CoolWiki - User contributions [en]

C-WAYS source matching work

2012-06-28T17:45:42Z

Novatne: /* The mechanics of what we need to do */

=Big Picture Introduction -- an analogy that might be too fanciful?=

[[image:oldmap1.png|left]] [[image:oldmap2.png|right]] When westerners first discovered the Americas, they had largely set out with the goal of finding gold or other treasure. They were coming at the new continent from the perspective of someone in a boat, with minimal information about what the landforms really were, except for what they could see with their own eyes. Their maps look strange to those of us used to seeing images of these landforms from space, but we have a whole lot more information now than they did then.

The first thing that these early Western explorers were able to attempt to map was the coasts, because that's what they had the most information about...and the most immediate need to know. They needed to know where coral reefs were that might damage their ships, and where the big rivers emptied into the sea so that they could take on more fresh water. They also could learn about more land faster when boating up the rivers rather than walking.

As more and more boats explored the coasts, the maps got better, but they still seem distorted compared to the landforms we know today. In some of these early maps of the Americas, when Europe and Africa were included, even the African coast on the Mediterranean side doesn't look all that realistic, compared to what we know now.

As the westerners pushed further and further into the land (in the Americas or for that matter Africa) from the coasts, their knowledge deepened about what the continent actually looked like, aided by improvements in technology (such as more accurate ways of measuring longitude). Their knowledge of the land started in clumps around the rivers, again because that's what they needed that best enabled them to travel the furthest. But, their knowledge expanded as fast as they could expand. And their goals changed too -- certainly some were still looking for treasure (or freedom from persecution, religious or otherwise), but more in the earliest years were just trying to survive (here I'm thinking of Jamestown or Roanoke). They explored to find more food to eat (critters or plants).

The Native Americans, of course, had a perfectly good understanding of what their land looked like, but even so, most likely, one tribe only knew the land near them -- my guess is that the Powhatan tribe (in VA) had no idea whatsoever what the Sioux tribe's lands looked like, even if trade routes were such that items could move from the Dakotas to Virginia. But the Native Americans were observing the land in a different way, having lived there for a while and having their own methods of exploration. Once westerners realized that they could learn from the Native Americans (here I'm thinking of Lewis and Clark), their knowledge could expand even faster once they paid attention to what was already known.

There were, at nearly every stage of these early maps, regions that were sort of hazy and unexplored, e.g., "here be dragons". Someone might have a vague idea of what was there, but maybe only on the edges; no one (at least no one known to the map maker) had any detailed knowledge of what was there.

SO NOW.... here is a perhaps tortured analogy... We would like to go exploring in a particular region, making note of where the big landforms are, and we have a specific goal of finding edible animals and plants to support our efforts in further explorations. Some people have spent some time exploring parts of this region before. It will make our knowledge expand faster if we pay attention to what is already known before setting off on our own journey. Others have mapped different parts of the region using different methods of exploration before -- some on foot and some on horseback, and still others in boats. Some people just ran through this region identifying the big trees and big rocks. Some people wrote down what they learned in Algonquin (what the Powhatan spoke) and we need to translate it before it makes sense in the language we speak. Some people cared a lot about their tiny camp next to the river and they know that region really well, but beyond the borders of their camp, "here be dragons." There is ''some'' information about the area around the camp that we can obtain from other people and from exploring on our own, but we can also come back to this very well-known region and check what we think we know about the rest of the area by testing it on the well-known region. The people who know the region right next to the river really well also know that this animal or that plant is good food and won't make us sick. When we go exploring out further from the camp, if we find a critter or a plant that we think is the same as the stuff that the people next to the river know is ok to eat, we can bring it back to that camp to compare it and see if it is, in fact, the same or something new. We can also, among the animals and plants we find, put them in groups of apparently similar things -- these are all 4-footed furry critters, and those have feathers and wings.

Explicitly drawing lines between that analogy and reality:
{| border="1"
|'''analogy'''
|'''reality translation'''
|-
|We would like to go exploring in a particular region, making note of where the big landforms are, and we have a specific goal of finding edible animals and plants to support our efforts in further explorations.
|We have a goal of exploring a region (well, really 3) on the sky, specifically looking for young stars.
|-
|Some people have spent some time exploring parts of this region before. It will make our knowledge expand faster if we pay attention to what is already known before setting off on our own journey.
| We need to read and understand the literature.
|-
| Other people have mapped different parts of the region using different methods of exploration before -- some on foot and some on horseback, and still others in boats.
| Other people have used different wavelengths to explore this region before.
|-
| Some people just ran through this region identifying the big trees and big rocks.
| Some people just identified the bright young stars, or the things bright in the wavelengths they were using.
|-
| Some people wrote what they learned down in Algonquin (what the Powhatan spoke) and we need to translate it before it makes sense in the language we speak.
| Some people wrote down poorly constrained coordinates in epoch B1950 coordinates and we need to translate it to accurate J2000 coordinates.
|-
| Some people cared a lot about a tiny patch next to the river and know that region really well, but beyond the borders of their camp, "here be dragons."
| The NITARP team last year spent their year worrying about the 5'x5' patch with 4-band IRAC coverage, but did not care about anything else.
|-
| There is ''some'' information about the area around the camp that we can obtain from other people and from exploring on our own...
| We can comb the literature and use the 2MASS+WISE data to help guide us in exploring the region.
|-
| ...but we can come back to this very well-known region and check what we think we know about the rest of the area by testing it on the well-known region.
| We can use WISE to identify things with YSO-like colors in the region. Did we rediscover the YSOs that other people found, particularly last year's team using Spitzer data? If not, why not? Do the objects with YSO-like colors look like point sources in 2MASS or do they look like galaxies?
|-
| The people who know the region right next to the river really well also know that this critter or that plant is good food and won't make us sick. When we go exploring out further from the camp, if we find a critter or a plant that we think is the same as the stuff that the people next to the river know is ok to eat, we can bring it back to that camp to compare it and see if it is, in fact, the same or something new.
| We have a region of space that is very well studied with Spitzer, and serendipitous Spitzer data nearby. We will use WISE over the ''whole region'' to find things that we think might be YSOs. We can check our hunch that some of the objects are in fact YSOs by comparing what we get to the Spitzer data where we can, and including that data in our analysis.
|-
|We can also, among the animals and plants we find, put them in groups of apparently similar things -- these are all 4-footed furry critters, and those have feathers and wings.
|Among the objects we find, we can put them in groups based on the shape of their SED, from 'really embedded' (class 0-I) down to 'not much of an IR excess' (class II-III).
|}

We will not be able to get a comprehensive be-all-end-all understanding of the region (e.g., in the analogy, we will not go straight from Columbus or even Lewis and Clark to weather satellite views of the continent with a GPS in our car as we drive). We can, however, do the best that we can with the information we have, by learning from those who have gone before, learning as we go, and making intelligent guesses about what we don't know.

And, of course, we need to do this in all of the regions we care about.

=More specific introduction to source matching from the literature=

Several people have done prior studies in BRC 27, BRC 34, and BRC 38 before, but they have NOT found all the young stars! You worked hard to find all of these articles in the context of the proposal. Certainly investigator A working in BRC 27 in year X saw some of the same sources as investigator B working in that same region in year Y, as did investigator C in year Z. Now we actually have to do the work of figuring out which specific sources are which in all the papers - are the sources called out in paper 1 the same or different sources as paper 2?, etc., until all the papers are exhausted, and we have a '''complete catalog of all the previously studied sources in the region'''.

The thing that makes this complicated is that, even though everyone is reporting in RA and Dec, not everyone is using exactly the same system (some are 1950 coordinates and some are 2000 coordinate), and not everyone has the same coordinate accuracies (some are working off of photographic plates, and some are working off large-format CCDs). And, what does it mean to have "the same" coordinates -- is within an arcsecond ok? 5 arcseconds? an arcminute? This is where it gets tricky, and where you have to apply your brain! Spitzer, WISE, and 2MASS are all using exactly the same, high-accuracy coordinate system -- it's all tied to 2MASS's J2000 coordinates -- but even then the position of the same object will not be EXACTLY the same in each image, in each catalog, because there is a limit to the precision with which we can identify the coordinates. Where possible, we need to update the old coordinates by comparing what the old papers say to the 2MASS data. Then we need to fold in the objects with newer coordinates into our collection of sources.

Part of the challenge here is bookkeeping -- writing down coordinates correctly, keeping track of which sources are which, and getting the correct data matched to the correct source.

Last year, I thought this would be a relatively simple project that could be done before the summer visit. However, it turned out not to be the case. Part of this is, I think, the complexity of the region, BRC 27 in particular (which is of course still a problem this year), and part of it was I think my ability to explain it! I've pulled out and updated all of my best(?) explanations and descriptions here. IF IT DOESN'T MAKE SENSE, PLEASE ASK QUESTIONS. If this is done wrong, or only halfway done, it will make for a LOT of pain downstream. ''Trust me.''

=1950 vs. 2000 Coordinates and Yet Another Analogy=

Review the differences between the 1950 and 2000 coordinate systems. '''REMINDER: THE STARS ARE NOT MOVING.''' (Several people last year kept saying things like "wow the stars move a lot" and if you say that, I WILL correct you!) '''''The coordinate system is moving, not the stars.''''' (Well, technically the stars may really be moving, but we don't have that information, and the size of any such motion will be on the order of a tenth of an arcsec or less; the change due to the change in coordinate systems is much greater.)

An analogy can provide an example. Through Google Maps, I can see that there is a Baskin Robbins near Ms. Linahan's school (from the NITARP 2011 class). I can give you the position of that Baskin Robbins in any of a number of ways:
*346 North Lake St, Mundelein, IL
*8 long blocks roughly west of the school
*4 minutes west of the school (if you drive)
*20 minutes west of the school (if you walk)
*latitude 42.269711, longitude -88.004308
Or, I could be really pathological and/or vague and say:
*the 3rd oldest Baskin Robbins in Mundelein (NB: i'm just making this up)
*the 5th oldest ice cream store in Munelein (NB: i'm just making this up)
*An ice cream store on Lake, south of Loch Lomond

Are the coordinates different in these systems? Yes, but they are pointing to the same physical location. Is the Baskin Robbins really moving? No.

That is what is going on in these BRCs. The most obvious difference is between B1950 coordinates and the J2000 coordinates -- these are different coordinate systems, and we are trying to translate one into the other, but we are also trying to understand the intrinsic errors of the earlier studies, and figure out which object they were 'really' talking about. In our example above, we want to translate each of the bullets in the above into "latitude 42.269711, longitude -88.004308". The added complication (in the BRCs and in the list above) is that some of the previous authors were not working in particularly precise coordinate systems. Given the list above, your steps in finding the 'true location' of this store would be slightly different for each bullet, and in the end, might include identifing all the ice cream stores on Lake, south of Loch Lomond, figuring out how old the ice cream stores are in Mundelein, figure out how far you could get in radius in a 4min drive from the school, figure out how far you could get in radius in a 20 min walk from school, etc. In this case, you know that all of these pointers are trying to indicate the same physical location, so you could then look at the commonalities in all of those results, and then, eventually, assert with confidence that all of them point to lat/long (42.269711, -88.004308). In the case of the BRCs, we don't know for sure that each object in each paper actually does have a match. Sometimes they don't. Sometimes there really are two objects close to each other, not just one.

So all of this is what we have to do with the BRCs. We have lots of lists of objects, all in slightly different systems and coming from different ways of searching for young stars. We have to apply our brain and figure out which objects each paper is talking about -- which ones are new objects and which ones are the same as objects previously identified.

=Venn Diagrams and Bookeeping=

One of the difficulties we will have during this project is keeping all the source lists straight. It happens every year, and I don't know how to make it easier, except for warning you that it will happen! Here is a Venn diagram explaining, roughly, the various source lists we will have before we are done, at minimum. This Venn diagram is meant to be a "big picture" sort of thing; this page on the source matching is meant to address just, well, the previously identified sources.

[[image:brcvenn1.png]]

The source lists include:
*All "bright enough" sources seen in the WISE maps (a conceptual list only)
*Sources in the WISE catalog of photometry (to which we will add photometry from 2MASS, Haleakala, and Spitzer in the places where we have that data)
*Sources in this general direction studied by anyone else, ever (the majority of those reported are also YSOs, but not all of them) -- this is the list we are trying to assemble here.

Out of those sets, our ultimate scientific goals mean that we are striving to identify:
*YSO candidates we select from IR excess
*YSOs that others identify that do not appear to have an IR excess.

The Venn diagram is even trying to correctly represent the relative sizes of the circles in that "all bright enough sources" ought to be darn close to "sources in the catalog" and that there will be some "sources in this general direction..." not in the regions we care about, and some of those sources that do not have IR excesses.

NOW we are going to work on the list of "Sources in this general direction studied by anyone else, ever" for BRC27.

[[image:brcvenn2.png]]

For this diagram, I tried to spatially represent the concepts behind what we're doing now (on this page), but I admit the circles are not as carefully constructed/laid out as the first one!

Each of the 5 papers studying things in the region of BRC27 (Ogura et al 2002, Gregorio Hetem et al. 2009, Chauhan et al 2009, Shevchenko et al 1999 and Wiramihardja et al 1986) looked in the direction of BRC27. Surely, then, they saw some of the same sources as each other, and as what we are seeing. For example, the Gregorio-Hetem survey covered a HUGE area, and we care only about a part of it. Ogura saw some of the same sources that Gregorio-Hetem did, but not all of them -- they were not covering the same areas, but even within the same area, they did not see the same sources, because one survey was X-ray driven, and one was Halpha driven. They '''*will*''' see different sources, not only because they're looking at different wavelengths, but also because each survey is not infinitely deep -- the sensitivity of the surveys is limited, and as such will not see every source in this direction. Same for each other pair of papers, and our survey.

This is hardest for BRC 27 because it has the most previous work. This is easiest for BRC 34 because there have been so few papers done on this region.

=The Goal=

The goal here is to construct a list that is as clean as possible for each of the objects that these other folks studied, identifying which objects are truly the same between surveys, and identifying which of these objects are ones that those authors thought were actually young stars (as opposed to, e.g., background giants). We also want to carry along each of the relevant bits of information that these other authors provided -- the object is a lot easier to identify as clearly a young object or a contaminant if there is optical data, so if the other authors reported any optical measurements, we should keep track of those and tie them to the correct object in our analysis. We should also make note of any spectral types or other relevant information. The aim of this part of the project is thus:
*'''Which objects from paper x are also seen in paper y?'''
and then, the next step we will take is
*Which of these objects are seen in the WISE data?

=The Challenges=

This would be an easy task if:
*everyone provided their original images, either as a figure or as a fits file
*everyone worked in the same coordinate system, by which i mean not just "J2000" vs "B1950" but "J2000 tied to 2MASS" as opposed to "J2000 tied to the pulsars seen by NRAO" or "J2000 as calibrated as best I can based on the HST Guide Stars I happen to see in my image".
*the objects were all greater than 5 arcseconds apart from each other on the sky, such that each source that is detected was cleanly and uniquely detected in each survey.
*and, of course, if we were guaranteed a match between surveys.

Working backwards up that list...

We've already talked above about how we are not guaranteed a match between surveys, because stars are different brightnesses at different bands, and because the surveys have limited sensitivity.

There are plenty of sources that are very close together. Even among just the YSO candidates, some are very close to each other, closer than 5 arcseconds.

If we had fabulous coordinates for everything, we could let the computer match them all up and not worry about it. But we don't. And it's not just a matter of precessing the B1950 ones to J2000 ones either - there are inherent errors in those old coordinates which will not necessarily smoothly map into a clean match to other objects.

If we had images, we could line them up by eye and identify the same objects in each frame. I don't necessarily mean "line them up in ds9" (which would be the ideal case). But also, you can identify the objects simply by comparison between images they publish and images to which you have access (IRAC, 2MASS, POSS). This is what we are going to have to retreat to, in the tough cases.

Here are some notes on the 5 BRC 27 papers, in no particular order:
*Gregorio-Hetem - finding charts for a few complex fields, which may or may not be in our region. J2000 coordinates tied to 2mass, though, so less worried about these. note that their discussion includes this very conceptual problem -- they are trying to tie X-ray sources to optical sources.
*Wiramihardja - no finding charts; a few very coarse-scale ones, one with just YSOs. Not a lot of help here. Also just 1950 coordinates read off a photographic plate. Likely to be large and unsystematic errors.
*Shevchenko - finding chart provided (fig 1). 1950 coordinates. big field (bigger than the region we care about).
*Ogura - finding chart provided; J2000 coordinates but not necessarily tied to 2MASS.
*Chauhan - no real finding charts provided; there are a few coarse-scale ones. J2000 coordinates tied to 2mass, though, so less worried about these.

=The mechanics of what we need to do=
'''Links of interest:'''
*http://irsa.ipac.caltech.edu/applications/Gator/ - Gator
*http://irsa.ipac.caltech.edu/applications/FinderChart/ - Finder Chart

For each of these papers, we need a machine-readable (read as "plain text file that the computer can parse into individual numbers rather than images of numbers or gobbledegook from microsoft") version of the relevant data tables. This was either:
*obtained from the journal itself, in which case the data table is much longer than we need
*obtained by typing in the coordinates of the objects in our fields from these older papers and then getting updated coordinates.

[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fR58i8zvMwQ Here] is a video I made for last year's team on getting updated coordinates. This approach SHOULD work in MOST cases but did not work in every case; more on this momentarily. What we need to do is :
*type the 1950 coordinates into the 2mass point source archive, making sure that it knows that it is 1950 coordinates; or type in the 2000 coordinates (and it will assume that they are 2000 coordinates).
*look at what comes back, and take the closest *bright* object.

Then we will have 5 lists of UPDATED, HIGH QUALITY coordinates, one per paper, and we can let the computer run through the list, finding the matches between papers. We then can generate one file that purports to have one line per literature object, with all the relevant data on that line. The difficulty comes in that inevitably, a few sources during this process end up tied to the same object, or identified in other ways as duplicates or incorrect matches.

The approach above to get updated coordinates for targets works ON THE ASSUMPTION THAT THERE ARE NOT "TOO MANY" SOURCES NEARBY, AND THAT THE PRIOR SURVEYS, BEING SHALLOW, ARE MOST LIKELY TO MATCH TO THE BRIGHT 2MASS SOURCE. As I say, this should work in MOST cases but not ALL of them.

If the original authors are reporting more than one source within one paper, we should not consolidate them into one unless we are REALLY sure that the original authors were wrong. (This does happen; see my North American Nebula paper for examples.) Within each paper, this is what I would do:
*Go do the 2MASS archive search (Go here: http://irsa.ipac.caltech.edu/applications/Gator/ -- pick 2MASS then on the next page pick 2mass point source catalog (PSC), then use that search page, making sure to specify which coordinate system in which you are working. Use the coordinates from the original paper to avoid transcription errors, as opposed to any subsequent notes or xls files. Be VERY careful to copy the coordinates exactly; that's the most common problem.)
*Look at the sources returned. Is there just one within 5-10 arcsec? that's probably your match; go on to the next source. If there is more than one, is there just one BRIGHT one within 5-10 arcsec? Is there another source from that same paper within 5-10 arcsec? If the answer to either of those questions is yes, go on to the next step.
*Go get the images in another window. Compare the images (if provided) from the original papers. We can use Finder Chart (http://irsa.ipac.caltech.edu/applications/FinderChart/) to get DSS and 2MASS images of the region where there is a confusing match. Compare this to the images provided in the papers. Identify which object is the one(s) in the paper.
*With that information, then go back to your PSC, and then use the 2MASS point source catalog to find the actual high-precision coordinates of that specific dot you have identified in the images as the match to the literature object.

UPDATE 31 May 12: while the OUTPUT of this process has to be in plain ASCII text, you can work in Excel or Google Docs and spit it out as plain text as the last step. [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nCJ3ctOGvNk Here] is a video on getting plain text (including IPAC table format) files into Excel.

Here is a list of all the papers we have assembled as part of the lit review, as well as a list of their coordinate list status. First priority items (e.g. those for you to tackle first in May/June) are in '''bold''' in the last column:
{| border="1"
|'''paper'''
|'''notes'''
|'''coordinate list status'''
|'''merging status and pending items'''
|-
| Getman et al 2007
| X-rays. BRC 38 only. coordinates likely just fine.
| got all tables from journal. LMR has merged t1,t2,t3 together
|need to merge it to rest of catalogs. '''does it really have all of [http://web.ipac.caltech.edu/staff/rebull/working/cwayspapers/3-oktoskip/nisini01.pdf Nisini et al. (2001)] already in t3? - YES, ''' ''Getman Table 3 contains K, 2MASS and Spitzer data for all 20 ''Embedded Young objects'' from Nisini Table 2 Getman Tables 1 and 2 contain X-Ray and MIR data for Nisini stars 2, 3, 10, 11 --Peggy Piper 20:56, 10 June 2012 (PDT)''
|-
| Beltran et al. 2009
| NIR. 38 only. coordinates likely just fine.
| got all tables from journal. ([http://web.ipac.caltech.edu/staff/rebull/working/cwayspapers/1-essential/beltran09data/ link])
| <strike>need to merge relevant bits of tables together</strike>. individual tables have been merged together. still need to merge that to rest of catalogs.
|-
|Choudhury et al. 2010
| MIR. 38 only. coordinates likely just fine.
| got all tables from journal. ([http://web.ipac.caltech.edu/staff/rebull/working/cwayspapers/1-essential/choud10_data/ link])
| <strike>need to merge relevant bits of tables together</strike> tables from paper have been merged together. still need to merge that to rest of catalogs.
|-
| Chauhan et al. 2009
| NIR, MIR (IRAC only). 27 and 38. coordinates ... odd. look at carefully.
| got all tables from journal. ([http://web.ipac.caltech.edu/staff/rebull/working/cwayspapers/1-essential/chauhan09data/ link])
| need to merge their tables together (will take some care! - do this if the rest of the bold stuff here is done and you're chomping at the bit for more), then merge that to rest of catalogs.
|-
| Barentsen et al. 2011
| iprime,rprime, halpha. BRC 34, 38.
| got all tables from journal.
| LMR has already merged it to rest of catalogs.
|-
| Nakano et al. 2012
| iprime, halpha, some AKARI. BRC 34, 38.
| got all tables from journal. ([http://web.ipac.caltech.edu/staff/rebull/working/cwayspapers/1-essential/nakano12data/ link])
| LMR has already merged it to rest of catalogs.
|-
| Ogura et al. 2002
| BRC 27, 34, 38. turns out will probably need 26 too!! '''there are finding charts!!!'''
| 34 is ~done. 27 only done in center (see rebull et al 2012 below). 26, 38 not touched. [http://web.ipac.caltech.edu/staff/rebull/working/cwayspapers/1-essential/group%20S/ogura02data/ link] for data files as downloaded from journal
| '''COORD NEED **UPDATING**''' 34 is done (see below). 27 is done only in center (see below). 26, 38 are not touched. need to obtain list of objects as published, find match in 2mass, assemble list of matches betw this and 2mass. you probably will need the finding charts in the paper to sort out the matches. Ogura list updated 20120625 (sorry, ignore the date in the name) text [[File:CWAYSBRC273438Oguraids_20120614.txt]] excel[[File:CWAYSBRC273438Oguraids_20120614.xls]] coordinates entered and matched, Peggy's groups cross checked within group, with Rebull 2012,and with Jackie's group. waiting Lauren and Jackie's groups cross check. There were no sources for BRC 26.
|-
| Gregorio-Hetem et al. 2009
| BRC 27 only. X-rays. coordinates probably ok.
| have whole tables from journal ([http://web.ipac.caltech.edu/staff/rebull/working/cwayspapers/2-scanfordata/gregoriodata/ link]). merged together. done in center (see below). over whole region, LMR beat against 2mass in region and took nearest within 2 arcsec. several still don't have matches. region we care about is small compared to region they worked on.
| '''COORD NEED CHECKING AND POSSIBLY UPDATING.''' [[file:gregorio_20120514.txt]] here is my file of the sources which has the published RA and Dec written in two ways (both J2000) and the proposed 2mass match (done blindly by the computer). if it has an asterisk (*) in front of the name, it is in the region we care about. Is it correctly matched to the right 2mass source? if not, what should it be?? Waiting Jackie and Bob source matching.
|-
| Shevchenko et al. 1999
| BRC 27 only. antiquated coordinates.
| have whole table from journal. done in center (see below). over whole region, LMR beat against 2mass in region and took nearest within 5(!!) arcsec. several still don't have matches. region we care about is small compared to region they worked on.
| '''COORD NEED CHECKING AND POSSIBLY UPDATING.''' [[file:shevchenko_20120514.txt]] [[file:shevchenko_20120615.txt]] here is my file of the sources which has the published RA and Dec (B1950) and then a converted-to-J2000 version of the published coordinates, both written in two ways (degrees and hh:mm:ss, dd:mm:ss) and the proposed 2mass match (done blindly by the computer). if it has an asterisk (*) in front of the name, it is in the region we care about. Is it correctly matched to the right 2mass source? if not, what should it be?? Waiting Debbie and Lauren source matching. [[File:Shevchenko_2012_06_27.xlsx]] The Shevchenko data had some very weird anomalies that bear further scrutiny by Luisa. We concluded that maybe some numbers had been swapped on source #99, and there are several multiple sources that were listed as one source.
|-
| Wiramihardja et al. 1986
| BRC 27 only. antiquated coordinates.
| have nothing from journal (it's too old).
|need to merge it to rest of catalogs. '''<strike>COORD NEED **UPDATING**</strike>''' done in center (see below). need to obtain list of objects as published, find match in 2mass, assemble list of matches betw this and 2mass. NB: region we care about is probably smaller than region they published. no need to find matches for objects outside of our region but may be easier to just blow through and do all of them? '''DONE''' coordinates entered, matched and data entered, Bob and Peggy's groups cross checked. text[[File:CWAYSBRC27Wiramihardjaidsdata_20120614.txt]] excel[[File:CWAYSBRC27Wiramihardjaidsdata_20120614.xls]]
|-
| Rebull et al. 2012
| BRC 27, 34 only. coordinates and crossmatches to literature should be good. I hope!!
| have tables, of course!
| should hopefully be ok! [[file:rebull2012t1brcxids_20120514.txt]] -- file of all literature information, crossids. note that technically this is in latex format, so "&" divides columns and \nodata means, well, "no data". some people provided errors, some didn't, so that is reflected in this table. last object listed for BRC 27 is actually off the edge of the IRAC 4-band region, and no longer appears in the table. The cross-ids should actually be ok, though. [[file:rebull2012t2_20120518.txt]] -- file of new measurements discussed in Rebull et al. 2012. Note that there are both limits and errors in this table.
|}

=Last (next) steps=

Once we have updated high-precision lists of coordinates from each paper, we can merge them together, and come up with a new-and-improved list of all the previously identified objects in this region in one place, one line per object with all the relevant information, in a plain text file.

Then we will compare this list to our WISE catalog. There will be some with IR excesses, and some without IR excesses. I expect that we will probably detect them all, but there might be some we do not detect.

Then we will also compare this list to where there is Spitzer data, and obtain Spitzer data for those sources where we can.

Then we will also compare this list to the optical data, where possible. There WILL be some we WILL NOT DETECT in the optical data.

C-WAYS source matching work

2012-06-28T17:37:16Z

Novatne: /* The mechanics of what we need to do */

=Big Picture Introduction -- an analogy that might be too fanciful?=

[[image:oldmap1.png|left]] [[image:oldmap2.png|right]] When westerners first discovered the Americas, they had largely set out with the goal of finding gold or other treasure. They were coming at the new continent from the perspective of someone in a boat, with minimal information about what the landforms really were, except for what they could see with their own eyes. Their maps look strange to those of us used to seeing images of these landforms from space, but we have a whole lot more information now than they did then.

The first thing that these early Western explorers were able to attempt to map was the coasts, because that's what they had the most information about...and the most immediate need to know. They needed to know where coral reefs were that might damage their ships, and where the big rivers emptied into the sea so that they could take on more fresh water. They also could learn about more land faster when boating up the rivers rather than walking.

As more and more boats explored the coasts, the maps got better, but they still seem distorted compared to the landforms we know today. In some of these early maps of the Americas, when Europe and Africa were included, even the African coast on the Mediterranean side doesn't look all that realistic, compared to what we know now.

As the westerners pushed further and further into the land (in the Americas or for that matter Africa) from the coasts, their knowledge deepened about what the continent actually looked like, aided by improvements in technology (such as more accurate ways of measuring longitude). Their knowledge of the land started in clumps around the rivers, again because that's what they needed that best enabled them to travel the furthest. But, their knowledge expanded as fast as they could expand. And their goals changed too -- certainly some were still looking for treasure (or freedom from persecution, religious or otherwise), but more in the earliest years were just trying to survive (here I'm thinking of Jamestown or Roanoke). They explored to find more food to eat (critters or plants).

The Native Americans, of course, had a perfectly good understanding of what their land looked like, but even so, most likely, one tribe only knew the land near them -- my guess is that the Powhatan tribe (in VA) had no idea whatsoever what the Sioux tribe's lands looked like, even if trade routes were such that items could move from the Dakotas to Virginia. But the Native Americans were observing the land in a different way, having lived there for a while and having their own methods of exploration. Once westerners realized that they could learn from the Native Americans (here I'm thinking of Lewis and Clark), their knowledge could expand even faster once they paid attention to what was already known.

There were, at nearly every stage of these early maps, regions that were sort of hazy and unexplored, e.g., "here be dragons". Someone might have a vague idea of what was there, but maybe only on the edges; no one (at least no one known to the map maker) had any detailed knowledge of what was there.

SO NOW.... here is a perhaps tortured analogy... We would like to go exploring in a particular region, making note of where the big landforms are, and we have a specific goal of finding edible animals and plants to support our efforts in further explorations. Some people have spent some time exploring parts of this region before. It will make our knowledge expand faster if we pay attention to what is already known before setting off on our own journey. Others have mapped different parts of the region using different methods of exploration before -- some on foot and some on horseback, and still others in boats. Some people just ran through this region identifying the big trees and big rocks. Some people wrote down what they learned in Algonquin (what the Powhatan spoke) and we need to translate it before it makes sense in the language we speak. Some people cared a lot about their tiny camp next to the river and they know that region really well, but beyond the borders of their camp, "here be dragons." There is ''some'' information about the area around the camp that we can obtain from other people and from exploring on our own, but we can also come back to this very well-known region and check what we think we know about the rest of the area by testing it on the well-known region. The people who know the region right next to the river really well also know that this animal or that plant is good food and won't make us sick. When we go exploring out further from the camp, if we find a critter or a plant that we think is the same as the stuff that the people next to the river know is ok to eat, we can bring it back to that camp to compare it and see if it is, in fact, the same or something new. We can also, among the animals and plants we find, put them in groups of apparently similar things -- these are all 4-footed furry critters, and those have feathers and wings.

Explicitly drawing lines between that analogy and reality:
{| border="1"
|'''analogy'''
|'''reality translation'''
|-
|We would like to go exploring in a particular region, making note of where the big landforms are, and we have a specific goal of finding edible animals and plants to support our efforts in further explorations.
|We have a goal of exploring a region (well, really 3) on the sky, specifically looking for young stars.
|-
|Some people have spent some time exploring parts of this region before. It will make our knowledge expand faster if we pay attention to what is already known before setting off on our own journey.
| We need to read and understand the literature.
|-
| Other people have mapped different parts of the region using different methods of exploration before -- some on foot and some on horseback, and still others in boats.
| Other people have used different wavelengths to explore this region before.
|-
| Some people just ran through this region identifying the big trees and big rocks.
| Some people just identified the bright young stars, or the things bright in the wavelengths they were using.
|-
| Some people wrote what they learned down in Algonquin (what the Powhatan spoke) and we need to translate it before it makes sense in the language we speak.
| Some people wrote down poorly constrained coordinates in epoch B1950 coordinates and we need to translate it to accurate J2000 coordinates.
|-
| Some people cared a lot about a tiny patch next to the river and know that region really well, but beyond the borders of their camp, "here be dragons."
| The NITARP team last year spent their year worrying about the 5'x5' patch with 4-band IRAC coverage, but did not care about anything else.
|-
| There is ''some'' information about the area around the camp that we can obtain from other people and from exploring on our own...
| We can comb the literature and use the 2MASS+WISE data to help guide us in exploring the region.
|-
| ...but we can come back to this very well-known region and check what we think we know about the rest of the area by testing it on the well-known region.
| We can use WISE to identify things with YSO-like colors in the region. Did we rediscover the YSOs that other people found, particularly last year's team using Spitzer data? If not, why not? Do the objects with YSO-like colors look like point sources in 2MASS or do they look like galaxies?
|-
| The people who know the region right next to the river really well also know that this critter or that plant is good food and won't make us sick. When we go exploring out further from the camp, if we find a critter or a plant that we think is the same as the stuff that the people next to the river know is ok to eat, we can bring it back to that camp to compare it and see if it is, in fact, the same or something new.
| We have a region of space that is very well studied with Spitzer, and serendipitous Spitzer data nearby. We will use WISE over the ''whole region'' to find things that we think might be YSOs. We can check our hunch that some of the objects are in fact YSOs by comparing what we get to the Spitzer data where we can, and including that data in our analysis.
|-
|We can also, among the animals and plants we find, put them in groups of apparently similar things -- these are all 4-footed furry critters, and those have feathers and wings.
|Among the objects we find, we can put them in groups based on the shape of their SED, from 'really embedded' (class 0-I) down to 'not much of an IR excess' (class II-III).
|}

We will not be able to get a comprehensive be-all-end-all understanding of the region (e.g., in the analogy, we will not go straight from Columbus or even Lewis and Clark to weather satellite views of the continent with a GPS in our car as we drive). We can, however, do the best that we can with the information we have, by learning from those who have gone before, learning as we go, and making intelligent guesses about what we don't know.

And, of course, we need to do this in all of the regions we care about.

=More specific introduction to source matching from the literature=

Several people have done prior studies in BRC 27, BRC 34, and BRC 38 before, but they have NOT found all the young stars! You worked hard to find all of these articles in the context of the proposal. Certainly investigator A working in BRC 27 in year X saw some of the same sources as investigator B working in that same region in year Y, as did investigator C in year Z. Now we actually have to do the work of figuring out which specific sources are which in all the papers - are the sources called out in paper 1 the same or different sources as paper 2?, etc., until all the papers are exhausted, and we have a '''complete catalog of all the previously studied sources in the region'''.

The thing that makes this complicated is that, even though everyone is reporting in RA and Dec, not everyone is using exactly the same system (some are 1950 coordinates and some are 2000 coordinate), and not everyone has the same coordinate accuracies (some are working off of photographic plates, and some are working off large-format CCDs). And, what does it mean to have "the same" coordinates -- is within an arcsecond ok? 5 arcseconds? an arcminute? This is where it gets tricky, and where you have to apply your brain! Spitzer, WISE, and 2MASS are all using exactly the same, high-accuracy coordinate system -- it's all tied to 2MASS's J2000 coordinates -- but even then the position of the same object will not be EXACTLY the same in each image, in each catalog, because there is a limit to the precision with which we can identify the coordinates. Where possible, we need to update the old coordinates by comparing what the old papers say to the 2MASS data. Then we need to fold in the objects with newer coordinates into our collection of sources.

Part of the challenge here is bookkeeping -- writing down coordinates correctly, keeping track of which sources are which, and getting the correct data matched to the correct source.

Last year, I thought this would be a relatively simple project that could be done before the summer visit. However, it turned out not to be the case. Part of this is, I think, the complexity of the region, BRC 27 in particular (which is of course still a problem this year), and part of it was I think my ability to explain it! I've pulled out and updated all of my best(?) explanations and descriptions here. IF IT DOESN'T MAKE SENSE, PLEASE ASK QUESTIONS. If this is done wrong, or only halfway done, it will make for a LOT of pain downstream. ''Trust me.''

=1950 vs. 2000 Coordinates and Yet Another Analogy=

Review the differences between the 1950 and 2000 coordinate systems. '''REMINDER: THE STARS ARE NOT MOVING.''' (Several people last year kept saying things like "wow the stars move a lot" and if you say that, I WILL correct you!) '''''The coordinate system is moving, not the stars.''''' (Well, technically the stars may really be moving, but we don't have that information, and the size of any such motion will be on the order of a tenth of an arcsec or less; the change due to the change in coordinate systems is much greater.)

An analogy can provide an example. Through Google Maps, I can see that there is a Baskin Robbins near Ms. Linahan's school (from the NITARP 2011 class). I can give you the position of that Baskin Robbins in any of a number of ways:
*346 North Lake St, Mundelein, IL
*8 long blocks roughly west of the school
*4 minutes west of the school (if you drive)
*20 minutes west of the school (if you walk)
*latitude 42.269711, longitude -88.004308
Or, I could be really pathological and/or vague and say:
*the 3rd oldest Baskin Robbins in Mundelein (NB: i'm just making this up)
*the 5th oldest ice cream store in Munelein (NB: i'm just making this up)
*An ice cream store on Lake, south of Loch Lomond

Are the coordinates different in these systems? Yes, but they are pointing to the same physical location. Is the Baskin Robbins really moving? No.

That is what is going on in these BRCs. The most obvious difference is between B1950 coordinates and the J2000 coordinates -- these are different coordinate systems, and we are trying to translate one into the other, but we are also trying to understand the intrinsic errors of the earlier studies, and figure out which object they were 'really' talking about. In our example above, we want to translate each of the bullets in the above into "latitude 42.269711, longitude -88.004308". The added complication (in the BRCs and in the list above) is that some of the previous authors were not working in particularly precise coordinate systems. Given the list above, your steps in finding the 'true location' of this store would be slightly different for each bullet, and in the end, might include identifing all the ice cream stores on Lake, south of Loch Lomond, figuring out how old the ice cream stores are in Mundelein, figure out how far you could get in radius in a 4min drive from the school, figure out how far you could get in radius in a 20 min walk from school, etc. In this case, you know that all of these pointers are trying to indicate the same physical location, so you could then look at the commonalities in all of those results, and then, eventually, assert with confidence that all of them point to lat/long (42.269711, -88.004308). In the case of the BRCs, we don't know for sure that each object in each paper actually does have a match. Sometimes they don't. Sometimes there really are two objects close to each other, not just one.

So all of this is what we have to do with the BRCs. We have lots of lists of objects, all in slightly different systems and coming from different ways of searching for young stars. We have to apply our brain and figure out which objects each paper is talking about -- which ones are new objects and which ones are the same as objects previously identified.

=Venn Diagrams and Bookeeping=

One of the difficulties we will have during this project is keeping all the source lists straight. It happens every year, and I don't know how to make it easier, except for warning you that it will happen! Here is a Venn diagram explaining, roughly, the various source lists we will have before we are done, at minimum. This Venn diagram is meant to be a "big picture" sort of thing; this page on the source matching is meant to address just, well, the previously identified sources.

[[image:brcvenn1.png]]

The source lists include:
*All "bright enough" sources seen in the WISE maps (a conceptual list only)
*Sources in the WISE catalog of photometry (to which we will add photometry from 2MASS, Haleakala, and Spitzer in the places where we have that data)
*Sources in this general direction studied by anyone else, ever (the majority of those reported are also YSOs, but not all of them) -- this is the list we are trying to assemble here.

Out of those sets, our ultimate scientific goals mean that we are striving to identify:
*YSO candidates we select from IR excess
*YSOs that others identify that do not appear to have an IR excess.

The Venn diagram is even trying to correctly represent the relative sizes of the circles in that "all bright enough sources" ought to be darn close to "sources in the catalog" and that there will be some "sources in this general direction..." not in the regions we care about, and some of those sources that do not have IR excesses.

NOW we are going to work on the list of "Sources in this general direction studied by anyone else, ever" for BRC27.

[[image:brcvenn2.png]]

For this diagram, I tried to spatially represent the concepts behind what we're doing now (on this page), but I admit the circles are not as carefully constructed/laid out as the first one!

Each of the 5 papers studying things in the region of BRC27 (Ogura et al 2002, Gregorio Hetem et al. 2009, Chauhan et al 2009, Shevchenko et al 1999 and Wiramihardja et al 1986) looked in the direction of BRC27. Surely, then, they saw some of the same sources as each other, and as what we are seeing. For example, the Gregorio-Hetem survey covered a HUGE area, and we care only about a part of it. Ogura saw some of the same sources that Gregorio-Hetem did, but not all of them -- they were not covering the same areas, but even within the same area, they did not see the same sources, because one survey was X-ray driven, and one was Halpha driven. They '''*will*''' see different sources, not only because they're looking at different wavelengths, but also because each survey is not infinitely deep -- the sensitivity of the surveys is limited, and as such will not see every source in this direction. Same for each other pair of papers, and our survey.

This is hardest for BRC 27 because it has the most previous work. This is easiest for BRC 34 because there have been so few papers done on this region.

=The Goal=

The goal here is to construct a list that is as clean as possible for each of the objects that these other folks studied, identifying which objects are truly the same between surveys, and identifying which of these objects are ones that those authors thought were actually young stars (as opposed to, e.g., background giants). We also want to carry along each of the relevant bits of information that these other authors provided -- the object is a lot easier to identify as clearly a young object or a contaminant if there is optical data, so if the other authors reported any optical measurements, we should keep track of those and tie them to the correct object in our analysis. We should also make note of any spectral types or other relevant information. The aim of this part of the project is thus:
*'''Which objects from paper x are also seen in paper y?'''
and then, the next step we will take is
*Which of these objects are seen in the WISE data?

=The Challenges=

This would be an easy task if:
*everyone provided their original images, either as a figure or as a fits file
*everyone worked in the same coordinate system, by which i mean not just "J2000" vs "B1950" but "J2000 tied to 2MASS" as opposed to "J2000 tied to the pulsars seen by NRAO" or "J2000 as calibrated as best I can based on the HST Guide Stars I happen to see in my image".
*the objects were all greater than 5 arcseconds apart from each other on the sky, such that each source that is detected was cleanly and uniquely detected in each survey.
*and, of course, if we were guaranteed a match between surveys.

Working backwards up that list...

We've already talked above about how we are not guaranteed a match between surveys, because stars are different brightnesses at different bands, and because the surveys have limited sensitivity.

There are plenty of sources that are very close together. Even among just the YSO candidates, some are very close to each other, closer than 5 arcseconds.

If we had fabulous coordinates for everything, we could let the computer match them all up and not worry about it. But we don't. And it's not just a matter of precessing the B1950 ones to J2000 ones either - there are inherent errors in those old coordinates which will not necessarily smoothly map into a clean match to other objects.

If we had images, we could line them up by eye and identify the same objects in each frame. I don't necessarily mean "line them up in ds9" (which would be the ideal case). But also, you can identify the objects simply by comparison between images they publish and images to which you have access (IRAC, 2MASS, POSS). This is what we are going to have to retreat to, in the tough cases.

Here are some notes on the 5 BRC 27 papers, in no particular order:
*Gregorio-Hetem - finding charts for a few complex fields, which may or may not be in our region. J2000 coordinates tied to 2mass, though, so less worried about these. note that their discussion includes this very conceptual problem -- they are trying to tie X-ray sources to optical sources.
*Wiramihardja - no finding charts; a few very coarse-scale ones, one with just YSOs. Not a lot of help here. Also just 1950 coordinates read off a photographic plate. Likely to be large and unsystematic errors.
*Shevchenko - finding chart provided (fig 1). 1950 coordinates. big field (bigger than the region we care about).
*Ogura - finding chart provided; J2000 coordinates but not necessarily tied to 2MASS.
*Chauhan - no real finding charts provided; there are a few coarse-scale ones. J2000 coordinates tied to 2mass, though, so less worried about these.

=The mechanics of what we need to do=
'''Links of interest:'''
*http://irsa.ipac.caltech.edu/applications/Gator/ - Gator
*http://irsa.ipac.caltech.edu/applications/FinderChart/ - Finder Chart

For each of these papers, we need a machine-readable (read as "plain text file that the computer can parse into individual numbers rather than images of numbers or gobbledegook from microsoft") version of the relevant data tables. This was either:
*obtained from the journal itself, in which case the data table is much longer than we need
*obtained by typing in the coordinates of the objects in our fields from these older papers and then getting updated coordinates.

[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fR58i8zvMwQ Here] is a video I made for last year's team on getting updated coordinates. This approach SHOULD work in MOST cases but did not work in every case; more on this momentarily. What we need to do is :
*type the 1950 coordinates into the 2mass point source archive, making sure that it knows that it is 1950 coordinates; or type in the 2000 coordinates (and it will assume that they are 2000 coordinates).
*look at what comes back, and take the closest *bright* object.

Then we will have 5 lists of UPDATED, HIGH QUALITY coordinates, one per paper, and we can let the computer run through the list, finding the matches between papers. We then can generate one file that purports to have one line per literature object, with all the relevant data on that line. The difficulty comes in that inevitably, a few sources during this process end up tied to the same object, or identified in other ways as duplicates or incorrect matches.

The approach above to get updated coordinates for targets works ON THE ASSUMPTION THAT THERE ARE NOT "TOO MANY" SOURCES NEARBY, AND THAT THE PRIOR SURVEYS, BEING SHALLOW, ARE MOST LIKELY TO MATCH TO THE BRIGHT 2MASS SOURCE. As I say, this should work in MOST cases but not ALL of them.

If the original authors are reporting more than one source within one paper, we should not consolidate them into one unless we are REALLY sure that the original authors were wrong. (This does happen; see my North American Nebula paper for examples.) Within each paper, this is what I would do:
*Go do the 2MASS archive search (Go here: http://irsa.ipac.caltech.edu/applications/Gator/ -- pick 2MASS then on the next page pick 2mass point source catalog (PSC), then use that search page, making sure to specify which coordinate system in which you are working. Use the coordinates from the original paper to avoid transcription errors, as opposed to any subsequent notes or xls files. Be VERY careful to copy the coordinates exactly; that's the most common problem.)
*Look at the sources returned. Is there just one within 5-10 arcsec? that's probably your match; go on to the next source. If there is more than one, is there just one BRIGHT one within 5-10 arcsec? Is there another source from that same paper within 5-10 arcsec? If the answer to either of those questions is yes, go on to the next step.
*Go get the images in another window. Compare the images (if provided) from the original papers. We can use Finder Chart (http://irsa.ipac.caltech.edu/applications/FinderChart/) to get DSS and 2MASS images of the region where there is a confusing match. Compare this to the images provided in the papers. Identify which object is the one(s) in the paper.
*With that information, then go back to your PSC, and then use the 2MASS point source catalog to find the actual high-precision coordinates of that specific dot you have identified in the images as the match to the literature object.

UPDATE 31 May 12: while the OUTPUT of this process has to be in plain ASCII text, you can work in Excel or Google Docs and spit it out as plain text as the last step. [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nCJ3ctOGvNk Here] is a video on getting plain text (including IPAC table format) files into Excel.

Here is a list of all the papers we have assembled as part of the lit review, as well as a list of their coordinate list status. First priority items (e.g. those for you to tackle first in May/June) are in '''bold''' in the last column:
{| border="1"
|'''paper'''
|'''notes'''
|'''coordinate list status'''
|'''merging status and pending items'''
|-
| Getman et al 2007
| X-rays. BRC 38 only. coordinates likely just fine.
| got all tables from journal. LMR has merged t1,t2,t3 together
|need to merge it to rest of catalogs. '''does it really have all of [http://web.ipac.caltech.edu/staff/rebull/working/cwayspapers/3-oktoskip/nisini01.pdf Nisini et al. (2001)] already in t3? - YES, ''' ''Getman Table 3 contains K, 2MASS and Spitzer data for all 20 ''Embedded Young objects'' from Nisini Table 2 Getman Tables 1 and 2 contain X-Ray and MIR data for Nisini stars 2, 3, 10, 11 --Peggy Piper 20:56, 10 June 2012 (PDT)''
|-
| Beltran et al. 2009
| NIR. 38 only. coordinates likely just fine.
| got all tables from journal. ([http://web.ipac.caltech.edu/staff/rebull/working/cwayspapers/1-essential/beltran09data/ link])
| <strike>need to merge relevant bits of tables together</strike>. individual tables have been merged together. still need to merge that to rest of catalogs.
|-
|Choudhury et al. 2010
| MIR. 38 only. coordinates likely just fine.
| got all tables from journal. ([http://web.ipac.caltech.edu/staff/rebull/working/cwayspapers/1-essential/choud10_data/ link])
| <strike>need to merge relevant bits of tables together</strike> tables from paper have been merged together. still need to merge that to rest of catalogs.
|-
| Chauhan et al. 2009
| NIR, MIR (IRAC only). 27 and 38. coordinates ... odd. look at carefully.
| got all tables from journal. ([http://web.ipac.caltech.edu/staff/rebull/working/cwayspapers/1-essential/chauhan09data/ link])
| need to merge their tables together (will take some care! - do this if the rest of the bold stuff here is done and you're chomping at the bit for more), then merge that to rest of catalogs.
|-
| Barentsen et al. 2011
| iprime,rprime, halpha. BRC 34, 38.
| got all tables from journal.
| LMR has already merged it to rest of catalogs.
|-
| Nakano et al. 2012
| iprime, halpha, some AKARI. BRC 34, 38.
| got all tables from journal. ([http://web.ipac.caltech.edu/staff/rebull/working/cwayspapers/1-essential/nakano12data/ link])
| LMR has already merged it to rest of catalogs.
|-
| Ogura et al. 2002
| BRC 27, 34, 38. turns out will probably need 26 too!! '''there are finding charts!!!'''
| 34 is ~done. 27 only done in center (see rebull et al 2012 below). 26, 38 not touched. [http://web.ipac.caltech.edu/staff/rebull/working/cwayspapers/1-essential/group%20S/ogura02data/ link] for data files as downloaded from journal
| '''COORD NEED **UPDATING**''' 34 is done (see below). 27 is done only in center (see below). 26, 38 are not touched. need to obtain list of objects as published, find match in 2mass, assemble list of matches betw this and 2mass. you probably will need the finding charts in the paper to sort out the matches. Ogura list updated 20120625 (sorry, ignore the date in the name) text [[File:CWAYSBRC273438Oguraids_20120614.txt]] excel[[File:CWAYSBRC273438Oguraids_20120614.xls]] coordinates entered and matched, Peggy's groups cross checked within group, with Rebull 2012,and with Jackie's group. waiting Lauren and Jackie's groups cross check. There were no sources for BRC 26.
|-
| Gregorio-Hetem et al. 2009
| BRC 27 only. X-rays. coordinates probably ok.
| have whole tables from journal ([http://web.ipac.caltech.edu/staff/rebull/working/cwayspapers/2-scanfordata/gregoriodata/ link]). merged together. done in center (see below). over whole region, LMR beat against 2mass in region and took nearest within 2 arcsec. several still don't have matches. region we care about is small compared to region they worked on.
| '''COORD NEED CHECKING AND POSSIBLY UPDATING.''' [[file:gregorio_20120514.txt]] here is my file of the sources which has the published RA and Dec written in two ways (both J2000) and the proposed 2mass match (done blindly by the computer). if it has an asterisk (*) in front of the name, it is in the region we care about. Is it correctly matched to the right 2mass source? if not, what should it be?? Waiting Jackie and Bob source matching.
|-
| Shevchenko et al. 1999
| BRC 27 only. antiquated coordinates.
| have whole table from journal. done in center (see below). over whole region, LMR beat against 2mass in region and took nearest within 5(!!) arcsec. several still don't have matches. region we care about is small compared to region they worked on.
| '''COORD NEED CHECKING AND POSSIBLY UPDATING.''' [[file:shevchenko_20120514.txt]] [[file:shevchenko_20120615.txt]] here is my file of the sources which has the published RA and Dec (B1950) and then a converted-to-J2000 version of the published coordinates, both written in two ways (degrees and hh:mm:ss, dd:mm:ss) and the proposed 2mass match (done blindly by the computer). if it has an asterisk (*) in front of the name, it is in the region we care about. Is it correctly matched to the right 2mass source? if not, what should it be?? Waiting Debbie and Lauren source matching. [[File:Shevchenko_2012_06_27.xlsx]] 
|-
| Wiramihardja et al. 1986
| BRC 27 only. antiquated coordinates.
| have nothing from journal (it's too old).
|need to merge it to rest of catalogs. '''<strike>COORD NEED **UPDATING**</strike>''' done in center (see below). need to obtain list of objects as published, find match in 2mass, assemble list of matches betw this and 2mass. NB: region we care about is probably smaller than region they published. no need to find matches for objects outside of our region but may be easier to just blow through and do all of them? '''DONE''' coordinates entered, matched and data entered, Bob and Peggy's groups cross checked. text[[File:CWAYSBRC27Wiramihardjaidsdata_20120614.txt]] excel[[File:CWAYSBRC27Wiramihardjaidsdata_20120614.xls]]
|-
| Rebull et al. 2012
| BRC 27, 34 only. coordinates and crossmatches to literature should be good. I hope!!
| have tables, of course!
| should hopefully be ok! [[file:rebull2012t1brcxids_20120514.txt]] -- file of all literature information, crossids. note that technically this is in latex format, so "&" divides columns and \nodata means, well, "no data". some people provided errors, some didn't, so that is reflected in this table. last object listed for BRC 27 is actually off the edge of the IRAC 4-band region, and no longer appears in the table. The cross-ids should actually be ok, though. [[file:rebull2012t2_20120518.txt]] -- file of new measurements discussed in Rebull et al. 2012. Note that there are both limits and errors in this table.
|}

=Last (next) steps=

Once we have updated high-precision lists of coordinates from each paper, we can merge them together, and come up with a new-and-improved list of all the previously identified objects in this region in one place, one line per object with all the relevant information, in a plain text file.

Then we will compare this list to our WISE catalog. There will be some with IR excesses, and some without IR excesses. I expect that we will probably detect them all, but there might be some we do not detect.

Then we will also compare this list to where there is Spitzer data, and obtain Spitzer data for those sources where we can.

Then we will also compare this list to the optical data, where possible. There WILL be some we WILL NOT DETECT in the optical data.

File:Shevchenko 2012 06 27.xlsx

2012-06-28T17:09:30Z

Novatne:

C-WAYS source matching work

2012-06-28T17:09:07Z

Novatne: /* The mechanics of what we need to do */

=Big Picture Introduction -- an analogy that might be too fanciful?=

[[image:oldmap1.png|left]] [[image:oldmap2.png|right]] When westerners first discovered the Americas, they had largely set out with the goal of finding gold or other treasure. They were coming at the new continent from the perspective of someone in a boat, with minimal information about what the landforms really were, except for what they could see with their own eyes. Their maps look strange to those of us used to seeing images of these landforms from space, but we have a whole lot more information now than they did then.

The first thing that these early Western explorers were able to attempt to map was the coasts, because that's what they had the most information about...and the most immediate need to know. They needed to know where coral reefs were that might damage their ships, and where the big rivers emptied into the sea so that they could take on more fresh water. They also could learn about more land faster when boating up the rivers rather than walking.

As more and more boats explored the coasts, the maps got better, but they still seem distorted compared to the landforms we know today. In some of these early maps of the Americas, when Europe and Africa were included, even the African coast on the Mediterranean side doesn't look all that realistic, compared to what we know now.

As the westerners pushed further and further into the land (in the Americas or for that matter Africa) from the coasts, their knowledge deepened about what the continent actually looked like, aided by improvements in technology (such as more accurate ways of measuring longitude). Their knowledge of the land started in clumps around the rivers, again because that's what they needed that best enabled them to travel the furthest. But, their knowledge expanded as fast as they could expand. And their goals changed too -- certainly some were still looking for treasure (or freedom from persecution, religious or otherwise), but more in the earliest years were just trying to survive (here I'm thinking of Jamestown or Roanoke). They explored to find more food to eat (critters or plants).

The Native Americans, of course, had a perfectly good understanding of what their land looked like, but even so, most likely, one tribe only knew the land near them -- my guess is that the Powhatan tribe (in VA) had no idea whatsoever what the Sioux tribe's lands looked like, even if trade routes were such that items could move from the Dakotas to Virginia. But the Native Americans were observing the land in a different way, having lived there for a while and having their own methods of exploration. Once westerners realized that they could learn from the Native Americans (here I'm thinking of Lewis and Clark), their knowledge could expand even faster once they paid attention to what was already known.

There were, at nearly every stage of these early maps, regions that were sort of hazy and unexplored, e.g., "here be dragons". Someone might have a vague idea of what was there, but maybe only on the edges; no one (at least no one known to the map maker) had any detailed knowledge of what was there.

