Changeset 39875 for trunk/doc/release.2015/ps1.calibration/calibration.tex

Timestamp:

Dec 16, 2016, 6:17:35 AM (10 years ago)

Author:

eugene

Message:

updates to calibration and Makefiles

File:

• trunk/doc/release.2015/ps1.calibration/calibration.tex (modified) (11 diffs)

trunk/doc/release.2015/ps1.calibration/calibration.tex

@@ -179 +179 @@
 The wide-field \PSONE\ telescope consists of a 1.8~meter diameter
 $f$/4.4 primary mirror with an 0.9~m secondary, producing a 3.3 degree
-field of view \citep{2004SPIE.5489..667H}.  The optical design yields low
-distortion and minimal vignetting even at the edges of the illuminated
-region.  The optics, in combination with the natural seeing, result in
-generally good image quality: the median image quality for the 3$\pi$
-survey is FWHM = (1.31, 1.19, 1.11, 1.07, 1.02) arcseconds for
-(\grizy), with a floor of $\sim0.7$ arcseconds.  The \PSONE\ camera
-\citep{PS1.GPCA} is a mosaic of 60 edge-abutted $4800\times4800$ pixel
-back-illuminated CCID58 Orthogonal Transfer Arrays manufactured by
-Lincoln Laboratory \citep{2006amos.confE..47T,2008SPIE.7021E..05T}.
-The CCDs have 10~$\mu$m pixels subtending 0.258~arcsec and are
-70$\mu$m thick.  The detectors are read out using a StarGrasp CCD
-controller, with a readout time of 7 seconds for a full unbinned image
+field of view \citep{2004SPIE.5489..667H}.  The optical design yields
+low distortion and minimal vignetting even at the edges of the
+illuminated region.  The optics, in combination with the natural
+seeing, result in generally good image quality: the median image
+quality for the 3$\pi$ survey is FWHM = (1.31, 1.19, 1.11, 1.07, 1.02)
+arcseconds for (\grizy), with a floor of $\sim0.7$ arcseconds.  The
+\PSONE\ camera \citep{2009amos.confE..40T} is a mosaic of 60
+edge-abutted $4800\times4800$ pixel back-illuminated CCID58 Orthogonal
+Transfer Arrays manufactured by Lincoln Laboratory
+\citep{2006amos.confE..47T,2008SPIE.7021E..05T}.  The CCDs have
+10~$\mu$m pixels subtending 0.258~arcsec and are 70$\mu$m thick.  The
+detectors are read out using a StarGrasp CCD controller, with a
+readout time of 7 seconds for a full unbinned image
 \citep{2008SPIE.7014E..0DO}.  The active, usable pixels cover $\sim
 80$\% of the FOV.
@@ -213 +214 @@
 the data is used for the purpose of this article.
 
-The data processing steps are described in detail by Waters REF and
-Magnier REF.  In summary, individual images are detrended:
-non-linearity and bias corrections are applied, a dark current model
-is subtracted and flat-field corrections are applied.  The \yps-band
-images are also corrected for fringing: a master fringe pattern is
-scaled to match the observed fringing and subtracted.  Mask and
-variance image arrays are generated with the detrend analysis and
+The data processing steps are described in detail by \cite{waters2017}
+and \cite{magnier2017a,magnier2017b}.  In summary, individual images
+are detrended: non-linearity and bias corrections are applied, a dark
+current model is subtracted and flat-field corrections are applied.
+The \yps-band images are also corrected for fringing: a master fringe
+pattern is scaled to match the observed fringing and subtracted.  Mask
+and variance image arrays are generated with the detrend analysis and
 carried forward at each stage of the IPP processing.  Source detection
 and photometry are performed for each chip independently.  As
@@ -241 +242 @@
 Astronomical objects are detected and characterized in the stacks
 images.  The details of the analysis of the sources in the stack
-images are discussed in Magnier et al REF, but in brief these include
+images are discussed in \cite{magnier2017b}, but in brief these include
 PSF photometry, along with a range of measurements driven by the goals
 of understanding the galaxies in the images.  Because of the
@@ -264 +265 @@
 fluxes from the individual warp images are averaged, a reliable
 measurement of the faint source flux is determined.  The details of
-this analysis are described in detail in Magnier et al REF.  
+this analysis are described in detail in Magnier et al
+\cite{magnier2017b}.
 
