IPP Software Navigation Tools IPP Links Communication Pan-STARRS Links

Changeset 40614 for trunk


Ignore:
Timestamp:
Jan 26, 2019, 2:24:50 PM (7 years ago)
Author:
eugene
Message:

minor changes

Location:
trunk/doc/release.2015
Files:
6 edited

Legend:

Unmodified
Added
Removed

  • trunk/doc/release.2015/ps1.analysis/Makefile

    r40584 r40614  
    44#
    55DO_PDFLATEX = 1
    6 DO_BIBTEX = 1
     6DO_BIBTEX = 0
    77
    88help:
    … …  
    2020PDFPICS = \
    2121pics/peaks.pdf \
    22 pics/FWHM.smooth.trend.ps1.pdf \
     22pics/FWHM.smooth.trend.ps1.png \
    2323pics/moment.class.pdf \
    2424pics/radial.profiles.pdf

  • trunk/doc/release.2015/ps1.analysis/analysis.tex

    r40610 r40614  
    1 % \documentclass[iop,floatfix]{emulateapj}
    2 \documentclass[10pt,preprint]{aastex}
     1\documentclass[iop,floatfix]{emulateapj}
     2% \documentclass[10pt,preprint]{aastex}
    33% \pdfoutput=1
    44
    … …  
    162162contained only average information resulting from the many individual
    163163images obtained by the $3\pi$ Survey observations.  A second data
    164 release, DR2, was made available \note{20 January 2019}.  DR2 provides
     164release, DR2, was made available 28 January 2019.  DR2 provides
    165165measurements from all of the individual exposures, and include an
    166166improved calibration of the PV3 processing of that dataset.
    … …  
    466466
    467467\begin{table*}
     468\caption{\label{tab:measurements} \nocode{psphot} measurements performed} % \vspace{-0.5cm}
    468469\begin{center}
    469470\footnotesize
    470 \caption{\label{tab:measurements} \nocode{psphot} measurements performed} % \vspace{-0.5cm}
    471471\begin{tabular}{lccccll}
    472472\hline
    … …  
    531531
    532532\begin{table*}
     533\caption{\label{tab:det_flag_values} \nocode{psphot} Detection Flag Values \#1} % \vspace{-0.5cm}
    533534\begin{center}
    534535\footnotesize
    535 \caption{\label{tab:det_flag_values} \nocode{psphot} Detection Flag Values \#1} % \vspace{-0.5cm}
    536536\begin{tabular}{lrl}
    537537\hline
    … …  
    578578
    579579\begin{table*}
     580\caption{\label{tab:det_flag2_values} \nocode{psphot} Detection Flag Values \#2} % \vspace{-0.5cm}
    580581\begin{center}
    581582\footnotesize
    582 \caption{\label{tab:det_flag2_values} \nocode{psphot} Detection Flag Values \#2} % \vspace{-0.5cm}
    583583\begin{tabular}{lrl}
    584584\hline
    … …  
    672672
    673673\begin{table*}
     674\caption{\label{tab:mask_values} \nocode{psphot} / GPC1 Mask Image Pixel Values} % \vspace{-0.5cm}
    674675\begin{center}
    675676\footnotesize
    676 \caption{\label{tab:mask_values} \nocode{psphot} / GPC1 Mask Image Pixel Values} % \vspace{-0.5cm}
    677677\begin{tabular}{lcccl}
    678678\hline
    … …  
    12521252a linear model:
    12531253\[
    1254 R[(x_{\rm mod},y_{\rm mod})][(x_{\rm ccd},y_{\rm ccd})] = R_o[(x_{\rm
    1255       mod},y_{\rm mod})] + R_x[(x_{\rm
    1256       mod},y_{\rm mod})] x_{\rm ccd} + R_y[(x_{\rm
    1257       mod},y_{\rm mod})] y_{\rm ccd}
     1254\begin{array}{lll}
     1255R[(x_{\rm mod},y_{\rm mod})][(x_{\rm ccd},y_{\rm ccd})] & = & R_o[(x_{\rm mod},y_{\rm mod})] \\
     1256& + & R_x[(x_{\rm mod},y_{\rm mod})] x_{\rm ccd} \\
     1257& + & R_y[(x_{\rm mod},y_{\rm mod})] y_{\rm ccd} \\
     1258\end{array}
    12581259\]
    12591260where $R[(x_{\rm mod},y_{\rm mod})][(x_{\rm ccd},y_{\rm ccd})]$ is the
    … …  
    13671368  for a given order of the PSF 2D variations.} % \vspace{-0.5cm}
    13681369\begin{center}
    1369 \begin{tabular}{llll}
     1370\begin{tabular}{lll}
    13701371\hline
    13711372\hline
    1372 {\bf Minimum Number of Stars} & {\bf Order} & {\bf Number of Grid Cells} \\
     1373{\bf Minimum Number} & {\bf Order} & {\bf Number of} \\
     1374{\bf of Stars}       &             & {\bf Grid Cells} \\
    13731375\hline
    1374  16 &  1 &  4 &   4 \\
    1375  54 &  2 &  9 &   6 \\
    1376 128 &  3 & 16 &   8 \\
    1377 300 &  4 & 25 &  12 \\
    1378 576 &  5 & 36 &  16 \\
     1376 16 &  1 &  4 \\
     1377 54 &  2 &  9 \\
     1378128 &  3 & 16 \\
     1379300 &  4 & 25 \\
     1380576 &  5 & 36 \\
    13791381\hline
    13801382\end{tabular}
    … …  
    23052307
    23062308% Graham & Driver : Graham A. W., Driver S. P.  2005, PASA 22, 118
    2307 a% DOI: https://doi.org/10.1071/AS05001
     2309% DOI: https://doi.org/10.1071/AS05001
    23082310
    23092311The central pixel of the S\'ersic, DeVaucouleur, and Exponential
    2310 models require special handling.  When comparing an analytical model
     2312models requires special handling.  When comparing an analytical model
    23112313to the pixelized image recorded by a CCD, one normally treats the
    23122314value in a pixel as equivalent to the value of the model at the center
    … …  
    27982800image.
