adsabs/AstroCLIMB huggingface dataset:
Paper: X-Ray Polarization Observations of BL Lacertae
Authors: Riccardo Middei, Ioannis Liodakis, Matteo Perri, Simonetta Puccetti, Elisabetta Cavazzuti, Laura Di Gesu, Steven R. Ehlert, Grzegorz Madejski, Alan P. Marscher, Herman L. Marshall, Fabio Muleri, Michela Negro, Svetlana G. Jorstad, Beatriz Agís-González, Iván Agudo, Giacomo Bonnoli, Maria I. Bernardos, Víctor Casanova, Maya García-Comas, César Husillos, Alessandro Marchini, Alfredo Sota, Pouya M. Kouch, Elina Lindfors, George A. Borman, Evgenia N. Kopatskaya, Elena G. Larionova, Daria A. Morozova, Sergey S. Savchenko, Andrey A. Vasilyev, Alexey V. Zhovtan, Carolina Casadio, Juan Escudero, Ioannis Myserlis, Antonio Hales, Seiji Kameno, Ruediger Kneissl, Hugo Messias, Hiroshi Nagai, Dmitry Blinov, Ioakeim G. Bourbah, Sebastian Kiehlmann, Evangelos Kontopodis, Nikos Mandarakas, Stylianos Romanopoulos, Raphael Skalidis, Anna Vervelaki, Joseph R. Masiero, Dimitri Mawet, Maxwell A. Millar-Blanchaer, Georgia V. Panopoulou, Samaporn Tinyanont, Andrei V. Berdyugin, Masato Kagitani, Vadim Kravtsov, Takeshi Sakanoi, Ryo Imazawa, Mahito Sasada, Yasushi Fukazawa, Koji S. Kawabata, Makoto Uemura, Tsunefumi Mizuno, Tatsuya Nakaoka, Hiroshi Akitaya, Mark Gurwell, Ramprasad Rao, Niccoló Di Lalla, Nicoló Cibrario, Immacolata Donnarumma, Dawoon E. Kim, Nicola Omodei, Luigi Pacciani, Juri Poutanen, Fabrizio Tavecchio, Lucio A. Antonelli, Matteo Bachetti, Luca Baldini, Wayne H. Baumgartner, Ronaldo Bellazzini, Stefano Bianchi, Stephen D. Bongiorno, Raffaella Bonino, Alessandro Brez, Niccoló Bucciantini, Fiamma Capitanio, Simone Castellano, Stefano Ciprini, Enrico Costa, Alessandra De Rosa, Ettore Del Monte, Alessandro Di Marco, Victor Doroshenko, Michal Dovčiak, Teruaki Enoto, Yuri Evangelista, Sergio Fabiani, Riccardo Ferrazzoli, Javier A. Garcia, Shuichi Gunji, Kiyoshi Hayashida, Jeremy Heyl, Wataru Iwakiri, Vladimir Karas, Takao Kitaguchi, Jeffery J. Kolodziejczak, Henric Krawczynski, Fabio La Monaca, Luca Latronico, Simone Maldera, Alberto Manfreda, Frédéric Marin, Andrea Marinucci, Francesco Massaro, Giorgio Matt, Ikuyuki Mitsuishi, C.-Y. Ng, Stephen L. O'Dell, Chiara Oppedisano, Alessandro Papitto, George G. Pavlov, Abel L. Peirson, Melissa Pesce-Rollins, Pierre-Olivier Petrucci, Maura Pilia, Andrea Possenti, Brian D. Ramsey, John Rankin, Ajay Ratheesh, Roger W. Romani, Carmelo Sgró, Patrick Slane, Paolo Soffitta, Gloria Spandre, Toru Tamagawa, Roberto Taverna, Yuzuru Tawara, Allyn F. Tennant, Nicholas E. Thomas, Francesco Tombesi, Alessio Trois, Sergey Tsygankov, Roberto Turolla, Jacco Vink, Martin C. Weisskopf, Kinwah Wu, Fei Xie, Silvia Zane
Figure caption: Infrared polarization vs. time for BL Lac object. Top: magnitude; middle: polarization degree; bottom: polarization angle. The gray shaded area demarks the duration of IXPE observation 1.
