Input-time horizon of a delayed optical receiver record ($H={\max }_j(T_j-d_j)$)

The input-time horizon of a delayed optical receiver record is the latest physical input time that could influence the recorded output, given the receiver's causal onset delay. If $h(t)=0$ for $t<d$ and the last output time is $T$, convolution depends only on input timesThus $T-d$ is a necessary timing limit on information in that record. Recoverability within the limit additionally depends on bandwidth, noise, sampling and the response's invertibility. Causal indistinguishability of delayed optical inputs on a finite record shows why later input changes cannot be inferred from the existing output samples.

For several channels with last recorded times $T_j$ and known onset delays $d_j$, the latest possible input horizon isAny input perturbation starting strictly after $H$ is invisible in every stored channel. A channel's latest output timestamp alone is insufficient to compare its input horizon with another channel's.

For an original example, channel 1 records through $120\mathrm{ns}$ with delay $15\mathrm{ns}$, while channel 2 records through $100\mathrm{ns}$ with delay $2\mathrm{ns}$. Their input limits are $105$ and $98\mathrm{ns}$; the combined limit is $105\mathrm{ns}$. Knowing both response functions exactly still supplies no observation of an input pulse beginning later than that limit.

A receiver-latency uncertainty in the inferred input-time horizon also changes the timing claim. If channel 1's delay is known only to lie between $14$ and $16\mathrm{ns}$, its possible horizon ranges from $104$ to $106\mathrm{ns}$. An input beginning at $104.5\mathrm{ns}$ could affect the record for one allowed delay but arrive too late for another. Using the conservative endpoint $104\mathrm{ns}$ avoids claiming timing access that depends on an unresolved latency. It still does not guarantee successful reconstruction of every earlier input.

NIST characterized detector, cable and oscilloscope as a combined response chain using a short known optical pulse.^[ref] Such a calibration must relate output timing to the physical input time origin. The delays above are illustrative, not quoted apparatus values. De-embedding known latency aligns the record's time reference; it cannot extend observations into an unrecorded future interval.

Receiver-latency uncertainty in the inferred input-time horizon propagates uncertainty in timing calibration into the latest input time that could have influenced a stored output record. For one channel, the horizon in input-time horizon of a delayed optical receiver record is $H=T-d$, with last output time $T$ and effective input-to-output timing offset $d$. HenceThis linear variance identity retains shared timing influences.^[ref]

A common calibration offset can cancel when it enters both quantities. In an original model, let errors be $\delta T=c+e_T$ and $\delta d=c+e_d$, with independent components of standard deviations $0.8$, $0.2$ and $0.6\mathrm{ns}$. Then $\delta H=e_T-e_d$ and $u(H)=\sqrt{0.2^2+0.6^2}\approx 0.6325\mathrm{ns}$. Discarding their common-offset covariance would instead give $\sqrt{0.8^2+0.2^2+0.8^2+0.6^2}\approx 1.296\mathrm{ns}$.

The shared component must come from the actual calibration model. Here $d$ is the effective timing offset relating the input and output coordinates, so an output-clock alignment error can enter both $T$ and $d$. A physical transport-delay error is not automatically correlated with the last-sample timestamp.

For hard timing limits, propagate validated bounds rather than reinterpret standard uncertainty as a guarantee. If $T=150\mathrm{ns}$ is known and $8\le d\le 12\mathrm{ns}$, then $138\le H\le 142\mathrm{ns}$. Claiming the optimistic endpoint as though it held for every allowed delay would overstate the input-time reach.

With several channels, $H={\max }_j(T_j-d_j)$. Channel switching under uncertainty in a combined receiver horizon makes this a nonsmooth function when the maximizing channel is uncertain. Propagate the justified joint timing set or distribution; a derivative of only one nominally best channel can miss such switching.

NIST's primary pulse calibration measured the detector, cable and oscilloscope together using a short known optical input.^[ref] The numerical timing errors above are chosen examples, not values from that apparatus. A timing horizon remains a necessary information limit; it does not guarantee invertibility of the receiver or bound future optical illumination.

Channel switching under uncertainty in a combined receiver horizon occurs when uncertainty changes which receiver has the latest accessible input time. For channel $j$, let $H_j=T_j-d_j$ be its last output time minus its effective input-to-output offset. The combined horizon is $H={\max }_j{H}_j$, as in receiver-latency uncertainty in the inferred input-time horizon. Away from ties a small perturbation may preserve the maximizing channel; near a tie it need not. Propagating only that channel's variance omits the switching operation.

An original two-channel model makes the effect exact. Suppose $H_1$ and $H_2$ are independent normal random variables with common mean $\mu$ and standard deviation $s>0$. Independence giveswhere $\Phi$ is the standard normal distribution cumulative distribution function. This square is already enough to show that $H$ is not normal: $\mathrm{Pr}(H\le \mu )=1/4$.