SO NOW.... here is a perhaps tortured analogy... We would like to go exploring in a particular region, making note of where the big landforms are, and we have a specific goal of finding edible animals and plants to support our efforts in further explorations. Some people have spent some time exploring parts of this region before. It will make our knowledge expand faster if we pay attention to what is already known before setting off on our own journey. Others have mapped different parts of the region using different methods of exploration before -- some on foot and some on horseback, and still others in boats. Some people just ran through this region identifying the big trees and big rocks. Some people wrote down what they learned in Algonquin (what the Powhatan spoke) and we need to translate it before it makes sense in the language we speak. Some people cared a lot about their tiny camp next to the river and they know that region really well, but beyond the borders of their camp, "here be dragons." There is ''some'' information about the area around the camp that we can obtain from other people and from exploring on our own, but we can also come back to this very well-known region and check what we think we know about the rest of the area by testing it on the well-known region. The people who know the region right next to the river really well also know that this animal or that plant is good food and won't make us sick. When we go exploring out further from the camp, if we find a critter or a plant that we think is the same as the stuff that the people next to the river know is ok to eat, we can bring it back to that camp to compare it and see if it is, in fact, the same or something new. We can also, among the animals and plants we find, put them in groups of apparently similar things -- these are all 4-footed furry critters, and those have feathers and wings.

Explicitly drawing lines between that analogy and reality:
{| border="1"
|'''analogy'''
|'''reality translation'''
|-
|We would like to go exploring in a particular region, making note of where the big landforms are, and we have a specific goal of finding edible animals and plants to support our efforts in further explorations.
|We have a goal of exploring a region (well, really 3) on the sky, specifically looking for young stars.
|-
|Some people have spent some time exploring parts of this region before. It will make our knowledge expand faster if we pay attention to what is already known before setting off on our own journey.
| We need to read and understand the literature.
|-
| Other people have mapped different parts of the region using different methods of exploration before -- some on foot and some on horseback, and still others in boats.
| Other people have used different wavelengths to explore this region before.
|-
| Some people just ran through this region identifying the big trees and big rocks.
| Some people just identified the bright young stars, or the things bright in the wavelengths they were using.
|-
| Some people wrote what they learned down in Algonquin (what the Powhatan spoke) and we need to translate it before it makes sense in the language we speak.
| Some people wrote down poorly constrained coordinates in epoch B1950 coordinates and we need to translate it to accurate J2000 coordinates.
|-
| Some people cared a lot about a tiny patch next to the river and know that region really well, but beyond the borders of their camp, "here be dragons."
| The NITARP team last year spent their year worrying about the 5'x5' patch with 4-band IRAC coverage, but did not care about anything else.
|-
| There is ''some'' information about the area around the camp that we can obtain from other people and from exploring on our own...
| We can comb the literature and use the 2MASS+WISE data to help guide us in exploring the region.
|-
| ...but we can come back to this very well-known region and check what we think we know about the rest of the area by testing it on the well-known region.
| We can use WISE to identify things with YSO-like colors in the region. Did we rediscover the YSOs that other people found, particularly last year's team using Spitzer data? If not, why not? Do the objects with YSO-like colors look like point sources in 2MASS or do they look like galaxies?
|-
| The people who know the region right next to the river really well also know that this critter or that plant is good food and won't make us sick. When we go exploring out further from the camp, if we find a critter or a plant that we think is the same as the stuff that the people next to the river know is ok to eat, we can bring it back to that camp to compare it and see if it is, in fact, the same or something new.
| We have a region of space that is very well studied with Spitzer, and serendipitous Spitzer data nearby. We will use WISE over the ''whole region'' to find things that we think might be YSOs. We can check our hunch that some of the objects are in fact YSOs by comparing what we get to the Spitzer data where we can, and including that data in our analysis.
|-
|We can also, among the animals and plants we find, put them in groups of apparently similar things -- these are all 4-footed furry critters, and those have feathers and wings.
|Among the objects we find, we can put them in groups based on the shape of their SED, from 'really embedded' (class 0-I) down to 'not much of an IR excess' (class II-III).
|}

We will not be able to get a comprehensive be-all-end-all understanding of the region (e.g., in the analogy, we will not go straight from Columbus or even Lewis and Clark to weather satellite views of the continent with a GPS in our car as we drive). We can, however, do the best that we can with the information we have, by learning from those who have gone before, learning as we go, and making intelligent guesses about what we don't know.

And, of course, we need to do this in all of the regions we care about.

=More specific introduction to source matching from the literature=

Several people have done prior studies in BRC 27, BRC 34, and BRC 38 before, but they have NOT found all the young stars! You worked hard to find all of these articles in the context of the proposal. Certainly investigator A working in BRC 27 in year X saw some of the same sources as investigator B working in that same region in year Y, as did investigator C in year Z. Now we actually have to do the work of figuring out which specific sources are which in all the papers - are the sources called out in paper 1 the same or different sources as paper 2?, etc., until all the papers are exhausted, and we have a '''complete catalog of all the previously studied sources in the region'''.

The thing that makes this complicated is that, even though everyone is reporting in RA and Dec, not everyone is using exactly the same system (some are 1950 coordinates and some are 2000 coordinate), and not everyone has the same coordinate accuracies (some are working off of photographic plates, and some are working off large-format CCDs). And, what does it mean to have "the same" coordinates -- is within an arcsecond ok? 5 arcseconds? an arcminute? This is where it gets tricky, and where you have to apply your brain! Spitzer, WISE, and 2MASS are all using exactly the same, high-accuracy coordinate system -- it's all tied to 2MASS's J2000 coordinates -- but even then the position of the same object will not be EXACTLY the same in each image, in each catalog, because there is a limit to the precision with which we can identify the coordinates. Where possible, we need to update the old coordinates by comparing what the old papers say to the 2MASS data. Then we need to fold in the objects with newer coordinates into our collection of sources.

Part of the challenge here is bookkeeping -- writing down coordinates correctly, keeping track of which sources are which, and getting the correct data matched to the correct source.

Last year, I thought this would be a relatively simple project that could be done before the summer visit. However, it turned out not to be the case. Part of this is, I think, the complexity of the region, BRC 27 in particular (which is of course still a problem this year), and part of it was I think my ability to explain it! I've pulled out and updated all of my best(?) explanations and descriptions here. IF IT DOESN'T MAKE SENSE, PLEASE ASK QUESTIONS. If this is done wrong, or only halfway done, it will make for a LOT of pain downstream. ''Trust me.''

=1950 vs. 2000 Coordinates and Yet Another Analogy=

Review the differences between the 1950 and 2000 coordinate systems. '''REMINDER: THE STARS ARE NOT MOVING.''' (Several people last year kept saying things like "wow the stars move a lot" and if you say that, I WILL correct you!) '''''The coordinate system is moving, not the stars.''''' (Well, technically the stars may really be moving, but we don't have that information, and the size of any such motion will be on the order of a tenth of an arcsec or less; the change due to the change in coordinate systems is much greater.)

An analogy can provide an example. Through Google Maps, I can see that there is a Baskin Robbins near Ms. Linahan's school (from the NITARP 2011 class). I can give you the position of that Baskin Robbins in any of a number of ways:
*346 North Lake St, Mundelein, IL
*8 long blocks roughly west of the school
*4 minutes west of the school (if you drive)
*20 minutes west of the school (if you walk)
*latitude 42.269711, longitude -88.004308
Or, I could be really pathological and/or vague and say:
*the 3rd oldest Baskin Robbins in Mundelein (NB: i'm just making this up)
*the 5th oldest ice cream store in Munelein (NB: i'm just making this up)
*An ice cream store on Lake, south of Loch Lomond

Are the coordinates different in these systems? Yes, but they are pointing to the same physical location. Is the Baskin Robbins really moving? No.

That is what is going on in these BRCs. The most obvious difference is between B1950 coordinates and the J2000 coordinates -- these are different coordinate systems, and we are trying to translate one into the other, but we are also trying to understand the intrinsic errors of the earlier studies, and figure out which object they were 'really' talking about. In our example above, we want to translate each of the bullets in the above into "latitude 42.269711, longitude -88.004308". The added complication (in the BRCs and in the list above) is that some of the previous authors were not working in particularly precise coordinate systems. Given the list above, your steps in finding the 'true location' of this store would be slightly different for each bullet, and in the end, might include identifing all the ice cream stores on Lake, south of Loch Lomond, figuring out how old the ice cream stores are in Mundelein, figure out how far you could get in radius in a 4min drive from the school, figure out how far you could get in radius in a 20 min walk from school, etc. In this case, you know that all of these pointers are trying to indicate the same physical location, so you could then look at the commonalities in all of those results, and then, eventually, assert with confidence that all of them point to lat/long (42.269711, -88.004308). In the case of the BRCs, we don't know for sure that each object in each paper actually does have a match. Sometimes they don't. Sometimes there really are two objects close to each other, not just one.

So all of this is what we have to do with the BRCs. We have lots of lists of objects, all in slightly different systems and coming from different ways of searching for young stars. We have to apply our brain and figure out which objects each paper is talking about -- which ones are new objects and which ones are the same as objects previously identified.

=Venn Diagrams and Bookeeping=

One of the difficulties we will have during this project is keeping all the source lists straight. It happens every year, and I don't know how to make it easier, except for warning you that it will happen! Here is a Venn diagram explaining, roughly, the various source lists we will have before we are done, at minimum. This Venn diagram is meant to be a "big picture" sort of thing; this page on the source matching is meant to address just, well, the previously identified sources.

[[image:brcvenn1.png]]

The source lists include:
*All "bright enough" sources seen in the WISE maps (a conceptual list only)
*Sources in the WISE catalog of photometry (to which we will add photometry from 2MASS, Haleakala, and Spitzer in the places where we have that data)
*Sources in this general direction studied by anyone else, ever (the majority of those reported are also YSOs, but not all of them) -- this is the list we are trying to assemble here.

Out of those sets, our ultimate scientific goals mean that we are striving to identify:
*YSO candidates we select from IR excess
*YSOs that others identify that do not appear to have an IR excess.

The Venn diagram is even trying to correctly represent the relative sizes of the circles in that "all bright enough sources" ought to be darn close to "sources in the catalog" and that there will be some "sources in this general direction..." not in the regions we care about, and some of those sources that do not have IR excesses.

NOW we are going to work on the list of "Sources in this general direction studied by anyone else, ever" for BRC27.

[[image:brcvenn2.png]]

For this diagram, I tried to spatially represent the concepts behind what we're doing now (on this page), but I admit the circles are not as carefully constructed/laid out as the first one!

Each of the 5 papers studying things in the region of BRC27 (Ogura et al 2002, Gregorio Hetem et al. 2009, Chauhan et al 2009, Shevchenko et al 1999 and Wiramihardja et al 1986) looked in the direction of BRC27. Surely, then, they saw some of the same sources as each other, and as what we are seeing. For example, the Gregorio-Hetem survey covered a HUGE area, and we care only about a part of it. Ogura saw some of the same sources that Gregorio-Hetem did, but not all of them -- they were not covering the same areas, but even within the same area, they did not see the same sources, because one survey was X-ray driven, and one was Halpha driven. They '''*will*''' see different sources, not only because they're looking at different wavelengths, but also because each survey is not infinitely deep -- the sensitivity of the surveys is limited, and as such will not see every source in this direction. Same for each other pair of papers, and our survey.

This is hardest for BRC 27 because it has the most previous work. This is easiest for BRC 34 because there have been so few papers done on this region.

=The Goal=

The goal here is to construct a list that is as clean as possible for each of the objects that these other folks studied, identifying which objects are truly the same between surveys, and identifying which of these objects are ones that those authors thought were actually young stars (as opposed to, e.g., background giants). We also want to carry along each of the relevant bits of information that these other authors provided -- the object is a lot easier to identify as clearly a young object or a contaminant if there is optical data, so if the other authors reported any optical measurements, we should keep track of those and tie them to the correct object in our analysis. We should also make note of any spectral types or other relevant information. The aim of this part of the project is thus:
*'''Which objects from paper x are also seen in paper y?'''
and then, the next step we will take is
*Which of these objects are seen in the WISE data?

=The Challenges=

This would be an easy task if:
*everyone provided their original images, either as a figure or as a fits file
*everyone worked in the same coordinate system, by which i mean not just "J2000" vs "B1950" but "J2000 tied to 2MASS" as opposed to "J2000 tied to the pulsars seen by NRAO" or "J2000 as calibrated as best I can based on the HST Guide Stars I happen to see in my image".
*the objects were all greater than 5 arcseconds apart from each other on the sky, such that each source that is detected was cleanly and uniquely detected in each survey.
*and, of course, if we were guaranteed a match between surveys.

Working backwards up that list...

We've already talked above about how we are not guaranteed a match between surveys, because stars are different brightnesses at different bands, and because the surveys have limited sensitivity.

There are plenty of sources that are very close together. Even among just the YSO candidates, some are very close to each other, closer than 5 arcseconds.

If we had fabulous coordinates for everything, we could let the computer match them all up and not worry about it. But we don't. And it's not just a matter of precessing the B1950 ones to J2000 ones either - there are inherent errors in those old coordinates which will not necessarily smoothly map into a clean match to other objects.

If we had images, we could line them up by eye and identify the same objects in each frame. I don't necessarily mean "line them up in ds9" (which would be the ideal case). But also, you can identify the objects simply by comparison between images they publish and images to which you have access (IRAC, 2MASS, POSS). This is what we are going to have to retreat to, in the tough cases.

Here are some notes on the 5 BRC 27 papers, in no particular order:
*Gregorio-Hetem - finding charts for a few complex fields, which may or may not be in our region. J2000 coordinates tied to 2mass, though, so less worried about these. note that their discussion includes this very conceptual problem -- they are trying to tie X-ray sources to optical sources.
*Wiramihardja - no finding charts; a few very coarse-scale ones, one with just YSOs. Not a lot of help here. Also just 1950 coordinates read off a photographic plate. Likely to be large and unsystematic errors.
*Shevchenko - finding chart provided (fig 1). 1950 coordinates. big field (bigger than the region we care about).
*Ogura - finding chart provided; J2000 coordinates but not necessarily tied to 2MASS.
*Chauhan - no real finding charts provided; there are a few coarse-scale ones. J2000 coordinates tied to 2mass, though, so less worried about these.

=The mechanics of what we need to do=
'''Links of interest:'''
*http://irsa.ipac.caltech.edu/applications/Gator/ - Gator
*http://irsa.ipac.caltech.edu/applications/FinderChart/ - Finder Chart

For each of these papers, we need a machine-readable (read as "plain text file that the computer can parse into individual numbers rather than images of numbers or gobbledegook from microsoft") version of the relevant data tables. This was either:
*obtained from the journal itself, in which case the data table is much longer than we need
*obtained by typing in the coordinates of the objects in our fields from these older papers and then getting updated coordinates.

[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fR58i8zvMwQ Here] is a video I made for last year's team on getting updated coordinates. This approach SHOULD work in MOST cases but did not work in every case; more on this momentarily. What we need to do is :
*type the 1950 coordinates into the 2mass point source archive, making sure that it knows that it is 1950 coordinates; or type in the 2000 coordinates (and it will assume that they are 2000 coordinates).
*look at what comes back, and take the closest *bright* object.

Then we will have 5 lists of UPDATED, HIGH QUALITY coordinates, one per paper, and we can let the computer run through the list, finding the matches between papers. We then can generate one file that purports to have one line per literature object, with all the relevant data on that line. The difficulty comes in that inevitably, a few sources during this process end up tied to the same object, or identified in other ways as duplicates or incorrect matches.

The approach above to get updated coordinates for targets works ON THE ASSUMPTION THAT THERE ARE NOT "TOO MANY" SOURCES NEARBY, AND THAT THE PRIOR SURVEYS, BEING SHALLOW, ARE MOST LIKELY TO MATCH TO THE BRIGHT 2MASS SOURCE. As I say, this should work in MOST cases but not ALL of them.

If the original authors are reporting more than one source within one paper, we should not consolidate them into one unless we are REALLY sure that the original authors were wrong. (This does happen; see my North American Nebula paper for examples.) Within each paper, this is what I would do:
*Go do the 2MASS archive search (Go here: http://irsa.ipac.caltech.edu/applications/Gator/ -- pick 2MASS then on the next page pick 2mass point source catalog (PSC), then use that search page, making sure to specify which coordinate system in which you are working. Use the coordinates from the original paper to avoid transcription errors, as opposed to any subsequent notes or xls files. Be VERY careful to copy the coordinates exactly; that's the most common problem.)
*Look at the sources returned. Is there just one within 5-10 arcsec? that's probably your match; go on to the next source. If there is more than one, is there just one BRIGHT one within 5-10 arcsec? Is there another source from that same paper within 5-10 arcsec? If the answer to either of those questions is yes, go on to the next step.
*Go get the images in another window. Compare the images (if provided) from the original papers. We can use Finder Chart (http://irsa.ipac.caltech.edu/applications/FinderChart/) to get DSS and 2MASS images of the region where there is a confusing match. Compare this to the images provided in the papers. Identify which object is the one(s) in the paper.
*With that information, then go back to your PSC, and then use the 2MASS point source catalog to find the actual high-precision coordinates of that specific dot you have identified in the images as the match to the literature object.

UPDATE 31 May 12: while the OUTPUT of this process has to be in plain ASCII text, you can work in Excel or Google Docs and spit it out as plain text as the last step. [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nCJ3ctOGvNk Here] is a video on getting plain text (including IPAC table format) files into Excel.

Here is a list of all the papers we have assembled as part of the lit review, as well as a list of their coordinate list status. First priority items (e.g. those for you to tackle first in May/June) are in '''bold''' in the last column:
{| border="1"
|'''paper'''
|'''notes'''
|'''coordinate list status'''
|'''merging status and pending items'''
|-
| Getman et al 2007
| X-rays. BRC 38 only. coordinates likely just fine.
| got all tables from journal. LMR has merged t1,t2,t3 together
|need to merge it to rest of catalogs. '''does it really have all of [http://web.ipac.caltech.edu/staff/rebull/working/cwayspapers/3-oktoskip/nisini01.pdf Nisini et al. (2001)] already in t3? - YES, ''' ''Getman Table 3 contains K, 2MASS and Spitzer data for all 20 ''Embedded Young objects'' from Nisini Table 2 Getman Tables 1 and 2 contain X-Ray and MIR data for Nisini stars 2, 3, 10, 11 --Peggy Piper 20:56, 10 June 2012 (PDT)''
|-
| Beltran et al. 2009
| NIR. 38 only. coordinates likely just fine.
| got all tables from journal. ([http://web.ipac.caltech.edu/staff/rebull/working/cwayspapers/1-essential/beltran09data/ link])
| <strike>need to merge relevant bits of tables together</strike>. individual tables have been merged together. still need to merge that to rest of catalogs.
|-
|Choudhury et al. 2010
| MIR. 38 only. coordinates likely just fine.
| got all tables from journal. ([http://web.ipac.caltech.edu/staff/rebull/working/cwayspapers/1-essential/choud10_data/ link])
| <strike>need to merge relevant bits of tables together</strike> tables from paper have been merged together. still need to merge that to rest of catalogs.
|-
| Chauhan et al. 2009
| NIR, MIR (IRAC only). 27 and 38. coordinates ... odd. look at carefully.
| got all tables from journal. ([http://web.ipac.caltech.edu/staff/rebull/working/cwayspapers/1-essential/chauhan09data/ link])
| need to merge their tables together (will take some care! - do this if the rest of the bold stuff here is done and you're chomping at the bit for more), then merge that to rest of catalogs.
|-
| Barentsen et al. 2011
| iprime,rprime, halpha. BRC 34, 38.
| got all tables from journal.
| LMR has already merged it to rest of catalogs.
|-
| Nakano et al. 2012
| iprime, halpha, some AKARI. BRC 34, 38.
| got all tables from journal. ([http://web.ipac.caltech.edu/staff/rebull/working/cwayspapers/1-essential/nakano12data/ link])
| LMR has already merged it to rest of catalogs.
|-
| Ogura et al. 2002
| BRC 27, 34, 38. turns out will probably need 26 too!! '''there are finding charts!!!'''
| 34 is ~done. 27 only done in center (see rebull et al 2012 below). 26, 38 not touched. [http://web.ipac.caltech.edu/staff/rebull/working/cwayspapers/1-essential/group%20S/ogura02data/ link] for data files as downloaded from journal
| '''COORD NEED **UPDATING**''' 34 is done (see below). 27 is done only in center (see below). 26, 38 are not touched. need to obtain list of objects as published, find match in 2mass, assemble list of matches betw this and 2mass. you probably will need the finding charts in the paper to sort out the matches. Ogura list updated 20120625 (sorry, ignore the date in the name) text [[File:CWAYSBRC273438Oguraids_20120614.txt]] excel[[File:CWAYSBRC273438Oguraids_20120614.xls]] coordinates entered and matched, Peggy's groups cross checked within group, with Rebull 2012,and with Jackie's group. waiting Lauren and Jackie's groups cross check. There were no sources for BRC 26.
|-
| Gregorio-Hetem et al. 2009
| BRC 27 only. X-rays. coordinates probably ok.
| have whole tables from journal ([http://web.ipac.caltech.edu/staff/rebull/working/cwayspapers/2-scanfordata/gregoriodata/ link]). merged together. done in center (see below). over whole region, LMR beat against 2mass in region and took nearest within 2 arcsec. several still don't have matches. region we care about is small compared to region they worked on.
| '''COORD NEED CHECKING AND POSSIBLY UPDATING.''' [[file:gregorio_20120514.txt]] here is my file of the sources which has the published RA and Dec written in two ways (both J2000) and the proposed 2mass match (done blindly by the computer). if it has an asterisk (*) in front of the name, it is in the region we care about. Is it correctly matched to the right 2mass source? if not, what should it be?? Waiting Jackie and Bob source matching.
|-
| Shevchenko et al. 1999
| BRC 27 only. antiquated coordinates.
| have whole table from journal. done in center (see below). over whole region, LMR beat against 2mass in region and took nearest within 5(!!) arcsec. several still don't have matches. region we care about is small compared to region they worked on.
| '''COORD NEED CHECKING AND POSSIBLY UPDATING.''' [[file:shevchenko_20120514.txt]] [[file:shevchenko_20120615.txt]] here is my file of the sources which has the published RA and Dec (B1950) and then a converted-to-J2000 version of the published coordinates, both written in two ways (degrees and hh:mm:ss, dd:mm:ss) and the proposed 2mass match (done blindly by the computer). if it has an asterisk (*) in front of the name, it is in the region we care about. Is it correctly matched to the right 2mass source? if not, what should it be?? Waiting Debbie and Lauren source matching. [[File:http://coolwiki.ipac.caltech.edu/images/c/ca/Shevchenko_2012_06_27.xlsx]] 
|-
| Wiramihardja et al. 1986
| BRC 27 only. antiquated coordinates.
| have nothing from journal (it's too old).
|need to merge it to rest of catalogs. '''<strike>COORD NEED **UPDATING**</strike>''' done in center (see below). need to obtain list of objects as published, find match in 2mass, assemble list of matches betw this and 2mass. NB: region we care about is probably smaller than region they published. no need to find matches for objects outside of our region but may be easier to just blow through and do all of them? '''DONE''' coordinates entered, matched and data entered, Bob and Peggy's groups cross checked. text[[File:CWAYSBRC27Wiramihardjaidsdata_20120614.txt]] excel[[File:CWAYSBRC27Wiramihardjaidsdata_20120614.xls]]
|-
| Rebull et al. 2012
| BRC 27, 34 only. coordinates and crossmatches to literature should be good. I hope!!
| have tables, of course!
| should hopefully be ok! [[file:rebull2012t1brcxids_20120514.txt]] -- file of all literature information, crossids. note that technically this is in latex format, so "&" divides columns and \nodata means, well, "no data". some people provided errors, some didn't, so that is reflected in this table. last object listed for BRC 27 is actually off the edge of the IRAC 4-band region, and no longer appears in the table. The cross-ids should actually be ok, though. [[file:rebull2012t2_20120518.txt]] -- file of new measurements discussed in Rebull et al. 2012. Note that there are both limits and errors in this table.
|}

=Last (next) steps=

Once we have updated high-precision lists of coordinates from each paper, we can merge them together, and come up with a new-and-improved list of all the previously identified objects in this region in one place, one line per object with all the relevant information, in a plain text file.

Then we will compare this list to our WISE catalog. There will be some with IR excesses, and some without IR excesses. I expect that we will probably detect them all, but there might be some we do not detect.

Then we will also compare this list to where there is Spitzer data, and obtain Spitzer data for those sources where we can.

Then we will also compare this list to the optical data, where possible. There WILL be some we WILL NOT DETECT in the optical data.

File:Shevchenko 20120627.xlsx

2012-06-28T17:07:24Z

Novatne:

C-WAYS source matching work

2012-06-28T17:00:49Z

Novatne: /* The mechanics of what we need to do */

=Big Picture Introduction -- an analogy that might be too fanciful?=

[[image:oldmap1.png|left]] [[image:oldmap2.png|right]] When westerners first discovered the Americas, they had largely set out with the goal of finding gold or other treasure. They were coming at the new continent from the perspective of someone in a boat, with minimal information about what the landforms really were, except for what they could see with their own eyes. Their maps look strange to those of us used to seeing images of these landforms from space, but we have a whole lot more information now than they did then.

The first thing that these early Western explorers were able to attempt to map was the coasts, because that's what they had the most information about...and the most immediate need to know. They needed to know where coral reefs were that might damage their ships, and where the big rivers emptied into the sea so that they could take on more fresh water. They also could learn about more land faster when boating up the rivers rather than walking.

As more and more boats explored the coasts, the maps got better, but they still seem distorted compared to the landforms we know today. In some of these early maps of the Americas, when Europe and Africa were included, even the African coast on the Mediterranean side doesn't look all that realistic, compared to what we know now.

As the westerners pushed further and further into the land (in the Americas or for that matter Africa) from the coasts, their knowledge deepened about what the continent actually looked like, aided by improvements in technology (such as more accurate ways of measuring longitude). Their knowledge of the land started in clumps around the rivers, again because that's what they needed that best enabled them to travel the furthest. But, their knowledge expanded as fast as they could expand. And their goals changed too -- certainly some were still looking for treasure (or freedom from persecution, religious or otherwise), but more in the earliest years were just trying to survive (here I'm thinking of Jamestown or Roanoke). They explored to find more food to eat (critters or plants).

The Native Americans, of course, had a perfectly good understanding of what their land looked like, but even so, most likely, one tribe only knew the land near them -- my guess is that the Powhatan tribe (in VA) had no idea whatsoever what the Sioux tribe's lands looked like, even if trade routes were such that items could move from the Dakotas to Virginia. But the Native Americans were observing the land in a different way, having lived there for a while and having their own methods of exploration. Once westerners realized that they could learn from the Native Americans (here I'm thinking of Lewis and Clark), their knowledge could expand even faster once they paid attention to what was already known.

There were, at nearly every stage of these early maps, regions that were sort of hazy and unexplored, e.g., "here be dragons". Someone might have a vague idea of what was there, but maybe only on the edges; no one (at least no one known to the map maker) had any detailed knowledge of what was there.

SO NOW.... here is a perhaps tortured analogy... We would like to go exploring in a particular region, making note of where the big landforms are, and we have a specific goal of finding edible animals and plants to support our efforts in further explorations. Some people have spent some time exploring parts of this region before. It will make our knowledge expand faster if we pay attention to what is already known before setting off on our own journey. Others have mapped different parts of the region using different methods of exploration before -- some on foot and some on horseback, and still others in boats. Some people just ran through this region identifying the big trees and big rocks. Some people wrote down what they learned in Algonquin (what the Powhatan spoke) and we need to translate it before it makes sense in the language we speak. Some people cared a lot about their tiny camp next to the river and they know that region really well, but beyond the borders of their camp, "here be dragons." There is ''some'' information about the area around the camp that we can obtain from other people and from exploring on our own, but we can also come back to this very well-known region and check what we think we know about the rest of the area by testing it on the well-known region. The people who know the region right next to the river really well also know that this animal or that plant is good food and won't make us sick. When we go exploring out further from the camp, if we find a critter or a plant that we think is the same as the stuff that the people next to the river know is ok to eat, we can bring it back to that camp to compare it and see if it is, in fact, the same or something new. We can also, among the animals and plants we find, put them in groups of apparently similar things -- these are all 4-footed furry critters, and those have feathers and wings.

Explicitly drawing lines between that analogy and reality:
{| border="1"
|'''analogy'''
|'''reality translation'''
|-
|We would like to go exploring in a particular region, making note of where the big landforms are, and we have a specific goal of finding edible animals and plants to support our efforts in further explorations.
|We have a goal of exploring a region (well, really 3) on the sky, specifically looking for young stars.
|-
|Some people have spent some time exploring parts of this region before. It will make our knowledge expand faster if we pay attention to what is already known before setting off on our own journey.
| We need to read and understand the literature.
|-
| Other people have mapped different parts of the region using different methods of exploration before -- some on foot and some on horseback, and still others in boats.
| Other people have used different wavelengths to explore this region before.
|-
| Some people just ran through this region identifying the big trees and big rocks.
| Some people just identified the bright young stars, or the things bright in the wavelengths they were using.
|-
| Some people wrote what they learned down in Algonquin (what the Powhatan spoke) and we need to translate it before it makes sense in the language we speak.
| Some people wrote down poorly constrained coordinates in epoch B1950 coordinates and we need to translate it to accurate J2000 coordinates.
|-
| Some people cared a lot about a tiny patch next to the river and know that region really well, but beyond the borders of their camp, "here be dragons."
| The NITARP team last year spent their year worrying about the 5'x5' patch with 4-band IRAC coverage, but did not care about anything else.
|-
| There is ''some'' information about the area around the camp that we can obtain from other people and from exploring on our own...
| We can comb the literature and use the 2MASS+WISE data to help guide us in exploring the region.
|-
| ...but we can come back to this very well-known region and check what we think we know about the rest of the area by testing it on the well-known region.
| We can use WISE to identify things with YSO-like colors in the region. Did we rediscover the YSOs that other people found, particularly last year's team using Spitzer data? If not, why not? Do the objects with YSO-like colors look like point sources in 2MASS or do they look like galaxies?
|-
| The people who know the region right next to the river really well also know that this critter or that plant is good food and won't make us sick. When we go exploring out further from the camp, if we find a critter or a plant that we think is the same as the stuff that the people next to the river know is ok to eat, we can bring it back to that camp to compare it and see if it is, in fact, the same or something new.
| We have a region of space that is very well studied with Spitzer, and serendipitous Spitzer data nearby. We will use WISE over the ''whole region'' to find things that we think might be YSOs. We can check our hunch that some of the objects are in fact YSOs by comparing what we get to the Spitzer data where we can, and including that data in our analysis.
|-
|We can also, among the animals and plants we find, put them in groups of apparently similar things -- these are all 4-footed furry critters, and those have feathers and wings.
|Among the objects we find, we can put them in groups based on the shape of their SED, from 'really embedded' (class 0-I) down to 'not much of an IR excess' (class II-III).
|}

We will not be able to get a comprehensive be-all-end-all understanding of the region (e.g., in the analogy, we will not go straight from Columbus or even Lewis and Clark to weather satellite views of the continent with a GPS in our car as we drive). We can, however, do the best that we can with the information we have, by learning from those who have gone before, learning as we go, and making intelligent guesses about what we don't know.

And, of course, we need to do this in all of the regions we care about.

=More specific introduction to source matching from the literature=

Several people have done prior studies in BRC 27, BRC 34, and BRC 38 before, but they have NOT found all the young stars! You worked hard to find all of these articles in the context of the proposal. Certainly investigator A working in BRC 27 in year X saw some of the same sources as investigator B working in that same region in year Y, as did investigator C in year Z. Now we actually have to do the work of figuring out which specific sources are which in all the papers - are the sources called out in paper 1 the same or different sources as paper 2?, etc., until all the papers are exhausted, and we have a '''complete catalog of all the previously studied sources in the region'''.

The thing that makes this complicated is that, even though everyone is reporting in RA and Dec, not everyone is using exactly the same system (some are 1950 coordinates and some are 2000 coordinate), and not everyone has the same coordinate accuracies (some are working off of photographic plates, and some are working off large-format CCDs). And, what does it mean to have "the same" coordinates -- is within an arcsecond ok? 5 arcseconds? an arcminute? This is where it gets tricky, and where you have to apply your brain! Spitzer, WISE, and 2MASS are all using exactly the same, high-accuracy coordinate system -- it's all tied to 2MASS's J2000 coordinates -- but even then the position of the same object will not be EXACTLY the same in each image, in each catalog, because there is a limit to the precision with which we can identify the coordinates. Where possible, we need to update the old coordinates by comparing what the old papers say to the 2MASS data. Then we need to fold in the objects with newer coordinates into our collection of sources.

Part of the challenge here is bookkeeping -- writing down coordinates correctly, keeping track of which sources are which, and getting the correct data matched to the correct source.

Last year, I thought this would be a relatively simple project that could be done before the summer visit. However, it turned out not to be the case. Part of this is, I think, the complexity of the region, BRC 27 in particular (which is of course still a problem this year), and part of it was I think my ability to explain it! I've pulled out and updated all of my best(?) explanations and descriptions here. IF IT DOESN'T MAKE SENSE, PLEASE ASK QUESTIONS. If this is done wrong, or only halfway done, it will make for a LOT of pain downstream. ''Trust me.''

=1950 vs. 2000 Coordinates and Yet Another Analogy=

Review the differences between the 1950 and 2000 coordinate systems. '''REMINDER: THE STARS ARE NOT MOVING.''' (Several people last year kept saying things like "wow the stars move a lot" and if you say that, I WILL correct you!) '''''The coordinate system is moving, not the stars.''''' (Well, technically the stars may really be moving, but we don't have that information, and the size of any such motion will be on the order of a tenth of an arcsec or less; the change due to the change in coordinate systems is much greater.)

An analogy can provide an example. Through Google Maps, I can see that there is a Baskin Robbins near Ms. Linahan's school (from the NITARP 2011 class). I can give you the position of that Baskin Robbins in any of a number of ways:
*346 North Lake St, Mundelein, IL
*8 long blocks roughly west of the school
*4 minutes west of the school (if you drive)
*20 minutes west of the school (if you walk)
*latitude 42.269711, longitude -88.004308
Or, I could be really pathological and/or vague and say:
*the 3rd oldest Baskin Robbins in Mundelein (NB: i'm just making this up)
*the 5th oldest ice cream store in Munelein (NB: i'm just making this up)
*An ice cream store on Lake, south of Loch Lomond

Are the coordinates different in these systems? Yes, but they are pointing to the same physical location. Is the Baskin Robbins really moving? No.

That is what is going on in these BRCs. The most obvious difference is between B1950 coordinates and the J2000 coordinates -- these are different coordinate systems, and we are trying to translate one into the other, but we are also trying to understand the intrinsic errors of the earlier studies, and figure out which object they were 'really' talking about. In our example above, we want to translate each of the bullets in the above into "latitude 42.269711, longitude -88.004308". The added complication (in the BRCs and in the list above) is that some of the previous authors were not working in particularly precise coordinate systems. Given the list above, your steps in finding the 'true location' of this store would be slightly different for each bullet, and in the end, might include identifing all the ice cream stores on Lake, south of Loch Lomond, figuring out how old the ice cream stores are in Mundelein, figure out how far you could get in radius in a 4min drive from the school, figure out how far you could get in radius in a 20 min walk from school, etc. In this case, you know that all of these pointers are trying to indicate the same physical location, so you could then look at the commonalities in all of those results, and then, eventually, assert with confidence that all of them point to lat/long (42.269711, -88.004308). In the case of the BRCs, we don't know for sure that each object in each paper actually does have a match. Sometimes they don't. Sometimes there really are two objects close to each other, not just one.

So all of this is what we have to do with the BRCs. We have lots of lists of objects, all in slightly different systems and coming from different ways of searching for young stars. We have to apply our brain and figure out which objects each paper is talking about -- which ones are new objects and which ones are the same as objects previously identified.

=Venn Diagrams and Bookeeping=

One of the difficulties we will have during this project is keeping all the source lists straight. It happens every year, and I don't know how to make it easier, except for warning you that it will happen! Here is a Venn diagram explaining, roughly, the various source lists we will have before we are done, at minimum. This Venn diagram is meant to be a "big picture" sort of thing; this page on the source matching is meant to address just, well, the previously identified sources.

[[image:brcvenn1.png]]

The source lists include:
*All "bright enough" sources seen in the WISE maps (a conceptual list only)
*Sources in the WISE catalog of photometry (to which we will add photometry from 2MASS, Haleakala, and Spitzer in the places where we have that data)
*Sources in this general direction studied by anyone else, ever (the majority of those reported are also YSOs, but not all of them) -- this is the list we are trying to assemble here.

Out of those sets, our ultimate scientific goals mean that we are striving to identify:
*YSO candidates we select from IR excess
*YSOs that others identify that do not appear to have an IR excess.

The Venn diagram is even trying to correctly represent the relative sizes of the circles in that "all bright enough sources" ought to be darn close to "sources in the catalog" and that there will be some "sources in this general direction..." not in the regions we care about, and some of those sources that do not have IR excesses.

NOW we are going to work on the list of "Sources in this general direction studied by anyone else, ever" for BRC27.

[[image:brcvenn2.png]]

For this diagram, I tried to spatially represent the concepts behind what we're doing now (on this page), but I admit the circles are not as carefully constructed/laid out as the first one!

Each of the 5 papers studying things in the region of BRC27 (Ogura et al 2002, Gregorio Hetem et al. 2009, Chauhan et al 2009, Shevchenko et al 1999 and Wiramihardja et al 1986) looked in the direction of BRC27. Surely, then, they saw some of the same sources as each other, and as what we are seeing. For example, the Gregorio-Hetem survey covered a HUGE area, and we care only about a part of it. Ogura saw some of the same sources that Gregorio-Hetem did, but not all of them -- they were not covering the same areas, but even within the same area, they did not see the same sources, because one survey was X-ray driven, and one was Halpha driven. They '''*will*''' see different sources, not only because they're looking at different wavelengths, but also because each survey is not infinitely deep -- the sensitivity of the surveys is limited, and as such will not see every source in this direction. Same for each other pair of papers, and our survey.

This is hardest for BRC 27 because it has the most previous work. This is easiest for BRC 34 because there have been so few papers done on this region.

=The Goal=

The goal here is to construct a list that is as clean as possible for each of the objects that these other folks studied, identifying which objects are truly the same between surveys, and identifying which of these objects are ones that those authors thought were actually young stars (as opposed to, e.g., background giants). We also want to carry along each of the relevant bits of information that these other authors provided -- the object is a lot easier to identify as clearly a young object or a contaminant if there is optical data, so if the other authors reported any optical measurements, we should keep track of those and tie them to the correct object in our analysis. We should also make note of any spectral types or other relevant information. The aim of this part of the project is thus:
*'''Which objects from paper x are also seen in paper y?'''
and then, the next step we will take is
*Which of these objects are seen in the WISE data?

=The Challenges=

This would be an easy task if:
*everyone provided their original images, either as a figure or as a fits file
*everyone worked in the same coordinate system, by which i mean not just "J2000" vs "B1950" but "J2000 tied to 2MASS" as opposed to "J2000 tied to the pulsars seen by NRAO" or "J2000 as calibrated as best I can based on the HST Guide Stars I happen to see in my image".
*the objects were all greater than 5 arcseconds apart from each other on the sky, such that each source that is detected was cleanly and uniquely detected in each survey.
*and, of course, if we were guaranteed a match between surveys.

Working backwards up that list...

We've already talked above about how we are not guaranteed a match between surveys, because stars are different brightnesses at different bands, and because the surveys have limited sensitivity.

There are plenty of sources that are very close together. Even among just the YSO candidates, some are very close to each other, closer than 5 arcseconds.

If we had fabulous coordinates for everything, we could let the computer match them all up and not worry about it. But we don't. And it's not just a matter of precessing the B1950 ones to J2000 ones either - there are inherent errors in those old coordinates which will not necessarily smoothly map into a clean match to other objects.

If we had images, we could line them up by eye and identify the same objects in each frame. I don't necessarily mean "line them up in ds9" (which would be the ideal case). But also, you can identify the objects simply by comparison between images they publish and images to which you have access (IRAC, 2MASS, POSS). This is what we are going to have to retreat to, in the tough cases.

Here are some notes on the 5 BRC 27 papers, in no particular order:
*Gregorio-Hetem - finding charts for a few complex fields, which may or may not be in our region. J2000 coordinates tied to 2mass, though, so less worried about these. note that their discussion includes this very conceptual problem -- they are trying to tie X-ray sources to optical sources.
*Wiramihardja - no finding charts; a few very coarse-scale ones, one with just YSOs. Not a lot of help here. Also just 1950 coordinates read off a photographic plate. Likely to be large and unsystematic errors.
*Shevchenko - finding chart provided (fig 1). 1950 coordinates. big field (bigger than the region we care about).
*Ogura - finding chart provided; J2000 coordinates but not necessarily tied to 2MASS.
*Chauhan - no real finding charts provided; there are a few coarse-scale ones. J2000 coordinates tied to 2mass, though, so less worried about these.

=The mechanics of what we need to do=
'''Links of interest:'''
*http://irsa.ipac.caltech.edu/applications/Gator/ - Gator
*http://irsa.ipac.caltech.edu/applications/FinderChart/ - Finder Chart

For each of these papers, we need a machine-readable (read as "plain text file that the computer can parse into individual numbers rather than images of numbers or gobbledegook from microsoft") version of the relevant data tables. This was either:
*obtained from the journal itself, in which case the data table is much longer than we need
*obtained by typing in the coordinates of the objects in our fields from these older papers and then getting updated coordinates.

[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fR58i8zvMwQ Here] is a video I made for last year's team on getting updated coordinates. This approach SHOULD work in MOST cases but did not work in every case; more on this momentarily. What we need to do is :
*type the 1950 coordinates into the 2mass point source archive, making sure that it knows that it is 1950 coordinates; or type in the 2000 coordinates (and it will assume that they are 2000 coordinates).
*look at what comes back, and take the closest *bright* object.

Then we will have 5 lists of UPDATED, HIGH QUALITY coordinates, one per paper, and we can let the computer run through the list, finding the matches between papers. We then can generate one file that purports to have one line per literature object, with all the relevant data on that line. The difficulty comes in that inevitably, a few sources during this process end up tied to the same object, or identified in other ways as duplicates or incorrect matches.

The approach above to get updated coordinates for targets works ON THE ASSUMPTION THAT THERE ARE NOT "TOO MANY" SOURCES NEARBY, AND THAT THE PRIOR SURVEYS, BEING SHALLOW, ARE MOST LIKELY TO MATCH TO THE BRIGHT 2MASS SOURCE. As I say, this should work in MOST cases but not ALL of them.

If the original authors are reporting more than one source within one paper, we should not consolidate them into one unless we are REALLY sure that the original authors were wrong. (This does happen; see my North American Nebula paper for examples.) Within each paper, this is what I would do:
*Go do the 2MASS archive search (Go here: http://irsa.ipac.caltech.edu/applications/Gator/ -- pick 2MASS then on the next page pick 2mass point source catalog (PSC), then use that search page, making sure to specify which coordinate system in which you are working. Use the coordinates from the original paper to avoid transcription errors, as opposed to any subsequent notes or xls files. Be VERY careful to copy the coordinates exactly; that's the most common problem.)
*Look at the sources returned. Is there just one within 5-10 arcsec? that's probably your match; go on to the next source. If there is more than one, is there just one BRIGHT one within 5-10 arcsec? Is there another source from that same paper within 5-10 arcsec? If the answer to either of those questions is yes, go on to the next step.
*Go get the images in another window. Compare the images (if provided) from the original papers. We can use Finder Chart (http://irsa.ipac.caltech.edu/applications/FinderChart/) to get DSS and 2MASS images of the region where there is a confusing match. Compare this to the images provided in the papers. Identify which object is the one(s) in the paper.
*With that information, then go back to your PSC, and then use the 2MASS point source catalog to find the actual high-precision coordinates of that specific dot you have identified in the images as the match to the literature object.

UPDATE 31 May 12: while the OUTPUT of this process has to be in plain ASCII text, you can work in Excel or Google Docs and spit it out as plain text as the last step. [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nCJ3ctOGvNk Here] is a video on getting plain text (including IPAC table format) files into Excel.

Here is a list of all the papers we have assembled as part of the lit review, as well as a list of their coordinate list status. First priority items (e.g. those for you to tackle first in May/June) are in '''bold''' in the last column:
{| border="1"
|'''paper'''
|'''notes'''
|'''coordinate list status'''
|'''merging status and pending items'''
|-
| Getman et al 2007
| X-rays. BRC 38 only. coordinates likely just fine.
| got all tables from journal. LMR has merged t1,t2,t3 together
|need to merge it to rest of catalogs. '''does it really have all of [http://web.ipac.caltech.edu/staff/rebull/working/cwayspapers/3-oktoskip/nisini01.pdf Nisini et al. (2001)] already in t3? - YES, ''' ''Getman Table 3 contains K, 2MASS and Spitzer data for all 20 ''Embedded Young objects'' from Nisini Table 2 Getman Tables 1 and 2 contain X-Ray and MIR data for Nisini stars 2, 3, 10, 11 --Peggy Piper 20:56, 10 June 2012 (PDT)''
|-
| Beltran et al. 2009
| NIR. 38 only. coordinates likely just fine.
| got all tables from journal. ([http://web.ipac.caltech.edu/staff/rebull/working/cwayspapers/1-essential/beltran09data/ link])
| <strike>need to merge relevant bits of tables together</strike>. individual tables have been merged together. still need to merge that to rest of catalogs.
|-
|Choudhury et al. 2010
| MIR. 38 only. coordinates likely just fine.
| got all tables from journal. ([http://web.ipac.caltech.edu/staff/rebull/working/cwayspapers/1-essential/choud10_data/ link])
| <strike>need to merge relevant bits of tables together</strike> tables from paper have been merged together. still need to merge that to rest of catalogs.
|-
| Chauhan et al. 2009
| NIR, MIR (IRAC only). 27 and 38. coordinates ... odd. look at carefully.
| got all tables from journal. ([http://web.ipac.caltech.edu/staff/rebull/working/cwayspapers/1-essential/chauhan09data/ link])
| need to merge their tables together (will take some care! - do this if the rest of the bold stuff here is done and you're chomping at the bit for more), then merge that to rest of catalogs.
|-
| Barentsen et al. 2011
| iprime,rprime, halpha. BRC 34, 38.
| got all tables from journal.
| LMR has already merged it to rest of catalogs.
|-
| Nakano et al. 2012
| iprime, halpha, some AKARI. BRC 34, 38.
| got all tables from journal. ([http://web.ipac.caltech.edu/staff/rebull/working/cwayspapers/1-essential/nakano12data/ link])
| LMR has already merged it to rest of catalogs.
|-
| Ogura et al. 2002
| BRC 27, 34, 38. turns out will probably need 26 too!! '''there are finding charts!!!'''
| 34 is ~done. 27 only done in center (see rebull et al 2012 below). 26, 38 not touched. [http://web.ipac.caltech.edu/staff/rebull/working/cwayspapers/1-essential/group%20S/ogura02data/ link] for data files as downloaded from journal
| '''COORD NEED **UPDATING**''' 34 is done (see below). 27 is done only in center (see below). 26, 38 are not touched. need to obtain list of objects as published, find match in 2mass, assemble list of matches betw this and 2mass. you probably will need the finding charts in the paper to sort out the matches. Ogura list updated 20120625 (sorry, ignore the date in the name) text [[File:CWAYSBRC273438Oguraids_20120614.txt]] excel[[File:CWAYSBRC273438Oguraids_20120614.xls]] coordinates entered and matched, Peggy's groups cross checked within group, with Rebull 2012,and with Jackie's group. waiting Lauren and Jackie's groups cross check. There were no sources for BRC 26.
|-
| Gregorio-Hetem et al. 2009
| BRC 27 only. X-rays. coordinates probably ok.
| have whole tables from journal ([http://web.ipac.caltech.edu/staff/rebull/working/cwayspapers/2-scanfordata/gregoriodata/ link]). merged together. done in center (see below). over whole region, LMR beat against 2mass in region and took nearest within 2 arcsec. several still don't have matches. region we care about is small compared to region they worked on.
| '''COORD NEED CHECKING AND POSSIBLY UPDATING.''' [[file:gregorio_20120514.txt]] here is my file of the sources which has the published RA and Dec written in two ways (both J2000) and the proposed 2mass match (done blindly by the computer). if it has an asterisk (*) in front of the name, it is in the region we care about. Is it correctly matched to the right 2mass source? if not, what should it be?? Waiting Jackie and Bob source matching.
|-
| Shevchenko et al. 1999
| BRC 27 only. antiquated coordinates.
| have whole table from journal. done in center (see below). over whole region, LMR beat against 2mass in region and took nearest within 5(!!) arcsec. several still don't have matches. region we care about is small compared to region they worked on.
| '''COORD NEED CHECKING AND POSSIBLY UPDATING.''' [[file:shevchenko_20120514.txt]] [[file:shevchenko_20120615.txt]] here is my file of the sources which has the published RA and Dec (B1950) and then a converted-to-J2000 version of the published coordinates, both written in two ways (degrees and hh:mm:ss, dd:mm:ss) and the proposed 2mass match (done blindly by the computer). if it has an asterisk (*) in front of the name, it is in the region we care about. Is it correctly matched to the right 2mass source? if not, what should it be?? Waiting Debbie and Lauren source matching. [[File:http://coolwiki.ipac.caltech.edu/images/c/ca/Shevchenko_20120628.xlsx]] 
|-
| Wiramihardja et al. 1986
| BRC 27 only. antiquated coordinates.
| have nothing from journal (it's too old).
|need to merge it to rest of catalogs. '''<strike>COORD NEED **UPDATING**</strike>''' done in center (see below). need to obtain list of objects as published, find match in 2mass, assemble list of matches betw this and 2mass. NB: region we care about is probably smaller than region they published. no need to find matches for objects outside of our region but may be easier to just blow through and do all of them? '''DONE''' coordinates entered, matched and data entered, Bob and Peggy's groups cross checked. text[[File:CWAYSBRC27Wiramihardjaidsdata_20120614.txt]] excel[[File:CWAYSBRC27Wiramihardjaidsdata_20120614.xls]]
|-
| Rebull et al. 2012
| BRC 27, 34 only. coordinates and crossmatches to literature should be good. I hope!!
| have tables, of course!
| should hopefully be ok! [[file:rebull2012t1brcxids_20120514.txt]] -- file of all literature information, crossids. note that technically this is in latex format, so "&" divides columns and \nodata means, well, "no data". some people provided errors, some didn't, so that is reflected in this table. last object listed for BRC 27 is actually off the edge of the IRAC 4-band region, and no longer appears in the table. The cross-ids should actually be ok, though. [[file:rebull2012t2_20120518.txt]] -- file of new measurements discussed in Rebull et al. 2012. Note that there are both limits and errors in this table.
|}

=Last (next) steps=

Once we have updated high-precision lists of coordinates from each paper, we can merge them together, and come up with a new-and-improved list of all the previously identified objects in this region in one place, one line per object with all the relevant information, in a plain text file.

Then we will compare this list to our WISE catalog. There will be some with IR excesses, and some without IR excesses. I expect that we will probably detect them all, but there might be some we do not detect.

Then we will also compare this list to where there is Spitzer data, and obtain Spitzer data for those sources where we can.

Then we will also compare this list to the optical data, where possible. There WILL be some we WILL NOT DETECT in the optical data.

File:Shevchenko 20120628.xlsx

2012-06-28T15:48:17Z

Novatne:

--[[User:Novatne|Novatne]] 08:48, 28 June 2012 (PDT) Here's the file, with numerous concerns in the comments column - with pictures!

File:Shevchenko 20120628.xlsx

2012-06-28T15:46:30Z

Novatne: Here's the file, with numerous concerns in the comments column - with pictures!

Here's the file, with numerous concerns in the comments column - with pictures!

C-WAYS Summer visit logistics

2012-05-23T18:22:17Z

Novatne: /* Flight & student & housing details */

I sent out a "big travel document" in March. It has all the information you need re: flights, etc. I will send it again in April or the beginning of May as a reminder.

It will reference [http://coolcosmos.ipac.caltech.edu/cosmic_classroom/teacher_research/visit/ this page] on the CoolCosmos website. This is where you find the legal things, like the student forms.

=High-level schedule=

The work days we've agreed upon are Jul 9-12, where there will be minimal help from me on Jul 12 as sort of a "training run" for when you go home.

I propose you come in relatively early on Jul 8, and plan on doing dinner at my house that night.

*Sunday morning/early afternoon - arrive in LA
*Sunday night - pizza party at Luisa's ... pizza arrives at 6. come by 5 or 5:30 if you want to play with Andrew!
*Monday morning 8:30-12? - lectures
*Monday afternoon 1-5 - software setup. WISE archive workthrough. Start to work with mosaics.
*Tuesday all day - hands-on work with computers
*Wednesday morning?? - JPL tour
*Wednesday afternoon - wrapup, plan for when you go home
*Thursday morning - Work on your own or small groups. Try to do some of the tasks we did as a group. Compare notes. Can you work on your own at home without me?
*Thursday afternoon - Reconvene for questions and help.
*Friday - return home

TO BE SCHEDULED - WHEN TO LEARN ABOUT THE LCOGT TELESCOPES.

=Software to install=

Make sure you (and all your students who are coming) '''each''' have a '''functional laptop''' that you know how to use with as much of the relevant software installed as possible well before you get on the plane. Trust me. Makes it '''much''' easier if you do all this ahead of time, including starting it up to make sure it works.
*[http://hea-www.harvard.edu/RD/ds9/ ds9]
*[http://spider.ipac.caltech.edu/staff/laher/apt/ APT]
*a web browser (Firefox, Safari, or Google Chrome -- NOT MICROSOFT INTERNET EXPLORER)
*Excel or other spreadsheet program (Google Docs is ok if your school lets you access it; most of the rest of us will be working with various versions of Excel)

Please list your version of Microsoft Office in this table
{| border="1"
|'''Name'''
|'''Microsoft Office version'''
|'''or Microsoft Excell if you don't have the whole suite'''
|'''version of Windows on your laptop(s)'''
|-
|Peggy
|2003, 2007, 2010 (windows)
|
|
|-
|Jackie
|my mac 2008 12.1.7; school's pc 2007; Many students have their own computers so there may be more versions later
|
|
|-
|Lauren
| 2010 (windows on laptop) (2011 at home on mac)
|
|
|-
|Debbie
|2003, 2010 (preferred version)
|
|
|-
|Bob
|2007 at work. 2010 at home.
|
|
|-
|J.D.
|
|
|
|-
|Mark
|
|
|
|-
|Russ
|
|
|
|-
|Babar
|
|
|
|-
|Luisa
| 2008 on the desktop, 2011 on the laptop (which is what you'll see when i hook it up to the projector). NB: they are both Macs!
|
|
|}

'''Also''' make sure you have all the passwords you need for installing new software, getting on a wireless network, or getting back into your machine if it reboots.

Besides the computer, you will need something to write on and something to write with to take notes! Experience has shown that this should be more than post-it notes. I will give you handouts, so the hyperorganized among you may want, e.g., a 3-ring binder.

=Flight & student & housing details=

Debbie - probably 2 (no driving in LA please)

Jackie - certainly 2, maybe 4 people

Lauren - bringing two (adult) students, one male (bringing spouse), one female

Bob - one or 2 (adult) students

Peggy - don't know because switching schools. Probably 3, including one college (will drive in LA but more than happy not to)

JD - (no students)

-> I count ~17 bodies that need to go back and forth from the hotel to campus every day. That probably means 3 vans total. We can certainly pay for 3 vans, but we need 3 drivers of the vans to volunteer...
 
Lets start collecting specifics, keeping to first names should satisfy school rules. 
When you know the names of the people you will have staying in your rooms, call Saga (info below) ask for Lori or Melodee, block of rooms being held for Peggy Piper, and secure your room with your credit card. All rooms $69/night, no charge until departure, 24 hour cancellation fee, rooms must be secured by June 15. There are rooms with two double beds for students who will be sharing rooms. There are rooms with King size beds set aside for the two married couples. The rest of the rooms for individuals will be either King size or double beds. 

