predominant @xmath153 power - law behavior .
it is chosen as a model that could help remove the foreground and residuals from calibration simultaneously with few terms .
in this section , we report the results of our uncertainty propagation .
the effect of each calibration uncertainty source is first analyzed individually by holding all other sources of uncertainties to zero .
then , all the uncertainties are propagated simultaneously to examine their combined impact .
we characterize the significance of the calibration uncertainties by calculating the rms of residuals to the foreground model fit for differing numbers of polynomial terms in the foreground model , exploring between zero and seven terms .
distributions of rms values are produced from thousands of mc repetitions .
we use @xmath154 repetitions when a single effect is studied in isolation and @xmath155 when all the effects are considered simultaneously .
these rms distributions are characterized in terms of their @xmath5 upper bounds , rms@xmath156 .
the results are presented in table  [ table_residuals ] .
the table lists the uncertainty sources and the corresponding @xmath157 levels after removing the foreground model , with increasing numbers of polynomial terms shown in separate columns from left to right .
the two rows next to each source represent the residuals for the quiet ( top ) and loud ( bottom ) skies respectively . for residuals below @xmath4
mk , the cells are left empty . in the case of the the open and shorted cable spectra ( @xmath61 , @xmath62 ) the residuals
are always below @xmath4 mk and hence not shown .
figure  [ figure_residuals ] illustrates typical residuals for a quiet sky .
each row corresponds to a different source of uncertainty .
the left column shows two representative cases ( in blue and red ) drawn arbitrarily from our mc simulations before removing any term .
the right column shows the residuals for the same two cases after fitting and removing equation  ( [ equation_model2 ] ) with five terms .
several trends can be identified from table  [ table_residuals ] . first and as expected , for most error sources and polynomial orders the residuals are larger when observing a loud sky .
this motivates the preference of low - foreground observations for estimation of the cosmological signal , or the downweighting of strong - foreground regions as suggested , for instance , in @xcite .
the table also makes evident the low sensitivity of the calibration to errors in measurements of the open and shorted cable . as stated before , the residuals for their spectra ( @xmath61 , @xmath62 ) remain consistently below @xmath4 mk and are not shown in the table . for their physical temperatures ( @xmath66 , @xmath67 ) the initial residuals are @xmath158 mk and for the reflections ( @xmath70 , @xmath71 ) they are @xmath159 mk . at five terms they all reach @xmath4 mk or less .
the largest initial residuals occur for errors in the physical temperatures of the ambient and hot loads ( @xmath64 , @xmath78 ) which , for the loud sky , reach up to @xmath160 k. however , as shown in figure  [ figure_residuals ] , they strongly follow a power law and can be removed with few terms .
specifically , three terms are needed to reduce the residuals to @xmath161 mk for our foreground model .
the same applies to the transmission coefficient magnitude of the cable inside the ambient / hot load ( @xmath130 ) since this quantity is involved in the computation of the hot load noise temperature ( section  [ section_absolute_hot_load ] ) .
the initial impact of thermal noise in the ambient and hot spectra ( @xmath59 , @xmath60 ) is at the @xmath162-mk and @xmath163-mk level for the quiet and loud skies respectively .
these residuals decrease slowly as terms are added .
more than five terms would be needed to reach @xmath4 mk . for the reflections of these loads ( @xmath68 , @xmath69 ) the initial residuals are significantly higher ( up to @xmath164 mk )
. however , five terms are sufficient to reduce them to @xmath161 mk due to their smooth spectral shape .    for the receiver and antenna reflection coefficients ( @xmath40 , @xmath39 ) the initial residuals
are comparable to those for the ambient and hot loads . however , it takes more than seven terms to reduce them to @xmath161 mk . with three or more terms
removed these residuals are the largest among all the effects .
the similarity in behavior between the two sources is not surprising considering their strong interaction in the calibration equations ( section  [ section_calibration_formalism ] ) .    finally , the last rows of the table present the residuals when all the uncertainties are combined in a comprehensive monte carlo analysis . as expected , initially they are larger than those from individual sources , amounting to about @xmath165 and @xmath166 k for the quiet and loud skies respectively . for the quiet sky
they drop to @xmath167 mk with five terms .    in the full uncertainty propagation ,
errors in reflection coefficients are assumed uncorrelated .
however , a test was also conducted with correlated errors where , in any given mc repetition , the same error was applied to all the magnitudes / phases .
this exercise simulates a case where all these measurements are affected by the same vna bias .
the results are qualitatively and quantitatively very similar to those shown in the table , thus not shown for brevity .
as shown in @xcite and @xcite through simulations , over a frequency range similar to edges high - band and with sub mk channel noise , it is possible to probe a significant range of eor models when the foreground and instrument spectral response are simultaneously modeled with less than six polynomial terms .