Paper: Macrospicules and Their Connection to Magnetic Reconnection in the Lower Solar Atmosphere
Authors: Yadan Duan, Yuandeng Shen, Hechao Chen, Zehao Tang, Chenrui Zhou, Xinping Zhou, Song Tan
Figure caption: The dynamics of macrospicules. Panels (a)–(d) show four examples of dynamic macrospicules, in which the red curves represent each negative magnetic flux variation that are indicated in the black box in Figures 1(b1)–(b5). The time–distance images from the AIA 193 channel are plotted along the each group macrospicules’ main axis. Panel (e) is a scatterplot of the relationship between the deceleration and maximum velocity, which is measured from a parabolic fitting of the trajectories of the macrospicules front as shown in the left column.
Paper: Macrospicules and Their Connection to Magnetic Reconnection in the Lower Solar Atmosphere
Authors: Yadan Duan, Yuandeng Shen, Hechao Chen, Zehao Tang, Chenrui Zhou, Xinping Zhou, Song Tan
Figure caption: Dynamics of the macrospicule in the region of panel (c3) in Figure 1 are observed in NVST Hα. NVST Ha core, wing (−0.6 and +0.6), AIA 304 and 211 Å images present the temporal evolution of the macrospicule. The yellow arrows denote the BPs, and the green contours outline the macrospicule from the Hα core images for the corresponding time. The FOV of NVST and SDO images is 25″ × 35″, while in the last row, Hα core images are 15″ × 15 ″, which corresponds to the base region of the macrospicule. The black arrows point out the small minifilament. The red contours mark the negative magnetic field, and the corresponding scale levels are −10 G. This negative-polarity flux is fully surrounded by an ambient positive-polarity flux (also see Figure 1(b3)). We rotated all the images from the top row to the bottom row by 30° to the north.
Paper: Macrospicules and Their Connection to Magnetic Reconnection in the Lower Solar Atmosphere
Authors: Yadan Duan, Yuandeng Shen, Hechao Chen, Zehao Tang, Chenrui Zhou, Xinping Zhou, Song Tan
Figure caption: Panel (a): IRIS 1400 Å slit-jaw image is taken at 00:08:08 UT on 2020 November 11. The slit location is shown in the white dashed line, and the green box indicates the FOV of panels (b1)–(b2). The yellow dashed lines outline the macrospicule in (b1)–(b2) 2796 Å images at different times, and the yellow arrows denote the BP at the base of the macrospicule. Panels (c)–(e): he red lines represent the spectra at the location indicated by the red diamond in panel (a). The black lines display the reference spectra averaged over the line profiles within the section indicated by the yellow line in panel (a).
Paper: Early Results from GLASS-JWST. XIII. A Faint, Distant, and Cold Brown Dwarf 
Authors: Mario Nonino, Karl Glazebrook, Adam J. Burgasser, Gianluca Polenta, Takahiro Morishita, Marius Lepinzan, Marco Castellano, Adriano Fontana, Emiliano Merlin, Andrea Bonchi, Diego Paris, Tommaso Treu, Benedetta Vulcani, Xin Wang, Paola Santini, Eros Vanzella, Themiya Nanayakkara, Amata Mercurio, Piero Rosati, Claudio Grillo, Marusa Bradac
Figure caption: Image cutouts (3.″5 × 3.″5) of the GLASS-JWST-BD1 brown dwarf candidate. The circles have a radius of 0.″5. North is up and east is left.
Paper: Early Results from GLASS-JWST. XIII. A Faint, Distant, and Cold Brown Dwarf 
Authors: Mario Nonino, Karl Glazebrook, Adam J. Burgasser, Gianluca Polenta, Takahiro Morishita, Marius Lepinzan, Marco Castellano, Adriano Fontana, Emiliano Merlin, Andrea Bonchi, Diego Paris, Tommaso Treu, Benedetta Vulcani, Xin Wang, Paola Santini, Eros Vanzella, Themiya Nanayakkara, Amata Mercurio, Piero Rosati, Claudio Grillo, Marusa Bradac
Figure caption: Comparison of observed photometry (black points with 1σ error bars) to the best-fit Sonora Cholla smoothed synthetic spectrum (blue line) and photometry (red points), with T eff = 650 K, ﹩\mathrm{log}g=5.25﹩, and solar metallicity. We indicate the > 50% range of the JWST NIRCam filter transmissions used in the GLASS-JWST-ERS observations. Error bars are at 1σ. Note that the source is not detected in the NIRCam F090W filter. Most of the dominant infrared molecular absorption features of H2O, CO, CO2, CH4, and NH3 are shown.
