adsabs/AstroCLIMB huggingface dataset:
Paper: Kinematics of Cataclysmic Variables in the Solar Neighborhood in the Gaia Era
Authors: Remziye Canbay, Tansel AK, Selçuk Bilir, Faruk Soydugan, Zeki Eker
Figure caption: Distribution of γ velocity errors (a), relative parallax errors (b), and relative proper-motion errors (c) of the CV sample. P and IP denote polars and intermediate polars, respectively.
Paper: Kinematics of Cataclysmic Variables in the Solar Neighborhood in the Gaia Era
Authors: Remziye Canbay, Tansel AK, Selçuk Bilir, Faruk Soydugan, Zeki Eker
Figure caption: Comparison of distances calculated from Gaia DR3 (Gaia Collaboration et al. 2023) database and C. A. L. Bailer-Jones et al. (2021) parallaxes for 432 CVs in the sample. The distribution of differences is given in the lower panel.
Paper: Kinematics of Cataclysmic Variables in the Solar Neighborhood in the Gaia Era
Authors: Remziye Canbay, Tansel AK, Selçuk Bilir, Faruk Soydugan, Zeki Eker
Figure caption: The differential rotation corrections dU (a) and dV (b) applied to the U and V space velocity components of the 432 CVs in the sample as a function of the Galactic longitude.
Paper: Kinematics of Cataclysmic Variables in the Solar Neighborhood in the Gaia Era
Authors: Remziye Canbay, Tansel AK, Selçuk Bilir, Faruk Soydugan, Zeki Eker
Figure caption: (a) Cumulative distribution and (b) histogram of the total space velocity errors of 432 CVs in the sample.
Paper: Accurate and Robust Stellar Rotation Periods Catalog for 82771 Kepler Stars Using Deep Learning
Authors: Ilay Kamai, Hagai B. Perets
Figure caption: Four light-curve examples with inconsistency between our model and that of A. McQuillan et al. (2014). For each sample, the lower panel shows the full light curve, and the upper-left panel shows a zoom-in slice of 166 days. The upper-right panel shows the ACF of the light curve. The light curve is averaged over a window of 1 day. The titles show the Kepler KIC, lightPred period, McQ14 period from A. McQuillan et al. (2014), and the confidence of the model.
Paper: Accurate and Robust Stellar Rotation Periods Catalog for 82771 Kepler Stars Using Deep Learning
Authors: Ilay Kamai, Hagai B. Perets
Figure caption: Left panel: EBs orbital period vs. the ratio between orbital and rotation period. Right panel: EBs orbital period vs. rotation period. Both panels show the results after filtering low confidence and fast rotators, as explained in Section 5.2.5. Colors represents classes defined by J. C. Lurie et al. (2017) and explained in Figure 15. Horizontal lines corresponds to Porb/Prot = 0.5, 1, 2.
Paper: Accurate and Robust Stellar Rotation Periods Catalog for 82771 Kepler Stars Using Deep Learning
Authors: Ilay Kamai, Hagai B. Perets
Figure caption: Examples of simulated light curve and the different preprocessing stages.
Paper: Accurate and Robust Stellar Rotation Periods Catalog for 82771 Kepler Stars Using Deep Learning
Authors: Ilay Kamai, Hagai B. Perets
Figure caption: Consistency curves of eclipsing binaries data set (left) and the A. McQuillan et al. (2014) data set (right). Consistency was defined as less than 40% or 1 day absolute difference.
Paper: Accurate and Robust Stellar Rotation Periods Catalog for 82771 Kepler Stars Using Deep Learning
Authors: Ilay Kamai, Hagai B. Perets
Figure caption: Self-supervised training (upper panel) and simulation-based training (lower panel). Gray represents the training data set. Red represents the validation data set.
Paper: Accurate and Robust Stellar Rotation Periods Catalog for 82771 Kepler Stars Using Deep Learning
Authors: Ilay Kamai, Hagai B. Perets
Figure caption: Prediction head.
Paper: Accurate and Robust Stellar Rotation Periods Catalog for 82771 Kepler Stars Using Deep Learning
Authors: Ilay Kamai, Hagai B. Perets
Figure caption: Temporal block.