Add arrival and departure times when you know them to help us coordinate rides. Arriving late morning morning/early afternoon will allow us to get settled in and then go play with Andrew:) Departing later on Friday will allow us to squeeze in any late additions or just chill by the pool. I was hoping we could all fly in to BUR, but $$ from Chicago are crazy high right now, so Jackie and I may end up needing to go to LAX 

{| border="1"
|'''Teacher'''
|'''Student first names, current grade level, male/female'''
|'''rooms reserved (King, Single, Double)'''
|'''arrival time LAX or BUR'''
|'''departure time LAX or BUR'''
|-
|Peggy
|Emily, 10, female Ashley, 11, female Matt, College Fr, male
|1 Single, 2 Doubles room for 1 male roommate
|
|
|-
|Jackie
|
|
|
|
|-
|Lauren
|Trista, 14, female Alex, 13, male
|2 doubles, 1 king (for married student)
|
|
|-
|Debbie
|
|
|
|
|-
|Bob
|
|
|
|
|}
 Saga Motor Hotel
1633 East Colorado Blvd.
Pasadena, California 91106

Phone:
626-795-0431

Fax:
626-792-0559

Toll Free:
800-793-7242

Email: pasadena@thesagamotorhotel.com

C-WAYS Summer visit logistics

2012-05-11T21:17:09Z

Novatne: /* Flight & student & housing details */

I sent out a "big travel document" in March. It has all the information you need re: flights, etc. I will send it again in April or the beginning of May as a reminder.

It will reference [http://coolcosmos.ipac.caltech.edu/cosmic_classroom/teacher_research/visit/ this page] on the CoolCosmos website. This is where you find the legal things, like the student forms.

=High-level schedule=

The work days we've agreed upon are Jul 9-12, where there will be minimal help from me on Jul 12 as sort of a "training run" for when you go home.

I propose you come in relatively early on Jul 8, and plan on doing dinner at my house that night.

*Sunday morning/early afternoon - arrive in LA
*Sunday night - pizza party at Luisa's ... pizza arrives at 6. come by 5 or 5:30 if you want to play with Andrew!
*Monday morning 8:30-12? - lectures
*Monday afternoon 1-5 - software setup. WISE archive workthrough. Start to work with mosaics.
*Tuesday all day - hands-on work with computers
*Wednesday morning?? - JPL tour
*Wednesday afternoon - wrapup, plan for when you go home
*Thursday morning - Work on your own or small groups. Try to do some of the tasks we did as a group. Compare notes. Can you work on your own at home without me?
*Thursday afternoon - Reconvene for questions and help.
*Friday - return home

TO BE SCHEDULED - WHEN TO LEARN ABOUT THE LCOGT TELESCOPES.

=Software to install=

Make sure you (and all your students who are coming) '''each''' have a '''functional laptop''' that you know how to use with as much of the relevant software installed as possible well before you get on the plane. Trust me. Makes it '''much''' easier if you do all this ahead of time, including starting it up to make sure it works.
*[http://hea-www.harvard.edu/RD/ds9/ ds9]
*[http://spider.ipac.caltech.edu/staff/laher/apt/ APT]
*a web browser (Firefox, Safari, or Google Chrome -- NOT MICROSOFT INTERNET EXPLORER)
*Excel or other spreadsheet program (Google Docs is ok if your school lets you access it; most of the rest of us will be working with various versions of Excel)

Please list your version of Microsoft Office in this table
{| border="1"
|'''Name'''
|'''Microsoft Office version'''
|'''or Microsoft Excell if you don't have the whole suite'''
|'''version of Windows on your laptop(s)'''
|-
|Peggy
|2003, 2007, 2010 (windows)
|
|
|-
|Jackie
|my mac 2008 12.1.7; school's pc 2007; Many students have their own computers so there may be more versions later
|
|
|-
|Lauren
| 2010 (windows on laptop) (2011 at home on mac)
|
|
|-
|Debbie
|2003, 2010 (preferred version)
|
|
|-
|Bob
|2007 at work. 2010 at home.
|
|
|-
|J.D.
|
|
|
|-
|Mark
|
|
|
|-
|Russ
|
|
|
|-
|Babar
|
|
|
|-
|Luisa
| 2008 on the desktop, 2011 on the laptop (which is what you'll see when i hook it up to the projector). NB: they are both Macs!
|
|
|}

'''Also''' make sure you have all the passwords you need for installing new software, getting on a wireless network, or getting back into your machine if it reboots.

Besides the computer, you will need something to write on and something to write with to take notes! Experience has shown that this should be more than post-it notes. I will give you handouts, so the hyperorganized among you may want, e.g., a 3-ring binder.

=Flight & student & housing details=

Debbie - probably 2 (no driving in LA please)

Jackie - certainly 2, maybe 4 people

Lauren - bringing two (adult) students, one male (bringing spouse), one female

Bob - one or 2 (adult) students

Peggy - don't know because switching schools. Probably 3, including one college (will drive in LA but more than happy not to)

JD - (no students)

-> I count ~17 bodies that need to go back and forth from the hotel to campus every day. That probably means 3 vans total. We can certainly pay for 3 vans, but we need 3 drivers of the vans to volunteer...
 
Lets start collecting specifics, keeping to first names should satisfy school rules. 
When you know the names of the people you will have staying in your rooms, call Saga (info below) ask for Lori or Melodee, block of rooms being held for Peggy Piper, and secure your room with your credit card. All rooms $69/night, no charge until departure, 24 hour cancellation fee, rooms must be secured by June 15. There are rooms with two double beds for students who will be sharing rooms. There are rooms with King size beds set aside for the two married couples. The rest of the rooms for individuals will be either King size or double beds. 

Add arrival and departure times when you know them to help us coordinate rides. Arriving late morning morning/early afternoon will allow us to get settled in and then go play with Andrew:) Departing later on Friday will allow us to squeeze in any late additions or just chill by the pool. I was hoping we could all fly in to BUR, but $$ from Chicago are crazy high right now, so Jackie and I may end up needing to go to LAX 

{| border="1"
|'''Teacher'''
|'''Student first names, current grade level, male/female'''
|'''rooms reserved (King, Single, Double)'''
|'''arrival time LAX or BUR'''
|'''departure time LAX or BUR'''
|-
|Peggy
|Emily, 10, female Ashley, 11, female Matt, College Fr, male
|1 Single, 2 Doubles room for 1 male roommate
|
|
|-
|Jackie
|
|
|
|
|-
|Lauren
|Trista, 14, female Alex, 13, male
|
|
|
|-
|Debbie
|
|
|
|
|-
|Bob
|
|
|
|
|}
 Saga Motor Hotel
1633 East Colorado Blvd.
Pasadena, California 91106

Phone:
626-795-0431

Fax:
626-792-0559

Toll Free:
800-793-7242

Email: pasadena@thesagamotorhotel.com

C-WAYS Spring work

2012-05-06T17:05:13Z

Novatne: /* Papers to discuss */

= Big Picture =

There are three things I'd like to accomplish before our visit:

(1) Start thinking about the issues of spatial resolution. I have developed a worksheet for this. '''WE DECIDED TO DO THIS FIRST.'''

(2) We need read in detail and discuss a short list of carefully selected papers. We'll rotate through our short list of papers, and each of you will get one to present to the group. This is modelling a so-called "journal club", a common occurrence in astronomy departments/groups/centers, where the papers are usually selected out of recent astro-ph mailings. The papers that went into this list came out of the extensive lists you assembled while writing the proposal. I then went through and sorted them into bins -- ones you want to read closely for the astronomy and astrophysics background, and/or for the interpretation, and/or for the big picture... ones from which you need to scavenge data, and you need to read enough to understand what it was they did, and what kinds of data they are reporting... ones you might read if you have time ... and ones you can ignore. '''WE SHOULD START ON THIS AFTER THE RESOLUTION STUFF.'''

(3) Actually doing the data scavenging out of those papers mentioned above. This can be as simple as going to the journal website and saving the data table as plain text, but in a handful of cases, it is a LOT more complicated. I am working on more explanation to go with this so-called source-matching work. Some of the work here springboards off of the journal articles we will read in detail, and some involves scanning additional articles. I AM STILL WORKING ON DEVELOPING A FRAMEWORK FOR THIS. It's ok if we don't get through this by the time of our visit, but it will slow us down for our visit.

= [[C-WAYS Spring calendar]] =

Not all of us are around and able to work on NITARP stuff for the whole spring.

= [[C-WAYS Resolution Worksheet]] =
[[C-WAYS Resolution Worksheet]] I hesitate to make a place for everyone to collect their answers on the wiki; in this case, I would like everyone to independently derive their own numbers and compare notes on the telecon together.

= [[C-WAYS source matching work]]=
[[C-WAYS source matching work]] -- this is an overview of what we need to know, and has some instructions, but no specific tasks doled out.

=Papers to discuss=

The relevant papers are sorted into the categories below.

I've attempted to make a roughly color-coded grouping of the papers below so that they can be presented in appropriate clumps. There are a LOT of papers to discuss, and I'm trying to make it roughly about the same amount of work per person. Here is the order I propose:

'''Reading Guide summaries and questions from discussed papers''' [http://coolwiki.ipac.caltech.edu/index.php/Summaries_and_questions_on_discussed_papers]

#person1 (JC1) -- '''Lauren''' -- Guieu et al 2010, Rebull et al 2011a and 2011b; possibly Johnson et al. 2012 and Rebull et al. 2012, or possibly makes more sense to wait until closer to the visit??
#person2 (JC2) -- '''Peggy''' -- Ogura et al 2002, Sugitani et al 1991 -- includes responsibility of leading the coordinate updating for these. [[SFO Paper Journals Guided Reading]]
#person3 (JC3) -- '''Jackie''' -- Getman et al 2007, Beltran et al 2009, should also probably read Choudhury et al. 2010... but Choudhury et al is meaty enough that it should be the next week after these. [Reading Guide Journal Club[http://coolwiki.ipac.caltech.edu/index.php/Talk:C-WAYS_Spring_work]]
#person4 (JC4) -- '''Debbie''' -- Choudhury et al. 2010 and Chauhan et al. 2009 -- Chauhan et al 2009 is not meaty enough on its own, but is very different than Choudhury et al. 2010, despite sharing a few authors. Choudhury et al. pulls together some of the thoughts started in Getman et al and Beltran et al.
#person5 (JC5) -- '''Bob''' -- Barentsen et al. 2011 and Nakano et al. 2012
#person6 -- appendices of Koenig et al. 2012 and Gutermuth et al 2008?? depending on time, can/should skip these for now.
#then, starting with Ogura et al. 2002 and Sugitani et al. 1991, start updating coordinates.
#then, Gregorio-Hetem et al. 2009, Shevchenko et al. 1999, Wiramihardja et al 1986, and update those coordinates.

This should work like a journal club or even a book club, as in the named person takes the lead in presenting the article. You should present things along the lines of the following:
*the main point of this work was ...
*what they did was ... (high level summary, no need to get into nitty gritty details)
*the most interesting thing i learned was ...
*what they did that i agree with is ...
*what they did that i disagree with is ...
*and, for us here, the reason we should care about this in the context of our planned YSO work is ...

EVERYONE should read the papers ahead of time, but it's kind of expected that the named person will spend the most time reading the paper in question!

==Essential reading==
This group of papers are ones we need to read in 'journal club' style - read and discuss them in detail. They provide the scientific context and/or establishes known facts or conclusions about the bright rimmed clouds, or are similar enough to the process we will use that they are worth the investment of time.
{| border="1"
|'''Paper'''
|'''Notes'''
|'''Presenter/ present with'''
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2010ApJ...720...46G Guieu et al., 2010, ApJ, 720, 46]
|Our paper from the IC2118 team (one of the pre-NITARP teams!). Spitzer-based search for YSOs in IC2118 (near Orion's knee). Large map to start from. Ground-based optical obtained specifically to support these observations, much like us. Note serendipitous discovery of high-proper-motion object. This is something Tim and his students found entirely on their own. We tried to obtain follow-up spectroscopy from Palomar, but had bad weather. I need to go back and try again to get these spectra. There is also an opportunity to look at this environment with WISE! do with other Rebull et al papers - "group R". This can be the lowest priority of that group, as it was written the longest time ago. (may be better to focus time and energy on CG4 paper and Taurus with WISE paper.)
| (do with group R) person1
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2011AJ....142...25R Rebull et al., 2011a, AJ, 142, 25]
|our paper from the CG4+Sa101 team (a NITARP 2009 team) (I gave you hard copy of this one at the AAS.) This is a Spitzer-based search for YSOs in this region. Fairly large map to start from, but smaller than IC2118. Ground-based optical pre-obtained through a collaborator to support the observations, similar to us. (She turns out to also have a bunch of spectra, but has other things in front of them in her queue.)
| (do with group R) person1
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2011ApJS..196....4R Rebull et al., 2011b, ApJS, 196, 4]
|our paper looking for new YSOs in Taurus using WISE -- the one my recent AAS poster was based on, and I also gave you hard copy of this paper at the AAS. This starts from a HUGE region, 260 sq degrees, and something like 2.6 million sources. This is a far larger region than we will do, but we will use a similar approach -- use WISE, obtain a set of possible YSOs, use all available data we can find to weed down the list, compare to the literature-discovered objects, and present a list of candidates.
| (do with group R) person1
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2012AAS...21933705J Johnson et al., 2012, AAS219, 337.05] and Rebull et al. in prep
|'''BRC 27 and 38''': The NITARP 2011 team work here. Spitzer-driven search for YSOs, with ground-based optical photometry to support observations. I think most of you have read the poster already. I am still actively working on the draft; whenever this paper comes up in the rotation, I'll give you whatever I have at that point, even if it's unpolished. Sigh.
| (do with group R) person1
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2002AJ....123.2597O Ogura K., Sugitani K., Pickles A., 2002, AJ, 123, 2597.]
|'''BRC 27, 34, 38?''' Optical + 2MASS; general BRC info. Most recent of the Sugitani series of four we found. Using Halpha to look for YSOs, following up their other work. Relevant issues: using multiple wavelengths to find YSOs (see [[Finding cluster members]]), spatial resolution (see [[Resolution]]), caveats with finding candidates. Nice intro, summary of larger issues, discussion of results. ''Need to be sure that this catalog is included in our list of previously known YSOs in this region'', so we can compare our results to theirs. ''Finding charts'' helpfully included so we can match obj. We should discuss this one in some depth; the other Sugitanis don't need to be done in as much depth ("group S").
|(do with group S) person2
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1991ApJS...77...59S Sugitani K., Fukui Y., Ogura K., 1991, ApJS, 77, 59.]
|'''SFO''' article (discovery paper) - the original SFO, origin of "BRC" terminology, numbers 1-44. covers the northern hemisphere. Has nice intro/summary of what's going on in BRCs, CGs, etc. Nice approach of combining two large surveys -- POSS and IRAS; nice clear discussion of weed-down process. Second half of paper (detailed analysis of IRAS colors, etc.) obsolete but has same essence as what we do now. Review with other Sugitani, Ogura papers, but can skim the surface. You all should have read this in Jan or Feb in the context of our proposal, so maybe we don't have to do this again?
|(do w/ group S) person2
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2007ApJ...654..316G Getman et al. 2007, ApJ, 654, 316]
|'''BRC 38.''' Chandra, 2MASS, and Spitzer. discusses X-ray sources that are associated with young stars in this region, which they call IC 1396N. Studying triggered star formation and protostars in IC 1396N. Good pictures to help with the visualization of 1396N and these sources; evidence of sequential star formation. really nice intro to put it all in context.
Found 117 x-ray sources in IC 1396N; identify some with central cluster, and some with globule. We are likely to have similar issues since we are looking further out from the globule. Objects at a variety of stages. One of the youngest sources detected in x-ray, #66, is found close to the source IRAS 21391+5802 (also called BIMA 2). List of these sources are included. Nice discussions about finding counterparts across wavelengths, contamination by background sources, predictions for more YSOs here to be found. Dense paper! We need to scavenge these data, compare to our results.
|do in detail. compare and contrast! scavenge data. person3 - Jackie 
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2009A%26A...504...97B Beltran, et al., 2009, A&A, 504, 97B]
|'''BRC 38.''' this looked for YSOs inside the BRC using deep JHK. Data tables available online only! Comparison of results to Chandra results from Getman; find no evidence for sequential star formation. get and include their data. lots of discussion of extended emission and comparison to other bands. includes figure using IRAC 4.5 um data, but that's it for Spitzer information. Do in detail, with Getman.
| do in detail, with Getman. scavenge data. person3 - Jackie 
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2010ApJ...717.1067C Choudhury R., Mookerjea, B., Bhatt, H., 2010, ApJ, 717, 1067]
| '''BRC 38''', including IRAC+MIPS+optical phot and spec. *REALLY* nice paper. A tremendous amount of work, very nicely done, and very complete data tables. Go through and discuss this one in detail, scavenge all the data. Does a lot of comparison with Getman and Beltran, trying to reconcile all results. Do this one after or with Getman, Beltran; this one is meaty enough that it probably should get its own week.
| do in detail. scavenge data. do after Getman, Beltran person4
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2009MNRAS.396..964C Chauhan N, Pandey A.K., Ogura K., Ojha D.K., Bhatt B.C., Ghosh S.K., Rawat P.S., 2009, MNRAS, 396, 964]
|'''BRC 27, 38.''' Optical (BVIc)+2mass+spitzer/irac. This one we should spend considerable time on. Testing small-scale sequential star formation suggested in earlier 'group S' papers. nice intro. multiwavelength and contaminants (see [[Finding cluster members]]). As I read this, they are using optical+nir to pick their YSOs, not Spitzer-driven, which is different than what we will do. We ''will'' find a different set of obj, not just classify them differently. We need to get their data tables and compare our results to theirs. Note lots of information is online only, which i attached to article pdf. Note also that some of their online tables don't contain the same sources as the other tables (they should have caught that before publication). analysis of Halpha-age and mass function is a bit of overinterpretation IMHO. need spectroscopy first!!
|do in detail -- read closely, compare and contrast! need to scavenge data too. person4
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2011MNRAS.415..103B Barensten et al., 2011, MNRAS, 415, 103]
|'''BRC 34, 38.''' T tauri candidates and accretion rates using IPHAS (r, i, Halpha); over the entire huge IC1396 complex. this is a useful paper. data tables of 158 objects they think are young; make sure to grab and incorporate what they found. their shortlist may or may not overlap with the fields we care about in brc 34 (cloud D??) and 38 (cloud E), but still very useful to include. if, when we get to that point of needing these objects, they still haven't released the full IPHAS catalog, i will email these guys and ask for source lists at least in the regions we care about (34 and 38)
Also includes some 2 MASS and Spitzer data but only for T Tauri candidates, or possibly only in the center of the complex? need to read closely enough to figure this out. NB: more evidence for sequential/triggered star formation; find increasing accretion rates, disc excesses and younger ages as move away from HD 206267 towards Cloud A (BRC 38 is Cloud E)
| do this in detail, scavenge data person5
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2012AJ....143...61N, Nakano et al., 2012, AJ, 143, 61] [[Media:Nagano_2012.pdf]]
|'''BRC 34, 38.''' Wide Field Survey of Emission-line Stars in IC 1396 (the whole complex). Nakano reports a total of 639 Halpha emission-line stars were detected in an area of 4.2 deg2; they matched to some literature sources, also some Akari sources. Data charts and images showing locations included. We should read this in some detail, and scavenge the data in the regions we care about (brc 34 and 38).
|do this in detail, scavenge data. person5
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2012ApJ...744..130K, Koenig et al., 2012, ApJ, 744, 130]
|WISE-based YSO selection mechanism (inspired by Gutermuth et al. 2008, 2009) described in appendix. Meat of paper on high-mass star formation (we aren't caring about that particularly here -- we mostly want the selection mechanism).
|should read the appendix closely; you can skip the rest if you want. Do with Gutermuth et al 2008 ("colormethods") (person6?)
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2008ApJ...674..336G Gutermuth et al., 2008, ApJ, 674, 336]
|Spitzer color selection (first version - Gutermuth et al. 2009 perturbs it a little) presented here. Some of the selection mechanism is described in the main text, and some is in the appendix. We should read about the selection mechanism.
|should read about the selection mechanism closely; you can skip the rest if you want. Do with Koenig et al. 2012. ("colormethods") (person6?)
|-
|}

==Should scan==
This group of papers is essential to read enough to get the data out of them, but we don't need to really study them in tremendous detail.

{| border="1"
|'''Paper'''
|'''Comments'''
|'''Presenter/ present with'''
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2009A%26A...506..711G Gregorio-Hetem J., Montmerle T., Rodrigues C. V., Marciotto E., Preibisch T., Zinnecker H., 2009, A&A, 506, 711.]
|'''BRC 27.''' ROSAT+VRI data. relevant issues: using multiple wavelengths to find YSOs (see [[Finding cluster members]]), spatial resolution (see [[Resolution]]). Mentions Chandra, XMM data, both of which would cover BRC 27, but I can't find the subsequent analysis that they advertise. We need to include this catalog in what we accumulate, and compare our results to theirs.
|read enough to understand and scavenge data.
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1999MNRAS.310..210S Shevchenko V. S., Ezhkova O. V., Ibrahimov M. A., van den Ancker M. E., Tjin A, Djie H. R. E., 1999, MNRAS, 310, 210.]
|'''BRC 27'''. optical. age, distance estimate. photo'''electric''' UBVR(!) and objective prism spectroscopy for Halpha and spectral types. combined with IRAS. using multiple wavelengths to find YSOs (see [[Finding cluster members]]). We need to include this catalog in what we accumulate, and compare our results to theirs. This is not necessarily a trivial task, as they have photographic 1950 coordinates, which will need to be precessed and then matched to a 2mass source to get a more recent position estimate (they have finding charts, which should help), but it only needs to be done for the objects in our region of interest. It's old methodology (from an Uzbecki telescope), but still good stuff, especially the spectral types. nice "put-it-in-context" discussion at the top for the entire CMa R1 region.
|should read enough to understand and scavenge data.
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1986PASJ...38..395W Wiramihardja S.D., Kogure T., Nakano M., Yoshida S., 1986, PASJ, 38, 395.]
|'''BRC 27.''' Halpha plus photo'''graphic''' UBV.(!) using multiple wavelengths to find YSOs (see [[Finding cluster members]]). We need to include this catalog in what we accumulate, and compare our results to theirs. This is not necessarily a trivial task, as they have photographic 1950 coordinates, which will need to be precessed and then matched to a 2mass source to get a more recent position estimate (they say they have finding charts, which should help), but it only needs to be done for the objects in our field of view (our data). Nice cross matching that they've already done for ''their'' previously identified objects. We don't need to read it in detail; it's a really old paper. But we need to read enough to understand and scavenge data.
|should read enough to understand and scavenge data.
|-
|}

==Can read==
This group of papers is useful but not essential.

{| border="1"
|'''Paper'''
|'''Comments'''
|'''Presenter/ present with'''
|-
|[http://cdsads.u-strasbg.fr/cgi-bin/nph-bib_query?2001A%26A...376..553N&db_key=AST&nosetcookie=1, Nisini et al., 2001, A&A 376, 553]
|'''BRC 38.''' Multiple H2 protostellar jets in the bright-rimmed globule IC 1396-N. Jets are indicative of young stars! The H2 excitation inside the globule could be from either shocks driven by the outflow of YSOs or to UV induced fluorescence from the external ionized region. The conclusion states that the emissions originate from non-dissociative shocks, and that they are associated with the most embedded and youngest objects of the field. The near IR confirms the existence of a cluster of young embedded sources and highly efficient star formation activity. Lots of awkward text that English editing did not catch. Has a list of YSO candidates with some cross-ids. Lots of focus on jets and knots too. Much of these cross ids are probably in Choudhury et al.
| read and scavenge table of YSOs?
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2003ApJ...593L..47R Reipurth et al., 2003, ApJ, 123, 2597-2626]
|'''BRC 38''' Blowout from IC 1396N: The emergence of Herbig-Haro objects in the vicinity of bright-rimmed clouds. Halpha and other narrowband filters. Reipurth et al usually work in these wavelengths to find HH objects. short paper. they have a list of knots in the region, but that's it. Herbig-Haro flow (HH 777) found coming out of ic 1396N; located at 214041.6+581638 While many near-infrared sources were found that apparently are young stars this study focused on the HH flows found. Computer modeling was used to find a match for observed features.
|ok to skip
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2002ApJ...573..246B Beltran et al., 2002, ApJ, 573, 1]
|'''BRC 38''' IRAS 21391+5802: The Molecular Outflow and its Exciting source. VLA and BIMA observations of dust and gas surrounding IRAS source; 3 sources isolated with BIMA, each a YSO. Really good text about the intermediate mass star morphology and evolution compared to that of the low mass stars. There is a table at the end that has point source information of BIMA observations of 5 epochs with bandwidth and spectral resolution. A table with 5 sources and flux density and spectral index, another table with millimeter flux densitites, for 3 BIMA sources, and a table with CO outflow properties. Our focus will be more on the point sources. This paper is really focused on the outflow and its sources. Nice for context of source matching and variations in coordinate accuracy coupled with physical differences in the sources. But not a whole lot appropriate for our point source study.
|ok to skip
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2007A%26A...468L..37F Fuente, et al., 2007, A&A, 468L, 37]
|'''BRC 38.''' very short paper, looking for protostellar clusters in IC 1396N, using PdBI at 1.3, 3.3 mm. Main point as relevant to us -- 4 cores in IC1396N. Yes, strongly tied to Neri et al 2007 paper.
|ok to skip
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2007A%26A...468L..33N Neri, et al. 2007, A&A, 468, 33]
|'''BRC 38.''' found a cluster of hot cores in 1396N. again, a very short paper using PdBI at 1.3, 3.3 mm. Main point as relevant to us -- cluster of cores here. Yes, strongly tied to Fuente et al 2007 paper.
|ok to skip
|-
|}

==For the over achievers==
Read if you are motivated to do so.

{| border="1"
|'''Paper'''
|'''Comments'''
|'''Presenter/ present with'''
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1994ApJS...92..163S Sugitani K., Ogura K., 1994, ApJS, 92, 163.]
|SFO/BRC catalog/nomenclature continued into the southern hemisphere. (NB: all our obj are in the N. Hem paper!). SFO/BRC numbers 45-89. Second (by time) in the Sugitani series. Again, much of detailed analysis now obsolete. Review with other Sugitani, Ogura papers, but can skim the surface.
|if do, do w/ group S
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1995ApJ...455L..39S Sugitani K., Tamura M., Ogura K., 1995, ApJ, 455, L39.]
| JHK follow-up of IRAS sources from SFO. relevant issues: using multiple wavelengths to find YSOs (see [[Finding cluster members]]), spatial resolution (see [[Resolution]]). Shame on them for not publishing a data table or even a figure with the locations of everything they identify as a YSO! BRC 27 is one that they choose to include in a finder chart, but doesn't do us much good. Nice summary of larger issues, timescales. Short paper. If do, review with other Sugitani, Ogura papers, but can skim the surface.
|if do, do w/ group S
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2007AJ....133.1528C Connelley et al., 2007, AJ, 133, 1528]
|'''BRC 38''' Infrared Nebulae around Young stellar objects. IRAS 21391+5802 - images show jet-like nebula and large patches of nebulosity. IRAS source thought to be a low mass Class 0 source (Beltran et al. 2002, 2004). This source has H2 emission in the form of bow shocks. We need to check the source in our images, but it's likely bright enough that it appears in many of the other papers.
|ok to skip
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2008ApJ...675.1352V Valdettaro R., Migenes V., Trinidad M.A., Brand J., Palla F., 2008, ApJ, 675, 1352.]
|'''BRC 34. (others?)''' VLA obs of water masers, following up 2005 work. BRC 34 observed, not detected. nice intro that puts their work in context with the rest of what they've done. Lots more non-dets, interpreted as forming low mass and/or older stars than had been assumed. I think they've gotten the interpretation spot-on.
|scan if you want
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2002A%26A...388..172S Soares J.B., Bica E., 2002, A&A, 388, 172.]
|'''BRC 27.''' OLD 2MASS. Editing ghastly. Really simple paper. In theory, we should include their results in what we accumulate, and compare our results, though (a) they are using "prehistoric" 2mass data reduction, and (b) they really make it hard, as they don't even tell us how many YSOs they think they've found, just the numbers of objects for which they've done photometry. So I don't think we really can compare our results to this one. However, nice "put it in larger context" discussion with wide-field IRAS image.
|skip it unless you want to see the IRAS image.
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2003A%26A...404..217S Soares J.B., Bica E., 2003, A&A, 404, 217.]
|2MASS + optical. Simple paper elsewhere in the same cloud as BRC 27. Same sort of 2MASS analysis as their 2002 paper. Still archaic 2MASS data reduction. Skip it.
| skip it.
|-
|Allen L., et al. 2011, American Astronomical Society, BAAS, 43, 258.15.
|Poster from AAS ... statistical measurement of YSOs in all of their BRC IRAC observations. not a lot of content beyond the images and their 'big picture' work.
|skip it.
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2004A%26A...426..535M Morgan L. K., Thompson M. A., Urquhart J. S., White G. J., Mio J., 2004, A&A, 426, 535.] note has erratum too.
|'''BRC 27, 34, 38?''' Radio and mid-ir survey. NRAO/NVSS/VLA (20cm), DSS, MSX data. both 27 and 34 in here, though 34 is a non-det. nice intro to the physics, though they get into far more math than we need to. relevant issues: this radio is thermal (free-free emission). they smoothed data -- spatial resolution (see [[Resolution]]). another nice use of three big surveys. sfo 27 in the online-only fig 1. T3 also online only. identifying ionizing source is not the same as identifying point sources in the images themselves. it's not clear that this is all that relevant for us. part of a PhD thesis.
|Drop... if you want to, read with "Group M" but skip the math.
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2008A%26A...477..557M Morgan L. K., Thompson M. A., Urquhart J. S., White G. J., 2008, A&A, 477, 557.]
|'''BRC 27, 34, 38?''' SCUBA submm survey (450+850 um) plus IRAS (12, 25, 60, 100 um), MSX, and 2MASS (erroneously identified as 2mm but really 2 micron). both 27 and 34 in here. next part of a PhD thesis. lots of nice overview, summary (as would be expected for a thesis) spread throughout article. seems to be a really long paper, but is almost all figures in the appendix. relevant issues: how the objects they are talking about (at long and short wavelengths) compare to what we see in our images (see [[Resolution]] and their, e.g., fig 4). Forward reference to Spitzer data analysis like ours but then says have already looked for GLIMPSE, 24 um obs. They are only looking at low-res flux densities. Appendix may be useful for scavenging additional targets if we want to do more analysis on more targets.
|Probably the most worth reading of "Group M"; skip the math.
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2009MNRAS.400.1726M Morgan L. K., Urquhart J. S., Thompson M. A., 2009, MNRAS, 400, 1726.]
|'''BRC 27, 34, 38?''' Radio, mid-ir, SCUBA observations; redefined SFO catalog. JCMT (CO) observations. 22 arcsec resolution! (see [[Resolution]] and their fig 2 here.) Likely last of his thesis, or first of his postdoc. (Look, his address changed, so this was published while he was a postdoc, but it's the same collaborators as before at his old institution, so my guess it's leftover thesis work.) They think 27 has been triggered, 34 not; this provides a nice compare-and-contrast opportunity for our write-up. Quick read.
|read with "Group M" for fig 2.
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2005A%26A...443..535V Valdettaro R., Palla F., Brand J., Cesaroni R., 2005, A&A, 443, 535.]
|Radio survey of water masers. 22.2 GHz (=1.35 cm if I did my math right). Really nice intro summarizing the big picture. Following up on Morgan and similar work asserting high-mass stars forming in BRCs by looking for masers. Our objects observed, not detected. Finding lots of non-detections, suggesting that low-mass stars forming instead. Nice, short writeup of basically a non-result, and I think they've gotten the interpretation spot-on. Nice to at least scan after the Morgan stuff for context. larger issues: spatial resolution (see [[Resolution]]). Again!! :)
|scan if you want with group M.
|-
|[http://arxiv.org/pdf/0909.3312v1.pdf Wang et al., 2009, A&A, 504, 369]
|The relation between 13CO j=2-1 line width in moelcular clouds and bolometric luminosity of associated IRAS sources. Radio. ignore at least for now IRAS 21391+5802 - suggests that it is a star forming cluster where high-mass stars will form
|
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1962ApJS....7....1L, Lynds, 1962, ApJS, 7, 1]
|The Lynds Dark Nebula paper. some of you were interested in the history of this. At least one if not all three of our BRCs are also associated with Lynds clouds. Read if you want to.
|-
|}

==Do not bother==
This group of paper has passing relevance to the science and the goals of NITARP. They are useful references for your readers to follow up on details. It is sufficient that one person (usually Luisa) has enough knowledge to know that the citation is proper. Reading the full paper is not essential.

{| border="1"
|'''Paper'''
|'''Comments'''
|-
|Makovoz D., Marleau F. R., 2005, PASP, 117, 1113.
|MOPEX info. VERY technical, not a manual, and not all that terribly relevant to what we're doing. skip it. you shouldn't have to get into MOPEX at all, but if you do, there is lots of online help in MOPEX that is really good, and also lots of documentation (aimed at professional astronomers, admittedly) on the SSC website.
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2010AJ....140.1868W Wright et al., 2010, AJ, 140, 1868]
|WISE "seminal paper" reference. Describes the mission. As I recall, there is some discussion of the data products, but for the complete discussion of data products in more of a manual form, consult the document that accompanies the delivery. Read this paper if you want a somewhat technical overview of the mission.
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2004ApJS..154..309W Werner et al., 2004, ApJS, 154, 309]
|Spitzer "seminar paper" reference. Describes the mission. No discussion of data products as I recall. Read this paper if you want a somewhat technical overview of the mission.
|-
|[http://articles.adsabs.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/nph-iarticle_query?1956BAN....13...77P&data_type=PDF_HIGH&whole_paper=YES&type=PRINTER&filetype=.pdf Bulletin of Astro. Instit. of the Netherlands, Vol 13, 471, 77-88, Pottasch et al., 1956, Bull. Astro. Instit. Netherlands, 13, 471]
|A study of bright rims in diffuse nebulae. VERY early work describing the location, shape of, density of, brightness of bright rim clouds in several nebula, including IC 1396 and Brc 38. So old that not really useful for assembling list of YSOs in region. skip.
|-
|[http://articles.adsabs.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/nph-iarticle_query?1999sf99.proc..381O&data_type=PDF_HIGH&whole_paper=YES&type=PRINTER&filetype=.pdf Ogura & Sugitani, 1999, Proceedings of Star Formation, pg 381-382]
|A large number of Halpha Emission Stars associated with BRCs. Conference proceedings, old at that. i'm sure this analysis is already written up in their later papers. ignore this one.
|-
|[http://articles.adsabs.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/nph-iarticle_query?1996A%26A...309..827S&data_type=PDF_HIGH&whole_paper=YES&type=PRINTER&filetype=.pdf, Saraceno et al., 1996, A&A, 309, 827-839]
|An evolutionary diagram for young stellar objects. deep, DEEP background, IGNORE THIS.
|-
|[http://arxiv.org/pdf/astro-ph/0407102v1.pdf, Beltran et al., 2004, A&A, 426, 941]
|'''BRC 38?''' The dense molecular cores in IRAS 21391 +5802 region. Radio and it sounds like theoretical models. ignore. Three sources found with BIMA (??) observations in 21391+5802; Hard to read as they are trying to use data to fit/model how gas is emitted from the core
|-
|[http://www.aperturephotometry.org, APT tool] Laher et al. 2012, PASP, submitted
| there are two papers that Russ is working on. One is a description of the basics of APT, what it's doing etc., and the other (i think) is more of a "what happens when you use APT to extract the photometry" kind of paper. It's been a while since I've seen these drafts; Russ has been going rounds with the referee on these both. He's started working on them again. Read this if you want to know the details of the inner workings of APT, and how it compares to other proven photometry programs.
|-
|Maoz 2007
|Referenced in the proposal; listed here for completeness. Astrophysics in a Nutshell (Princeton, NJ). i think this is someone's (Debbie's?) textbook. don't need to read her textbook, but you might want to find your own! :)
|-
|}

C-WAYS Spring work

2012-05-06T17:00:37Z

Novatne: /* Papers to discuss */

= Big Picture =

There are three things I'd like to accomplish before our visit:

(1) Start thinking about the issues of spatial resolution. I have developed a worksheet for this. '''WE DECIDED TO DO THIS FIRST.'''

(2) We need read in detail and discuss a short list of carefully selected papers. We'll rotate through our short list of papers, and each of you will get one to present to the group. This is modelling a so-called "journal club", a common occurrence in astronomy departments/groups/centers, where the papers are usually selected out of recent astro-ph mailings. The papers that went into this list came out of the extensive lists you assembled while writing the proposal. I then went through and sorted them into bins -- ones you want to read closely for the astronomy and astrophysics background, and/or for the interpretation, and/or for the big picture... ones from which you need to scavenge data, and you need to read enough to understand what it was they did, and what kinds of data they are reporting... ones you might read if you have time ... and ones you can ignore. '''WE SHOULD START ON THIS AFTER THE RESOLUTION STUFF.'''

(3) Actually doing the data scavenging out of those papers mentioned above. This can be as simple as going to the journal website and saving the data table as plain text, but in a handful of cases, it is a LOT more complicated. I am working on more explanation to go with this so-called source-matching work. Some of the work here springboards off of the journal articles we will read in detail, and some involves scanning additional articles. I AM STILL WORKING ON DEVELOPING A FRAMEWORK FOR THIS. It's ok if we don't get through this by the time of our visit, but it will slow us down for our visit.

= [[C-WAYS Spring calendar]] =

Not all of us are around and able to work on NITARP stuff for the whole spring.

= [[C-WAYS Resolution Worksheet]] =
[[C-WAYS Resolution Worksheet]] I hesitate to make a place for everyone to collect their answers on the wiki; in this case, I would like everyone to independently derive their own numbers and compare notes on the telecon together.

= [[C-WAYS source matching work]]=
[[C-WAYS source matching work]] -- this is an overview of what we need to know, and has some instructions, but no specific tasks doled out.

=Papers to discuss=

The relevant papers are sorted into the categories below.

I've attempted to make a roughly color-coded grouping of the papers below so that they can be presented in appropriate clumps. There are a LOT of papers to discuss, and I'm trying to make it roughly about the same amount of work per person. Here is the order I propose:

'''Summaries and questions from discussed papers''' [http://coolwiki.ipac.caltech.edu/index.php/Summaries_and_questions_on_discussed_papers]

#person1 (JC1) -- '''Lauren''' -- Guieu et al 2010, Rebull et al 2011a and 2011b; possibly Johnson et al. 2012 and Rebull et al. 2012, or possibly makes more sense to wait until closer to the visit??
#person2 (JC2) -- '''Peggy''' -- Ogura et al 2002, Sugitani et al 1991 -- includes responsibility of leading the coordinate updating for these. [[SFO Paper Journals Guided Reading]]
#person3 (JC3) -- '''Jackie''' -- Getman et al 2007, Beltran et al 2009, should also probably read Choudhury et al. 2010... but Choudhury et al is meaty enough that it should be the next week after these. [Reading Guide Journal Club[http://coolwiki.ipac.caltech.edu/index.php/Talk:C-WAYS_Spring_work]]
#person4 (JC4) -- '''Debbie''' -- Choudhury et al. 2010 and Chauhan et al. 2009 -- Chauhan et al 2009 is not meaty enough on its own, but is very different than Choudhury et al. 2010, despite sharing a few authors. Choudhury et al. pulls together some of the thoughts started in Getman et al and Beltran et al.
#person5 (JC5) -- '''Bob''' -- Barentsen et al. 2011 and Nakano et al. 2012
#person6 -- appendices of Koenig et al. 2012 and Gutermuth et al 2008?? depending on time, can/should skip these for now.
#then, starting with Ogura et al. 2002 and Sugitani et al. 1991, start updating coordinates.
#then, Gregorio-Hetem et al. 2009, Shevchenko et al. 1999, Wiramihardja et al 1986, and update those coordinates.

This should work like a journal club or even a book club, as in the named person takes the lead in presenting the article. You should present things along the lines of the following:
*the main point of this work was ...
*what they did was ... (high level summary, no need to get into nitty gritty details)
*the most interesting thing i learned was ...
*what they did that i agree with is ...
*what they did that i disagree with is ...
*and, for us here, the reason we should care about this in the context of our planned YSO work is ...

EVERYONE should read the papers ahead of time, but it's kind of expected that the named person will spend the most time reading the paper in question!

==Essential reading==
This group of papers are ones we need to read in 'journal club' style - read and discuss them in detail. They provide the scientific context and/or establishes known facts or conclusions about the bright rimmed clouds, or are similar enough to the process we will use that they are worth the investment of time.
{| border="1"
|'''Paper'''
|'''Notes'''
|'''Presenter/ present with'''
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2010ApJ...720...46G Guieu et al., 2010, ApJ, 720, 46]
|Our paper from the IC2118 team (one of the pre-NITARP teams!). Spitzer-based search for YSOs in IC2118 (near Orion's knee). Large map to start from. Ground-based optical obtained specifically to support these observations, much like us. Note serendipitous discovery of high-proper-motion object. This is something Tim and his students found entirely on their own. We tried to obtain follow-up spectroscopy from Palomar, but had bad weather. I need to go back and try again to get these spectra. There is also an opportunity to look at this environment with WISE! do with other Rebull et al papers - "group R". This can be the lowest priority of that group, as it was written the longest time ago. (may be better to focus time and energy on CG4 paper and Taurus with WISE paper.)
| (do with group R) person1
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2011AJ....142...25R Rebull et al., 2011a, AJ, 142, 25]
|our paper from the CG4+Sa101 team (a NITARP 2009 team) (I gave you hard copy of this one at the AAS.) This is a Spitzer-based search for YSOs in this region. Fairly large map to start from, but smaller than IC2118. Ground-based optical pre-obtained through a collaborator to support the observations, similar to us. (She turns out to also have a bunch of spectra, but has other things in front of them in her queue.)
| (do with group R) person1
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2011ApJS..196....4R Rebull et al., 2011b, ApJS, 196, 4]
|our paper looking for new YSOs in Taurus using WISE -- the one my recent AAS poster was based on, and I also gave you hard copy of this paper at the AAS. This starts from a HUGE region, 260 sq degrees, and something like 2.6 million sources. This is a far larger region than we will do, but we will use a similar approach -- use WISE, obtain a set of possible YSOs, use all available data we can find to weed down the list, compare to the literature-discovered objects, and present a list of candidates.
| (do with group R) person1
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2012AAS...21933705J Johnson et al., 2012, AAS219, 337.05] and Rebull et al. in prep
|'''BRC 27 and 38''': The NITARP 2011 team work here. Spitzer-driven search for YSOs, with ground-based optical photometry to support observations. I think most of you have read the poster already. I am still actively working on the draft; whenever this paper comes up in the rotation, I'll give you whatever I have at that point, even if it's unpolished. Sigh.
| (do with group R) person1
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2002AJ....123.2597O Ogura K., Sugitani K., Pickles A., 2002, AJ, 123, 2597.]
|'''BRC 27, 34, 38?''' Optical + 2MASS; general BRC info. Most recent of the Sugitani series of four we found. Using Halpha to look for YSOs, following up their other work. Relevant issues: using multiple wavelengths to find YSOs (see [[Finding cluster members]]), spatial resolution (see [[Resolution]]), caveats with finding candidates. Nice intro, summary of larger issues, discussion of results. ''Need to be sure that this catalog is included in our list of previously known YSOs in this region'', so we can compare our results to theirs. ''Finding charts'' helpfully included so we can match obj. We should discuss this one in some depth; the other Sugitanis don't need to be done in as much depth ("group S").
|(do with group S) person2
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1991ApJS...77...59S Sugitani K., Fukui Y., Ogura K., 1991, ApJS, 77, 59.]
|'''SFO''' article (discovery paper) - the original SFO, origin of "BRC" terminology, numbers 1-44. covers the northern hemisphere. Has nice intro/summary of what's going on in BRCs, CGs, etc. Nice approach of combining two large surveys -- POSS and IRAS; nice clear discussion of weed-down process. Second half of paper (detailed analysis of IRAS colors, etc.) obsolete but has same essence as what we do now. Review with other Sugitani, Ogura papers, but can skim the surface. You all should have read this in Jan or Feb in the context of our proposal, so maybe we don't have to do this again?
|(do w/ group S) person2
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2007ApJ...654..316G Getman et al. 2007, ApJ, 654, 316]
|'''BRC 38.''' Chandra, 2MASS, and Spitzer. discusses X-ray sources that are associated with young stars in this region, which they call IC 1396N. Studying triggered star formation and protostars in IC 1396N. Good pictures to help with the visualization of 1396N and these sources; evidence of sequential star formation. really nice intro to put it all in context.
Found 117 x-ray sources in IC 1396N; identify some with central cluster, and some with globule. We are likely to have similar issues since we are looking further out from the globule. Objects at a variety of stages. One of the youngest sources detected in x-ray, #66, is found close to the source IRAS 21391+5802 (also called BIMA 2). List of these sources are included. Nice discussions about finding counterparts across wavelengths, contamination by background sources, predictions for more YSOs here to be found. Dense paper! We need to scavenge these data, compare to our results.
|do in detail. compare and contrast! scavenge data. person3 - Jackie 
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2009A%26A...504...97B Beltran, et al., 2009, A&A, 504, 97B]
|'''BRC 38.''' this looked for YSOs inside the BRC using deep JHK. Data tables available online only! Comparison of results to Chandra results from Getman; find no evidence for sequential star formation. get and include their data. lots of discussion of extended emission and comparison to other bands. includes figure using IRAC 4.5 um data, but that's it for Spitzer information. Do in detail, with Getman.
| do in detail, with Getman. scavenge data. person3 - Jackie 
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2010ApJ...717.1067C Choudhury R., Mookerjea, B., Bhatt, H., 2010, ApJ, 717, 1067]
| '''BRC 38''', including IRAC+MIPS+optical phot and spec. *REALLY* nice paper. A tremendous amount of work, very nicely done, and very complete data tables. Go through and discuss this one in detail, scavenge all the data. Does a lot of comparison with Getman and Beltran, trying to reconcile all results. Do this one after or with Getman, Beltran; this one is meaty enough that it probably should get its own week.
| do in detail. scavenge data. do after Getman, Beltran person4
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2009MNRAS.396..964C Chauhan N, Pandey A.K., Ogura K., Ojha D.K., Bhatt B.C., Ghosh S.K., Rawat P.S., 2009, MNRAS, 396, 964]
|'''BRC 27, 38.''' Optical (BVIc)+2mass+spitzer/irac. This one we should spend considerable time on. Testing small-scale sequential star formation suggested in earlier 'group S' papers. nice intro. multiwavelength and contaminants (see [[Finding cluster members]]). As I read this, they are using optical+nir to pick their YSOs, not Spitzer-driven, which is different than what we will do. We ''will'' find a different set of obj, not just classify them differently. We need to get their data tables and compare our results to theirs. Note lots of information is online only, which i attached to article pdf. Note also that some of their online tables don't contain the same sources as the other tables (they should have caught that before publication). analysis of Halpha-age and mass function is a bit of overinterpretation IMHO. need spectroscopy first!!
|do in detail -- read closely, compare and contrast! need to scavenge data too. person4
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2011MNRAS.415..103B Barensten et al., 2011, MNRAS, 415, 103]
|'''BRC 34, 38.''' T tauri candidates and accretion rates using IPHAS (r, i, Halpha); over the entire huge IC1396 complex. this is a useful paper. data tables of 158 objects they think are young; make sure to grab and incorporate what they found. their shortlist may or may not overlap with the fields we care about in brc 34 (cloud D??) and 38 (cloud E), but still very useful to include. if, when we get to that point of needing these objects, they still haven't released the full IPHAS catalog, i will email these guys and ask for source lists at least in the regions we care about (34 and 38)
Also includes some 2 MASS and Spitzer data but only for T Tauri candidates, or possibly only in the center of the complex? need to read closely enough to figure this out. NB: more evidence for sequential/triggered star formation; find increasing accretion rates, disc excesses and younger ages as move away from HD 206267 towards Cloud A (BRC 38 is Cloud E)
| do this in detail, scavenge data person5
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2012AJ....143...61N, Nakano et al., 2012, AJ, 143, 61] [[Media:Nagano_2012.pdf]]
|'''BRC 34, 38.''' Wide Field Survey of Emission-line Stars in IC 1396 (the whole complex). Nakano reports a total of 639 Halpha emission-line stars were detected in an area of 4.2 deg2; they matched to some literature sources, also some Akari sources. Data charts and images showing locations included. We should read this in some detail, and scavenge the data in the regions we care about (brc 34 and 38).
|do this in detail, scavenge data. person5
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2012ApJ...744..130K, Koenig et al., 2012, ApJ, 744, 130]
|WISE-based YSO selection mechanism (inspired by Gutermuth et al. 2008, 2009) described in appendix. Meat of paper on high-mass star formation (we aren't caring about that particularly here -- we mostly want the selection mechanism).
|should read the appendix closely; you can skip the rest if you want. Do with Gutermuth et al 2008 ("colormethods") (person6?)
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2008ApJ...674..336G Gutermuth et al., 2008, ApJ, 674, 336]
|Spitzer color selection (first version - Gutermuth et al. 2009 perturbs it a little) presented here. Some of the selection mechanism is described in the main text, and some is in the appendix. We should read about the selection mechanism.
|should read about the selection mechanism closely; you can skip the rest if you want. Do with Koenig et al. 2012. ("colormethods") (person6?)
|-
|}

==Should scan==
This group of papers is essential to read enough to get the data out of them, but we don't need to really study them in tremendous detail.

{| border="1"
|'''Paper'''
|'''Comments'''
|'''Presenter/ present with'''
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2009A%26A...506..711G Gregorio-Hetem J., Montmerle T., Rodrigues C. V., Marciotto E., Preibisch T., Zinnecker H., 2009, A&A, 506, 711.]
|'''BRC 27.''' ROSAT+VRI data. relevant issues: using multiple wavelengths to find YSOs (see [[Finding cluster members]]), spatial resolution (see [[Resolution]]). Mentions Chandra, XMM data, both of which would cover BRC 27, but I can't find the subsequent analysis that they advertise. We need to include this catalog in what we accumulate, and compare our results to theirs.
|read enough to understand and scavenge data.
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1999MNRAS.310..210S Shevchenko V. S., Ezhkova O. V., Ibrahimov M. A., van den Ancker M. E., Tjin A, Djie H. R. E., 1999, MNRAS, 310, 210.]
|'''BRC 27'''. optical. age, distance estimate. photo'''electric''' UBVR(!) and objective prism spectroscopy for Halpha and spectral types. combined with IRAS. using multiple wavelengths to find YSOs (see [[Finding cluster members]]). We need to include this catalog in what we accumulate, and compare our results to theirs. This is not necessarily a trivial task, as they have photographic 1950 coordinates, which will need to be precessed and then matched to a 2mass source to get a more recent position estimate (they have finding charts, which should help), but it only needs to be done for the objects in our region of interest. It's old methodology (from an Uzbecki telescope), but still good stuff, especially the spectral types. nice "put-it-in-context" discussion at the top for the entire CMa R1 region.
|should read enough to understand and scavenge data.
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1986PASJ...38..395W Wiramihardja S.D., Kogure T., Nakano M., Yoshida S., 1986, PASJ, 38, 395.]
|'''BRC 27.''' Halpha plus photo'''graphic''' UBV.(!) using multiple wavelengths to find YSOs (see [[Finding cluster members]]). We need to include this catalog in what we accumulate, and compare our results to theirs. This is not necessarily a trivial task, as they have photographic 1950 coordinates, which will need to be precessed and then matched to a 2mass source to get a more recent position estimate (they say they have finding charts, which should help), but it only needs to be done for the objects in our field of view (our data). Nice cross matching that they've already done for ''their'' previously identified objects. We don't need to read it in detail; it's a really old paper. But we need to read enough to understand and scavenge data.
|should read enough to understand and scavenge data.
|-
|}

==Can read==
This group of papers is useful but not essential.

{| border="1"
|'''Paper'''
|'''Comments'''
|'''Presenter/ present with'''
|-
|[http://cdsads.u-strasbg.fr/cgi-bin/nph-bib_query?2001A%26A...376..553N&db_key=AST&nosetcookie=1, Nisini et al., 2001, A&A 376, 553]
|'''BRC 38.''' Multiple H2 protostellar jets in the bright-rimmed globule IC 1396-N. Jets are indicative of young stars! The H2 excitation inside the globule could be from either shocks driven by the outflow of YSOs or to UV induced fluorescence from the external ionized region. The conclusion states that the emissions originate from non-dissociative shocks, and that they are associated with the most embedded and youngest objects of the field. The near IR confirms the existence of a cluster of young embedded sources and highly efficient star formation activity. Lots of awkward text that English editing did not catch. Has a list of YSO candidates with some cross-ids. Lots of focus on jets and knots too. Much of these cross ids are probably in Choudhury et al.
| read and scavenge table of YSOs?
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2003ApJ...593L..47R Reipurth et al., 2003, ApJ, 123, 2597-2626]
|'''BRC 38''' Blowout from IC 1396N: The emergence of Herbig-Haro objects in the vicinity of bright-rimmed clouds. Halpha and other narrowband filters. Reipurth et al usually work in these wavelengths to find HH objects. short paper. they have a list of knots in the region, but that's it. Herbig-Haro flow (HH 777) found coming out of ic 1396N; located at 214041.6+581638 While many near-infrared sources were found that apparently are young stars this study focused on the HH flows found. Computer modeling was used to find a match for observed features.
|ok to skip
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2002ApJ...573..246B Beltran et al., 2002, ApJ, 573, 1]
|'''BRC 38''' IRAS 21391+5802: The Molecular Outflow and its Exciting source. VLA and BIMA observations of dust and gas surrounding IRAS source; 3 sources isolated with BIMA, each a YSO. Really good text about the intermediate mass star morphology and evolution compared to that of the low mass stars. There is a table at the end that has point source information of BIMA observations of 5 epochs with bandwidth and spectral resolution. A table with 5 sources and flux density and spectral index, another table with millimeter flux densitites, for 3 BIMA sources, and a table with CO outflow properties. Our focus will be more on the point sources. This paper is really focused on the outflow and its sources. Nice for context of source matching and variations in coordinate accuracy coupled with physical differences in the sources. But not a whole lot appropriate for our point source study.
|ok to skip
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2007A%26A...468L..37F Fuente, et al., 2007, A&A, 468L, 37]
|'''BRC 38.''' very short paper, looking for protostellar clusters in IC 1396N, using PdBI at 1.3, 3.3 mm. Main point as relevant to us -- 4 cores in IC1396N. Yes, strongly tied to Neri et al 2007 paper.
|ok to skip
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2007A%26A...468L..33N Neri, et al. 2007, A&A, 468, 33]
|'''BRC 38.''' found a cluster of hot cores in 1396N. again, a very short paper using PdBI at 1.3, 3.3 mm. Main point as relevant to us -- cluster of cores here. Yes, strongly tied to Fuente et al 2007 paper.
|ok to skip
|-
|}

==For the over achievers==
Read if you are motivated to do so.