Paper: Constraints on the Hosts of UHECR Accelerators
Authors: Marco Stein Muzio, Glennys R. Farrar
Figure caption: The joint posterior distribution of the effective size, L, and magnetic field strength, B, of the source environment fitting to the UHECR spectrum and composition of Auger alone (top), while compatible with IceCube bounds on EHE neutrinos (middle), and while simultaneously fitting to astrophysical neutrino data (bottom), using SIBYLL2.3C (left) or EPOS-LHC (right), and taking a blackbody spectrum, n 0 = 1. The case fitting UHECR data alone (top row) is not a valid fit. The bands give the 1σ, 2σ, and 3σ uncertainty bands (darkest to lightest gray, respectively) of the joint posterior distribution. For a different value of n 0, the posterior distribution slides along the diagonal as discussed in the text. The maximum rigidity of the accelerator is shown for the median and 16th/84th percentiles (solid and dashed black lines, respectively) of the posterior distribution for ﹩{\mathrm{log}}_{10}{R}_{\max }﹩. Red lines demarcate regions where synchrotron losses in the source environment significantly affect the neutrino spectrum and a more detailed analysis would be required. The indicated size and magnetic field strengths of various potential source types are approximate and serve as a guide.
Paper: Constraints on the Hosts of UHECR Accelerators
Authors: Marco Stein Muzio, Glennys R. Farrar
Figure caption: Posterior distribution of astrophysical parameters for our fiducial model, fitting to UHECR data alone using the SIBYLL2.3C HIM. Dotted lines on one-dimensional histograms indicate the median and 16th and 84th percentiles of the distribution. Gray regions on two-dimensional histograms denote the 1σ, 2σ, and 3σ uncertainty bands of the distribution (darkest to lightest, respectively). These plots are for n 0 = 1, a blackbody photon spectrum.
Paper: Constraints on the Hosts of UHECR Accelerators
Authors: Marco Stein Muzio, Glennys R. Farrar
Figure caption: Same as Figure 4 comparing a negative m = −3 source (blue) and SFR (orange) evolutions, fitting CR data alone while rejecting models violating EHE neutrino bounds (analogous to the fiducial case above) using the SIBYLL2.3C HIM.
Paper: Constraints on the Hosts of UHECR Accelerators
Authors: Marco Stein Muzio, Glennys R. Farrar
Figure caption: Same as Figure 8 for the EPOS-LHC HIM.
Paper: Constraints on the Hosts of UHECR Accelerators
Authors: Marco Stein Muzio, Glennys R. Farrar
Figure caption: Same as Figure 5 for B L and ﹩{{Ln}}_{{\rm{g}}}﹩. These products are independent of the value of n 0 so that the joint posterior distribution is unaffected by its value.
Paper: Constraints on the Hosts of UHECR Accelerators
Authors: Marco Stein Muzio, Glennys R. Farrar
Figure caption: Left: same as Figure 5(c) assuming a negative m = −3 source evolution. Right: same as Figure 6(c) assuming a negative m = −3 source evolution.
Paper: Constraints on the Hosts of UHECR Accelerators
Authors: Marco Stein Muzio, Glennys R. Farrar
Figure caption: Same as Figure 7 but fitting to UHECR data alone while remaining compatible with IceCube bounds on EHE neutrinos under the assumption of the SIBYLL2.3C HIM.
Paper: Constraints on the Hosts of UHECR Accelerators
Authors: Marco Stein Muzio, Glennys R. Farrar
Figure caption: Best fits of blackbody (BB), modified blackbody (MBB), and broken power-law (BPL) spectra to the peak of the SEDs for M82 (left) and Arp 220 (right). The best-fit graybody factors resulting from each of these fits are listed above the figure and provide a rough estimate of the true graybody factor for each system.
