adsabs/AstroCLIMB huggingface dataset:
Paper: The First Data Release of CNIa0.02—A Complete Nearby (Redshift <0.02) Sample of Type Ia Supernova Light Curves  
Authors: Ping Chen, Subo Dong, C. S. Kochanek, K. Z. Stanek, R. S. Post, M. D. Stritzinger, J. L. Prieto, Alexei V. Filippenko, Juna A. Kollmeier, N. Elias-Rosa, Boaz Katz, Lina Tomasella, S. Bose, Chris Ashall, S. Benetti, D. Bersier, Joseph Brimacombe, Thomas G. Brink, P. Brown, David A. H. Buckley, Enrico Cappellaro, Grant W. Christie, Morgan Fraser, Mariusz Gromadzki, Thomas W.-S. Holoien, Shaoming Hu, Erkki Kankare, Robert Koff, P. Lundqvist, S. Mattila, P. A. Milne, Nidia Morrell, J. A. Muñoz, Robert Mutel, Tim Natusch, Joel Nicolas, A. Pastorello, Simon Prentice, Tyler Roth, B. J. Shappee, Geoffrey Stone, Todd A. Thompson, Steven Villanueva, and WeiKang Zheng
Figure caption: Distribution of all available direct Δm15(B) measurements for 129 SNe Ia in DR1 (left panel) and 95 SNe Ia in the complete sample (right panel).
Paper: The First Data Release of CNIa0.02—A Complete Nearby (Redshift <0.02) Sample of Type Ia Supernova Light Curves  
Authors: Ping Chen, Subo Dong, C. S. Kochanek, K. Z. Stanek, R. S. Post, M. D. Stritzinger, J. L. Prieto, Alexei V. Filippenko, Juna A. Kollmeier, N. Elias-Rosa, Boaz Katz, Lina Tomasella, S. Bose, Chris Ashall, S. Benetti, D. Bersier, Joseph Brimacombe, Thomas G. Brink, P. Brown, David A. H. Buckley, Enrico Cappellaro, Grant W. Christie, Morgan Fraser, Mariusz Gromadzki, Thomas W.-S. Holoien, Shaoming Hu, Erkki Kankare, Robert Koff, P. Lundqvist, S. Mattila, P. A. Milne, Nidia Morrell, J. A. Muñoz, Robert Mutel, Tim Natusch, Joel Nicolas, A. Pastorello, Simon Prentice, Tyler Roth, B. J. Shappee, Geoffrey Stone, Todd A. Thompson, Steven Villanueva, and WeiKang Zheng
Figure caption: Observing protocol for the CNIa0.02 complete sample.
Paper: The First Data Release of CNIa0.02—A Complete Nearby (Redshift <0.02) Sample of Type Ia Supernova Light Curves  
Authors: Ping Chen, Subo Dong, C. S. Kochanek, K. Z. Stanek, R. S. Post, M. D. Stritzinger, J. L. Prieto, Alexei V. Filippenko, Juna A. Kollmeier, N. Elias-Rosa, Boaz Katz, Lina Tomasella, S. Bose, Chris Ashall, S. Benetti, D. Bersier, Joseph Brimacombe, Thomas G. Brink, P. Brown, David A. H. Buckley, Enrico Cappellaro, Grant W. Christie, Morgan Fraser, Mariusz Gromadzki, Thomas W.-S. Holoien, Shaoming Hu, Erkki Kankare, Robert Koff, P. Lundqvist, S. Mattila, P. A. Milne, Nidia Morrell, J. A. Muñoz, Robert Mutel, Tim Natusch, Joel Nicolas, A. Pastorello, Simon Prentice, Tyler Roth, B. J. Shappee, Geoffrey Stone, Todd A. Thompson, Steven Villanueva, and WeiKang Zheng
Figure caption: The filter bandpasses used to obtain the majority of data released in this paper (solid lines). The standard Landolt BV and SDSS ri bandpasses (dashed lines) are shown for comparison.