    27992801
    2800 \section{Examples and Tests}
    2801 
    2802 \note{to be added}
     2802% \section{Examples and Tests}
     2803
     2804% \section{Conclusions}
    28032805
    28042806\acknowledgments
    … …  
    28212823
    28222824\bibliographystyle{apj}
    2823 \bibliography{lib}{}
    2824 %\input{analysis.bbl}
     2825%\bibliography{lib}{}
     2826\input{analysis.bbl}
    28252827
    28262828\end{document}
    … …  
    28512853* plots showing the quality of the data?
    28522854
    2853 Tables needed:
    2854 
    2855 * table of models?
    2856 
    2857 Work still needed:
    2858 
    2859 * section 3.5.3 Model applied to detected sources needs to be reviewed
    2860 
    2861 * background model description (see waters)
    2862 
    2863 % alternative version:
    2864 % @book{madsen2004methods,
    2865 %   title={Methods for Non-linear Least Squares Problems},
    2866 %   author={Madsen, K. and Nielsen, H.B. and Tingleff, O. and Danmarks tekniske universitet. Informatik og Matematisk Modellering},
    2867 %   url={https://books.google.com/books?id=mhj4MgEACAAJ},
    2868 %   year={2004},
    2869 %   publisher={Informatics and Mathematical Modelling, Technical University of Denmark}
    2870 % }
    2871 
    28722855% programs mentioned in this text:
    28732856% psphot
    … …  
    28772860% ppSub
    28782861
    2879 
    2880 kukui: foreach f (`grep PM_SOURCE ~/src/kukui/panstarrs/ipp-trunk/psModules/src/objects/pmSourceMasks.h | grep -v "^#" | prcol 1`)
    2881 foreach? echo --- $f ---
    2882 foreach? grep $f */*.tex
    2883 foreach? end
    2884 --- PM_SOURCE_MODE_DEFAULT ---
    2885 --- PM_SOURCE_MODE_PSFMODEL ---
    2886 --- PM_SOURCE_MODE_EXTMODEL ---
    2887 --- PM_SOURCE_MODE_FITTED ---
    2888 --- PM_SOURCE_MODE_FAIL ---
    2889 ps1.analysis/analysis.tex:flags the object with the bad bit \code{PM_SOURCE_MODE_FAIL}.  It is
    2890 ps1.analysis/analysis.tex:non-linear PSF fit (\code{PM_SOURCE_MODE_FAIL}).
    2891 --- PM_SOURCE_MODE_POOR ---
    2892 ps1.analysis/analysis.tex:the flag bit (\code{PM_SOURCE_MODE_POOR}).
    2893 --- PM_SOURCE_MODE_PAIR ---
    2894 --- PM_SOURCE_MODE_PSFSTAR ---
    2895 --- PM_SOURCE_MODE_SATSTAR ---
    2896 ps1.analysis/analysis.tex:non-linear PSF model fit (\code{PM_SOURCE_MODE_SATSTAR}).  Among these
    2897 ps1.analysis/analysis.tex:saturated stars (\code{PM_SOURCE_MODE_SATSTAR}).  These model fits
    2898 --- PM_SOURCE_MODE_BLEND ---
    2899 --- PM_SOURCE_MODE_EXTERNAL ---
    2900 --- PM_SOURCE_MODE_BADPSF ---
    2901 --- PM_SOURCE_MODE_DEFECT ---
    2902 --- PM_SOURCE_MODE_SATURATED ---
    2903 --- PM_SOURCE_MODE_CR_LIMIT ---
    2904 --- PM_SOURCE_MODE_EXT_LIMIT ---
    2905 --- PM_SOURCE_MODE_MOMENTS_FAILURE ---
    2906 --- PM_SOURCE_MODE_SKY_FAILURE ---
    2907 --- PM_SOURCE_MODE_SKYVAR_FAILURE ---
    2908 --- PM_SOURCE_MODE_BELOW_MOMENTS_SN ---
    2909 --- PM_SOURCE_MODE_BIG_RADIUS ---
    2910 --- PM_SOURCE_MODE_AP_MAGS ---
    2911 --- PM_SOURCE_MODE_BLEND_FIT ---
    2912 --- PM_SOURCE_MODE_EXTENDED_FIT ---
    2913 --- PM_SOURCE_MODE_EXTENDED_STATS ---
    2914 --- PM_SOURCE_MODE_LINEAR_FIT ---
    2915 --- PM_SOURCE_MODE_NONLINEAR_FIT ---
    2916 --- PM_SOURCE_MODE_RADIAL_FLUX ---
    2917 --- PM_SOURCE_MODE_SIZE_SKIPPED ---
    2918 --- PM_SOURCE_MODE_ON_SPIKE ---
    2919 --- PM_SOURCE_MODE_ON_GHOST ---
    2920 --- PM_SOURCE_MODE_OFF_CHIP ---
    2921 --- PM_SOURCE_MODE2_DEFAULT ---
    2922 --- PM_SOURCE_MODE2_DIFF_WITH_SINGLE ---
    2923 ps1.analysis/analysis.tex:\code{PM_SOURCE_MODE2_DIFF_WITH_SINGLE = 0x00000001} is raised, while
    2924 --- PM_SOURCE_MODE2_DIFF_WITH_DOUBLE ---
    2925 ps1.analysis/analysis.tex:\code{PM_SOURCE_MODE2_DIFF_WITH_DOUBLE = 0x00000002} raised.
    2926 --- PM_SOURCE_MODE2_MATCHED ---
    2927 --- PM_SOURCE_MODE2_ON_SPIKE ---
    2928 --- PM_SOURCE_MODE2_ON_STARCORE ---
    2929 --- PM_SOURCE_MODE2_ON_BURNTOOL ---
    2930 --- PM_SOURCE_MODE2_ON_CONVPOOR ---
    2931 --- PM_SOURCE_MODE2_PASS1_SRC ---
    2932 --- PM_SOURCE_MODE2_HAS_BRIGHTER_NEIGHBOR ---
    2933 --- PM_SOURCE_MODE2_BRIGHT_NEIGHBOR_1 ---
    2934 --- PM_SOURCE_MODE2_BRIGHT_NEIGHBOR_10 ---
    2935 --- PM_SOURCE_MODE2_DIFF_SELF_MATCH ---
    2936 ps1.analysis/analysis.tex:$\sigma$, then the bit \code{PM_SOURCE_MODE2_DIFF_SELF_MATCH =
    2937 --- PM_SOURCE_MODE2_SATSTAR_PROFILE ---
    2938 --- PM_SOURCE_MODE2_ECONTOUR_FEW_PTS ---
    2939 --- PM_SOURCE_MODE2_RADBIN_NAN_CENTER ---
    2940 --- PM_SOURCE_MODE2_PETRO_NAN_CENTER ---
    2941 --- PM_SOURCE_MODE2_PETRO_NO_PROFILE ---
    2942 --- PM_SOURCE_MODE2_PETRO_INSIG_RATIO ---
    2943 --- PM_SOURCE_MODE2_PETRO_RATIO_ZEROBIN ---
    2944 --- PM_SOURCE_MODE2_EXT_FITS_RUN ---
    2945 --- PM_SOURCE_MODE2_EXT_FITS_FAIL ---
    2946 --- PM_SOURCE_MODE2_EXT_FITS_RETRY ---
    2947 --- PM_SOURCE_MODE2_EXT_FITS_NONE ---