 In this article, we discuss the photometric calibration of the
@@ -278 +280 @@
 Three somewhat distinct astrometric models are employed within the IPP
 at different stages.  The simplest model is defined independently for
-each chip: a simple TAN projection (Calabretta \& Griesen REF) is used
-to relate sky coordinates to a cartesian tangent-plane coordinate
-system.  A pair of low-order
+each chip: a simple TAN projection as described by
+\cite{2002AA...395.1077C} is used to relate sky coordinates to a
+cartesian tangent-plane coordinate system.  A pair of low-order
 polynomials are used to relate the chip pixel coordinates to this
 tangent-plane coordinate system.  The transforming polynomials are of
@@ -596 +598 @@
 
 The photometric calibration of the DVO database starts with the
-``ubercal'' analysis technique as described by \cite{2012ApJ...756..158S}.
-This analysis is performed by the group at Harvard, loading data from
-the \code{smf} files into their instance of the Large Scale Database
-(LSD, Juric REF), a system similar to DVO used to manage the
-detections and determine the calibrations.
+``ubercal'' analysis technique as described by
+\cite{2012ApJ...756..158S}.  This analysis is performed by the group
+at Harvard, loading data from the \code{smf} files into their instance
+of the Large Scale Database \citep[LSD,][]{2011AAS...21743319J}, a
+system similar to DVO used to manage the detections and determine the
+calibrations.
 
 Photometric nights are selected and all other exposures are ignored.
@@ -648 +651 @@
 field to match the photometry measured by \cite{2012ApJ...750...99T}
 on the reference photometric night of MJD 55744 (UT 02 July 2011).
-\cite{2015ApJ...815..117S} have re-examined the photometry of Calspec
-standards as observed by PS1.  They reject 2 of the 5 stars used by
-\cite{2012ApJ...750...99T} and add photometry of 2 additional stars.
+\cite{2014ApJ...795...45S} and \cite{2015ApJ...815..117S} have
+re-examined the photometry of Calspec standards \citep{Bohlin.1996} as
+observed by PS1.  \cite{2014ApJ...795...45S} reject 2 of the 7 stars
+used by \cite{2012ApJ...750...99T} and add photometry of 5 additional
+stars.  \cite{2015ApJ...815..117S} further reject measurements of
+Calspec standards obtained close to the center of the camera field of
+view where the PSF size and shape changes very rapidly.  The result of
+this analysis modifies the over system zero points by 20 - 35
+millimags compared with the system determined by
+\cite{2012ApJ...756..158S}.
 
 %% \note{The calspec spectrophotometry values have also been re-examined
@@ -656 +666 @@
 %%   determine new zero points for the PS1 system, which we have applied
 %%   (see below).}
+
+% http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/0004-637X/815/2/117/pdf
 
 \subsection{Applying the Ubercal Zero Points : Setphot}
@@ -679 +691 @@
 filter.  These static values are listed in Table~\ref{tab:zpts}.  When
 \code{setphot} was run, these static zero points have been adjusted by
-the calspec offsets listed in Table~\ref{tab:zpts} based on the
-analysis of CALSPEC standards by Scolnic et al REF.  These offsets
-bring the photometric system defined by the ubercal analysis into
-alignment with the Scolnic analysis of the PS1 observations of XXX
-calspec standard stars.  The value $M_{cal}$ is the offset needed by
-each exposure to match the ubercal value, or to bring the non-ubercal
-exposures into agreement with the rest of the exposures, as discussed
-below.  The flat-field information is encoded in a table of flat-field
-offsets as a function of time, filter, and camera position.  Each
-image which is part of the ubercal subset is marked with a bit in the
-field \code{Image.flags}: \code{ID_IMAGE_PHOTOM_UBERCAL = 0x00000200}
+the Calspec offsets listed in Table~\ref{tab:zpts} based on the
+analysis of Calspec standards by \cite{2015ApJ...815..117S}.  These
+offsets bring the photometric system defined by the ubercal analysis
+into alignment with \cite{2015ApJ...815..117S}.  The value $M_{cal}$
+is the offset needed by each exposure to match the ubercal value, or
+to bring the non-ubercal exposures into agreement with the rest of the
+exposures, as discussed below.  The flat-field information is encoded
+in a table of flat-field offsets as a function of time, filter, and
+camera position.  Each image which is part of the ubercal subset is
+marked with a bit in the field \code{Image.flags}:
+\code{ID_IMAGE_PHOTOM_UBERCAL = 0x00000200}
 
 %% \note{give airmass formula for completeness?}.
@@ -737 +749 @@
 
 Relative photometry is used to determine the zero points of the
-exposures which were not included in the ubercal analysis.  The relative photometry analysis has been desribed in the
-past in Magnier et al 2013 REF.  We review that analysis here, along
-with specific updates for PV3.  
+exposures which were not included in the ubercal analysis.  The
+relative photometry analysis has been described in the past by
+\cite{2013ApJS..205...20M}.  We review that analysis here, along with
+specific updates for PV3.
 
 As described above, the instrumental magnitude and the calibrated magnitude
@@ -1286 +1299 @@
 
 \bibliographystyle{apj}
-%\bibliography{lib}{}
-\input{calibration.bbl}
+\bibliography{lib}{}
+%\input{calibration.bbl}
 
 \end{document}