To calculate the resulting bias relative to the common nominal horizon, write $H=(H_1+H_2+|H_1-H_2|)/2$. The difference has normal distribution with variance $2s^2$, hence $E|H_1-H_2|=2s/\sqrt{\pi }$. The sum and difference are independent in this model, givingFor $\mu =100\mathrm{ns}$ and $s=1\mathrm{ns}$, the combined mean is about $100.564\mathrm{ns}$ and its standard deviation is about $0.826\mathrm{ns}$. The formulas concern the uncertainty distribution of the horizon, not a promise of extra observable future illumination. The normal cdf/ppf routines provide direct evaluation of the probabilities.^[ref]

Shared clock or calibration errors invalidate the independence product. The distribution of the maximum of correlated receiver horizons must retain the joint timing model; NIST's general uncertainty guidance retains input covariance and requires distributional justification for coverage.^[ref] For hard bounds instead, $H_1\in [99,101]\mathrm{ns}$ and $H_2\in [100,102]\mathrm{ns}$ imply $H\in [100,102]\mathrm{ns}$ without selecting a fixed winning channel. Neither calculation establishes invertibility of the physical receiver.

The distribution of the maximum of correlated receiver horizons must use the joint timing law. Let $H=\max (H_1,H_2)$. Then $\mathrm{Pr}(H\le h)=\mathrm{Pr}(H_1\le h,H_2\le h)$, which generally is not the product of the marginal probabilities. The independent special case is derived in channel switching under uncertainty in a combined receiver horizon.

For an explicit correlated model, suppose $(H_1,H_2)$ has a bivariate normal distribution with common mean $\mu$, common standard deviation $s>0$, and correlation coefficient $-1<\rho <1$. With $z=(h-\mu )/s$, the cumulative distribution function and density of the maximum areHere $\varphi ,\Phi$ are the standard normal distribution density and cdf, and ${\Phi }_2$ is the bivariate cdf. The density follows by differentiating along both boundaries and using the conditional normal law. The official SciPy reference supplies a cdf method parameterized by the mean vector and covariance matrix; it is a numerical evaluation, not an assumption of channel independence.^[ref]

The equal-variance model also gives exact moments. Write $H=(S+|D|)/2$, with $S=H_1+H_2$ and $D=H_1-H_2$. They are independent normal variables, with $\mathrm{Var}(D)=2s^2(1-\rho )$. The absolute-normal moment then givesFor an original shared-clock example, let $\mu =100\mathrm{ns}$, $s=1\mathrm{ns}$, and $\rho =1/2$. Then $EH\approx 100.399\mathrm{ns}$ and the standard deviation is about $0.917\mathrm{ns}$. Positive correlation reduces the expected gain from selecting the larger horizon, while increasing its variance relative to the independent equal-channel case.

A common-clock contribution to a maximum receiver horizon can be modeled for nonnegative $\rho$ by $H_j=\mu +s(\sqrt{\rho }{Z}_0+\sqrt{1-\rho }{Z}_j)$ with independent standard normal inputs. As $\rho$ tends to one, both channels share the same uncertain horizon: selection does not remove the common error. Actual receiver timing correlations must be justified by calibration and reference reuse; the example neither measures them nor guarantees that the receiver is invertible.

A common-clock contribution to a maximum receiver horizon is a residual timing error that survives in every channel's inferred input-time horizon. Write $H_j=h_j+C+{\epsilon }_j$, with common error $C$ independent of the remaining channel errors. Then the identityshows that selecting the latest channel does not average away the common term. With finite variances,Here $C$ means a component remaining after each channel's subtraction $T_j-d_j$. A clock contribution that already cancels inside that subtraction must not be added again; see receiver-latency uncertainty in the inferred input-time horizon.

For two equal nominal horizons $h_j=\mu$, take independent channel errors ${\epsilon }_j\sim N(0,s^2)$ and $EC=0$. The independent maximum moments derived in channel switching under uncertainty in a combined receiver horizon giveIf the common error is also normal, each channel has variance ${\sigma }_C^2+s^2$ and their correlation is ${\sigma }_C^2/({\sigma }_C^2+s^2)$, recovering the equal-channel model in distribution of the maximum of correlated receiver horizons.

For an original example, choose ${\sigma }_C=0.8\mathrm{ns}$ and $s=0.3\mathrm{ns}$. The combined mean is about $0.1693\mathrm{ns}$ above $\mu$, and its standard deviation is about $0.8375\mathrm{ns}$. Yet the difference between channel horizons has standard deviation only $\sqrt{2}s\approx 0.4243\mathrm{ns}$, because $C$ cancels there. Good agreement between channels therefore need not establish a precise absolute horizon.

A timing experiment needs an independently justified reference for the common component, in addition to channel-to-channel alignment observations. Shared-input covariance is explicitly retained in NIST's uncertainty law.^[ref] Repeated reads sharing the same clock realization cannot estimate away its absolute displacement simply by choosing the largest result.