Paper: The Value-added Catalog for LAMOST DR8 Low-resolution Spectra
Authors: Chun Wang, Yang Huang, Haibo Yuan, Huawei Zhang, Maosheng Xiang, and Xiaowei Liu
Figure caption: The distributions of the LGMWAS training stars (top panels) and test stars (bottom panels) in the (MBp − MRp)–MG, (MJ − MKs)–MH, (﹩{M}_{B}-{M}_{{r}_{A}}﹩)–MV (APASS bands), (Mg − Mi)–Mr (SDSS bands), and (MW1 − MW2)–MW1 planes. The number of stars in the training and test sets are labeled in each panel. Typical errors of these absolute magnitudes and colors of the LGMWAS training sample are indicated by the error bars (blue cross) in each panel. The error bar in the y-axis is hard to see because the error of absolute magnitude is much smaller than its coverage.
Paper: The Value-added Catalog for LAMOST DR8 Low-resolution Spectra
Authors: Chun Wang, Yang Huang, Haibo Yuan, Huawei Zhang, Maosheng Xiang, and Xiaowei Liu
Figure caption: The comparison of photometric absolute magnitudes (MGphot, estimated based on the distance modulus) and absolute magnitudes derived from LAMOST spectra (MGNN) for the Gaia EDR3 G band of the initial 6000 training stars. Black dots are the stars in the final LGMWAS training sample. Red dots are the possible binary stars. Blue dots are stars beyond 1.5σ. Typical errors of MGphot and MGNN are indicated by the error bars (blue cross) at the top left.
Paper: The Value-added Catalog for LAMOST DR8 Low-resolution Spectra
Authors: Chun Wang, Yang Huang, Haibo Yuan, Huawei Zhang, Maosheng Xiang, and Xiaowei Liu
Figure caption: Relative internal residuals of our stellar parameters given by duplicate observations of similar spectral S/N at different spectral S/N bins. Black dots are the differences of duplicate observations of S/N differences smaller than 10%. Blue dots and error bars represent the medians and standard deviations (after divided by ﹩\sqrt{2}﹩) of the relative residuals in the individual spectral S/N bins. Red lines indicate fits of the standard deviations as a function of spectral S/N. The standard deviation values of relative internal residuals at S/N = 20, 50, 100 are respectively shown at the bottom of each panel from left to right.
Paper: The Value-added Catalog for LAMOST DR8 Low-resolution Spectra
Authors: Chun Wang, Yang Huang, Haibo Yuan, Huawei Zhang, Maosheng Xiang, and Xiaowei Liu
Figure caption: Comparing the effective temperatures provided by Gaia-ESO DR3 (left panel) and APOGEE DR16 (right panel) with that derived from LAMOST spectra based on neural network models using LAMOST–PASTEL stars as a training set. The offset and standard deviations of the difference between the two comparisons are marked in each panel. The difference is also overplotted at the bottom of each panel. The effective temperatures of Gaia-ESO DR3 and APOGEE DR16 minus that derived from LAMOST spectra are ΔTeff. Typical errors of APOGEE Teff and our estimated Teff are indicated by the error bars (blue cross) in the left panel.
Paper: The Value-added Catalog for LAMOST DR8 Low-resolution Spectra
Authors: Chun Wang, Yang Huang, Haibo Yuan, Huawei Zhang, Maosheng Xiang, and Xiaowei Liu
Figure caption: Comparing our log g values estimated using LAMOST–PASTEL (bottom panels) and LAMOST–APOGEE (top panels) as training sets with asteroseismic log g (left panels) and log g from APOGEE DR16 (right panels). The offset and standard deviations are marked in each panel. The difference is also overplotted at the bottom of each panel. The asteroseismic log g and APOGEE log g minus that derived from LAMOST spectra are ﹩{\rm{\Delta }}\mathrm{log}\,g﹩. Typical errors of asteroseismic/APOGEE log g and our estimated log g are indicated by the error bars (blue cross) in each panel.