some recent cosmological models yield large or late absorption features , or rapid reionization histories within the edges high - band range @xcite .
these models should also be accessible with a similar instrument performance .
the edges beam chromaticity has been modeled by @xcite to be less than @xmath4 mk at quiet sky locations after a fit to equation  ( [ equation_model2 ] ) with five terms .
ideally , this number of terms and residual level should not increase due to systematics from receiver calibration .
therefore , in order to avoid being limited by receiver systematics , the natural goal for the receiver calibration performance corresponds to keeping the residuals below @xmath4 mk after a fit to equation  ( [ equation_model2 ] ) with five terms .
this goal is already being met for most of the measurements .
the three exceptions correspond to 1 ) the spectra of the ambient and hot loads , 2 ) the reflection coefficient of the receiver , and 3 ) the reflection coefficient of the antenna .
simulations indicate that reducing the impact of noise in the ambient and hot load spectra to @xmath161 mk with five terms requires lowering the noise level to @xmath168% of its nominal value . with the current digitization efficiency , this is equivalent to integrating for more than @xmath169 days , since the nominal value is the result of one day of integration .
meeting this requirement is realistic and planned for future calibration revisions .    the situation is more challenging for the reflection coefficients .
it would be necessary to reduce the magnitude and phase uncertainties to @xmath170% and @xmath171% of the nominal values , respectively .
achieving such tight tolerances is an area of active research and we are identifying promising techniques .
for instance , the current uncertainty levels could be reduced by incorporating measurements of custom reflection standards , such as well characterized air - dielectric coaxial lines , into the vna calibration process @xcite .
cccccccccc + @xmath122 & ( a ) & 32 & 12 & 12 & 12 & 9 & 6 & 3 & 1 + & ( b ) & 29 & 7 & 6 & 6 & 5 & 3 & 1 & 1 + & ( c ) & 21 & 12 & 12 & 11 & 9 & 6 & 3 & 1 + & ( d ) & 34 & 12 & 11 & 6 & 3 & 1 & & + & ( e ) & 18 & 6 & 6 & 6 & 5 & 3 & 1 & 1 + & ( f ) & 19 & 7 & 6 & 3 & 2 & & & +   + @xmath129 & ( a ) & 36 & 33 & 29 & 28 & 23 & 16 & 7 & 4 + & ( b ) & 18 & 17 & 16 & 15 & 13 & 8 & 4 & 1 + & ( c ) & 35 & 32 & 29 & 27 & 23 & 15 & 7 & 4 + & ( d ) & 36 & 33 & 25 & 16 & 6 & 3 & & + & ( e ) & 18 & 17 & 15 & 15 & 12 & 7 & 4 & 1 + & ( f ) & 18 & 17 & 12 & 9 & 2 & 1 & &    an alternative approach to reduce the sensitivity of edges to errors in reflection measurements consists of improving the impedance match between the antenna and receiver . as stated in section  [ section_calibration_formalism ] , our reflection coefficients are referenced to the @xmath41-@xmath42 system impedance . therefore , improvement involves bringing both impedances closer to @xmath41-@xmath42 or , equivalently , lowering both reflection coefficients
.    table  [ table_antenna_residuals ] presents five simulation examples with potential for reducing sensitivity to errors in the antenna reflection coefficient ( magnitude , @xmath122 , and phase , @xmath129 ) for different levels of reflection from the antenna and receiver .
the computations assume a quiet sky and the nominal uncertainties of table  [ table_nomenclature ] .
case ( a ) corresponds to the same residuals shown in table  [ table_residuals ] , presented again for reference . in case ( b ) , the magnitude of the receiver reflection coefficient is lowered from @xmath172 to @xmath90 db .
this change produces a reduction in residuals from the antenna reflection magnitude and phase by a factor of about two for almost any number of terms . in case ( c ) ,
the nominal settings have been modified by lowering the magnitude of the antenna reflection coefficient from @xmath111 to @xmath136 db .
relative to ( a ) , this scenario produces an improvement in the initial residuals of the magnitude , which decreases from @xmath173 to @xmath0 mk .
however , when introducing terms in the model , the residuals become almost identical to those in the nominal case . in case ( d ) the delay of the antenna has been reduced from @xmath174 ns to @xmath175 ns , i.e. , the linear change in phase between @xmath113 and @xmath114 mhz has been reduced from @xmath112 to @xmath176 .
this change has no impact on the initial residuals , but as more terms are introduced the improvement becomes significant . with five terms ,
the magnitude residuals are reduced from @xmath177 to @xmath4 mk , and in phase they are reduced from @xmath178 to @xmath179 mk . case ( e ) corresponds to the combination of cases ( b ) and ( c ) , i.e. , both reflection magnitudes have been reduced .