{| border="1"
|'''Paper'''
|'''Comments'''
|'''Presenter/ present with'''
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1994ApJS...92..163S Sugitani K., Ogura K., 1994, ApJS, 92, 163.]
|SFO/BRC catalog/nomenclature continued into the southern hemisphere. (NB: all our obj are in the N. Hem paper!). SFO/BRC numbers 45-89. Second (by time) in the Sugitani series. Again, much of detailed analysis now obsolete. Review with other Sugitani, Ogura papers, but can skim the surface.
|if do, do w/ group S
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1995ApJ...455L..39S Sugitani K., Tamura M., Ogura K., 1995, ApJ, 455, L39.]
| JHK follow-up of IRAS sources from SFO. relevant issues: using multiple wavelengths to find YSOs (see [[Finding cluster members]]), spatial resolution (see [[Resolution]]). Shame on them for not publishing a data table or even a figure with the locations of everything they identify as a YSO! BRC 27 is one that they choose to include in a finder chart, but doesn't do us much good. Nice summary of larger issues, timescales. Short paper. If do, review with other Sugitani, Ogura papers, but can skim the surface.
|if do, do w/ group S
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2007AJ....133.1528C Connelley et al., 2007, AJ, 133, 1528]
|'''BRC 38''' Infrared Nebulae around Young stellar objects. IRAS 21391+5802 - images show jet-like nebula and large patches of nebulosity. IRAS source thought to be a low mass Class 0 source (Beltran et al. 2002, 2004). This source has H2 emission in the form of bow shocks. We need to check the source in our images, but it's likely bright enough that it appears in many of the other papers.
|ok to skip
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2008ApJ...675.1352V Valdettaro R., Migenes V., Trinidad M.A., Brand J., Palla F., 2008, ApJ, 675, 1352.]
|'''BRC 34. (others?)''' VLA obs of water masers, following up 2005 work. BRC 34 observed, not detected. nice intro that puts their work in context with the rest of what they've done. Lots more non-dets, interpreted as forming low mass and/or older stars than had been assumed. I think they've gotten the interpretation spot-on.
|scan if you want
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2002A%26A...388..172S Soares J.B., Bica E., 2002, A&A, 388, 172.]
|'''BRC 27.''' OLD 2MASS. Editing ghastly. Really simple paper. In theory, we should include their results in what we accumulate, and compare our results, though (a) they are using "prehistoric" 2mass data reduction, and (b) they really make it hard, as they don't even tell us how many YSOs they think they've found, just the numbers of objects for which they've done photometry. So I don't think we really can compare our results to this one. However, nice "put it in larger context" discussion with wide-field IRAS image.
|skip it unless you want to see the IRAS image.
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2003A%26A...404..217S Soares J.B., Bica E., 2003, A&A, 404, 217.]
|2MASS + optical. Simple paper elsewhere in the same cloud as BRC 27. Same sort of 2MASS analysis as their 2002 paper. Still archaic 2MASS data reduction. Skip it.
| skip it.
|-
|Allen L., et al. 2011, American Astronomical Society, BAAS, 43, 258.15.
|Poster from AAS ... statistical measurement of YSOs in all of their BRC IRAC observations. not a lot of content beyond the images and their 'big picture' work.
|skip it.
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2004A%26A...426..535M Morgan L. K., Thompson M. A., Urquhart J. S., White G. J., Mio J., 2004, A&A, 426, 535.] note has erratum too.
|'''BRC 27, 34, 38?''' Radio and mid-ir survey. NRAO/NVSS/VLA (20cm), DSS, MSX data. both 27 and 34 in here, though 34 is a non-det. nice intro to the physics, though they get into far more math than we need to. relevant issues: this radio is thermal (free-free emission). they smoothed data -- spatial resolution (see [[Resolution]]). another nice use of three big surveys. sfo 27 in the online-only fig 1. T3 also online only. identifying ionizing source is not the same as identifying point sources in the images themselves. it's not clear that this is all that relevant for us. part of a PhD thesis.
|Drop... if you want to, read with "Group M" but skip the math.
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2008A%26A...477..557M Morgan L. K., Thompson M. A., Urquhart J. S., White G. J., 2008, A&A, 477, 557.]
|'''BRC 27, 34, 38?''' SCUBA submm survey (450+850 um) plus IRAS (12, 25, 60, 100 um), MSX, and 2MASS (erroneously identified as 2mm but really 2 micron). both 27 and 34 in here. next part of a PhD thesis. lots of nice overview, summary (as would be expected for a thesis) spread throughout article. seems to be a really long paper, but is almost all figures in the appendix. relevant issues: how the objects they are talking about (at long and short wavelengths) compare to what we see in our images (see [[Resolution]] and their, e.g., fig 4). Forward reference to Spitzer data analysis like ours but then says have already looked for GLIMPSE, 24 um obs. They are only looking at low-res flux densities. Appendix may be useful for scavenging additional targets if we want to do more analysis on more targets.
|Probably the most worth reading of "Group M"; skip the math.
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2009MNRAS.400.1726M Morgan L. K., Urquhart J. S., Thompson M. A., 2009, MNRAS, 400, 1726.]
|'''BRC 27, 34, 38?''' Radio, mid-ir, SCUBA observations; redefined SFO catalog. JCMT (CO) observations. 22 arcsec resolution! (see [[Resolution]] and their fig 2 here.) Likely last of his thesis, or first of his postdoc. (Look, his address changed, so this was published while he was a postdoc, but it's the same collaborators as before at his old institution, so my guess it's leftover thesis work.) They think 27 has been triggered, 34 not; this provides a nice compare-and-contrast opportunity for our write-up. Quick read.
|read with "Group M" for fig 2.
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2005A%26A...443..535V Valdettaro R., Palla F., Brand J., Cesaroni R., 2005, A&A, 443, 535.]
|Radio survey of water masers. 22.2 GHz (=1.35 cm if I did my math right). Really nice intro summarizing the big picture. Following up on Morgan and similar work asserting high-mass stars forming in BRCs by looking for masers. Our objects observed, not detected. Finding lots of non-detections, suggesting that low-mass stars forming instead. Nice, short writeup of basically a non-result, and I think they've gotten the interpretation spot-on. Nice to at least scan after the Morgan stuff for context. larger issues: spatial resolution (see [[Resolution]]). Again!! :)
|scan if you want with group M.
|-
|[http://arxiv.org/pdf/0909.3312v1.pdf Wang et al., 2009, A&A, 504, 369]
|The relation between 13CO j=2-1 line width in moelcular clouds and bolometric luminosity of associated IRAS sources. Radio. ignore at least for now IRAS 21391+5802 - suggests that it is a star forming cluster where high-mass stars will form
|
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1962ApJS....7....1L, Lynds, 1962, ApJS, 7, 1]
|The Lynds Dark Nebula paper. some of you were interested in the history of this. At least one if not all three of our BRCs are also associated with Lynds clouds. Read if you want to.
|-
|}

==Do not bother==
This group of paper has passing relevance to the science and the goals of NITARP. They are useful references for your readers to follow up on details. It is sufficient that one person (usually Luisa) has enough knowledge to know that the citation is proper. Reading the full paper is not essential.

{| border="1"
|'''Paper'''
|'''Comments'''
|-
|Makovoz D., Marleau F. R., 2005, PASP, 117, 1113.
|MOPEX info. VERY technical, not a manual, and not all that terribly relevant to what we're doing. skip it. you shouldn't have to get into MOPEX at all, but if you do, there is lots of online help in MOPEX that is really good, and also lots of documentation (aimed at professional astronomers, admittedly) on the SSC website.
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2010AJ....140.1868W Wright et al., 2010, AJ, 140, 1868]
|WISE "seminal paper" reference. Describes the mission. As I recall, there is some discussion of the data products, but for the complete discussion of data products in more of a manual form, consult the document that accompanies the delivery. Read this paper if you want a somewhat technical overview of the mission.
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2004ApJS..154..309W Werner et al., 2004, ApJS, 154, 309]
|Spitzer "seminar paper" reference. Describes the mission. No discussion of data products as I recall. Read this paper if you want a somewhat technical overview of the mission.
|-
|[http://articles.adsabs.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/nph-iarticle_query?1956BAN....13...77P&data_type=PDF_HIGH&whole_paper=YES&type=PRINTER&filetype=.pdf Bulletin of Astro. Instit. of the Netherlands, Vol 13, 471, 77-88, Pottasch et al., 1956, Bull. Astro. Instit. Netherlands, 13, 471]
|A study of bright rims in diffuse nebulae. VERY early work describing the location, shape of, density of, brightness of bright rim clouds in several nebula, including IC 1396 and Brc 38. So old that not really useful for assembling list of YSOs in region. skip.
|-
|[http://articles.adsabs.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/nph-iarticle_query?1999sf99.proc..381O&data_type=PDF_HIGH&whole_paper=YES&type=PRINTER&filetype=.pdf Ogura & Sugitani, 1999, Proceedings of Star Formation, pg 381-382]
|A large number of Halpha Emission Stars associated with BRCs. Conference proceedings, old at that. i'm sure this analysis is already written up in their later papers. ignore this one.
|-
|[http://articles.adsabs.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/nph-iarticle_query?1996A%26A...309..827S&data_type=PDF_HIGH&whole_paper=YES&type=PRINTER&filetype=.pdf, Saraceno et al., 1996, A&A, 309, 827-839]
|An evolutionary diagram for young stellar objects. deep, DEEP background, IGNORE THIS.
|-
|[http://arxiv.org/pdf/astro-ph/0407102v1.pdf, Beltran et al., 2004, A&A, 426, 941]
|'''BRC 38?''' The dense molecular cores in IRAS 21391 +5802 region. Radio and it sounds like theoretical models. ignore. Three sources found with BIMA (??) observations in 21391+5802; Hard to read as they are trying to use data to fit/model how gas is emitted from the core
|-
|[http://www.aperturephotometry.org, APT tool] Laher et al. 2012, PASP, submitted
| there are two papers that Russ is working on. One is a description of the basics of APT, what it's doing etc., and the other (i think) is more of a "what happens when you use APT to extract the photometry" kind of paper. It's been a while since I've seen these drafts; Russ has been going rounds with the referee on these both. He's started working on them again. Read this if you want to know the details of the inner workings of APT, and how it compares to other proven photometry programs.
|-
|Maoz 2007
|Referenced in the proposal; listed here for completeness. Astrophysics in a Nutshell (Princeton, NJ). i think this is someone's (Debbie's?) textbook. don't need to read her textbook, but you might want to find your own! :)
|-
|}

C-WAYS Spring work

2012-05-06T16:56:58Z

Novatne: /* Papers to discuss */

= Big Picture =

There are three things I'd like to accomplish before our visit:

(1) Start thinking about the issues of spatial resolution. I have developed a worksheet for this. '''WE DECIDED TO DO THIS FIRST.'''

(2) We need read in detail and discuss a short list of carefully selected papers. We'll rotate through our short list of papers, and each of you will get one to present to the group. This is modelling a so-called "journal club", a common occurrence in astronomy departments/groups/centers, where the papers are usually selected out of recent astro-ph mailings. The papers that went into this list came out of the extensive lists you assembled while writing the proposal. I then went through and sorted them into bins -- ones you want to read closely for the astronomy and astrophysics background, and/or for the interpretation, and/or for the big picture... ones from which you need to scavenge data, and you need to read enough to understand what it was they did, and what kinds of data they are reporting... ones you might read if you have time ... and ones you can ignore. '''WE SHOULD START ON THIS AFTER THE RESOLUTION STUFF.'''

(3) Actually doing the data scavenging out of those papers mentioned above. This can be as simple as going to the journal website and saving the data table as plain text, but in a handful of cases, it is a LOT more complicated. I am working on more explanation to go with this so-called source-matching work. Some of the work here springboards off of the journal articles we will read in detail, and some involves scanning additional articles. I AM STILL WORKING ON DEVELOPING A FRAMEWORK FOR THIS. It's ok if we don't get through this by the time of our visit, but it will slow us down for our visit.

= [[C-WAYS Spring calendar]] =

Not all of us are around and able to work on NITARP stuff for the whole spring.

= [[C-WAYS Resolution Worksheet]] =
[[C-WAYS Resolution Worksheet]] I hesitate to make a place for everyone to collect their answers on the wiki; in this case, I would like everyone to independently derive their own numbers and compare notes on the telecon together.

= [[C-WAYS source matching work]]=
[[C-WAYS source matching work]] -- this is an overview of what we need to know, and has some instructions, but no specific tasks doled out.

=Papers to discuss=

The relevant papers are sorted into the categories below.

I've attempted to make a roughly color-coded grouping of the papers below so that they can be presented in appropriate clumps. There are a LOT of papers to discuss, and I'm trying to make it roughly about the same amount of work per person. Here is the order I propose:

[[Summaries and questions from discussed papers http://coolwiki.ipac.caltech.edu/index.php/Summaries_and_questions_on_discussed_papers]]
#person1 (JC1) -- '''Lauren''' -- Guieu et al 2010, Rebull et al 2011a and 2011b; possibly Johnson et al. 2012 and Rebull et al. 2012, or possibly makes more sense to wait until closer to the visit??
#person2 (JC2) -- '''Peggy''' -- Ogura et al 2002, Sugitani et al 1991 -- includes responsibility of leading the coordinate updating for these. [[SFO Paper Journals Guided Reading]]
#person3 (JC3) -- '''Jackie''' -- Getman et al 2007, Beltran et al 2009, should also probably read Choudhury et al. 2010... but Choudhury et al is meaty enough that it should be the next week after these. [Reading Guide Journal Club[http://coolwiki.ipac.caltech.edu/index.php/Talk:C-WAYS_Spring_work]]
#person4 (JC4) -- '''Debbie''' -- Choudhury et al. 2010 and Chauhan et al. 2009 -- Chauhan et al 2009 is not meaty enough on its own, but is very different than Choudhury et al. 2010, despite sharing a few authors. Choudhury et al. pulls together some of the thoughts started in Getman et al and Beltran et al.
#person5 (JC5) -- '''Bob''' -- Barentsen et al. 2011 and Nakano et al. 2012
#person6 -- appendices of Koenig et al. 2012 and Gutermuth et al 2008?? depending on time, can/should skip these for now.
#then, starting with Ogura et al. 2002 and Sugitani et al. 1991, start updating coordinates.
#then, Gregorio-Hetem et al. 2009, Shevchenko et al. 1999, Wiramihardja et al 1986, and update those coordinates.

This should work like a journal club or even a book club, as in the named person takes the lead in presenting the article. You should present things along the lines of the following:
*the main point of this work was ...
*what they did was ... (high level summary, no need to get into nitty gritty details)
*the most interesting thing i learned was ...
*what they did that i agree with is ...
*what they did that i disagree with is ...
*and, for us here, the reason we should care about this in the context of our planned YSO work is ...

EVERYONE should read the papers ahead of time, but it's kind of expected that the named person will spend the most time reading the paper in question!

==Essential reading==
This group of papers are ones we need to read in 'journal club' style - read and discuss them in detail. They provide the scientific context and/or establishes known facts or conclusions about the bright rimmed clouds, or are similar enough to the process we will use that they are worth the investment of time.
{| border="1"
|'''Paper'''
|'''Notes'''
|'''Presenter/ present with'''
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2010ApJ...720...46G Guieu et al., 2010, ApJ, 720, 46]
|Our paper from the IC2118 team (one of the pre-NITARP teams!). Spitzer-based search for YSOs in IC2118 (near Orion's knee). Large map to start from. Ground-based optical obtained specifically to support these observations, much like us. Note serendipitous discovery of high-proper-motion object. This is something Tim and his students found entirely on their own. We tried to obtain follow-up spectroscopy from Palomar, but had bad weather. I need to go back and try again to get these spectra. There is also an opportunity to look at this environment with WISE! do with other Rebull et al papers - "group R". This can be the lowest priority of that group, as it was written the longest time ago. (may be better to focus time and energy on CG4 paper and Taurus with WISE paper.)
| (do with group R) person1
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2011AJ....142...25R Rebull et al., 2011a, AJ, 142, 25]
|our paper from the CG4+Sa101 team (a NITARP 2009 team) (I gave you hard copy of this one at the AAS.) This is a Spitzer-based search for YSOs in this region. Fairly large map to start from, but smaller than IC2118. Ground-based optical pre-obtained through a collaborator to support the observations, similar to us. (She turns out to also have a bunch of spectra, but has other things in front of them in her queue.)
| (do with group R) person1
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2011ApJS..196....4R Rebull et al., 2011b, ApJS, 196, 4]
|our paper looking for new YSOs in Taurus using WISE -- the one my recent AAS poster was based on, and I also gave you hard copy of this paper at the AAS. This starts from a HUGE region, 260 sq degrees, and something like 2.6 million sources. This is a far larger region than we will do, but we will use a similar approach -- use WISE, obtain a set of possible YSOs, use all available data we can find to weed down the list, compare to the literature-discovered objects, and present a list of candidates.
| (do with group R) person1
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2012AAS...21933705J Johnson et al., 2012, AAS219, 337.05] and Rebull et al. in prep
|'''BRC 27 and 38''': The NITARP 2011 team work here. Spitzer-driven search for YSOs, with ground-based optical photometry to support observations. I think most of you have read the poster already. I am still actively working on the draft; whenever this paper comes up in the rotation, I'll give you whatever I have at that point, even if it's unpolished. Sigh.
| (do with group R) person1
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2002AJ....123.2597O Ogura K., Sugitani K., Pickles A., 2002, AJ, 123, 2597.]
|'''BRC 27, 34, 38?''' Optical + 2MASS; general BRC info. Most recent of the Sugitani series of four we found. Using Halpha to look for YSOs, following up their other work. Relevant issues: using multiple wavelengths to find YSOs (see [[Finding cluster members]]), spatial resolution (see [[Resolution]]), caveats with finding candidates. Nice intro, summary of larger issues, discussion of results. ''Need to be sure that this catalog is included in our list of previously known YSOs in this region'', so we can compare our results to theirs. ''Finding charts'' helpfully included so we can match obj. We should discuss this one in some depth; the other Sugitanis don't need to be done in as much depth ("group S").
|(do with group S) person2
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1991ApJS...77...59S Sugitani K., Fukui Y., Ogura K., 1991, ApJS, 77, 59.]
|'''SFO''' article (discovery paper) - the original SFO, origin of "BRC" terminology, numbers 1-44. covers the northern hemisphere. Has nice intro/summary of what's going on in BRCs, CGs, etc. Nice approach of combining two large surveys -- POSS and IRAS; nice clear discussion of weed-down process. Second half of paper (detailed analysis of IRAS colors, etc.) obsolete but has same essence as what we do now. Review with other Sugitani, Ogura papers, but can skim the surface. You all should have read this in Jan or Feb in the context of our proposal, so maybe we don't have to do this again?
|(do w/ group S) person2
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2007ApJ...654..316G Getman et al. 2007, ApJ, 654, 316]
|'''BRC 38.''' Chandra, 2MASS, and Spitzer. discusses X-ray sources that are associated with young stars in this region, which they call IC 1396N. Studying triggered star formation and protostars in IC 1396N. Good pictures to help with the visualization of 1396N and these sources; evidence of sequential star formation. really nice intro to put it all in context.
Found 117 x-ray sources in IC 1396N; identify some with central cluster, and some with globule. We are likely to have similar issues since we are looking further out from the globule. Objects at a variety of stages. One of the youngest sources detected in x-ray, #66, is found close to the source IRAS 21391+5802 (also called BIMA 2). List of these sources are included. Nice discussions about finding counterparts across wavelengths, contamination by background sources, predictions for more YSOs here to be found. Dense paper! We need to scavenge these data, compare to our results.
|do in detail. compare and contrast! scavenge data. person3 - Jackie 
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2009A%26A...504...97B Beltran, et al., 2009, A&A, 504, 97B]
|'''BRC 38.''' this looked for YSOs inside the BRC using deep JHK. Data tables available online only! Comparison of results to Chandra results from Getman; find no evidence for sequential star formation. get and include their data. lots of discussion of extended emission and comparison to other bands. includes figure using IRAC 4.5 um data, but that's it for Spitzer information. Do in detail, with Getman.
| do in detail, with Getman. scavenge data. person3 - Jackie 
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2010ApJ...717.1067C Choudhury R., Mookerjea, B., Bhatt, H., 2010, ApJ, 717, 1067]
| '''BRC 38''', including IRAC+MIPS+optical phot and spec. *REALLY* nice paper. A tremendous amount of work, very nicely done, and very complete data tables. Go through and discuss this one in detail, scavenge all the data. Does a lot of comparison with Getman and Beltran, trying to reconcile all results. Do this one after or with Getman, Beltran; this one is meaty enough that it probably should get its own week.
| do in detail. scavenge data. do after Getman, Beltran person4
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2009MNRAS.396..964C Chauhan N, Pandey A.K., Ogura K., Ojha D.K., Bhatt B.C., Ghosh S.K., Rawat P.S., 2009, MNRAS, 396, 964]
|'''BRC 27, 38.''' Optical (BVIc)+2mass+spitzer/irac. This one we should spend considerable time on. Testing small-scale sequential star formation suggested in earlier 'group S' papers. nice intro. multiwavelength and contaminants (see [[Finding cluster members]]). As I read this, they are using optical+nir to pick their YSOs, not Spitzer-driven, which is different than what we will do. We ''will'' find a different set of obj, not just classify them differently. We need to get their data tables and compare our results to theirs. Note lots of information is online only, which i attached to article pdf. Note also that some of their online tables don't contain the same sources as the other tables (they should have caught that before publication). analysis of Halpha-age and mass function is a bit of overinterpretation IMHO. need spectroscopy first!!
|do in detail -- read closely, compare and contrast! need to scavenge data too. person4
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2011MNRAS.415..103B Barensten et al., 2011, MNRAS, 415, 103]
|'''BRC 34, 38.''' T tauri candidates and accretion rates using IPHAS (r, i, Halpha); over the entire huge IC1396 complex. this is a useful paper. data tables of 158 objects they think are young; make sure to grab and incorporate what they found. their shortlist may or may not overlap with the fields we care about in brc 34 (cloud D??) and 38 (cloud E), but still very useful to include. if, when we get to that point of needing these objects, they still haven't released the full IPHAS catalog, i will email these guys and ask for source lists at least in the regions we care about (34 and 38)
Also includes some 2 MASS and Spitzer data but only for T Tauri candidates, or possibly only in the center of the complex? need to read closely enough to figure this out. NB: more evidence for sequential/triggered star formation; find increasing accretion rates, disc excesses and younger ages as move away from HD 206267 towards Cloud A (BRC 38 is Cloud E)
| do this in detail, scavenge data person5
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2012AJ....143...61N, Nakano et al., 2012, AJ, 143, 61] [[Media:Nagano_2012.pdf]]
|'''BRC 34, 38.''' Wide Field Survey of Emission-line Stars in IC 1396 (the whole complex). Nakano reports a total of 639 Halpha emission-line stars were detected in an area of 4.2 deg2; they matched to some literature sources, also some Akari sources. Data charts and images showing locations included. We should read this in some detail, and scavenge the data in the regions we care about (brc 34 and 38).
|do this in detail, scavenge data. person5
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2012ApJ...744..130K, Koenig et al., 2012, ApJ, 744, 130]
|WISE-based YSO selection mechanism (inspired by Gutermuth et al. 2008, 2009) described in appendix. Meat of paper on high-mass star formation (we aren't caring about that particularly here -- we mostly want the selection mechanism).
|should read the appendix closely; you can skip the rest if you want. Do with Gutermuth et al 2008 ("colormethods") (person6?)
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2008ApJ...674..336G Gutermuth et al., 2008, ApJ, 674, 336]
|Spitzer color selection (first version - Gutermuth et al. 2009 perturbs it a little) presented here. Some of the selection mechanism is described in the main text, and some is in the appendix. We should read about the selection mechanism.
|should read about the selection mechanism closely; you can skip the rest if you want. Do with Koenig et al. 2012. ("colormethods") (person6?)
|-
|}

==Should scan==
This group of papers is essential to read enough to get the data out of them, but we don't need to really study them in tremendous detail.

{| border="1"
|'''Paper'''
|'''Comments'''
|'''Presenter/ present with'''
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2009A%26A...506..711G Gregorio-Hetem J., Montmerle T., Rodrigues C. V., Marciotto E., Preibisch T., Zinnecker H., 2009, A&A, 506, 711.]
|'''BRC 27.''' ROSAT+VRI data. relevant issues: using multiple wavelengths to find YSOs (see [[Finding cluster members]]), spatial resolution (see [[Resolution]]). Mentions Chandra, XMM data, both of which would cover BRC 27, but I can't find the subsequent analysis that they advertise. We need to include this catalog in what we accumulate, and compare our results to theirs.
|read enough to understand and scavenge data.
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1999MNRAS.310..210S Shevchenko V. S., Ezhkova O. V., Ibrahimov M. A., van den Ancker M. E., Tjin A, Djie H. R. E., 1999, MNRAS, 310, 210.]
|'''BRC 27'''. optical. age, distance estimate. photo'''electric''' UBVR(!) and objective prism spectroscopy for Halpha and spectral types. combined with IRAS. using multiple wavelengths to find YSOs (see [[Finding cluster members]]). We need to include this catalog in what we accumulate, and compare our results to theirs. This is not necessarily a trivial task, as they have photographic 1950 coordinates, which will need to be precessed and then matched to a 2mass source to get a more recent position estimate (they have finding charts, which should help), but it only needs to be done for the objects in our region of interest. It's old methodology (from an Uzbecki telescope), but still good stuff, especially the spectral types. nice "put-it-in-context" discussion at the top for the entire CMa R1 region.
|should read enough to understand and scavenge data.
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1986PASJ...38..395W Wiramihardja S.D., Kogure T., Nakano M., Yoshida S., 1986, PASJ, 38, 395.]
|'''BRC 27.''' Halpha plus photo'''graphic''' UBV.(!) using multiple wavelengths to find YSOs (see [[Finding cluster members]]). We need to include this catalog in what we accumulate, and compare our results to theirs. This is not necessarily a trivial task, as they have photographic 1950 coordinates, which will need to be precessed and then matched to a 2mass source to get a more recent position estimate (they say they have finding charts, which should help), but it only needs to be done for the objects in our field of view (our data). Nice cross matching that they've already done for ''their'' previously identified objects. We don't need to read it in detail; it's a really old paper. But we need to read enough to understand and scavenge data.
|should read enough to understand and scavenge data.
|-
|}

==Can read==
This group of papers is useful but not essential.

{| border="1"
|'''Paper'''
|'''Comments'''
|'''Presenter/ present with'''
|-
|[http://cdsads.u-strasbg.fr/cgi-bin/nph-bib_query?2001A%26A...376..553N&db_key=AST&nosetcookie=1, Nisini et al., 2001, A&A 376, 553]
|'''BRC 38.''' Multiple H2 protostellar jets in the bright-rimmed globule IC 1396-N. Jets are indicative of young stars! The H2 excitation inside the globule could be from either shocks driven by the outflow of YSOs or to UV induced fluorescence from the external ionized region. The conclusion states that the emissions originate from non-dissociative shocks, and that they are associated with the most embedded and youngest objects of the field. The near IR confirms the existence of a cluster of young embedded sources and highly efficient star formation activity. Lots of awkward text that English editing did not catch. Has a list of YSO candidates with some cross-ids. Lots of focus on jets and knots too. Much of these cross ids are probably in Choudhury et al.
| read and scavenge table of YSOs?
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2003ApJ...593L..47R Reipurth et al., 2003, ApJ, 123, 2597-2626]
|'''BRC 38''' Blowout from IC 1396N: The emergence of Herbig-Haro objects in the vicinity of bright-rimmed clouds. Halpha and other narrowband filters. Reipurth et al usually work in these wavelengths to find HH objects. short paper. they have a list of knots in the region, but that's it. Herbig-Haro flow (HH 777) found coming out of ic 1396N; located at 214041.6+581638 While many near-infrared sources were found that apparently are young stars this study focused on the HH flows found. Computer modeling was used to find a match for observed features.
|ok to skip
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2002ApJ...573..246B Beltran et al., 2002, ApJ, 573, 1]
|'''BRC 38''' IRAS 21391+5802: The Molecular Outflow and its Exciting source. VLA and BIMA observations of dust and gas surrounding IRAS source; 3 sources isolated with BIMA, each a YSO. Really good text about the intermediate mass star morphology and evolution compared to that of the low mass stars. There is a table at the end that has point source information of BIMA observations of 5 epochs with bandwidth and spectral resolution. A table with 5 sources and flux density and spectral index, another table with millimeter flux densitites, for 3 BIMA sources, and a table with CO outflow properties. Our focus will be more on the point sources. This paper is really focused on the outflow and its sources. Nice for context of source matching and variations in coordinate accuracy coupled with physical differences in the sources. But not a whole lot appropriate for our point source study.
|ok to skip
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2007A%26A...468L..37F Fuente, et al., 2007, A&A, 468L, 37]
|'''BRC 38.''' very short paper, looking for protostellar clusters in IC 1396N, using PdBI at 1.3, 3.3 mm. Main point as relevant to us -- 4 cores in IC1396N. Yes, strongly tied to Neri et al 2007 paper.
|ok to skip
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2007A%26A...468L..33N Neri, et al. 2007, A&A, 468, 33]
|'''BRC 38.''' found a cluster of hot cores in 1396N. again, a very short paper using PdBI at 1.3, 3.3 mm. Main point as relevant to us -- cluster of cores here. Yes, strongly tied to Fuente et al 2007 paper.
|ok to skip
|-
|}

==For the over achievers==
Read if you are motivated to do so.

{| border="1"
|'''Paper'''
|'''Comments'''
|'''Presenter/ present with'''
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1994ApJS...92..163S Sugitani K., Ogura K., 1994, ApJS, 92, 163.]
|SFO/BRC catalog/nomenclature continued into the southern hemisphere. (NB: all our obj are in the N. Hem paper!). SFO/BRC numbers 45-89. Second (by time) in the Sugitani series. Again, much of detailed analysis now obsolete. Review with other Sugitani, Ogura papers, but can skim the surface.
|if do, do w/ group S
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1995ApJ...455L..39S Sugitani K., Tamura M., Ogura K., 1995, ApJ, 455, L39.]
| JHK follow-up of IRAS sources from SFO. relevant issues: using multiple wavelengths to find YSOs (see [[Finding cluster members]]), spatial resolution (see [[Resolution]]). Shame on them for not publishing a data table or even a figure with the locations of everything they identify as a YSO! BRC 27 is one that they choose to include in a finder chart, but doesn't do us much good. Nice summary of larger issues, timescales. Short paper. If do, review with other Sugitani, Ogura papers, but can skim the surface.
|if do, do w/ group S
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2007AJ....133.1528C Connelley et al., 2007, AJ, 133, 1528]
|'''BRC 38''' Infrared Nebulae around Young stellar objects. IRAS 21391+5802 - images show jet-like nebula and large patches of nebulosity. IRAS source thought to be a low mass Class 0 source (Beltran et al. 2002, 2004). This source has H2 emission in the form of bow shocks. We need to check the source in our images, but it's likely bright enough that it appears in many of the other papers.
|ok to skip
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2008ApJ...675.1352V Valdettaro R., Migenes V., Trinidad M.A., Brand J., Palla F., 2008, ApJ, 675, 1352.]
|'''BRC 34. (others?)''' VLA obs of water masers, following up 2005 work. BRC 34 observed, not detected. nice intro that puts their work in context with the rest of what they've done. Lots more non-dets, interpreted as forming low mass and/or older stars than had been assumed. I think they've gotten the interpretation spot-on.
|scan if you want
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2002A%26A...388..172S Soares J.B., Bica E., 2002, A&A, 388, 172.]
|'''BRC 27.''' OLD 2MASS. Editing ghastly. Really simple paper. In theory, we should include their results in what we accumulate, and compare our results, though (a) they are using "prehistoric" 2mass data reduction, and (b) they really make it hard, as they don't even tell us how many YSOs they think they've found, just the numbers of objects for which they've done photometry. So I don't think we really can compare our results to this one. However, nice "put it in larger context" discussion with wide-field IRAS image.
|skip it unless you want to see the IRAS image.
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2003A%26A...404..217S Soares J.B., Bica E., 2003, A&A, 404, 217.]
|2MASS + optical. Simple paper elsewhere in the same cloud as BRC 27. Same sort of 2MASS analysis as their 2002 paper. Still archaic 2MASS data reduction. Skip it.
| skip it.
|-
|Allen L., et al. 2011, American Astronomical Society, BAAS, 43, 258.15.
|Poster from AAS ... statistical measurement of YSOs in all of their BRC IRAC observations. not a lot of content beyond the images and their 'big picture' work.
|skip it.
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2004A%26A...426..535M Morgan L. K., Thompson M. A., Urquhart J. S., White G. J., Mio J., 2004, A&A, 426, 535.] note has erratum too.
|'''BRC 27, 34, 38?''' Radio and mid-ir survey. NRAO/NVSS/VLA (20cm), DSS, MSX data. both 27 and 34 in here, though 34 is a non-det. nice intro to the physics, though they get into far more math than we need to. relevant issues: this radio is thermal (free-free emission). they smoothed data -- spatial resolution (see [[Resolution]]). another nice use of three big surveys. sfo 27 in the online-only fig 1. T3 also online only. identifying ionizing source is not the same as identifying point sources in the images themselves. it's not clear that this is all that relevant for us. part of a PhD thesis.
|Drop... if you want to, read with "Group M" but skip the math.
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2008A%26A...477..557M Morgan L. K., Thompson M. A., Urquhart J. S., White G. J., 2008, A&A, 477, 557.]
|'''BRC 27, 34, 38?''' SCUBA submm survey (450+850 um) plus IRAS (12, 25, 60, 100 um), MSX, and 2MASS (erroneously identified as 2mm but really 2 micron). both 27 and 34 in here. next part of a PhD thesis. lots of nice overview, summary (as would be expected for a thesis) spread throughout article. seems to be a really long paper, but is almost all figures in the appendix. relevant issues: how the objects they are talking about (at long and short wavelengths) compare to what we see in our images (see [[Resolution]] and their, e.g., fig 4). Forward reference to Spitzer data analysis like ours but then says have already looked for GLIMPSE, 24 um obs. They are only looking at low-res flux densities. Appendix may be useful for scavenging additional targets if we want to do more analysis on more targets.
|Probably the most worth reading of "Group M"; skip the math.
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2009MNRAS.400.1726M Morgan L. K., Urquhart J. S., Thompson M. A., 2009, MNRAS, 400, 1726.]
|'''BRC 27, 34, 38?''' Radio, mid-ir, SCUBA observations; redefined SFO catalog. JCMT (CO) observations. 22 arcsec resolution! (see [[Resolution]] and their fig 2 here.) Likely last of his thesis, or first of his postdoc. (Look, his address changed, so this was published while he was a postdoc, but it's the same collaborators as before at his old institution, so my guess it's leftover thesis work.) They think 27 has been triggered, 34 not; this provides a nice compare-and-contrast opportunity for our write-up. Quick read.
|read with "Group M" for fig 2.
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2005A%26A...443..535V Valdettaro R., Palla F., Brand J., Cesaroni R., 2005, A&A, 443, 535.]
|Radio survey of water masers. 22.2 GHz (=1.35 cm if I did my math right). Really nice intro summarizing the big picture. Following up on Morgan and similar work asserting high-mass stars forming in BRCs by looking for masers. Our objects observed, not detected. Finding lots of non-detections, suggesting that low-mass stars forming instead. Nice, short writeup of basically a non-result, and I think they've gotten the interpretation spot-on. Nice to at least scan after the Morgan stuff for context. larger issues: spatial resolution (see [[Resolution]]). Again!! :)
|scan if you want with group M.
|-
|[http://arxiv.org/pdf/0909.3312v1.pdf Wang et al., 2009, A&A, 504, 369]
|The relation between 13CO j=2-1 line width in moelcular clouds and bolometric luminosity of associated IRAS sources. Radio. ignore at least for now IRAS 21391+5802 - suggests that it is a star forming cluster where high-mass stars will form
|
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1962ApJS....7....1L, Lynds, 1962, ApJS, 7, 1]
|The Lynds Dark Nebula paper. some of you were interested in the history of this. At least one if not all three of our BRCs are also associated with Lynds clouds. Read if you want to.
|-
|}

==Do not bother==
This group of paper has passing relevance to the science and the goals of NITARP. They are useful references for your readers to follow up on details. It is sufficient that one person (usually Luisa) has enough knowledge to know that the citation is proper. Reading the full paper is not essential.

{| border="1"
|'''Paper'''
|'''Comments'''
|-
|Makovoz D., Marleau F. R., 2005, PASP, 117, 1113.
|MOPEX info. VERY technical, not a manual, and not all that terribly relevant to what we're doing. skip it. you shouldn't have to get into MOPEX at all, but if you do, there is lots of online help in MOPEX that is really good, and also lots of documentation (aimed at professional astronomers, admittedly) on the SSC website.
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2010AJ....140.1868W Wright et al., 2010, AJ, 140, 1868]
|WISE "seminal paper" reference. Describes the mission. As I recall, there is some discussion of the data products, but for the complete discussion of data products in more of a manual form, consult the document that accompanies the delivery. Read this paper if you want a somewhat technical overview of the mission.
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2004ApJS..154..309W Werner et al., 2004, ApJS, 154, 309]
|Spitzer "seminar paper" reference. Describes the mission. No discussion of data products as I recall. Read this paper if you want a somewhat technical overview of the mission.
|-
|[http://articles.adsabs.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/nph-iarticle_query?1956BAN....13...77P&data_type=PDF_HIGH&whole_paper=YES&type=PRINTER&filetype=.pdf Bulletin of Astro. Instit. of the Netherlands, Vol 13, 471, 77-88, Pottasch et al., 1956, Bull. Astro. Instit. Netherlands, 13, 471]
|A study of bright rims in diffuse nebulae. VERY early work describing the location, shape of, density of, brightness of bright rim clouds in several nebula, including IC 1396 and Brc 38. So old that not really useful for assembling list of YSOs in region. skip.
|-
|[http://articles.adsabs.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/nph-iarticle_query?1999sf99.proc..381O&data_type=PDF_HIGH&whole_paper=YES&type=PRINTER&filetype=.pdf Ogura & Sugitani, 1999, Proceedings of Star Formation, pg 381-382]
|A large number of Halpha Emission Stars associated with BRCs. Conference proceedings, old at that. i'm sure this analysis is already written up in their later papers. ignore this one.
|-
|[http://articles.adsabs.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/nph-iarticle_query?1996A%26A...309..827S&data_type=PDF_HIGH&whole_paper=YES&type=PRINTER&filetype=.pdf, Saraceno et al., 1996, A&A, 309, 827-839]
|An evolutionary diagram for young stellar objects. deep, DEEP background, IGNORE THIS.
|-
|[http://arxiv.org/pdf/astro-ph/0407102v1.pdf, Beltran et al., 2004, A&A, 426, 941]
|'''BRC 38?''' The dense molecular cores in IRAS 21391 +5802 region. Radio and it sounds like theoretical models. ignore. Three sources found with BIMA (??) observations in 21391+5802; Hard to read as they are trying to use data to fit/model how gas is emitted from the core
|-
|[http://www.aperturephotometry.org, APT tool] Laher et al. 2012, PASP, submitted
| there are two papers that Russ is working on. One is a description of the basics of APT, what it's doing etc., and the other (i think) is more of a "what happens when you use APT to extract the photometry" kind of paper. It's been a while since I've seen these drafts; Russ has been going rounds with the referee on these both. He's started working on them again. Read this if you want to know the details of the inner workings of APT, and how it compares to other proven photometry programs.
|-
|Maoz 2007
|Referenced in the proposal; listed here for completeness. Astrophysics in a Nutshell (Princeton, NJ). i think this is someone's (Debbie's?) textbook. don't need to read her textbook, but you might want to find your own! :)
|-
|}

Summaries and questions on discussed papers

2012-05-06T16:54:17Z

Novatne: Summaries and questions from discussed papers

----

== Getman 2006 X-Ray Study of Triggered Star Formation and Protostars in IC 1396N ==

An observation of IC 1396N with Chandra, so X-ray light. How long (total time) was the observation? 30 ks = 30 kilo seconds = 30,000 seconds = 500 min = 8.33 hours - '''Is this a long observation? I got the impression from the reading that it was short.'''

''Intro - What will be useful in this section for us?''

'''The cometary globule this study looks at is BRC 38?'''

Nice list of indicators of star formation in IC 1396N. Things we should know about

-IRAS source 21391 +5802

-H2O masers

-molecular outflows

-HH flows

-clusters of IR embedded sources

-radio mm portostars

Explanation of RDI - easy to understand.
Explanation of why an x-ray study - I was surprised. Didn't think about magnetic fields being active in YSO.

----
"2.1 - 2.3 Chandra Observation & Source List - The meat for us!"

The most important things here are the tables and figures. Locations given for the found sources and correlations to 2MASS. '''Will we eventually understand what each of these columns mean?'''

2.1 - Interesting that 8 corrections were made to the data. EIGHT pg 317-8
Data reduced to 117 point sources (listed in table 1); 66 of those correlated with 2MASS; 5 newly identified

----
''Sections 3, 4 & 5 - Interesting things about IC 1396N''

3.1-3.4 Data reduced to sources coming from star formation. 25 sources are probable members of the globule. Sources classified as class 0, I, II, III.

4.1- 4.3 It was interesting that there was flaring going on. '''Are YSO variable in the their light output, like a variable star?''' 4.3 was hard to understand. I have to sort out wavelengths and energies associated with each em light band.

5.1-5.3 Figure 10 a - This is a great picture of results of using different types of observations and even of resolution. Why correlation with other studies is needed.
Figure 10 c - Source 66 and 68 are so much brighter than the others. Interesting. It was also interesting that #66 is the brightest x-ray object in IC 1396N. '''What does it mean that it is 'one of the most heavily absorbed sources'?'''

Questions

1. Does this symbol mean of the Sun? M⊙ = mass in relation to the Sun?

2. What is IMF - initial mass function? pg 328, last full paragraph

3. What is MedE? pg 331 5.2

4. What is intervening column density? pg 332 5.3 2nd paragraph

5. What is extinction? pg 332 5.3 3rd paragraph

----
"Section 6 & 7 - Science questions and summary"

Section 6 pulls the info from the study into the larger science questions - What do these results say about triggered star formation and the two initiation methods mentioned? It seems that RDI (radiation driven implosion) is supported.

I like section 7's summary. Easy to understand and I like the list of classifications of the 25 YSO.

----

== Beltran 2009 The stellar population and complex structure of the bright-rimmed cloud IC 1396N ==

This article discusses the structure of this cloud and gives positions of everything it talks about. 18 pages worth of tables! Their conclusions are also different than the previous paper about star formation.

I found it interesting that individual sources we read about in the previous article have been resolved into several sources by the time this one was written.

Questions

1. They mention that bluer YSO mean older and redder are younger -- this is opposite of main sequence stars

2. '''What is on source images and off sources images? Why do you do this?''' this is to try and adjust for background light

The images went through 5 set of corrections or adjustments before photometry

3.2 The authors conclude not all star formation is triggered star formation in this cloud. Then what else is there?

3.3.1 All this info about H2 knots. Dense material. '''Does the red and blue shift indicate spinning?''' No, it is looking at a jet face on but not perpendicular

3.3.2 H2 flows are complicated. A lot of assumptions are made.

4. 736 sources found in all three bands - J, H K' 128 sources found only in HK' 67 sources found only in K' 79 sources found only in JH

Different conclusions from Getman. An age gradient is not found in the south-north direction of the globule; not all star formation in globule is by triggered star formation. NO alternative method given.

----

----

==Original SFO - Sugitani et al 1991==
Survey of BRCs to describe the BRCs themselves and look for YSOs. 
Palomar Sky Survey (PSS) and IRAS point sources. 

44 BRCs found in Palomar Sky survey prints that had associated IRAS point sources where all found to have IRAS point sources that were good candidates for being YSOs. Tables/images exist for; HII region locations, PPS finding charts, BRC location charts, IRAS point source properties (12, 25, 60, 100 micron), BRC and point source descriptions and plots. 

Questions to ask yourself as you read 

Abstract, Intro and Summary 
-what is the flow of all the types of nebulosity that they describe and the cause/effect relationship to star formation? 
-how will the understanding of this cause/effect help us in our closer study of just three BRCs? 

The Sample, Results 
-how did the authors take advantage of Palomar Sky Survey Prints? 
-how will this help future astronomers with their work? 
-table 3 lists exactly one IRAS source for each BRC, where are the rest of the YSOs we expect to see? 
Discussion 
Although 15 of the IRAS point sources were catagoized as type I and “really are” YSOs, why are all 44 of the sources considered good candidates for YSOs? 
==Most recent paper - Ogura et al 2002==
Looking for H-alpha emissions using grism spectroscopy to find previously undetected YSOs that do not have strong IR excess in order to collect more information on star formation in BRCs and contained HH objects, and further investigate small-scale sequential star formation (SSSSF). 
Optical (H-alpha using grism spectroscopy), 2 MASS 

Questions to ask yourself as you read 

Introduction, Observations and Data Reduction 
-why do the authors recommend higher resolution studies? 
-what is SSSSF and what is the evidence for supporting this hypothesis? 
-what is grism spectroscopy and how does it help “fill in some holes” in terms of YSOs? 
-how did the authors categorize H-alpha equivalent widths in “difficult cases”? Think about the usefulness of this data. 

Images and Data 
-what qualitative and quantitative information will be helpful to us in our study? List tables and images, highlighting information specific to our study. 
H-alpha stars, HH objects and Discussion 
-what did the authors find of interest in our particular BRCs? 
-what evidence is given to support further multi-wavelength studies searching for YSOs?

----

== Info to help you answer questions and things I just don't get ==

Data provided in 2002 paper - observation survey regions, dates, and exposure times; IRAS associated BRCs; H-alpha stars by BRC (BRC 27 (32 stars), 34 (2 stars), 38 (16 stars)), location, H-alpha EW, comments; H-alpha EW distribution; Finding charts (BRC 27 (chart k), 24 (chart o), 38 (chart q)); HH objects location and emission line intensities(BRC 38 only, 9 HH objects, data for 2); HH finding charts (BRC 38 only, chart d)

OB stars are hot, massive, short lived stars that emit enormous amounts of UV which ionizes surrounding interstellar gas forming HII regions and providing ionization/shock fronts to trigger star formation.
HII (H-two) regions are large, low-density clouds with large amounts of ionized atomic hydrogen and other gases. HII regions can be the birthplace of thousands of stars over millions of years until supernova explosions and stellar winds from massive stars disperse the remaining gas and leave behind a cluster (i.e. Pleiades).
Bok globules are dark dense clouds within HII regions, the result of formation of multiple star systems (can contain many young stars) that contain molecular hydrogen, carbon oxides, helium and silicate dust. Cometary globules are Bok globules that have comet like tail (can contain many young stars
BRCs (Bright Rimmed Clouds) are dense clumps of matter (can contain many young stars) in older HII regions which have been further compressed and illuminated and from which surrounding interstellar medium has been dispersed by UV radiation from nearby OB stars.
The hypothesis of small-scale sequential star formation (SSSSF) has redder stars in a BRC closer to the head of the BRC, furthest from the OB exciting star – stars are born as the shock wave moves away from the OB star, the youngest stars are the furthest from the OB star.
HH (Herbig-Haro) are short lived areas of emission nebulae from young stars (there are young stars nearby, possible still hidden in their cocoon), formed when material ejected from the poles of young stars collides with interstellar medium to produce visible light.
Hot Cirrus sources are filamentary (like cirrus clouds) structure that can be seen in the IR, but when “hot cirrus sources” are detected in an HII region, they may be YSOs that have been contaminated at the long wavelengths by emissions from the HII region.
Grism spectroscopy makes use of a prism/diffraction grating to allow light at a central wavelength to pass through. In this study a “wide H-alpha” of 6300-6750 angstroms was used.
???Author talks about JHK observations and two color diagrams, but I do not see data for this???

----

== Spitzer Observations of IC 2118: “Witch Head Nebula” ==

Summary:

The Witch Head Nebula (WHN) is thought to be a site of triggered star formation. Observations in 7 IR bands using SST and 4 bands in optical yields IR excesses in 4 of 6 previously known T Tauri stars and discovery of 6 new candidate YSOs.

This article has a nice introduction that covers a bit of stellar formation overview due to 2 mechanisms: gravitational collapse and “triggered” from nearby events like supernova. The Initial Mass Function (IMF) and the star formation efficiency are supported by the inventory of YSOs formed in a cloud, which then supports closer study of the initial conditions of star formation.

A detailed comparison of the two formation mechanisms with respect to the IMF and stellar formation efficiency will assist with understanding the mechanics of star formation itself.

The data analysis section was highly detailed and technical. This section gave me the greatest comprehension challenge and also the greatest number of questions that require a bit more clarification.

The selection of YSO candidates focused on finding sources having an infrared excess characteristic of YSOs surrounded by a dust disk. A high source contamination rate was expected. Filtering mechanisms form the literature based on Spitzer colors were used to distinguish likely galaxies from likely members. Optical information was used to further winnow the candidate list.

Both color-color and color-magnitude diagrams from IRAC were used to select sources. 459 sources were identified having colors consistent with galaxies dominated by Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAHs). 765 more sources having colors consistent with active galactic nuclei (AGN), only 27 sources are not flagged as background contaminants and have colors compatible with YSOs and with IRAC excess. The list of 27 sources not flagged as contaminants bears further scrutiny. 18 of the YSO candidates have magnitudes fainter than 12. As the brightness decreases, the probability of the object being background contamination increases.

The wealth of data allowed these data to additionally constrain the YSO selection. 18 faint sources all fall in the region occupied by main-sequence stars or background galaxies. The 9 remaining YSOs with magnitudes less than 12 all appear redder, near or above a 30 Myr isochrones. These are strongly suspected to be contaminants. The 9 brighter objects are included in the list of their (the authors) IRAC selected YSO candidates. There are restrictions imposed with the consequence that leads to a distance assumption that may be problematic. The details of this challenge appear in the bottom half of page 13 for further detailed description, should curiosity require investigation.

All 9 of the IRAC selected YSO candidates are seen at MIPS-24. There is a bit more technical justification about why seeing these candidates in MIPS-24 at one of the two distances proposed (~210 pc and ~440pc).

Most of the sources seen in the observations at 24 or 70 μm are foreground stars or background galaxies.

POSS and 2MASS and optical images for each candidate were used to verify that they did not appear extended in any of these bands. All YSO candidates passed the checks and appear to be point sources in all available bands.

The MIPS selection was technically detailed and the objects seemed to fall into either Class II or Class III with weak excesses. There appears to be three distinct groups of object: 1) objects of zero color (likely foreground or background stars), 2) objects that are faint and red (likely galaxies) and 3) objects that are bright and red (likely YSOs). There doesn’t appear to be any sources between the photospehric Class III and Class II objects. The chosen selection process may have gathered the YSO candidates into the group of brightest or reddest object, lending further support that the assertion of faint object being most likely background galaxies (bottom of page 14). Why is this so??

There is a good amount of detailed description of how the candidates were sorted out from the other sources. From the list of 10 YSO candidates, six are new discoveries. One of the Class II T Tauri stars is a flat disk. The fit for the edge-on-disk candidate was not the same as for the non-disk candidates, since the slope changes significantly depending on whether the MIPS points are included in the fit for the edge-on disk. I think I’d like to understand the slope correlation a bit better…

All of the YSO candidates are located in the head of the nebula, the most massive molecular cloud of the WHN. The distributions lend further support o the assertion that the IRAC and MIPS selected bright object are likely YSOs. The expected YSO candidates for the regions further south were not found. Apparently the conditions in this region do not support substantial star formation. The head of the nebula is about 3 times more massive than any of the other clouds.

There is a nice explanation of at least two intertwined mysteries that enshroud the WHN. The distance to it, and the external source that is responsible for the surface sculpture, illumination and possible trigger mechanism. There is a nice explanation of how the possible two sources (the Trapezium and Rigel) at different distances could solve the mysteries. There are arguments for both explanations, and the conclusion is that there is no clear answer. GAIA (galactic mapping mission proposed to launch in 2013) highlighted text abovecould provide a definitive answer by deriving accurate parallaxes to some objects.

The conclusion for the work states that the inventory of YSOs and candidates has doubles as a result of using Spitzer data to search for objects with IR excess in the region. SEDs are used extensively to identify YSO candidates. If the region is a triggered star formation mechanism, then trends of age or mass as they relate to location may be established. Since there are so few objects, since the distance is uncertain and since the spectral types for most of these objects is unknown, this correlation cannot be done rigorously.

Additional follow-up spectroscopic data are needed to confirm or refute the YSO status for the six new objects.

The new edge –on disk candidate in particular warrants further study, since such objects are relatively rare.

GAIA will be needed to resolve the mystery of the distance to the WHN.

Questions:

What:
1. I want to verify that I understand correctly that bands UVRcIc stand for: Ultraviolet, Visible, Red and Infrared, respectively.
2. Fat fielding issues
3. 100 MJy/ sr
4. Median boxcar filter
5. NaNs
6. UV RcIc
7. “real matches “
8. false source associations
9. centroiding
10. ELAIS
11. U and 70 micro meters
12. Optical Mv
13. VLBA and VLBI
14. mas/yr

How and HUH? : - see text above as well…

1. APEXZ portion of MOPEX
2. Zero point used to convert flux densities to magnitudes
3. …as a final check on our measurements.
4. …through observation of Landolt standards… Does this mean that the additional epoc was just for verification of data integrity?
5. …deviate significantly from zero
Why?
1. The data were further processed…
2. …we wished to add reddened stellar models to the plots…

----

== New Young Star Candidates in the Taurus-Auriga Region as Selected from WISE ==
New Young Star Candidates in the Taurus-Auriga Region as Selected from WISE

Summary: WISE data is used to search for YSO candidates in Taurus from a 260 square degree patch of sky to encompass previously identified Taurus members. Near and mid IR colors are used to select objects with apparent IR excesses and incorporate other catalogs of ancillary data. There is likely to be contamination lingering in this candidate list, and follow up spectra are warranted.

Even though Spitzer is good at finding new young stars, some are located surprisingly far from the traditional location based on CO gas or IRAS dust maps. A 44 square degree survey of Taurus was done with Spitzer. It was found that any solely near and mid IR color selection was filled with contamination from galaxies and asymptotic giant brand (AGB) stars. The use of ancillary data was crucial to establishing a list of high quality new members of Taurus. WISE surveyed the entire sky; the depth of coverage in the Taurus region is somewhat degraded relative to regions of comparable ecliptic latitude due to Moon avoidance maneuvers. Since the cloud is only 140 pc away, both surveys (Spitzer and WISE) should easily detect legitimate Taurus members.

New Taurus candidates were selected with IR excesses using WISE colors with the Koenig et al method. There are three lists: 1) recovered young stars, 2) rejected objects, and 3) candidate new Taurus members.

A substantial multi-wavelength database was assembled for point sources throughout the Taurus region. Not every source has photometry at all bands due to variations in depth and spatial coverage among the surveys involved.

The WISE data acquisition and reduction are discussed in Wright et al, Jarrett et al and in the Explanatory Supplement to the WISE preliminary Data Release Products. Any sources with contamination and confusion flags were rejected, as were “DHOP” (what’s this?) characters.

There were about 2.38 MILLION sources. Signal to Noise Ratio (SNR) measurements were used to drastically shrink the catalog to about 7,000 sources. The SNR cut was used in W4 to limit the contamination. Since the contamination rate for any color selection is expected to be relatively large, ancillary data are crucial for culling the list to high - quality candidates. A rough total of about 2,000 contaminants per square degree were determined. Approximately 1,760 YSO candidates were obtained before imposing additional requirements (which were???) to the SNR be imposed on all four WISE channels reduced the number to 1,014.

Ancillary data were used to weed out contaminants from the list of potential YSO candidates. Only 27 sources on the list of potential YSOs found matches with SDSS spectra.

Of the 1,014 potential YSOs, 196 of them have matches to previously identified stars. 18 of these are listed as unconfirmed candidates in Rebull et al (2010).

Manual Inspection was used to sort objects into “likely contaminant” or “perhaps YSO” bins. The four criteria used to categorize were: 1) matching objects in SIMBAD, 2) matches to objects identified as contaminants in Rebull at al (2010), 3) matches to the 2MASS Extended Source Catalog, and 4) identification as extended in the SDSS pipeline. SEDs were then generated using all the photometric date in the database, and the SEDs were inspected. Based on experience, the SEDs were then categorized as still possible YSO candidates, or likely extragalactic objects. This process may have dropped viable YSO candidates similar to MHO-1 (huh?) or Haro 6-39 (huh?). This process left about 130 candidates. The sources were identified as either being likely subjected to source contamination (HOW?) resolved as a likely galaxy (HOW?) or still apparently clean, point sources (HOW?) This brought the number of candidates down to about 94 objects. All SEDs for the 94 appear in the Appendix.

Projected location of the previously identified YSOs is generally highly clustered along the filamentary distribution of gas and dust, and the new objects are less clustered. The goal was to look for new YSOs outside the canonical groupings of previously known Taurus members. This could also be an indication of persistent contamination in the surviving list of YSOs candidates. There is more discussion about the location of previously identified YSOs and contaminants.

Previous YSOs are generally found in regions of high Av, and background galaxies are found in regions of low Av. The new objects are not particularly clustered, but not evenly distributed either. Most of the previously identified YSOs are bright and most of the contaminants are faint. The new YSO candidates span the range of bright and faint.

The list of objects by type: recovery of 196 previously identified young stars with IR excess, 686 likely to be galaxies, 13 foreground stars, 1 planetary nebula, 24 objects that are likely to be confusing and 94 new YSO candidates that are widely distributed in space.

Questions:

1. What s the “J” in 2MASS J04360131
2. What is color near zero?
3. What is the reddening factor?
4. What is the meaning of “...in the right regime for JHKs diagram”
5. What is “z measurement”?
6. What are large inner disk holes?

----

== New Young Star Candidates in CG4 and Sa101 ==

The introduction to this paper also has some very good background about the Gum Nebula and the stellar formation mechanisms thought to apply within it. Previous studies by Reipurth and Pettersson are summarized, with a conclusion that stars associated with the Cometary Globule 4 (CG4) and Sa 101 are associated with the Gum Nebula. The distances to all considered objects are uncertain; the distances vary from 300 to 500 pc. The extrema of the distance estimates were tested, though the results are not strongly dependent on distance. The region contains previously identified young stars, so it is likely that there are more young stars of lower mass or more embedded than those previously discovered.