Paper: Timing Analysis of the 2022 Outburst of the Accreting Millisecond X-Ray Pulsar SAX J1808.4-3658: Hints of an Orbital Shrinking
Authors: Giulia Illiano, Alessandro Papitto, Andrea Sanna, Peter Bult, Filippo Ambrosino, Arianna Miraval Zanon, Francesco Coti Zelati, Luigi Stella, Diego Altamirano, Maria Cristina Baglio, Enrico Bozzo, Luciano Burderi, Domitilla de Martino, Alessandro Di Marco, Tiziana di Salvo, Carlo Ferrigno, Vladislav Loktev, Alessio Marino, Mason Ng, Maura Pilia, Juri Poutanen, Tuomo Salmi
Figure caption: Top panel: spin frequency evolution of SAX J1808 since the 1998 outburst. Blue points show measurements made with RXTE from the 1998 outburst to that of 2011 (Hartman et al. 2008, 2009; Papitto et al. 2011); the green dot represents the best estimate in the 2015 outburst (Sanna et al. 2017), and the orange one is from the linear model of the 2019 outburst (Bult et al. 2020). The red dot is from this work, having corrected the data with the source coordinates from Hartman et al. (2008) and fitted the phase delays with a linear model. All frequencies are expressed relative to the 1998 spin frequency, ν 98 = 400.975210371 Hz (Hartman et al. 2008). The dotted line indicates the best-fitting function including the Doppler modulation due to source coordinates error, and the dashed line is the corresponding linear function. Bottom panel: residuals relative to the best-fitting function. We did not include the 2015 spin frequency estimate because its uncertainty is about a factor of 20 larger than the others and compatible with the amplitude of Doppler modulation.
Paper: Timing Analysis of the 2022 Outburst of the Accreting Millisecond X-Ray Pulsar SAX J1808.4-3658: Hints of an Orbital Shrinking
Authors: Giulia Illiano, Alessandro Papitto, Andrea Sanna, Peter Bult, Filippo Ambrosino, Arianna Miraval Zanon, Francesco Coti Zelati, Luigi Stella, Diego Altamirano, Maria Cristina Baglio, Enrico Bozzo, Luciano Burderi, Domitilla de Martino, Alessandro Di Marco, Tiziana di Salvo, Carlo Ferrigno, Vladislav Loktev, Alessio Marino, Mason Ng, Maura Pilia, Juri Poutanen, Tuomo Salmi
Figure caption: Top panel: long-term evolution of T asc as a function of the number of orbital cycles since the epoch of the 2002 outburst, T ref = MJD 52499.9602472. Blue points represent the measurements made with RXTE from the 1998 outburst to that of 2011 (Hartman et al. 2008; Burderi et al. 2009; Papitto et al. 2011), the green dot is the best value found for the 2015 outburst (Sanna et al. 2017), the orange one for the 2019 outburst (Bult et al. 2020), and the red one is from this work. The dotted line indicates a quadratic fitting function, while the dashed line indicates the best-fitting quadraticsinusoidal function. Middle panel: residuals relative to the quadratic model. Bottom panel: residuals relative to the quadraticsinusoidal fitting function. We point out that different y-axes are used for the second and the third panels.
Paper: Timing Analysis of the 2022 Outburst of the Accreting Millisecond X-Ray Pulsar SAX J1808.4-3658: Hints of an Orbital Shrinking
Authors: Giulia Illiano, Alessandro Papitto, Andrea Sanna, Peter Bult, Filippo Ambrosino, Arianna Miraval Zanon, Francesco Coti Zelati, Luigi Stella, Diego Altamirano, Maria Cristina Baglio, Enrico Bozzo, Luciano Burderi, Domitilla de Martino, Alessandro Di Marco, Tiziana di Salvo, Carlo Ferrigno, Vladislav Loktev, Alessio Marino, Mason Ng, Maura Pilia, Juri Poutanen, Tuomo Salmi
Figure caption: Temporal evolution of the 2022 outburst monitored with NICER. Top panel: the 0.5–10 keV light curve using 200 s bins. Second panel: pulse fractional amplitude for the first harmonic (black) and the second harmonic (red). Third and fourth panels: phase residuals relative to the linear phase model for the first harmonic (black) and the second harmonic (red), and flux-adjusted phase models, respectively (also see Table 1). The phase residuals relative to the quadratic model are not plotted as they are similar to those of the linear model (see text).
Paper: Gamma Cas Stars as Be+White Dwarf Binary Systems
Authors: Douglas R. Gies, Luqian Wang, 璐茜 王, Robert Klement
Figure caption: Predicted magnitude differences for Be+sdO binaries based upon the sdO flux models from Götberg et al. (2018) for stars at the halfway point of He-core burning. The Be stars are assumed to have masses 8× larger than the sdO stars and have temperatures and radii associated with main-sequence values for the mass. The upper, short-dashed line shows the predicted magnitude difference at 1450 Å (FUV) while the lower, long-dashed line is for 16500 Å (near-infrared H band). Diamonds indicate observed values from FUV studies, and the crosses show those from CHARA Array H-band interferometry. The FUV predictions and observations all are brighter than the faint limit of HST spectroscopy (middle dotted line), and the H-band models and observations are all much brighter than the detection limits of the CHARA Array (lower dotted–dashed line). These comparisons indicate that current observational methods are sufficient to detect the faint companion stars in most or all Be+sdO systems (but not in the case of Be+WD binaries).