  • trunk/doc/release.2015/ps1.calibration/Makefile

    r40597 r40614  
    44# remember to set \pdfoutput at the top
    55
    6 DO_BIBTEX = 1
     6DO_BIBTEX = 0
    77# remember to change from \bibliography to \input{.bbl} at the bottom
    88
    … …  
    2121../inputs/code.sty \
    2222../inputs/apj.bst \
    23 ../inputs/lib.bib \
    24 pics/photflat.example.png \
    25 pics/allsky.photom.sigma.png \
     23pics/photflat.example.sm.png \
     24pics/allsky.photom.sigma.sm.png \
     25pics/rings.v3.example.png \
    2626pics/KHexample.png \
    2727pics/KHmap.png \
    2828pics/dcr.r2.g.png \
    29 pics/astroflat.gri.png \
    30 pics/astroflat.zy.png \
     29pics/astroflat.gri.sm.png \
     30pics/astroflat.zy.sm.png \
    3131pics/allsky.astrom.sigma.png \
    3232pics/gaia.photom.png \

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

    r40602 r40614  
    1 \documentclass[10pt,preprint]{aastex}
    2 % \documentclass[iop,floatfix]{emulateapj}
     1% \documentclass[10pt,preprint]{aastex}
     2\documentclass[iop,floatfix]{emulateapj}
    33% \pdfoutput=1
    44
    … …  
    101101of the Pan-STARRS\,1 $3\pi$ Survey.  The photometric goals were to
    102102reduce the systematic effects introduced by the camera and detectors,
    103 and to place all of the observations into a photometric system with
     103and to place all of the observations onto a photometric system with
    104104consistent zero points over the entire area surveyed, the \approx
    10510530,000 square degrees north of $\delta = -30$\degrees.  The
    … …  
    115115
    116116\section{Introduction}\label{sec:intro}
    117 
    118 \note{list all ID\_IMAgE, ID\_MEAS, ID\_OBJ, ID\_SECF flags from libdvo/include/dvo.h and identify how they are set; make tables}
    119 
    120117
    121118From May 2010 through March 2014, the Pan-STARRS Science Consortium
    … …  
    175172contained only average information resulting from the many individual
    176173images obtained by the $3\pi$ Survey observations.  A second data
    177 release, DR2, was made available \note{20 January 2019}.  DR2 provides
     174release, DR2, was made available 28 January 2019.  DR2 provides
    178175measurements from all of the individual exposures, and include an
    179176improved calibration of the PV3 processing of that dataset.
    180177
    181178This is the fifth in a series of seven papers describing the
    182 Pan-STARRS1 Surveys, the data reduction techiques and the resulting
     179Pan-STARRS1 Surveys, the data reduction techniques and the resulting
    183180data products.  This paper (Paper V) describes the final calibration
    184181process, and the resulting photometric and astrometric quality.
    … …  
    195192%Pan-STARRS Data Processing Stages
    196193\citet[][Paper II]{magnier2017.datasystem}
    197 describes how the various data processing stages are organised and implemented
     194describes how the various data processing stages are organized and implemented
    198195in the Imaging Processing Pipeline (IPP), including details of the
    199196the processing database which is a critical element in the IPP infrastructure .
    … …  
    288285Astronomical objects are detected and characterized in the stack
    289286images.  The details of the analysis of the sources in the stack
    290 images are discussed in \cite{magnier2017.analysis}, but in brief these include
    291 PSF photometry, along with a range of measurements driven by the goals
    292 of understanding the galaxies in the images.  Because of the
    293 significant mask fraction of the GPC1 focal plane, and the varying
    294 image quality both within and between exposures, the effective PSF of
    295 the PS1 stack images is highly variable.  The PSF varies significantly
    296 on scales as small as a few to tens of pixels, making accurate PSF
    297 modelling essentially infeasible.  The PSF photometry of sources in
    298 the stack images is thus degraded significantly compared to the
    299 quality of the photometry measured for the individual chip images. 
     287images are discussed in \cite{magnier2017.analysis}, but in brief
     288these include PSF photometry, along with a range of measurements
     289driven by the goals of understanding the galaxies in the images.
     290Because of the significant mask fraction of the GPC1 focal plane, and
     291the varying image quality both within and between exposures, the
     292effective PSF of the PS1 stack images (often including more than 10
     293input exposures taken in different conditions) is highly variable.
     294The PSF varies significantly on scales as small as a few to tens of
     295pixels, making accurate PSF modelling essentially infeasible.  The PSF
     296photometry of sources in the stack images is thus degraded
     297significantly compared to the quality of the photometry measured for
     298the individual chip images.
    300299
    301300To recover most of the photometric quality of the individual chip
    … …  
    311310fluxes from the individual warp images are averaged, a reliable
    312311measurement of the faint source flux is determined.  The details of
    313 this analysis are described in detail in Magnier et al
    314 \cite{magnier2017.analysis}.
     312this analysis are described in detail in \cite{magnier2017.analysis}.
    315313
    316314The data products from the chip photometry, stack photometry, and
    … …  
    320318photometric and astrometric calibrations.  In this article, we discuss
    321319the photometric calibration of the individual exposures, the stacks,
    322 and the warp imags.  We also discuss the astrometric calibration of
     320and the warp images.  We also discuss the astrometric calibration of
    323321the individual exposures and the stack images.
    324322
    … …  
    332330each chip: a simple TAN projection as described by
    333331\cite{2002AA...395.1077C} is used to relate sky coordinates to a
    334 cartesian tangent-plane coordinate system.  A pair of low-order
     332Cartesian tangent-plane coordinate system.  A pair of low-order
    335333polynomials are used to relate the chip pixel coordinates to this
    336334tangent-plane coordinate system.  The transforming polynomials are of
    … …  
    352350accuracy consists of a set of connected solutions for all chips in a
    353351single exposure.  This model also uses a TAN projection to relate the
    354 sky coordinates to a locally cartesian tangent plane coordinate system.
     352sky coordinates to a locally Cartesian tangent plane coordinate system.
