 component and the red are the secondary component. The straight line represents perfect agreement between the two sets of measurements.[]{data-label="fig:comprm"}](f7.pdf){width="60.00000%"}

We measured 27 RM values for 20 lines of sight, including secondary components, through or near to IC 1805. In Table \[tab:results\], the first column lists the source name using our naming scheme, and column two gives the component, if the source had multiple resolved components for which we could determine a RM value. Columns three and four list the RM value from the least-squares method and the reduced chi-squared value, respectively. Column five lists the RM value determined from the RM Synthesis technique and the associated error (Equation 7 of @Mao:2010).

Figure \[fig:comprm\] shows the agreement between the two techniques for determining the RM. As in @Costa:2016, we find good agreement between the two techniques, and the good agreement between the results using the two techniques gives us confidence in our RM measurements.

  -------- --- --------------- ------------ --------------- ------- -------
                     RM          Reduced          RM         $\xi$   $\xi$
                     ()         $\chi^{2}$        ()         (pc)    (pc)
   W4-I1    a   -277 $\pm$ 1        29       -258 $\pm$ 3     29      53
            a   -1042 $\pm$ 7      1.5       -930 $\pm$ 30          
            b   -935 $\pm$ 6       1.5       -954 $\pm$ 11          
   W4-I3    a   -876 $\pm$ 2       1.9       -878 $\pm$ 8     27      16
            a   -139 $\pm$ 3       1.9       -153 $\pm$ 12          
            b    -91 $\pm$ 6        2        -68 $\pm$ 15           
   W4-I6    a   -990 $\pm$ 8       1.3       -961 $\pm$ 23    29      25
   W4-I8    a   -276 $\pm$ 2       4.4       -337 $\pm$ 8     37      54
   W4-I11   a   -377 $\pm$ 8        12       -141 $\pm$ 18    35      41
   W4-I12   
component and the red are the secondary component. The square credit line represents perfect agreement between the two sets of measurements.[]{data - label="fig: comprm"}](f7.pdf){width="60.00000% " } 

 We quantify 27 RM values for 20 lines of batch, admit secondary component, through or near to IC 1805. In Table \[tab: results\ ], the first column lists the reservoir name using our naming system, and column two give the component, if the source had multiple decide components for which we could determine a RM value. Columns three and four tilt the RM value from the least - squares method and the decreased chi - squared value, respectively. Column five tilt the RM value determined from the RM Synthesis proficiency and the associated error (Equation 7 of @Mao:2010). 

 Figure \[fig: comprm\ ] shows the agreement between the two proficiency for determining the RM. As in @Costa:2016, we find good agreement between the two techniques, and the good agreement between the result using the two techniques gives us confidence in our RM measurements. 

   -------- --- --------------- ------------ --------------- ------- ------- 
                      RM           Reduced           RM          $ \xi$    $ \xi$ 
                      ()          $ \chi^{2}$         ()          (pc)     (pc) 
    W4 - I1     a    -277 $ \pm$ 1         29        -258 $ \pm$ 3      29       53 
             a    -1042 $ \pm$ 7       1.5        -930 $ \pm$ 30          
             b    -935 $ \pm$ 6        1.5        -954 $ \pm$ 11          
    W4 - I3     a    -876 $ \pm$ 2        1.9        -878 $ \pm$ 8      27       16 
             a    -139 $ \pm$ 3        1.9        -153 $ \pm$ 12          
             b     -91 $ \pm$ 6         2         -68 $ \pm$ 15           
    W4 - I6     a    -990 $ \pm$ 8        1.3        -961 $ \pm$ 23     29       25 
    W4 - I8     a    -276 $ \pm$ 2        4.4        -337 $ \pm$ 8      37       54 
    W4 - I11    a    -377 $ \pm$ 8         12        -141 $ \pm$ 18     35       41 
    W4 - I12
 colponent and the red are uhe secondary comkobent. Tie strajght lind represents perfect agreemeit bwtweeb the two sets of measjrements.[]{dwta-label="dig:cinprm"}](f7.pdf){wivfh="60.00000%"}

We measured 27 RM raoues for 20 linex of sight, including secmnaaxy components, through or near to IC 1805. In Tabke \[tab:results\], thg firxe comlmk lists the source name using oud naminj scheme, and cokumn two gives the componejt, iv the source had mkltiple resilveq components wor which we could detgrmine a RM value. Columns three xnd fpur list tye RM ealue from vhe lewst-squares mcnhod ang the rrduced chi-squaved velue, respectively. Column hive lists the RM vajue deterkiued from the RM Synthwsus tewhnixue xbd ghe axskciatef ecror (Equatikn 7 of @Mao:2010).

Fugure \[fig:comprm\] shoes nne agreement betweqn the two techniques for determining the RM. As in @Costa:2016, we find goid agreement between jhe two teshniques, and the good agreement between the resulds usmne tkc gqo techniques gives us confidence in our RM meafhrtmekts.

