adsabs/AstroCLIMB huggingface dataset:
Paper: Revised Masses for Low-density Planets Orbiting the Disordered M-dwarf System TOI-1266
Authors: Dakotah Tyler, Erik A. Petigura, James Rogers, Jack Lubin, Andreas Seifhart, Jacob L. Bean, Madison Brady, Rafael Luque
Figure caption: Plausible evolution of envelope fraction over time given the current masses and radii of the TOI-1266 systems within the photoevaporative mass-loss framework of J. G. Rogers et al. (2021). Here planet b is more envelope rich than planet c at early and late times.
Paper: Excess Ultraviolet Emission at High Galactic Latitudes: A New Horizons View
Authors: Jayant Murthy, J. Michael Shull, Marc Postman, Joel Wm. Parker, Seth Redfield, Nathaniel Cunningham, G. Randall Gladstone, Jon P. Pineau, Pontus Brandt, Anne J. Verbiscer, Kelsi N. Singer, Harold A. Weaver, Richard C. Henry, S. Alan Stern
Figure caption: The Alice entrance aperture is a square Box on top of a narrow, rectangular Stem (S. A. Stern 2008).
Paper: Excess Ultraviolet Emission at High Galactic Latitudes: A New Horizons View
Authors: Jayant Murthy, J. Michael Shull, Marc Postman, Joel Wm. Parker, Seth Redfield, Nathaniel Cunningham, G. Randall Gladstone, Jon P. Pineau, Pontus Brandt, Anne J. Verbiscer, Kelsi N. Singer, Harold A. Weaver, Richard C. Henry, S. Alan Stern
Figure caption: Detector image of one of our diffuse background observations, with the instrumental STIM pulses seen on either side of the image. The scale is in units of counts pixel−1 s−1. Wavelength increases to the right with the illuminated region spanning the range from 520 to 1870 Å. Lyα is at the center of the image with much of the background due to instrumental scattering and dark counts. The Stem is identified in the lower part of the image, and the Box in the upper part.
Paper: Excess Ultraviolet Emission at High Galactic Latitudes: A New Horizons View
Authors: Jayant Murthy, J. Michael Shull, Marc Postman, Joel Wm. Parker, Seth Redfield, Nathaniel Cunningham, G. Randall Gladstone, Jon P. Pineau, Pontus Brandt, Anne J. Verbiscer, Kelsi N. Singer, Harold A. Weaver, Richard C. Henry, S. Alan Stern
Figure caption: The locations of the CUVB fields are shown on the Infrared Interferometer in Space (Improved Reprocessing of the IRAS Survey) full-sky 100 μm map (M. A. Miville-Deschênes & G. Lagache 2005) in Galactic coordinates. The auxiliary fields include the two shock fields and one molecular hydrogen field.
Paper: Excess Ultraviolet Emission at High Galactic Latitudes: A New Horizons View
Authors: Jayant Murthy, J. Michael Shull, Marc Postman, Joel Wm. Parker, Seth Redfield, Nathaniel Cunningham, G. Randall Gladstone, Jon P. Pineau, Pontus Brandt, Anne J. Verbiscer, Kelsi N. Singer, Harold A. Weaver, Richard C. Henry, S. Alan Stern
Figure caption: Spectrum of the dark counts in the Stem from 2007 (black line) and 2023 (red line). Note that there is less noise in 2023 because of the length of the dark observations (Table 3).
Paper: Excess Ultraviolet Emission at High Galactic Latitudes: A New Horizons View
Authors: Jayant Murthy, J. Michael Shull, Marc Postman, Joel Wm. Parker, Seth Redfield, Nathaniel Cunningham, G. Randall Gladstone, Jon P. Pineau, Pontus Brandt, Anne J. Verbiscer, Kelsi N. Singer, Harold A. Weaver, Richard C. Henry, S. Alan Stern
Figure caption: The average dark count rate over the Stem (+) and the Box (*) as a function of the year in which the observations were taken (Table 3). The error bars were smaller than the data points.
Paper: Excess Ultraviolet Emission at High Galactic Latitudes: A New Horizons View
Authors: Jayant Murthy, J. Michael Shull, Marc Postman, Joel Wm. Parker, Seth Redfield, Nathaniel Cunningham, G. Randall Gladstone, Jon P. Pineau, Pontus Brandt, Anne J. Verbiscer, Kelsi N. Singer, Harold A. Weaver, Richard C. Henry, S. Alan Stern
Figure caption: Spectrum of the dark counts in the Box from 2007 (black line) and 2023 (red line).
