First concede this: if a photon is "lost" in the sense of not producing a useful response signal to be captured, there's
not gonna be a perfect magic solution. Here's what I mean.
Since you're doing two-edge separation for distinct detectors, you are implicitly interested in the question, "once I
receive photon A, how much longer until I receive photon B?" If an instance of photon A is lost, the two-edge task
will make no time measurement for the corresponding B photon. This is your best scenario because you simply fail
to register any sample for that pair. If an instance of photon B is lost, the two edge task will then "ignore" the next
photon A and record an *incorrect* time interval that extends to the second instance of photo B. You'll get one
interval from A(i) to B(i+1) instead of two intervals from A(i) to B(i) and A(i+1) to B(i+1).
In general, you can't really know which photon might get lost or when, so it'll be hard to know where data is missing
and/or where it's corrupted & incorrect.
I think I would try to approach this as 2 separate tasks, each one timestamping the pulses from one detector. I would
use an "arm-start" trigger to make sure the 2 tasks are referenced to the same t=0 point. Then I'd do some software
post-processing to try to figure out where photons may have been missed, and to calculate intervals wherever I
determine I can validly do so. I would still kinda suspect that there's gonna be some educated guesswork involved
trying to distinguish between valid and invalid intervals.
-Kevin P
ALERT! LabVIEW's subscription-only policy came to an end (finally!). Unfortunately, pricing favors the captured and committed over new adopters -- so tread carefully.