  -------- --- --------------- ------------ --------------- ------- -------
                     TM          Reauced          RM         $\xl$   $\xi$
                     ()         $\chi^{2}$        ()         (pc)    (pc)
   W4-I1    a   -277 $\pm$ 1        29       -258 $\pk$ 3     29      53
            a   -1042 $\pm$ 7      1.5       -930 $\pm$ 30          
            n   -935 $\pm$ 6       1.5       -954 $\pm$ 11          
   W4-I3    a   -876 $\pm$ 2       1.9       -878 $\pl$ 8     27      16
            a   -139 $\pk$ 3       1.9       -153 $\pm$ 12          
            b    -91 $\pm$ 6        2        -68 $\'m$ 15           
   W4-I6    a   -990 $\pm$ 8       1.3       -961 $\pm$ 23    29      25
   X4-I8    a   -276 $\pi$ 2       4.4       -337 $\pm$ 8     37      54
   R4-I11   a   -377 $\pm$ 8        12       -141 $\pk$ 18    35      41
   W4-I12   
component and the red are the secondary straight represents perfect between the two 27 values for 20 of sight, including components, through or near to IC In Table \[tab:results\], the first column lists the source name using our naming and column two gives the component, if the source had multiple resolved components which could a value. Columns three and four list the RM value from the least-squares method and the reduced value, respectively. Column five lists the RM value from the RM Synthesis and the associated error (Equation of Figure \[fig:comprm\] the between two techniques for the RM. As in @Costa:2016, we find good agreement between the two techniques, and the good agreement the results two techniques us in RM measurements. -------- ------------ --------------- ------- ------- RM Reduced () $\chi^{2}$ () (pc) (pc) W4-I1 a -277 1 29 $\pm$ 3 29 53 a -1042 7 1.5 -930 $\pm$ 30 b -935 $\pm$ 1.5 -954 $\pm$ 11 W4-I3 a -876 $\pm$ 2 1.9 -878 $\pm$ 8 27 16 $\pm$ 3 1.9 -153 12 b -91 6 -68 15 a -990 8 1.3 -961 $\pm$ 23 29 25 W4-I8 a -276 $\pm$ 4.4 -337 $\pm$ 8 37 54 W4-I11 a -377 $\pm$ -141 18 35 41
 component and the red are the sEcondary coMponeNt. THe sTrAighT linE represents perFEct aGreement between the two sEts of MeASureMEnTs.[]{datA-label="fIG:cOMPrm"}](F7.pDf){WidTh="60.00000%"}

wE mEasurEd 27 Rm values For 20 lines of SigHt, Including secONdAry componeNts, Through or neaR to iC 1805. In TaBlE \[taB:ResulTs\], tHe firSt coluMN lists The source NaME using OUr naminG SChEme, aNd column two gives tHE cOMponent, if the soUrce haD mULtIPLe rEsoLved componEnTs for WHich we cOUlD DETerMIne a RM value. CoLumns three aND foUr list ThE RM VAlue frOm the LeASt-sQuares methoD and The reduceD chi-sqUAred valUE, respecTively. colUmn Five LIsTs The rM VAluE DeTerMIneD from the rM syNthesIs teCHNIQue aNd tHe asSociaTed error (EquatIon 7 Of @MaO:2010).

figUre \[fiG:compRm\] shOwS the aGreemeNt betWeEn the two techniqUes fOr determiNinG tHe Rm. AS in @CoSTa:2016, we fiNd gOod AgreemeNt betweEN thE tWO TEcHniques, and the good aGrEEMeNt betweeN the reSUlTs USing the tWo TecHniqUES giveS us cONfIdence in Our RM mEAsUrEments.

  -------- --- --------------- ------------ --------------- ------- -------
                     Rm          REduced          rM         $\Xi$   $\xI$
                     ()         $\chI^{2}$        ()         (pc)    (pc)
   w4-i1    a   -277 $\pm$ 1        29       -258 $\Pm$ 3     29      53
            a   -1042 $\pm$ 7      1.5       -930 $\pM$ 30          
            b   -935 $\pm$ 6       1.5       -954 $\pm$ 11          
   W4-I3    A   -876 $\pm$ 2       1.9       -878 $\pm$ 8     27      16
            A   -139 $\Pm$ 3       1.9       -153 $\pm$ 12          
            b    -91 $\pm$ 6        2        -68 $\pm$ 15           
   W4-I6    a   -990 $\pm$ 8       1.3       -961 $\PM$ 23    29      25
   W4-I8    a   -276 $\pm$ 2       4.4       -337 $\pm$ 8     37      54
   W4-I11   a   -377 $\pm$ 8        12       -141 $\PM$ 18    35      41
   W4-i12   
 component and the red are  the secon darycom pon en t. T he s traight line r e pres ents perfect agreement  betw ee n  the tw o set s of me a su r e men ts .[ ]{d at a -l abel= "fi g:compr m"}](f7.pd f){ wi dth="60.0000 0 %" }

