adsabs/AstroCLIMB huggingface dataset:
Paper: Transiting Exoplanet Yields for the Roman Galactic Bulge Time Domain Survey Predicted from Pixel-level Simulations
Authors: Robert F. Wilson, Thomas Barclay, Brian P. Powell, Joshua Schlieder, Christina Hedges, Benjamin T. Montet, Elisa Quintana, Iain Mcdonald, Matthew T. Penny, Néstor Espinoza, Eamonn Kerins
Figure caption: Simulated false-color image of the adopted GBTDS field created by RImTimSim. (A) A 512 × 512 pixel RGB image, which corresponds to ∼0.09% of the full WFI field of view. The pixel scale is demonstrated by the white bar in the top right corner. The combined image consists of a 215 s exposure in the F184 bandpass, a 46.8 s exposure in the F146 bandpass, and a 180 s exposure in the F087 bandpass for the red, green, and blue channels, respectively. The red box is a 5″ × 5″ cutout with more detail shown in subfigures (B)–(E). (B)–(E) A zoomed-in version of the red box in (A), showing each individual RGB component, as well as the combined image. The individual bandpass images (B), (C), and (D) are on a logarithmic scale, while the RGB images (A) and (E) are scaled to highlight the diffraction spikes using a modified version of the algorithm from Lupton et al. (2004).
Paper: Transiting Exoplanet Yields for the Roman Galactic Bulge Time Domain Survey Predicted from Pixel-level Simulations
Authors: Robert F. Wilson, Thomas Barclay, Brian P. Powell, Joshua Schlieder, Christina Hedges, Benjamin T. Montet, Elisa Quintana, Iain Mcdonald, Matthew T. Penny, Néstor Espinoza, Eamonn Kerins
Figure caption: A light curve of a transiting planet, in a particularly crowded region, generated from multiple apertures in our synthetic images. Each panel is labeled with the aperture radius, measured MES, and crowding (Γ c ). The black line shows the injected signal, and the teal line shows the diluted transit signal after fitting for Γ c . The white circles show the relative flux averaged in bins of 15 minutes, the observing cadence.
Paper: Transiting Exoplanet Yields for the Roman Galactic Bulge Time Domain Survey Predicted from Pixel-level Simulations
Authors: Robert F. Wilson, Thomas Barclay, Brian P. Powell, Joshua Schlieder, Christina Hedges, Benjamin T. Montet, Elisa Quintana, Iain Mcdonald, Matthew T. Penny, Néstor Espinoza, Eamonn Kerins
Figure caption: The field considered in this study, with the seven proposed GBTDS fields from Penny et al. (2019) overlaid on an H-band extinction map of the Galactic Center. Also shown for the sake of comparison are a few well-studied fields, the Stanek window (l = 0.°25, b = − 2.°15; green), the SWEEPS field (l = 1.°24, b = − 2.°67; blue), and Sagittarius A* (orange). The extinction map was calculated from the reddening map of Surot et al. (2020) using extinction ratios from Alonso-García et al. (2017).
Paper: Transiting Exoplanet Yields for the Roman Galactic Bulge Time Domain Survey Predicted from Pixel-level Simulations
Authors: Robert F. Wilson, Thomas Barclay, Brian P. Powell, Joshua Schlieder, Christina Hedges, Benjamin T. Montet, Elisa Quintana, Iain Mcdonald, Matthew T. Penny, Néstor Espinoza, Eamonn Kerins
Figure caption: The combined planet detection sensitivity via transit and microlensing in the Roman Galactic Bulge Time Domain Survey. The contours show the sum of the transit survey efficiency multiplied by the number of stars searched and the microlensing survey efficiency from Penny et al. (2019). The green/blue points show our sample of detected planets for one field of the GBTDS. The green points denote conservative requirements of >1 transit per season (≥7 total), and the blue points denote liberal detection requirements of ≤1 transit per season (<7 total), including single-transiting systems. Both transiting planet yields assume our default simulation parameters and adopt the mass–radius relationship from Chen & Kipping (2017) to convert from planet radius to planet mass. The orange points show the simulated catalog of detected microlensing planets from Penny et al. (2019). The solar system planets are also included at their respective masses and semimajor axes for reference. The planets with fewer than seven transits should overlap significantly with the microlensing sample in this parameter space.
