[KIDS] comparison of KIDS to SDSS photometry

Francesco La Barbera flabarber at gmail.com
Fri Nov 30 12:09:31 CET 2012


On Fri, Nov 30, 2012 at 12:01 PM, Konrad Kuijken <kuijken at strw.leidenuniv.nl
> wrote:

>  Hi all,
>
> indeed amazingly flat plots, Francesco!
> I suppose the conclusion from this is that we shouldn't use petroMags for
> comparing stellar magnitudes, and that our coadd photometry is pretty flat
> now.
>
>
Yup, these are my conclusions too, Jelte !
In any case, let's wait to hear also from Mario on Monday morning. We
should stick at using petromags for galaxies and psfmags for stars,
measuring KIDS mags accordingly. This is also crucial to properly
characterize the color terms.

Cheers,
Francesco


> Cheers,
> Jelte
>
>
> On 30/11/12 11:35, Francesco La Barbera wrote:
>
> Hi All,
>
>  this is a "quick" test, showing the delta(mag) stacked plots (i.e.
> overplotting all 13 fields),
> when one adopts PSFmags from SDSS and KIDSCAT large-diameter (8'')
> apertures.
> I used the SDSS-KIDS matched catalogs produced by Mario.
> I didn't plot single values but only binned trends. The x- and y-scales
> are the same as in previous plots.
> Amazing how the 2.5deg patterns disappear!! Although in some cases (e.g.
> magenta curve for g-band comparison), you can see some trend, we should
> consider (IMHO) that PSFmags can still be affected by systematics of the
> order of 0.01-0.02mag, and we are using an arbitrarely(!) large aperture
> for KIDS data. Measuring mags in the same (large) apertures would possibly
> solve any residual aperture effect.
> BTW, the amplitude of the trends is amazingly small !!
>
>  Cheers,
> Francesco
>
>
>
> On Fri, Nov 30, 2012 at 10:40 AM, Konrad Kuijken <
> kuijken at strw.leidenuniv.nl> wrote:
>
>>  Hi all,
>> Beautiful work! Jelte and I looked at the plots yesterday and indeed
>> concluded that the step functions correspond to the size of the Sloan
>> chips. The pattern in iband is 2.5 deg wide, exactly the width of a stripe
>> in Sloan. Two interleaved exposures, six chips with large gaps each,
>> similar to a 1d version of the paw print pattern in vista, would give the
>> step pattern you find.
>>
>>  One thing to check: does the effect show up if you use Sloan psf
>> magnitudes? Petrosian mags might be a little seeing dependent, psf mags
>> should be optimal if they have done their analysis right.
>>
>>  Thanks
>> Konrad
>>
>>
>> On 29 Nov 2012, at 12:15, Jelte de Jong <jelte at strw.leidenuniv.nl> wrote:
>>
>>     Hi Francesco and all,
>>
>> since I was quite intrigued by the strange offsets in the SDSS vs. KiDS
>> comparison for stars (and not for galaxies), I had a look at the DR8 data
>> in the area of the 10 contiguous tiles in INT-DR2.
>> The problem here is of course that we need an independent calibrator that
>> we are certain is constant over the field-of-view, and the obvious thing to
>> me seemed to be the stellar locus.
>>
>> Here is what I did:
>> - downloaded the DR8 petroMag data for stars for (183.5 < RA < 186.5) and
>> (-2 < DEC < +2)
>> - applied extinction correction (using values included in DR8)
>> - calculated the principle colors
>> (FYI: from Ivezic et al, 2004, AN, 325, 583
>> p2s = -0.249*u0 + 0.794*g0 - 0.555*r0 + 0.234
>> p2w = -0.227*g0 + 0.792*r0 - 0.567*i0 + 0.050
>> p2x = 0.707*g0 - 0.707*r0 -0.988
>> p1s = 0.910*u0 - 0.495*g0 - 0.415*r0 - 1.28
>> p1w = 0.928*g0 - 0.556*r0 - 0.372*i0 - 0.425
>> p1x = 1.0*r0 - 1.0*i0
>> )
>> - for the stars with r(petro,SDSS)<18 plotted the principle colors p2s,
>> p2w and p2x (using only the part of the stellar locus that is vertical in
>> these colors, e.g. see
>> http://wiki.astro-wise.org/projects:kids:photometry#sdss-style_principle_colors
>> )
>>
>> In the p2s and p2x projections I couldn't see anything specific, but in
>> p2w there does seem to be a variation, corresponding to the same offsets
>> seen in the plots Francesco sent around.
>> The attached plot shows the p2w color vs. DEC for three different RA bins
>> (middle panel is full RA range, top is low-RA half and bottom is high-RA
>> half of the area), with a running mean plotted in red.
>> I hope you can see (squinting might help ;) there is a 'modulation' in
>> the top and middle panel, and the 'phase' of it agrees with the offsets in
>> the SDSS vs. KiDS comparison!
>> It seems this effect is stronger at RA between 183.5 and 185, and is
>> weaker (or absent) at RA between 185 and 186.5; @Francesco: is this
>> confirmed by the SDSS vs. KiDS comparison?
>>
>> My interpretation on why this is only obvious in the p2w color and not in
>> p2s and p2x, is that the 'problem' is strongest in i-band (the offsets in
>> Mario+Francesco's plots seems larger in i than in the other filters) and
>> p2w is the only principle color that depends on i.