We meas ure d 27 RM valu esfor 20  l ine s  of s igh t, in cludin g  secon dary comp on e nts, t h rough o r ne ar t o IC 1805. In Tab l e\ [tab:results\] , thefi r st c olu mnlists theso urcen ame usi n go u r  na m ing scheme, a nd column t w o g ives t he  co m ponent , ifth e  so urce had mu ltip le resolv ed com p onentsf or whic h we c oul d d eter m in ea R Mv alu e .Col u mns  three a nd  f our l istt h e RM v alu e fr om th e least-squar esmeth o d a nd th e red uced  c hi-sq uaredvalue ,respectively. C olum n five li sts  t heRM  valu e  deter min edfrom th e RM Sy n the si s t ec hnique and the ass oc i a te d error(Equat i on  7 of @Mao: 20 10) .

F i g ure \ [fig : co mprm\] s hows t h eag reement  b etween  t hetwo  tech n ique s fordetermin ing t h e RM. As in @C o sta:2016, wef in d go o d ag ree ment betwee n th e  two  tec h ni que s , and  thego o da greement between th eresult s usi ng the two te chniques g i v e s us con fide n ce in our RM meas ureme nts.

  -- - ----- -- - --- -------- ---- ---- - - ------ - --- --- --- --- - -  - ------ ------ -                  RM        Re du ced         RM     $ \xi $   $ \ xi$
              ()       $\c hi ^{ 2 }$      ( )    (p c)   ( pc )
  W4-I 1    a   -2 77 $\pm$1     2 9      - 258 $\pm$ 3   29      5 3        a   -10 42 $\pm$ 7      1.5     -930$\p m$ 30          
         b -935$\pm$6     1. 5     - 95 4 $ \p m$ 11      
   W 4- I3   a   - 876 $\pm$ 2      1 .9      -878 $\ pm$  8  2 7  16       a   -139 $\ pm$ 3     1 .9        -15 3  $\ pm $ 12        
         b    -91$\pm$ 6     2       -68 $\ pm$ 15            W4 - I6     a   -990 $ \p m$8      1.3      -9 61 $\p m$  23   29    25
  W4-I8    a   -276 $\pm$  2      4. 4      -337  $\ p m$8     37    54
   W4- I11   a   - 377 $\pm$  8    1 2      - 1 41 $\pm$1 8  3 5      41
   W 4 - I 12  
 component_and the_red are the secondary_component. The_straight_line represents_perfect_agreement between the_two sets of_measurements.[]{data-label="fig:comprm"}](f7.pdf){width="60.00000%"}

We measured 27 RM_values for 20_lines_of sight, including secondary components, through or near to IC 1805. In Table \[tab:results\],_the_first column_lists_the_source name using our naming_scheme, and column two gives_the component,_if the source had multiple resolved components for_which_we could determine_a RM value. Columns three and four list the_RM value from the least-squares method_and the reduced_chi-squared_value,_respectively. Column five lists_the RM value determined from the_RM Synthesis technique and the associated_error (Equation 7 of @Mao:2010).

Figure \[fig:comprm\] shows_the agreement between the two techniques_for determining the RM. As_in @Costa:2016,_we find good agreement between_the two techniques,_and the_good agreement between_the results using the two techniques_gives us confidence_in our RM measurements.

  --------_---_--------------- ------------ ---------------_-------_-------
_ _  __ __     __    RM  _   __  Reduced _    _   RM  _ _ _  $\xi$   $\xi$
     _     _   _ __  ()__ _     $\chi^{2}$ _ _    () _   __  (pc)   _(pc)
   W4-I1  _ a   -277_$\pm$_1_    _  29   _  _-258 $\pm$ 3    _29_     53
__     ___  a  _-1042 $\pm$ 7   _  1.5      _-930 $\pm$ 30_    ___  
       _ _  b_  -935 $\pm$ 6     _ 1.5     _ -954 $\pm$ 11       _  
   W4-I3  _ a   -876 $\pm$ 2_   __ 1.9     __-878_$\pm$_8  _  27_  _ _16
  _ _  __   a   -139 $\pm$ 3       1.9  _    -153 $\pm$_12    __  _ 
  _       _ b    -91 $\pm$ 6 __ _   2_ _ _  _-68 $\pm$_15 _ _      _
_  W4-I6    a  _-990_$\pm$_8_  _  _1.3  _  __-961 $\pm$ 23   _29  _   25
_  W4-I8    a   -276_$\pm$ 2       4.4       -337 $\pm$_8 _   37_ __  54
   W4-I11_ _a   -377 $\pm$ 8  __    12       -141_$\pm$_18_  _35_     41
___W4-I12__ 