The data sections, like the other two papers summarized, are highly technical and summarizing all the details doesn’t seem fruitful beyond this very minimal overview. More detailed reading should be the way to get more detail about the data analysis.

For the IRAC data, two exposures were taken with three dithers per position. The two observational locations were reduced independently even though they overlap on the sky. Some of the very bright stars in the filed of view had instrumental effects that rendered the data very difficult to work with. There is quite a bit of detailed description of calibration technique, correlation and photometry and error reduction methods.

The MIPS 24 and 70 micron data were combined. The 24-micron data were affected by the bright objects and required additional processing. The background levels between the two observations were problematic, and a description of how this was addressed was discussed. Optimized data reduction to obtain brighter source measurements led to many sources fainter than the bright sources in the image being excluded from the catalog because the scientific goals are aimed at brighter objects. There is a good, technical justification of the filtering choices made to process the data.

The optical data used the observed Landolt (1992) standard stars of two or three fields several times per night for photometric calibration. For each target, aperture photometry was performed using multiple size apertures. There is a discussion of the correction used for a noticeable variation of the point-spread function (PSF) that is location dependent on the CCD.

The bandmerging of the photometric data was first merged from all four IRAC channels with the near IR 2MASS data for each observation. This was then merged together with the source lists from each observation. The MIPS data was then included, and then the optical data was merged. A very detailed discussion of how this was done follows.

YSO candidate properties are discussed in the subset of optical, near IR, B-band and SEDs. Optical data can greatly aid in the confirmation or refutation of YSO candidacy because they provide constraints on the Wien side of the SED. Objects with optical data that have already been ruled out as SOs based on the IRAC properties are all well below the 30 Myr isochrones scaled to 500 pc. Deeper optical data are desirable to obtain magnitude estimates for the remaining YSO candidates. The degree of reddening is difficult to estimate because the spectral types for most of the sources are not available. The candidates have infrared excess with a moderate degree of reddening. Young stars that are actively accreting from their circumstellar disks can have excess UV emission in the U or B bands or longer. These bands are also the most sensitive to reddening. Figure 13 is discussed with respect to mass accretion. The coordinates of the YSOs are listed in Table 1. The SEDs of the 22 YSO candidates are displayed in figures 14 - 16. A spectral type of MO was assumed for the remaining objects. A redden model of each object is shown and normalized to the Ks band where possible. These are presented as a guide to the eye rather than a robust fit to the object to allow the immediate IR excesses to be immediately apparent. There is quite a bit of more technically detailed description of the properties in the SEDs section than is summarized here.

There is a galaxy, ESO 257 – G 019 that is mentioned because it appears in the observation field. It has not been studied, and some basic astrometric data about it is listed.

In conclusion, 6 previously identified young stars were rediscovered. There are 16 new YSOs that were discovered and evaluated with ground-based data in the near IR from 2MASS to constrain the SEDs of the candidates. The new young star candidates were graded into confidence groups. Additional data will be needed, such as optical photometry where it is missing and optical spectroscopy to obtain spectral types.

I didn’t have any questions about this article.

C-WAYS Spring work

2012-05-06T16:37:34Z

Novatne: /* Papers to discuss */

= Big Picture =

There are three things I'd like to accomplish before our visit:

(1) Start thinking about the issues of spatial resolution. I have developed a worksheet for this. '''WE DECIDED TO DO THIS FIRST.'''

(2) We need read in detail and discuss a short list of carefully selected papers. We'll rotate through our short list of papers, and each of you will get one to present to the group. This is modelling a so-called "journal club", a common occurrence in astronomy departments/groups/centers, where the papers are usually selected out of recent astro-ph mailings. The papers that went into this list came out of the extensive lists you assembled while writing the proposal. I then went through and sorted them into bins -- ones you want to read closely for the astronomy and astrophysics background, and/or for the interpretation, and/or for the big picture... ones from which you need to scavenge data, and you need to read enough to understand what it was they did, and what kinds of data they are reporting... ones you might read if you have time ... and ones you can ignore. '''WE SHOULD START ON THIS AFTER THE RESOLUTION STUFF.'''

(3) Actually doing the data scavenging out of those papers mentioned above. This can be as simple as going to the journal website and saving the data table as plain text, but in a handful of cases, it is a LOT more complicated. I am working on more explanation to go with this so-called source-matching work. Some of the work here springboards off of the journal articles we will read in detail, and some involves scanning additional articles. I AM STILL WORKING ON DEVELOPING A FRAMEWORK FOR THIS. It's ok if we don't get through this by the time of our visit, but it will slow us down for our visit.

= [[C-WAYS Spring calendar]] =

Not all of us are around and able to work on NITARP stuff for the whole spring.

= [[C-WAYS Resolution Worksheet]] =
[[C-WAYS Resolution Worksheet]] I hesitate to make a place for everyone to collect their answers on the wiki; in this case, I would like everyone to independently derive their own numbers and compare notes on the telecon together.

= [[C-WAYS source matching work]]=
[[C-WAYS source matching work]] -- this is an overview of what we need to know, and has some instructions, but no specific tasks doled out.

=Papers to discuss=

The relevant papers are sorted into the categories below.

I've attempted to make a roughly color-coded grouping of the papers below so that they can be presented in appropriate clumps. There are a LOT of papers to discuss, and I'm trying to make it roughly about the same amount of work per person. Here is the order I propose:

#person1 (JC1) -- '''Lauren''' -- Guieu et al 2010, Rebull et al 2011a and 2011b; possibly Johnson et al. 2012 and Rebull et al. 2012, or possibly makes more sense to wait until closer to the visit??
#person2 (JC2) -- '''Peggy''' -- Ogura et al 2002, Sugitani et al 1991 -- includes responsibility of leading the coordinate updating for these. [[SFO Paper Journals Guided Reading]]
#person3 (JC3) -- '''Jackie''' -- Getman et al 2007, Beltran et al 2009, should also probably read Choudhury et al. 2010... but Choudhury et al is meaty enough that it should be the next week after these. [Reading Guide Journal Club[http://coolwiki.ipac.caltech.edu/index.php/Talk:C-WAYS_Spring_work]]
#person4 (JC4) -- '''Debbie''' -- Choudhury et al. 2010 and Chauhan et al. 2009 -- Chauhan et al 2009 is not meaty enough on its own, but is very different than Choudhury et al. 2010, despite sharing a few authors. Choudhury et al. pulls together some of the thoughts started in Getman et al and Beltran et al.
#person5 (JC5) -- '''Bob''' -- Barentsen et al. 2011 and Nakano et al. 2012
#person6 -- appendices of Koenig et al. 2012 and Gutermuth et al 2008?? depending on time, can/should skip these for now.
#then, starting with Ogura et al. 2002 and Sugitani et al. 1991, start updating coordinates.
#then, Gregorio-Hetem et al. 2009, Shevchenko et al. 1999, Wiramihardja et al 1986, and update those coordinates.

This should work like a journal club or even a book club, as in the named person takes the lead in presenting the article. You should present things along the lines of the following:
*the main point of this work was ...
*what they did was ... (high level summary, no need to get into nitty gritty details)
*the most interesting thing i learned was ...
*what they did that i agree with is ...
*what they did that i disagree with is ...
*and, for us here, the reason we should care about this in the context of our planned YSO work is ...

EVERYONE should read the papers ahead of time, but it's kind of expected that the named person will spend the most time reading the paper in question!

==Essential reading==
This group of papers are ones we need to read in 'journal club' style - read and discuss them in detail. They provide the scientific context and/or establishes known facts or conclusions about the bright rimmed clouds, or are similar enough to the process we will use that they are worth the investment of time.
{| border="1"
|'''Paper'''
|'''Notes'''
|'''Presenter/ present with'''
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2010ApJ...720...46G Guieu et al., 2010, ApJ, 720, 46]
|Our paper from the IC2118 team (one of the pre-NITARP teams!). Spitzer-based search for YSOs in IC2118 (near Orion's knee). Large map to start from. Ground-based optical obtained specifically to support these observations, much like us. Note serendipitous discovery of high-proper-motion object. This is something Tim and his students found entirely on their own. We tried to obtain follow-up spectroscopy from Palomar, but had bad weather. I need to go back and try again to get these spectra. There is also an opportunity to look at this environment with WISE! do with other Rebull et al papers - "group R". This can be the lowest priority of that group, as it was written the longest time ago. (may be better to focus time and energy on CG4 paper and Taurus with WISE paper.)
| (do with group R) person1
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2011AJ....142...25R Rebull et al., 2011a, AJ, 142, 25]
|our paper from the CG4+Sa101 team (a NITARP 2009 team) (I gave you hard copy of this one at the AAS.) This is a Spitzer-based search for YSOs in this region. Fairly large map to start from, but smaller than IC2118. Ground-based optical pre-obtained through a collaborator to support the observations, similar to us. (She turns out to also have a bunch of spectra, but has other things in front of them in her queue.)
| (do with group R) person1
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2011ApJS..196....4R Rebull et al., 2011b, ApJS, 196, 4]
|our paper looking for new YSOs in Taurus using WISE -- the one my recent AAS poster was based on, and I also gave you hard copy of this paper at the AAS. This starts from a HUGE region, 260 sq degrees, and something like 2.6 million sources. This is a far larger region than we will do, but we will use a similar approach -- use WISE, obtain a set of possible YSOs, use all available data we can find to weed down the list, compare to the literature-discovered objects, and present a list of candidates.
| (do with group R) person1
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2012AAS...21933705J Johnson et al., 2012, AAS219, 337.05] and Rebull et al. in prep
|'''BRC 27 and 38''': The NITARP 2011 team work here. Spitzer-driven search for YSOs, with ground-based optical photometry to support observations. I think most of you have read the poster already. I am still actively working on the draft; whenever this paper comes up in the rotation, I'll give you whatever I have at that point, even if it's unpolished. Sigh.
| (do with group R) person1
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2002AJ....123.2597O Ogura K., Sugitani K., Pickles A., 2002, AJ, 123, 2597.]
|'''BRC 27, 34, 38?''' Optical + 2MASS; general BRC info. Most recent of the Sugitani series of four we found. Using Halpha to look for YSOs, following up their other work. Relevant issues: using multiple wavelengths to find YSOs (see [[Finding cluster members]]), spatial resolution (see [[Resolution]]), caveats with finding candidates. Nice intro, summary of larger issues, discussion of results. ''Need to be sure that this catalog is included in our list of previously known YSOs in this region'', so we can compare our results to theirs. ''Finding charts'' helpfully included so we can match obj. We should discuss this one in some depth; the other Sugitanis don't need to be done in as much depth ("group S").
|(do with group S) person2
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1991ApJS...77...59S Sugitani K., Fukui Y., Ogura K., 1991, ApJS, 77, 59.]
|'''SFO''' article (discovery paper) - the original SFO, origin of "BRC" terminology, numbers 1-44. covers the northern hemisphere. Has nice intro/summary of what's going on in BRCs, CGs, etc. Nice approach of combining two large surveys -- POSS and IRAS; nice clear discussion of weed-down process. Second half of paper (detailed analysis of IRAS colors, etc.) obsolete but has same essence as what we do now. Review with other Sugitani, Ogura papers, but can skim the surface. You all should have read this in Jan or Feb in the context of our proposal, so maybe we don't have to do this again?
|(do w/ group S) person2
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2007ApJ...654..316G Getman et al. 2007, ApJ, 654, 316]
|'''BRC 38.''' Chandra, 2MASS, and Spitzer. discusses X-ray sources that are associated with young stars in this region, which they call IC 1396N. Studying triggered star formation and protostars in IC 1396N. Good pictures to help with the visualization of 1396N and these sources; evidence of sequential star formation. really nice intro to put it all in context.
Found 117 x-ray sources in IC 1396N; identify some with central cluster, and some with globule. We are likely to have similar issues since we are looking further out from the globule. Objects at a variety of stages. One of the youngest sources detected in x-ray, #66, is found close to the source IRAS 21391+5802 (also called BIMA 2). List of these sources are included. Nice discussions about finding counterparts across wavelengths, contamination by background sources, predictions for more YSOs here to be found. Dense paper! We need to scavenge these data, compare to our results.
|do in detail. compare and contrast! scavenge data. person3 - Jackie 
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2009A%26A...504...97B Beltran, et al., 2009, A&A, 504, 97B]
|'''BRC 38.''' this looked for YSOs inside the BRC using deep JHK. Data tables available online only! Comparison of results to Chandra results from Getman; find no evidence for sequential star formation. get and include their data. lots of discussion of extended emission and comparison to other bands. includes figure using IRAC 4.5 um data, but that's it for Spitzer information. Do in detail, with Getman.
| do in detail, with Getman. scavenge data. person3 - Jackie 
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2010ApJ...717.1067C Choudhury R., Mookerjea, B., Bhatt, H., 2010, ApJ, 717, 1067]
| '''BRC 38''', including IRAC+MIPS+optical phot and spec. *REALLY* nice paper. A tremendous amount of work, very nicely done, and very complete data tables. Go through and discuss this one in detail, scavenge all the data. Does a lot of comparison with Getman and Beltran, trying to reconcile all results. Do this one after or with Getman, Beltran; this one is meaty enough that it probably should get its own week.
| do in detail. scavenge data. do after Getman, Beltran person4
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2009MNRAS.396..964C Chauhan N, Pandey A.K., Ogura K., Ojha D.K., Bhatt B.C., Ghosh S.K., Rawat P.S., 2009, MNRAS, 396, 964]
|'''BRC 27, 38.''' Optical (BVIc)+2mass+spitzer/irac. This one we should spend considerable time on. Testing small-scale sequential star formation suggested in earlier 'group S' papers. nice intro. multiwavelength and contaminants (see [[Finding cluster members]]). As I read this, they are using optical+nir to pick their YSOs, not Spitzer-driven, which is different than what we will do. We ''will'' find a different set of obj, not just classify them differently. We need to get their data tables and compare our results to theirs. Note lots of information is online only, which i attached to article pdf. Note also that some of their online tables don't contain the same sources as the other tables (they should have caught that before publication). analysis of Halpha-age and mass function is a bit of overinterpretation IMHO. need spectroscopy first!!
|do in detail -- read closely, compare and contrast! need to scavenge data too. person4
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2011MNRAS.415..103B Barensten et al., 2011, MNRAS, 415, 103]
|'''BRC 34, 38.''' T tauri candidates and accretion rates using IPHAS (r, i, Halpha); over the entire huge IC1396 complex. this is a useful paper. data tables of 158 objects they think are young; make sure to grab and incorporate what they found. their shortlist may or may not overlap with the fields we care about in brc 34 (cloud D??) and 38 (cloud E), but still very useful to include. if, when we get to that point of needing these objects, they still haven't released the full IPHAS catalog, i will email these guys and ask for source lists at least in the regions we care about (34 and 38)
Also includes some 2 MASS and Spitzer data but only for T Tauri candidates, or possibly only in the center of the complex? need to read closely enough to figure this out. NB: more evidence for sequential/triggered star formation; find increasing accretion rates, disc excesses and younger ages as move away from HD 206267 towards Cloud A (BRC 38 is Cloud E)
| do this in detail, scavenge data person5
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2012AJ....143...61N, Nakano et al., 2012, AJ, 143, 61] [[Media:Nagano_2012.pdf]]
|'''BRC 34, 38.''' Wide Field Survey of Emission-line Stars in IC 1396 (the whole complex). Nakano reports a total of 639 Halpha emission-line stars were detected in an area of 4.2 deg2; they matched to some literature sources, also some Akari sources. Data charts and images showing locations included. We should read this in some detail, and scavenge the data in the regions we care about (brc 34 and 38).
|do this in detail, scavenge data. person5
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2012ApJ...744..130K, Koenig et al., 2012, ApJ, 744, 130]
|WISE-based YSO selection mechanism (inspired by Gutermuth et al. 2008, 2009) described in appendix. Meat of paper on high-mass star formation (we aren't caring about that particularly here -- we mostly want the selection mechanism).
|should read the appendix closely; you can skip the rest if you want. Do with Gutermuth et al 2008 ("colormethods") (person6?)
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2008ApJ...674..336G Gutermuth et al., 2008, ApJ, 674, 336]
|Spitzer color selection (first version - Gutermuth et al. 2009 perturbs it a little) presented here. Some of the selection mechanism is described in the main text, and some is in the appendix. We should read about the selection mechanism.
|should read about the selection mechanism closely; you can skip the rest if you want. Do with Koenig et al. 2012. ("colormethods") (person6?)
|-
|}

==Should scan==
This group of papers is essential to read enough to get the data out of them, but we don't need to really study them in tremendous detail.

{| border="1"
|'''Paper'''
|'''Comments'''
|'''Presenter/ present with'''
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2009A%26A...506..711G Gregorio-Hetem J., Montmerle T., Rodrigues C. V., Marciotto E., Preibisch T., Zinnecker H., 2009, A&A, 506, 711.]
|'''BRC 27.''' ROSAT+VRI data. relevant issues: using multiple wavelengths to find YSOs (see [[Finding cluster members]]), spatial resolution (see [[Resolution]]). Mentions Chandra, XMM data, both of which would cover BRC 27, but I can't find the subsequent analysis that they advertise. We need to include this catalog in what we accumulate, and compare our results to theirs.
|read enough to understand and scavenge data.
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1999MNRAS.310..210S Shevchenko V. S., Ezhkova O. V., Ibrahimov M. A., van den Ancker M. E., Tjin A, Djie H. R. E., 1999, MNRAS, 310, 210.]
|'''BRC 27'''. optical. age, distance estimate. photo'''electric''' UBVR(!) and objective prism spectroscopy for Halpha and spectral types. combined with IRAS. using multiple wavelengths to find YSOs (see [[Finding cluster members]]). We need to include this catalog in what we accumulate, and compare our results to theirs. This is not necessarily a trivial task, as they have photographic 1950 coordinates, which will need to be precessed and then matched to a 2mass source to get a more recent position estimate (they have finding charts, which should help), but it only needs to be done for the objects in our region of interest. It's old methodology (from an Uzbecki telescope), but still good stuff, especially the spectral types. nice "put-it-in-context" discussion at the top for the entire CMa R1 region.
|should read enough to understand and scavenge data.
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1986PASJ...38..395W Wiramihardja S.D., Kogure T., Nakano M., Yoshida S., 1986, PASJ, 38, 395.]
|'''BRC 27.''' Halpha plus photo'''graphic''' UBV.(!) using multiple wavelengths to find YSOs (see [[Finding cluster members]]). We need to include this catalog in what we accumulate, and compare our results to theirs. This is not necessarily a trivial task, as they have photographic 1950 coordinates, which will need to be precessed and then matched to a 2mass source to get a more recent position estimate (they say they have finding charts, which should help), but it only needs to be done for the objects in our field of view (our data). Nice cross matching that they've already done for ''their'' previously identified objects. We don't need to read it in detail; it's a really old paper. But we need to read enough to understand and scavenge data.
|should read enough to understand and scavenge data.
|-
|}

==Can read==
This group of papers is useful but not essential.

{| border="1"
|'''Paper'''
|'''Comments'''
|'''Presenter/ present with'''
|-
|[http://cdsads.u-strasbg.fr/cgi-bin/nph-bib_query?2001A%26A...376..553N&db_key=AST&nosetcookie=1, Nisini et al., 2001, A&A 376, 553]
|'''BRC 38.''' Multiple H2 protostellar jets in the bright-rimmed globule IC 1396-N. Jets are indicative of young stars! The H2 excitation inside the globule could be from either shocks driven by the outflow of YSOs or to UV induced fluorescence from the external ionized region. The conclusion states that the emissions originate from non-dissociative shocks, and that they are associated with the most embedded and youngest objects of the field. The near IR confirms the existence of a cluster of young embedded sources and highly efficient star formation activity. Lots of awkward text that English editing did not catch. Has a list of YSO candidates with some cross-ids. Lots of focus on jets and knots too. Much of these cross ids are probably in Choudhury et al.
| read and scavenge table of YSOs?
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2003ApJ...593L..47R Reipurth et al., 2003, ApJ, 123, 2597-2626]
|'''BRC 38''' Blowout from IC 1396N: The emergence of Herbig-Haro objects in the vicinity of bright-rimmed clouds. Halpha and other narrowband filters. Reipurth et al usually work in these wavelengths to find HH objects. short paper. they have a list of knots in the region, but that's it. Herbig-Haro flow (HH 777) found coming out of ic 1396N; located at 214041.6+581638 While many near-infrared sources were found that apparently are young stars this study focused on the HH flows found. Computer modeling was used to find a match for observed features.
|ok to skip
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2002ApJ...573..246B Beltran et al., 2002, ApJ, 573, 1]
|'''BRC 38''' IRAS 21391+5802: The Molecular Outflow and its Exciting source. VLA and BIMA observations of dust and gas surrounding IRAS source; 3 sources isolated with BIMA, each a YSO. Really good text about the intermediate mass star morphology and evolution compared to that of the low mass stars. There is a table at the end that has point source information of BIMA observations of 5 epochs with bandwidth and spectral resolution. A table with 5 sources and flux density and spectral index, another table with millimeter flux densitites, for 3 BIMA sources, and a table with CO outflow properties. Our focus will be more on the point sources. This paper is really focused on the outflow and its sources. Nice for context of source matching and variations in coordinate accuracy coupled with physical differences in the sources. But not a whole lot appropriate for our point source study.
|ok to skip
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2007A%26A...468L..37F Fuente, et al., 2007, A&A, 468L, 37]
|'''BRC 38.''' very short paper, looking for protostellar clusters in IC 1396N, using PdBI at 1.3, 3.3 mm. Main point as relevant to us -- 4 cores in IC1396N. Yes, strongly tied to Neri et al 2007 paper.
|ok to skip
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2007A%26A...468L..33N Neri, et al. 2007, A&A, 468, 33]
|'''BRC 38.''' found a cluster of hot cores in 1396N. again, a very short paper using PdBI at 1.3, 3.3 mm. Main point as relevant to us -- cluster of cores here. Yes, strongly tied to Fuente et al 2007 paper.
|ok to skip
|-
|}

==For the over achievers==
Read if you are motivated to do so.

{| border="1"
|'''Paper'''
|'''Comments'''
|'''Presenter/ present with'''
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1994ApJS...92..163S Sugitani K., Ogura K., 1994, ApJS, 92, 163.]
|SFO/BRC catalog/nomenclature continued into the southern hemisphere. (NB: all our obj are in the N. Hem paper!). SFO/BRC numbers 45-89. Second (by time) in the Sugitani series. Again, much of detailed analysis now obsolete. Review with other Sugitani, Ogura papers, but can skim the surface.
|if do, do w/ group S
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1995ApJ...455L..39S Sugitani K., Tamura M., Ogura K., 1995, ApJ, 455, L39.]
| JHK follow-up of IRAS sources from SFO. relevant issues: using multiple wavelengths to find YSOs (see [[Finding cluster members]]), spatial resolution (see [[Resolution]]). Shame on them for not publishing a data table or even a figure with the locations of everything they identify as a YSO! BRC 27 is one that they choose to include in a finder chart, but doesn't do us much good. Nice summary of larger issues, timescales. Short paper. If do, review with other Sugitani, Ogura papers, but can skim the surface.
|if do, do w/ group S
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2007AJ....133.1528C Connelley et al., 2007, AJ, 133, 1528]
|'''BRC 38''' Infrared Nebulae around Young stellar objects. IRAS 21391+5802 - images show jet-like nebula and large patches of nebulosity. IRAS source thought to be a low mass Class 0 source (Beltran et al. 2002, 2004). This source has H2 emission in the form of bow shocks. We need to check the source in our images, but it's likely bright enough that it appears in many of the other papers.
|ok to skip
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2008ApJ...675.1352V Valdettaro R., Migenes V., Trinidad M.A., Brand J., Palla F., 2008, ApJ, 675, 1352.]
|'''BRC 34. (others?)''' VLA obs of water masers, following up 2005 work. BRC 34 observed, not detected. nice intro that puts their work in context with the rest of what they've done. Lots more non-dets, interpreted as forming low mass and/or older stars than had been assumed. I think they've gotten the interpretation spot-on.
|scan if you want
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2002A%26A...388..172S Soares J.B., Bica E., 2002, A&A, 388, 172.]
|'''BRC 27.''' OLD 2MASS. Editing ghastly. Really simple paper. In theory, we should include their results in what we accumulate, and compare our results, though (a) they are using "prehistoric" 2mass data reduction, and (b) they really make it hard, as they don't even tell us how many YSOs they think they've found, just the numbers of objects for which they've done photometry. So I don't think we really can compare our results to this one. However, nice "put it in larger context" discussion with wide-field IRAS image.
|skip it unless you want to see the IRAS image.
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2003A%26A...404..217S Soares J.B., Bica E., 2003, A&A, 404, 217.]
|2MASS + optical. Simple paper elsewhere in the same cloud as BRC 27. Same sort of 2MASS analysis as their 2002 paper. Still archaic 2MASS data reduction. Skip it.
| skip it.
|-
|Allen L., et al. 2011, American Astronomical Society, BAAS, 43, 258.15.
|Poster from AAS ... statistical measurement of YSOs in all of their BRC IRAC observations. not a lot of content beyond the images and their 'big picture' work.
|skip it.
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2004A%26A...426..535M Morgan L. K., Thompson M. A., Urquhart J. S., White G. J., Mio J., 2004, A&A, 426, 535.] note has erratum too.
|'''BRC 27, 34, 38?''' Radio and mid-ir survey. NRAO/NVSS/VLA (20cm), DSS, MSX data. both 27 and 34 in here, though 34 is a non-det. nice intro to the physics, though they get into far more math than we need to. relevant issues: this radio is thermal (free-free emission). they smoothed data -- spatial resolution (see [[Resolution]]). another nice use of three big surveys. sfo 27 in the online-only fig 1. T3 also online only. identifying ionizing source is not the same as identifying point sources in the images themselves. it's not clear that this is all that relevant for us. part of a PhD thesis.
|Drop... if you want to, read with "Group M" but skip the math.
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2008A%26A...477..557M Morgan L. K., Thompson M. A., Urquhart J. S., White G. J., 2008, A&A, 477, 557.]
|'''BRC 27, 34, 38?''' SCUBA submm survey (450+850 um) plus IRAS (12, 25, 60, 100 um), MSX, and 2MASS (erroneously identified as 2mm but really 2 micron). both 27 and 34 in here. next part of a PhD thesis. lots of nice overview, summary (as would be expected for a thesis) spread throughout article. seems to be a really long paper, but is almost all figures in the appendix. relevant issues: how the objects they are talking about (at long and short wavelengths) compare to what we see in our images (see [[Resolution]] and their, e.g., fig 4). Forward reference to Spitzer data analysis like ours but then says have already looked for GLIMPSE, 24 um obs. They are only looking at low-res flux densities. Appendix may be useful for scavenging additional targets if we want to do more analysis on more targets.
|Probably the most worth reading of "Group M"; skip the math.
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2009MNRAS.400.1726M Morgan L. K., Urquhart J. S., Thompson M. A., 2009, MNRAS, 400, 1726.]
|'''BRC 27, 34, 38?''' Radio, mid-ir, SCUBA observations; redefined SFO catalog. JCMT (CO) observations. 22 arcsec resolution! (see [[Resolution]] and their fig 2 here.) Likely last of his thesis, or first of his postdoc. (Look, his address changed, so this was published while he was a postdoc, but it's the same collaborators as before at his old institution, so my guess it's leftover thesis work.) They think 27 has been triggered, 34 not; this provides a nice compare-and-contrast opportunity for our write-up. Quick read.
|read with "Group M" for fig 2.
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2005A%26A...443..535V Valdettaro R., Palla F., Brand J., Cesaroni R., 2005, A&A, 443, 535.]
|Radio survey of water masers. 22.2 GHz (=1.35 cm if I did my math right). Really nice intro summarizing the big picture. Following up on Morgan and similar work asserting high-mass stars forming in BRCs by looking for masers. Our objects observed, not detected. Finding lots of non-detections, suggesting that low-mass stars forming instead. Nice, short writeup of basically a non-result, and I think they've gotten the interpretation spot-on. Nice to at least scan after the Morgan stuff for context. larger issues: spatial resolution (see [[Resolution]]). Again!! :)
|scan if you want with group M.
|-
|[http://arxiv.org/pdf/0909.3312v1.pdf Wang et al., 2009, A&A, 504, 369]
|The relation between 13CO j=2-1 line width in moelcular clouds and bolometric luminosity of associated IRAS sources. Radio. ignore at least for now IRAS 21391+5802 - suggests that it is a star forming cluster where high-mass stars will form
|
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1962ApJS....7....1L, Lynds, 1962, ApJS, 7, 1]
|The Lynds Dark Nebula paper. some of you were interested in the history of this. At least one if not all three of our BRCs are also associated with Lynds clouds. Read if you want to.
|-
|}

==Do not bother==
This group of paper has passing relevance to the science and the goals of NITARP. They are useful references for your readers to follow up on details. It is sufficient that one person (usually Luisa) has enough knowledge to know that the citation is proper. Reading the full paper is not essential.

{| border="1"
|'''Paper'''
|'''Comments'''
|-
|Makovoz D., Marleau F. R., 2005, PASP, 117, 1113.
|MOPEX info. VERY technical, not a manual, and not all that terribly relevant to what we're doing. skip it. you shouldn't have to get into MOPEX at all, but if you do, there is lots of online help in MOPEX that is really good, and also lots of documentation (aimed at professional astronomers, admittedly) on the SSC website.
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2010AJ....140.1868W Wright et al., 2010, AJ, 140, 1868]
|WISE "seminal paper" reference. Describes the mission. As I recall, there is some discussion of the data products, but for the complete discussion of data products in more of a manual form, consult the document that accompanies the delivery. Read this paper if you want a somewhat technical overview of the mission.
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2004ApJS..154..309W Werner et al., 2004, ApJS, 154, 309]
|Spitzer "seminar paper" reference. Describes the mission. No discussion of data products as I recall. Read this paper if you want a somewhat technical overview of the mission.
|-
|[http://articles.adsabs.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/nph-iarticle_query?1956BAN....13...77P&data_type=PDF_HIGH&whole_paper=YES&type=PRINTER&filetype=.pdf Bulletin of Astro. Instit. of the Netherlands, Vol 13, 471, 77-88, Pottasch et al., 1956, Bull. Astro. Instit. Netherlands, 13, 471]
|A study of bright rims in diffuse nebulae. VERY early work describing the location, shape of, density of, brightness of bright rim clouds in several nebula, including IC 1396 and Brc 38. So old that not really useful for assembling list of YSOs in region. skip.
|-
|[http://articles.adsabs.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/nph-iarticle_query?1999sf99.proc..381O&data_type=PDF_HIGH&whole_paper=YES&type=PRINTER&filetype=.pdf Ogura & Sugitani, 1999, Proceedings of Star Formation, pg 381-382]
|A large number of Halpha Emission Stars associated with BRCs. Conference proceedings, old at that. i'm sure this analysis is already written up in their later papers. ignore this one.
|-
|[http://articles.adsabs.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/nph-iarticle_query?1996A%26A...309..827S&data_type=PDF_HIGH&whole_paper=YES&type=PRINTER&filetype=.pdf, Saraceno et al., 1996, A&A, 309, 827-839]
|An evolutionary diagram for young stellar objects. deep, DEEP background, IGNORE THIS.
|-
|[http://arxiv.org/pdf/astro-ph/0407102v1.pdf, Beltran et al., 2004, A&A, 426, 941]
|'''BRC 38?''' The dense molecular cores in IRAS 21391 +5802 region. Radio and it sounds like theoretical models. ignore. Three sources found with BIMA (??) observations in 21391+5802; Hard to read as they are trying to use data to fit/model how gas is emitted from the core
|-
|[http://www.aperturephotometry.org, APT tool] Laher et al. 2012, PASP, submitted
| there are two papers that Russ is working on. One is a description of the basics of APT, what it's doing etc., and the other (i think) is more of a "what happens when you use APT to extract the photometry" kind of paper. It's been a while since I've seen these drafts; Russ has been going rounds with the referee on these both. He's started working on them again. Read this if you want to know the details of the inner workings of APT, and how it compares to other proven photometry programs.
|-
|Maoz 2007
|Referenced in the proposal; listed here for completeness. Astrophysics in a Nutshell (Princeton, NJ). i think this is someone's (Debbie's?) textbook. don't need to read her textbook, but you might want to find your own! :)
|-
|}

Talk:C-WAYS Spring work

2012-05-06T16:35:32Z

Novatne:

Talk:C-WAYS Spring work

2012-05-06T16:35:15Z

Novatne:

Talk:C-WAYS Spring work

2012-05-06T16:34:57Z

Novatne:

C-WAYS Spring work

2012-05-06T16:33:42Z

Novatne: /* Papers to discuss */

= Big Picture =

There are three things I'd like to accomplish before our visit:

(1) Start thinking about the issues of spatial resolution. I have developed a worksheet for this. '''WE DECIDED TO DO THIS FIRST.'''

(2) We need read in detail and discuss a short list of carefully selected papers. We'll rotate through our short list of papers, and each of you will get one to present to the group. This is modelling a so-called "journal club", a common occurrence in astronomy departments/groups/centers, where the papers are usually selected out of recent astro-ph mailings. The papers that went into this list came out of the extensive lists you assembled while writing the proposal. I then went through and sorted them into bins -- ones you want to read closely for the astronomy and astrophysics background, and/or for the interpretation, and/or for the big picture... ones from which you need to scavenge data, and you need to read enough to understand what it was they did, and what kinds of data they are reporting... ones you might read if you have time ... and ones you can ignore. '''WE SHOULD START ON THIS AFTER THE RESOLUTION STUFF.'''

(3) Actually doing the data scavenging out of those papers mentioned above. This can be as simple as going to the journal website and saving the data table as plain text, but in a handful of cases, it is a LOT more complicated. I am working on more explanation to go with this so-called source-matching work. Some of the work here springboards off of the journal articles we will read in detail, and some involves scanning additional articles. I AM STILL WORKING ON DEVELOPING A FRAMEWORK FOR THIS. It's ok if we don't get through this by the time of our visit, but it will slow us down for our visit.

= [[C-WAYS Spring calendar]] =

Not all of us are around and able to work on NITARP stuff for the whole spring.

= [[C-WAYS Resolution Worksheet]] =
[[C-WAYS Resolution Worksheet]] I hesitate to make a place for everyone to collect their answers on the wiki; in this case, I would like everyone to independently derive their own numbers and compare notes on the telecon together.

= [[C-WAYS source matching work]]=
[[C-WAYS source matching work]] -- this is an overview of what we need to know, and has some instructions, but no specific tasks doled out.

=Papers to discuss=

The relevant papers are sorted into the categories below.

I've attempted to make a roughly color-coded grouping of the papers below so that they can be presented in appropriate clumps. There are a LOT of papers to discuss, and I'm trying to make it roughly about the same amount of work per person. Here is the order I propose:

[[Summaries and questions from discussed papers[http://coolwiki.ipac.caltech.edu/index.php/Talk:C-WAYS_Spring_work]]]

#person1 (JC1) -- '''Lauren''' -- Guieu et al 2010, Rebull et al 2011a and 2011b; possibly Johnson et al. 2012 and Rebull et al. 2012, or possibly makes more sense to wait until closer to the visit??
#person2 (JC2) -- '''Peggy''' -- Ogura et al 2002, Sugitani et al 1991 -- includes responsibility of leading the coordinate updating for these. [[SFO Paper Journals Guided Reading]]
#person3 (JC3) -- '''Jackie''' -- Getman et al 2007, Beltran et al 2009, should also probably read Choudhury et al. 2010... but Choudhury et al is meaty enough that it should be the next week after these. [Reading Guide Journal Club[http://coolwiki.ipac.caltech.edu/index.php/Talk:C-WAYS_Spring_work]]
#person4 (JC4) -- '''Debbie''' -- Choudhury et al. 2010 and Chauhan et al. 2009 -- Chauhan et al 2009 is not meaty enough on its own, but is very different than Choudhury et al. 2010, despite sharing a few authors. Choudhury et al. pulls together some of the thoughts started in Getman et al and Beltran et al.
#person5 (JC5) -- '''Bob''' -- Barentsen et al. 2011 and Nakano et al. 2012
#person6 -- appendices of Koenig et al. 2012 and Gutermuth et al 2008?? depending on time, can/should skip these for now.
#then, starting with Ogura et al. 2002 and Sugitani et al. 1991, start updating coordinates.
#then, Gregorio-Hetem et al. 2009, Shevchenko et al. 1999, Wiramihardja et al 1986, and update those coordinates.

This should work like a journal club or even a book club, as in the named person takes the lead in presenting the article. You should present things along the lines of the following:
*the main point of this work was ...
*what they did was ... (high level summary, no need to get into nitty gritty details)
*the most interesting thing i learned was ...
*what they did that i agree with is ...
*what they did that i disagree with is ...
*and, for us here, the reason we should care about this in the context of our planned YSO work is ...

EVERYONE should read the papers ahead of time, but it's kind of expected that the named person will spend the most time reading the paper in question!

==Essential reading==
This group of papers are ones we need to read in 'journal club' style - read and discuss them in detail. They provide the scientific context and/or establishes known facts or conclusions about the bright rimmed clouds, or are similar enough to the process we will use that they are worth the investment of time.
{| border="1"
|'''Paper'''
|'''Notes'''
|'''Presenter/ present with'''
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2010ApJ...720...46G Guieu et al., 2010, ApJ, 720, 46]
|Our paper from the IC2118 team (one of the pre-NITARP teams!). Spitzer-based search for YSOs in IC2118 (near Orion's knee). Large map to start from. Ground-based optical obtained specifically to support these observations, much like us. Note serendipitous discovery of high-proper-motion object. This is something Tim and his students found entirely on their own. We tried to obtain follow-up spectroscopy from Palomar, but had bad weather. I need to go back and try again to get these spectra. There is also an opportunity to look at this environment with WISE! do with other Rebull et al papers - "group R". This can be the lowest priority of that group, as it was written the longest time ago. (may be better to focus time and energy on CG4 paper and Taurus with WISE paper.)
| (do with group R) person1
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2011AJ....142...25R Rebull et al., 2011a, AJ, 142, 25]
|our paper from the CG4+Sa101 team (a NITARP 2009 team) (I gave you hard copy of this one at the AAS.) This is a Spitzer-based search for YSOs in this region. Fairly large map to start from, but smaller than IC2118. Ground-based optical pre-obtained through a collaborator to support the observations, similar to us. (She turns out to also have a bunch of spectra, but has other things in front of them in her queue.)
| (do with group R) person1
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2011ApJS..196....4R Rebull et al., 2011b, ApJS, 196, 4]
|our paper looking for new YSOs in Taurus using WISE -- the one my recent AAS poster was based on, and I also gave you hard copy of this paper at the AAS. This starts from a HUGE region, 260 sq degrees, and something like 2.6 million sources. This is a far larger region than we will do, but we will use a similar approach -- use WISE, obtain a set of possible YSOs, use all available data we can find to weed down the list, compare to the literature-discovered objects, and present a list of candidates.
| (do with group R) person1
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2012AAS...21933705J Johnson et al., 2012, AAS219, 337.05] and Rebull et al. in prep
|'''BRC 27 and 38''': The NITARP 2011 team work here. Spitzer-driven search for YSOs, with ground-based optical photometry to support observations. I think most of you have read the poster already. I am still actively working on the draft; whenever this paper comes up in the rotation, I'll give you whatever I have at that point, even if it's unpolished. Sigh.
| (do with group R) person1
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2002AJ....123.2597O Ogura K., Sugitani K., Pickles A., 2002, AJ, 123, 2597.]
|'''BRC 27, 34, 38?''' Optical + 2MASS; general BRC info. Most recent of the Sugitani series of four we found. Using Halpha to look for YSOs, following up their other work. Relevant issues: using multiple wavelengths to find YSOs (see [[Finding cluster members]]), spatial resolution (see [[Resolution]]), caveats with finding candidates. Nice intro, summary of larger issues, discussion of results. ''Need to be sure that this catalog is included in our list of previously known YSOs in this region'', so we can compare our results to theirs. ''Finding charts'' helpfully included so we can match obj. We should discuss this one in some depth; the other Sugitanis don't need to be done in as much depth ("group S").
|(do with group S) person2
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1991ApJS...77...59S Sugitani K., Fukui Y., Ogura K., 1991, ApJS, 77, 59.]
|'''SFO''' article (discovery paper) - the original SFO, origin of "BRC" terminology, numbers 1-44. covers the northern hemisphere. Has nice intro/summary of what's going on in BRCs, CGs, etc. Nice approach of combining two large surveys -- POSS and IRAS; nice clear discussion of weed-down process. Second half of paper (detailed analysis of IRAS colors, etc.) obsolete but has same essence as what we do now. Review with other Sugitani, Ogura papers, but can skim the surface. You all should have read this in Jan or Feb in the context of our proposal, so maybe we don't have to do this again?
|(do w/ group S) person2
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2007ApJ...654..316G Getman et al. 2007, ApJ, 654, 316]
|'''BRC 38.''' Chandra, 2MASS, and Spitzer. discusses X-ray sources that are associated with young stars in this region, which they call IC 1396N. Studying triggered star formation and protostars in IC 1396N. Good pictures to help with the visualization of 1396N and these sources; evidence of sequential star formation. really nice intro to put it all in context.
Found 117 x-ray sources in IC 1396N; identify some with central cluster, and some with globule. We are likely to have similar issues since we are looking further out from the globule. Objects at a variety of stages. One of the youngest sources detected in x-ray, #66, is found close to the source IRAS 21391+5802 (also called BIMA 2). List of these sources are included. Nice discussions about finding counterparts across wavelengths, contamination by background sources, predictions for more YSOs here to be found. Dense paper! We need to scavenge these data, compare to our results.
|do in detail. compare and contrast! scavenge data. person3 - Jackie 
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2009A%26A...504...97B Beltran, et al., 2009, A&A, 504, 97B]
|'''BRC 38.''' this looked for YSOs inside the BRC using deep JHK. Data tables available online only! Comparison of results to Chandra results from Getman; find no evidence for sequential star formation. get and include their data. lots of discussion of extended emission and comparison to other bands. includes figure using IRAC 4.5 um data, but that's it for Spitzer information. Do in detail, with Getman.
| do in detail, with Getman. scavenge data. person3 - Jackie 
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2010ApJ...717.1067C Choudhury R., Mookerjea, B., Bhatt, H., 2010, ApJ, 717, 1067]
| '''BRC 38''', including IRAC+MIPS+optical phot and spec. *REALLY* nice paper. A tremendous amount of work, very nicely done, and very complete data tables. Go through and discuss this one in detail, scavenge all the data. Does a lot of comparison with Getman and Beltran, trying to reconcile all results. Do this one after or with Getman, Beltran; this one is meaty enough that it probably should get its own week.
| do in detail. scavenge data. do after Getman, Beltran person4
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2009MNRAS.396..964C Chauhan N, Pandey A.K., Ogura K., Ojha D.K., Bhatt B.C., Ghosh S.K., Rawat P.S., 2009, MNRAS, 396, 964]
|'''BRC 27, 38.''' Optical (BVIc)+2mass+spitzer/irac. This one we should spend considerable time on. Testing small-scale sequential star formation suggested in earlier 'group S' papers. nice intro. multiwavelength and contaminants (see [[Finding cluster members]]). As I read this, they are using optical+nir to pick their YSOs, not Spitzer-driven, which is different than what we will do. We ''will'' find a different set of obj, not just classify them differently. We need to get their data tables and compare our results to theirs. Note lots of information is online only, which i attached to article pdf. Note also that some of their online tables don't contain the same sources as the other tables (they should have caught that before publication). analysis of Halpha-age and mass function is a bit of overinterpretation IMHO. need spectroscopy first!!
|do in detail -- read closely, compare and contrast! need to scavenge data too. person4
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2011MNRAS.415..103B Barensten et al., 2011, MNRAS, 415, 103]
|'''BRC 34, 38.''' T tauri candidates and accretion rates using IPHAS (r, i, Halpha); over the entire huge IC1396 complex. this is a useful paper. data tables of 158 objects they think are young; make sure to grab and incorporate what they found. their shortlist may or may not overlap with the fields we care about in brc 34 (cloud D??) and 38 (cloud E), but still very useful to include. if, when we get to that point of needing these objects, they still haven't released the full IPHAS catalog, i will email these guys and ask for source lists at least in the regions we care about (34 and 38)
Also includes some 2 MASS and Spitzer data but only for T Tauri candidates, or possibly only in the center of the complex? need to read closely enough to figure this out. NB: more evidence for sequential/triggered star formation; find increasing accretion rates, disc excesses and younger ages as move away from HD 206267 towards Cloud A (BRC 38 is Cloud E)
| do this in detail, scavenge data person5
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2012AJ....143...61N, Nakano et al., 2012, AJ, 143, 61] [[Media:Nagano_2012.pdf]]
|'''BRC 34, 38.''' Wide Field Survey of Emission-line Stars in IC 1396 (the whole complex). Nakano reports a total of 639 Halpha emission-line stars were detected in an area of 4.2 deg2; they matched to some literature sources, also some Akari sources. Data charts and images showing locations included. We should read this in some detail, and scavenge the data in the regions we care about (brc 34 and 38).
|do this in detail, scavenge data. person5
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2012ApJ...744..130K, Koenig et al., 2012, ApJ, 744, 130]
|WISE-based YSO selection mechanism (inspired by Gutermuth et al. 2008, 2009) described in appendix. Meat of paper on high-mass star formation (we aren't caring about that particularly here -- we mostly want the selection mechanism).
|should read the appendix closely; you can skip the rest if you want. Do with Gutermuth et al 2008 ("colormethods") (person6?)
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2008ApJ...674..336G Gutermuth et al., 2008, ApJ, 674, 336]
|Spitzer color selection (first version - Gutermuth et al. 2009 perturbs it a little) presented here. Some of the selection mechanism is described in the main text, and some is in the appendix. We should read about the selection mechanism.
|should read about the selection mechanism closely; you can skip the rest if you want. Do with Koenig et al. 2012. ("colormethods") (person6?)
|-
|}

==Should scan==
This group of papers is essential to read enough to get the data out of them, but we don't need to really study them in tremendous detail.

{| border="1"
|'''Paper'''
|'''Comments'''
|'''Presenter/ present with'''
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2009A%26A...506..711G Gregorio-Hetem J., Montmerle T., Rodrigues C. V., Marciotto E., Preibisch T., Zinnecker H., 2009, A&A, 506, 711.]
|'''BRC 27.''' ROSAT+VRI data. relevant issues: using multiple wavelengths to find YSOs (see [[Finding cluster members]]), spatial resolution (see [[Resolution]]). Mentions Chandra, XMM data, both of which would cover BRC 27, but I can't find the subsequent analysis that they advertise. We need to include this catalog in what we accumulate, and compare our results to theirs.
|read enough to understand and scavenge data.
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1999MNRAS.310..210S Shevchenko V. S., Ezhkova O. V., Ibrahimov M. A., van den Ancker M. E., Tjin A, Djie H. R. E., 1999, MNRAS, 310, 210.]
|'''BRC 27'''. optical. age, distance estimate. photo'''electric''' UBVR(!) and objective prism spectroscopy for Halpha and spectral types. combined with IRAS. using multiple wavelengths to find YSOs (see [[Finding cluster members]]). We need to include this catalog in what we accumulate, and compare our results to theirs. This is not necessarily a trivial task, as they have photographic 1950 coordinates, which will need to be precessed and then matched to a 2mass source to get a more recent position estimate (they have finding charts, which should help), but it only needs to be done for the objects in our region of interest. It's old methodology (from an Uzbecki telescope), but still good stuff, especially the spectral types. nice "put-it-in-context" discussion at the top for the entire CMa R1 region.
|should read enough to understand and scavenge data.
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1986PASJ...38..395W Wiramihardja S.D., Kogure T., Nakano M., Yoshida S., 1986, PASJ, 38, 395.]
|'''BRC 27.''' Halpha plus photo'''graphic''' UBV.(!) using multiple wavelengths to find YSOs (see [[Finding cluster members]]). We need to include this catalog in what we accumulate, and compare our results to theirs. This is not necessarily a trivial task, as they have photographic 1950 coordinates, which will need to be precessed and then matched to a 2mass source to get a more recent position estimate (they say they have finding charts, which should help), but it only needs to be done for the objects in our field of view (our data). Nice cross matching that they've already done for ''their'' previously identified objects. We don't need to read it in detail; it's a really old paper. But we need to read enough to understand and scavenge data.
|should read enough to understand and scavenge data.
|-
|}

==Can read==
This group of papers is useful but not essential.

{| border="1"
|'''Paper'''
|'''Comments'''
|'''Presenter/ present with'''
|-
|[http://cdsads.u-strasbg.fr/cgi-bin/nph-bib_query?2001A%26A...376..553N&db_key=AST&nosetcookie=1, Nisini et al., 2001, A&A 376, 553]
|'''BRC 38.''' Multiple H2 protostellar jets in the bright-rimmed globule IC 1396-N. Jets are indicative of young stars! The H2 excitation inside the globule could be from either shocks driven by the outflow of YSOs or to UV induced fluorescence from the external ionized region. The conclusion states that the emissions originate from non-dissociative shocks, and that they are associated with the most embedded and youngest objects of the field. The near IR confirms the existence of a cluster of young embedded sources and highly efficient star formation activity. Lots of awkward text that English editing did not catch. Has a list of YSO candidates with some cross-ids. Lots of focus on jets and knots too. Much of these cross ids are probably in Choudhury et al.
| read and scavenge table of YSOs?
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2003ApJ...593L..47R Reipurth et al., 2003, ApJ, 123, 2597-2626]
|'''BRC 38''' Blowout from IC 1396N: The emergence of Herbig-Haro objects in the vicinity of bright-rimmed clouds. Halpha and other narrowband filters. Reipurth et al usually work in these wavelengths to find HH objects. short paper. they have a list of knots in the region, but that's it. Herbig-Haro flow (HH 777) found coming out of ic 1396N; located at 214041.6+581638 While many near-infrared sources were found that apparently are young stars this study focused on the HH flows found. Computer modeling was used to find a match for observed features.
|ok to skip
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2002ApJ...573..246B Beltran et al., 2002, ApJ, 573, 1]
|'''BRC 38''' IRAS 21391+5802: The Molecular Outflow and its Exciting source. VLA and BIMA observations of dust and gas surrounding IRAS source; 3 sources isolated with BIMA, each a YSO. Really good text about the intermediate mass star morphology and evolution compared to that of the low mass stars. There is a table at the end that has point source information of BIMA observations of 5 epochs with bandwidth and spectral resolution. A table with 5 sources and flux density and spectral index, another table with millimeter flux densitites, for 3 BIMA sources, and a table with CO outflow properties. Our focus will be more on the point sources. This paper is really focused on the outflow and its sources. Nice for context of source matching and variations in coordinate accuracy coupled with physical differences in the sources. But not a whole lot appropriate for our point source study.
|ok to skip
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2007A%26A...468L..37F Fuente, et al., 2007, A&A, 468L, 37]
|'''BRC 38.''' very short paper, looking for protostellar clusters in IC 1396N, using PdBI at 1.3, 3.3 mm. Main point as relevant to us -- 4 cores in IC1396N. Yes, strongly tied to Neri et al 2007 paper.
|ok to skip
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2007A%26A...468L..33N Neri, et al. 2007, A&A, 468, 33]
|'''BRC 38.''' found a cluster of hot cores in 1396N. again, a very short paper using PdBI at 1.3, 3.3 mm. Main point as relevant to us -- cluster of cores here. Yes, strongly tied to Fuente et al 2007 paper.
|ok to skip
|-
|}

==For the over achievers==
Read if you are motivated to do so.

{| border="1"
|'''Paper'''
|'''Comments'''
|'''Presenter/ present with'''
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1994ApJS...92..163S Sugitani K., Ogura K., 1994, ApJS, 92, 163.]
|SFO/BRC catalog/nomenclature continued into the southern hemisphere. (NB: all our obj are in the N. Hem paper!). SFO/BRC numbers 45-89. Second (by time) in the Sugitani series. Again, much of detailed analysis now obsolete. Review with other Sugitani, Ogura papers, but can skim the surface.
|if do, do w/ group S
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1995ApJ...455L..39S Sugitani K., Tamura M., Ogura K., 1995, ApJ, 455, L39.]
| JHK follow-up of IRAS sources from SFO. relevant issues: using multiple wavelengths to find YSOs (see [[Finding cluster members]]), spatial resolution (see [[Resolution]]). Shame on them for not publishing a data table or even a figure with the locations of everything they identify as a YSO! BRC 27 is one that they choose to include in a finder chart, but doesn't do us much good. Nice summary of larger issues, timescales. Short paper. If do, review with other Sugitani, Ogura papers, but can skim the surface.
|if do, do w/ group S
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2007AJ....133.1528C Connelley et al., 2007, AJ, 133, 1528]
|'''BRC 38''' Infrared Nebulae around Young stellar objects. IRAS 21391+5802 - images show jet-like nebula and large patches of nebulosity. IRAS source thought to be a low mass Class 0 source (Beltran et al. 2002, 2004). This source has H2 emission in the form of bow shocks. We need to check the source in our images, but it's likely bright enough that it appears in many of the other papers.
|ok to skip
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2008ApJ...675.1352V Valdettaro R., Migenes V., Trinidad M.A., Brand J., Palla F., 2008, ApJ, 675, 1352.]
|'''BRC 34. (others?)''' VLA obs of water masers, following up 2005 work. BRC 34 observed, not detected. nice intro that puts their work in context with the rest of what they've done. Lots more non-dets, interpreted as forming low mass and/or older stars than had been assumed. I think they've gotten the interpretation spot-on.
|scan if you want
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2002A%26A...388..172S Soares J.B., Bica E., 2002, A&A, 388, 172.]
|'''BRC 27.''' OLD 2MASS. Editing ghastly. Really simple paper. In theory, we should include their results in what we accumulate, and compare our results, though (a) they are using "prehistoric" 2mass data reduction, and (b) they really make it hard, as they don't even tell us how many YSOs they think they've found, just the numbers of objects for which they've done photometry. So I don't think we really can compare our results to this one. However, nice "put it in larger context" discussion with wide-field IRAS image.
|skip it unless you want to see the IRAS image.
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2003A%26A...404..217S Soares J.B., Bica E., 2003, A&A, 404, 217.]
|2MASS + optical. Simple paper elsewhere in the same cloud as BRC 27. Same sort of 2MASS analysis as their 2002 paper. Still archaic 2MASS data reduction. Skip it.
| skip it.
|-
|Allen L., et al. 2011, American Astronomical Society, BAAS, 43, 258.15.
|Poster from AAS ... statistical measurement of YSOs in all of their BRC IRAC observations. not a lot of content beyond the images and their 'big picture' work.
|skip it.
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2004A%26A...426..535M Morgan L. K., Thompson M. A., Urquhart J. S., White G. J., Mio J., 2004, A&A, 426, 535.] note has erratum too.
|'''BRC 27, 34, 38?''' Radio and mid-ir survey. NRAO/NVSS/VLA (20cm), DSS, MSX data. both 27 and 34 in here, though 34 is a non-det. nice intro to the physics, though they get into far more math than we need to. relevant issues: this radio is thermal (free-free emission). they smoothed data -- spatial resolution (see [[Resolution]]). another nice use of three big surveys. sfo 27 in the online-only fig 1. T3 also online only. identifying ionizing source is not the same as identifying point sources in the images themselves. it's not clear that this is all that relevant for us. part of a PhD thesis.
|Drop... if you want to, read with "Group M" but skip the math.
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2008A%26A...477..557M Morgan L. K., Thompson M. A., Urquhart J. S., White G. J., 2008, A&A, 477, 557.]
|'''BRC 27, 34, 38?''' SCUBA submm survey (450+850 um) plus IRAS (12, 25, 60, 100 um), MSX, and 2MASS (erroneously identified as 2mm but really 2 micron). both 27 and 34 in here. next part of a PhD thesis. lots of nice overview, summary (as would be expected for a thesis) spread throughout article. seems to be a really long paper, but is almost all figures in the appendix. relevant issues: how the objects they are talking about (at long and short wavelengths) compare to what we see in our images (see [[Resolution]] and their, e.g., fig 4). Forward reference to Spitzer data analysis like ours but then says have already looked for GLIMPSE, 24 um obs. They are only looking at low-res flux densities. Appendix may be useful for scavenging additional targets if we want to do more analysis on more targets.
|Probably the most worth reading of "Group M"; skip the math.
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2009MNRAS.400.1726M Morgan L. K., Urquhart J. S., Thompson M. A., 2009, MNRAS, 400, 1726.]
|'''BRC 27, 34, 38?''' Radio, mid-ir, SCUBA observations; redefined SFO catalog. JCMT (CO) observations. 22 arcsec resolution! (see [[Resolution]] and their fig 2 here.) Likely last of his thesis, or first of his postdoc. (Look, his address changed, so this was published while he was a postdoc, but it's the same collaborators as before at his old institution, so my guess it's leftover thesis work.) They think 27 has been triggered, 34 not; this provides a nice compare-and-contrast opportunity for our write-up. Quick read.
|read with "Group M" for fig 2.
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2005A%26A...443..535V Valdettaro R., Palla F., Brand J., Cesaroni R., 2005, A&A, 443, 535.]
|Radio survey of water masers. 22.2 GHz (=1.35 cm if I did my math right). Really nice intro summarizing the big picture. Following up on Morgan and similar work asserting high-mass stars forming in BRCs by looking for masers. Our objects observed, not detected. Finding lots of non-detections, suggesting that low-mass stars forming instead. Nice, short writeup of basically a non-result, and I think they've gotten the interpretation spot-on. Nice to at least scan after the Morgan stuff for context. larger issues: spatial resolution (see [[Resolution]]). Again!! :)
|scan if you want with group M.
|-
|[http://arxiv.org/pdf/0909.3312v1.pdf Wang et al., 2009, A&A, 504, 369]
|The relation between 13CO j=2-1 line width in moelcular clouds and bolometric luminosity of associated IRAS sources. Radio. ignore at least for now IRAS 21391+5802 - suggests that it is a star forming cluster where high-mass stars will form
|
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1962ApJS....7....1L, Lynds, 1962, ApJS, 7, 1]
|The Lynds Dark Nebula paper. some of you were interested in the history of this. At least one if not all three of our BRCs are also associated with Lynds clouds. Read if you want to.
|-
|}

==Do not bother==
This group of paper has passing relevance to the science and the goals of NITARP. They are useful references for your readers to follow up on details. It is sufficient that one person (usually Luisa) has enough knowledge to know that the citation is proper. Reading the full paper is not essential.