    355353A set of polynomials is then used to relate the tangent plane
    356354coordinates to a `focal plane' coordinate system, $L,M$:
    … …  
    363361across the field of the camera.  Since these effects are smooth across
    364362the field of the camera, a single pair of polynomials can be used for
    365 each exposure.  Like in the chip analysis about, the \ippprog{psastro}
     363each exposure.  Like in the chip analysis above, the \ippprog{psastro}
    366364code restricts the exponents with the rule $i + j <= N_{\rm order}$
    367365where the order of the fit, $N_{\rm order}$, may be 1 to 3, under the
    … …  
    392390\end{eqnarray}
    393391
    394 \note{does this section need more? does this section need to be moved?}
    395 
    396392%% Include a description of the WCS keywords used to represent the fit elements?
    397393
    … …  
    476472if too many reference stars are chosen, there is a higher chance of a
    477473false-positive match, especially as many of the reference stars may
    478 not be detected in the GPC1 image.  The seletion of the reference
     474not be detected in the GPC1 image.  The selection of the reference
    479475stars includes a limit on the brightest and faintest magnitudes of the
    480476stars selected.
    … …  
    537533
    538534The astrometry solution from the cross correlation step above is again
    539 used to selected matches between the reference stars and observed
     535used to select matches between the reference stars and observed
    540536stars in the image.  The matching radius starts off quite large, and a
    541537series of fits is performed to generate the transformation between
    … …  
    586582the current best set of transformations.  These fits start with low
    587583order (1) and large matching radius.  As the iterations proceed, the
    588 radius is reduced and the order is allowed to increaes, up to 3rd
     584radius is reduced and the order is allowed to increase, up to 3rd
    589585order for the final iterations. 
    590586
    … …  
    610606calibration was based on a reference catalog generated from
    611607\PSONE\ photometry, this methods was no longer needed.  Note that we
    612 do not include an airmass correction in this zero point analysis: the
    613 airmass correction is folded into the observed zero point.  The zero
     608do not fit for the airmass slope in this analysis.  The nominal
     609airmass slope is used for each filter; any deviation from the nominal
     610value is effectively folded into the observed zero point.  The zero
    614611point may be measured separately for each chip or as a single value
    615612for the entire exposure; the latter option was used for the PV3
    … …  
    687684\code{X} in both cases is one of {$grizy$}.
    688685%
    689 Table~\ref{tab:tab:object_mask_values} lists the flags specific to an
     686Table~\ref{tab:object_mask_values} lists the flags specific to an
    690687object as a whole.  These values are stored in the DVO database field
    691688\code{Average.flags} and are exposed in PSPS in
    … …  
    875872
    876873Photometric nights are selected and all other exposures are ignored.
    877 Each night is allowed to have a single fitted zero point and a single
    878 fitted value for the airmass extinction coefficient per filter.  The
    879 zero points and extinction terms are determined as a least squares
    880 minimization process using the repeated measurements of the same stars
    881 from different nights to tie nights together.  Flat-field corrections
    882 are also determined as part of the minimization process.  In the
    883 original (PV1) ubercal analysis, \cite{2012ApJ...756..158S} determined
    884 flat-field corrections for $2\times 2$ sub-regions of each chip in the
    885 camera and four distinct time periods (``seasons'').  Later analysis
    886 (PV2) used an $8\times8$ grid of flat-field corrections to good
    887 effect.
     874Each night is allowed to have a single fitted zero point
     875(corresponding to the sum $zp_{\rm nominal} + M_{cal}$ below) and a
     876single fitted value for the airmass extinction coefficient ($K_{\rm
     877  \lambda}$) per filter.  The zero points and extinction terms are
     878determined as a least squares minimization process using the repeated
     879measurements of the same stars from different nights to tie nights
     880together.  Flat-field corrections are also determined as part of the
     881minimization process.  In the original (PV1) ubercal analysis,
     882\cite{2012ApJ...756..158S} determined flat-field corrections for
     883$2\times 2$ sub-regions of each chip in the camera and four distinct
     884time periods (``seasons'').  Later analysis (PV2) used an $8\times8$
     885grid of flat-field corrections to good effect.
    888886
    889887The ubercal analysis was re-run for PV3 by the Harvard group.  For the
    … …  
    952950DVO internal representation in which the zero point of each image is
    953951split into three main components:
    954 \[
     952\begin{equation}
    955953zp_{\rm total} = zp_{\rm nominal} + M_{cal} + K_{\rm \lambda}(\sec \zeta - 1)
    956 \]
     954\end{equation}
    957955where $zp_{\rm nominal}$ and $K_{\rm \lambda}$ are static values for
    958956each filter representing respectively the nominal zero point and the
    … …  
    978976\hline
    979977\hline
    980 {\bf Filter} & {\bf Zero Point (Raw)} & {\bf Zero Point (Calspec)} & {\bf Airmass Slope} \\
     978{\bf Filter} & {\bf Zero Point} & {\bf Zero Point} & {\bf Airmass Slope} \\
     979 & {\bf (Raw)} & {\bf (Calspec)} & \\
    981980\hline
    982981\gps & 24.563 & 24.583 & 0.147 \\
    … …  
    995994tables, it also updates the individual measurements associated with
    996995those images.  In the DVO database schema, the normalized instrumental
    997 magnitude, $M_{\rm inst} = -2.5log_{10} (DN / sec) + 25.0$ are stored
    998 for each measurement.  The value of 25.0 is an arbitrary (but fixed)
    999 constant offset to place the instrumental magnitudes into
     996magnitude, $M_{\rm inst} = -2.5log_{10} (DN / sec)$ is stored
     997for each measurement, with an arbitrary (but fixed)
     998constant offset of 25 to place the modified instrumental magnitudes into
    1000999approximately the correct range.  Associated with each measurement are
    10011000two correction magnitudes: $M_{\rm cal}$ and $M_{\rm flat}$, along
    … …  
    10091008(`relative') magnitude is determined from the stored database values