Paper: Excess Ultraviolet Emission at High Galactic Latitudes: A New Horizons View
Authors: Jayant Murthy, J. Michael Shull, Marc Postman, Joel Wm. Parker, Seth Redfield, Nathaniel Cunningham, G. Randall Gladstone, Jon P. Pineau, Pontus Brandt, Anne J. Verbiscer, Kelsi N. Singer, Harold A. Weaver, Richard C. Henry, S. Alan Stern
Figure caption: Offsets at zero reddening plotted as 1σ error bars for the Box. The discontinuity from 1100 to 1350 Å is because we have blanked out the section where uncertainties in the subtraction of the Lyα template dominate the errors. Components of the diffuse radiation field are plotted in order from the bottom: EBL (filled gray) from S. Koushan et al. (2021), unresolved stars (filled green), O VI and C IV line emission (cyan), and two-photon emission (red). The cyan bar represents the GALEX offset found by M. S. Akshaya et al. (2018). See text for discussion.
Paper: Excess Ultraviolet Emission at High Galactic Latitudes: A New Horizons View
Authors: Jayant Murthy, J. Michael Shull, Marc Postman, Joel Wm. Parker, Seth Redfield, Nathaniel Cunningham, G. Randall Gladstone, Jon P. Pineau, Pontus Brandt, Anne J. Verbiscer, Kelsi N. Singer, Harold A. Weaver, Richard C. Henry, S. Alan Stern
Figure caption: Box spectrum for each of the fields plotted as a function of wavelength (600–1800 Å). The spectra are ordered by the mean Planck E(B − V) in the Box, except for the last three spectra, and are labeled as per Table 2. The surface brightness in the last three spectra has been divided by 5 for plotting purposes and is not used in the analysis (see text). The data are available in electronic format.(The data used to create this figure are available in the online article.)(The data used to create this figure are available.)
Paper: Excess Ultraviolet Emission at High Galactic Latitudes: A New Horizons View
Authors: Jayant Murthy, J. Michael Shull, Marc Postman, Joel Wm. Parker, Seth Redfield, Nathaniel Cunningham, G. Randall Gladstone, Jon P. Pineau, Pontus Brandt, Anne J. Verbiscer, Kelsi N. Singer, Harold A. Weaver, Richard C. Henry, S. Alan Stern
Figure caption: Stem (black) and Box (red) Alice surface brightness between 1350 Å and 1800 Å compared to the mean GALEX surface brightness in the FUV band. The best-fit lines are NH = 0.82G − 31.2 for the Stem (black line) and NH = 0.71G − 23.2 for the Box (red line), where NH is the observed Alice surface brightness and G is the GALEX surface brightness (Table 6). We have shown 1σ error bars for the Box but not for the Stem to avoid clutter in the plot.
Paper: Excess Ultraviolet Emission at High Galactic Latitudes: A New Horizons View
Authors: Jayant Murthy, J. Michael Shull, Marc Postman, Joel Wm. Parker, Seth Redfield, Nathaniel Cunningham, G. Randall Gladstone, Jon P. Pineau, Pontus Brandt, Anne J. Verbiscer, Kelsi N. Singer, Harold A. Weaver, Richard C. Henry, S. Alan Stern
Figure caption: Different components of the template creation for the Stem. Symbols in the key are as defined in Equation (2). The Lyα scattering matrix is given by the difference between the observed spectrum in 2007 (S2007) and 2023 (S2023) and has to be scaled to the observed counts in the Lyα line. The CUVB is the resultant after subtraction of the scaled scattering matrix and the dark current (D2023 + T × L2007)
Paper: Excess Ultraviolet Emission at High Galactic Latitudes: A New Horizons View
Authors: Jayant Murthy, J. Michael Shull, Marc Postman, Joel Wm. Parker, Seth Redfield, Nathaniel Cunningham, G. Randall Gladstone, Jon P. Pineau, Pontus Brandt, Anne J. Verbiscer, Kelsi N. Singer, Harold A. Weaver, Richard C. Henry, S. Alan Stern
Figure caption: Derived CUVB in the Stem (red) and Box (black), plotted as 1σ error bars, where the derivation of the errors is discussed in Section 3.3.1. The solid angle subtended by the Stem is ﹩\tfrac{1}{20}﹩ that of the Box, and this is reflected in the observed count rate. We have not shown the region immediately around the Lyα line where the subtraction of the intense Lyα line is uncertain.