case ( f ) combines all the suggested improvements and reduces the residuals to the lowest figures .
they start at 19 and 18 mk for the magnitude and phase with no terms removed , and converge to @xmath161 mk with five terms .
the improvements described above have the potential to reduce sensitivity to errors . at the same time
, their implementation has to consider tradeoffs typically encountered in wideband instrument design .
for instance , reducing the antenna reflection coefficient can have an impact on the spectral smoothness of the beam .
similarly for the receiver , it is necessary to balance its input reflection coefficient with its noise performance .
in addition , the phase of the antenna reflection depends on the physical dimensions of the antenna and on the length of any transmission line between the antenna and the reflection measurement plane .
we are currently investigating these alternatives to converge to an optimal instrumental solution .
the results presented thus far correspond to @xmath133% residuals in the range @xmath2 mhz . on top of refinements in the instrumentation , a decrease in residuals could be achieved by reducing the bandwidth used in the science analysis motivated , for instance , by the interest in probing late ( @xmath180 ) reionization transitions @xcite .    here
we show the improvement in performance when reducing the bandwidth to @xmath91 mhz by computing residuals in the range @xmath181 mhz ( @xmath182 ) from the mc simulations of section  [ section_uncertainty_propagation ] . discarding a @xmath6-mhz section at the low - frequency end results in less spectral structure , and in structure with lower amplitude due to the lower sky temperature in the remaining band . as depicted in figure  [ figure_residuals ] , this especially occurs for key sources of uncertainty such as the antenna and receiver reflection coefficients .    with a quiet sky and after removing five terms in the range @xmath181 mhz , the residuals for the ambient and hot load spectra are reduced to @xmath4 mk . for the magnitude and phase of the receiver reflection coefficient
they go down to @xmath179 and @xmath162 mk , respectively . for the antenna reflection
they are reduced to @xmath183 and @xmath57 mk .
finally , when all the uncertainty sources are considered the result is @xmath184 mk .
this result for the combined case is about three times better than the @xmath167 mk obtained for the @xmath2 mhz range .
this suggests that for a given signal model it may be possible to optimize the bandwidth processed to maximize the constraints on the model .
this paper describes the laboratory calibration of the edges high - band receiver used in the @xmath3 observational campaign .
the calibration was performed prior to instrument deployment and involved measuring the spectra , reflection coefficients , and physical temperatures of four absolute calibrators connected at the receiver input .
these measurements are used to determine the function that converts the antenna noise power to noise temperature .
the calibration was done in the range @xmath2 mhz , corresponding to @xmath1 .
to evaluate the impact on science analysis of realistic calibration uncertainties , we developed a monte carlo uncertainty propagation pipeline .
the results are presented as @xmath133% confidence levels for rms residuals after modeling and fitting the systematics from simulated calibration errors with low - order polynomials , using between zero and seven terms .
we focus on the results from the five - term model because this is the number of terms required to account for beam chromaticity from the edges blade antenna .
after polynomial subtraction , the systematics from a combination of all the error sources considered in this work amount to @xmath167 mk for observations of a quiet , low - foreground sky . to a large extent , this value is the result of uncertainties in the reflection coefficient of the antenna and the receiver input , which contribute individually with @xmath170 mk . for almost all other error sources the residuals are @xmath161 mk .
the receiver calibration is determined in the lab and applied to data taken in the field .
while every effort is made to equalize the instrument characteristics in the two circumstances , the validity of the assumptions that go into the mc simulations can only be tested with real sky measurements .
this will be addressed in forthcoming papers .
assuming that the receiver performance determined in the lab adequately reflects the instrument performance in the field , it should be possible for edges high - band to probe some @xmath0-cm models described in the literature , particularly those with astrophysical parameter combinations that yield large or late absorption features , or with rapid reionization histories .
astrophysical results will also be reported in future papers .
there are promising near - term opportunities for reduction of systematics from reflection measurements : 1 ) the incorporation of custom reflection standards into the calibration of the vector network analyzer used for measurements , 2 ) the improvement of the impedance match between the antenna and the receiver input , 3 ) the reduction of the changes in antenna phase with frequency .
current efforts are focused on investigating and implementing these improvements .
we thank the referee for suggestions that helped improve the quality of this manuscript .
this work was supported by the nsf through research awards for the experiment to detect the global eor signature ( ast-0905990 and ast-1207761 ) and by nasa through cooperative agreements for the lunar university network for astrophysics ( nna09db30a ) and the nancy grace roman technology fellowship ( nnx12ai17 g ) .
raul monsalve acknowledges support from the nasa ames research center ( nnx16af59 g ) .