Version 20 (modified by mhuber@…, 6 years ago)


Summary of MD10.refstack.20120705/20120804

Similar to the MD10.GR0 (MD.GR0#MD10.GR0) refstacks for the 2011/2012 season, new one includes recent improvement and input cuts to help constrain the convolved stacks as well. Because the refstack is made with reprocessed pixels, the refstack pixels will now have the ubercalibration.

The MD10.refstack.20120705 was found to have the weight pixel problem causing arc of lower sensitivity over multiple skycells, is replaced with MD10.refstack.20120804 now.

MD10 observations started end of July (last season started mid-July and ended early December).

Filter N total N (FWHM<8 pixels)
g 491 438
r 493 462
i 448 396
z 462 428
y 305 302

MD10.V3 Processing (chip->warp + refstack)

Exposure reprocessing was done for only a limited number (~150) of the best images from 2010+2011 to provide a balance of N input warps versus best seeing, excluding exposures with large background, low zeropoints and large elongation. Processing chip-warp and the refstack itself has the same label, data_group

  • label: MD10.refstack.20120705
  • data_group: MD10.refstack.20120705

Cuts used:

Replacement refstack made using the 20120705 reprocessed exposures

  • label: MD10.refstack.20120804 --> once becomes the active refstack, label changed to MD10.refstack
  • data_group: MD10.refstack.20120804

Histograms of the FWHM major and minor and elongation from camera stage value (full exposure) for the sample of reprocessed exposures 20120705 (red) and used for refstack.20120804 (top blue) and used for refstack.20110821 (bottom blue) in grizy order

Test stack (reftest) sample also made again for skycell.055 with different number of input warps.

  • label: MD10.reftest.20120705
  • data_group:
    • MD10.reftest.20120705.c#f<FWHM cut> where #=comparison run, <FWHM cut>=cut <fwhm_major from camProcessedExp x10>
    • MD10.reftest.20120705.all.<FWHM cut> where all means 2009+2010+2011 data possible, <FWHM cut>=cut <fwhm_major from camProcessedExp x10>
    • MD10.reftest.20120705.2011.<FWHM cut> where 2011 means 2011 data only, <FWHM cut>=cut <fwhm_major from camProcessedExp x10>

Some of the test c1f cases had problems in the convolved stack (odd PSF), so a c2f set was run with different FWHM upper limits to see if could be improved. Only a couple are noted in the table below.

Summary comparison table with the approximate FWHM (major) as the PSF FWHM from a center field skycell (V3=055) after running psphot on the stacks. The replaced refstack.20120804 should be similar to the original refstack.20120705 and the tests. Note with the change in input cuts/restrictions, the Ninput~100 is cut to the best ~70.

version data_group filter center skycell input warps (rej) center skycell FWHM (major, pixels)
new MD10.refstack.20120804 g 103(36) 5.08
MD10.reftest.20120705.all.49 g 72(12)
MD10.reftest.20120705.2011.49 g 59(9)
MD10.reftest.20120705.c1f46 g 27(3)
MD10.reftest.20120705.c1f48 g 52(12)
MD10.reftest.20120705.c1f50 g 88(13)
MD10.reftest.20120705.c1f51 g 103(13)
old MD10.refstack.20110821 g 79(3) 5.60
new MD10.refstack.20120804 r 98(21) 4.25
MD10.reftest.20120705.all.44 r 60(2)
MD10.reftest.20120705.2011.44 r 50(11)
MD10.reftest.20120705.c1f42 r 26(4)
MD10.reftest.20120705.c1f43 r 41(3)
MD10.reftest.20120705.c1f45 r 76(6)
MD10.reftest.20120705.c1f46 r 98(9)
old MD10.refstack.20110821 r 76(0) 5.12
new MD10.refstack.20120804 i 89(13) 3.50
MD10.reftest.20120705.all.40 i 68(4)
MD10.reftest.20120705.2011.40 i 46(3)
MD10.reftest.20120705.c1f37 i 26(4)
MD10.reftest.20120705.c1f39 i 42(5)
MD10.reftest.20120705.c1f41 i 60(4)
MD10.reftest.20120705.c1f43 i 68(3)
MD10.reftest.20120705.c2f42 i 89(14)
old MD10.refstack.20110821 i 75(1) 3.96
new MD10.refstack.20120804 z 100(19) 3.41
MD10.reftest.20120705.all.39 z 73(11)
MD10.reftest.20120705.2011.39 z 59(5)
MD10.reftest.20120705.c1f36 z 24(3)
MD10.reftest.20120705.c1f38 z 50(5)
MD10.reftest.20120705.c1f40 z 84(7)
MD10.reftest.20120705.c1f41 z 100(9)
old MD10.refstack.20110821 z 72(0) 4.08
new MD10.refstack.20120804 y 71(11) 3.64
MD10.reftest.20120705.all.45 y 84(18)
MD10.reftest.20120705.2011.45 y 60(7)
MD10.reftest.20120705.c1f37 y 26(5)
MD10.reftest.20120705.c1f41 y 48(3)
MD10.reftest.20120705.c1f47 y 80(19)
MD10.reftest.20120705.c1f52 y 108(34)
MD10.reftest.20120705.c2f45b y 71(11)
old MD10.refstack.20110821 y 63(11) 3.84

Additional cuts used (including reftest.c1f,c2f):


  • generally edge skycells have issues, need better containment of those still.
  • some convolved stacks have strange PSF -- reprocessed using DEEP_STACK config with lighter input restrictions so may not have best FWHM, but 99% on the edge of field so won't anyways.
    • g: 038, 045
    • r: ---
    • i: ---
    • z: ---
    • y: ---
  • bad cell arc in primarily skycell.036,033,024,025,026,047 y-band from ota14, cell 31 -- see MD01.refstack.20120803
  • poor/bad cell arc in primarily skycell.054 g-band (and less so in other filters) from ota43, cell 54?

  • misc ghosts in g-band

Refstack Summary

2012 Refstack Summary

MD10.refstack.20120804 run through the staticsky (full 5 filter mode with deteff measurements) and skycal stage on the unconvolved stacks:

  • label: MD10.refstack.20120804, MD10.refstack.20120804
  • data_group: MD10.refstack.20120804.1x20120805, MD10.refstack.20120804.1x20120805.cal20120805

Replacement MD10.refstack.20120804 rerun through staticsky (single filter mode so basic psphot with deteff measurements) and skycal stage on the unconvolved stacks to make the map plots

  • label: MD10.refstack.20120804, MD10.refstack.20120804
  • data_group: MD10.refstack.20120804.1x20121006, MD10.refstack.20120804.1x20121006.cal20121006

Source photometry psf_major,_minor maps (grizy):

Magnitude of sources@5-sigma maps (grizy):

Detection efficiency magnitude @50% recovery (500 fakes, grizy):

2011 Refstack Summary (MD01.refstack.20110820, for comparison)

Source photometry psf_major,_minor maps (grizy):

Magnitude of sources@5-sigma maps (grizy):

Detection efficiency magnitude @50% recovery (500 fakes, grizy):