Paper: The Value-added Catalog for LAMOST DR8 Low-resolution Spectra
Authors: Chun Wang, Yang Huang, Haibo Yuan, Huawei Zhang, Maosheng Xiang, and Xiaowei Liu
Figure caption: Comparing the [Fe/H] provided by Gaia-ESO DR3 with our [Fe/H] measurements using the LAMOST–PASTEL (left panel) and LAMOST–APOGEE (right panel) stellar sample as training sets. The offset and standard deviations of the difference between the two comparisons are marked in each panel. The difference is also overplotted at the bottom of each panel. The [Fe/H] values derived from LAMOST spectra minus that provided by Gaia-ESO DR3 are Δ[Fe/H]. The horizontal lines and dashed lines indicate μ and μ ± σ, respectively.
Paper: The Value-added Catalog for LAMOST DR8 Low-resolution Spectra
Authors: Chun Wang, Yang Huang, Haibo Yuan, Huawei Zhang, Maosheng Xiang, and Xiaowei Liu
Figure caption: Similar to Figure 8, but for the comparisons with the [Fe/H] values of APOGEE DR16. Typical errors of our two kinds of [Fe/H] and APOGEE [Fe/H] are indicated by the error bars (blue cross) in each panel.
Paper: The Value-added Catalog for LAMOST DR8 Low-resolution Spectra
Authors: Chun Wang, Yang Huang, Haibo Yuan, Huawei Zhang, Maosheng Xiang, and Xiaowei Liu
Figure caption: The metallicity (estimated using LAMOST–PASTEL common stars as training sample) variations with Teff of cluster members in the four OCs of Melotte 20, Melotte 22, NGC 2632, NGC 2682. The mean value μ and standard deviations σ of the metallicity are marked in each panel. The red line indicates the mean value μ, the red dashed lines indicate the μ minus/plus σ dex. The gray lines show the error of each metallicity estimate.
Paper: The Value-added Catalog for LAMOST DR8 Low-resolution Spectra
Authors: Chun Wang, Yang Huang, Haibo Yuan, Huawei Zhang, Maosheng Xiang, and Xiaowei Liu
Figure caption: The distributions of LAMOST–PASTEL training set (black dots) and stars in these four OCs with significantly underestimated [Fe/H] values (blue stars) in the plane of Teff–log g. The stars with significantly underestimated [Fe/H] values are 3σ clipped stars. Typical errors of Teff and log g are indicated by the error bars (blue cross) at the top left of the figure.
Paper: The Value-added Catalog for LAMOST DR8 Low-resolution Spectra
Authors: Chun Wang, Yang Huang, Haibo Yuan, Huawei Zhang, Maosheng Xiang, and Xiaowei Liu
Figure caption: Similar to Figure 10, but for the results of [Fe/H] estimations using LAMOST–APOGEE common stars as the training set.
Paper: The Value-added Catalog for LAMOST DR8 Low-resolution Spectra
Authors: Chun Wang, Yang Huang, Haibo Yuan, Huawei Zhang, Maosheng Xiang, and Xiaowei Liu
Figure caption: Comparisons between the chemical abundance estimates provided by APOGEE DR16 and that derived from LAMOST spectra based on the neural network method using LAMOST–APOGEE common stars as a training set. The offset and standard deviations of the difference between the two kinds of chemical abundance measurements are marked in each panel. The difference is also overplotted at the bottom of each panel. The chemical abundance of APOGEE DR16 minus that derived from LAMOST spectra is Δ[M/H], Δ[α/M], Δ[C/Fe], or Δ[N/Fe]. Typical errors of the chemical abundance of us and APOGEE are indicated by the error bars (blue cross) at the top left of each panel.
Paper: The Value-added Catalog for LAMOST DR8 Low-resolution Spectra
Authors: Chun Wang, Yang Huang, Haibo Yuan, Huawei Zhang, Maosheng Xiang, and Xiaowei Liu
Figure caption: Similar to Figure 10, but for results of [M/H] estimations using LAMOST–APOGEE common stars as a training set.
Paper: The Value-added Catalog for LAMOST DR8 Low-resolution Spectra
Authors: Chun Wang, Yang Huang, Haibo Yuan, Huawei Zhang, Maosheng Xiang, and Xiaowei Liu
Figure caption: Similar to Figure 10, but for results of [α/M] estimations using LAMOST–APOGEE common stars as a training set.