Paper: JWST's PEARLS: Bright 1.5–2.0 μm Dropouts in the Spitzer/IRAC Dark Field
Authors: Haojing Yan, Seth H. Cohen, Rogier A. Windhorst, Rolf A. Jansen, Zhiyuan Ma, John F. Beacom, Chenxiaoji Ling, Cheng Cheng, Jia-Sheng Huang, Norman A. Grogin, S. P. Willner, Min Yun, Heidi B. Hammel, Stefanie N. Milam, Christopher J. Conselice, Simon P. Driver, Brenda Frye, Madeline A. Marshall, Anton Koekemoer, Christopher N. A. Willmer, Aaron Robotham, Jordan C. J. D'Silva, Jake Summers, Jeremy Lim, Kevin Harrington, Leonardo Ferreira, Jose Maria Diego, Nor Pirzkal, Stephen M. Wilkins, Lifan Wang, Nimish P. Hathi, Adi Zitrin, Rachana A. Bhatawdekar, Nathan J. Adams, Lukas J. Furtak, Peter Maksym, Michael J. Rutkowski, Giovanni G. Fazio
Figure caption: SED-fitting results of the surviving TmI F150W and F200W dropouts. The first two rows show the two F150W dropouts with the Le Phare results above and the EAZY results below. Source names are above each Le Phare panel. The remaining rows show the six F200W dropouts in the same arrangement. The derived photometric redshifts and χ 2 values are given near the top of each panel. The χ 2 values are the raw values, i.e., not the reduced χ 2. In each Le Phare panel, red circles and black upper limits show the data. Blue curves are the best-fit models corresponding to the first peak of the redshift PDFs. The PDFs themselves are shown as insets. The green curves, when present, are the best-fit model corresponding to the second peak of the PDF. In the panels showing the EAZY results, the black symbols show the data, and the curves show the best-fit models. The red circles mark the synthesized magnitudes based on the best-fit models. The PDFs are shown (with yellow fill) next to the model fits.
Paper: JWST's PEARLS: Bright 1.5–2.0 μm Dropouts in the Spitzer/IRAC Dark Field
Authors: Haojing Yan, Seth H. Cohen, Rogier A. Windhorst, Rolf A. Jansen, Zhiyuan Ma, John F. Beacom, Chenxiaoji Ling, Cheng Cheng, Jia-Sheng Huang, Norman A. Grogin, S. P. Willner, Min Yun, Heidi B. Hammel, Stefanie N. Milam, Christopher J. Conselice, Simon P. Driver, Brenda Frye, Madeline A. Marshall, Anton Koekemoer, Christopher N. A. Willmer, Aaron Robotham, Jordan C. J. D'Silva, Jake Summers, Jeremy Lim, Kevin Harrington, Leonardo Ferreira, Jose Maria Diego, Nor Pirzkal, Stephen M. Wilkins, Lifan Wang, Nimish P. Hathi, Adi Zitrin, Rachana A. Bhatawdekar, Nathan J. Adams, Lukas J. Furtak, Peter Maksym, Michael J. Rutkowski, Giovanni G. Fazio
Figure caption: Nine-band image stamps of the five F150W dropout candidates selected in the TDF. The images are 2.″4 × 2.″4 in size and are oriented north-up and east-left. The candidates are centered on the images and are indicated by red circles with radii 0.″5. These F150W candidates were selected using only the same four NIRCam bands as in the IDF plus the HST ACS F606W band. (Short IDs of sources are “TmI” for “TDF mimicking IDF.”) The numbers shown on the F200W images are their magnitudes in this band. The two dropouts that survive after incorporating the other four NIRCam bands (especially F090W and F115W as the veto bands) are in the top two rows. The bottom three rows show sources rejected by their formal S/N ≥ 2 detections in F115W and/or F090W or by the visual inspection in these two bands (marked by “X”).