    10101009as:
    1011 \[
    1012 M_{\rm rel} = M_{\rm inst} - 25.0 + zp_{\rm ref} + M_{\rm cal} + M_{\rm flat} + K_\lambda (sec \zeta - 1).
    1013 \]
     1010\begin{equation}
     1011M_{\rm rel} = M_{\rm inst} + zp_{\rm ref} + M_{\rm cal} + M_{\rm flat} + K_\lambda (sec \zeta - 1).
     1012\end{equation}
    10141013The calibration offsets, $M_{\rm cal}$ and $M_{\rm flat}$, represent
    10151014the per-exposure zero point correction and the slowly-changing
    … …  
    10451044are related by arithmetic magnitude offsets which account for effects
    10461045such as the instrumental variations and atmospheric attenuation. 
    1047 \[
     1046\begin{equation}
    10481047M_{rel} = m_{inst} + ZP + M_{cal}
    1049 \]
     1048\end{equation}
    10501049
    10511050From the collection of measurements, we can generate an average
    10521051magnitude for a single star (or other object):
    1053 \[ M_{ave} = \frac{\sum_i M_{rel,i} w_i}{\sum_i w_i} \]
     1052\begin{equation}
     1053  M_{ave} = \frac{\sum_i M_{rel,i} w_i}{\sum_i w_i}
     1054\end{equation}
    10541055We find that the color difference of the different chips can be
    10551056ignored, and set the color-trend slope to 0.0.  Note that we only use
    … …  
    10631064finding the best mean magnitudes for all objects and the best
    10641065$M_{\rm cal}$ offset for each exposure:
    1065 \[ \chi^2 = \sum_{i,j} (m_{inst}[i,j] + ZP + K \zeta + M_{clouds}[i] - M_{ave}[j]) w_{i,j} / \sum_{i,j} w_{i,j} \]
     1066\begin{equation}
     1067  \chi^2 = \frac{\sum_{i,j} (m_{inst}[i,j] + ZP + K \zeta +
     1068    M_{clouds}[i] - M_{ave}[j]) w_{i,j}}{\sum_{i,j} w_{i,j}}
     1069\end{equation}
    10661070
    10671071If everything were fitted at once and allowed to float, this system of
    … …  
    10871091We attempt to exclude these poor measurements in advance by rejecting
    10881092measurements which the photometric analysis has flagged the result as
    1089 suspcious.  We reject detections which are excessively masked; these include
     1093suspicious.  We reject detections which are excessively masked; these include
    10901094detections which are too close to other bright objects, diffraction
    10911095spikes, ghost images, or the detector edges.  However, these
    … …  
    11331137% \note{do we drop this when calculating the final mean mags?}
    11341138% \note{do I need to present the math?}
    1135 \[ \mu = \frac{\sum m_i w_i \sigma_i^{-2}}{\sum w_i \sigma_i^{-2}} \]
    1136 \[ \sigma_\mu = \frac{\sum w_i^2 \sigma_i^{-2}}{(\sum w_i \sigma_i^{-2})^2} \]
     1139\begin{equation}
     1140  \mu = \frac{\sum m_i w_i \sigma_i^{-2}}{\sum w_i \sigma_i^{-2}}
     1141\end{equation}
     1142\begin{equation}
     1143  \sigma_\mu = \frac{\sum w_i^2 \sigma_i^{-2}}{(\sum w_i
     1144    \sigma_i^{-2})^2}
     1145\end{equation}
    11371146
    11381147The calculation of the relative photometry zero points is performed
    … …  
    11581167 \begin{center}
    11591168  \begin{minipage}{0.85\linewidth}
    1160    \includegraphics[width=\textwidth,clip]{{pics/photflat.example}.png}
     1169   \includegraphics[width=\textwidth,clip]{{pics/photflat.example.sm}.png}
    11611170  \end{minipage}
    11621171  \hspace{-2.75in}
    … …  
    11701179The iterations described above (calculate mean
    11711180magnitudes, calculate zero points, calculate new measurements) are
    1172 peformed on each of the 73 region hosts in parallel.  However, between
     1181performed on each of the 73 region hosts in parallel.  However, between
    11731182certain iteration steps, the region hosts must share some information.
    11741183After mean object magnitudes are calculated, the region hosts must
    … …  
    11851194the 73 region hosts.  A process is then launched on each of the region
    11861195hosts which is responsible for managing the image calibration analysis
    1187 on that host.  These processes in turn make an intial request of the
     1196on that host.  These processes in turn make an initial request of the
    11881197photometry information (object and measurement) from the 100 parallel
    11891198DVO partition machines.  In practice, the processes on the the region
    … …  
    12111220analysis.
    12121221
    1213 \begin{figure}[htbp]
     1222\begin{figure*}[htbp]
    12141223  \begin{center}
    12151224%width=\hsize
    1216  \includegraphics[height=\vsize,clip]{{pics/allsky.photom.sigma}.png}
     1225 \includegraphics[height=\vsize,clip]{{pics/allsky.photom.sigma.sm}.png}
    12171226  \caption{\label{fig:allsky.photom.sigma} Consistency of photometry
    12181227    measurements across the sky.  Each panel shows a map of the
    … …  
    12231232    single-measurement errors for bright stars.}
    12241233  \end{center}
    1225 \end{figure}
     1234\end{figure*}
    12261235
    12271236%% \note{need to discuss the process of setting the final mean magnitudes}
    … …  
    13071316for photometry tied to the PSF model and a second for the
    13081317aperture-like measurements (total aperture magnitudes, Kron magnitude,
    1309 cicular fixed-radius aperture magnitudes).  This split is needed
     1318circular fixed-radius aperture magnitudes).  This split is needed
    13101319because of the limited quality of the stack PSF photometry due to the
    13111320highly variable PSF in the stacks.  Aperture magnitudes, however, are
    … …  
    13261335\subsection{Photometry Calibration Quality}
    13271336
    1328 Figure~\ref{fig:allsky.photom.sigma} shows the standard devitions of
     1337Figure~\ref{fig:allsky.photom.sigma} shows the standard deviations of
    13291338the mean residual photometry for bright stars as a function of
    13301339position across the sky.  For each pixel in these images, we selected
    … …  
    13651374
    13661375Once the image photometric calibrations (zero points and flat-field
    1367 corrections) have been determined and applied to the measuremetns from
     1376corrections) have been determined and applied to the measurements from
    13681377each image, we can calculate the best average photometry for each
    13691378object.  We calculate average magnitudes for the chip photometry; for
    … …  
    13981407The ranking values are defined as follows:
    13991408\begin{itemize}
    1400 \item {\bf rank 0 :} perfect measurment (no quality concerns)
     1409\item {\bf rank 0 :} perfect measurement (no quality concerns)
    14011410\item {\bf rank 1 :} PSF ``perfect pixel'' quality factor (\code{PSF_QF_PERFECT}) $< 0.85$.  \code{PSF_QF_PERFECT} measures the PSF-weighted fraction of pixels which are not masked \citep[see][]{magnier2017.analysis}.
