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 our wisp subtraction process. The top left panel shows the full extent of the wisps in an F200W mosaic of CEERS NIRCam pointing 1. We then illustrate the process of fitting the wisp templates using one F200W image from detector B4 as an example. We minimize the variance of the wisp template W scaled by a factor a and subtracted from the image I in order to find the best-fitting a (0.87 in this case). The bottom right panel shows a cleaned version of the F200W image where the wisp feature has been removed. The top right panel shows the full F200W mosaic for this pointing once the wisps are subtracted from all affected input images. The three images in the bottom row have been smoothed by a Gaussian kernel with σ = 2 pixels for display purposes. We note that while we show a DR0.5 mosaic in the top row of this figure, the orientation of the mosaic has been rotated 180° to align with the NIRCam field of view. The images in the bottom row therefore display the wisp feature as it would appear on an individual B4 detector.
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 our process for removing 1/f noise from count-rate maps. The image on the left shows an input count-rate map in F200W affected by 1/f noise. We show the median pixel value measured in the unmasked portions of each row (A) and column (B) in blue along the right and bottom edges, respectively, showing significant variation due to 1/f noise. The middle panels show the horizontal and vertical striping patterns that we identify using the unmasked portions of the image. The amplifier-dependent pattern is visible as the four vertical quadrants in the horizontal striping model. The image on the right shows the result of subtracting both models, where the right (C) and bottom (D) panels show that the noise in the image has been significantly reduced. All four panels displaying the median pixel values (A–D) are plotted with the same limits ±0. The count-rate maps are flat-fielded and smoothed by a Gaussian kernel with σ = 2 pixels.
Paper: CEERS Key Paper. III. The Diversity of Galaxy Structure and Morphology at z = 3–9 with JWST
Authors: Jeyhan S. Kartaltepe, Caitlin Rose, Brittany N. Vanderhoof, Elizabeth J. McGrath, Luca Costantin, Isabella G. Cox, L. Y. Aaron Yung, Dale D. Kocevski, Stijn Wuyts, Henry C. Ferguson, Micaela B. Bagley, Steven L. Finkelstein, Ricardo O. Amorín, Brett H. Andrews, Pablo Arrabal Haro, Bren E. Backhaus, Peter Behroozi, Laura Bisigello, Antonello Calabrò, Caitlin M. Casey, Rosemary T. Coogan, M. C. Cooper, Darren Croton, Alexander de la Vega, Mark Dickinson, Adriano Fontana, Maximilien Franco, Andrea Grazian, Norman A. Grogin, Nimish P. Hathi, Benne W. Holwerda, Marc Huertas-Company, Kartheik G. Iyer, Shardha Jogee, Intae Jung, Lisa J. Kewley, Allison Kirkpatrick, Anton M. Koekemoer, James Liu, Jennifer M. Lotz, Ray A. Lucas, Jeffrey A. Newman, Camilla Pacifici, Viraj Pandya, Casey Papovich, Laura Pentericci, Pablo G. Pérez-González, Jayse Petersen, Nor Pirzkal, Marc Rafelski, Swara Ravindranath, Raymond C. Simons, Gregory F. Snyder, Rachel S. Somerville, Elizabeth R. Stanway, Amber N. Straughn, Sandro Tacchella, Jonathan R. Trump, Jesús Vega-Ferrero, Stephen M. Wilkins, Guang Yang, Jorge A. Zavala
Figure caption: Example set of postage stamps for one galaxy (CANDELS ID 16438 with z = 3.8 and log(M ⋆/M ⊙) = 10.0), used for the visual classification of galaxies at z > 3. The stamps are scaled by the size of the galaxy as measured by Source Extractor, following Equations (2) and (3) of Häussler et al. (2007), with a minimum size of 100 × 100 pixels. Two of the three classifiers classified this galaxy as having both a disk and a spheroid, while the third classified it as having a disk only.
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: Steps for subtracting background from the coadded images.
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: Left: sky background around the borders of tier 1 of the source mask. Tier 1 has the largest convolution kernel and therefore masks the most extended sources. The diagram here shows the background (in MJy sr−1) in unmasked pixels beyond the boundaries of the galaxies in this mask, as a function of distance to the closest masked pixel. One can see the overall elevated background level in the points from the original i2d file. There is a slight gradient toward brighter pixels closer to the boundaries of the masks, as expected from the faint extended wings of galaxies. The blue points show that the typical background is zero and that wings of the galaxies have been slightly suppressed. Right: statistics as a function of scale before and after background removal in the F200W image of NIRCam1. For each block size, the image has been block-summed in boxes of N × N pixels. The variance is then computed for blocks that had no pixels masked during the background estimation (i.e., these are our best effort at source-free regions of the image). The equivalent per-pixel rms from this estimate is ﹩\sqrt{\mathrm{var}}/{\rm{N}}﹩. The image coaddition suppresses the pixel-to-pixel rms on scales of a few pixels. On larger scales, the equivalent per-pixel rms continues to grow in the original image owing to the various nonuniformities. Some of these nonuniformities are from scattered light, but the procedure also suppresses the extended wings of bright galaxies. The fluctuations are suppressed on scales of more than about 40 pixels by the background subtraction procedure. The remaining fluctuations on intermediate scales are due to the wings of galaxies and to galaxies below the detection threshold. The green line shows the ideal rms expected if the sky fluctuations were due purely to photon counting statistics. This helps to confirm that the procedure has done an excellent job of removing large-scale nonuniformities in the image.
