\begin{table}%t2
\caption{\label{tab1}Parameters of the 1-point distribution of pixel temperature estimates, versus iteration of the pixel-based despiking, for cases~$R_1$  and~$R_2$ (observations of small maps, same conditions as in Fig.~\ref{fig3}).}
%\centering
\par
\begin{tabular}{ccccc}
\hline \hline \noalign{\smallskip}
Iteration & Average ($\rm \mu K$) & rms ($\rm \mu K$) & skewness & kurtosis \\ 
\hline
no CR & 0.0 $\pm$ 0.7  & 39.6 $\pm$ 0.4 & $-$0.001 $\pm$
0.038 & 0.022 $\pm$ 0.078 \\
\hline
 0 ($R_1$) &  (1439 $\pm$ 6) &  (159 $\pm$ 4) & (0.193 $\pm$ 0.070) & (0.06 $\pm$ 0.15) \\
1 ($R_1$) &  (529 $\pm$ 3) & (92.3 $\pm$ 2.1) &  (0.231 $\pm$ 0.070) &  (0.11 $\pm$ 0.15) \\
2 ($R_1$) &  (173.8 $\pm$ 1.5) &  (59.1 $\pm$ 0.8) & (0.092 $\pm$ 0.042) &  (0.059 $\pm$ 0.087)\\
3 ($R_1$) &  (94.3 $\pm$ 1.1) & (56.0 $\pm$ 0.6) &  (0.020 $\pm$ 0.038) &  (0.029 $\pm$ 0.076)\\
4 ($R_1$) &  (81.4 $\pm$ 1.1) &  (57.4 $\pm$ 0.6) &  (0.014 $\pm$ 0.038) &  (0.029 $\pm$ 0.076) \\
5 ($R_1$) &  (79.3 $\pm$ 1.1) &  (57.9 $\pm$ 0.6) &  (0.012 $\pm$ 0.038) &  (0.029 $\pm$ 0.077)\\
\hline
0 ($R_2$) &  (12.5 $\pm$ 0.7) &  (41.9 $\pm$ 0.5) &  (0.069 $\pm$ 0.039) &  (0.089 $\pm$ 0.087)\\
1 ($R_2$) & (1.1 $\pm$ 0.7) & (40.6 $\pm$ 0.4) &  (0.001 $\pm$ 0.037) & (0.029 $\pm$ 0.078) \\
2 ($R_2$) &  (0.8 $\pm$ 0.7) &  (40.9 $\pm$ 0.4) &  (0.001 $\pm$ 0.037) &  (0.029 $\pm$ 0.077)\\
3 ($R_2$) &  (0.8 $\pm$ 0.7) &  (41.0 $\pm$ 0.5) &  (0.001 $\pm$ 0.037) &  (0.029 $\pm$ 0.078) \\
4 ($R_2$) &  (0.8 $\pm$ 0.7) &  (41.0 $\pm$ 0.4) &  (0.001 $\pm$ 0.037) &  (0.029 $\pm$ 0.078) \\
5 ($R_2$) & (0.8 $\pm$ 0.7) &  (41.0 $\pm$ 0.4) &  (0.001 $\pm$ 0.037) &  (0.029 $\pm$ 0.078)\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\tablefoot {Iteration 0 refers to the values without despiking. The first line reports the
noise-only case (no~CRs). The errors describe the dispersion in the results of 3000~simulations.}
\vspace*{5mm}
\end{table}