Paper: Accurate and Robust Stellar Rotation Periods Catalog for 82771 Kepler Stars Using Deep Learning
Authors: Ilay Kamai, Hagai B. Perets
Figure caption: Conformer block.
Paper: Mon R2: A Hub–Filament System with an Infrared Bubble at the Hub Center
Authors: L. K. Dewangan, N. K. Bhadari, A. K. Maity, O. R. Jadhav, Saurabh Sharma, A. Haj Ismail
Figure caption: (a) Grayscale map of the column density (N(H2)) derived using C18O(1–0). Different zones are highlighted by open and filled circles centered on IRS 2 where the radial distribution of N(H2) and Vlsr is examined. (b) Radial distribution of N(H2) and Vlsr estimated from the center of the circle marked by a star in panel (a). Colored regions in the radial plot refer to the areas marked in panel (a). (c) The integrated intensity map of HNC(3–2) overlaid with several concentric circular arcs centered on IRS 2 (star), where the radial distribution of different emission toward the hub region in Mon R2 is examined. (d) Radial distribution of various emissions toward the hub region in Mon R2 estimated toward the eastern zone from the center of the circle marked by a star in panel (c). Concentric circular arcs highlighted in panel (c) are marked by vertical lines in the radial plot. The maps in panels (a) and (c) have the same resolution of about 4″.
Paper: Mon R2: A Hub–Filament System with an Infrared Bubble at the Hub Center
Authors: L. K. Dewangan, N. K. Bhadari, A. K. Maity, O. R. Jadhav, Saurabh Sharma, A. Haj Ismail
Figure caption: Distribution of dust and molecular emissions in the direction of the area highlighted by the solid box in Figure 1(d). (a) The ALMA 1.14 mm dust continuum map and the 1.14 mm continuum emission contour at 0.45 mJy beam−1. Integrated intensity maps (at Vlsr of [6, 15] km s−1) are shown of (b) HNC(3–2), (c) H13CN(3–2), (d) C18O(1–0), and (e) CS(2–1). In panels (a)–(e), diamonds are the same as in Figure 1(a). The lower four panels show latitude–velocity maps of (f) HNC(3–2), (g) H13CN(3–2), (h) C18O(1–0), and (i) CS(2–1). In panels (f)–(i), the molecular emission (at Vlsr of [6, 15] km s−1) is integrated over the longitude from 213.7038° to 213.7098° (see the solid box in Figure 1(d)).
Paper: Infrared Compositional Measurements in Comet C/2017 K2 (Pan-STARRS) at Heliocentric Distances Beyond 2.3 au
Authors: Chemeda Ejeta, Erika Gibb, Michael A. DiSanti, Hideyo Kawakita, Boncho P. Bonev, Neil Dello Russo, Nathan X. Roth, Younas Khan, Adam J. McKay, Michael R. Combi, Lori Feaga, Mohammad Saki, Ronald J. Vervack Jr, Yinsi Shou
Figure caption: Sample spectra and best-fit fluorescent models of K2 on UT 2022 August 10 (panel (a)), August 19 [(b) and (c)], and August 20 (d). The observed spectra (black) are superimposed with the telluric model (yellow). Continuum-subtracted spectra with individual fluorescence emission models (color coded by species) are shown below the observed spectrum in each panel.  The bottom trace indicates the residual spectrum (after subtracting the modeled continuum and total molecular contributions), with the superimposed ﹩\pm ﹩1σ stochastic noise envelope shown in orange.
Paper: Mon R2: A Hub–Filament System with an Infrared Bubble at the Hub Center
Authors: L. K. Dewangan, N. K. Bhadari, A. K. Maity, O. R. Jadhav, Saurabh Sharma, A. Haj Ismail
Figure caption: PPV maps of (a) ALMA HNC(3–2) and (b) ALMA C18O(1–0) in the direction of an area shown in Figures 8(b) and (d). The PPV maps are produced using the tool SCOUSEPY.
Paper: Mon R2: A Hub–Filament System with an Infrared Bubble at the Hub Center
Authors: L. K. Dewangan, N. K. Bhadari, A. K. Maity, O. R. Jadhav, Saurabh Sharma, A. Haj Ismail
Figure caption: PV diagrams of (a) the HNC(3–2) and (c) the H13CN(3–2) emission along the path s1, and (b) the HNC(3–2) and (d) the H13CN(3–2) emission along the path s2. (e)–(h) PV diagrams of the HNC(3–2) emission along the paths g1–g4. All these paths are indicated by dotted–dashed lines in Figure 6(a).