Paper: JWST's PEARLS: Bright 1.5–2.0 μm Dropouts in the Spitzer/IRAC Dark Field
Authors: Haojing Yan, Seth H. Cohen, Rogier A. Windhorst, Rolf A. Jansen, Zhiyuan Ma, John F. Beacom, Chenxiaoji Ling, Cheng Cheng, Jia-Sheng Huang, Norman A. Grogin, S. P. Willner, Min Yun, Heidi B. Hammel, Stefanie N. Milam, Christopher J. Conselice, Simon P. Driver, Brenda Frye, Madeline A. Marshall, Anton Koekemoer, Christopher N. A. Willmer, Aaron Robotham, Jordan C. J. D'Silva, Jake Summers, Jeremy Lim, Kevin Harrington, Leonardo Ferreira, Jose Maria Diego, Nor Pirzkal, Stephen M. Wilkins, Lifan Wang, Nimish P. Hathi, Adi Zitrin, Rachana A. Bhatawdekar, Nathan J. Adams, Lukas J. Furtak, Peter Maksym, Michael J. Rutkowski, Giovanni G. Fazio
Figure caption: Similar to Figure B1 but for the nine TmI F200W candidates. The numbers shown on the F356W images are their magnitudes in this band. After incorporating the other four NIRCam bands, the objects in the top six rows survive, and those in the bottom three rows are rejected by images marked with “X.”
Paper: Gas-rich, Field Ultra-diffuse Galaxies Host Few Gobular Clusters
Authors: Michael G. Jones, Ananthan Karunakaran, Paul Bennet, David J. Sand, Kristine Spekkens, Burçin Mutlu-Pakdil, Denija Crnojević, Steven Janowiecki, Lukas Leisman, Catherine E. Fielder
Figure caption: Globular cluster counts as a function of V-band absolute magnitude. Dwarf galaxies from Harris et al. (2013) are shown for comparison as light orange (early types) and light blue (late types) circles. The GC counts (Forbes et al. 2020) of the Coma UDGs from van Dokkum et al. (2015) and Yagi et al. (2016) are shown with pink crosses (error bars are omitted to aid the clarity of the plot, but are typically less than 0.35 dex for N GC). The GC counts from this work are shown as black triangles. Those that are above zero are corrected for the missing half of the GCLF. Due to the potential for contamination from other star clusters we consider these values are upper limits on the true values of N GC, and thus those with no GCCs are plotted at N GC = 1. There are nine objects with no GCCs, however several markers overlap (almost) entirely. The mean (corrected) number of GCs per galaxy is shown by the single set of black error bars. UDGs in the Hydra cluster (Iodice et al. 2020; La Marca et al. 2022) are shown with gray error bars and upper limits (unfilled gray triangles). A small sample of UDGs in groups are also shown with green (Somalwar et al. 2020) and dark orange (Jones et al. 2021) error bars. Finally, the UDGs DF2 and DF4 (van Dokkum et al. 2018, 2019) are shown with dark blue diamonds, and MATLAS-2019 (Muller et al. 2021) is shown as a dark blue filled plus sign with an error bar on N GC. The diagonal solid, dashed, and dotted lines correspond to GC specific frequency (Harris & van den Bergh 1981) values of 1, 10, and 100, respectively. It should be noted that the UDGs and LSB galaxies in our sample are considerably bluer than the other UDGs plotted for comparison. If plotted in terms of stellar mass, rather than M V, then they would shift to the left in relative to other UDGs.
Paper: General Circulation Model Constraints on the Detectability of the CO2-CH4 Biosignature Pair on TRAPPIST-1e with JWST
Authors: Yoav Rotman, Thaddeus D. Komacek, Geronimo L. Villanueva, Thomas J. Fauchez, Erin M. May
Figure caption: Transmission spectra for a full year of the 1, 10−1, 10−2, 10−3, and 10−4 bar pCO2 cases (left), and a resulting PandExo noise output example (right). Black lines represent the methane case, while blue lines represent the methane-free case for each pCO2. Higher carbon dioxide cases tend to have larger features but also a higher continuum floor, which masks smaller features like those of CH4, as seen in the 1 bar case; note that the 10−3 and 10−4 bar cases are shown on a smaller vertical scale to emphasize spectral features. The bottom-right panel shows the time-averaged continuum floor of all 360 spectra with (solid line) and without (dashed line) methane, for each of the five pCO2 cases. The height of continuum floors and the difference between the methane-inclusive and exclusive continuum floors for each case both increase dramatically with increasing pCO2. The four varied noise floors (0 through 50 ppm) are shown in the right plot for a standard 10−2 bar pCO2 spectrum, with the residuals plotted below. Higher noise floors correspond to larger residuals, and the sub-1 μm region has larger uncertainties than the 1–5 μm region for all noise floors.