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: Example of the drizzle tests we performed with simulated images containing 72 point sources and varying the output pixel scales and pixfrac values. The plots here show results for F277W, for which we explored 0.″03 and 0.″04 pixel−1 output pixel scales. In the top row we show the median recovered FWHM normalized by intrinsic FWHM (left) and the standard deviation of the 72 recovered FWHMs normalized by the median (right), both as a function of pixfrac. In the middle panels, we show small regions of the VAR_RNOISE arrays for each pixel scale and pixfrac, all plotted with the same image stretch and scale. These panels illustrate the decreasing read noise with increasing pixel scale and/or pixfrac. In the bottom left panel we show the normalized standard deviation of sigma-clipped pixel values in the VAR_RNOISE as a function of pixfrac. In the bottom right panel we plot the fraction of pixels in the inverse VAR_RNOISE arrays that lie below various thresholds as a way to quantify the number of outlier pixels in each mosaic. These tests informed our choice to adopt an output pixel scale of 0.″03 pixel−1 and a pixfrac of 1 for the mosaics in our first data release.
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: Evaluation of the relative detector-to-detector photometric calibration for the CEERS NIRCam data. We compare the photometry of sources in CEERS NIRCam imaging with that of HST/WFC3 and Spitzer/IRAC directly (“Method 1” described in the text) or with synthetic photometry (“Method 2”) and normalize all offsets to the B1 and BLONG detectors. We performed this analysis for an earlier CEERS reduction using pmap 0959 (red circles). The measurements here can be interpreted as photometric offsets or corrections that should be applied to the flux calibration in pmap 0959. A reevaluation of the zero-point detector-to-detector offsets for the DR0.5 images released through this paper (calibrated with pmap 0989; blue circles) demonstrates the improvement in the flux calibration, while still indicating residual offsets at the 2%–4% level.
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: Custom flat-field images we created for the reduction of our simulated images. We show the SW detectors A1, A3, A4, B1, B3, and B4, each of which has a different low-level feature present, caused by areas on the detectors with thinner epoxy layers. We use these six custom flats in reducing our simulated images. We also show an earlier custom flat we created for the LW detector ALONG. This feature was present in our SDR1 images and is included here for reference. With updated Mirage, jwst, and CRDS reference file versions, we no longer see this ALONG feature in our simulated images.
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: A seven-color image of the CEERS Epoch 1 NIRCam imaging. These images were reduced at TACC and colorized by Zoltan Levay. High-resolution versions of these images and related information are available at ceers.github.io/ceers-first-images-release.html.
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 full CEERS simulated field, including all 10 NIRCam pointings. Here we show the F277W mosaic and a zoom-in around pointing 5, which was the focus of our early simulated data release. We further zoom in around one of the real z ∼ 9 candidate galaxies that has been added to this field (see Section C.2). We show 3″ postage stamps of the simulated images of this galaxy in all filters.
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: Example of background removal for a single detector in the F200W of CEERS field 1. The image on the left is the coadded image before background subtraction. The image on the right has had the fluctuating background removed as described in the text.