{| border="1"
|'''Paper'''
|'''Comments'''
|-
|Makovoz D., Marleau F. R., 2005, PASP, 117, 1113.
|MOPEX info. VERY technical, not a manual, and not all that terribly relevant to what we're doing. skip it. you shouldn't have to get into MOPEX at all, but if you do, there is lots of online help in MOPEX that is really good, and also lots of documentation (aimed at professional astronomers, admittedly) on the SSC website.
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2010AJ....140.1868W Wright et al., 2010, AJ, 140, 1868]
|WISE "seminal paper" reference. Describes the mission. As I recall, there is some discussion of the data products, but for the complete discussion of data products in more of a manual form, consult the document that accompanies the delivery. Read this paper if you want a somewhat technical overview of the mission.
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2004ApJS..154..309W Werner et al., 2004, ApJS, 154, 309]
|Spitzer "seminar paper" reference. Describes the mission. No discussion of data products as I recall. Read this paper if you want a somewhat technical overview of the mission.
|-
|[http://articles.adsabs.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/nph-iarticle_query?1956BAN....13...77P&data_type=PDF_HIGH&whole_paper=YES&type=PRINTER&filetype=.pdf Bulletin of Astro. Instit. of the Netherlands, Vol 13, 471, 77-88, Pottasch et al., 1956, Bull. Astro. Instit. Netherlands, 13, 471]
|A study of bright rims in diffuse nebulae. VERY early work describing the location, shape of, density of, brightness of bright rim clouds in several nebula, including IC 1396 and Brc 38. So old that not really useful for assembling list of YSOs in region. skip.
|-
|[http://articles.adsabs.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/nph-iarticle_query?1999sf99.proc..381O&data_type=PDF_HIGH&whole_paper=YES&type=PRINTER&filetype=.pdf Ogura & Sugitani, 1999, Proceedings of Star Formation, pg 381-382]
|A large number of Halpha Emission Stars associated with BRCs. Conference proceedings, old at that. i'm sure this analysis is already written up in their later papers. ignore this one.
|-
|[http://articles.adsabs.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/nph-iarticle_query?1996A%26A...309..827S&data_type=PDF_HIGH&whole_paper=YES&type=PRINTER&filetype=.pdf, Saraceno et al., 1996, A&A, 309, 827-839]
|An evolutionary diagram for young stellar objects. deep, DEEP background, IGNORE THIS.
|-
|[http://arxiv.org/pdf/astro-ph/0407102v1.pdf, Beltran et al., 2004, A&A, 426, 941]
|'''BRC 38?''' The dense molecular cores in IRAS 21391 +5802 region. Radio and it sounds like theoretical models. ignore. Three sources found with BIMA (??) observations in 21391+5802; Hard to read as they are trying to use data to fit/model how gas is emitted from the core
|-
|[http://www.aperturephotometry.org, APT tool] Laher et al. 2012, PASP, submitted
| there are two papers that Russ is working on. One is a description of the basics of APT, what it's doing etc., and the other (i think) is more of a "what happens when you use APT to extract the photometry" kind of paper. It's been a while since I've seen these drafts; Russ has been going rounds with the referee on these both. He's started working on them again. Read this if you want to know the details of the inner workings of APT, and how it compares to other proven photometry programs.
|-
|Maoz 2007
|Referenced in the proposal; listed here for completeness. Astrophysics in a Nutshell (Princeton, NJ). i think this is someone's (Debbie's?) textbook. don't need to read her textbook, but you might want to find your own! :)
|-
|}

C-WAYS Spring work

2012-05-06T16:31:54Z

Novatne: /* Papers to discuss */

= Big Picture =

There are three things I'd like to accomplish before our visit:

(1) Start thinking about the issues of spatial resolution. I have developed a worksheet for this. '''WE DECIDED TO DO THIS FIRST.'''

(2) We need read in detail and discuss a short list of carefully selected papers. We'll rotate through our short list of papers, and each of you will get one to present to the group. This is modelling a so-called "journal club", a common occurrence in astronomy departments/groups/centers, where the papers are usually selected out of recent astro-ph mailings. The papers that went into this list came out of the extensive lists you assembled while writing the proposal. I then went through and sorted them into bins -- ones you want to read closely for the astronomy and astrophysics background, and/or for the interpretation, and/or for the big picture... ones from which you need to scavenge data, and you need to read enough to understand what it was they did, and what kinds of data they are reporting... ones you might read if you have time ... and ones you can ignore. '''WE SHOULD START ON THIS AFTER THE RESOLUTION STUFF.'''

(3) Actually doing the data scavenging out of those papers mentioned above. This can be as simple as going to the journal website and saving the data table as plain text, but in a handful of cases, it is a LOT more complicated. I am working on more explanation to go with this so-called source-matching work. Some of the work here springboards off of the journal articles we will read in detail, and some involves scanning additional articles. I AM STILL WORKING ON DEVELOPING A FRAMEWORK FOR THIS. It's ok if we don't get through this by the time of our visit, but it will slow us down for our visit.

= [[C-WAYS Spring calendar]] =

Not all of us are around and able to work on NITARP stuff for the whole spring.

= [[C-WAYS Resolution Worksheet]] =
[[C-WAYS Resolution Worksheet]] I hesitate to make a place for everyone to collect their answers on the wiki; in this case, I would like everyone to independently derive their own numbers and compare notes on the telecon together.

= [[C-WAYS source matching work]]=
[[C-WAYS source matching work]] -- this is an overview of what we need to know, and has some instructions, but no specific tasks doled out.

=Papers to discuss=

The relevant papers are sorted into the categories below.

I've attempted to make a roughly color-coded grouping of the papers below so that they can be presented in appropriate clumps. There are a LOT of papers to discuss, and I'm trying to make it roughly about the same amount of work per person. Here is the order I propose:

[[Summaries and questions from discussed papers]]

#person1 (JC1) -- '''Lauren''' -- Guieu et al 2010, Rebull et al 2011a and 2011b; possibly Johnson et al. 2012 and Rebull et al. 2012, or possibly makes more sense to wait until closer to the visit??
#person2 (JC2) -- '''Peggy''' -- Ogura et al 2002, Sugitani et al 1991 -- includes responsibility of leading the coordinate updating for these. [[SFO Paper Journals Guided Reading]]
#person3 (JC3) -- '''Jackie''' -- Getman et al 2007, Beltran et al 2009, should also probably read Choudhury et al. 2010... but Choudhury et al is meaty enough that it should be the next week after these. [Reading Guide Journal Club[http://coolwiki.ipac.caltech.edu/index.php/Talk:C-WAYS_Spring_work]]
#person4 (JC4) -- '''Debbie''' -- Choudhury et al. 2010 and Chauhan et al. 2009 -- Chauhan et al 2009 is not meaty enough on its own, but is very different than Choudhury et al. 2010, despite sharing a few authors. Choudhury et al. pulls together some of the thoughts started in Getman et al and Beltran et al.
#person5 (JC5) -- '''Bob''' -- Barentsen et al. 2011 and Nakano et al. 2012
#person6 -- appendices of Koenig et al. 2012 and Gutermuth et al 2008?? depending on time, can/should skip these for now.
#then, starting with Ogura et al. 2002 and Sugitani et al. 1991, start updating coordinates.
#then, Gregorio-Hetem et al. 2009, Shevchenko et al. 1999, Wiramihardja et al 1986, and update those coordinates.

This should work like a journal club or even a book club, as in the named person takes the lead in presenting the article. You should present things along the lines of the following:
*the main point of this work was ...
*what they did was ... (high level summary, no need to get into nitty gritty details)
*the most interesting thing i learned was ...
*what they did that i agree with is ...
*what they did that i disagree with is ...
*and, for us here, the reason we should care about this in the context of our planned YSO work is ...

EVERYONE should read the papers ahead of time, but it's kind of expected that the named person will spend the most time reading the paper in question!

==Essential reading==
This group of papers are ones we need to read in 'journal club' style - read and discuss them in detail. They provide the scientific context and/or establishes known facts or conclusions about the bright rimmed clouds, or are similar enough to the process we will use that they are worth the investment of time.
{| border="1"
|'''Paper'''
|'''Notes'''
|'''Presenter/ present with'''
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2010ApJ...720...46G Guieu et al., 2010, ApJ, 720, 46]
|Our paper from the IC2118 team (one of the pre-NITARP teams!). Spitzer-based search for YSOs in IC2118 (near Orion's knee). Large map to start from. Ground-based optical obtained specifically to support these observations, much like us. Note serendipitous discovery of high-proper-motion object. This is something Tim and his students found entirely on their own. We tried to obtain follow-up spectroscopy from Palomar, but had bad weather. I need to go back and try again to get these spectra. There is also an opportunity to look at this environment with WISE! do with other Rebull et al papers - "group R". This can be the lowest priority of that group, as it was written the longest time ago. (may be better to focus time and energy on CG4 paper and Taurus with WISE paper.)
| (do with group R) person1
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2011AJ....142...25R Rebull et al., 2011a, AJ, 142, 25]
|our paper from the CG4+Sa101 team (a NITARP 2009 team) (I gave you hard copy of this one at the AAS.) This is a Spitzer-based search for YSOs in this region. Fairly large map to start from, but smaller than IC2118. Ground-based optical pre-obtained through a collaborator to support the observations, similar to us. (She turns out to also have a bunch of spectra, but has other things in front of them in her queue.)
| (do with group R) person1
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2011ApJS..196....4R Rebull et al., 2011b, ApJS, 196, 4]
|our paper looking for new YSOs in Taurus using WISE -- the one my recent AAS poster was based on, and I also gave you hard copy of this paper at the AAS. This starts from a HUGE region, 260 sq degrees, and something like 2.6 million sources. This is a far larger region than we will do, but we will use a similar approach -- use WISE, obtain a set of possible YSOs, use all available data we can find to weed down the list, compare to the literature-discovered objects, and present a list of candidates.
| (do with group R) person1
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2012AAS...21933705J Johnson et al., 2012, AAS219, 337.05] and Rebull et al. in prep
|'''BRC 27 and 38''': The NITARP 2011 team work here. Spitzer-driven search for YSOs, with ground-based optical photometry to support observations. I think most of you have read the poster already. I am still actively working on the draft; whenever this paper comes up in the rotation, I'll give you whatever I have at that point, even if it's unpolished. Sigh.
| (do with group R) person1
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2002AJ....123.2597O Ogura K., Sugitani K., Pickles A., 2002, AJ, 123, 2597.]
|'''BRC 27, 34, 38?''' Optical + 2MASS; general BRC info. Most recent of the Sugitani series of four we found. Using Halpha to look for YSOs, following up their other work. Relevant issues: using multiple wavelengths to find YSOs (see [[Finding cluster members]]), spatial resolution (see [[Resolution]]), caveats with finding candidates. Nice intro, summary of larger issues, discussion of results. ''Need to be sure that this catalog is included in our list of previously known YSOs in this region'', so we can compare our results to theirs. ''Finding charts'' helpfully included so we can match obj. We should discuss this one in some depth; the other Sugitanis don't need to be done in as much depth ("group S").
|(do with group S) person2
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1991ApJS...77...59S Sugitani K., Fukui Y., Ogura K., 1991, ApJS, 77, 59.]
|'''SFO''' article (discovery paper) - the original SFO, origin of "BRC" terminology, numbers 1-44. covers the northern hemisphere. Has nice intro/summary of what's going on in BRCs, CGs, etc. Nice approach of combining two large surveys -- POSS and IRAS; nice clear discussion of weed-down process. Second half of paper (detailed analysis of IRAS colors, etc.) obsolete but has same essence as what we do now. Review with other Sugitani, Ogura papers, but can skim the surface. You all should have read this in Jan or Feb in the context of our proposal, so maybe we don't have to do this again?
|(do w/ group S) person2
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2007ApJ...654..316G Getman et al. 2007, ApJ, 654, 316]
|'''BRC 38.''' Chandra, 2MASS, and Spitzer. discusses X-ray sources that are associated with young stars in this region, which they call IC 1396N. Studying triggered star formation and protostars in IC 1396N. Good pictures to help with the visualization of 1396N and these sources; evidence of sequential star formation. really nice intro to put it all in context.
Found 117 x-ray sources in IC 1396N; identify some with central cluster, and some with globule. We are likely to have similar issues since we are looking further out from the globule. Objects at a variety of stages. One of the youngest sources detected in x-ray, #66, is found close to the source IRAS 21391+5802 (also called BIMA 2). List of these sources are included. Nice discussions about finding counterparts across wavelengths, contamination by background sources, predictions for more YSOs here to be found. Dense paper! We need to scavenge these data, compare to our results.
|do in detail. compare and contrast! scavenge data. person3 - Jackie 
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2009A%26A...504...97B Beltran, et al., 2009, A&A, 504, 97B]
|'''BRC 38.''' this looked for YSOs inside the BRC using deep JHK. Data tables available online only! Comparison of results to Chandra results from Getman; find no evidence for sequential star formation. get and include their data. lots of discussion of extended emission and comparison to other bands. includes figure using IRAC 4.5 um data, but that's it for Spitzer information. Do in detail, with Getman.
| do in detail, with Getman. scavenge data. person3 - Jackie 
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2010ApJ...717.1067C Choudhury R., Mookerjea, B., Bhatt, H., 2010, ApJ, 717, 1067]
| '''BRC 38''', including IRAC+MIPS+optical phot and spec. *REALLY* nice paper. A tremendous amount of work, very nicely done, and very complete data tables. Go through and discuss this one in detail, scavenge all the data. Does a lot of comparison with Getman and Beltran, trying to reconcile all results. Do this one after or with Getman, Beltran; this one is meaty enough that it probably should get its own week.
| do in detail. scavenge data. do after Getman, Beltran person4
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2009MNRAS.396..964C Chauhan N, Pandey A.K., Ogura K., Ojha D.K., Bhatt B.C., Ghosh S.K., Rawat P.S., 2009, MNRAS, 396, 964]
|'''BRC 27, 38.''' Optical (BVIc)+2mass+spitzer/irac. This one we should spend considerable time on. Testing small-scale sequential star formation suggested in earlier 'group S' papers. nice intro. multiwavelength and contaminants (see [[Finding cluster members]]). As I read this, they are using optical+nir to pick their YSOs, not Spitzer-driven, which is different than what we will do. We ''will'' find a different set of obj, not just classify them differently. We need to get their data tables and compare our results to theirs. Note lots of information is online only, which i attached to article pdf. Note also that some of their online tables don't contain the same sources as the other tables (they should have caught that before publication). analysis of Halpha-age and mass function is a bit of overinterpretation IMHO. need spectroscopy first!!
|do in detail -- read closely, compare and contrast! need to scavenge data too. person4
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2011MNRAS.415..103B Barensten et al., 2011, MNRAS, 415, 103]
|'''BRC 34, 38.''' T tauri candidates and accretion rates using IPHAS (r, i, Halpha); over the entire huge IC1396 complex. this is a useful paper. data tables of 158 objects they think are young; make sure to grab and incorporate what they found. their shortlist may or may not overlap with the fields we care about in brc 34 (cloud D??) and 38 (cloud E), but still very useful to include. if, when we get to that point of needing these objects, they still haven't released the full IPHAS catalog, i will email these guys and ask for source lists at least in the regions we care about (34 and 38)
Also includes some 2 MASS and Spitzer data but only for T Tauri candidates, or possibly only in the center of the complex? need to read closely enough to figure this out. NB: more evidence for sequential/triggered star formation; find increasing accretion rates, disc excesses and younger ages as move away from HD 206267 towards Cloud A (BRC 38 is Cloud E)
| do this in detail, scavenge data person5
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2012AJ....143...61N, Nakano et al., 2012, AJ, 143, 61] [[Media:Nagano_2012.pdf]]
|'''BRC 34, 38.''' Wide Field Survey of Emission-line Stars in IC 1396 (the whole complex). Nakano reports a total of 639 Halpha emission-line stars were detected in an area of 4.2 deg2; they matched to some literature sources, also some Akari sources. Data charts and images showing locations included. We should read this in some detail, and scavenge the data in the regions we care about (brc 34 and 38).
|do this in detail, scavenge data. person5
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2012ApJ...744..130K, Koenig et al., 2012, ApJ, 744, 130]
|WISE-based YSO selection mechanism (inspired by Gutermuth et al. 2008, 2009) described in appendix. Meat of paper on high-mass star formation (we aren't caring about that particularly here -- we mostly want the selection mechanism).
|should read the appendix closely; you can skip the rest if you want. Do with Gutermuth et al 2008 ("colormethods") (person6?)
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2008ApJ...674..336G Gutermuth et al., 2008, ApJ, 674, 336]
|Spitzer color selection (first version - Gutermuth et al. 2009 perturbs it a little) presented here. Some of the selection mechanism is described in the main text, and some is in the appendix. We should read about the selection mechanism.
|should read about the selection mechanism closely; you can skip the rest if you want. Do with Koenig et al. 2012. ("colormethods") (person6?)
|-
|}

==Should scan==
This group of papers is essential to read enough to get the data out of them, but we don't need to really study them in tremendous detail.

{| border="1"
|'''Paper'''
|'''Comments'''
|'''Presenter/ present with'''
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2009A%26A...506..711G Gregorio-Hetem J., Montmerle T., Rodrigues C. V., Marciotto E., Preibisch T., Zinnecker H., 2009, A&A, 506, 711.]
|'''BRC 27.''' ROSAT+VRI data. relevant issues: using multiple wavelengths to find YSOs (see [[Finding cluster members]]), spatial resolution (see [[Resolution]]). Mentions Chandra, XMM data, both of which would cover BRC 27, but I can't find the subsequent analysis that they advertise. We need to include this catalog in what we accumulate, and compare our results to theirs.
|read enough to understand and scavenge data.
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1999MNRAS.310..210S Shevchenko V. S., Ezhkova O. V., Ibrahimov M. A., van den Ancker M. E., Tjin A, Djie H. R. E., 1999, MNRAS, 310, 210.]
|'''BRC 27'''. optical. age, distance estimate. photo'''electric''' UBVR(!) and objective prism spectroscopy for Halpha and spectral types. combined with IRAS. using multiple wavelengths to find YSOs (see [[Finding cluster members]]). We need to include this catalog in what we accumulate, and compare our results to theirs. This is not necessarily a trivial task, as they have photographic 1950 coordinates, which will need to be precessed and then matched to a 2mass source to get a more recent position estimate (they have finding charts, which should help), but it only needs to be done for the objects in our region of interest. It's old methodology (from an Uzbecki telescope), but still good stuff, especially the spectral types. nice "put-it-in-context" discussion at the top for the entire CMa R1 region.
|should read enough to understand and scavenge data.
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1986PASJ...38..395W Wiramihardja S.D., Kogure T., Nakano M., Yoshida S., 1986, PASJ, 38, 395.]
|'''BRC 27.''' Halpha plus photo'''graphic''' UBV.(!) using multiple wavelengths to find YSOs (see [[Finding cluster members]]). We need to include this catalog in what we accumulate, and compare our results to theirs. This is not necessarily a trivial task, as they have photographic 1950 coordinates, which will need to be precessed and then matched to a 2mass source to get a more recent position estimate (they say they have finding charts, which should help), but it only needs to be done for the objects in our field of view (our data). Nice cross matching that they've already done for ''their'' previously identified objects. We don't need to read it in detail; it's a really old paper. But we need to read enough to understand and scavenge data.
|should read enough to understand and scavenge data.
|-
|}

==Can read==
This group of papers is useful but not essential.

{| border="1"
|'''Paper'''
|'''Comments'''
|'''Presenter/ present with'''
|-
|[http://cdsads.u-strasbg.fr/cgi-bin/nph-bib_query?2001A%26A...376..553N&db_key=AST&nosetcookie=1, Nisini et al., 2001, A&A 376, 553]
|'''BRC 38.''' Multiple H2 protostellar jets in the bright-rimmed globule IC 1396-N. Jets are indicative of young stars! The H2 excitation inside the globule could be from either shocks driven by the outflow of YSOs or to UV induced fluorescence from the external ionized region. The conclusion states that the emissions originate from non-dissociative shocks, and that they are associated with the most embedded and youngest objects of the field. The near IR confirms the existence of a cluster of young embedded sources and highly efficient star formation activity. Lots of awkward text that English editing did not catch. Has a list of YSO candidates with some cross-ids. Lots of focus on jets and knots too. Much of these cross ids are probably in Choudhury et al.
| read and scavenge table of YSOs?
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2003ApJ...593L..47R Reipurth et al., 2003, ApJ, 123, 2597-2626]
|'''BRC 38''' Blowout from IC 1396N: The emergence of Herbig-Haro objects in the vicinity of bright-rimmed clouds. Halpha and other narrowband filters. Reipurth et al usually work in these wavelengths to find HH objects. short paper. they have a list of knots in the region, but that's it. Herbig-Haro flow (HH 777) found coming out of ic 1396N; located at 214041.6+581638 While many near-infrared sources were found that apparently are young stars this study focused on the HH flows found. Computer modeling was used to find a match for observed features.
|ok to skip
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2002ApJ...573..246B Beltran et al., 2002, ApJ, 573, 1]
|'''BRC 38''' IRAS 21391+5802: The Molecular Outflow and its Exciting source. VLA and BIMA observations of dust and gas surrounding IRAS source; 3 sources isolated with BIMA, each a YSO. Really good text about the intermediate mass star morphology and evolution compared to that of the low mass stars. There is a table at the end that has point source information of BIMA observations of 5 epochs with bandwidth and spectral resolution. A table with 5 sources and flux density and spectral index, another table with millimeter flux densitites, for 3 BIMA sources, and a table with CO outflow properties. Our focus will be more on the point sources. This paper is really focused on the outflow and its sources. Nice for context of source matching and variations in coordinate accuracy coupled with physical differences in the sources. But not a whole lot appropriate for our point source study.
|ok to skip
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2007A%26A...468L..37F Fuente, et al., 2007, A&A, 468L, 37]
|'''BRC 38.''' very short paper, looking for protostellar clusters in IC 1396N, using PdBI at 1.3, 3.3 mm. Main point as relevant to us -- 4 cores in IC1396N. Yes, strongly tied to Neri et al 2007 paper.
|ok to skip
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2007A%26A...468L..33N Neri, et al. 2007, A&A, 468, 33]
|'''BRC 38.''' found a cluster of hot cores in 1396N. again, a very short paper using PdBI at 1.3, 3.3 mm. Main point as relevant to us -- cluster of cores here. Yes, strongly tied to Fuente et al 2007 paper.
|ok to skip
|-
|}

==For the over achievers==
Read if you are motivated to do so.

{| border="1"
|'''Paper'''
|'''Comments'''
|'''Presenter/ present with'''
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1994ApJS...92..163S Sugitani K., Ogura K., 1994, ApJS, 92, 163.]
|SFO/BRC catalog/nomenclature continued into the southern hemisphere. (NB: all our obj are in the N. Hem paper!). SFO/BRC numbers 45-89. Second (by time) in the Sugitani series. Again, much of detailed analysis now obsolete. Review with other Sugitani, Ogura papers, but can skim the surface.
|if do, do w/ group S
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1995ApJ...455L..39S Sugitani K., Tamura M., Ogura K., 1995, ApJ, 455, L39.]
| JHK follow-up of IRAS sources from SFO. relevant issues: using multiple wavelengths to find YSOs (see [[Finding cluster members]]), spatial resolution (see [[Resolution]]). Shame on them for not publishing a data table or even a figure with the locations of everything they identify as a YSO! BRC 27 is one that they choose to include in a finder chart, but doesn't do us much good. Nice summary of larger issues, timescales. Short paper. If do, review with other Sugitani, Ogura papers, but can skim the surface.
|if do, do w/ group S
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2007AJ....133.1528C Connelley et al., 2007, AJ, 133, 1528]
|'''BRC 38''' Infrared Nebulae around Young stellar objects. IRAS 21391+5802 - images show jet-like nebula and large patches of nebulosity. IRAS source thought to be a low mass Class 0 source (Beltran et al. 2002, 2004). This source has H2 emission in the form of bow shocks. We need to check the source in our images, but it's likely bright enough that it appears in many of the other papers.
|ok to skip
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2008ApJ...675.1352V Valdettaro R., Migenes V., Trinidad M.A., Brand J., Palla F., 2008, ApJ, 675, 1352.]
|'''BRC 34. (others?)''' VLA obs of water masers, following up 2005 work. BRC 34 observed, not detected. nice intro that puts their work in context with the rest of what they've done. Lots more non-dets, interpreted as forming low mass and/or older stars than had been assumed. I think they've gotten the interpretation spot-on.
|scan if you want
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2002A%26A...388..172S Soares J.B., Bica E., 2002, A&A, 388, 172.]
|'''BRC 27.''' OLD 2MASS. Editing ghastly. Really simple paper. In theory, we should include their results in what we accumulate, and compare our results, though (a) they are using "prehistoric" 2mass data reduction, and (b) they really make it hard, as they don't even tell us how many YSOs they think they've found, just the numbers of objects for which they've done photometry. So I don't think we really can compare our results to this one. However, nice "put it in larger context" discussion with wide-field IRAS image.
|skip it unless you want to see the IRAS image.
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2003A%26A...404..217S Soares J.B., Bica E., 2003, A&A, 404, 217.]
|2MASS + optical. Simple paper elsewhere in the same cloud as BRC 27. Same sort of 2MASS analysis as their 2002 paper. Still archaic 2MASS data reduction. Skip it.
| skip it.
|-
|Allen L., et al. 2011, American Astronomical Society, BAAS, 43, 258.15.
|Poster from AAS ... statistical measurement of YSOs in all of their BRC IRAC observations. not a lot of content beyond the images and their 'big picture' work.
|skip it.
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2004A%26A...426..535M Morgan L. K., Thompson M. A., Urquhart J. S., White G. J., Mio J., 2004, A&A, 426, 535.] note has erratum too.
|'''BRC 27, 34, 38?''' Radio and mid-ir survey. NRAO/NVSS/VLA (20cm), DSS, MSX data. both 27 and 34 in here, though 34 is a non-det. nice intro to the physics, though they get into far more math than we need to. relevant issues: this radio is thermal (free-free emission). they smoothed data -- spatial resolution (see [[Resolution]]). another nice use of three big surveys. sfo 27 in the online-only fig 1. T3 also online only. identifying ionizing source is not the same as identifying point sources in the images themselves. it's not clear that this is all that relevant for us. part of a PhD thesis.
|Drop... if you want to, read with "Group M" but skip the math.
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2008A%26A...477..557M Morgan L. K., Thompson M. A., Urquhart J. S., White G. J., 2008, A&A, 477, 557.]
|'''BRC 27, 34, 38?''' SCUBA submm survey (450+850 um) plus IRAS (12, 25, 60, 100 um), MSX, and 2MASS (erroneously identified as 2mm but really 2 micron). both 27 and 34 in here. next part of a PhD thesis. lots of nice overview, summary (as would be expected for a thesis) spread throughout article. seems to be a really long paper, but is almost all figures in the appendix. relevant issues: how the objects they are talking about (at long and short wavelengths) compare to what we see in our images (see [[Resolution]] and their, e.g., fig 4). Forward reference to Spitzer data analysis like ours but then says have already looked for GLIMPSE, 24 um obs. They are only looking at low-res flux densities. Appendix may be useful for scavenging additional targets if we want to do more analysis on more targets.
|Probably the most worth reading of "Group M"; skip the math.
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2009MNRAS.400.1726M Morgan L. K., Urquhart J. S., Thompson M. A., 2009, MNRAS, 400, 1726.]
|'''BRC 27, 34, 38?''' Radio, mid-ir, SCUBA observations; redefined SFO catalog. JCMT (CO) observations. 22 arcsec resolution! (see [[Resolution]] and their fig 2 here.) Likely last of his thesis, or first of his postdoc. (Look, his address changed, so this was published while he was a postdoc, but it's the same collaborators as before at his old institution, so my guess it's leftover thesis work.) They think 27 has been triggered, 34 not; this provides a nice compare-and-contrast opportunity for our write-up. Quick read.
|read with "Group M" for fig 2.
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2005A%26A...443..535V Valdettaro R., Palla F., Brand J., Cesaroni R., 2005, A&A, 443, 535.]
|Radio survey of water masers. 22.2 GHz (=1.35 cm if I did my math right). Really nice intro summarizing the big picture. Following up on Morgan and similar work asserting high-mass stars forming in BRCs by looking for masers. Our objects observed, not detected. Finding lots of non-detections, suggesting that low-mass stars forming instead. Nice, short writeup of basically a non-result, and I think they've gotten the interpretation spot-on. Nice to at least scan after the Morgan stuff for context. larger issues: spatial resolution (see [[Resolution]]). Again!! :)
|scan if you want with group M.
|-
|[http://arxiv.org/pdf/0909.3312v1.pdf Wang et al., 2009, A&A, 504, 369]
|The relation between 13CO j=2-1 line width in moelcular clouds and bolometric luminosity of associated IRAS sources. Radio. ignore at least for now IRAS 21391+5802 - suggests that it is a star forming cluster where high-mass stars will form
|
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1962ApJS....7....1L, Lynds, 1962, ApJS, 7, 1]
|The Lynds Dark Nebula paper. some of you were interested in the history of this. At least one if not all three of our BRCs are also associated with Lynds clouds. Read if you want to.
|-
|}

==Do not bother==
This group of paper has passing relevance to the science and the goals of NITARP. They are useful references for your readers to follow up on details. It is sufficient that one person (usually Luisa) has enough knowledge to know that the citation is proper. Reading the full paper is not essential.

{| border="1"
|'''Paper'''
|'''Comments'''
|-
|Makovoz D., Marleau F. R., 2005, PASP, 117, 1113.
|MOPEX info. VERY technical, not a manual, and not all that terribly relevant to what we're doing. skip it. you shouldn't have to get into MOPEX at all, but if you do, there is lots of online help in MOPEX that is really good, and also lots of documentation (aimed at professional astronomers, admittedly) on the SSC website.
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2010AJ....140.1868W Wright et al., 2010, AJ, 140, 1868]
|WISE "seminal paper" reference. Describes the mission. As I recall, there is some discussion of the data products, but for the complete discussion of data products in more of a manual form, consult the document that accompanies the delivery. Read this paper if you want a somewhat technical overview of the mission.
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2004ApJS..154..309W Werner et al., 2004, ApJS, 154, 309]
|Spitzer "seminar paper" reference. Describes the mission. No discussion of data products as I recall. Read this paper if you want a somewhat technical overview of the mission.
|-
|[http://articles.adsabs.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/nph-iarticle_query?1956BAN....13...77P&data_type=PDF_HIGH&whole_paper=YES&type=PRINTER&filetype=.pdf Bulletin of Astro. Instit. of the Netherlands, Vol 13, 471, 77-88, Pottasch et al., 1956, Bull. Astro. Instit. Netherlands, 13, 471]
|A study of bright rims in diffuse nebulae. VERY early work describing the location, shape of, density of, brightness of bright rim clouds in several nebula, including IC 1396 and Brc 38. So old that not really useful for assembling list of YSOs in region. skip.
|-
|[http://articles.adsabs.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/nph-iarticle_query?1999sf99.proc..381O&data_type=PDF_HIGH&whole_paper=YES&type=PRINTER&filetype=.pdf Ogura & Sugitani, 1999, Proceedings of Star Formation, pg 381-382]
|A large number of Halpha Emission Stars associated with BRCs. Conference proceedings, old at that. i'm sure this analysis is already written up in their later papers. ignore this one.
|-
|[http://articles.adsabs.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/nph-iarticle_query?1996A%26A...309..827S&data_type=PDF_HIGH&whole_paper=YES&type=PRINTER&filetype=.pdf, Saraceno et al., 1996, A&A, 309, 827-839]
|An evolutionary diagram for young stellar objects. deep, DEEP background, IGNORE THIS.
|-
|[http://arxiv.org/pdf/astro-ph/0407102v1.pdf, Beltran et al., 2004, A&A, 426, 941]
|'''BRC 38?''' The dense molecular cores in IRAS 21391 +5802 region. Radio and it sounds like theoretical models. ignore. Three sources found with BIMA (??) observations in 21391+5802; Hard to read as they are trying to use data to fit/model how gas is emitted from the core
|-
|[http://www.aperturephotometry.org, APT tool] Laher et al. 2012, PASP, submitted
| there are two papers that Russ is working on. One is a description of the basics of APT, what it's doing etc., and the other (i think) is more of a "what happens when you use APT to extract the photometry" kind of paper. It's been a while since I've seen these drafts; Russ has been going rounds with the referee on these both. He's started working on them again. Read this if you want to know the details of the inner workings of APT, and how it compares to other proven photometry programs.
|-
|Maoz 2007
|Referenced in the proposal; listed here for completeness. Astrophysics in a Nutshell (Princeton, NJ). i think this is someone's (Debbie's?) textbook. don't need to read her textbook, but you might want to find your own! :)
|-
|}

C-WAYS Spring work

2012-05-06T16:30:16Z

Novatne: /* Papers to discuss */

= Big Picture =

There are three things I'd like to accomplish before our visit:

(1) Start thinking about the issues of spatial resolution. I have developed a worksheet for this. '''WE DECIDED TO DO THIS FIRST.'''

(2) We need read in detail and discuss a short list of carefully selected papers. We'll rotate through our short list of papers, and each of you will get one to present to the group. This is modelling a so-called "journal club", a common occurrence in astronomy departments/groups/centers, where the papers are usually selected out of recent astro-ph mailings. The papers that went into this list came out of the extensive lists you assembled while writing the proposal. I then went through and sorted them into bins -- ones you want to read closely for the astronomy and astrophysics background, and/or for the interpretation, and/or for the big picture... ones from which you need to scavenge data, and you need to read enough to understand what it was they did, and what kinds of data they are reporting... ones you might read if you have time ... and ones you can ignore. '''WE SHOULD START ON THIS AFTER THE RESOLUTION STUFF.'''

(3) Actually doing the data scavenging out of those papers mentioned above. This can be as simple as going to the journal website and saving the data table as plain text, but in a handful of cases, it is a LOT more complicated. I am working on more explanation to go with this so-called source-matching work. Some of the work here springboards off of the journal articles we will read in detail, and some involves scanning additional articles. I AM STILL WORKING ON DEVELOPING A FRAMEWORK FOR THIS. It's ok if we don't get through this by the time of our visit, but it will slow us down for our visit.

= [[C-WAYS Spring calendar]] =

Not all of us are around and able to work on NITARP stuff for the whole spring.

= [[C-WAYS Resolution Worksheet]] =
[[C-WAYS Resolution Worksheet]] I hesitate to make a place for everyone to collect their answers on the wiki; in this case, I would like everyone to independently derive their own numbers and compare notes on the telecon together.

= [[C-WAYS source matching work]]=
[[C-WAYS source matching work]] -- this is an overview of what we need to know, and has some instructions, but no specific tasks doled out.

=Papers to discuss=

The relevant papers are sorted into the categories below.

I've attempted to make a roughly color-coded grouping of the papers below so that they can be presented in appropriate clumps. There are a LOT of papers to discuss, and I'm trying to make it roughly about the same amount of work per person. Here is the order I propose:

[[Media:Summaries and questions from discussed papers]]

#person1 (JC1) -- '''Lauren''' -- Guieu et al 2010, Rebull et al 2011a and 2011b; possibly Johnson et al. 2012 and Rebull et al. 2012, or possibly makes more sense to wait until closer to the visit??
#person2 (JC2) -- '''Peggy''' -- Ogura et al 2002, Sugitani et al 1991 -- includes responsibility of leading the coordinate updating for these. [[SFO Paper Journals Guided Reading]]
#person3 (JC3) -- '''Jackie''' -- Getman et al 2007, Beltran et al 2009, should also probably read Choudhury et al. 2010... but Choudhury et al is meaty enough that it should be the next week after these. [Reading Guide Journal Club[http://coolwiki.ipac.caltech.edu/index.php/Talk:C-WAYS_Spring_work]]
#person4 (JC4) -- '''Debbie''' -- Choudhury et al. 2010 and Chauhan et al. 2009 -- Chauhan et al 2009 is not meaty enough on its own, but is very different than Choudhury et al. 2010, despite sharing a few authors. Choudhury et al. pulls together some of the thoughts started in Getman et al and Beltran et al.
#person5 (JC5) -- '''Bob''' -- Barentsen et al. 2011 and Nakano et al. 2012
#person6 -- appendices of Koenig et al. 2012 and Gutermuth et al 2008?? depending on time, can/should skip these for now.
#then, starting with Ogura et al. 2002 and Sugitani et al. 1991, start updating coordinates.
#then, Gregorio-Hetem et al. 2009, Shevchenko et al. 1999, Wiramihardja et al 1986, and update those coordinates.

This should work like a journal club or even a book club, as in the named person takes the lead in presenting the article. You should present things along the lines of the following:
*the main point of this work was ...
*what they did was ... (high level summary, no need to get into nitty gritty details)
*the most interesting thing i learned was ...
*what they did that i agree with is ...
*what they did that i disagree with is ...
*and, for us here, the reason we should care about this in the context of our planned YSO work is ...

EVERYONE should read the papers ahead of time, but it's kind of expected that the named person will spend the most time reading the paper in question!

==Essential reading==
This group of papers are ones we need to read in 'journal club' style - read and discuss them in detail. They provide the scientific context and/or establishes known facts or conclusions about the bright rimmed clouds, or are similar enough to the process we will use that they are worth the investment of time.
{| border="1"
|'''Paper'''
|'''Notes'''
|'''Presenter/ present with'''
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2010ApJ...720...46G Guieu et al., 2010, ApJ, 720, 46]
|Our paper from the IC2118 team (one of the pre-NITARP teams!). Spitzer-based search for YSOs in IC2118 (near Orion's knee). Large map to start from. Ground-based optical obtained specifically to support these observations, much like us. Note serendipitous discovery of high-proper-motion object. This is something Tim and his students found entirely on their own. We tried to obtain follow-up spectroscopy from Palomar, but had bad weather. I need to go back and try again to get these spectra. There is also an opportunity to look at this environment with WISE! do with other Rebull et al papers - "group R". This can be the lowest priority of that group, as it was written the longest time ago. (may be better to focus time and energy on CG4 paper and Taurus with WISE paper.)
| (do with group R) person1
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2011AJ....142...25R Rebull et al., 2011a, AJ, 142, 25]
|our paper from the CG4+Sa101 team (a NITARP 2009 team) (I gave you hard copy of this one at the AAS.) This is a Spitzer-based search for YSOs in this region. Fairly large map to start from, but smaller than IC2118. Ground-based optical pre-obtained through a collaborator to support the observations, similar to us. (She turns out to also have a bunch of spectra, but has other things in front of them in her queue.)
| (do with group R) person1
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2011ApJS..196....4R Rebull et al., 2011b, ApJS, 196, 4]
|our paper looking for new YSOs in Taurus using WISE -- the one my recent AAS poster was based on, and I also gave you hard copy of this paper at the AAS. This starts from a HUGE region, 260 sq degrees, and something like 2.6 million sources. This is a far larger region than we will do, but we will use a similar approach -- use WISE, obtain a set of possible YSOs, use all available data we can find to weed down the list, compare to the literature-discovered objects, and present a list of candidates.
| (do with group R) person1
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2012AAS...21933705J Johnson et al., 2012, AAS219, 337.05] and Rebull et al. in prep
|'''BRC 27 and 38''': The NITARP 2011 team work here. Spitzer-driven search for YSOs, with ground-based optical photometry to support observations. I think most of you have read the poster already. I am still actively working on the draft; whenever this paper comes up in the rotation, I'll give you whatever I have at that point, even if it's unpolished. Sigh.
| (do with group R) person1
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2002AJ....123.2597O Ogura K., Sugitani K., Pickles A., 2002, AJ, 123, 2597.]
|'''BRC 27, 34, 38?''' Optical + 2MASS; general BRC info. Most recent of the Sugitani series of four we found. Using Halpha to look for YSOs, following up their other work. Relevant issues: using multiple wavelengths to find YSOs (see [[Finding cluster members]]), spatial resolution (see [[Resolution]]), caveats with finding candidates. Nice intro, summary of larger issues, discussion of results. ''Need to be sure that this catalog is included in our list of previously known YSOs in this region'', so we can compare our results to theirs. ''Finding charts'' helpfully included so we can match obj. We should discuss this one in some depth; the other Sugitanis don't need to be done in as much depth ("group S").
|(do with group S) person2
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1991ApJS...77...59S Sugitani K., Fukui Y., Ogura K., 1991, ApJS, 77, 59.]
|'''SFO''' article (discovery paper) - the original SFO, origin of "BRC" terminology, numbers 1-44. covers the northern hemisphere. Has nice intro/summary of what's going on in BRCs, CGs, etc. Nice approach of combining two large surveys -- POSS and IRAS; nice clear discussion of weed-down process. Second half of paper (detailed analysis of IRAS colors, etc.) obsolete but has same essence as what we do now. Review with other Sugitani, Ogura papers, but can skim the surface. You all should have read this in Jan or Feb in the context of our proposal, so maybe we don't have to do this again?
|(do w/ group S) person2
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2007ApJ...654..316G Getman et al. 2007, ApJ, 654, 316]
|'''BRC 38.''' Chandra, 2MASS, and Spitzer. discusses X-ray sources that are associated with young stars in this region, which they call IC 1396N. Studying triggered star formation and protostars in IC 1396N. Good pictures to help with the visualization of 1396N and these sources; evidence of sequential star formation. really nice intro to put it all in context.
Found 117 x-ray sources in IC 1396N; identify some with central cluster, and some with globule. We are likely to have similar issues since we are looking further out from the globule. Objects at a variety of stages. One of the youngest sources detected in x-ray, #66, is found close to the source IRAS 21391+5802 (also called BIMA 2). List of these sources are included. Nice discussions about finding counterparts across wavelengths, contamination by background sources, predictions for more YSOs here to be found. Dense paper! We need to scavenge these data, compare to our results.
|do in detail. compare and contrast! scavenge data. person3 - Jackie 
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2009A%26A...504...97B Beltran, et al., 2009, A&A, 504, 97B]
|'''BRC 38.''' this looked for YSOs inside the BRC using deep JHK. Data tables available online only! Comparison of results to Chandra results from Getman; find no evidence for sequential star formation. get and include their data. lots of discussion of extended emission and comparison to other bands. includes figure using IRAC 4.5 um data, but that's it for Spitzer information. Do in detail, with Getman.
| do in detail, with Getman. scavenge data. person3 - Jackie 
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2010ApJ...717.1067C Choudhury R., Mookerjea, B., Bhatt, H., 2010, ApJ, 717, 1067]
| '''BRC 38''', including IRAC+MIPS+optical phot and spec. *REALLY* nice paper. A tremendous amount of work, very nicely done, and very complete data tables. Go through and discuss this one in detail, scavenge all the data. Does a lot of comparison with Getman and Beltran, trying to reconcile all results. Do this one after or with Getman, Beltran; this one is meaty enough that it probably should get its own week.
| do in detail. scavenge data. do after Getman, Beltran person4
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2009MNRAS.396..964C Chauhan N, Pandey A.K., Ogura K., Ojha D.K., Bhatt B.C., Ghosh S.K., Rawat P.S., 2009, MNRAS, 396, 964]
|'''BRC 27, 38.''' Optical (BVIc)+2mass+spitzer/irac. This one we should spend considerable time on. Testing small-scale sequential star formation suggested in earlier 'group S' papers. nice intro. multiwavelength and contaminants (see [[Finding cluster members]]). As I read this, they are using optical+nir to pick their YSOs, not Spitzer-driven, which is different than what we will do. We ''will'' find a different set of obj, not just classify them differently. We need to get their data tables and compare our results to theirs. Note lots of information is online only, which i attached to article pdf. Note also that some of their online tables don't contain the same sources as the other tables (they should have caught that before publication). analysis of Halpha-age and mass function is a bit of overinterpretation IMHO. need spectroscopy first!!
|do in detail -- read closely, compare and contrast! need to scavenge data too. person4
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2011MNRAS.415..103B Barensten et al., 2011, MNRAS, 415, 103]
|'''BRC 34, 38.''' T tauri candidates and accretion rates using IPHAS (r, i, Halpha); over the entire huge IC1396 complex. this is a useful paper. data tables of 158 objects they think are young; make sure to grab and incorporate what they found. their shortlist may or may not overlap with the fields we care about in brc 34 (cloud D??) and 38 (cloud E), but still very useful to include. if, when we get to that point of needing these objects, they still haven't released the full IPHAS catalog, i will email these guys and ask for source lists at least in the regions we care about (34 and 38)
Also includes some 2 MASS and Spitzer data but only for T Tauri candidates, or possibly only in the center of the complex? need to read closely enough to figure this out. NB: more evidence for sequential/triggered star formation; find increasing accretion rates, disc excesses and younger ages as move away from HD 206267 towards Cloud A (BRC 38 is Cloud E)
| do this in detail, scavenge data person5
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2012AJ....143...61N, Nakano et al., 2012, AJ, 143, 61] [[Media:Nagano_2012.pdf]]
|'''BRC 34, 38.''' Wide Field Survey of Emission-line Stars in IC 1396 (the whole complex). Nakano reports a total of 639 Halpha emission-line stars were detected in an area of 4.2 deg2; they matched to some literature sources, also some Akari sources. Data charts and images showing locations included. We should read this in some detail, and scavenge the data in the regions we care about (brc 34 and 38).
|do this in detail, scavenge data. person5
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2012ApJ...744..130K, Koenig et al., 2012, ApJ, 744, 130]
|WISE-based YSO selection mechanism (inspired by Gutermuth et al. 2008, 2009) described in appendix. Meat of paper on high-mass star formation (we aren't caring about that particularly here -- we mostly want the selection mechanism).
|should read the appendix closely; you can skip the rest if you want. Do with Gutermuth et al 2008 ("colormethods") (person6?)
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2008ApJ...674..336G Gutermuth et al., 2008, ApJ, 674, 336]
|Spitzer color selection (first version - Gutermuth et al. 2009 perturbs it a little) presented here. Some of the selection mechanism is described in the main text, and some is in the appendix. We should read about the selection mechanism.
|should read about the selection mechanism closely; you can skip the rest if you want. Do with Koenig et al. 2012. ("colormethods") (person6?)
|-
|}

==Should scan==
This group of papers is essential to read enough to get the data out of them, but we don't need to really study them in tremendous detail.

{| border="1"
|'''Paper'''
|'''Comments'''
|'''Presenter/ present with'''
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2009A%26A...506..711G Gregorio-Hetem J., Montmerle T., Rodrigues C. V., Marciotto E., Preibisch T., Zinnecker H., 2009, A&A, 506, 711.]
|'''BRC 27.''' ROSAT+VRI data. relevant issues: using multiple wavelengths to find YSOs (see [[Finding cluster members]]), spatial resolution (see [[Resolution]]). Mentions Chandra, XMM data, both of which would cover BRC 27, but I can't find the subsequent analysis that they advertise. We need to include this catalog in what we accumulate, and compare our results to theirs.
|read enough to understand and scavenge data.
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1999MNRAS.310..210S Shevchenko V. S., Ezhkova O. V., Ibrahimov M. A., van den Ancker M. E., Tjin A, Djie H. R. E., 1999, MNRAS, 310, 210.]
|'''BRC 27'''. optical. age, distance estimate. photo'''electric''' UBVR(!) and objective prism spectroscopy for Halpha and spectral types. combined with IRAS. using multiple wavelengths to find YSOs (see [[Finding cluster members]]). We need to include this catalog in what we accumulate, and compare our results to theirs. This is not necessarily a trivial task, as they have photographic 1950 coordinates, which will need to be precessed and then matched to a 2mass source to get a more recent position estimate (they have finding charts, which should help), but it only needs to be done for the objects in our region of interest. It's old methodology (from an Uzbecki telescope), but still good stuff, especially the spectral types. nice "put-it-in-context" discussion at the top for the entire CMa R1 region.
|should read enough to understand and scavenge data.
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1986PASJ...38..395W Wiramihardja S.D., Kogure T., Nakano M., Yoshida S., 1986, PASJ, 38, 395.]
|'''BRC 27.''' Halpha plus photo'''graphic''' UBV.(!) using multiple wavelengths to find YSOs (see [[Finding cluster members]]). We need to include this catalog in what we accumulate, and compare our results to theirs. This is not necessarily a trivial task, as they have photographic 1950 coordinates, which will need to be precessed and then matched to a 2mass source to get a more recent position estimate (they say they have finding charts, which should help), but it only needs to be done for the objects in our field of view (our data). Nice cross matching that they've already done for ''their'' previously identified objects. We don't need to read it in detail; it's a really old paper. But we need to read enough to understand and scavenge data.
|should read enough to understand and scavenge data.
|-
|}

==Can read==
This group of papers is useful but not essential.

{| border="1"
|'''Paper'''
|'''Comments'''
|'''Presenter/ present with'''
|-
|[http://cdsads.u-strasbg.fr/cgi-bin/nph-bib_query?2001A%26A...376..553N&db_key=AST&nosetcookie=1, Nisini et al., 2001, A&A 376, 553]
|'''BRC 38.''' Multiple H2 protostellar jets in the bright-rimmed globule IC 1396-N. Jets are indicative of young stars! The H2 excitation inside the globule could be from either shocks driven by the outflow of YSOs or to UV induced fluorescence from the external ionized region. The conclusion states that the emissions originate from non-dissociative shocks, and that they are associated with the most embedded and youngest objects of the field. The near IR confirms the existence of a cluster of young embedded sources and highly efficient star formation activity. Lots of awkward text that English editing did not catch. Has a list of YSO candidates with some cross-ids. Lots of focus on jets and knots too. Much of these cross ids are probably in Choudhury et al.
| read and scavenge table of YSOs?
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2003ApJ...593L..47R Reipurth et al., 2003, ApJ, 123, 2597-2626]
|'''BRC 38''' Blowout from IC 1396N: The emergence of Herbig-Haro objects in the vicinity of bright-rimmed clouds. Halpha and other narrowband filters. Reipurth et al usually work in these wavelengths to find HH objects. short paper. they have a list of knots in the region, but that's it. Herbig-Haro flow (HH 777) found coming out of ic 1396N; located at 214041.6+581638 While many near-infrared sources were found that apparently are young stars this study focused on the HH flows found. Computer modeling was used to find a match for observed features.
|ok to skip
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2002ApJ...573..246B Beltran et al., 2002, ApJ, 573, 1]
|'''BRC 38''' IRAS 21391+5802: The Molecular Outflow and its Exciting source. VLA and BIMA observations of dust and gas surrounding IRAS source; 3 sources isolated with BIMA, each a YSO. Really good text about the intermediate mass star morphology and evolution compared to that of the low mass stars. There is a table at the end that has point source information of BIMA observations of 5 epochs with bandwidth and spectral resolution. A table with 5 sources and flux density and spectral index, another table with millimeter flux densitites, for 3 BIMA sources, and a table with CO outflow properties. Our focus will be more on the point sources. This paper is really focused on the outflow and its sources. Nice for context of source matching and variations in coordinate accuracy coupled with physical differences in the sources. But not a whole lot appropriate for our point source study.
|ok to skip
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2007A%26A...468L..37F Fuente, et al., 2007, A&A, 468L, 37]
|'''BRC 38.''' very short paper, looking for protostellar clusters in IC 1396N, using PdBI at 1.3, 3.3 mm. Main point as relevant to us -- 4 cores in IC1396N. Yes, strongly tied to Neri et al 2007 paper.
|ok to skip
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2007A%26A...468L..33N Neri, et al. 2007, A&A, 468, 33]
|'''BRC 38.''' found a cluster of hot cores in 1396N. again, a very short paper using PdBI at 1.3, 3.3 mm. Main point as relevant to us -- cluster of cores here. Yes, strongly tied to Fuente et al 2007 paper.
|ok to skip
|-
|}

==For the over achievers==
Read if you are motivated to do so.