Paper: Excess Ultraviolet Emission at High Galactic Latitudes: A New Horizons View
Authors: Jayant Murthy, J. Michael Shull, Marc Postman, Joel Wm. Parker, Seth Redfield, Nathaniel Cunningham, G. Randall Gladstone, Jon P. Pineau, Pontus Brandt, Anne J. Verbiscer, Kelsi N. Singer, Harold A. Weaver, Richard C. Henry, S. Alan Stern
Figure caption: Mean surface brightness in the Box from 912 to 1100 Å as a function of the E(B − V) with 1σ errors. Red points are near the south Galactic pole, and black points are near the north Galactic pole. The line represents the best fit to the data with SB = 2994E(B − V) + 221 photon units (Table 5), where SB is the observed surface brightness.
Paper: Excess Ultraviolet Emission at High Galactic Latitudes: A New Horizons View
Authors: Jayant Murthy, J. Michael Shull, Marc Postman, Joel Wm. Parker, Seth Redfield, Nathaniel Cunningham, G. Randall Gladstone, Jon P. Pineau, Pontus Brandt, Anne J. Verbiscer, Kelsi N. Singer, Harold A. Weaver, Richard C. Henry, S. Alan Stern
Figure caption: Mean surface brightness in the Box from 1400 to 1700 Å as a function of the E(B − V) with 1σ errors. Red points are near the south Galactic pole, and black points are near the north Galactic pole. The line represents the best fit to the data with SB = 6723E(B − V) + 264 photon units (Table 5), where SB is the observed surface brightness.
Paper: Excess Ultraviolet Emission at High Galactic Latitudes: A New Horizons View
Authors: Jayant Murthy, J. Michael Shull, Marc Postman, Joel Wm. Parker, Seth Redfield, Nathaniel Cunningham, G. Randall Gladstone, Jon P. Pineau, Pontus Brandt, Anne J. Verbiscer, Kelsi N. Singer, Harold A. Weaver, Richard C. Henry, S. Alan Stern
Figure caption: Diffuse FUV image from GALEX (J. Murthy 2014) in Galactic coordinates with the Alice Box and Stem observations from 2007 (red) and 2023 (white) superimposed. The dashed observations did not include the star HIP 648 (blue star) in the Box and were not used in the derivation of the Box template. Black areas show where there were no GALEX diffuse data.
Paper: Excess Ultraviolet Emission at High Galactic Latitudes: A New Horizons View
Authors: Jayant Murthy, J. Michael Shull, Marc Postman, Joel Wm. Parker, Seth Redfield, Nathaniel Cunningham, G. Randall Gladstone, Jon P. Pineau, Pontus Brandt, Anne J. Verbiscer, Kelsi N. Singer, Harold A. Weaver, Richard C. Henry, S. Alan Stern
Figure caption: Different components of the template creation for the Box. Symbols in the key are as defined in Equation (2). See the caption for Figure 8.
Paper: Excess Ultraviolet Emission at High Galactic Latitudes: A New Horizons View
Authors: Jayant Murthy, J. Michael Shull, Marc Postman, Joel Wm. Parker, Seth Redfield, Nathaniel Cunningham, G. Randall Gladstone, Jon P. Pineau, Pontus Brandt, Anne J. Verbiscer, Kelsi N. Singer, Harold A. Weaver, Richard C. Henry, S. Alan Stern
Figure caption: Offsets for the northern observations (black) and the southern observations (red).
Paper: SKYSURF. VI. The Impact of Thermal Variations of HST on Background Light Estimates
Authors: Isabel A. McIntyre, Timothy Carleton, Rosalia O'Brien, Rogier A. Windhorst, Sarah Caddy, Seth H. Cohen, Rolf A. Jansen, John MacKenty, Scott J. Kenyon
Figure caption: Empirical WFC3/IR thermal background level in the F160W filter as a function of Earth–Sun distance. The residual has a higher amount of scatter than in Figure 9, consistent with a more variable thermal background. The scatter is described well by a thermal background that fluctuates by ±3.5 K (as shown by the blue and red dotted lines). There is a significant trend between thermal background and Earth–Sun distance, that we describe by a linearly decreasing temperature with Earth–Sun distance shown as the black dashed line.