    1402 \item {\bf rank 2 :} Photometry analysis flag field (\code{photFlags}) has one of the ``poor quality'' bits raised.  These bits are listed below; OR-ed together they have the hexideciaml value \code{0xe0440130}
     1411\item {\bf rank 2 :} Photometry analysis flag field (\code{photFlags}) has one of the ``poor quality'' bits raised.  These bits are listed below; OR-ed together they have the hexadecimal value \code{0xe0440130}
    14031412\begin{itemize}
    14041413  \item {\tt PM\_SOURCE\_MODE\_POOR = 0x00000010} : Fit succeeded, but with low-S/N or high-Chisq
    … …  
    14191428  \code{PSF_QF} measures the PSF-weighted fraction of pixels which are
    14201429  not masked as ``bad'', but may be ``suspect''.  Bad values are
    1421   blank, highly non-linear or non-responsibe; suspect pixels include
     1430  blank, highly non-linear or non-responsive; suspect pixels include
    14221431  those pixels on ghosts, diffraction spikes, bright star bleeds, and
    14231432  the mildly-saturated cores of bright stars.  Suspect values may have
    … …  
    14401449%%   IMAGE_OFFSET = 2.0 mag
    14411450%%   IMAGE_SCATTER = 0.075 mag
    1442 \item {\bf rank 6 :} Photometry analysis flag field (\code{photFlags}) has one of the ``bad quality'' bits raised.  These bits are listed below; OR-ed together they have the hexideciaml value \code{0x1003bc88}
     1451\item {\bf rank 6 :} Photometry analysis flag field (\code{photFlags}) has one of the ``bad quality'' bits raised.  These bits are listed below; OR-ed together they have the hexadecimal value \code{0x1003bc88}
    14431452\begin{itemize}
    14441453  \item {\tt PM\_SOURCE\_MODE\_FAIL = 0x00000008} : Non-linear fit failed (non-converge, off-edge, run to zero)
    … …  
    14691478
    14701479Rank values are assigned exclusively starting from the highest values:
    1471 if a measurements satisfieds the rule for \eg, rank 6, it will not be
     1480if a measurements satisfies the rule for \eg, rank 6, it will not be
    14721481tested for ranks 5 and lower.  After all measurements have been
    14731482assigned a ranking value, the set of all measurements with the common
    … …  
    15121521error, is used to modify the standard weight.  We use a Cauchy
    15131522function to define a new weight:
    1514 \[
     1523\begin{equation}
    15151524\omega^\prime = \frac{\omega}{1 + r^2}
    1516 \]
     1525\end{equation}
    15171526using
    1518 \[
     1527\begin{equation}
    15191528r = \frac{F_o - F_i}{\sigma}
    1520 \]
     1529\end{equation}
    15211530where $F_o$ is the average magnitude (or flux for forced-warp
    15221531photometry), $F_i$ is the measured magnitude (or flux), $\sigma$ is
    … …  
    15621571bootstrap-resampled measurement of the error may be artificially
    15631572small.  We record the maximum of the bootstrap-sampling error and the
    1564 formal error from the weighted average calculation.  The minimumn and
     1573formal error from the weighted average calculation.  The minimum and
    15651574maximum of the unclipped values are also recorded for the chip
    15661575photometry.
    … …  
    16461655from the same skycell for each object.  Also note that a faint object,
    16471656near the detection limit of the stack, may be detected on a
    1648 secondary skycell but not (due to statistical flucuations) be detected
     1657secondary skycell but not (due to statistical fluctuations) be detected
    16491658on the corresponding primary skycell.  Thus it is expected that some
    16501659objects may be lacking any primary detections.
    … …  
    17021711 \includegraphics[width=\hsize,clip]{{pics/KHexample}.png}
    17031712  \caption{\label{fig:KHexample} Illustration of the Koppenh\"ofer Effect
    1704     on chip XY04.  In each plot, the solid line shows the measured
     1713    on chip XY04.  {\bf Bottom left} X-direction before correction.  The solid line shows the measured
    17051714    mean residual for stars detected on this chip as a function of the
    1706     instrumental magnitude / FWHM$^2$.  {\bf bottom left} X-direction before correction. 
    1707 {\bf bottom right} Y-direction before correction. 
    1708 {\bf top left} X-direction after correction. 
    1709 {\bf top right} Y-direction after correction.  }
     1715    instrumental magnitude / FWHM$^2$. 
     1716{\bf Bottom right} Y-direction before correction. 
     1717{\bf Top left} X-direction after correction. 
     1718{\bf Top right} Y-direction after correction.  }
    17101719  \end{center}
    17111720\end{figure*}
    … …  
    17161725  \caption{\label{fig:KHmap} Map of the amplitude of the
    17171726    Koppenh\"ofer Effect on chips across the focal plane.  In the
    1718     affected chips, bright stars are up to 0.2 \note{arcsec} deviant
    1719     from their expected positions. {\bf bottom left} X-direction before
    1720     correction.  {\bf bottom right} Y-direction before correction.  {\bf
    1721       top left} X-direction after correction.  {\bf top right}
     1727    affected chips, bright stars are up to 0.2 arcsec deviant
     1728    from their expected positions. {\bf Bottom left} X-direction before
     1729    correction.  {\bf Bottom right} Y-direction before correction.  {\bf
     1730      Top left} X-direction after correction.  {\bf Top right}
    17221731    Y-direction after correction.}
    17231732  \end{center}
    … …  
    17621771The Koppenh\"ofer Effect was first identified in February 2011 by
    17631772Johannes Koppenh\"ofer (MPE) as part of the effort to search for
    1764 planet transists in the Stellar Transit Survey data.  He noticed that
    1765 the astromety of bright stars and faint stars disagreed on overlapping
     1773planet transits in the Stellar Transit Survey data.  He noticed that
     1774the astrometry of bright stars and faint stars disagreed on overlapping
    17661775chips at the boundary between the STS fields.  After some exploration,
    17671776it was determined that the X coordinate of the brightest stars was
    … …  
    18321841angle.  For each filter, we determine the DCR trend as a function of
    18331842the difference between the star color and the reference star color,
    1834 using the red or blue color approriate to the particular filter, times
     1843using the red or blue color appropriate to the particular filter, times
    18351844the tangent of the zenith distance.  Figure~\ref{fig:DCRexample} shows the