Paper: The Value-added Catalog for LAMOST DR8 Low-resolution Spectra
Authors: Chun Wang, Yang Huang, Haibo Yuan, Huawei Zhang, Maosheng Xiang, and Xiaowei Liu
Figure caption: Similar to Figure 10, but for results of [C/Fe] estimations using LAMOST–APOGEE common stars as a training set.
Paper: The Value-added Catalog for LAMOST DR8 Low-resolution Spectra
Authors: Chun Wang, Yang Huang, Haibo Yuan, Huawei Zhang, Maosheng Xiang, and Xiaowei Liu
Figure caption: Similar to Figure 10, but for results of [N/Fe] estimations using LAMOST–APOGEE common stars as a training set.
Paper: The Value-added Catalog for LAMOST DR8 Low-resolution Spectra
Authors: Chun Wang, Yang Huang, Haibo Yuan, Huawei Zhang, Maosheng Xiang, and Xiaowei Liu
Figure caption: The distributions of LAMOST–APOGEE training stars (black dots) and stars with significantly underestimated [N/Fe] (blue stars) in the Teff–log g plane. The stars with significantly underestimated [N/Fe] values are 3σ clipped stars. Typical errors of Teff and log g are indicated by the error bars (blue cross) at the top left of the figure.
Paper: The Value-added Catalog for LAMOST DR8 Low-resolution Spectra
Authors: Chun Wang, Yang Huang, Haibo Yuan, Huawei Zhang, Maosheng Xiang, and Xiaowei Liu
Figure caption: [C/N] variations with log g of cluster members in the open cluster of NGC 2682. [C/N] is equal to [C/Fe]−[N/Fe]. The gray lines show the error of each [C/N] value.
Paper: The Value-added Catalog for LAMOST DR8 Low-resolution Spectra
Authors: Chun Wang, Yang Huang, Haibo Yuan, Huawei Zhang, Maosheng Xiang, and Xiaowei Liu
Figure caption: Comparisons between the photometric absolute magnitudes estimated based on the distance modulus and absolute magnitudes derived from LAMOST spectra. The offset and standard deviations are marked in each panel. The difference is also overplotted at the bottom of each panel. The absolute magnitudes based on the distance modulus minus that derived from LAMOST spectra are ΔM. Typical errors of these absolute magnitudes are also indicated by the error bars (blue cross) at the top left of each panel. However, they are hard to see because the typical errors are very small.
Paper: The Value-added Catalog for LAMOST DR8 Low-resolution Spectra
Authors: Chun Wang, Yang Huang, Haibo Yuan, Huawei Zhang, Maosheng Xiang, and Xiaowei Liu
Figure caption: The comparisons of our [Fe/H]–NN–PASTEL (left panel) and [Fe/H]–NN–VMP (right panel) values with the [Fe/H] values provided by Li et al. (2018) for VMP candidates. Our [Fe/H]–NN–VMP and [Fe/H]–NN–PASTEL minus [Fe/H]–Li–L are Δ[Fe/H]. Typical errors of [Fe/H] values of Li et al. (2018) and ours are indicated by the error bars (blue cross) at the bottom left of each panel.
Paper: The Value-added Catalog for LAMOST DR8 Low-resolution Spectra
Authors: Chun Wang, Yang Huang, Haibo Yuan, Huawei Zhang, Maosheng Xiang, and Xiaowei Liu
Figure caption: The comparisons of our [Fe/H]–NN–PASTEL (left panel) and [Fe/H]–NN–VMP (right panel) values with the [Fe/H] values derived from high-resolution spectra.
Paper: The Value-added Catalog for LAMOST DR8 Low-resolution Spectra
Authors: Chun Wang, Yang Huang, Haibo Yuan, Huawei Zhang, Maosheng Xiang, and Xiaowei Liu
Figure caption: The variations of systematic difference of our spectrophotometric distance and geometrical distance provided by Gaia EDR3 with our spectrophotometric distance. The geometrical distance minus our spectrophotometric distance is ΔDist. The black dashed line shows the spectrophotometric distance of 2.0 kpc.
