adsabs/AstroCLIMB huggingface dataset:
Paper: CEERS Epoch 1 NIRCam Imaging: Reduction Methods and Simulations Enabling Early JWST Science Results
Authors: Micaela B. Bagley, Steven L. Finkelstein, Anton M. Koekemoer, Henry C. Ferguson, Pablo Arrabal Haro, Mark Dickinson, Jeyhan S. Kartaltepe, Casey Papovich, Pablo G. Pérez-González, Nor Pirzkal, Rachel S. Somerville, Christopher N. A. Willmer, Guang Yang, L. Y. Aaron Yung, Adriano Fontana, Andrea Grazian, Norman A. Grogin, Michaela Hirschmann, Lisa J. Kewley, Allison Kirkpatrick, Dale D. Kocevski, Jennifer M. Lotz, Aubrey Medrano, Alexa M. Morales, Laura Pentericci, Swara Ravindranath, Jonathan R. Trump, Stephen M. Wilkins, Antonello Calabrò, M. C. Cooper, Luca Costantin, Alexander de la Vega, Bryan Hilbert, Taylor A. Hutchison, Rebecca L. Larson, Ray A. Lucas, Elizabeth J. McGrath, Russell Ryan, Xin Wang, Stijn Wuyts
Figure caption: An illustration of the CEERS NIRCam observations, using NIRCam1 as an example. We show an SW (F200W) mosaic on the top left and an LW (F277W) mosaic on the bottom left. The SW and LW detectors are labeled in blue and red, respectively. The large module gap is visible in both mosaics, and the SW detector gaps are visible in the F200W mosaic. The CEERS filter throughput curves are plotted in the middle, with SW filters shown in purple-blue and LW filters in orange-red. Along the right edge, we show 29″ × 29″ zoom-ins of the mosaic, with the same portion of the HST F160W mosaic displayed on top for reference. The black bars in the lower right corners of the zoom-in panels indicate a 5″ scale. We note that the orientation of this image is flipped 180° with respect to the orientation of the NIRCam field of view in documentation. The orientation of this figure matches that of the NIRCam mosaics released as part of CEERS DR0.5.
Paper: CEERS Epoch 1 NIRCam Imaging: Reduction Methods and Simulations Enabling Early JWST Science Results
Authors: Micaela B. Bagley, Steven L. Finkelstein, Anton M. Koekemoer, Henry C. Ferguson, Pablo Arrabal Haro, Mark Dickinson, Jeyhan S. Kartaltepe, Casey Papovich, Pablo G. Pérez-González, Nor Pirzkal, Rachel S. Somerville, Christopher N. A. Willmer, Guang Yang, L. Y. Aaron Yung, Adriano Fontana, Andrea Grazian, Norman A. Grogin, Michaela Hirschmann, Lisa J. Kewley, Allison Kirkpatrick, Dale D. Kocevski, Jennifer M. Lotz, Aubrey Medrano, Alexa M. Morales, Laura Pentericci, Swara Ravindranath, Jonathan R. Trump, Stephen M. Wilkins, Antonello Calabrò, M. C. Cooper, Luca Costantin, Alexander de la Vega, Bryan Hilbert, Taylor A. Hutchison, Rebecca L. Larson, Ray A. Lucas, Elizabeth J. McGrath, Russell Ryan, Xin Wang, Stijn Wuyts
Figure caption: The persistence in the additional F200W imaging in NIRCam2. The top row shows persistent or scattered light present in A3 images of commissioning program 1022, in which Jupiter was observed on detector A1. These two images are displayed with the same zscale stretch to highlight how the illumination pattern is fading with time. One of the CEERS F200W exposures obtained ∼6 hr later is displayed in the bottom left panel, where the same pattern is visible. We constructed a mask of pixels with elevated counts in both images from program 1022, shown in the bottom right panel. We then manually masked the pixels within the red histogram, necessary to mask the fainter edges of the pattern that otherwise are present in the final mosaic. None of the other detectors contain clear signatures of persistence. Regardless, a future reduction will include a more careful treatment of persistence in these observations.
Paper: CEERS Epoch 1 NIRCam Imaging: Reduction Methods and Simulations Enabling Early JWST Science Results
Authors: Micaela B. Bagley, Steven L. Finkelstein, Anton M. Koekemoer, Henry C. Ferguson, Pablo Arrabal Haro, Mark Dickinson, Jeyhan S. Kartaltepe, Casey Papovich, Pablo G. Pérez-González, Nor Pirzkal, Rachel S. Somerville, Christopher N. A. Willmer, Guang Yang, L. Y. Aaron Yung, Adriano Fontana, Andrea Grazian, Norman A. Grogin, Michaela Hirschmann, Lisa J. Kewley, Allison Kirkpatrick, Dale D. Kocevski, Jennifer M. Lotz, Aubrey Medrano, Alexa M. Morales, Laura Pentericci, Swara Ravindranath, Jonathan R. Trump, Stephen M. Wilkins, Antonello Calabrò, M. C. Cooper, Luca Costantin, Alexander de la Vega, Bryan Hilbert, Taylor A. Hutchison, Rebecca L. Larson, Ray A. Lucas, Elizabeth J. McGrath, Russell Ryan, Xin Wang, Stijn Wuyts
Figure caption: Diagnostic plots of the CEERS NIRCam astrometric alignment. In the lefts panel we show the offsets for sources detected in all four pointings when compared with their positions in the HST F160W mosaic. The right panels show astrometric offsets compared with positions in the NIRCam F150W mosaic. The black points in the scatter plots show the offsets for source positions in the F277W images, and the orange cross indicates the median astrometric offset. The filled histograms show the distribution of offsets in R.A. and decl. for F277W source positions, and the open histogram shows the same for source positions in the F200W images. We show both an SW filter and an LW filter to indicate the quality of the astrometry in both channels. The red circles have a radius of 0.″03, or 1 pixel in the output mosaics. Both cases show a median offset consistent with 0 and an rms scatter less than 1 pixel. The rms of the HST-to-NIRCam alignment is ∼12–15 mas, while that of the NIRCam-to-NIRCam alignment is ∼5–10 mas, generally smaller for the SW filters and larger for the LW filters. In the left panel, the green histogram indicates the F200W distribution excluding NIRCam3, the field that exhibits larger offsets relative to HST (see the text for details). The F277W distribution excluding NIRCam3 is very similar.