Paper: Mon R2: A Hub–Filament System with an Infrared Bubble at the Hub Center
Authors: L. K. Dewangan, N. K. Bhadari, A. K. Maity, O. R. Jadhav, Saurabh Sharma, A. Haj Ismail
Figure caption: Summary of the various features observed toward Mon R2 in this study.
Paper: Infrared Compositional Measurements in Comet C/2017 K2 (Pan-STARRS) at Heliocentric Distances Beyond 2.3 au
Authors: Chemeda Ejeta, Erika Gibb, Michael A. DiSanti, Hideyo Kawakita, Boncho P. Bonev, Neil Dello Russo, Nathan X. Roth, Younas Khan, Adam J. McKay, Michael R. Combi, Lori Feaga, Mohammad Saki, Ronald J. Vervack Jr, Yinsi Shou
Figure caption: Sample spectra of H2O, OH*, HCN, and C2H2 acquired using the NIRSPEC KL1 (top panel) and KL2 (bottom panel) settings on UT 2022 July 28, with 56 and 60 minutes on the source, respectively (Table 1). The observed spectra are in black, with the telluric model overplotted in yellow (for KL1) and green (for KL2). The individual fluorescence models are indicated in different colors, with red showing the total fluorescence and telluric models. The residual spectra are displayed at the bottom of each panel with 1σ stochastic noise envelope superimposed.
Paper: Spectroscopically Resolved Partial Phase Curve of the Rapid Heating and Cooling of the Highly Eccentric Hot Jupiter HAT-P-2b with WFC3
Authors: Bob Jacobs, Jean-Michel Désert, Nikole Lewis, Ryan C. Challener, L. C. Mayorga, Zoë L. de Beurs, Vivien Parmentier, Kevin B. Stevenson, Julien de Wit, Saugata Barat, Jonathan Fortney, Tiffany Kataria, Michael Line
Figure caption: HAT-P-2b's partial phase curve compared to a suite of forward models. We denote the 3D GCMs by N. K. Lewis et al. (2014) in red for the solar metallicity case and in yellow for the 5× solar metallicity case. Cloudless 1D solar metallicity forward models by L. C. Mayorga et al. (2021, and in preparation) are blue, and cloudy models are pink. For the models we denote the equilibrium case with a solid line and cases where TiO and VO are excluded with a dashed–dotted line. We also denote the posterior distribution of the time of periastron from this work (purple) and from J. de Wit et al. (2017), and we show their median as a dashed line. The 1D time-stepping forward models are for the planet's dayside rather than the Earth-facing hemisphere. Between periastron and secondary eclipse this is a decent approximation. Top: planetary flux relative to the stellar flux at Spitzer's 4.5 μm wavelengths from J. de Wit et al. (2017) in green. The models are sampled at the epoch, and therefore orbital geometry, at which J. de Wit et al. (2017) observed. The 1D time step shows a sudden step in brightness at ~5 hr after midtransit due to the sudden onset of a thermal inversion and therefore a sudden change in atmospheric layers probed. Middle: Fp/Fs at WFC3 wavelengths. A total of 200 posterior samples from Figure 2 are shown in aquamarine green, with the best-fit light curve being shown as a thick line. The models are sampled at the epoch of the WFC3 observations. Bottom: common-mode blackbody temperature phase curve compared to modeled blackbody temperatures and brightness temperatures of the white light-curve fits. The measured temperatures were calculated for each orbit using the common-mode method and a blackbody fit. We converted the Fp/Fs from the models to blackbody temperatures by fitting a blackbody to their phase-resolved spectra, hence why the GCM temperatures are more bumpy than the modeled band-averaged flux. The common-mode measured temperatures of the second visit are also noted in Table 4. We discard the common-mode results for the first visit because of the strong telescope systematics as discussed in Section 2.5.