Paper: SKYSURF. VI. The Impact of Thermal Variations of HST on Background Light Estimates
Authors: Isabel A. McIntyre, Timothy Carleton, Rosalia O'Brien, Rogier A. Windhorst, Sarah Caddy, Seth H. Cohen, Rolf A. Jansen, John MacKenty, Scott J. Kenyon
Figure caption: Residual WFC3/IR background (measured background level minus the background level based on the fit to Equation (2)) in different WFC3 filters after fitting to the model described in Equation (2). The residuals are consistent with 0, with a standard deviation consistent with the instrumental noise described in R. A. Windhorst et al. (2022) and R. O’Brien et al. (2023).
Paper: SKYSURF. VI. The Impact of Thermal Variations of HST on Background Light Estimates
Authors: Isabel A. McIntyre, Timothy Carleton, Rosalia O'Brien, Rogier A. Windhorst, Sarah Caddy, Seth H. Cohen, Rolf A. Jansen, John MacKenty, Scott J. Kenyon
Figure caption: Pickoff arm temperature vs. day of the year and orbital phase (degrees), where the color represents TPOM (degrees Celsius). The horizontal red lines indicate where the Earth is closest to the Sun and the horizontal blue lines indicate where Earth is furthest from the Sun.
Paper: SKYSURF. VI. The Impact of Thermal Variations of HST on Background Light Estimates
Authors: Isabel A. McIntyre, Timothy Carleton, Rosalia O'Brien, Rogier A. Windhorst, Sarah Caddy, Seth H. Cohen, Rolf A. Jansen, John MacKenty, Scott J. Kenyon
Figure caption: Orbital phase (degrees) vs. average TPOM (degrees Celsius). The orbital phase is binned over 50°, and data are grouped by time since occultation in 1000 s bins. Data was obtained for each month of January for 2015 through 2023. Errors are calculated as the standard deviation of the residuals in Figure 7.
Paper: SKYSURF. VI. The Impact of Thermal Variations of HST on Background Light Estimates
Authors: Isabel A. McIntyre, Timothy Carleton, Rosalia O'Brien, Rogier A. Windhorst, Sarah Caddy, Seth H. Cohen, Rolf A. Jansen, John MacKenty, Scott J. Kenyon
Figure caption: Temperatures of other WFC3 hardware components. Top: temperature change of the IR focal plane array using data from 2009 through 2022. Middle: temperature change of the optical bench condenser saddle using data from 2009 through 2022. Bottom: temperature change of the optical bench cold plate using data from 2009 through 2022.
Paper: SKYSURF. VI. The Impact of Thermal Variations of HST on Background Light Estimates
Authors: Isabel A. McIntyre, Timothy Carleton, Rosalia O'Brien, Rogier A. Windhorst, Sarah Caddy, Seth H. Cohen, Rolf A. Jansen, John MacKenty, Scott J. Kenyon
Figure caption: Model of the deviation in TPOM from the average yearly temperature as a function of the Earth–Sun distance. Error bars are calculated as the standard deviation of the residual.
Paper: SKYSURF. VI. The Impact of Thermal Variations of HST on Background Light Estimates
Authors: Isabel A. McIntyre, Timothy Carleton, Rosalia O'Brien, Rogier A. Windhorst, Sarah Caddy, Seth H. Cohen, Rolf A. Jansen, John MacKenty, Scott J. Kenyon
Figure caption: Time since occultation (seconds) vs. average TPOM (in degrees Celsius) with orbital phase in 45° bins. For any time value greater than 6000 s, a value of 6000 s is assigned. Data was obtained for each month of January only for the years 2015 through 2023. Errors are calculated as the standard deviation of the residuals in Figure 7.
Paper: SKYSURF. VI. The Impact of Thermal Variations of HST on Background Light Estimates
Authors: Isabel A. McIntyre, Timothy Carleton, Rosalia O'Brien, Rogier A. Windhorst, Sarah Caddy, Seth H. Cohen, Rolf A. Jansen, John MacKenty, Scott J. Kenyon
Figure caption: Pickoff arm temperature as a function of day of the year. Top: Pickoff arm temperature vs. orbital phase (degrees) and day of the year. Bottom: Pickoff arm temperature vs. time since occultation (seconds) and the day of the year. The color represents TPOM (°C).
Paper: SKYSURF. VI. The Impact of Thermal Variations of HST on Background Light Estimates
Authors: Isabel A. McIntyre, Timothy Carleton, Rosalia O'Brien, Rogier A. Windhorst, Sarah Caddy, Seth H. Cohen, Rolf A. Jansen, John MacKenty, Scott J. Kenyon
Figure caption: Optical bench temperature vs. day of the year and orbital phase (degrees), where the color representing average optical bench temperature (degrees Celsius).