Paper: Transiting Exoplanet Yields for the Roman Galactic Bulge Time Domain Survey Predicted from Pixel-level Simulations
Authors: Robert F. Wilson, Thomas Barclay, Brian P. Powell, Joshua Schlieder, Christina Hedges, Benjamin T. Montet, Elisa Quintana, Iain Mcdonald, Matthew T. Penny, Néstor Espinoza, Eamonn Kerins
Figure caption: The transiting planet yield as a function of distance. The top row is the transit yield assuming the default planet occurrence, and the bottom row is the yield after taking metallicity correlations into account. Left panels: The planet yield labeled by planet size. Middle panels: The planet yield labeled by spectral type. Right panels: The planet yield labeled by Galactic stellar population.
Paper: Transiting Exoplanet Yields for the Roman Galactic Bulge Time Domain Survey Predicted from Pixel-level Simulations
Authors: Robert F. Wilson, Thomas Barclay, Brian P. Powell, Joshua Schlieder, Christina Hedges, Benjamin T. Montet, Elisa Quintana, Iain Mcdonald, Matthew T. Penny, Néstor Espinoza, Eamonn Kerins
Figure caption: The seeing-limited flux distribution of sources in the GBTDS. Each row is centered on a source of different magnitude, and each column represents a different seeing limit. The pink circles represent fiber entrance apertures of diameters 0.″5 (dashed) and 1.″0 (solid). In good seeing conditions (∼0.″5), ground-based observations are limited to sources with J ≲ 18. Sources with J < 20 can be followed up with a 0.″5 diameter fiber, if the PSF can be controlled to FWHM ≈ 0.″3.
Paper: Transiting Exoplanet Yields for the Roman Galactic Bulge Time Domain Survey Predicted from Pixel-level Simulations
Authors: Robert F. Wilson, Thomas Barclay, Brian P. Powell, Joshua Schlieder, Christina Hedges, Benjamin T. Montet, Elisa Quintana, Iain Mcdonald, Matthew T. Penny, Néstor Espinoza, Eamonn Kerins
Figure caption: The relative change in yield per field as a function of planet size for changes in survey parameters. Each color represents planets of a different size. Jupiters are shown in orange, sub-Saturns in pink, sub-Neptunes in teal, and super-Earths in blue. Top: The relative change in yield with sector duration, which is equal to the observing cadence. Bottom: The relative change in yield as a function of season duration.
Paper: Transiting Exoplanet Yields for the Roman Galactic Bulge Time Domain Survey Predicted from Pixel-level Simulations
Authors: Robert F. Wilson, Thomas Barclay, Brian P. Powell, Joshua Schlieder, Christina Hedges, Benjamin T. Montet, Elisa Quintana, Iain Mcdonald, Matthew T. Penny, Néstor Espinoza, Eamonn Kerins
Figure caption: The combined, expected differential photometric precision over a period of one hour. Top: The expected noise distribution given the crowding at each apparent magnitude. The dashed lines show the average noise contributions from crowding (pink), photon noise (orange), and semisaturation (teal), while the blue line gives the average total noise as a function of apparent magnitude. Bottom: The measured differential photometric precision for each injected source with ﹩{\rm{S}}/{{\rm{N}}}_{\exp }\gt 10﹩. The blue dashed line is the same as in the top panel, and the noise model for an isolated star from Penny et al. (2019) is included as a comparison (orange).