    18361845DCR trend for the 5 filters \grizy, as well as the measured
    … …  
    18491858The amplitude of the DCR trend in the five filters is $(g,r,i,z,y) =
    18501859(0.010, 0.001, -0.003, -0.017, -0.021)$ arcsec airmass$^{-1}$
    1851 magntiude$^{-1}$.  We saturate the DCR correction if the term $color
     1860magnitude$^{-1}$.  We saturate the DCR correction if the term $color
    18521861TAN (\zeta)$ for a given measurement is outside a range where the
    18531862DCR correction is well measured.  The maximum DCR correction applied
    … …  
    18591868\begin{figure*}[htbp]
    18601869 \begin{center}
    1861  \includegraphics[width=0.85\textwidth,clip]{{pics/astroflat.gri}.png}
     1870 \includegraphics[width=0.85\textwidth,clip]{{pics/astroflat.gri.sm}.png}
    18621871 \caption{\label{fig:astroflat.gri} High-resolution astrometric flat-field correction images for $gri$.}
    18631872 \end{center}
    … …  
    18661875\begin{figure*}[htbp]
    18671876 \begin{center}
    1868  \includegraphics[width=0.85\textwidth,clip]{{pics/astroflat.zy}.png}
     1877 \includegraphics[width=0.85\textwidth,clip]{{pics/astroflat.zy.sm}.png}
    18691878 \caption{\label{fig:astroflat.zy} High-resolution astrometric flat-field correction images for $zy$.}
    18701879 \end{center}
    … …  
    18911900The dominant pattern in the astrometric residual is roughly a series
    18921901of concentric rings. The pattern is similar to the pattern of the
    1893 focal surface residuals measured by \cite{onaka.spie}, which also has
     1902focal surface residuals measured by \cite{2008SPIE.7014E..0DO}, which also has
    18941903a concentric series of rings with similar spacing.  The ``tent'' in
    18951904the center of the focal surface is reflected in these astrometry
    … …  
    19611970per-measurement position errors. 
    19621971
    1963 Figure~\ref{fig:allsky.astrom.sigma} shows the standard devitions of
     1972Figure~\ref{fig:allsky.astrom.sigma} shows the standard deviations of
    19641973the mean residual astrometry in $(\alpha,\delta)$ for bright stars as
    19651974a function of position across the sky.  For each pixel in these
    … …  
    19972006than the \approx 17 mas value in that earlier analysis.  We attribute
    19982007this degradation to the noise introduced by the astrometric
    1999 flat-field.
    2000 
    2001 \note{This noise has been addressed for the DR2 release of the
    2002   individual measurement data.  show updated maps and residuals}
     2008flat-field.  This noise has been addressed for the DR2 release
     2009of the individual measurement data.
    20032010
    20042011\begin{figure}[htbp]
    … …  
    20392046
    20402047The initial analysis of the PV2 astrometry used the 2MASS positions as
    2041 an inertial constraint: the 2MASS coordiates were included in the
     2048an inertial constraint: the 2MASS coordinates were included in the
    20422049calculation of the mean positions for the objects in the database,
    20432050with weight corresponding to the reported astrometric errors.  In this
    … …  
    20642071and PS1 epoch (\approx 2012).  Since we are fitting the image
    20652072calibrations without fitting for the proper motions of the stars, we
    2066 are in essencence forcing those stars to have proper motions of 0.0.
     2073are in essence forcing those stars to have proper motions of 0.0.
    20672074The background quasars would then be observed to have proper motions
    20682075corresponding to the proper motions of the reference stars, but in the
    … …  
    20802087star mean position is then translated to the expected position at the
    20812088epoch of that image.  The image calibration is then performed relative
    2082 to these predicted postions.  This process naturally accounts for the
     2089to these predicted positions.  This process naturally accounts for the
    20832090proper motion of the reference stars.  In order to make the
    20842091calibrations consistent with the observed coordinates of an external
    … …  
    20892096
    20902097In order to perform this analysis, we need estimated distances for
    2091 every reference star used in the analysis.  Green et al (REF)
     2098every reference star used in the analysis.  \cite{2014ApJ...783..114G}
    20922099performed SED fitting for 800M stars in the 3$\pi$ region using PV2
    20932100data.  The goal of this work was to determine the 3D structure of the
    … …  
    21042111and Solar motion parameters ($U_{\rm sol}, V_{\rm sol}, W_{\rm sol}$)
    21052112= (9.32, 11.18, 7.61) km sec$^{-1}$ as determined by
    2106 \cite{1997MNRAS.291..683F} using Hipparcos data.  Proper motions are
     2113\cite{1997MNRAS.291..683F} using Hipparchus data.  Proper motions are
    21072114determined from the following:
    21082115\begin{eqnarray}
    … …  
    21122119\mu^{\rm sol}_{b} & = & \frac{(U \cos(l) + V \sin(l)) \sin(b) - W \cos(b)}{d}
    21132120\end{eqnarray}
    2114 where $d$ is the distance and $l,b$ are the Galactic coordintes of the
     2121where $d$ is the distance and $l,b$ are the Galactic coordinates of the
    21152122star. Note that the proper motion induced by
    21162123%% \note{some reference for this?} 
    … …  
    21792186to $g-r$ and $g-i$ colors.  This transformation reproduces Gaia
    21802187photometry reasonably well for stars which are not too red.  For a
    2181 comparison, we have seleted all PS1 stars with Gaia measurements
     2188comparison, we have selected all PS1 stars with Gaia measurements
    21822189meeting the following criteria: $14 < i < 19$, with at least 10 total
    21832190measurements, within a modest color range $0.2 < g - r < 0.9$.  We
    … …  
    22102217% set Gr = -0.090 + gr*gi*0.229 + gi*(-0.207+gi*(gi*0.015 - 0.250)) + gr*(0.491+gr*(-0.021*gr - 0.052))
    22112218
    2212 %\[
     2219%\begin{equation}
    22132220%G - r = -0.09 + 0.229(g-r)(g-r) + (g-i)((
    22142221
    … …  
    22472254median differences are ($\sigma_\alpha, \sigma_\delta) = (4, 3)$
    22482255milliarcseconds.
     2256
     2257For a future data release, we will recalibrate the Pan-STARRS $3\pi$
     2258astrometry using the Gaia DR2 release.  The addition of Gaia-measured
     2259proper motions will obviate the need to correct for the Galactic rotation.
    22492260
    22502261\subsection{Calculation of Object Astrometry}
    … …  
    23762387
    23772388\bibliographystyle{apj}
    2378 \bibliography{lib}{}
    2379 % \input{calibration.bbl}
     2389% \bibliography{lib}{}
     2390\input{calibration.bbl}
    23802391
    23812392\end{document}