Paper: SKYSURF. VI. The Impact of Thermal Variations of HST on Background Light Estimates
Authors: Isabel A. McIntyre, Timothy Carleton, Rosalia O'Brien, Rogier A. Windhorst, Sarah Caddy, Seth H. Cohen, Rolf A. Jansen, John MacKenty, Scott J. Kenyon
Figure caption: Top: sky-surface brightness measurements from this work for maximum and minimum (TPOM) and M1 temperature measurements, compared to those from R. A. Bernstein et al. (2002), S. Matsuura et al. (2017), and R. O’Brien et al. (2023), and the zodiacal light models from G. Aldering (2001) and T. Kelsall et al. (1998). The R. A. Bernstein et al. (2002) results are at an ecliptic longitude of 35﹩\mathop{.}\limits^{\circ }﹩5 and ecliptic latitude of −35﹩\mathop{.}\limits^{\circ }﹩5, and a galactic longitude of 206﹩\mathop{.}\limits^{\circ }﹩6 and a galactic latitude of −59﹩\mathop{.}\limits^{\circ }﹩8. The S. Matsuura et al. (2017) results are at an ecliptic longitude of 342﹩\mathop{.}\limits^{\circ }﹩70 and ecliptic latitude of 89﹩\mathop{.}\limits^{\circ }﹩64, and a galactic longitude of 96﹩\mathop{.}\limits^{\circ }﹩26 and a galactic latitude of 29﹩\mathop{.}\limits^{\circ }﹩46. Given that the SKYSURF points are normalized to the ecliptic pole, slight differences between previous measurements and SKYSURF measurements may be attributable to slightly different ecliptic and galactic positions. The vertical line in the top left of the plot represents the average size of the error bars for these measurements. Errors are assumed to be approximately 3%, per R. A. Windhorst et al. (2022). Bottom: a zoomed-in version of the top plot to highlight the differences between instrument components and maximums and minimums.
Paper: SKYSURF. VI. The Impact of Thermal Variations of HST on Background Light Estimates
Authors: Isabel A. McIntyre, Timothy Carleton, Rosalia O'Brien, Rogier A. Windhorst, Sarah Caddy, Seth H. Cohen, Rolf A. Jansen, John MacKenty, Scott J. Kenyon
Figure caption: Top left: residual between R. O’Brien et al. (2023) sky-surface-brightness measurements and T. Kelsall et al. (1998) zodiacal light model extrapolated to redder wavelengths following T. Carleton et al. (2022) in the F125W filter using the thermal dark correction from T. Carleton et al. (2022). The red line is the line of best fit for these data. Top right: residual between R. O’Brien et al. (2023) sky-surface brightness measurements and T. Kelsall et al. (1998) zodiacal light model in the F125W filter using the empirical thermal dark correction this work. The red line is the line of best fit for these data. Middle left: same as top left, but using the F140W filter. Middle right: same as top right, but using the F140W filter. Bottom left: Same as top left, but using the F160W filter. Bottom right: same as top right, but using the F160W filter.
Paper: A Differentiable Binary Microlensing Model Using Adaptive Contour Integration Method
Authors: Haibin Ren, 海滨 任, Wei Zhu, 伟 祝
Figure caption: An example binary-lens light curve (top panel) and its derivative with respect to the planet-to-star mass ratio q (middle panel). Three different methods have been used here, including using microlux with (black curve) and without (red curve) the new error estimator term, Ed, and using VBBinaryLensing through the finite difference method (blue curve; implemented in scipy.approx_fprime). The bottom panels show the zoom-in views of the two caustic-crossing regions. The inset in the top panel illustrates the binary-lens geometry (caustic and trajectory), with q = 0.2, s = 0.9, and ρ = 10−2. Only microlux with Ed is able to yield a smooth (and accurate) model gradient curve.
Paper: A Differentiable Binary Microlensing Model Using Adaptive Contour Integration Method
Authors: Haibin Ren, 海滨 任, Wei Zhu, 伟 祝
Figure caption: The corner plot illustrating the covariance matrices of KMT-2019-BLG-0371 from the Fisher information matrix approach (red curve) and the HMC sampling (blue curve). Only the 1σ contours are shown in the former case, whereas the 1–3σ contours are shown in the HMC case. The light curve and the binary-lens geometry for the close solution are shown in the upper right figure.