>> Also, the fact that the effect is very small in p2w (~1 %) is probably
>> because the calibration problem occurs in all SDSS filters, meaning that
>> the colors are almost not affected.
>>
>> Perhaps there are other ways in which to go deeper into this, but right
>> now I'm not sure exactly how. Perhaps another independent calibrator can be
>> used... QSO's or something?
>>
>> In any case I have the feeling that the offsets we see might very well be
>> due to a calibration issue in SDSS, or at least in the SDSS petroMags for
>> stars.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Jelte
>>
>> On 28/11/12 10:21, Francesco La Barbera wrote:
>>
>> Dear All,
>>
>>  I  summarize  here  the  comparison  of KIDS  to  SDSS  photometry  we
>> (Mario+me) have performed so far for  the 52 coadds of KIDS INTR2. All
>> plots are included in the attached archive.
>>
>>  Mario has  also performed a  comparison to CFHTLS  as well as  a first
>> attempt to characterize of color terms using SDSS and CFHTLS data, but
>> I'm not going to include it in  here (we didn't have much time to look
>> at it in detail, so far).
>>
>>  We have matched the KIDSCAT catalogs to SDSS DR8, separating stars and
>> galaxies according to SDSS classification.
>>
>>  The plots
>>
>>  sdss_${SOURCE}_${BAND}_${FIELD}_full_DR8.png
>>
>>  show differences  in magnitude as a  function of RA  (upper panel) and
>> DEC (lower panel), where
>> SOURCES -> gal/st refer to galaxies and stars, respectively
>> BAND -> ugri
>> FIELD -> f135 plots the three fields with RA~131, 135, and 139
>>          f185 plots the ten fields with RA~184, 185, and 186
>>
>>  We  are using  petromags  from  SDSS (for  both  stars and  galaxies).
>> KIDSCAT  mags have  been  interpotaled to  match  the SDSS  4xPetroRad
>> (diameter) aperture  for each object.   Lines are running  medians for
>> different bands/pointings (the u-band comparison for galaxies is quite
>> meaningless,  considering the  low S/N  of SDSS  u-band  data). Median
>> KIDS-SDSS offsets have been subtracted off for each field.
>>
>>  On  average, the  agreement is  good, with  no  significant variations
>> (larger than a few cenths of  mags) across the fields. This is further
>> shown in the attached plots
>>
>>  cmp_${BAND}band_phot_ra_dec_${SOURCES}_errmag0.05.jpg
>>
>>  where
>>
>>  BAND->ugri
>> SOURCES-> stars/galaxies
>>
>>  plotting magntiude  differences as a function  of RA and  DEC with all
>> fields overplotted (after subtracting off the RA and DEC of each coadd
>> center).   Median magnitude  offsets have  been removed  (as  done for
>> previous  plots),  and  only   objects  with  better  SDSS  photometry
>> (petroerr_mag<0.05mag) have been  selected. Circles plot all available
>> sources (for  all 13  coadds in each  band). Curves  are median-binned
>> trends (each bin including the same number of objects), with different
>> colors corresponding to different  fields. Notice that the u-band plot
>> for galaxies is not included, for the reasons mentioned above.
>>
>>  Finally, the plots
>>
>>  off_${BAND}band_phot_ra_dec_${SOURCES}_errmag0.05.jpg
>>
>>  show  the distribution  of median  magnitude  offsets for  all the  13
>> fields available in  each band.  In general, the  distributions have a
>> width  of a  few cenths  of mags,  but in  one  case (KIDS_185.0_-0.5,
>> g-band) there is a large offset of ~0.1mag. We think it's important to
>> investigate why this happened.
>>
>>  I'm also  attaching two tables  (produced by Mario, hopefully  in wiki
>> format)  summarizing the  the median  offsets, mad,  and peak  to peak
>> amplitudes  in RA  and DEC  (to have  an upper  value to  the internal
>> photometric accuracy):
>>
>>  ov_sdss_gals.tab
>> ov_sdss_stars.tab
>>
>>  If  necessary, I can  provide further  details/info on  the comparison
>> during today's teleconf. We'll try to put all this material on the wiki as
>> soon as possible.
>>
>>  Cheers,
>> Francesco & Mario
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> KiDS mailing listKiDS at astro-wise.orghttp://listman.astro-wise.org/mailman/listinfo/kids
>>
>>
>> --
>> Dr. Jelte T. A. de Jong
>> Sterrewacht Leiden
>> Leiden University, Leiden, the Netherlands
>> E: jelte at strw.leidenuniv.nl
>> T: +31-(0)715275818
>> W: jelte.jdejong.net
>>
>>    <DR8_p2w.eps>
>>
>>  _______________________________________________
>> KiDS mailing list
>> KiDS at astro-wise.org
>> http://listman.astro-wise.org/mailman/listinfo/kids
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> KiDS mailing list
>> KiDS at astro-wise.org
>> http://listman.astro-wise.org/mailman/listinfo/kids
>>
>>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://listman.astro-wise.org/pipermail/kids/attachments/20121130/573dd9d8/attachment.html 


More information about the KiDS mailing list