Paper: Spectroscopically Resolved Partial Phase Curve of the Rapid Heating and Cooling of the Highly Eccentric Hot Jupiter HAT-P-2b with WFC3
Authors: Bob Jacobs, Jean-Michel Désert, Nikole Lewis, Ryan C. Challener, L. C. Mayorga, Zoë L. de Beurs, Vivien Parmentier, Kevin B. Stevenson, Julien de Wit, Saugata Barat, Jonathan Fortney, Tiffany Kataria, Michael Line
Figure caption: Partial phase curve spectra for HAT-P-2b of the second visit for the common-mode method (black data) compared to forward models and the 1D free-chemistry retrieval (aquamarine green). The 3D GCMs are represented in red for the solar metallicity scenario and in yellow for the 5× solar metallicity scenario. 1D cloudless solar metallicity forward models by (L. C. Mayorga et al. 2021, and in preparation) are depicted in blue, while cloudy models are shown in pink. Equilibrium cases are denoted with solid lines, and cases excluding TiO and VO are represented with dashed–dotted lines. Dashed lines represent fits of a blackbody spectrum plus a monochromatic offset. The fits without priors are colored, and the fits including temperature priors from the white light curve are shown in black. Any features in the blackbody fits are of stellar origin. We excluded the wavelength bin at 1.28 μm from the fits. In the four panels on the left, the common-mode spectra have been shifted with a monochromatic offset that fits the blackbody spectra without priors. In the four panels on the right, they are shifted to best fit the 1D free-chemistry retrievals. Due to the nature of the common-mode method, these offsets are not known a priori. The big difference in monochromatic offset between the blackbody fits and the free-chemistry retrievals is readily visible and quantified in Table 4.
Paper: Spectroscopically Resolved Partial Phase Curve of the Rapid Heating and Cooling of the Highly Eccentric Hot Jupiter HAT-P-2b with WFC3
Authors: Bob Jacobs, Jean-Michel Désert, Nikole Lewis, Ryan C. Challener, L. C. Mayorga, Zoë L. de Beurs, Vivien Parmentier, Kevin B. Stevenson, Julien de Wit, Saugata Barat, Jonathan Fortney, Tiffany Kataria, Michael Line
Figure caption: HAT-P-2b's eclipse spectrum for WFC3 with the RECTE fit (purple), with the common-mode method (gray), and for the Spitzer observations (black; N. K. Lewis et al. 2013; J. de Wit et al. 2017). We also overplot a blackbody fit (dashed black line), the 3D GCM models (red, yellow), the 1D time-stepping models (blue, pink), and the best-fit 1D free-chemistry retrieval (aquamarine green). The retrieval was performed on the WFC3 data only, but excluding the bin centered at 1.28 μm (denoted with a cross). See Section 5.3 for a discussion on this. Top: full HAT-P-2b near-infrared eclipse spectrum. We sampled the forward models at what was the time of secondary eclipse during the epoch of the Spitzer observations (2011). This makes for a ~80 ppm difference at Spitzer wavelengths compared to the WFC3 epoch (2020). The Spitzer data by N. K. Lewis et al. (2013) do not take any stellar pulsations into account. Bottom left: eclipse spectrum zoomed in on the WFC3 wavelengths. The models are sampled at the epoch of the WFC3 observations (2020). We added a monochromatic offset to the common-mode-reduced spectrum to match the average eclipse depth of the RECTE fit. We also offset the common-mode-reduced spectrum in wavelength slightly to make it more distinguishable from the RECTE fit. Note that the common-mode method is entirely different from the RECTE method, yet the results are relatively similar. Bottom right: TP profiles of the models, sampled at the time of secondary eclipse during the WFC3 epoch. The equilibrium forward models have a thermal inversion, while the models without TiO/VO do not. The median TP profile (purple) of the free-chemistry retrieval is almost isothermal, while the best-fit profile (aquamarine green) is not.