Paper: TOI-3235 b: A Transiting Giant Planet around an M4 Dwarf Star
Authors: Melissa J. Hobson, Andrés Jordán, E. M. Bryant, R. Brahm, D. Bayliss, J. D. Hartman, G. Á. Bakos, Th. Henning, Jose Manuel Almenara, Khalid Barkaoui, Zouhair Benkhaldoun, Xavier Bonfils, François Bouchy, David Charbonneau, Marion Cointepas, Karen A. Collins, Jason D. Eastman, Mourad Ghachoui, Michaël Gillon, Robert F. Goeke, Keith Horne, Jonathan M. Irwin, Emmanuel Jehin, Jon M. Jenkins, David W. Latham, Dan Moldovan, Felipe Murgas, Francisco J. Pozuelos, George R. Ricker, Richard P. Schwarz, S. Seager, Gregor Srdoc, Stephanie Striegel, Mathilde Timmermans, Andrew Vanderburg, Roland Vanderspek, Joshua N. Winn
Figure caption: Left: high-precision RVs from ESPRESSO/VLT phased with respect to the midtransit time, together with the best-fit model, where the center-of-mass velocity has been subtracted (top); RV O − C residuals (center); and bisector spans (bottom). Error bars include the estimated jitter, which is a free parameter in the fitting. Top right: absolute G magnitude vs. the dereddened G − K  S  color from Gaia DR2 and 2MASS (filled blue circle) and 1σ and 2σ confidence regions, including estimated systematic errors in the photometry (blue lines), compared to theoretical isochrones (black lines; ages listed in gigayears) and stellar evolution tracks (green dashed lines; mass listed in solar masses) from the MIST models interpolated at the best-estimate value for the host metallicity. The red lines show isochrones at higher and lower metallicities than the best-estimate value, labeled with their metallicity and age in gigayears. Bottom right: spectral energy distribution (SED) as measured via broadband photometry through the listed filters (top, “Observed Magnitude”) and O − C residuals from the best-fit model (bottom, “Δ Mag”). We plot the observed magnitudes without correcting for distance or extinction. Overplotted are 200 model SEDs randomly selected from the Markov Chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) posterior distribution produced through the global analysis (gray lines). Black error bars show the catalog errors for the broadband photometry measurements; red error bars add an assumed 0.02 mag systematic uncertainty in quadrature to the catalog errors. These latter uncertainties are used in the fit.
Paper: TOI-3235 b: A Transiting Giant Planet around an M4 Dwarf Star
Authors: Melissa J. Hobson, Andrés Jordán, E. M. Bryant, R. Brahm, D. Bayliss, J. D. Hartman, G. Á. Bakos, Th. Henning, Jose Manuel Almenara, Khalid Barkaoui, Zouhair Benkhaldoun, Xavier Bonfils, François Bouchy, David Charbonneau, Marion Cointepas, Karen A. Collins, Jason D. Eastman, Mourad Ghachoui, Michaël Gillon, Robert F. Goeke, Keith Horne, Jonathan M. Irwin, Emmanuel Jehin, Jon M. Jenkins, David W. Latham, Dan Moldovan, Felipe Murgas, Francisco J. Pozuelos, George R. Ricker, Richard P. Schwarz, S. Seager, Gregor Srdoc, Stephanie Striegel, Mathilde Timmermans, Andrew Vanderburg, Roland Vanderspek, Joshua N. Winn
Figure caption: Ground-based photometry for the the transiting planet system TOI-3235. Left: phase-folded unbinned full HATSouth light curve (top), light curve zoomed in on the transit (middle), and residuals from the best-fit model zoomed in on the transit (bottom). Solid red lines show the best-fit model. Blue circles show the light curves binned in phase with a bin size of 0.002. Right: unbinned follow-up transit light curves corrected for instrumental trends fitted simultaneously with the transit model, which is overplotted (left column), and the residuals to the transit model (right column). Dates, filters, and instruments are indicated. For ExTrA we indicate the midpoint of the spectral range. The error bars represent the photon and background shot noise, plus the readout noise.
Paper: TOI-3235 b: A Transiting Giant Planet around an M4 Dwarf Star
Authors: Melissa J. Hobson, Andrés Jordán, E. M. Bryant, R. Brahm, D. Bayliss, J. D. Hartman, G. Á. Bakos, Th. Henning, Jose Manuel Almenara, Khalid Barkaoui, Zouhair Benkhaldoun, Xavier Bonfils, François Bouchy, David Charbonneau, Marion Cointepas, Karen A. Collins, Jason D. Eastman, Mourad Ghachoui, Michaël Gillon, Robert F. Goeke, Keith Horne, Jonathan M. Irwin, Emmanuel Jehin, Jon M. Jenkins, David W. Latham, Dan Moldovan, Felipe Murgas, Francisco J. Pozuelos, George R. Ricker, Richard P. Schwarz, S. Seager, Gregor Srdoc, Stephanie Striegel, Mathilde Timmermans, Andrew Vanderburg, Roland Vanderspek, Joshua N. Winn
Figure caption: TESS long-cadence light curves for TOI-3235 for sector 11 (left column; 30 minute cadence) and sector 38 (right column; 10 minute cadence). For each sector, we show the full unphased light curve as a function of time (top row); the full phase-folded light curve (second row); the phase-folded light curve zoomed in on the planetary transit (third row); the residuals from the best-fit model, the phase-folded residuals from the best-fit model, zoomed in on the planetary transit (fourth row); and the phase-folded light curve zoomed in on the secondary eclipse (bottom row). The solid red line in each panel shows the model fit to the light curve. The blue filled circles show the light curve binned in phase with a bin size of 0.002. Other observations included in our analysis of this system are shown in Figures 2 and 3.