SPIRE point source photometry: within the Herschel interactive processing environment (HIPE) |
| |
Authors: | Chris Pearson Tanya Lim Chris North George Bendo Luca Conversi Darren Dowell Matt Griffin Terry Jin Nicolas Laporte Andreas Papageorgiou Bernhard Schulz Dave Shupe Anthony J. Smith Kevin Xu |
| |
Affiliation: | 1. RAL Space, STFC Rutherford Appleton Laboratory, Didcot, Oxon, OX11 0QX, UK 2. The Open University, Milton Keynes, MK7 6AA, UK 3. School of Physics and Astronomy, Cardiff University, The Parade, Cardiff, CF24 3AA, UK 4. UK ALMA Regional Centre Node, Jodrell Bank Centre for Astrophysics, School of Physics and Astronomy, University of Manchester, Oxford Road, Manchester, M13 9PL, UK 5. Herschel Science Centre, ESAC, ESA, Villanueva de la Canada, 28691, Madrid, Spain 6. NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory, 4800 Oak Grove Drive, Pasadena, CA, 91109, USA 7. Department of Physics and Astronomy, University College London, London, WC1E 6BT, UK 8. Instituto de Astrofisica de Canarias, Calle Via Lactea, 38205, La Laguna, Spain 9. NASA Herschel Science Centre, IPAC, 770 South Wilson Avenue, Pasadena, CA, 91125, USA 10. Astronomy Centre, University of Sussex, Brighton, BN1 9QH, UK 11. Bluesky Spectroscopy, Lethbridge, Canada
|
| |
Abstract: | The different algorithms appropriate for point source photometry on data from the SPIRE instrument on-board the Herschel Space Observatory, within the Herschel Interactive Processing Environment (HIPE) are compared. Point source photometry of a large ensemble of standard calibration stars and dark sky observations is carried out using the 4 major methods within HIPE: SUSSEXtractor, DAOphot, the SPIRE Timeline Fitter and simple Aperture Photometry. Colour corrections and effective beam areas as a function of the assumed source spectral index are also included to produce a large number of photometric measurements per individual target, in each of the 3 SPIRE bands (250, 350, 500μm), to examine both the accuracy and repeatability of each of the 4 algorithms. It is concluded that for flux densities down to the level of 30mJy that the SPIRE Timeline Fitter is the method of choice. However, at least in the 250 and 350μm bands, all 4 methods provide photometric repeatability better than a few percent down to at approximately 100mJy. The DAOphot method appears in many cases to have a systematic offset of ~8 % in all SPIRE bands which may be indicative of a sub-optimal aperture correction. In general, aperture photometry is the least reliable method, i.e. largest scatter between observations, especially in the longest wavelength band. At the faintest fluxes, <30mJy, SUSSEXtractor or DAOphot provide a better alternative to the Timeline Fitter. |
| |
Keywords: | |
本文献已被 SpringerLink 等数据库收录! |
|