Paper: MOMOS: The Multi-Object MKID Optical Spectrometer Simulator and Data Reduction Package
Authors: Crystal S. Kim, John I. Bailey, Ronald A. López, W. Hawkins Clay, Benjamin A. Mazin
Figure caption: (Left) Flux density distributions and cumulative-density function (CDF) of an example pixel in the on-blaze grating setup. (Right) A histogram of the randomly drawn wavelengths from the CDF, using a Poisson random draw to determine the total number of photons. Each of the five Gaussian-like histogram peaks represent this MKID pixel’s simulated response to the corresponding spectral order. The orders are in ascending order with energy (descending with wavelength). The simulated ﹩{{\mathscr{R}}}_{{\rm{MKID}}}=15﹩ is relatively low, so the orders overlap.
Paper: A Differentiable Binary Microlensing Model Using Adaptive Contour Integration Method
Authors: Haibin Ren, 海滨 任, Wei Zhu, 伟 祝
Figure caption: Derivatives of the same binary light curve as in Figure 5 with respect to the other microlensing parameters obtained by microlux with the E4 term.
Paper: MOMOS: The Multi-Object MKID Optical Spectrometer Simulator and Data Reduction Package
Authors: Crystal S. Kim, John I. Bailey, Ronald A. López, W. Hawkins Clay, Benjamin A. Mazin
Figure caption: Grating blaze as a function of wavelength and order for (left) an on-blaze grating setup and (right) a non-ideal “off-blaze” setup with unity peak throughput. The off-blaze setup represents the current state of MOMOS. Order numbers are specific to the grating for each plot.
Paper: MOMOS: The Multi-Object MKID Optical Spectrometer Simulator and Data Reduction Package
Authors: Crystal S. Kim, John I. Bailey, Ronald A. López, W. Hawkins Clay, Benjamin A. Mazin
Figure caption: Multiplication with this example apodization samples the spectrum right up the edges of the pixel, where it is cut off by the fraction shown.
Paper: MOMOS: The Multi-Object MKID Optical Spectrometer Simulator and Data Reduction Package
Authors: Crystal S. Kim, John I. Bailey, Ronald A. López, W. Hawkins Clay, Benjamin A. Mazin
Figure caption: A flow chart schematic detailing how and where MOMOS data-reduction steps and options are implemented.
Paper: MOMOS: The Multi-Object MKID Optical Spectrometer Simulator and Data Reduction Package
Authors: Crystal S. Kim, John I. Bailey, Ronald A. López, W. Hawkins Clay, Benjamin A. Mazin
Figure caption: A flow chart schematic detailing how and where MOMOS simulator steps and options are implemented.
Paper: MOMOS: The Multi-Object MKID Optical Spectrometer Simulator and Data Reduction Package
Authors: Crystal S. Kim, John I. Bailey, Ronald A. López, W. Hawkins Clay, Benjamin A. Mazin
Figure caption: Effect of bleeding subtraction using a PHOENIX G5 spectrum with prominent airglow. (Left) On-blaze configuration with ﹩{{\mathscr{R}}}_{{\rm{MKID}}}=60﹩ and virtually no overlap. The strong emission lines do not bleed into other orders and no MSF correction was done. (Middle) The same exact configuration except ﹩{{\mathscr{R}}}_{{\rm{MKID}}}=15﹩, also with no correction. The very bright line near 630 nm has bled into the adjacent order shown in the inset. The residual plot shows the difference in SNR from R = 60. As a result, the SNR is lower than average where there is significant bleed. (Right) Order bleeding correction from the MSF after being applied to the middle plot. The bleed has been reduced and the ±correction has been propagated to the ∓uncertainty. The bleed-heavy, low-SNR points have been smoothed out with lowered airglow noise. Both simulations used the same random seed.
Paper: MOMOS: The Multi-Object MKID Optical Spectrometer Simulator and Data Reduction Package
Authors: Crystal S. Kim, John I. Bailey, Ronald A. López, W. Hawkins Clay, Benjamin A. Mazin
Figure caption: A PyReduce wavelength calibration comparing the used HgAr atlas lines and one order of the HgAr lamp spectrum in the on-blaze grating setup. The polynomial degree for the solution is four and the residual between the wavelengths is also shown. The residual upper limit was set to 85 km s−1, which corresponds to the width of about one MKID pixel.