Paper: Transiting Exoplanet Yields for the Roman Galactic Bulge Time Domain Survey Predicted from Pixel-level Simulations
Authors: Robert F. Wilson, Thomas Barclay, Brian P. Powell, Joshua Schlieder, Christina Hedges, Benjamin T. Montet, Elisa Quintana, Iain Mcdonald, Matthew T. Penny, Néstor Espinoza, Eamonn Kerins
Figure caption: The fraction of injected transit signals that were detected (p det) as a function of expected signal-to-noise ratio (﹩{\rm{S}}/{{\rm{N}}}_{\exp }﹩). Top: The fraction of transits detected as p det calculated from the full sample of generated light curves. The dashed gray line shows an error function with σ = 1 centered on ﹩{\rm{S}}/{{\rm{N}}}_{\exp }=8.0﹩, which is the expectation from the formulation of our simulated matched-filter detection pipeline. The teal circles show the measured p det in ﹩{\rm{S}}/{{\rm{N}}}_{\exp }﹩ bins of width 0.2, and the teal line shows our fit to those points. Bottom: Our logistic fits to the injection sample split into different magnitude ranges. Due primarily to crowding, p det is more efficient for brighter stars, except for the brightest stars in the sample, where our noise model underestimates the impact of semisaturation effects, causing ﹩{\rm{S}}/{{\rm{N}}}_{\exp }﹩ to be overestimated.
Paper: Transiting Exoplanet Yields for the Roman Galactic Bulge Time Domain Survey Predicted from Pixel-level Simulations
Authors: Robert F. Wilson, Thomas Barclay, Brian P. Powell, Joshua Schlieder, Christina Hedges, Benjamin T. Montet, Elisa Quintana, Iain Mcdonald, Matthew T. Penny, Néstor Espinoza, Eamonn Kerins
Figure caption: The total transiting planet yields for the Galactic Bulge Time Domain Survey for differing combinations of spectral type and planet size. For each combination, we report two values for the yield. The bottom number (green/blue, orange/pink bar) is the yield under the conservative requirement of more than one transit per season (n tran ≥ 7), while the top number (gray bar) is the yield considering all planets with at least one transit in the full survey. Top left: The number of detected transiting planets with stellar hosts brighter than F146 = 19.5 mag. Top right: The transiting planet yields for all stars brighter than F146 = 21 mag. Bottom: The same as the top row, but assuming the relation between planet occurrence and stellar metallicity described in Section 2.3.1.
Paper: Transiting Exoplanet Yields for the Roman Galactic Bulge Time Domain Survey Predicted from Pixel-level Simulations
Authors: Robert F. Wilson, Thomas Barclay, Brian P. Powell, Joshua Schlieder, Christina Hedges, Benjamin T. Montet, Elisa Quintana, Iain Mcdonald, Matthew T. Penny, Néstor Espinoza, Eamonn Kerins
Figure caption: The overall transit survey efficiency, η, defined as the product of the probability a planet transits across our line of sight (p tra), the probability that the telescope observes the minimum number of required transits (p win), and the probability that the transit signal is detected (p det); ﹩\eta ={p}_{\mathrm{tra}}\times {p}_{\mathrm{win}}\times {p}_{\det }﹩. Top left: The survey efficiency for a bright Sunlike star requiring a minimum of seven transits. Top right: The survey efficiency for a dim Sunlike star requiring a minimum of seven transits. Bottom left: The survey efficiency for a bright Sunlike star requiring a minimum of one transit. Bottom right: The survey efficiency for a dim Sunlike star requiring a minimum of one transit.
Paper: Transiting Exoplanet Yields for the Roman Galactic Bulge Time Domain Survey Predicted from Pixel-level Simulations
Authors: Robert F. Wilson, Thomas Barclay, Brian P. Powell, Joshua Schlieder, Christina Hedges, Benjamin T. Montet, Elisa Quintana, Iain Mcdonald, Matthew T. Penny, Néstor Espinoza, Eamonn Kerins
Figure caption: The stellar host metallicity distribution functions of the GBTDS transiting planet sample for differing planet radius ranges. Each panel shows the distribution assuming a constant occurrence rate (gray), the distribution when scaling the planet occurrence as a function of metallicity (colored), and the distribution of field stars with F146 < 21 mag (dashed line). Metallicity differences in the default occurrence distributions with respect to field stars reflect the Galactic metallicity distribution function convolved with the transit detection efficiency for each particular planet size.