  • trunk/doc/release.2015/ps1.detrend/detrend.bbl

    r40567 r40614  
    1 \begin{thebibliography}{16}
     1\begin{thebibliography}{19}
    22\expandafter\ifx\csname natexlab\endcsname\relax\def\natexlab#1{#1}\fi
    33
    … …  
    4747  {Shiao}, B. 2016, ArXiv e-prints
    4848
     49\bibitem[{{Hodapp} {et~al.}(2004){Hodapp}, {Siegmund}, {Kaiser}, {Chambers},
     50  {Laux}, {Morgan}, \& {Mannery}}]{2004SPIE.5489..667H}
     51{Hodapp}, K.~W., {Siegmund}, W.~A., {Kaiser}, N., {Chambers}, K.~C., {Laux},
     52  U., {Morgan}, J., \& {Mannery}, E. 2004, in \procspie, Vol. 5489,
     53  Ground-based Telescopes, ed. J.~M. {Oschmann}, Jr., 667--678
     54
    4955\bibitem[{{Huber} {et~al.}(2017){Huber}, {TBD}, {TBD}, \& et~al.}]{huber2017}
    5056{Huber}, M., {TBD}, A., {TBD}, B., \& et~al. 2017, ArXiv e-prints
    … …  
    8793  C.~W., \& {Wainscoast}, R.~J. 2016{\natexlab{b}}, ArXiv e-prints
    8894
     95\bibitem[{{Onaka} {et~al.}(2008){Onaka}, {Tonry}, {Isani}, {Lee}, {Uyeshiro},
     96  {Rae}, {Robertson}, \& {Ching}}]{2008SPIE.7014E..0DO}
     97{Onaka}, P., {Tonry}, J.~L., {Isani}, S., {Lee}, A., {Uyeshiro}, R., {Rae}, C.,
     98  {Robertson}, L., \& {Ching}, G. 2008, in \procspie, Vol. 7014, Ground-based
     99  and Airborne Instrumentation for Astronomy II, 70140D
     100
    89101\bibitem[{{Price} {et~al.}(2017){Price}, {TBD}, {TBD}, \& et~al.}]{price2017}
    90102{Price}, P.~A., {TBD}, A., {TBD}, B., \& et~al. 2017, ArXiv e-prints
    … …  
    99111  {Rix}, H.-W., {Stubbs}, C.~W., {Tonry}, J.~L., \& {Wainscoat}, R.~J. 2012,
    100112  \apj, 756, 158
     113
     114\bibitem[{{Tonry} \& {Onaka}(2009)}]{2009amos.confE..40T}
     115{Tonry}, J. \& {Onaka}, P. 2009, in Advanced Maui Optical and Space
     116  Surveillance Technologies Conference, E40
    101117
    102118\bibitem[{{Tonry} {et~al.}(2012){Tonry}, {Stubbs}, {Lykke}, {Doherty},

  • trunk/doc/release.2015/ps1.detrend/detrend.tex

    r40602 r40614  
    1 \documentclass[10pt,preprint]{aastex}
    2 %\documentclass[iop,floatfix]{emulateapj}
     1%\documentclass[10pt,preprint]{aastex}
     2\documentclass[iop,floatfix]{emulateapj}
    33
    44\pdfoutput=1
    … …  
    845845excludes.
    846846
    847 \subsubsubsection{Electronic crosstalk ghosts}
     847\paragraph{Electronic crosstalk ghosts}
    848848\label{sec:crosstalk}
    849849
    … …  
    904904\end{deluxetable}
    905905
    906 \subsubsubsection{Optical ghosts}
     906\paragraph{Optical ghosts}
    907907\label{sec:optical_ghosts}
    908908
    … …  
    990990\end{figure}
    991991
    992 \subsubsubsection{Optical glints}
     992\paragraph{Optical glints}
    993993\label{sec:glints}
    994994
    … …  
    10211021\end{figure}
    10221022
    1023 \subsubsubsection{Diffraction Spikes and Saturated Stars}
     1023\paragraph{Diffraction Spikes and Saturated Stars}
    10241024\label{sec:diffraction_spikes}
    10251025
Note: See TracChangeset for help on using the changeset viewer.