Paper: Spectroscopically Resolved Partial Phase Curve of the Rapid Heating and Cooling of the Highly Eccentric Hot Jupiter HAT-P-2b with WFC3
Authors: Bob Jacobs, Jean-Michel Désert, Nikole Lewis, Ryan C. Challener, L. C. Mayorga, Zoë L. de Beurs, Vivien Parmentier, Kevin B. Stevenson, Julien de Wit, Saugata Barat, Jonathan Fortney, Tiffany Kataria, Michael Line
Figure caption: Corner–corner plot of HAT-P-2b's phase curve parameters from the full light-curve fits. Correlations between the fit parameters shown in this figure and other fit parameters are shown in Figure 15 in Appendix B. From left to right: Fp/Fs,min, the minimum planetary flux in ppm; Fp/Fs,sec, the secondary eclipse depth in ppm, which is not fit but derived from the other parameters; c1, the difference in planetary flux between its minimum and maximum in ppm; c2, the difference in hours between periastron and the time of flux maximum; c3, the flux increase timescale in hours; c4, the flux decrease timescale in hours; and tper, the difference in hours between t0 and the time of periastron. We overplot the values found by J. de Wit et al. (2017; green) and Z. L. de Beurs et al. (2023; blue). Median values are denoted with a solid line in the histograms, and 1σ uncertainties are denoted with dashed lines.
Paper: Spectroscopically Resolved Partial Phase Curve of the Rapid Heating and Cooling of the Highly Eccentric Hot Jupiter HAT-P-2b with WFC3
Authors: Bob Jacobs, Jean-Michel Désert, Nikole Lewis, Ryan C. Challener, L. C. Mayorga, Zoë L. de Beurs, Vivien Parmentier, Kevin B. Stevenson, Julien de Wit, Saugata Barat, Jonathan Fortney, Tiffany Kataria, Michael Line
Figure caption: Corner–corner plot of HAT-P-2b's orbital parameters from the white light-curve fits. This is an excerpt from the full corner–corner plot in Figure 15 in Appendix B. From left to right: Δt0, the difference in minutes between the measured transit and the predicted timing of midtransit from E. S. Ivshina & J. N. Winn (2022); e, the orbital eccentricity; ω⋆, the argument of periastron; and tper, the difference in hours between t0 and the time of periastron that is derived from the measured t0, e, and ω⋆. Because tper is almost uniquely defined by ω⋆, we do not show its correlations. Median values are denoted with a solid line in the histograms, and 1σ values are denoted with dashed lines. We overplot the values found by J. de Wit et al. (2017; green), E. S. Ivshina & J. N. Winn (2022; brown), and Z. L. de Beurs et al. (2023; blue).
Paper: Spectroscopically Resolved Partial Phase Curve of the Rapid Heating and Cooling of the Highly Eccentric Hot Jupiter HAT-P-2b with WFC3
Authors: Bob Jacobs, Jean-Michel Désert, Nikole Lewis, Ryan C. Challener, L. C. Mayorga, Zoë L. de Beurs, Vivien Parmentier, Kevin B. Stevenson, Julien de Wit, Saugata Barat, Jonathan Fortney, Tiffany Kataria, Michael Line
Figure caption: Best-fit (aquamarine green) and median (purple) TP profiles of the 1D free-chemistry retrievals of the secondary eclipse spectrum. The right panel displays the contribution function that corresponds to the best-fit TP profile. We compare this to the TP profiles and the pressure of the τ = 0.5 layer of the 1D time-stepping forward models. There are almost no differences between the cloudy and cloudless contribution functions.
Paper: Spectroscopically Resolved Partial Phase Curve of the Rapid Heating and Cooling of the Highly Eccentric Hot Jupiter HAT-P-2b with WFC3
Authors: Bob Jacobs, Jean-Michel Désert, Nikole Lewis, Ryan C. Challener, L. C. Mayorga, Zoë L. de Beurs, Vivien Parmentier, Kevin B. Stevenson, Julien de Wit, Saugata Barat, Jonathan Fortney, Tiffany Kataria, Michael Line
Figure caption: Median retrieved TP profiles for the partial phase curve spectra. The shaded regions denote the 1σ uncertainties. The solid lines are median TP profiles. The spectra are shown in Figure 10.
Paper: Spectroscopically Resolved Partial Phase Curve of the Rapid Heating and Cooling of the Highly Eccentric Hot Jupiter HAT-P-2b with WFC3
Authors: Bob Jacobs, Jean-Michel Désert, Nikole Lewis, Ryan C. Challener, L. C. Mayorga, Zoë L. de Beurs, Vivien Parmentier, Kevin B. Stevenson, Julien de Wit, Saugata Barat, Jonathan Fortney, Tiffany Kataria, Michael Line
Figure caption: HAT-P-2b's transmission spectrum measured for WFC3. We overplot the monochromatic fit (aquamarine green) and cloudless (blue) and cloudy (pink) 1D equilibrium chemistry models from Section 3.2. The shaded region on the fit denotes a 1σ uncertainty on the wavelength-averaged transit depth. Because the clouds in the cloudy model reside at very high pressures, the cloudless and cloudy models are so similar that they are almost indistinguishable in this plot.