Paper: Transiting Exoplanet Yields for the Roman Galactic Bulge Time Domain Survey Predicted from Pixel-level Simulations
Authors: Robert F. Wilson, Thomas Barclay, Brian P. Powell, Joshua Schlieder, Christina Hedges, Benjamin T. Montet, Elisa Quintana, Iain Mcdonald, Matthew T. Penny, Néstor Espinoza, Eamonn Kerins
Figure caption: Example light curves for two simulated sources with transits injected at the pixel level. In each row of figures, the left panel shows the light curve (gray points), along with the injected signal before (black line) and after (blue line) adjusting for crowding. The right panels show a ∼2″ × 2″ cutout of the region surrounding the star of interest. Nearby stars brighter than F146 = 24 are denoted by a white “x,” with their sizes indicative of their brightness. The figure label gives relevant information on the simulated system, including its recovered significance (MES) and crowding (Γ c ).
Paper: Transiting Exoplanet Yields for the Roman Galactic Bulge Time Domain Survey Predicted from Pixel-level Simulations
Authors: Robert F. Wilson, Thomas Barclay, Brian P. Powell, Joshua Schlieder, Christina Hedges, Benjamin T. Montet, Elisa Quintana, Iain Mcdonald, Matthew T. Penny, Néstor Espinoza, Eamonn Kerins
Figure caption: The fraction of total flux from the WFI pixel-response function (PRF) captured as a function of aperture radius. The circles are the aperture radii considered in this work and the dashed vertical lines denote the pixel scale.
Paper: Transiting Exoplanet Yields for the Roman Galactic Bulge Time Domain Survey Predicted from Pixel-level Simulations
Authors: Robert F. Wilson, Thomas Barclay, Brian P. Powell, Joshua Schlieder, Christina Hedges, Benjamin T. Montet, Elisa Quintana, Iain Mcdonald, Matthew T. Penny, Néstor Espinoza, Eamonn Kerins
Figure caption: The F146 distribution of stars in the GBTDS, by stellar type. In both figures, the vertical dashed lines show the magnitude range considered in this study. Top: The number of monitored stars below a given magnitude. Bottom: The stellar density, in units of stars per unit solid angle per magnitude.
Paper: Statistical Analysis of Long GRBs’ Prompt Emission and X-Ray Flares: Multivariate Clustering and Correlations
Authors: Joseph Saji, Shabnam Iyyani, Kratika Mazde
Figure caption: Comparisons of the distribution of the prompt emission properties E iso, T 90, α, and energy fluence of GRBs with and without X-ray flares are shown.
Paper: Edge-on Low-surface-brightness Galaxy Candidates Detected from SDSS Images Using YOLO
Authors: Yongguang Xing, Zhenping Yi, Zengxu Liang, Hao Su, Wei Du, Min He, Meng Liu, Xiaoming Kong, Yude Bu, Hong Wu
Figure caption: An edge-on LSBG in a labeled bounding box. The image is one of the training samples, which is a gri-band composite image of SDSS DR16 obtained from the SAS.
Paper: Edge-on Low-surface-brightness Galaxy Candidates Detected from SDSS Images Using YOLO
Authors: Yongguang Xing, Zhenping Yi, Zengxu Liang, Hao Su, Wei Du, Min He, Meng Liu, Xiaoming Kong, Yude Bu, Hong Wu
Figure caption: Images of six edge-on LSBG samples in SDSS DR7.
Paper: Edge-on Low-surface-brightness Galaxy Candidates Detected from SDSS Images Using YOLO
Authors: Yongguang Xing, Zhenping Yi, Zengxu Liang, Hao Su, Wei Du, Min He, Meng Liu, Xiaoming Kong, Yude Bu, Hong Wu
Figure caption: Distribution of confidence for all the labeled edge-on LSBGs in the test set detected by the YOLOv5m model.
Paper: Edge-on Low-surface-brightness Galaxy Candidates Detected from SDSS Images Using YOLO
Authors: Yongguang Xing, Zhenping Yi, Zengxu Liang, Hao Su, Wei Du, Min He, Meng Liu, Xiaoming Kong, Yude Bu, Hong Wu
Figure caption: The normalized distribution of μ 0,B  of the training edge-on LSBGs and the detected candidate LSBGs. The red and blue vertical lines are marked at the peaks of the training samples and detected samples, respectively.
