All Tables

Table 1: Details of the observations of the Crab nebula with HESS between October 2003 and January 2005. For the purposes of this study, the data has been divided into 3 subsets.
Table 2: Selection cuts optimised for various purposes, as described in the text. Cuts are applied on MRSW and MRSL, as well as on the distance ( $\theta$ ) from the reconstructed shower position to the source. A minimum of two telescopes passing the per-telescope cuts, on image amplitude and distance from the centre of the field of view, are also required. Standard cuts, as well as hard, loose and extended cuts, as described in the text, are listed.
Table 3: $\ensuremath {\gamma }$ -ray rate predictions from simulations for the standard, hard and loose selection cuts. This table is valid for a source with an energy spectrum similar to the Crab, for observations at an offset of 0.5 $\ensuremath {^{\circ }}$ (the usual observing mode). The cut selection efficiencies and (peak rate) energy thresholds in each case are also given.
Table 4: Events passing cuts in on and off regions for the Crab, listed by data set along with excesses, significance and $\ensuremath {\gamma }$ -ray rates. Various selection cuts described in Table 2 are also compared for data sets I-III combined. The results using the ring-background model are given (denoted as Ring). The integrated flux from the Crab above 1 TeV is shown also, as described in Sect. 7.1. The $\ensuremath {\chi ^{2}}$ / d.o.f. for a fit to a constant flux for the data set is given, as is the percentage run-by-run rms deviation in the flux.
Table 5: Flux measurements for each energy bin in the combined spectral fit on data sets I-III, as plotted in Fig. 18b. The flux errors are error-propagated 68% Feldman-Cousins confidence intervals (Feldman & Cousins 1998).
Table 6: Flux and spectral measurements of the Crab, divided up by data set as outlined in Table 1, for a power law fit with an exponential cutoff. Results for the various selection cuts described in Table 2 are also compared. The results for a power-law fit (PL) and for a broken power-law fit (BPL) are also given. The spectral fit estimated using the ring background model is given (ring), as is that estimated without the optical efficiency correction (uncorr.). Only statistical results are shown in the table. Similar measurements from other experiments are given for comparison, the Whipple results is taken from Mohanty et al. (1998), the CAT results from Masterson et al. (1999) and the HEGRA results from Aharonian et al. (2004b).
Table 7: Summary table showing the various estimated contributions to the systematic flux error.