Paper: The Value-added Catalog for LAMOST DR8 Low-resolution Spectra
Authors: Chun Wang, Yang Huang, Haibo Yuan, Huawei Zhang, Maosheng Xiang, and Xiaowei Liu
Figure caption: Spatial stellar number density distributions of the LAMOST DR8 stars in the disk X–Y (left panel) and X–Z (right panel) planes.
Paper: The Value-added Catalog for LAMOST DR8 Low-resolution Spectra
Authors: Chun Wang, Yang Huang, Haibo Yuan, Huawei Zhang, Maosheng Xiang, and Xiaowei Liu
Figure caption: The stellar number density distributions of the LAMOST DR8 stars in the Teff–log g (left panel), Teff–MG (medium panel), and (MBp − MRp)–MG (right panel) planes.
Paper: The Value-added Catalog for LAMOST DR8 Low-resolution Spectra
Authors: Chun Wang, Yang Huang, Haibo Yuan, Huawei Zhang, Maosheng Xiang, and Xiaowei Liu
Figure caption: The stellar number density distributions of the LAMOST DR8 stars in the [Fe/H]–[α/M] plane for dwarf (left panel) and giant (right panel) stars.
Paper: The Value-added Catalog for LAMOST DR8 Low-resolution Spectra
Authors: Chun Wang, Yang Huang, Haibo Yuan, Huawei Zhang, Maosheng Xiang, and Xiaowei Liu
Figure caption: Comparisons between the stellar atmospheric parameters coming from PASTEL and that derived from LAMOST spectra for training (top panels) and test (bottom panels) stars based on neural network models. The offset and standard deviations are marked in each panel. The difference is also overplotted at the bottom of each panel. The values of stellar atmospheric parameters coming from PASTEL minus that derived from LAMOST spectra are ΔTeff, ﹩{\rm{\Delta }}\mathrm{log}g﹩, or Δ[Fe/H]. Typical errors of Teff, ﹩\mathrm{log}g﹩, and [Fe/H] are indicated by the error bars (blue cross) at the bottom right of each panel.
Paper: The Value-added Catalog for LAMOST DR8 Low-resolution Spectra
Authors: Chun Wang, Yang Huang, Haibo Yuan, Huawei Zhang, Maosheng Xiang, and Xiaowei Liu
Figure caption: Comparisons between the stellar parameters coming from APOGEE and that derived from LAMOST spectra for LAMOST–APOGEE test stars based on neural network models. The offset and standard deviations are marked in each panel. The difference is also overplotted at the bottom of each panel. The values of stellar parameters coming from APOGEE minus that derived from LAMOST spectra are Δ[X/H], Δ[X/Fe], or ﹩{\rm{\Delta }}\mathrm{log}g﹩. The horizontal dashed lines indicate zero minus/plus 0.15 dex. Typical errors of chemical abundances and log g are indicated by the error bars (blue cross) at the bottom right of each panel.
Paper: The Value-added Catalog for LAMOST DR8 Low-resolution Spectra
Authors: Chun Wang, Yang Huang, Haibo Yuan, Huawei Zhang, Maosheng Xiang, and Xiaowei Liu
Figure caption: Comparisons between the photometric absolute magnitudes estimated based on the distance modulus and absolute magnitudes derived from LAMOST spectra for LGMWAS test stars based on neural network models. The offset and standard deviations are marked in each panel. The difference is also overplotted at the bottom of each panel. The absolute magnitudes based on the distance modulus minus that derived from LAMOST spectra are ΔM. The horizontal dashed lines indicate zero minus/plus 0.25 mag. Typical errors of these absolute magnitudes are also indicated by the error bars (blue cross) at the top left of each panel. However, they are hard to see because the typical errors are very small.