Paper: Edge-on Low-surface-brightness Galaxy Candidates Detected from SDSS Images Using YOLO
Authors: Yongguang Xing, Zhenping Yi, Zengxu Liang, Hao Su, Wei Du, Min He, Meng Liu, Xiaoming Kong, Yude Bu, Hong Wu
Figure caption: Six candidate LSBGs identified by our object detection model, which are also included in the galaxy view of SDSS DR16 (the first two rows). And three candidate LSBGs identified by our model, which are not included in the galaxy view of SDSS DR16 (the last row).
Paper: Edge-on Low-surface-brightness Galaxy Candidates Detected from SDSS Images Using YOLO
Authors: Yongguang Xing, Zhenping Yi, Zengxu Liang, Hao Su, Wei Du, Min He, Meng Liu, Xiaoming Kong, Yude Bu, Hong Wu
Figure caption: Distribution of axis ratio vs. B-band central surface brightness for training and detected samples in g band (left panel) and r band (right panel).
Paper: Edge-on Low-surface-brightness Galaxy Candidates Detected from SDSS Images Using YOLO
Authors: Yongguang Xing, Zhenping Yi, Zengxu Liang, Hao Su, Wei Du, Min He, Meng Liu, Xiaoming Kong, Yude Bu, Hong Wu
Figure caption: The distribution of the anomaly scores. The left panel shows a scatter plot, and the right panel is a histogram plot. The red line in the scatter plot represents the upper limit of 0.49.
Paper: Edge-on Low-surface-brightness Galaxy Candidates Detected from SDSS Images Using YOLO
Authors: Yongguang Xing, Zhenping Yi, Zengxu Liang, Hao Su, Wei Du, Min He, Meng Liu, Xiaoming Kong, Yude Bu, Hong Wu
Figure caption: Examples of anomalous sources detected by the model. Their anomaly scores are 0.67, 1.00, 2.12, 2.44, 6.74, and 11.14, respectively.
Paper: Edge-on Low-surface-brightness Galaxy Candidates Detected from SDSS Images Using YOLO
Authors: Yongguang Xing, Zhenping Yi, Zengxu Liang, Hao Su, Wei Du, Min He, Meng Liu, Xiaoming Kong, Yude Bu, Hong Wu
Figure caption: Color–magnitude relation for the detected candidate LSBGs (black) and training edge-on LSBGs (red). The green line is the dividing line between “red”-sequence galaxies and “blue” cloud galaxies (Bernardi et al. 2010).
Paper: Edge-on Low-surface-brightness Galaxy Candidates Detected from SDSS Images Using YOLO
Authors: Yongguang Xing, Zhenping Yi, Zengxu Liang, Hao Su, Wei Du, Min He, Meng Liu, Xiaoming Kong, Yude Bu, Hong Wu
Figure caption: Distribution of axis ratio in g band and r band of the training edge-on LSBGs (top panel) and identified candidate LSBGs (bottom panel).
Paper: Edge-on Low-surface-brightness Galaxy Candidates Detected from SDSS Images Using YOLO
Authors: Yongguang Xing, Zhenping Yi, Zengxu Liang, Hao Su, Wei Du, Min He, Meng Liu, Xiaoming Kong, Yude Bu, Hong Wu
Figure caption: Two candidates detected by the model in an SDSS composite image, with the confidence of the candidates predicted by our model.
Paper: Finding Multiply Lensed and Binary Quasars in the DESI Legacy Imaging Surveys
Authors: C. Dawes, C. Storfer, X. Huang, G. Aldering, Aleksandar Cikota, Arjun Dey, D. J. Schlegel
Figure caption: Legacy Surveys image cutouts alongside spectra from SNIFS on UH88 for 18 observed candidates with sufficient S/N ratio. We perform a correlation between the spectra and the SDSS quasar spectral template. Here we report the best-matched redshift. For each system, the spectrum is shown in orange, with the error spectrum in magenta shading. Redshifted templates are shown in blue, with the black lines representing emission features. DESI-237.7387 + 02.3629 was previously observed by SDSS with consistent redshift. Note that, for some systems, only the blue channel of SNIFS was available at the time of observation.
