ner_tags: O O O O O O O O O B-Telescope O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B-Wavelength I-Wavelength O O O O O O O B-Wavelength I-Wavelength O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B-Telescope O O O O O O B-Telescope O O O O O O O O O B-Model I-Model O O O O B-Telescope O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B-Model I-Model O O O O O O O O O O B-Telescope O O O O O O O O O O O O B-Telescope O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B-Telescope O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B-Telescope O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B-Telescope O O O O B-CelestialObject I-CelestialObject O B-CelestialObject O O O O O O O O O O O O O B-Telescope O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B-Telescope O O O O B-Model I-Model I-Model I-Model I-Model O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B-Formula I-Formula I-Formula I-Formula I-Formula O O O O O O O O B-CelestialObject I-CelestialObject O B-CelestialObject O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B-CelestialRegion I-CelestialRegion I-CelestialRegion I-CelestialRegion I-CelestialRegion I-CelestialRegion O B-CelestialRegion I-CelestialRegion I-CelestialRegion I-CelestialRegion I-CelestialRegion I-CelestialRegion O O O O B-CelestialObject O O O O O
tokens: on all rows as vertical dotted lines. Variation in GBT spectra among rows two, three, and four demonstrates some of the variations in OH content and distribution over the region that increases the uncertainty in T ex determined with the expected profile method. Also worth noting is the unusual case in the fourth row in which the 1665 MHz line appears to be brighter than the 1667 MHz line and the secondary component appears to dominate. This deviation is within the uncertainty so it could be attributed to noise, or perhaps it is evidence of a localized anomaly in the secondary component. Figure 5. VLA absorption spectra from Source 2 and GBT emission spectra from its vicinity for the expected profile. Gaussian fits are performed on the VLA spectra and shown superimposed with a dashed line, and the centroid velocity of the Gaussian fit is displayed as a vertical dotted line on each spectrum. VLA observations of Source 1 as well as three of the four nearby GBT observations for the expected emission profile are shown in Figure 4 . The fourth GBT observation was not used because T C at that position was too high. The VLA observations at Source 1 reveal the presence of two OH components: a primary component centered near −39 km s −1 (called Component A), and a secondary component centered near −37.5 km s −1 (called component B). The expected profiles made by averaging the GBT spectra from observations surrounding Sources 1 and 2, respectively, also display these two components, but in the case of the individual GBT spectra averaged, both components are not always detected together. As a result, it makes sense to treat the two components as separate OH features, fit the VLA absorption data as a sum of two Gaussian components, and compare the optical depth and line temperature values for the corresponding components when using Equation ( 2 ) to estimate the excitation temperatures. These T ex values can then be averaged together after their separate determinations, but if the components of the OH features are not treated separately, the analysis will be faulty. The results of this exercise are given in Table 1 . The uncertainties reported in this Table are calculated only from the error in the profile integral and the absorption optical depth measurements. Table 1 Excitation Temperatures for the Components of Source 1 Note. Errors from profile integrals and optical depth measurements. In order to estimate the error resulting from variation in OH, we look at some of the variation in OH profile integrals between adjacent pointings within our survey. We choose an example with background T C = 4.0 K in order to best approximate the regions surrounding Sources 1 and 2, which have similar background T C values, because we wish to avoid making assumptions about T ex and how that would affect emission profile integral strengths. Between coordinates l = 138625, b = 15, and l = 13875, b = 15, the profile integral at W5 radial velocities varies between a