Paper: The Value-added Catalog for LAMOST DR8 Low-resolution Spectra
Authors: Chun Wang, Yang Huang, Haibo Yuan, Huawei Zhang, Maosheng Xiang, and Xiaowei Liu
Figure caption: Comparison between the [Fe/H] values coming from PASTEL and our improved [Fe/H] values for LAMOST–PASTEL [Fe/H] < − 1.0 dex training stars. The offset and standard deviation are marked in the figure. The difference is also overplotted at the bottom of the figure. The [Fe/H] values coming from PASTEL minus that derived from LAMOST spectra are Δ[Fe/H]. The horizontal dashed lines indicate zero minus/plus 0.2 dex. Typical errors of [Fe/H] of us and PASTEL are indicated by the error bars (blue cross) at the top left.
Paper: The Value-added Catalog for LAMOST DR8 Low-resolution Spectra
Authors: Chun Wang, Yang Huang, Haibo Yuan, Huawei Zhang, Maosheng Xiang, and Xiaowei Liu
Figure caption: The distributions of the 1281 LAMOST–PASTEL training stars in the Teff–log g (left panel) and Teff–[Fe/H] (right panel) planes. Typical errors of Teff, log g, and [Fe/H] of the LAMOST–PASTEL training sample are indicated by the error bars (blue cross) in each panel.
Paper: The Value-added Catalog for LAMOST DR8 Low-resolution Spectra
Authors: Chun Wang, Yang Huang, Haibo Yuan, Huawei Zhang, Maosheng Xiang, and Xiaowei Liu
Figure caption: The distributions of the LAMOST–APOGEE training stars (top panels) and test stars (bottom panels) in the Teff–log g, [M/H]–[α/M], [M/H]–[C/Fe], and [M/H]–[N/Fe] planes. The number of stars in the training and test sets are labeled in each panel. Typical errors of Teff, log g, [M/H], [C/Fe], and [N/Fe] of the LAMOST–APOGEE training sample are indicated by the error bars (blue cross) in each panel.
Paper: Optical Spectral Variations of a Large Sample of Fermi Blazars
Authors: Bing-Kai Zhang, Xiao-Yun Zhao, and Qi Wu
Figure caption: The optical light curve of 3C 454.3.
Paper: Optical Spectral Variations of a Large Sample of Fermi Blazars
Authors: Bing-Kai Zhang, Xiao-Yun Zhao, and Qi Wu
Figure caption: The relation between the optical B and R bands of 3C 454.3.
Paper: Optical Spectral Variations of a Large Sample of Fermi Blazars
Authors: Bing-Kai Zhang, Xiao-Yun Zhao, and Qi Wu
Figure caption: A sketch of the optical spectral behavior of blazars.
Paper: Whence the Interstellar Magnetic Field Shaping the Heliosphere?
Authors: P. C. Frisch, V. Piirola, A. B. Berdyugin, C. Heiles, A. A. Cole, K. Hill, A. M. Magalhães, S. J. Wiktorowicz, J. Bailey, D. V. Cotton, L. Kedziora-Chudczer, N. A. Schwadron, M. Bzowski, D. J. McComas, E. J. Zirnstein, H. O. Funsten, C. Harlingten, and Seth Redfield
Figure caption: Polarization position angles are shown with fan-shaped symbols for data where P/ΔP > 1.95, and with dots where P/ΔP < 1.95. Angular widths of the fan-shaped symbols show twice the measurement uncertainties of polarization position angles. Dot sizes are proportional to P/ΔP. The symbols “B,” “aB,” “N,” and “T” give the directions of the IBEX ribbon ISMF direction, 180° from that location, and the heliosphere nose and tail directions, respectively.
Paper: Whence the Interstellar Magnetic Field Shaping the Heliosphere?