{| border="1"
|'''Paper'''
|'''Comments'''
|'''Presenter/ present with'''
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1994ApJS...92..163S Sugitani K., Ogura K., 1994, ApJS, 92, 163.]
|SFO/BRC catalog/nomenclature continued into the southern hemisphere. (NB: all our obj are in the N. Hem paper!). SFO/BRC numbers 45-89. Second (by time) in the Sugitani series. Again, much of detailed analysis now obsolete. Review with other Sugitani, Ogura papers, but can skim the surface.
|if do, do w/ group S
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1995ApJ...455L..39S Sugitani K., Tamura M., Ogura K., 1995, ApJ, 455, L39.]
| JHK follow-up of IRAS sources from SFO. relevant issues: using multiple wavelengths to find YSOs (see [[Finding cluster members]]), spatial resolution (see [[Resolution]]). Shame on them for not publishing a data table or even a figure with the locations of everything they identify as a YSO! BRC 27 is one that they choose to include in a finder chart, but doesn't do us much good. Nice summary of larger issues, timescales. Short paper. If do, review with other Sugitani, Ogura papers, but can skim the surface.
|if do, do w/ group S
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2007AJ....133.1528C Connelley et al., 2007, AJ, 133, 1528]
|'''BRC 38''' Infrared Nebulae around Young stellar objects. IRAS 21391+5802 - images show jet-like nebula and large patches of nebulosity. IRAS source thought to be a low mass Class 0 source (Beltran et al. 2002, 2004). This source has H2 emission in the form of bow shocks. We need to check the source in our images, but it's likely bright enough that it appears in many of the other papers.
|ok to skip
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2008ApJ...675.1352V Valdettaro R., Migenes V., Trinidad M.A., Brand J., Palla F., 2008, ApJ, 675, 1352.]
|'''BRC 34. (others?)''' VLA obs of water masers, following up 2005 work. BRC 34 observed, not detected. nice intro that puts their work in context with the rest of what they've done. Lots more non-dets, interpreted as forming low mass and/or older stars than had been assumed. I think they've gotten the interpretation spot-on.
|scan if you want
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2002A%26A...388..172S Soares J.B., Bica E., 2002, A&A, 388, 172.]
|'''BRC 27.''' OLD 2MASS. Editing ghastly. Really simple paper. In theory, we should include their results in what we accumulate, and compare our results, though (a) they are using "prehistoric" 2mass data reduction, and (b) they really make it hard, as they don't even tell us how many YSOs they think they've found, just the numbers of objects for which they've done photometry. So I don't think we really can compare our results to this one. However, nice "put it in larger context" discussion with wide-field IRAS image.
|skip it unless you want to see the IRAS image.
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2003A%26A...404..217S Soares J.B., Bica E., 2003, A&A, 404, 217.]
|2MASS + optical. Simple paper elsewhere in the same cloud as BRC 27. Same sort of 2MASS analysis as their 2002 paper. Still archaic 2MASS data reduction. Skip it.
| skip it.
|-
|Allen L., et al. 2011, American Astronomical Society, BAAS, 43, 258.15.
|Poster from AAS ... statistical measurement of YSOs in all of their BRC IRAC observations. not a lot of content beyond the images and their 'big picture' work.
|skip it.
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2004A%26A...426..535M Morgan L. K., Thompson M. A., Urquhart J. S., White G. J., Mio J., 2004, A&A, 426, 535.] note has erratum too.
|'''BRC 27, 34, 38?''' Radio and mid-ir survey. NRAO/NVSS/VLA (20cm), DSS, MSX data. both 27 and 34 in here, though 34 is a non-det. nice intro to the physics, though they get into far more math than we need to. relevant issues: this radio is thermal (free-free emission). they smoothed data -- spatial resolution (see [[Resolution]]). another nice use of three big surveys. sfo 27 in the online-only fig 1. T3 also online only. identifying ionizing source is not the same as identifying point sources in the images themselves. it's not clear that this is all that relevant for us. part of a PhD thesis.
|Drop... if you want to, read with "Group M" but skip the math.
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2008A%26A...477..557M Morgan L. K., Thompson M. A., Urquhart J. S., White G. J., 2008, A&A, 477, 557.]
|'''BRC 27, 34, 38?''' SCUBA submm survey (450+850 um) plus IRAS (12, 25, 60, 100 um), MSX, and 2MASS (erroneously identified as 2mm but really 2 micron). both 27 and 34 in here. next part of a PhD thesis. lots of nice overview, summary (as would be expected for a thesis) spread throughout article. seems to be a really long paper, but is almost all figures in the appendix. relevant issues: how the objects they are talking about (at long and short wavelengths) compare to what we see in our images (see [[Resolution]] and their, e.g., fig 4). Forward reference to Spitzer data analysis like ours but then says have already looked for GLIMPSE, 24 um obs. They are only looking at low-res flux densities. Appendix may be useful for scavenging additional targets if we want to do more analysis on more targets.
|Probably the most worth reading of "Group M"; skip the math.
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2009MNRAS.400.1726M Morgan L. K., Urquhart J. S., Thompson M. A., 2009, MNRAS, 400, 1726.]
|'''BRC 27, 34, 38?''' Radio, mid-ir, SCUBA observations; redefined SFO catalog. JCMT (CO) observations. 22 arcsec resolution! (see [[Resolution]] and their fig 2 here.) Likely last of his thesis, or first of his postdoc. (Look, his address changed, so this was published while he was a postdoc, but it's the same collaborators as before at his old institution, so my guess it's leftover thesis work.) They think 27 has been triggered, 34 not; this provides a nice compare-and-contrast opportunity for our write-up. Quick read.
|read with "Group M" for fig 2.
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2005A%26A...443..535V Valdettaro R., Palla F., Brand J., Cesaroni R., 2005, A&A, 443, 535.]
|Radio survey of water masers. 22.2 GHz (=1.35 cm if I did my math right). Really nice intro summarizing the big picture. Following up on Morgan and similar work asserting high-mass stars forming in BRCs by looking for masers. Our objects observed, not detected. Finding lots of non-detections, suggesting that low-mass stars forming instead. Nice, short writeup of basically a non-result, and I think they've gotten the interpretation spot-on. Nice to at least scan after the Morgan stuff for context. larger issues: spatial resolution (see [[Resolution]]). Again!! :)
|scan if you want with group M.
|-
|[http://arxiv.org/pdf/0909.3312v1.pdf Wang et al., 2009, A&A, 504, 369]
|The relation between 13CO j=2-1 line width in moelcular clouds and bolometric luminosity of associated IRAS sources. Radio. ignore at least for now IRAS 21391+5802 - suggests that it is a star forming cluster where high-mass stars will form
|
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1962ApJS....7....1L, Lynds, 1962, ApJS, 7, 1]
|The Lynds Dark Nebula paper. some of you were interested in the history of this. At least one if not all three of our BRCs are also associated with Lynds clouds. Read if you want to.
|-
|}

==Do not bother==
This group of paper has passing relevance to the science and the goals of NITARP. They are useful references for your readers to follow up on details. It is sufficient that one person (usually Luisa) has enough knowledge to know that the citation is proper. Reading the full paper is not essential.

{| border="1"
|'''Paper'''
|'''Comments'''
|-
|Makovoz D., Marleau F. R., 2005, PASP, 117, 1113.
|MOPEX info. VERY technical, not a manual, and not all that terribly relevant to what we're doing. skip it. you shouldn't have to get into MOPEX at all, but if you do, there is lots of online help in MOPEX that is really good, and also lots of documentation (aimed at professional astronomers, admittedly) on the SSC website.
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2010AJ....140.1868W Wright et al., 2010, AJ, 140, 1868]
|WISE "seminal paper" reference. Describes the mission. As I recall, there is some discussion of the data products, but for the complete discussion of data products in more of a manual form, consult the document that accompanies the delivery. Read this paper if you want a somewhat technical overview of the mission.
|-
|[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2004ApJS..154..309W Werner et al., 2004, ApJS, 154, 309]
|Spitzer "seminar paper" reference. Describes the mission. No discussion of data products as I recall. Read this paper if you want a somewhat technical overview of the mission.
|-
|[http://articles.adsabs.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/nph-iarticle_query?1956BAN....13...77P&data_type=PDF_HIGH&whole_paper=YES&type=PRINTER&filetype=.pdf Bulletin of Astro. Instit. of the Netherlands, Vol 13, 471, 77-88, Pottasch et al., 1956, Bull. Astro. Instit. Netherlands, 13, 471]
|A study of bright rims in diffuse nebulae. VERY early work describing the location, shape of, density of, brightness of bright rim clouds in several nebula, including IC 1396 and Brc 38. So old that not really useful for assembling list of YSOs in region. skip.
|-
|[http://articles.adsabs.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/nph-iarticle_query?1999sf99.proc..381O&data_type=PDF_HIGH&whole_paper=YES&type=PRINTER&filetype=.pdf Ogura & Sugitani, 1999, Proceedings of Star Formation, pg 381-382]
|A large number of Halpha Emission Stars associated with BRCs. Conference proceedings, old at that. i'm sure this analysis is already written up in their later papers. ignore this one.
|-
|[http://articles.adsabs.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/nph-iarticle_query?1996A%26A...309..827S&data_type=PDF_HIGH&whole_paper=YES&type=PRINTER&filetype=.pdf, Saraceno et al., 1996, A&A, 309, 827-839]
|An evolutionary diagram for young stellar objects. deep, DEEP background, IGNORE THIS.
|-
|[http://arxiv.org/pdf/astro-ph/0407102v1.pdf, Beltran et al., 2004, A&A, 426, 941]
|'''BRC 38?''' The dense molecular cores in IRAS 21391 +5802 region. Radio and it sounds like theoretical models. ignore. Three sources found with BIMA (??) observations in 21391+5802; Hard to read as they are trying to use data to fit/model how gas is emitted from the core
|-
|[http://www.aperturephotometry.org, APT tool] Laher et al. 2012, PASP, submitted
| there are two papers that Russ is working on. One is a description of the basics of APT, what it's doing etc., and the other (i think) is more of a "what happens when you use APT to extract the photometry" kind of paper. It's been a while since I've seen these drafts; Russ has been going rounds with the referee on these both. He's started working on them again. Read this if you want to know the details of the inner workings of APT, and how it compares to other proven photometry programs.
|-
|Maoz 2007
|Referenced in the proposal; listed here for completeness. Astrophysics in a Nutshell (Princeton, NJ). i think this is someone's (Debbie's?) textbook. don't need to read her textbook, but you might want to find your own! :)
|-
|}

Talk:C-WAYS Spring work

2012-05-06T16:29:13Z

Novatne: Summaries and questions from discussed papers

== Getman 2006 X-Ray Study of Triggered Star Formation and Protostars in IC 1396N ==

An observation of IC 1396N with Chandra, so X-ray light. How long (total time) was the observation? 30 ks = 30 kilo seconds = 30,000 seconds = 500 min = 8.33 hours - '''Is this a long observation? I got the impression from the reading that it was short.'''

''Intro - What will be useful in this section for us?''

'''The cometary globule this study looks at is BRC 38?'''

Nice list of indicators of star formation in IC 1396N. Things we should know about

-IRAS source 21391 +5802

-H2O masers

-molecular outflows

-HH flows

-clusters of IR embedded sources

-radio mm portostars

Explanation of RDI - easy to understand.
Explanation of why an x-ray study - I was surprised. Didn't think about magnetic fields being active in YSO.

----
"2.1 - 2.3 Chandra Observation & Source List - The meat for us!"

The most important things here are the tables and figures. Locations given for the found sources and correlations to 2MASS. '''Will we eventually understand what each of these columns mean?'''

2.1 - Interesting that 8 corrections were made to the data. EIGHT pg 317-8
Data reduced to 117 point sources (listed in table 1); 66 of those correlated with 2MASS; 5 newly identified

----
''Sections 3, 4 & 5 - Interesting things about IC 1396N''

3.1-3.4 Data reduced to sources coming from star formation. 25 sources are probable members of the globule. Sources classified as class 0, I, II, III.

4.1- 4.3 It was interesting that there was flaring going on. '''Are YSO variable in the their light output, like a variable star?''' 4.3 was hard to understand. I have to sort out wavelengths and energies associated with each em light band.

5.1-5.3 Figure 10 a - This is a great picture of results of using different types of observations and even of resolution. Why correlation with other studies is needed.
Figure 10 c - Source 66 and 68 are so much brighter than the others. Interesting. It was also interesting that #66 is the brightest x-ray object in IC 1396N. '''What does it mean that it is 'one of the most heavily absorbed sources'?'''

Questions

1. Does this symbol mean of the Sun? M⊙ = mass in relation to the Sun?

2. What is IMF - initial mass function? pg 328, last full paragraph

3. What is MedE? pg 331 5.2

4. What is intervening column density? pg 332 5.3 2nd paragraph

5. What is extinction? pg 332 5.3 3rd paragraph

----
"Section 6 & 7 - Science questions and summary"

Section 6 pulls the info from the study into the larger science questions - What do these results say about triggered star formation and the two initiation methods mentioned? It seems that RDI (radiation driven implosion) is supported.

I like section 7's summary. Easy to understand and I like the list of classifications of the 25 YSO.

----

== Beltran 2009 The stellar population and complex structure of the bright-rimmed cloud IC 1396N ==

This article discusses the structure of this cloud and gives positions of everything it talks about. 18 pages worth of tables! Their conclusions are also different than the previous paper about star formation.

I found it interesting that individual sources we read about in the previous article have been resolved into several sources by the time this one was written.

Questions

1. They mention that bluer YSO mean older and redder are younger -- this is opposite of main sequence stars

2. '''What is on source images and off sources images? Why do you do this?''' this is to try and adjust for background light

The images went through 5 set of corrections or adjustments before photometry

3.2 The authors conclude not all star formation is triggered star formation in this cloud. Then what else is there?

3.3.1 All this info about H2 knots. Dense material. '''Does the red and blue shift indicate spinning?''' No, it is looking at a jet face on but not perpendicular

3.3.2 H2 flows are complicated. A lot of assumptions are made.

4. 736 sources found in all three bands - J, H K' 128 sources found only in HK' 67 sources found only in K' 79 sources found only in JH

Different conclusions from Getman. An age gradient is not found in the south-north direction of the globule; not all star formation in globule is by triggered star formation. NO alternative method given.

----

== '''Spitzer Observations of IC 2118''' The Witch Head Nebula ==

Summary:

The Witch Head Nebula (WHN) is thought to be a site of triggered star formation. Observations in 7 IR bands using SST and 4 bands in optical yields IR excesses in 4 of 6 previously known T Tauri stars and discovery of 6 new candidate YSOs.

This article has a nice introduction that covers a bit of stellar formation overview due to 2 mechanisms: gravitational collapse and “triggered” from nearby events like supernova. The Initial Mass Function (IMF) and the star formation efficiency are supported by the inventory of YSOs formed in a cloud, which then supports closer study of the initial conditions of star formation.

A detailed comparison of the two formation mechanisms with respect to the IMF and stellar formation efficiency will assist with understanding the mechanics of star formation itself.

The data analysis section was highly detailed and technical. This section gave me the greatest comprehension challenge and also the greatest number of questions that require a bit more clarification.

The selection of YSO candidates focused on finding sources having an infrared excess characteristic of YSOs surrounded by a dust disk. A high source contamination rate was expected. Filtering mechanisms form the literature based on Spitzer colors were used to distinguish likely galaxies from likely members. Optical information was used to further winnow the candidate list.

Both color-color and color-magnitude diagrams from IRAC were used to select sources. 459 sources were identified having colors consistent with galaxies dominated by Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAHs). 765 more sources having colors consistent with active galactic nuclei (AGN), only 27 sources are not flagged as background contaminants and have colors compatible with YSOs and with IRAC excess. The list of 27 sources not flagged as contaminants bears further scrutiny. 18 of the YSO candidates have magnitudes fainter than 12. As the brightness decreases, the probability of the object being background contamination increases.

The wealth of data allowed these data to additionally constrain the YSO selection. 18 faint sources all fall in the region occupied by main-sequence stars or background galaxies. The 9 remaining YSOs with magnitudes less than 12 all appear redder, near or above a 30 Myr isochrones. These are strongly suspected to be contaminants. The 9 brighter objects are included in the list of their (the authors) IRAC selected YSO candidates. There are restrictions imposed with the consequence that leads to a distance assumption that may be problematic. The details of this challenge appear in the bottom half of page 13 for further detailed description, should curiosity require investigation.

All 9 of the IRAC selected YSO candidates are seen at MIPS-24. There is a bit more technical justification about why seeing these candidates in MIPS-24 at one of the two distances proposed (~210 pc and ~440pc).

Most of the sources seen in the observations at 24 or 70 μm are foreground stars or background galaxies.

POSS and 2MASS and optical images for each candidate were used to verify that they did not appear extended in any of these bands. All YSO candidates passed the checks and appear to be point sources in all available bands.

The MIPS selection was technically detailed and the objects seemed to fall into either Class II or Class III with weak excesses. There appears to be three distinct groups of object: 1) objects of zero color (likely foreground or background stars), 2) objects that are faint and red (likely galaxies) and 3) objects that are bright and red (likely YSOs). There doesn’t appear to be any sources between the photospehric Class III and Class II objects. The chosen selection process may have gathered the YSO candidates into the group of brightest or reddest object, lending further support that the assertion of faint object being most likely background galaxies (bottom of page 14). Why is this so??

There is a good amount of detailed description of how the candidates were sorted out from the other sources. From the list of 10 YSO candidates, six are new discoveries. One of the Class II T Tauri stars is a flat disk. The fit for the edge-on-disk candidate was not the same as for the non-disk candidates, since the slope changes significantly depending on whether the MIPS points are included in the fit for the edge-on disk. I think I’d like to understand the slope correlation a bit better…

All of the YSO candidates are located in the head of the nebula, the most massive molecular cloud of the WHN. The distributions lend further support o the assertion that the IRAC and MIPS selected bright object are likely YSOs. The expected YSO candidates for the regions further south were not found. Apparently the conditions in this region do not support substantial star formation. The head of the nebula is about 3 times more massive than any of the other clouds.

There is a nice explanation of at least two intertwined mysteries that enshroud the WHN. The distance to it, and the external source that is responsible for the surface sculpture, illumination and possible trigger mechanism. There is a nice explanation of how the possible two sources (the Trapezium and Rigel) at different distances could solve the mysteries. There are arguments for both explanations, and the conclusion is that there is no clear answer. GAIA (galactic mapping mission proposed to launch in 2013) highlighted text abovecould provide a definitive answer by deriving accurate parallaxes to some objects.

The conclusion for the work states that the inventory of YSOs and candidates has doubles as a result of using Spitzer data to search for objects with IR excess in the region. SEDs are used extensively to identify YSO candidates. If the region is a triggered star formation mechanism, then trends of age or mass as they relate to location may be established. Since there are so few objects, since the distance is uncertain and since the spectral types for most of these objects is unknown, this correlation cannot be done rigorously.

Additional follow-up spectroscopic data are needed to confirm or refute the YSO status for the six new objects.

The new edge –on disk candidate in particular warrants further study, since such objects are relatively rare.

GAIA will be needed to resolve the mystery of the distance to the WHN.

Questions:

What:
1. I want to verify that I understand correctly that bands UVRcIc stand for: Ultraviolet, Visible, Red and Infrared, respectively.
2. Fat fielding issues
3. 100 MJy/ sr
4. Median boxcar filter
5. NaNs
6. UV RcIc
7. “real matches “
8. false source associations
9. centroiding
10. ELAIS
11. U and 70 micro meters
12. Optical Mv
13. VLBA and VLBI
14. mas/yr

How and HUH?

1. APEXZ portion of MOPEX
2. Zero point used to convert flux densities to magnitudes
3. …as a final check on our measurements.
4. …through observation of Landolt standards. Does this mean that the additional epoc was just for verification of data integrity?
5. …deviate significantly from zero

Why?
1. The data were further processed…
2. …we wished to add reddened stellar models to the plots

----

== '''New Young Star Candidate in the Taurus-Aruiga Region as Selected from WISE''' ==

Summary: WISE data is used to search for YSO candidates in Taurus from a 260 square degree patch of sky to encompass previously identified Taurus members. Near and mid IR colors are used to select objects with apparent IR excesses and incorporate other catalogs of ancillary data. There is likely to be contamination lingering in this candidate list, and follow up spectra are warranted.

Even though Spitzer is good at finding new young stars, some are located surprisingly far from the traditional location based on CO gas or IRAS dust maps. A 44 square degree survey of Taurus was done with Spitzer. It was found that any solely near and mid IR color selection was filled with contamination from galaxies and asymptotic giant brand (AGB) stars. The use of ancillary data was crucial to establishing a list of high quality new members of Taurus. WISE surveyed the entire sky; the depth of coverage in the Taurus region is somewhat degraded relative to regions of comparable ecliptic latitude due to Moon avoidance maneuvers. Since the cloud is only 140 pc away, both surveys (Spitzer and WISE) should easily detect legitimate Taurus members.

New Taurus candidates were selected with IR excesses using WISE colors with the Koenig et al method. There are three lists: 1) recovered young stars, 2) rejected objects, and 3) candidate new Taurus members.

A substantial multi-wavelength database was assembled for point sources throughout the Taurus region. Not every source has photometry at all bands due to variations in depth and spatial coverage among the surveys involved.

The WISE data acquisition and reduction are discussed in Wright et al, Jarrett et al and in the Explanatory Supplement to the WISE preliminary Data Release Products. Any sources with contamination and confusion flags were rejected, as were “DHOP” (what’s this?) characters.

There were about 2.38 MILLION sources. Signal to Noise Ratio (SNR) measurements were used to drastically shrink the catalog to about 7,000 sources. The SNR cut was used in W4 to limit the contamination. Since the contamination rate for any color selection is expected to be relatively large, ancillary data are crucial for culling the list to high - quality candidates. A rough total of about 2,000 contaminants per square degree were determined. Approximately 1,760 YSO candidates were obtained before imposing additional requirements (which were???) to the SNR be imposed on all four WISE channels reduced the number to 1,014.

Ancillary data were used to weed out contaminants from the list of potential YSO candidates. Only 27 sources on the list of potential YSOs found matches with SDSS spectra.

Of the 1,014 potential YSOs, 196 of them have matches to previously identified stars. 18 of these are listed as unconfirmed candidates in Rebull et al (2010).

Manual Inspection was used to sort objects into “likely contaminant” or “perhaps YSO” bins. The four criteria used to categorize were: 1) matching objects in SIMBAD, 2) matches to objects identified as contaminants in Rebull at al (2010), 3) matches to the 2MASS Extended Source Catalog, and 4) identification as extended in the SDSS pipeline. SEDs were then generated using all the photometric date in the database, and the SEDs were inspected. Based on experience, the SEDs were then categorized as still possible YSO candidates, or likely extragalactic objects. This process may have dropped viable YSO candidates similar to MHO-1 (huh?) or Haro 6-39 (huh?). This process left about 130 candidates. The sources were identified as either being likely subjected to source contamination (HOW?) resolved as a likely galaxy (HOW?) or still apparently clean, point sources (HOW?) This brought the number of candidates down to about 94 objects. All SEDs for the 94 appear in the Appendix.

Projected location of the previously identified YSOs is generally highly clustered along the filamentary distribution of gas and dust, and the new objects are less clustered. The goal was to look for new YSOs outside the canonical groupings of previously known Taurus members. This could also be an indication of persistent contamination in the surviving list of YSOs candidates. There is more discussion about the location of previously identified YSOs and contaminants.

Previous YSOs are generally found in regions of high Av, and background galaxies are found in regions of low Av. The new objects are not particularly clustered, but not evenly distributed either. Most of the previously identified YSOs are bright and most of the contaminants are faint. The new YSO candidates span the range of bright and faint.

The list of objects by type: recovery of 196 previously identified young stars with IR excess, 686 likely to be galaxies, 13 foreground stars, 1 planetary nebula, 24 objects that are likely to be confusing and 94 new YSO candidates that are widely distributed in space.

Questions:

1. What s the “J” in 2MASS J04360131
2. What is color near zero?
3. What is the reddening factor?
4. What is the meaning of “...in the right regime for JHKs diagram”
5. What is “z measurement”?
6. What are large inner disk holes?

----

== '''New Young Star Candidates in CG4 and Sa101''' ==

The introduction to this paper also has some very good background about the Gum Nebula and the stellar formation mechanisms thought to apply within it. Previous studies by Reipurth and Pettersson are summarized, with a conclusion that stars associated with the Cometary Globule 4 (CG4) and Sa 101 are associated with the Gum Nebula. The distances to all considered objects are uncertain; the distances vary from 300 to 500 pc. The extrema of the distance estimates were tested, though the results are not strongly dependent on distance. The region contains previously identified young stars, so it is likely that there are more young stars of lower mass or more embedded than those previously discovered.

The data sections, like the other two papers summarized, are highly technical and summarizing all the details doesn’t seem fruitful beyond this very minimal overview. More detailed reading should be the way to get more detail about the data analysis.

For the IRAC data, two exposures were taken with three dithers per position. The two observational locations were reduced independently even though they overlap on the sky. Some of the very bright stars in the filed of view had instrumental effects that rendered the data very difficult to work with. There is quite a bit of detailed description of calibration technique, correlation and photometry and error reduction methods.

The MIPS 24 and 70 micron data were combined. The 24-micron data were affected by the bright objects and required additional processing. The background levels between the two observations were problematic, and a description of how this was addressed was discussed. Optimized data reduction to obtain brighter source measurements led to many sources fainter than the bright sources in the image being excluded from the catalog because the scientific goals are aimed at brighter objects. There is a good, technical justification of the filtering choices made to process the data.

The optical data used the observed Landolt (1992) standard stars of two or three fields several times per night for photometric calibration. For each target, aperture photometry was performed using multiple size apertures. There is a discussion of the correction used for a noticeable variation of the point-spread function (PSF) that is location dependent on the CCD.

The bandmerging of the photometric data was first merged from all four IRAC channels with the near IR 2MASS data for each observation. This was then merged together with the source lists from each observation. The MIPS data was then included, and then the optical data was merged. A very detailed discussion of how this was done follows.

YSO candidate properties are discussed in the subset of optical, near IR, B-band and SEDs. Optical data can greatly aid in the confirmation or refutation of YSO candidacy because they provide constraints on the Wien side of the SED. Objects with optical data that have already been ruled out as SOs based on the IRAC properties are all well below the 30 Myr isochrones scaled to 500 pc. Deeper optical data are desirable to obtain magnitude estimates for the remaining YSO candidates. The degree of reddening is difficult to estimate because the spectral types for most of the sources are not available. The candidates have infrared excess with a moderate degree of reddening. Young stars that are actively accreting from their circumstellar disks can have excess UV emission in the U or B bands or longer. These bands are also the most sensitive to reddening. Figure 13 is discussed with respect to mass accretion. The coordinates of the YSOs are listed in Table 1. The SEDs of the 22 YSO candidates are displayed in figures 14 - 16. A spectral type of MO was assumed for the remaining objects. A redden model of each object is shown and normalized to the Ks band where possible. These are presented as a guide to the eye rather than a robust fit to the object to allow the immediate IR excesses to be immediately apparent. There is quite a bit of more technically detailed description of the properties in the SEDs section than is summarized here.

There is a galaxy, ESO 257 – G 019 that is mentioned because it appears in the observation field. It has not been studied, and some basic astrometric data about it is listed.

In conclusion, 6 previously identified young stars were rediscovered. There are 16 new YSOs that were discovered and evaluated with ground-based data in the near IR from 2MASS to constrain the SEDs of the candidates. The new young star candidates were graded into confidence groups. Additional data will be needed, such as optical photometry where it is missing and optical spectroscopy to obtain spectral types.

Talk:C-WAYS Spring work

2012-05-06T16:25:06Z

Novatne: /* Getman 2006 X-Ray Study of Triggered Star Formation and Protostars in IC 1396N */

----

----

== Getman 2006 X-Ray Study of Triggered Star Formation and Protostars in IC 1396N ==

An observation of IC 1396N with Chandra, so X-ray light. How long (total time) was the observation? 30 ks = 30 kilo seconds = 30,000 seconds = 500 min = 8.33 hours - '''Is this a long observation? I got the impression from the reading that it was short.'''

''Intro - What will be useful in this section for us?''

'''The cometary globule this study looks at is BRC 38?'''

Nice list of indicators of star formation in IC 1396N. Things we should know about

-IRAS source 21391 +5802

-H2O masers

-molecular outflows

-HH flows

-clusters of IR embedded sources

-radio mm portostars

Explanation of RDI - easy to understand.
Explanation of why an x-ray study - I was surprised. Didn't think about magnetic fields being active in YSO.

----
"2.1 - 2.3 Chandra Observation & Source List - The meat for us!"

The most important things here are the tables and figures. Locations given for the found sources and correlations to 2MASS. '''Will we eventually understand what each of these columns mean?'''

2.1 - Interesting that 8 corrections were made to the data. EIGHT pg 317-8
Data reduced to 117 point sources (listed in table 1); 66 of those correlated with 2MASS; 5 newly identified

----
''Sections 3, 4 & 5 - Interesting things about IC 1396N''

3.1-3.4 Data reduced to sources coming from star formation. 25 sources are probable members of the globule. Sources classified as class 0, I, II, III.

4.1- 4.3 It was interesting that there was flaring going on. '''Are YSO variable in the their light output, like a variable star?''' 4.3 was hard to understand. I have to sort out wavelengths and energies associated with each em light band.

5.1-5.3 Figure 10 a - This is a great picture of results of using different types of observations and even of resolution. Why correlation with other studies is needed.
Figure 10 c - Source 66 and 68 are so much brighter than the others. Interesting. It was also interesting that #66 is the brightest x-ray object in IC 1396N. '''What does it mean that it is 'one of the most heavily absorbed sources'?'''

Questions

1. Does this symbol mean of the Sun? M⊙ = mass in relation to the Sun?

2. What is IMF - initial mass function? pg 328, last full paragraph

3. What is MedE? pg 331 5.2

4. What is intervening column density? pg 332 5.3 2nd paragraph

5. What is extinction? pg 332 5.3 3rd paragraph

----
"Section 6 & 7 - Science questions and summary"

Section 6 pulls the info from the study into the larger science questions - What do these results say about triggered star formation and the two initiation methods mentioned? It seems that RDI (radiation driven implosion) is supported.

I like section 7's summary. Easy to understand and I like the list of classifications of the 25 YSO.

----

== Beltran 2009 The stellar population and complex structure of the bright-rimmed cloud IC 1396N ==

This article discusses the structure of this cloud and gives positions of everything it talks about. 18 pages worth of tables! Their conclusions are also different than the previous paper about star formation.

I found it interesting that individual sources we read about in the previous article have been resolved into several sources by the time this one was written.

Questions

1. They mention that bluer YSO mean older and redder are younger -- this is opposite of main sequence stars

2. '''What is on source images and off sources images? Why do you do this?''' this is to try and adjust for background light

The images went through 5 set of corrections or adjustments before photometry

3.2 The authors conclude not all star formation is triggered star formation in this cloud. Then what else is there?

3.3.1 All this info about H2 knots. Dense material. '''Does the red and blue shift indicate spinning?''' No, it is looking at a jet face on but not perpendicular

3.3.2 H2 flows are complicated. A lot of assumptions are made.

4. 736 sources found in all three bands - J, H K' 128 sources found only in HK' 67 sources found only in K' 79 sources found only in JH

Different conclusions from Getman. An age gradient is not found in the south-north direction of the globule; not all star formation in globule is by triggered star formation. NO alternative method given.

----

== '''Spitzer Observations of IC 2118''' The Witch Head Nebula ==

Summary:

The Witch Head Nebula (WHN) is thought to be a site of triggered star formation. Observations in 7 IR bands using SST and 4 bands in optical yields IR excesses in 4 of 6 previously known T Tauri stars and discovery of 6 new candidate YSOs.

This article has a nice introduction that covers a bit of stellar formation overview due to 2 mechanisms: gravitational collapse and “triggered” from nearby events like supernova. The Initial Mass Function (IMF) and the star formation efficiency are supported by the inventory of YSOs formed in a cloud, which then supports closer study of the initial conditions of star formation.

A detailed comparison of the two formation mechanisms with respect to the IMF and stellar formation efficiency will assist with understanding the mechanics of star formation itself.

The data analysis section was highly detailed and technical. This section gave me the greatest comprehension challenge and also the greatest number of questions that require a bit more clarification.

The selection of YSO candidates focused on finding sources having an infrared excess characteristic of YSOs surrounded by a dust disk. A high source contamination rate was expected. Filtering mechanisms form the literature based on Spitzer colors were used to distinguish likely galaxies from likely members. Optical information was used to further winnow the candidate list.

Both color-color and color-magnitude diagrams from IRAC were used to select sources. 459 sources were identified having colors consistent with galaxies dominated by Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAHs). 765 more sources having colors consistent with active galactic nuclei (AGN), only 27 sources are not flagged as background contaminants and have colors compatible with YSOs and with IRAC excess. The list of 27 sources not flagged as contaminants bears further scrutiny. 18 of the YSO candidates have magnitudes fainter than 12. As the brightness decreases, the probability of the object being background contamination increases.

The wealth of data allowed these data to additionally constrain the YSO selection. 18 faint sources all fall in the region occupied by main-sequence stars or background galaxies. The 9 remaining YSOs with magnitudes less than 12 all appear redder, near or above a 30 Myr isochrones. These are strongly suspected to be contaminants. The 9 brighter objects are included in the list of their (the authors) IRAC selected YSO candidates. There are restrictions imposed with the consequence that leads to a distance assumption that may be problematic. The details of this challenge appear in the bottom half of page 13 for further detailed description, should curiosity require investigation.

All 9 of the IRAC selected YSO candidates are seen at MIPS-24. There is a bit more technical justification about why seeing these candidates in MIPS-24 at one of the two distances proposed (~210 pc and ~440pc).

Most of the sources seen in the observations at 24 or 70 μm are foreground stars or background galaxies.

POSS and 2MASS and optical images for each candidate were used to verify that they did not appear extended in any of these bands. All YSO candidates passed the checks and appear to be point sources in all available bands.

The MIPS selection was technically detailed and the objects seemed to fall into either Class II or Class III with weak excesses. There appears to be three distinct groups of object: 1) objects of zero color (likely foreground or background stars), 2) objects that are faint and red (likely galaxies) and 3) objects that are bright and red (likely YSOs). There doesn’t appear to be any sources between the photospehric Class III and Class II objects. The chosen selection process may have gathered the YSO candidates into the group of brightest or reddest object, lending further support that the assertion of faint object being most likely background galaxies (bottom of page 14). Why is this so??

There is a good amount of detailed description of how the candidates were sorted out from the other sources. From the list of 10 YSO candidates, six are new discoveries. One of the Class II T Tauri stars is a flat disk. The fit for the edge-on-disk candidate was not the same as for the non-disk candidates, since the slope changes significantly depending on whether the MIPS points are included in the fit for the edge-on disk. I think I’d like to understand the slope correlation a bit better…

All of the YSO candidates are located in the head of the nebula, the most massive molecular cloud of the WHN. The distributions lend further support o the assertion that the IRAC and MIPS selected bright object are likely YSOs. The expected YSO candidates for the regions further south were not found. Apparently the conditions in this region do not support substantial star formation. The head of the nebula is about 3 times more massive than any of the other clouds.

There is a nice explanation of at least two intertwined mysteries that enshroud the WHN. The distance to it, and the external source that is responsible for the surface sculpture, illumination and possible trigger mechanism. There is a nice explanation of how the possible two sources (the Trapezium and Rigel) at different distances could solve the mysteries. There are arguments for both explanations, and the conclusion is that there is no clear answer. GAIA (galactic mapping mission proposed to launch in 2013) highlighted text abovecould provide a definitive answer by deriving accurate parallaxes to some objects.

The conclusion for the work states that the inventory of YSOs and candidates has doubles as a result of using Spitzer data to search for objects with IR excess in the region. SEDs are used extensively to identify YSO candidates. If the region is a triggered star formation mechanism, then trends of age or mass as they relate to location may be established. Since there are so few objects, since the distance is uncertain and since the spectral types for most of these objects is unknown, this correlation cannot be done rigorously.

Additional follow-up spectroscopic data are needed to confirm or refute the YSO status for the six new objects.

The new edge –on disk candidate in particular warrants further study, since such objects are relatively rare.

GAIA will be needed to resolve the mystery of the distance to the WHN.

Questions:

What:
1. I want to verify that I understand correctly that bands UVRcIc stand for: Ultraviolet, Visible, Red and Infrared, respectively.
2. Fat fielding issues
3. 100 MJy/ sr
4. Median boxcar filter
5. NaNs
6. UV RcIc
7. “real matches “
8. false source associations
9. centroiding
10. ELAIS
11. U and 70 micro meters
12. Optical Mv
13. VLBA and VLBI
14. mas/yr

How and HUH?

1. APEXZ portion of MOPEX
2. Zero point used to convert flux densities to magnitudes
3. …as a final check on our measurements.
4. …through observation of Landolt standards. Does this mean that the additional epoc was just for verification of data integrity?
5. …deviate significantly from zero

Why?
1. The data were further processed…
2. …we wished to add reddened stellar models to the plots

----

== '''New Young Star Candidate in the Taurus-Aruiga Region as Selected from WISE''' ==

Summary: WISE data is used to search for YSO candidates in Taurus from a 260 square degree patch of sky to encompass previously identified Taurus members. Near and mid IR colors are used to select objects with apparent IR excesses and incorporate other catalogs of ancillary data. There is likely to be contamination lingering in this candidate list, and follow up spectra are warranted.

Even though Spitzer is good at finding new young stars, some are located surprisingly far from the traditional location based on CO gas or IRAS dust maps. A 44 square degree survey of Taurus was done with Spitzer. It was found that any solely near and mid IR color selection was filled with contamination from galaxies and asymptotic giant brand (AGB) stars. The use of ancillary data was crucial to establishing a list of high quality new members of Taurus. WISE surveyed the entire sky; the depth of coverage in the Taurus region is somewhat degraded relative to regions of comparable ecliptic latitude due to Moon avoidance maneuvers. Since the cloud is only 140 pc away, both surveys (Spitzer and WISE) should easily detect legitimate Taurus members.

New Taurus candidates were selected with IR excesses using WISE colors with the Koenig et al method. There are three lists: 1) recovered young stars, 2) rejected objects, and 3) candidate new Taurus members.

A substantial multi-wavelength database was assembled for point sources throughout the Taurus region. Not every source has photometry at all bands due to variations in depth and spatial coverage among the surveys involved.

The WISE data acquisition and reduction are discussed in Wright et al, Jarrett et al and in the Explanatory Supplement to the WISE preliminary Data Release Products. Any sources with contamination and confusion flags were rejected, as were “DHOP” (what’s this?) characters.

There were about 2.38 MILLION sources. Signal to Noise Ratio (SNR) measurements were used to drastically shrink the catalog to about 7,000 sources. The SNR cut was used in W4 to limit the contamination. Since the contamination rate for any color selection is expected to be relatively large, ancillary data are crucial for culling the list to high - quality candidates. A rough total of about 2,000 contaminants per square degree were determined. Approximately 1,760 YSO candidates were obtained before imposing additional requirements (which were???) to the SNR be imposed on all four WISE channels reduced the number to 1,014.

Ancillary data were used to weed out contaminants from the list of potential YSO candidates. Only 27 sources on the list of potential YSOs found matches with SDSS spectra.

Of the 1,014 potential YSOs, 196 of them have matches to previously identified stars. 18 of these are listed as unconfirmed candidates in Rebull et al (2010).

Manual Inspection was used to sort objects into “likely contaminant” or “perhaps YSO” bins. The four criteria used to categorize were: 1) matching objects in SIMBAD, 2) matches to objects identified as contaminants in Rebull at al (2010), 3) matches to the 2MASS Extended Source Catalog, and 4) identification as extended in the SDSS pipeline. SEDs were then generated using all the photometric date in the database, and the SEDs were inspected. Based on experience, the SEDs were then categorized as still possible YSO candidates, or likely extragalactic objects. This process may have dropped viable YSO candidates similar to MHO-1 (huh?) or Haro 6-39 (huh?). This process left about 130 candidates. The sources were identified as either being likely subjected to source contamination (HOW?) resolved as a likely galaxy (HOW?) or still apparently clean, point sources (HOW?) This brought the number of candidates down to about 94 objects. All SEDs for the 94 appear in the Appendix.

Projected location of the previously identified YSOs is generally highly clustered along the filamentary distribution of gas and dust, and the new objects are less clustered. The goal was to look for new YSOs outside the canonical groupings of previously known Taurus members. This could also be an indication of persistent contamination in the surviving list of YSOs candidates. There is more discussion about the location of previously identified YSOs and contaminants.

Previous YSOs are generally found in regions of high Av, and background galaxies are found in regions of low Av. The new objects are not particularly clustered, but not evenly distributed either. Most of the previously identified YSOs are bright and most of the contaminants are faint. The new YSO candidates span the range of bright and faint.

The list of objects by type: recovery of 196 previously identified young stars with IR excess, 686 likely to be galaxies, 13 foreground stars, 1 planetary nebula, 24 objects that are likely to be confusing and 94 new YSO candidates that are widely distributed in space.

Questions:

1. What s the “J” in 2MASS J04360131
2. What is color near zero?
3. What is the reddening factor?
4. What is the meaning of “...in the right regime for JHKs diagram”
5. What is “z measurement”?
6. What are large inner disk holes?

----

== '''New Young Star Candidates in CG4 and Sa101''' ==

The introduction to this paper also has some very good background about the Gum Nebula and the stellar formation mechanisms thought to apply within it. Previous studies by Reipurth and Pettersson are summarized, with a conclusion that stars associated with the Cometary Globule 4 (CG4) and Sa 101 are associated with the Gum Nebula. The distances to all considered objects are uncertain; the distances vary from 300 to 500 pc. The extrema of the distance estimates were tested, though the results are not strongly dependent on distance. The region contains previously identified young stars, so it is likely that there are more young stars of lower mass or more embedded than those previously discovered.

The data sections, like the other two papers summarized, are highly technical and summarizing all the details doesn’t seem fruitful beyond this very minimal overview. More detailed reading should be the way to get more detail about the data analysis.

For the IRAC data, two exposures were taken with three dithers per position. The two observational locations were reduced independently even though they overlap on the sky. Some of the very bright stars in the filed of view had instrumental effects that rendered the data very difficult to work with. There is quite a bit of detailed description of calibration technique, correlation and photometry and error reduction methods.

The MIPS 24 and 70 micron data were combined. The 24-micron data were affected by the bright objects and required additional processing. The background levels between the two observations were problematic, and a description of how this was addressed was discussed. Optimized data reduction to obtain brighter source measurements led to many sources fainter than the bright sources in the image being excluded from the catalog because the scientific goals are aimed at brighter objects. There is a good, technical justification of the filtering choices made to process the data.

The optical data used the observed Landolt (1992) standard stars of two or three fields several times per night for photometric calibration. For each target, aperture photometry was performed using multiple size apertures. There is a discussion of the correction used for a noticeable variation of the point-spread function (PSF) that is location dependent on the CCD.

The bandmerging of the photometric data was first merged from all four IRAC channels with the near IR 2MASS data for each observation. This was then merged together with the source lists from each observation. The MIPS data was then included, and then the optical data was merged. A very detailed discussion of how this was done follows.

YSO candidate properties are discussed in the subset of optical, near IR, B-band and SEDs. Optical data can greatly aid in the confirmation or refutation of YSO candidacy because they provide constraints on the Wien side of the SED. Objects with optical data that have already been ruled out as SOs based on the IRAC properties are all well below the 30 Myr isochrones scaled to 500 pc. Deeper optical data are desirable to obtain magnitude estimates for the remaining YSO candidates. The degree of reddening is difficult to estimate because the spectral types for most of the sources are not available. The candidates have infrared excess with a moderate degree of reddening. Young stars that are actively accreting from their circumstellar disks can have excess UV emission in the U or B bands or longer. These bands are also the most sensitive to reddening. Figure 13 is discussed with respect to mass accretion. The coordinates of the YSOs are listed in Table 1. The SEDs of the 22 YSO candidates are displayed in figures 14 - 16. A spectral type of MO was assumed for the remaining objects. A redden model of each object is shown and normalized to the Ks band where possible. These are presented as a guide to the eye rather than a robust fit to the object to allow the immediate IR excesses to be immediately apparent. There is quite a bit of more technically detailed description of the properties in the SEDs section than is summarized here.

There is a galaxy, ESO 257 – G 019 that is mentioned because it appears in the observation field. It has not been studied, and some basic astrometric data about it is listed.

In conclusion, 6 previously identified young stars were rediscovered. There are 16 new YSOs that were discovered and evaluated with ground-based data in the near IR from 2MASS to constrain the SEDs of the candidates. The new young star candidates were graded into confidence groups. Additional data will be needed, such as optical photometry where it is missing and optical spectroscopy to obtain spectral types.

Talk:C-WAYS Spring work

2012-05-06T16:24:40Z

Novatne: /* Getman 2006 X-Ray Study of Triggered Star Formation and Protostars in IC 1396N */

----

== Getman 2006 X-Ray Study of Triggered Star Formation and Protostars in IC 1396N ==

An observation of IC 1396N with Chandra, so X-ray light. How long (total time) was the observation? 30 ks = 30 kilo seconds = 30,000 seconds = 500 min = 8.33 hours - '''Is this a long observation? I got the impression from the reading that it was short.'''

''Intro - What will be useful in this section for us?''

'''The cometary globule this study looks at is BRC 38?'''

Nice list of indicators of star formation in IC 1396N. Things we should know about

-IRAS source 21391 +5802

-H2O masers

-molecular outflows

-HH flows

-clusters of IR embedded sources

-radio mm portostars

Explanation of RDI - easy to understand.
Explanation of why an x-ray study - I was surprised. Didn't think about magnetic fields being active in YSO.

----
"2.1 - 2.3 Chandra Observation & Source List - The meat for us!"

The most important things here are the tables and figures. Locations given for the found sources and correlations to 2MASS. '''Will we eventually understand what each of these columns mean?'''

2.1 - Interesting that 8 corrections were made to the data. EIGHT pg 317-8
Data reduced to 117 point sources (listed in table 1); 66 of those correlated with 2MASS; 5 newly identified

----
''Sections 3, 4 & 5 - Interesting things about IC 1396N''

3.1-3.4 Data reduced to sources coming from star formation. 25 sources are probable members of the globule. Sources classified as class 0, I, II, III.

4.1- 4.3 It was interesting that there was flaring going on. '''Are YSO variable in the their light output, like a variable star?''' 4.3 was hard to understand. I have to sort out wavelengths and energies associated with each em light band.

5.1-5.3 Figure 10 a - This is a great picture of results of using different types of observations and even of resolution. Why correlation with other studies is needed.
Figure 10 c - Source 66 and 68 are so much brighter than the others. Interesting. It was also interesting that #66 is the brightest x-ray object in IC 1396N. '''What does it mean that it is 'one of the most heavily absorbed sources'?'''

Questions

1. Does this symbol mean of the Sun? M⊙ = mass in relation to the Sun?

2. What is IMF - initial mass function? pg 328, last full paragraph

3. What is MedE? pg 331 5.2

4. What is intervening column density? pg 332 5.3 2nd paragraph

5. What is extinction? pg 332 5.3 3rd paragraph

----
"Section 6 & 7 - Science questions and summary"

Section 6 pulls the info from the study into the larger science questions - What do these results say about triggered star formation and the two initiation methods mentioned? It seems that RDI (radiation driven implosion) is supported.

I like section 7's summary. Easy to understand and I like the list of classifications of the 25 YSO.

----

== Beltran 2009 The stellar population and complex structure of the bright-rimmed cloud IC 1396N ==

This article discusses the structure of this cloud and gives positions of everything it talks about. 18 pages worth of tables! Their conclusions are also different than the previous paper about star formation.

I found it interesting that individual sources we read about in the previous article have been resolved into several sources by the time this one was written.

Questions

1. They mention that bluer YSO mean older and redder are younger -- this is opposite of main sequence stars

2. '''What is on source images and off sources images? Why do you do this?''' this is to try and adjust for background light

The images went through 5 set of corrections or adjustments before photometry

3.2 The authors conclude not all star formation is triggered star formation in this cloud. Then what else is there?

3.3.1 All this info about H2 knots. Dense material. '''Does the red and blue shift indicate spinning?''' No, it is looking at a jet face on but not perpendicular

3.3.2 H2 flows are complicated. A lot of assumptions are made.

4. 736 sources found in all three bands - J, H K' 128 sources found only in HK' 67 sources found only in K' 79 sources found only in JH

Different conclusions from Getman. An age gradient is not found in the south-north direction of the globule; not all star formation in globule is by triggered star formation. NO alternative method given.

----

== '''Spitzer Observations of IC 2118''' The Witch Head Nebula ==

Summary:

The Witch Head Nebula (WHN) is thought to be a site of triggered star formation. Observations in 7 IR bands using SST and 4 bands in optical yields IR excesses in 4 of 6 previously known T Tauri stars and discovery of 6 new candidate YSOs.

This article has a nice introduction that covers a bit of stellar formation overview due to 2 mechanisms: gravitational collapse and “triggered” from nearby events like supernova. The Initial Mass Function (IMF) and the star formation efficiency are supported by the inventory of YSOs formed in a cloud, which then supports closer study of the initial conditions of star formation.

A detailed comparison of the two formation mechanisms with respect to the IMF and stellar formation efficiency will assist with understanding the mechanics of star formation itself.

The data analysis section was highly detailed and technical. This section gave me the greatest comprehension challenge and also the greatest number of questions that require a bit more clarification.

The selection of YSO candidates focused on finding sources having an infrared excess characteristic of YSOs surrounded by a dust disk. A high source contamination rate was expected. Filtering mechanisms form the literature based on Spitzer colors were used to distinguish likely galaxies from likely members. Optical information was used to further winnow the candidate list.

Both color-color and color-magnitude diagrams from IRAC were used to select sources. 459 sources were identified having colors consistent with galaxies dominated by Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAHs). 765 more sources having colors consistent with active galactic nuclei (AGN), only 27 sources are not flagged as background contaminants and have colors compatible with YSOs and with IRAC excess. The list of 27 sources not flagged as contaminants bears further scrutiny. 18 of the YSO candidates have magnitudes fainter than 12. As the brightness decreases, the probability of the object being background contamination increases.

The wealth of data allowed these data to additionally constrain the YSO selection. 18 faint sources all fall in the region occupied by main-sequence stars or background galaxies. The 9 remaining YSOs with magnitudes less than 12 all appear redder, near or above a 30 Myr isochrones. These are strongly suspected to be contaminants. The 9 brighter objects are included in the list of their (the authors) IRAC selected YSO candidates. There are restrictions imposed with the consequence that leads to a distance assumption that may be problematic. The details of this challenge appear in the bottom half of page 13 for further detailed description, should curiosity require investigation.

All 9 of the IRAC selected YSO candidates are seen at MIPS-24. There is a bit more technical justification about why seeing these candidates in MIPS-24 at one of the two distances proposed (~210 pc and ~440pc).

Most of the sources seen in the observations at 24 or 70 μm are foreground stars or background galaxies.

POSS and 2MASS and optical images for each candidate were used to verify that they did not appear extended in any of these bands. All YSO candidates passed the checks and appear to be point sources in all available bands.

The MIPS selection was technically detailed and the objects seemed to fall into either Class II or Class III with weak excesses. There appears to be three distinct groups of object: 1) objects of zero color (likely foreground or background stars), 2) objects that are faint and red (likely galaxies) and 3) objects that are bright and red (likely YSOs). There doesn’t appear to be any sources between the photospehric Class III and Class II objects. The chosen selection process may have gathered the YSO candidates into the group of brightest or reddest object, lending further support that the assertion of faint object being most likely background galaxies (bottom of page 14). Why is this so??

There is a good amount of detailed description of how the candidates were sorted out from the other sources. From the list of 10 YSO candidates, six are new discoveries. One of the Class II T Tauri stars is a flat disk. The fit for the edge-on-disk candidate was not the same as for the non-disk candidates, since the slope changes significantly depending on whether the MIPS points are included in the fit for the edge-on disk. I think I’d like to understand the slope correlation a bit better…

All of the YSO candidates are located in the head of the nebula, the most massive molecular cloud of the WHN. The distributions lend further support o the assertion that the IRAC and MIPS selected bright object are likely YSOs. The expected YSO candidates for the regions further south were not found. Apparently the conditions in this region do not support substantial star formation. The head of the nebula is about 3 times more massive than any of the other clouds.

There is a nice explanation of at least two intertwined mysteries that enshroud the WHN. The distance to it, and the external source that is responsible for the surface sculpture, illumination and possible trigger mechanism. There is a nice explanation of how the possible two sources (the Trapezium and Rigel) at different distances could solve the mysteries. There are arguments for both explanations, and the conclusion is that there is no clear answer. GAIA (galactic mapping mission proposed to launch in 2013) highlighted text abovecould provide a definitive answer by deriving accurate parallaxes to some objects.

The conclusion for the work states that the inventory of YSOs and candidates has doubles as a result of using Spitzer data to search for objects with IR excess in the region. SEDs are used extensively to identify YSO candidates. If the region is a triggered star formation mechanism, then trends of age or mass as they relate to location may be established. Since there are so few objects, since the distance is uncertain and since the spectral types for most of these objects is unknown, this correlation cannot be done rigorously.

Additional follow-up spectroscopic data are needed to confirm or refute the YSO status for the six new objects.

The new edge –on disk candidate in particular warrants further study, since such objects are relatively rare.

GAIA will be needed to resolve the mystery of the distance to the WHN.

Questions:

What:
1. I want to verify that I understand correctly that bands UVRcIc stand for: Ultraviolet, Visible, Red and Infrared, respectively.
2. Fat fielding issues
3. 100 MJy/ sr
4. Median boxcar filter
5. NaNs
6. UV RcIc
7. “real matches “
8. false source associations
9. centroiding
10. ELAIS
11. U and 70 micro meters
12. Optical Mv
13. VLBA and VLBI
14. mas/yr

How and HUH?

1. APEXZ portion of MOPEX
2. Zero point used to convert flux densities to magnitudes
3. …as a final check on our measurements.
4. …through observation of Landolt standards. Does this mean that the additional epoc was just for verification of data integrity?
5. …deviate significantly from zero

Why?
1. The data were further processed…
2. …we wished to add reddened stellar models to the plots

----

== '''New Young Star Candidate in the Taurus-Aruiga Region as Selected from WISE''' ==

Summary: WISE data is used to search for YSO candidates in Taurus from a 260 square degree patch of sky to encompass previously identified Taurus members. Near and mid IR colors are used to select objects with apparent IR excesses and incorporate other catalogs of ancillary data. There is likely to be contamination lingering in this candidate list, and follow up spectra are warranted.

Even though Spitzer is good at finding new young stars, some are located surprisingly far from the traditional location based on CO gas or IRAS dust maps. A 44 square degree survey of Taurus was done with Spitzer. It was found that any solely near and mid IR color selection was filled with contamination from galaxies and asymptotic giant brand (AGB) stars. The use of ancillary data was crucial to establishing a list of high quality new members of Taurus. WISE surveyed the entire sky; the depth of coverage in the Taurus region is somewhat degraded relative to regions of comparable ecliptic latitude due to Moon avoidance maneuvers. Since the cloud is only 140 pc away, both surveys (Spitzer and WISE) should easily detect legitimate Taurus members.

New Taurus candidates were selected with IR excesses using WISE colors with the Koenig et al method. There are three lists: 1) recovered young stars, 2) rejected objects, and 3) candidate new Taurus members.

A substantial multi-wavelength database was assembled for point sources throughout the Taurus region. Not every source has photometry at all bands due to variations in depth and spatial coverage among the surveys involved.

The WISE data acquisition and reduction are discussed in Wright et al, Jarrett et al and in the Explanatory Supplement to the WISE preliminary Data Release Products. Any sources with contamination and confusion flags were rejected, as were “DHOP” (what’s this?) characters.

There were about 2.38 MILLION sources. Signal to Noise Ratio (SNR) measurements were used to drastically shrink the catalog to about 7,000 sources. The SNR cut was used in W4 to limit the contamination. Since the contamination rate for any color selection is expected to be relatively large, ancillary data are crucial for culling the list to high - quality candidates. A rough total of about 2,000 contaminants per square degree were determined. Approximately 1,760 YSO candidates were obtained before imposing additional requirements (which were???) to the SNR be imposed on all four WISE channels reduced the number to 1,014.

Ancillary data were used to weed out contaminants from the list of potential YSO candidates. Only 27 sources on the list of potential YSOs found matches with SDSS spectra.

Of the 1,014 potential YSOs, 196 of them have matches to previously identified stars. 18 of these are listed as unconfirmed candidates in Rebull et al (2010).

Manual Inspection was used to sort objects into “likely contaminant” or “perhaps YSO” bins. The four criteria used to categorize were: 1) matching objects in SIMBAD, 2) matches to objects identified as contaminants in Rebull at al (2010), 3) matches to the 2MASS Extended Source Catalog, and 4) identification as extended in the SDSS pipeline. SEDs were then generated using all the photometric date in the database, and the SEDs were inspected. Based on experience, the SEDs were then categorized as still possible YSO candidates, or likely extragalactic objects. This process may have dropped viable YSO candidates similar to MHO-1 (huh?) or Haro 6-39 (huh?). This process left about 130 candidates. The sources were identified as either being likely subjected to source contamination (HOW?) resolved as a likely galaxy (HOW?) or still apparently clean, point sources (HOW?) This brought the number of candidates down to about 94 objects. All SEDs for the 94 appear in the Appendix.

Projected location of the previously identified YSOs is generally highly clustered along the filamentary distribution of gas and dust, and the new objects are less clustered. The goal was to look for new YSOs outside the canonical groupings of previously known Taurus members. This could also be an indication of persistent contamination in the surviving list of YSOs candidates. There is more discussion about the location of previously identified YSOs and contaminants.

Previous YSOs are generally found in regions of high Av, and background galaxies are found in regions of low Av. The new objects are not particularly clustered, but not evenly distributed either. Most of the previously identified YSOs are bright and most of the contaminants are faint. The new YSO candidates span the range of bright and faint.

The list of objects by type: recovery of 196 previously identified young stars with IR excess, 686 likely to be galaxies, 13 foreground stars, 1 planetary nebula, 24 objects that are likely to be confusing and 94 new YSO candidates that are widely distributed in space.

Questions:

1. What s the “J” in 2MASS J04360131
2. What is color near zero?
3. What is the reddening factor?
4. What is the meaning of “...in the right regime for JHKs diagram”
5. What is “z measurement”?
6. What are large inner disk holes?

----

== '''New Young Star Candidates in CG4 and Sa101''' ==

The introduction to this paper also has some very good background about the Gum Nebula and the stellar formation mechanisms thought to apply within it. Previous studies by Reipurth and Pettersson are summarized, with a conclusion that stars associated with the Cometary Globule 4 (CG4) and Sa 101 are associated with the Gum Nebula. The distances to all considered objects are uncertain; the distances vary from 300 to 500 pc. The extrema of the distance estimates were tested, though the results are not strongly dependent on distance. The region contains previously identified young stars, so it is likely that there are more young stars of lower mass or more embedded than those previously discovered.