Paper: Spectroscopically Resolved Partial Phase Curve of the Rapid Heating and Cooling of the Highly Eccentric Hot Jupiter HAT-P-2b with WFC3
Authors: Bob Jacobs, Jean-Michel Désert, Nikole Lewis, Ryan C. Challener, L. C. Mayorga, Zoë L. de Beurs, Vivien Parmentier, Kevin B. Stevenson, Julien de Wit, Saugata Barat, Jonathan Fortney, Tiffany Kataria, Michael Line
Figure caption: Average observed spectral stellar electron count rate per exposure during the occultation of HAT-P-2b. It is a convolution of the actual stellar spectrum and the G141 transmission function. The wavelengths that are used for this work are highlighted in blue. The observed count rate at the longest wavelength is only 60% of the peak count rate, requiring wavelength-dependent telescope systematics parameters.
Paper: starkiller: Subtracting Stars and Other Sources from IFU Spectroscopic Data Through Forward Modeling
Authors: Ryan Ridden-Harper, Michele T. Bannister, Sophie E. Deam, Thomas Nordlander
Figure caption: Extracted spectra of the satellite strike on Blazar WISEA J014132.24-542751.0 (J0141-5427) on 2022 July 23 (see Figure 11). Top left: blazar with satellite contamination (blue), with the satellite spectrum extracted from its streak (red) by starkiller's sat_killer functionality. Top right: the residuals from subtracting another MUSE spectrum (“uncontaminated”) of the blazar that was acquired immediately after the satellite passed; blue is equivalent to the satellite spectrum (i.e., red line in top-left panel), and orange to the formerly contaminated blazar data after starkiller was applied. Lower left: the satellite spectrum (red) compared with a solar spectrum (gray) and the best-fitting atmospheric extinction for a solar spectrum (black). Several prominent solar lines are visible in the satellite's spectrum, such as Hα and the Na doublet, but others are not solar or telluric. Lower right: best-fitting atmospheric extinction that maximizes the correlation of an extincted solar spectrum to the satellite spectrum (orange), and the three dominant extinction components from aerosols (purple dotted–dashed), Rayleigh scattering (blue dashed), and ozone (blue dotted).
Paper: starkiller: Subtracting Stars and Other Sources from IFU Spectroscopic Data Through Forward Modeling
Authors: Ryan Ridden-Harper, Michele T. Bannister, Sophie E. Deam, Thomas Nordlander
Figure caption: starkiller applied to the data cube of planetary nebula NGC 6563 (no AO) with position-corrected Gaia DR3 stars shown as orange circles. Left: mean stack of all wavelength for the reduced MUSE data cube. Middle: scene constructed by starkiller on Gaia-listed stars in the FOV. Right: the median stack of all wavelengths for the scene-subtracted cube. The subtracted Gaia DR3 stars have residuals <​​​​​​10%.
Paper: starkiller: Subtracting Stars and Other Sources from IFU Spectroscopic Data Through Forward Modeling
Authors: Ryan Ridden-Harper, Michele T. Bannister, Sophie E. Deam, Thomas Nordlander
Figure caption: Images of the dust emission (7080–7120 Å) from 2I/Borisov (S. Deam et al. 2025 in preparation ) before and after the application of starkiller to MUSE data cubes. 2I was within 10° of the Galactic plane on 2020 February 2 and 2020 March 19, and the FOV for each exposure contained between 80 and 136 stars with mGAIA−G < 21. More significant improvement occurred for the 2020 March 19 data: the number of usable exposures (without a star directly behind 2I) increased from two to three due to starkiller, allowing for improved median coadding and the removal of more stars. The greater number of bright stars in the March observations allowed for more accurate modeling of the streaked PSFs and their subsequent subtractions. The upper images are displayed with a square-root stretch over a 99.95th percentile interval, while the lower images show contours from a Gaussian convolved image of 1 standard deviation.