Paper: Finding Multiply Lensed and Binary Quasars in the DESI Legacy Imaging Surveys
Authors: C. Dawes, C. Storfer, X. Huang, G. Aldering, Aleksandar Cikota, Arjun Dey, D. J. Schlegel
Figure caption: The DESI Legacy Imaging Surveys footprint in an equal-area Aitoff projection in equatorial coordinates. The dotted line separates the north (MzLS/BASS) and south (DECaLS) subregions. Slightly above δ = 32°, there is a small amount of overlap between MzLS/BASS and DECaLS. Patches with different shades of blue indicate the depth in the z band (5σ detection significance). “Discoverable” lensed quasars and other known lensed quasars (see Section 3, Table 1) within the Legacy Surveys footprint are overlaid.
Paper: Finding Multiply Lensed and Binary Quasars in the DESI Legacy Imaging Surveys
Authors: C. Dawes, C. Storfer, X. Huang, G. Aldering, Aleksandar Cikota, Arjun Dey, D. J. Schlegel
Figure caption: Ten visually impressive candidates. The naming convention is R.A. and decl. in decimal format. The top right corner of each image indicates its grade. North is up, and east is to the left. DESI-118.5478 + 10.4849 is a potential quad and the other nine are doubles. Note that observation by the blue channel of SNIFS did not detect quasar features in DESI-090.5672-43.5945, possibly due to the low S/N of the spectrum.
Paper: Finding Multiply Lensed and Binary Quasars in the DESI Legacy Imaging Surveys
Authors: C. Dawes, C. Storfer, X. Huang, G. Aldering, Aleksandar Cikota, Arjun Dey, D. J. Schlegel
Figure caption: In this figure, we show representative configurations of the “discoverable confirmed” lensed quasar systems. The left panel consists of doubles: the first column shows systems that require deblending; the second column shows small-image-separation systems (<2.″5); and the third column shows large-image-separation systems (≳2.″5). The right panel consists of quads: the first column shows systems that require deblending and the second column shows systems that do not.
Paper: Finding Multiply Lensed and Binary Quasars in the DESI Legacy Imaging Surveys
Authors: C. Dawes, C. Storfer, X. Huang, G. Aldering, Aleksandar Cikota, Arjun Dey, D. J. Schlegel
Figure caption: Grade A, B, and C candidates overlaid on the DESI Legacy Surveys (see Figure 1) are shown as red, orange, and yellow dots, respectively (those without Gaia data as triangles; see Section 4.1). Note that the 94 “discoverable known” systems are not included. Candidates with spectroscopic redshifts from SDSS DR16 (see Section 4.2.2) are outlined by a black diamond.
Paper: Finding Multiply Lensed and Binary Quasars in the DESI Legacy Imaging Surveys
Authors: C. Dawes, C. Storfer, X. Huang, G. Aldering, Aleksandar Cikota, Arjun Dey, D. J. Schlegel
Figure caption: Distributions of g-, r-, and z-band magnitudes of the images of new candidates and “discoverable confirmed” systems. Note that the distributions of our candidates are fainter than the “discoverable confirmed” systems.
Paper: Finding Multiply Lensed and Binary Quasars in the DESI Legacy Imaging Surveys
Authors: C. Dawes, C. Storfer, X. Huang, G. Aldering, Aleksandar Cikota, Arjun Dey, D. J. Schlegel
Figure caption: Histogram of separations between lensed quasar images for the 94 “discoverable known” systems (see the text).
Paper: Finding Multiply Lensed and Binary Quasars in the DESI Legacy Imaging Surveys
Authors: C. Dawes, C. Storfer, X. Huang, G. Aldering, Aleksandar Cikota, Arjun Dey, D. J. Schlegel
Figure caption: The first 80 of our newly discovered candidates by ascending R.A., grouped by grade. For the naming convention, see the Figure 6 caption. The top right corner of each image indicates its grade. North is up, and east to the left. Additional information about each system can be found in Table 2.
Paper: Finding Multiply Lensed and Binary Quasars in the DESI Legacy Imaging Surveys
Authors: C. Dawes, C. Storfer, X. Huang, G. Aldering, Aleksandar Cikota, Arjun Dey, D. J. Schlegel
Figure caption: The distributions of significance of both PM and parallax in the images of our newly discovered candidates and of “discoverable confirmed” systems (see Table 1).