Authors: P. C. Frisch, V. Piirola, A. B. Berdyugin, C. Heiles, A. A. Cole, K. Hill, A. M. Magalhães, S. J. Wiktorowicz, J. Bailey, D. V. Cotton, L. Kedziora-Chudczer, N. A. Schwadron, M. Bzowski, D. J. McComas, E. J. Zirnstein, H. O. Funsten, C. Harlingten, and Seth Redfield
Figure caption: Polarization position angles are mapped in Galactic (top left), celestial (top right), and nose-centered and tail-centered ecliptic coordinates (bottom left and bottom right). Cyan triangles indicate sightlines toward three compact QSOs aligned with Filament A (Section 5.3.2). Cyan “X” marks show Voyager 3 kHz emissions (Section 5.3.1). The two large cyan-colored circular arcs (upper left) are sections of circles centered at ℓ, b = 184°, –16° (“Arc 1”: λ, β = 74.°9, −5.°9, radius 63°) and ℓ, b = 180°, –16° (“Arc 2”: λ, β = 73.°0, −2.°5, radius 50°) The green line separates the hemispheres defined by Bmagpol < 0 and Bmagpol > 0, where Bmagpol represents the best-fitting ISMF orientation ℓ, b = 42°, 49° (Section 3). The B–V plane is plotted with a purple dashed–dotted line.
Paper: Whence the Interstellar Magnetic Field Shaping the Heliosphere?
Authors: P. C. Frisch, V. Piirola, A. B. Berdyugin, C. Heiles, A. A. Cole, K. Hill, A. M. Magalhães, S. J. Wiktorowicz, J. Bailey, D. V. Cotton, L. Kedziora-Chudczer, N. A. Schwadron, M. Bzowski, D. J. McComas, E. J. Zirnstein, H. O. Funsten, C. Harlingten, and Seth Redfield
Figure caption: Stereographic projections of polarization position angles are shown for a coordinate system centered on poles located at the best-fitting ISMF to all data, ℓ, b = 42°, 49°, and 180° away. Stars above/below the equator of the projection (the cyan dashed line) are shown in the left/right panels. Labels “45” and “0” denote the ℓ = 45°, and ℓ = 0° locations in the plane of the projections. The semicircular band of shaded squares displays the 1.7 keV IBEX ribbon from Year 1 of the IBEX mission. The green “N” marks the heliosphere nose direction.
Paper: Whence the Interstellar Magnetic Field Shaping the Heliosphere?
Authors: P. C. Frisch, V. Piirola, A. B. Berdyugin, C. Heiles, A. A. Cole, K. Hill, A. M. Magalhães, S. J. Wiktorowicz, J. Bailey, D. V. Cotton, L. Kedziora-Chudczer, N. A. Schwadron, M. Bzowski, D. J. McComas, E. J. Zirnstein, H. O. Funsten, C. Harlingten, and Seth Redfield
Figure caption: Left panel: all-sky Galactic-coordinate map of the normalized ﹩\widehat{{\chi }^{2}}﹩ for all 331 stars (Section 3). The minimum occurs near (l, b) = (42°, 49°). The middle panel displays the normalized ﹩\widehat{{\chi }^{2}}﹩ for the bmagpol > 0 (upfield) stars, and the right panel for bmagpol < 0 (downfield) stars. The line bmagpol = 0 in all three panels separates the bmagpol > 0 and bmagpol < 0 hemispheres. Blue asterisks show the locations of stars used in each analysis. “N” indicates the heliosphere nose. Red “Xs” represent the ISMF directions obtained from ENA ribbon centers measured by IBEX-Hi (Section 3).
Paper: Whence the Interstellar Magnetic Field Shaping the Heliosphere?
Authors: P. C. Frisch, V. Piirola, A. B. Berdyugin, C. Heiles, A. A. Cole, K. Hill, A. M. Magalhães, S. J. Wiktorowicz, J. Bailey, D. V. Cotton, L. Kedziora-Chudczer, N. A. Schwadron, M. Bzowski, D. J. McComas, E. J. Zirnstein, H. O. Funsten, C. Harlingten, and Seth Redfield
Figure caption: Ecliptic-coordinate maps of the probability density function (Equation (1)) of the location of the magnetic pole for upfield stars (left panel) and downfield stars (right panel). The PDF is represented both by gray scale (increased darkness indicates increased PDF) and two contours. The red contour is the 2σ contour, which envelopes 95.4% of the PDF, and the green contour is the 1σ contour (68.4%). Red X’s indicate locations of ribbon centers for the five IBEX energy bands of IBEX at energies 0.7, 1.1, 1.8, 2.7, and 4.3 keV, top to bottom (see text).