The data sections, like the other two papers summarized, are highly technical and summarizing all the details doesn’t seem fruitful beyond this very minimal overview. More detailed reading should be the way to get more detail about the data analysis.

For the IRAC data, two exposures were taken with three dithers per position. The two observational locations were reduced independently even though they overlap on the sky. Some of the very bright stars in the filed of view had instrumental effects that rendered the data very difficult to work with. There is quite a bit of detailed description of calibration technique, correlation and photometry and error reduction methods.

The MIPS 24 and 70 micron data were combined. The 24-micron data were affected by the bright objects and required additional processing. The background levels between the two observations were problematic, and a description of how this was addressed was discussed. Optimized data reduction to obtain brighter source measurements led to many sources fainter than the bright sources in the image being excluded from the catalog because the scientific goals are aimed at brighter objects. There is a good, technical justification of the filtering choices made to process the data.

The optical data used the observed Landolt (1992) standard stars of two or three fields several times per night for photometric calibration. For each target, aperture photometry was performed using multiple size apertures. There is a discussion of the correction used for a noticeable variation of the point-spread function (PSF) that is location dependent on the CCD.

The bandmerging of the photometric data was first merged from all four IRAC channels with the near IR 2MASS data for each observation. This was then merged together with the source lists from each observation. The MIPS data was then included, and then the optical data was merged. A very detailed discussion of how this was done follows.

YSO candidate properties are discussed in the subset of optical, near IR, B-band and SEDs. Optical data can greatly aid in the confirmation or refutation of YSO candidacy because they provide constraints on the Wien side of the SED. Objects with optical data that have already been ruled out as SOs based on the IRAC properties are all well below the 30 Myr isochrones scaled to 500 pc. Deeper optical data are desirable to obtain magnitude estimates for the remaining YSO candidates. The degree of reddening is difficult to estimate because the spectral types for most of the sources are not available. The candidates have infrared excess with a moderate degree of reddening. Young stars that are actively accreting from their circumstellar disks can have excess UV emission in the U or B bands or longer. These bands are also the most sensitive to reddening. Figure 13 is discussed with respect to mass accretion. The coordinates of the YSOs are listed in Table 1. The SEDs of the 22 YSO candidates are displayed in figures 14 - 16. A spectral type of MO was assumed for the remaining objects. A redden model of each object is shown and normalized to the Ks band where possible. These are presented as a guide to the eye rather than a robust fit to the object to allow the immediate IR excesses to be immediately apparent. There is quite a bit of more technically detailed description of the properties in the SEDs section than is summarized here.

There is a galaxy, ESO 257 – G 019 that is mentioned because it appears in the observation field. It has not been studied, and some basic astrometric data about it is listed.

In conclusion, 6 previously identified young stars were rediscovered. There are 16 new YSOs that were discovered and evaluated with ground-based data in the near IR from 2MASS to constrain the SEDs of the candidates. The new young star candidates were graded into confidence groups. Additional data will be needed, such as optical photometry where it is missing and optical spectroscopy to obtain spectral types.

Talk:C-WAYS Spring work

2012-05-06T16:24:22Z

Novatne: /* New Young Star Candidates in CG4 and Sa101 */

Talk:C-WAYS Spring work

2012-05-06T16:23:58Z

Novatne: /* New Young Star Candidate in the Taurus-Aruiga Region as Selected from WISE */

== Getman 2006 X-Ray Study of Triggered Star Formation and Protostars in IC 1396N ==

An observation of IC 1396N with Chandra, so X-ray light. How long (total time) was the observation? 30 ks = 30 kilo seconds = 30,000 seconds = 500 min = 8.33 hours - '''Is this a long observation? I got the impression from the reading that it was short.'''

''Intro - What will be useful in this section for us?''

'''The cometary globule this study looks at is BRC 38?'''

Nice list of indicators of star formation in IC 1396N. Things we should know about

-IRAS source 21391 +5802

-H2O masers

-molecular outflows

-HH flows

-clusters of IR embedded sources

-radio mm portostars

Explanation of RDI - easy to understand.
Explanation of why an x-ray study - I was surprised. Didn't think about magnetic fields being active in YSO.

----
"2.1 - 2.3 Chandra Observation & Source List - The meat for us!"

The most important things here are the tables and figures. Locations given for the found sources and correlations to 2MASS. '''Will we eventually understand what each of these columns mean?'''

2.1 - Interesting that 8 corrections were made to the data. EIGHT pg 317-8
Data reduced to 117 point sources (listed in table 1); 66 of those correlated with 2MASS; 5 newly identified

----
''Sections 3, 4 & 5 - Interesting things about IC 1396N''

3.1-3.4 Data reduced to sources coming from star formation. 25 sources are probable members of the globule. Sources classified as class 0, I, II, III.

4.1- 4.3 It was interesting that there was flaring going on. '''Are YSO variable in the their light output, like a variable star?''' 4.3 was hard to understand. I have to sort out wavelengths and energies associated with each em light band.

5.1-5.3 Figure 10 a - This is a great picture of results of using different types of observations and even of resolution. Why correlation with other studies is needed.
Figure 10 c - Source 66 and 68 are so much brighter than the others. Interesting. It was also interesting that #66 is the brightest x-ray object in IC 1396N. '''What does it mean that it is 'one of the most heavily absorbed sources'?'''

Questions

1. Does this symbol mean of the Sun? M⊙ = mass in relation to the Sun?

2. What is IMF - initial mass function? pg 328, last full paragraph

3. What is MedE? pg 331 5.2

4. What is intervening column density? pg 332 5.3 2nd paragraph

5. What is extinction? pg 332 5.3 3rd paragraph

----
"Section 6 & 7 - Science questions and summary"

Section 6 pulls the info from the study into the larger science questions - What do these results say about triggered star formation and the two initiation methods mentioned? It seems that RDI (radiation driven implosion) is supported.

I like section 7's summary. Easy to understand and I like the list of classifications of the 25 YSO.

----

== Beltran 2009 The stellar population and complex structure of the bright-rimmed cloud IC 1396N ==

This article discusses the structure of this cloud and gives positions of everything it talks about. 18 pages worth of tables! Their conclusions are also different than the previous paper about star formation.

I found it interesting that individual sources we read about in the previous article have been resolved into several sources by the time this one was written.

Questions

1. They mention that bluer YSO mean older and redder are younger -- this is opposite of main sequence stars

2. '''What is on source images and off sources images? Why do you do this?''' this is to try and adjust for background light

The images went through 5 set of corrections or adjustments before photometry

3.2 The authors conclude not all star formation is triggered star formation in this cloud. Then what else is there?

3.3.1 All this info about H2 knots. Dense material. '''Does the red and blue shift indicate spinning?''' No, it is looking at a jet face on but not perpendicular

3.3.2 H2 flows are complicated. A lot of assumptions are made.

4. 736 sources found in all three bands - J, H K' 128 sources found only in HK' 67 sources found only in K' 79 sources found only in JH

Different conclusions from Getman. An age gradient is not found in the south-north direction of the globule; not all star formation in globule is by triggered star formation. NO alternative method given.

----

== '''Spitzer Observations of IC 2118''' The Witch Head Nebula ==

Summary:

The Witch Head Nebula (WHN) is thought to be a site of triggered star formation. Observations in 7 IR bands using SST and 4 bands in optical yields IR excesses in 4 of 6 previously known T Tauri stars and discovery of 6 new candidate YSOs.

This article has a nice introduction that covers a bit of stellar formation overview due to 2 mechanisms: gravitational collapse and “triggered” from nearby events like supernova. The Initial Mass Function (IMF) and the star formation efficiency are supported by the inventory of YSOs formed in a cloud, which then supports closer study of the initial conditions of star formation.

A detailed comparison of the two formation mechanisms with respect to the IMF and stellar formation efficiency will assist with understanding the mechanics of star formation itself.

The data analysis section was highly detailed and technical. This section gave me the greatest comprehension challenge and also the greatest number of questions that require a bit more clarification.

The selection of YSO candidates focused on finding sources having an infrared excess characteristic of YSOs surrounded by a dust disk. A high source contamination rate was expected. Filtering mechanisms form the literature based on Spitzer colors were used to distinguish likely galaxies from likely members. Optical information was used to further winnow the candidate list.

Both color-color and color-magnitude diagrams from IRAC were used to select sources. 459 sources were identified having colors consistent with galaxies dominated by Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAHs). 765 more sources having colors consistent with active galactic nuclei (AGN), only 27 sources are not flagged as background contaminants and have colors compatible with YSOs and with IRAC excess. The list of 27 sources not flagged as contaminants bears further scrutiny. 18 of the YSO candidates have magnitudes fainter than 12. As the brightness decreases, the probability of the object being background contamination increases.

The wealth of data allowed these data to additionally constrain the YSO selection. 18 faint sources all fall in the region occupied by main-sequence stars or background galaxies. The 9 remaining YSOs with magnitudes less than 12 all appear redder, near or above a 30 Myr isochrones. These are strongly suspected to be contaminants. The 9 brighter objects are included in the list of their (the authors) IRAC selected YSO candidates. There are restrictions imposed with the consequence that leads to a distance assumption that may be problematic. The details of this challenge appear in the bottom half of page 13 for further detailed description, should curiosity require investigation.

All 9 of the IRAC selected YSO candidates are seen at MIPS-24. There is a bit more technical justification about why seeing these candidates in MIPS-24 at one of the two distances proposed (~210 pc and ~440pc).

Most of the sources seen in the observations at 24 or 70 μm are foreground stars or background galaxies.

POSS and 2MASS and optical images for each candidate were used to verify that they did not appear extended in any of these bands. All YSO candidates passed the checks and appear to be point sources in all available bands.

The MIPS selection was technically detailed and the objects seemed to fall into either Class II or Class III with weak excesses. There appears to be three distinct groups of object: 1) objects of zero color (likely foreground or background stars), 2) objects that are faint and red (likely galaxies) and 3) objects that are bright and red (likely YSOs). There doesn’t appear to be any sources between the photospehric Class III and Class II objects. The chosen selection process may have gathered the YSO candidates into the group of brightest or reddest object, lending further support that the assertion of faint object being most likely background galaxies (bottom of page 14). Why is this so??

There is a good amount of detailed description of how the candidates were sorted out from the other sources. From the list of 10 YSO candidates, six are new discoveries. One of the Class II T Tauri stars is a flat disk. The fit for the edge-on-disk candidate was not the same as for the non-disk candidates, since the slope changes significantly depending on whether the MIPS points are included in the fit for the edge-on disk. I think I’d like to understand the slope correlation a bit better…

All of the YSO candidates are located in the head of the nebula, the most massive molecular cloud of the WHN. The distributions lend further support o the assertion that the IRAC and MIPS selected bright object are likely YSOs. The expected YSO candidates for the regions further south were not found. Apparently the conditions in this region do not support substantial star formation. The head of the nebula is about 3 times more massive than any of the other clouds.

There is a nice explanation of at least two intertwined mysteries that enshroud the WHN. The distance to it, and the external source that is responsible for the surface sculpture, illumination and possible trigger mechanism. There is a nice explanation of how the possible two sources (the Trapezium and Rigel) at different distances could solve the mysteries. There are arguments for both explanations, and the conclusion is that there is no clear answer. GAIA (galactic mapping mission proposed to launch in 2013) highlighted text abovecould provide a definitive answer by deriving accurate parallaxes to some objects.

The conclusion for the work states that the inventory of YSOs and candidates has doubles as a result of using Spitzer data to search for objects with IR excess in the region. SEDs are used extensively to identify YSO candidates. If the region is a triggered star formation mechanism, then trends of age or mass as they relate to location may be established. Since there are so few objects, since the distance is uncertain and since the spectral types for most of these objects is unknown, this correlation cannot be done rigorously.

Additional follow-up spectroscopic data are needed to confirm or refute the YSO status for the six new objects.

The new edge –on disk candidate in particular warrants further study, since such objects are relatively rare.

GAIA will be needed to resolve the mystery of the distance to the WHN.

Questions:

What:
1. I want to verify that I understand correctly that bands UVRcIc stand for: Ultraviolet, Visible, Red and Infrared, respectively.
2. Fat fielding issues
3. 100 MJy/ sr
4. Median boxcar filter
5. NaNs
6. UV RcIc
7. “real matches “
8. false source associations
9. centroiding
10. ELAIS
11. U and 70 micro meters
12. Optical Mv
13. VLBA and VLBI
14. mas/yr

How and HUH?

1. APEXZ portion of MOPEX
2. Zero point used to convert flux densities to magnitudes
3. …as a final check on our measurements.
4. …through observation of Landolt standards. Does this mean that the additional epoc was just for verification of data integrity?
5. …deviate significantly from zero

Why?
1. The data were further processed…
2. …we wished to add reddened stellar models to the plots

----

== '''New Young Star Candidate in the Taurus-Aruiga Region as Selected from WISE''' ==

Summary: WISE data is used to search for YSO candidates in Taurus from a 260 square degree patch of sky to encompass previously identified Taurus members. Near and mid IR colors are used to select objects with apparent IR excesses and incorporate other catalogs of ancillary data. There is likely to be contamination lingering in this candidate list, and follow up spectra are warranted.

Even though Spitzer is good at finding new young stars, some are located surprisingly far from the traditional location based on CO gas or IRAS dust maps. A 44 square degree survey of Taurus was done with Spitzer. It was found that any solely near and mid IR color selection was filled with contamination from galaxies and asymptotic giant brand (AGB) stars. The use of ancillary data was crucial to establishing a list of high quality new members of Taurus. WISE surveyed the entire sky; the depth of coverage in the Taurus region is somewhat degraded relative to regions of comparable ecliptic latitude due to Moon avoidance maneuvers. Since the cloud is only 140 pc away, both surveys (Spitzer and WISE) should easily detect legitimate Taurus members.

New Taurus candidates were selected with IR excesses using WISE colors with the Koenig et al method. There are three lists: 1) recovered young stars, 2) rejected objects, and 3) candidate new Taurus members.

A substantial multi-wavelength database was assembled for point sources throughout the Taurus region. Not every source has photometry at all bands due to variations in depth and spatial coverage among the surveys involved.

The WISE data acquisition and reduction are discussed in Wright et al, Jarrett et al and in the Explanatory Supplement to the WISE preliminary Data Release Products. Any sources with contamination and confusion flags were rejected, as were “DHOP” (what’s this?) characters.

There were about 2.38 MILLION sources. Signal to Noise Ratio (SNR) measurements were used to drastically shrink the catalog to about 7,000 sources. The SNR cut was used in W4 to limit the contamination. Since the contamination rate for any color selection is expected to be relatively large, ancillary data are crucial for culling the list to high - quality candidates. A rough total of about 2,000 contaminants per square degree were determined. Approximately 1,760 YSO candidates were obtained before imposing additional requirements (which were???) to the SNR be imposed on all four WISE channels reduced the number to 1,014.

Ancillary data were used to weed out contaminants from the list of potential YSO candidates. Only 27 sources on the list of potential YSOs found matches with SDSS spectra.

Of the 1,014 potential YSOs, 196 of them have matches to previously identified stars. 18 of these are listed as unconfirmed candidates in Rebull et al (2010).

Manual Inspection was used to sort objects into “likely contaminant” or “perhaps YSO” bins. The four criteria used to categorize were: 1) matching objects in SIMBAD, 2) matches to objects identified as contaminants in Rebull at al (2010), 3) matches to the 2MASS Extended Source Catalog, and 4) identification as extended in the SDSS pipeline. SEDs were then generated using all the photometric date in the database, and the SEDs were inspected. Based on experience, the SEDs were then categorized as still possible YSO candidates, or likely extragalactic objects. This process may have dropped viable YSO candidates similar to MHO-1 (huh?) or Haro 6-39 (huh?). This process left about 130 candidates. The sources were identified as either being likely subjected to source contamination (HOW?) resolved as a likely galaxy (HOW?) or still apparently clean, point sources (HOW?) This brought the number of candidates down to about 94 objects. All SEDs for the 94 appear in the Appendix.

Projected location of the previously identified YSOs is generally highly clustered along the filamentary distribution of gas and dust, and the new objects are less clustered. The goal was to look for new YSOs outside the canonical groupings of previously known Taurus members. This could also be an indication of persistent contamination in the surviving list of YSOs candidates. There is more discussion about the location of previously identified YSOs and contaminants.

Previous YSOs are generally found in regions of high Av, and background galaxies are found in regions of low Av. The new objects are not particularly clustered, but not evenly distributed either. Most of the previously identified YSOs are bright and most of the contaminants are faint. The new YSO candidates span the range of bright and faint.

The list of objects by type: recovery of 196 previously identified young stars with IR excess, 686 likely to be galaxies, 13 foreground stars, 1 planetary nebula, 24 objects that are likely to be confusing and 94 new YSO candidates that are widely distributed in space.

Questions:

1. What s the “J” in 2MASS J04360131
2. What is color near zero?
3. What is the reddening factor?
4. What is the meaning of “...in the right regime for JHKs diagram”
5. What is “z measurement”?
6. What are large inner disk holes?

== '''New Young Star Candidates in CG4 and Sa101''' ==

The introduction to this paper also has some very good background about the Gum Nebula and the stellar formation mechanisms thought to apply within it. Previous studies by Reipurth and Pettersson are summarized, with a conclusion that stars associated with the Cometary Globule 4 (CG4) and Sa 101 are associated with the Gum Nebula. The distances to all considered objects are uncertain; the distances vary from 300 to 500 pc. The extrema of the distance estimates were tested, though the results are not strongly dependent on distance. The region contains previously identified young stars, so it is likely that there are more young stars of lower mass or more embedded than those previously discovered.

The data sections, like the other two papers summarized, are highly technical and summarizing all the details doesn’t seem fruitful beyond this very minimal overview. More detailed reading should be the way to get more detail about the data analysis.

For the IRAC data, two exposures were taken with three dithers per position. The two observational locations were reduced independently even though they overlap on the sky. Some of the very bright stars in the filed of view had instrumental effects that rendered the data very difficult to work with. There is quite a bit of detailed description of calibration technique, correlation and photometry and error reduction methods.

The MIPS 24 and 70 micron data were combined. The 24-micron data were affected by the bright objects and required additional processing. The background levels between the two observations were problematic, and a description of how this was addressed was discussed. Optimized data reduction to obtain brighter source measurements led to many sources fainter than the bright sources in the image being excluded from the catalog because the scientific goals are aimed at brighter objects. There is a good, technical justification of the filtering choices made to process the data.

The optical data used the observed Landolt (1992) standard stars of two or three fields several times per night for photometric calibration. For each target, aperture photometry was performed using multiple size apertures. There is a discussion of the correction used for a noticeable variation of the point-spread function (PSF) that is location dependent on the CCD.

The bandmerging of the photometric data was first merged from all four IRAC channels with the near IR 2MASS data for each observation. This was then merged together with the source lists from each observation. The MIPS data was then included, and then the optical data was merged. A very detailed discussion of how this was done follows.

YSO candidate properties are discussed in the subset of optical, near IR, B-band and SEDs. Optical data can greatly aid in the confirmation or refutation of YSO candidacy because they provide constraints on the Wien side of the SED. Objects with optical data that have already been ruled out as SOs based on the IRAC properties are all well below the 30 Myr isochrones scaled to 500 pc. Deeper optical data are desirable to obtain magnitude estimates for the remaining YSO candidates. The degree of reddening is difficult to estimate because the spectral types for most of the sources are not available. The candidates have infrared excess with a moderate degree of reddening. Young stars that are actively accreting from their circumstellar disks can have excess UV emission in the U or B bands or longer. These bands are also the most sensitive to reddening. Figure 13 is discussed with respect to mass accretion. The coordinates of the YSOs are listed in Table 1. The SEDs of the 22 YSO candidates are displayed in figures 14 - 16. A spectral type of MO was assumed for the remaining objects. A redden model of each object is shown and normalized to the Ks band where possible. These are presented as a guide to the eye rather than a robust fit to the object to allow the immediate IR excesses to be immediately apparent. There is quite a bit of more technically detailed description of the properties in the SEDs section than is summarized here.

There is a galaxy, ESO 257 – G 019 that is mentioned because it appears in the observation field. It has not been studied, and some basic astrometric data about it is listed.

In conclusion, 6 previously identified young stars were rediscovered. There are 16 new YSOs that were discovered and evaluated with ground-based data in the near IR from 2MASS to constrain the SEDs of the candidates. The new young star candidates were graded into confidence groups. Additional data will be needed, such as optical photometry where it is missing and optical spectroscopy to obtain spectral types.

Talk:C-WAYS Spring work

2012-05-06T16:23:23Z

Novatne: /* Spitzer Observations of IC 2118 The Witch Head Nebula */

== Getman 2006 X-Ray Study of Triggered Star Formation and Protostars in IC 1396N ==

An observation of IC 1396N with Chandra, so X-ray light. How long (total time) was the observation? 30 ks = 30 kilo seconds = 30,000 seconds = 500 min = 8.33 hours - '''Is this a long observation? I got the impression from the reading that it was short.'''

''Intro - What will be useful in this section for us?''

'''The cometary globule this study looks at is BRC 38?'''

Nice list of indicators of star formation in IC 1396N. Things we should know about

-IRAS source 21391 +5802

-H2O masers

-molecular outflows

-HH flows

-clusters of IR embedded sources

-radio mm portostars

Explanation of RDI - easy to understand.
Explanation of why an x-ray study - I was surprised. Didn't think about magnetic fields being active in YSO.

----
"2.1 - 2.3 Chandra Observation & Source List - The meat for us!"

The most important things here are the tables and figures. Locations given for the found sources and correlations to 2MASS. '''Will we eventually understand what each of these columns mean?'''

2.1 - Interesting that 8 corrections were made to the data. EIGHT pg 317-8
Data reduced to 117 point sources (listed in table 1); 66 of those correlated with 2MASS; 5 newly identified

----
''Sections 3, 4 & 5 - Interesting things about IC 1396N''

3.1-3.4 Data reduced to sources coming from star formation. 25 sources are probable members of the globule. Sources classified as class 0, I, II, III.

4.1- 4.3 It was interesting that there was flaring going on. '''Are YSO variable in the their light output, like a variable star?''' 4.3 was hard to understand. I have to sort out wavelengths and energies associated with each em light band.

5.1-5.3 Figure 10 a - This is a great picture of results of using different types of observations and even of resolution. Why correlation with other studies is needed.
Figure 10 c - Source 66 and 68 are so much brighter than the others. Interesting. It was also interesting that #66 is the brightest x-ray object in IC 1396N. '''What does it mean that it is 'one of the most heavily absorbed sources'?'''

Questions

1. Does this symbol mean of the Sun? M⊙ = mass in relation to the Sun?

2. What is IMF - initial mass function? pg 328, last full paragraph

3. What is MedE? pg 331 5.2

4. What is intervening column density? pg 332 5.3 2nd paragraph

5. What is extinction? pg 332 5.3 3rd paragraph

----
"Section 6 & 7 - Science questions and summary"

Section 6 pulls the info from the study into the larger science questions - What do these results say about triggered star formation and the two initiation methods mentioned? It seems that RDI (radiation driven implosion) is supported.

I like section 7's summary. Easy to understand and I like the list of classifications of the 25 YSO.

----

== Beltran 2009 The stellar population and complex structure of the bright-rimmed cloud IC 1396N ==

This article discusses the structure of this cloud and gives positions of everything it talks about. 18 pages worth of tables! Their conclusions are also different than the previous paper about star formation.

I found it interesting that individual sources we read about in the previous article have been resolved into several sources by the time this one was written.

Questions

1. They mention that bluer YSO mean older and redder are younger -- this is opposite of main sequence stars

2. '''What is on source images and off sources images? Why do you do this?''' this is to try and adjust for background light

The images went through 5 set of corrections or adjustments before photometry

3.2 The authors conclude not all star formation is triggered star formation in this cloud. Then what else is there?

3.3.1 All this info about H2 knots. Dense material. '''Does the red and blue shift indicate spinning?''' No, it is looking at a jet face on but not perpendicular

3.3.2 H2 flows are complicated. A lot of assumptions are made.

4. 736 sources found in all three bands - J, H K' 128 sources found only in HK' 67 sources found only in K' 79 sources found only in JH

Different conclusions from Getman. An age gradient is not found in the south-north direction of the globule; not all star formation in globule is by triggered star formation. NO alternative method given.

----

== '''Spitzer Observations of IC 2118''' The Witch Head Nebula ==

Summary:

The Witch Head Nebula (WHN) is thought to be a site of triggered star formation. Observations in 7 IR bands using SST and 4 bands in optical yields IR excesses in 4 of 6 previously known T Tauri stars and discovery of 6 new candidate YSOs.

This article has a nice introduction that covers a bit of stellar formation overview due to 2 mechanisms: gravitational collapse and “triggered” from nearby events like supernova. The Initial Mass Function (IMF) and the star formation efficiency are supported by the inventory of YSOs formed in a cloud, which then supports closer study of the initial conditions of star formation.

A detailed comparison of the two formation mechanisms with respect to the IMF and stellar formation efficiency will assist with understanding the mechanics of star formation itself.

The data analysis section was highly detailed and technical. This section gave me the greatest comprehension challenge and also the greatest number of questions that require a bit more clarification.

The selection of YSO candidates focused on finding sources having an infrared excess characteristic of YSOs surrounded by a dust disk. A high source contamination rate was expected. Filtering mechanisms form the literature based on Spitzer colors were used to distinguish likely galaxies from likely members. Optical information was used to further winnow the candidate list.

Both color-color and color-magnitude diagrams from IRAC were used to select sources. 459 sources were identified having colors consistent with galaxies dominated by Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAHs). 765 more sources having colors consistent with active galactic nuclei (AGN), only 27 sources are not flagged as background contaminants and have colors compatible with YSOs and with IRAC excess. The list of 27 sources not flagged as contaminants bears further scrutiny. 18 of the YSO candidates have magnitudes fainter than 12. As the brightness decreases, the probability of the object being background contamination increases.

The wealth of data allowed these data to additionally constrain the YSO selection. 18 faint sources all fall in the region occupied by main-sequence stars or background galaxies. The 9 remaining YSOs with magnitudes less than 12 all appear redder, near or above a 30 Myr isochrones. These are strongly suspected to be contaminants. The 9 brighter objects are included in the list of their (the authors) IRAC selected YSO candidates. There are restrictions imposed with the consequence that leads to a distance assumption that may be problematic. The details of this challenge appear in the bottom half of page 13 for further detailed description, should curiosity require investigation.

All 9 of the IRAC selected YSO candidates are seen at MIPS-24. There is a bit more technical justification about why seeing these candidates in MIPS-24 at one of the two distances proposed (~210 pc and ~440pc).

Most of the sources seen in the observations at 24 or 70 μm are foreground stars or background galaxies.

POSS and 2MASS and optical images for each candidate were used to verify that they did not appear extended in any of these bands. All YSO candidates passed the checks and appear to be point sources in all available bands.

The MIPS selection was technically detailed and the objects seemed to fall into either Class II or Class III with weak excesses. There appears to be three distinct groups of object: 1) objects of zero color (likely foreground or background stars), 2) objects that are faint and red (likely galaxies) and 3) objects that are bright and red (likely YSOs). There doesn’t appear to be any sources between the photospehric Class III and Class II objects. The chosen selection process may have gathered the YSO candidates into the group of brightest or reddest object, lending further support that the assertion of faint object being most likely background galaxies (bottom of page 14). Why is this so??

There is a good amount of detailed description of how the candidates were sorted out from the other sources. From the list of 10 YSO candidates, six are new discoveries. One of the Class II T Tauri stars is a flat disk. The fit for the edge-on-disk candidate was not the same as for the non-disk candidates, since the slope changes significantly depending on whether the MIPS points are included in the fit for the edge-on disk. I think I’d like to understand the slope correlation a bit better…

All of the YSO candidates are located in the head of the nebula, the most massive molecular cloud of the WHN. The distributions lend further support o the assertion that the IRAC and MIPS selected bright object are likely YSOs. The expected YSO candidates for the regions further south were not found. Apparently the conditions in this region do not support substantial star formation. The head of the nebula is about 3 times more massive than any of the other clouds.

There is a nice explanation of at least two intertwined mysteries that enshroud the WHN. The distance to it, and the external source that is responsible for the surface sculpture, illumination and possible trigger mechanism. There is a nice explanation of how the possible two sources (the Trapezium and Rigel) at different distances could solve the mysteries. There are arguments for both explanations, and the conclusion is that there is no clear answer. GAIA (galactic mapping mission proposed to launch in 2013) highlighted text abovecould provide a definitive answer by deriving accurate parallaxes to some objects.

The conclusion for the work states that the inventory of YSOs and candidates has doubles as a result of using Spitzer data to search for objects with IR excess in the region. SEDs are used extensively to identify YSO candidates. If the region is a triggered star formation mechanism, then trends of age or mass as they relate to location may be established. Since there are so few objects, since the distance is uncertain and since the spectral types for most of these objects is unknown, this correlation cannot be done rigorously.

Additional follow-up spectroscopic data are needed to confirm or refute the YSO status for the six new objects.

The new edge –on disk candidate in particular warrants further study, since such objects are relatively rare.

GAIA will be needed to resolve the mystery of the distance to the WHN.

Questions:

What:
1. I want to verify that I understand correctly that bands UVRcIc stand for: Ultraviolet, Visible, Red and Infrared, respectively.
2. Fat fielding issues
3. 100 MJy/ sr
4. Median boxcar filter
5. NaNs
6. UV RcIc
7. “real matches “
8. false source associations
9. centroiding
10. ELAIS
11. U and 70 micro meters
12. Optical Mv
13. VLBA and VLBI
14. mas/yr

How and HUH?

1. APEXZ portion of MOPEX
2. Zero point used to convert flux densities to magnitudes
3. …as a final check on our measurements.
4. …through observation of Landolt standards. Does this mean that the additional epoc was just for verification of data integrity?
5. …deviate significantly from zero

Why?
1. The data were further processed…
2. …we wished to add reddened stellar models to the plots

== '''New Young Star Candidate in the Taurus-Aruiga Region as Selected from WISE''' ==

Summary: WISE data is used to search for YSO candidates in Taurus from a 260 square degree patch of sky to encompass previously identified Taurus members. Near and mid IR colors are used to select objects with apparent IR excesses and incorporate other catalogs of ancillary data. There is likely to be contamination lingering in this candidate list, and follow up spectra are warranted.

Even though Spitzer is good at finding new young stars, some are located surprisingly far from the traditional location based on CO gas or IRAS dust maps. A 44 square degree survey of Taurus was done with Spitzer. It was found that any solely near and mid IR color selection was filled with contamination from galaxies and asymptotic giant brand (AGB) stars. The use of ancillary data was crucial to establishing a list of high quality new members of Taurus. WISE surveyed the entire sky; the depth of coverage in the Taurus region is somewhat degraded relative to regions of comparable ecliptic latitude due to Moon avoidance maneuvers. Since the cloud is only 140 pc away, both surveys (Spitzer and WISE) should easily detect legitimate Taurus members.

New Taurus candidates were selected with IR excesses using WISE colors with the Koenig et al method. There are three lists: 1) recovered young stars, 2) rejected objects, and 3) candidate new Taurus members.

A substantial multi-wavelength database was assembled for point sources throughout the Taurus region. Not every source has photometry at all bands due to variations in depth and spatial coverage among the surveys involved.

The WISE data acquisition and reduction are discussed in Wright et al, Jarrett et al and in the Explanatory Supplement to the WISE preliminary Data Release Products. Any sources with contamination and confusion flags were rejected, as were “DHOP” (what’s this?) characters.

There were about 2.38 MILLION sources. Signal to Noise Ratio (SNR) measurements were used to drastically shrink the catalog to about 7,000 sources. The SNR cut was used in W4 to limit the contamination. Since the contamination rate for any color selection is expected to be relatively large, ancillary data are crucial for culling the list to high - quality candidates. A rough total of about 2,000 contaminants per square degree were determined. Approximately 1,760 YSO candidates were obtained before imposing additional requirements (which were???) to the SNR be imposed on all four WISE channels reduced the number to 1,014.

Ancillary data were used to weed out contaminants from the list of potential YSO candidates. Only 27 sources on the list of potential YSOs found matches with SDSS spectra.

Of the 1,014 potential YSOs, 196 of them have matches to previously identified stars. 18 of these are listed as unconfirmed candidates in Rebull et al (2010).

Manual Inspection was used to sort objects into “likely contaminant” or “perhaps YSO” bins. The four criteria used to categorize were: 1) matching objects in SIMBAD, 2) matches to objects identified as contaminants in Rebull at al (2010), 3) matches to the 2MASS Extended Source Catalog, and 4) identification as extended in the SDSS pipeline. SEDs were then generated using all the photometric date in the database, and the SEDs were inspected. Based on experience, the SEDs were then categorized as still possible YSO candidates, or likely extragalactic objects. This process may have dropped viable YSO candidates similar to MHO-1 (huh?) or Haro 6-39 (huh?). This process left about 130 candidates. The sources were identified as either being likely subjected to source contamination (HOW?) resolved as a likely galaxy (HOW?) or still apparently clean, point sources (HOW?) This brought the number of candidates down to about 94 objects. All SEDs for the 94 appear in the Appendix.

Projected location of the previously identified YSOs is generally highly clustered along the filamentary distribution of gas and dust, and the new objects are less clustered. The goal was to look for new YSOs outside the canonical groupings of previously known Taurus members. This could also be an indication of persistent contamination in the surviving list of YSOs candidates. There is more discussion about the location of previously identified YSOs and contaminants.

Previous YSOs are generally found in regions of high Av, and background galaxies are found in regions of low Av. The new objects are not particularly clustered, but not evenly distributed either. Most of the previously identified YSOs are bright and most of the contaminants are faint. The new YSO candidates span the range of bright and faint.

The list of objects by type: recovery of 196 previously identified young stars with IR excess, 686 likely to be galaxies, 13 foreground stars, 1 planetary nebula, 24 objects that are likely to be confusing and 94 new YSO candidates that are widely distributed in space.

Questions:

1. What s the “J” in 2MASS J04360131
2. What is color near zero?
3. What is the reddening factor?
4. What is the meaning of “...in the right regime for JHKs diagram”
5. What is “z measurement”?
6. What are large inner disk holes?

== '''New Young Star Candidates in CG4 and Sa101''' ==

The introduction to this paper also has some very good background about the Gum Nebula and the stellar formation mechanisms thought to apply within it. Previous studies by Reipurth and Pettersson are summarized, with a conclusion that stars associated with the Cometary Globule 4 (CG4) and Sa 101 are associated with the Gum Nebula. The distances to all considered objects are uncertain; the distances vary from 300 to 500 pc. The extrema of the distance estimates were tested, though the results are not strongly dependent on distance. The region contains previously identified young stars, so it is likely that there are more young stars of lower mass or more embedded than those previously discovered.

The data sections, like the other two papers summarized, are highly technical and summarizing all the details doesn’t seem fruitful beyond this very minimal overview. More detailed reading should be the way to get more detail about the data analysis.

For the IRAC data, two exposures were taken with three dithers per position. The two observational locations were reduced independently even though they overlap on the sky. Some of the very bright stars in the filed of view had instrumental effects that rendered the data very difficult to work with. There is quite a bit of detailed description of calibration technique, correlation and photometry and error reduction methods.

The MIPS 24 and 70 micron data were combined. The 24-micron data were affected by the bright objects and required additional processing. The background levels between the two observations were problematic, and a description of how this was addressed was discussed. Optimized data reduction to obtain brighter source measurements led to many sources fainter than the bright sources in the image being excluded from the catalog because the scientific goals are aimed at brighter objects. There is a good, technical justification of the filtering choices made to process the data.

The optical data used the observed Landolt (1992) standard stars of two or three fields several times per night for photometric calibration. For each target, aperture photometry was performed using multiple size apertures. There is a discussion of the correction used for a noticeable variation of the point-spread function (PSF) that is location dependent on the CCD.

The bandmerging of the photometric data was first merged from all four IRAC channels with the near IR 2MASS data for each observation. This was then merged together with the source lists from each observation. The MIPS data was then included, and then the optical data was merged. A very detailed discussion of how this was done follows.

YSO candidate properties are discussed in the subset of optical, near IR, B-band and SEDs. Optical data can greatly aid in the confirmation or refutation of YSO candidacy because they provide constraints on the Wien side of the SED. Objects with optical data that have already been ruled out as SOs based on the IRAC properties are all well below the 30 Myr isochrones scaled to 500 pc. Deeper optical data are desirable to obtain magnitude estimates for the remaining YSO candidates. The degree of reddening is difficult to estimate because the spectral types for most of the sources are not available. The candidates have infrared excess with a moderate degree of reddening. Young stars that are actively accreting from their circumstellar disks can have excess UV emission in the U or B bands or longer. These bands are also the most sensitive to reddening. Figure 13 is discussed with respect to mass accretion. The coordinates of the YSOs are listed in Table 1. The SEDs of the 22 YSO candidates are displayed in figures 14 - 16. A spectral type of MO was assumed for the remaining objects. A redden model of each object is shown and normalized to the Ks band where possible. These are presented as a guide to the eye rather than a robust fit to the object to allow the immediate IR excesses to be immediately apparent. There is quite a bit of more technically detailed description of the properties in the SEDs section than is summarized here.

There is a galaxy, ESO 257 – G 019 that is mentioned because it appears in the observation field. It has not been studied, and some basic astrometric data about it is listed.

In conclusion, 6 previously identified young stars were rediscovered. There are 16 new YSOs that were discovered and evaluated with ground-based data in the near IR from 2MASS to constrain the SEDs of the candidates. The new young star candidates were graded into confidence groups. Additional data will be needed, such as optical photometry where it is missing and optical spectroscopy to obtain spectral types.

SFO Paper Journals Guided Reading

2012-05-06T16:16:36Z

Novatne: /* Info to help you answer questions and things I just don't get */

==[[Info to help you answer questions and things I just don't get]]==

==Original SFO - Sugitani et al 1991==
Survey of BRCs to describe the BRCs themselves and look for YSOs. 
Palomar Sky Survey (PSS) and IRAS point sources. 

44 BRCs found in Palomar Sky survey prints that had associated IRAS point sources where all found to have IRAS point sources that were good candidates for being YSOs. Tables/images exist for; HII region locations, PPS finding charts, BRC location charts, IRAS point source properties (12, 25, 60, 100 micron), BRC and point source descriptions and plots. 

Questions to ask yourself as you read 

Abstract, Intro and Summary 
-what is the flow of all the types of nebulosity that they describe and the cause/effect relationship to star formation? 
-how will the understanding of this cause/effect help us in our closer study of just three BRCs? 

The Sample, Results 
-how did the authors take advantage of Palomar Sky Survey Prints? 
-how will this help future astronomers with their work? 
-table 3 lists exactly one IRAS source for each BRC, where are the rest of the YSOs we expect to see? 
Discussion 
Although 15 of the IRAS point sources were catagoized as type I and “really are” YSOs, why are all 44 of the sources considered good candidates for YSOs? 

==Most recent paper - Ogura et al 2002==
Looking for H-alpha emissions using grism spectroscopy to find previously undetected YSOs that do not have strong IR excess in order to collect more information on star formation in BRCs and contained HH objects, and further investigate small-scale sequential star formation (SSSSF). 
Optical (H-alpha using grism spectroscopy), 2 MASS 

Questions to ask yourself as you read 

Introduction, Observations and Data Reduction 
-why do the authors recommend higher resolution studies? 
-what is SSSSF and what is the evidence for supporting this hypothesis? 
-what is grism spectroscopy and how does it help “fill in some holes” in terms of YSOs? 
-how did the authors categorize H-alpha equivalent widths in “difficult cases”? Think about the usefulness of this data. 

Images and Data 
-what qualitative and quantitative information will be helpful to us in our study? List tables and images, highlighting information specific to our study. 
H-alpha stars, HH objects and Discussion 
-what did the authors find of interest in our particular BRCs? 
-what evidence is given to support further multi-wavelength studies searching for YSOs?

Talk:C-WAYS Spring work

2012-05-06T16:04:03Z

Novatne: /* Spitzer Observations of IC 2118 The Witch Head Nebula */

== Getman 2006 X-Ray Study of Triggered Star Formation and Protostars in IC 1396N ==

An observation of IC 1396N with Chandra, so X-ray light. How long (total time) was the observation? 30 ks = 30 kilo seconds = 30,000 seconds = 500 min = 8.33 hours - '''Is this a long observation? I got the impression from the reading that it was short.'''

''Intro - What will be useful in this section for us?''

'''The cometary globule this study looks at is BRC 38?'''

Nice list of indicators of star formation in IC 1396N. Things we should know about

-IRAS source 21391 +5802

-H2O masers

-molecular outflows

-HH flows

-clusters of IR embedded sources

-radio mm portostars

Explanation of RDI - easy to understand.
Explanation of why an x-ray study - I was surprised. Didn't think about magnetic fields being active in YSO.

----
"2.1 - 2.3 Chandra Observation & Source List - The meat for us!"

The most important things here are the tables and figures. Locations given for the found sources and correlations to 2MASS. '''Will we eventually understand what each of these columns mean?'''

2.1 - Interesting that 8 corrections were made to the data. EIGHT pg 317-8
Data reduced to 117 point sources (listed in table 1); 66 of those correlated with 2MASS; 5 newly identified

----
''Sections 3, 4 & 5 - Interesting things about IC 1396N''

3.1-3.4 Data reduced to sources coming from star formation. 25 sources are probable members of the globule. Sources classified as class 0, I, II, III.

4.1- 4.3 It was interesting that there was flaring going on. '''Are YSO variable in the their light output, like a variable star?''' 4.3 was hard to understand. I have to sort out wavelengths and energies associated with each em light band.

5.1-5.3 Figure 10 a - This is a great picture of results of using different types of observations and even of resolution. Why correlation with other studies is needed.
Figure 10 c - Source 66 and 68 are so much brighter than the others. Interesting. It was also interesting that #66 is the brightest x-ray object in IC 1396N. '''What does it mean that it is 'one of the most heavily absorbed sources'?'''

Questions

1. Does this symbol mean of the Sun? M⊙ = mass in relation to the Sun?

2. What is IMF - initial mass function? pg 328, last full paragraph

3. What is MedE? pg 331 5.2

4. What is intervening column density? pg 332 5.3 2nd paragraph

5. What is extinction? pg 332 5.3 3rd paragraph

----
"Section 6 & 7 - Science questions and summary"

Section 6 pulls the info from the study into the larger science questions - What do these results say about triggered star formation and the two initiation methods mentioned? It seems that RDI (radiation driven implosion) is supported.

I like section 7's summary. Easy to understand and I like the list of classifications of the 25 YSO.

----

== Beltran 2009 The stellar population and complex structure of the bright-rimmed cloud IC 1396N ==

This article discusses the structure of this cloud and gives positions of everything it talks about. 18 pages worth of tables! Their conclusions are also different than the previous paper about star formation.

I found it interesting that individual sources we read about in the previous article have been resolved into several sources by the time this one was written.

Questions

1. They mention that bluer YSO mean older and redder are younger -- this is opposite of main sequence stars

2. '''What is on source images and off sources images? Why do you do this?''' this is to try and adjust for background light

The images went through 5 set of corrections or adjustments before photometry

3.2 The authors conclude not all star formation is triggered star formation in this cloud. Then what else is there?

3.3.1 All this info about H2 knots. Dense material. '''Does the red and blue shift indicate spinning?''' No, it is looking at a jet face on but not perpendicular

3.3.2 H2 flows are complicated. A lot of assumptions are made.

4. 736 sources found in all three bands - J, H K' 128 sources found only in HK' 67 sources found only in K' 79 sources found only in JH

Different conclusions from Getman. An age gradient is not found in the south-north direction of the globule; not all star formation in globule is by triggered star formation. NO alternative method given.

== '''Spitzer Observations of IC 2118''' The Witch Head Nebula ==

Summary:

The Witch Head Nebula (WHN) is thought to be a site of triggered star formation. Observations in 7 IR bands using SST and 4 bands in optical yields IR excesses in 4 of 6 previously known T Tauri stars and discovery of 6 new candidate YSOs.

This article has a nice introduction that covers a bit of stellar formation overview due to 2 mechanisms: gravitational collapse and “triggered” from nearby events like supernova. The Initial Mass Function (IMF) and the star formation efficiency are supported by the inventory of YSOs formed in a cloud, which then supports closer study of the initial conditions of star formation.

A detailed comparison of the two formation mechanisms with respect to the IMF and stellar formation efficiency will assist with understanding the mechanics of star formation itself.

The data analysis section was highly detailed and technical. This section gave me the greatest comprehension challenge and also the greatest number of questions that require a bit more clarification.

The selection of YSO candidates focused on finding sources having an infrared excess characteristic of YSOs surrounded by a dust disk. A high source contamination rate was expected. Filtering mechanisms form the literature based on Spitzer colors were used to distinguish likely galaxies from likely members. Optical information was used to further winnow the candidate list.

Both color-color and color-magnitude diagrams from IRAC were used to select sources. 459 sources were identified having colors consistent with galaxies dominated by Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAHs). 765 more sources having colors consistent with active galactic nuclei (AGN), only 27 sources are not flagged as background contaminants and have colors compatible with YSOs and with IRAC excess. The list of 27 sources not flagged as contaminants bears further scrutiny. 18 of the YSO candidates have magnitudes fainter than 12. As the brightness decreases, the probability of the object being background contamination increases.

The wealth of data allowed these data to additionally constrain the YSO selection. 18 faint sources all fall in the region occupied by main-sequence stars or background galaxies. The 9 remaining YSOs with magnitudes less than 12 all appear redder, near or above a 30 Myr isochrones. These are strongly suspected to be contaminants. The 9 brighter objects are included in the list of their (the authors) IRAC selected YSO candidates. There are restrictions imposed with the consequence that leads to a distance assumption that may be problematic. The details of this challenge appear in the bottom half of page 13 for further detailed description, should curiosity require investigation.

All 9 of the IRAC selected YSO candidates are seen at MIPS-24. There is a bit more technical justification about why seeing these candidates in MIPS-24 at one of the two distances proposed (~210 pc and ~440pc).

Most of the sources seen in the observations at 24 or 70 μm are foreground stars or background galaxies.

POSS and 2MASS and optical images for each candidate were used to verify that they did not appear extended in any of these bands. All YSO candidates passed the checks and appear to be point sources in all available bands.

The MIPS selection was technically detailed and the objects seemed to fall into either Class II or Class III with weak excesses. There appears to be three distinct groups of object: 1) objects of zero color (likely foreground or background stars), 2) objects that are faint and red (likely galaxies) and 3) objects that are bright and red (likely YSOs). There doesn’t appear to be any sources between the photospehric Class III and Class II objects. The chosen selection process may have gathered the YSO candidates into the group of brightest or reddest object, lending further support that the assertion of faint object being most likely background galaxies (bottom of page 14). Why is this so??

There is a good amount of detailed description of how the candidates were sorted out from the other sources. From the list of 10 YSO candidates, six are new discoveries. One of the Class II T Tauri stars is a flat disk. The fit for the edge-on-disk candidate was not the same as for the non-disk candidates, since the slope changes significantly depending on whether the MIPS points are included in the fit for the edge-on disk. I think I’d like to understand the slope correlation a bit better…

All of the YSO candidates are located in the head of the nebula, the most massive molecular cloud of the WHN. The distributions lend further support o the assertion that the IRAC and MIPS selected bright object are likely YSOs. The expected YSO candidates for the regions further south were not found. Apparently the conditions in this region do not support substantial star formation. The head of the nebula is about 3 times more massive than any of the other clouds.

There is a nice explanation of at least two intertwined mysteries that enshroud the WHN. The distance to it, and the external source that is responsible for the surface sculpture, illumination and possible trigger mechanism. There is a nice explanation of how the possible two sources (the Trapezium and Rigel) at different distances could solve the mysteries. There are arguments for both explanations, and the conclusion is that there is no clear answer. GAIA (galactic mapping mission proposed to launch in 2013) highlighted text abovecould provide a definitive answer by deriving accurate parallaxes to some objects.

The conclusion for the work states that the inventory of YSOs and candidates has doubles as a result of using Spitzer data to search for objects with IR excess in the region. SEDs are used extensively to identify YSO candidates. If the region is a triggered star formation mechanism, then trends of age or mass as they relate to location may be established. Since there are so few objects, since the distance is uncertain and since the spectral types for most of these objects is unknown, this correlation cannot be done rigorously.

Additional follow-up spectroscopic data are needed to confirm or refute the YSO status for the six new objects.

The new edge –on disk candidate in particular warrants further study, since such objects are relatively rare.

GAIA will be needed to resolve the mystery of the distance to the WHN.

Questions:

What:
1. I want to verify that I understand correctly that bands UVRcIc stand for: Ultraviolet, Visible, Red and Infrared, respectively.
2. Fat fielding issues
3. 100 MJy/ sr
4. Median boxcar filter
5. NaNs
6. UV RcIc
7. “real matches “
8. false source associations
9. centroiding
10. ELAIS
11. U and 70 micro meters
12. Optical Mv
13. VLBA and VLBI
14. mas/yr

How and HUH?

1. APEXZ portion of MOPEX
2. Zero point used to convert flux densities to magnitudes
3. …as a final check on our measurements.
4. …through observation of Landolt standards. Does this mean that the additional epoc was just for verification of data integrity?
5. …deviate significantly from zero

Why?
1. The data were further processed…
2. …we wished to add reddened stellar models to the plots

== '''New Young Star Candidate in the Taurus-Aruiga Region as Selected from WISE''' ==

Summary: WISE data is used to search for YSO candidates in Taurus from a 260 square degree patch of sky to encompass previously identified Taurus members. Near and mid IR colors are used to select objects with apparent IR excesses and incorporate other catalogs of ancillary data. There is likely to be contamination lingering in this candidate list, and follow up spectra are warranted.

Even though Spitzer is good at finding new young stars, some are located surprisingly far from the traditional location based on CO gas or IRAS dust maps. A 44 square degree survey of Taurus was done with Spitzer. It was found that any solely near and mid IR color selection was filled with contamination from galaxies and asymptotic giant brand (AGB) stars. The use of ancillary data was crucial to establishing a list of high quality new members of Taurus. WISE surveyed the entire sky; the depth of coverage in the Taurus region is somewhat degraded relative to regions of comparable ecliptic latitude due to Moon avoidance maneuvers. Since the cloud is only 140 pc away, both surveys (Spitzer and WISE) should easily detect legitimate Taurus members.

New Taurus candidates were selected with IR excesses using WISE colors with the Koenig et al method. There are three lists: 1) recovered young stars, 2) rejected objects, and 3) candidate new Taurus members.

A substantial multi-wavelength database was assembled for point sources throughout the Taurus region. Not every source has photometry at all bands due to variations in depth and spatial coverage among the surveys involved.

The WISE data acquisition and reduction are discussed in Wright et al, Jarrett et al and in the Explanatory Supplement to the WISE preliminary Data Release Products. Any sources with contamination and confusion flags were rejected, as were “DHOP” (what’s this?) characters.

There were about 2.38 MILLION sources. Signal to Noise Ratio (SNR) measurements were used to drastically shrink the catalog to about 7,000 sources. The SNR cut was used in W4 to limit the contamination. Since the contamination rate for any color selection is expected to be relatively large, ancillary data are crucial for culling the list to high - quality candidates. A rough total of about 2,000 contaminants per square degree were determined. Approximately 1,760 YSO candidates were obtained before imposing additional requirements (which were???) to the SNR be imposed on all four WISE channels reduced the number to 1,014.

Ancillary data were used to weed out contaminants from the list of potential YSO candidates. Only 27 sources on the list of potential YSOs found matches with SDSS spectra.

Of the 1,014 potential YSOs, 196 of them have matches to previously identified stars. 18 of these are listed as unconfirmed candidates in Rebull et al (2010).

Manual Inspection was used to sort objects into “likely contaminant” or “perhaps YSO” bins. The four criteria used to categorize were: 1) matching objects in SIMBAD, 2) matches to objects identified as contaminants in Rebull at al (2010), 3) matches to the 2MASS Extended Source Catalog, and 4) identification as extended in the SDSS pipeline. SEDs were then generated using all the photometric date in the database, and the SEDs were inspected. Based on experience, the SEDs were then categorized as still possible YSO candidates, or likely extragalactic objects. This process may have dropped viable YSO candidates similar to MHO-1 (huh?) or Haro 6-39 (huh?). This process left about 130 candidates. The sources were identified as either being likely subjected to source contamination (HOW?) resolved as a likely galaxy (HOW?) or still apparently clean, point sources (HOW?) This brought the number of candidates down to about 94 objects. All SEDs for the 94 appear in the Appendix.

Projected location of the previously identified YSOs is generally highly clustered along the filamentary distribution of gas and dust, and the new objects are less clustered. The goal was to look for new YSOs outside the canonical groupings of previously known Taurus members. This could also be an indication of persistent contamination in the surviving list of YSOs candidates. There is more discussion about the location of previously identified YSOs and contaminants.

Previous YSOs are generally found in regions of high Av, and background galaxies are found in regions of low Av. The new objects are not particularly clustered, but not evenly distributed either. Most of the previously identified YSOs are bright and most of the contaminants are faint. The new YSO candidates span the range of bright and faint.

The list of objects by type: recovery of 196 previously identified young stars with IR excess, 686 likely to be galaxies, 13 foreground stars, 1 planetary nebula, 24 objects that are likely to be confusing and 94 new YSO candidates that are widely distributed in space.

Questions:

1. What s the “J” in 2MASS J04360131
2. What is color near zero?
3. What is the reddening factor?
4. What is the meaning of “...in the right regime for JHKs diagram”
5. What is “z measurement”?
6. What are large inner disk holes?

== '''New Young Star Candidates in CG4 and Sa101''' ==

The introduction to this paper also has some very good background about the Gum Nebula and the stellar formation mechanisms thought to apply within it. Previous studies by Reipurth and Pettersson are summarized, with a conclusion that stars associated with the Cometary Globule 4 (CG4) and Sa 101 are associated with the Gum Nebula. The distances to all considered objects are uncertain; the distances vary from 300 to 500 pc. The extrema of the distance estimates were tested, though the results are not strongly dependent on distance. The region contains previously identified young stars, so it is likely that there are more young stars of lower mass or more embedded than those previously discovered.

The data sections, like the other two papers summarized, are highly technical and summarizing all the details doesn’t seem fruitful beyond this very minimal overview. More detailed reading should be the way to get more detail about the data analysis.

For the IRAC data, two exposures were taken with three dithers per position. The two observational locations were reduced independently even though they overlap on the sky. Some of the very bright stars in the filed of view had instrumental effects that rendered the data very difficult to work with. There is quite a bit of detailed description of calibration technique, correlation and photometry and error reduction methods.

The MIPS 24 and 70 micron data were combined. The 24-micron data were affected by the bright objects and required additional processing. The background levels between the two observations were problematic, and a description of how this was addressed was discussed. Optimized data reduction to obtain brighter source measurements led to many sources fainter than the bright sources in the image being excluded from the catalog because the scientific goals are aimed at brighter objects. There is a good, technical justification of the filtering choices made to process the data.

The optical data used the observed Landolt (1992) standard stars of two or three fields several times per night for photometric calibration. For each target, aperture photometry was performed using multiple size apertures. There is a discussion of the correction used for a noticeable variation of the point-spread function (PSF) that is location dependent on the CCD.

The bandmerging of the photometric data was first merged from all four IRAC channels with the near IR 2MASS data for each observation. This was then merged together with the source lists from each observation. The MIPS data was then included, and then the optical data was merged. A very detailed discussion of how this was done follows.

YSO candidate properties are discussed in the subset of optical, near IR, B-band and SEDs. Optical data can greatly aid in the confirmation or refutation of YSO candidacy because they provide constraints on the Wien side of the SED. Objects with optical data that have already been ruled out as SOs based on the IRAC properties are all well below the 30 Myr isochrones scaled to 500 pc. Deeper optical data are desirable to obtain magnitude estimates for the remaining YSO candidates. The degree of reddening is difficult to estimate because the spectral types for most of the sources are not available. The candidates have infrared excess with a moderate degree of reddening. Young stars that are actively accreting from their circumstellar disks can have excess UV emission in the U or B bands or longer. These bands are also the most sensitive to reddening. Figure 13 is discussed with respect to mass accretion. The coordinates of the YSOs are listed in Table 1. The SEDs of the 22 YSO candidates are displayed in figures 14 - 16. A spectral type of MO was assumed for the remaining objects. A redden model of each object is shown and normalized to the Ks band where possible. These are presented as a guide to the eye rather than a robust fit to the object to allow the immediate IR excesses to be immediately apparent. There is quite a bit of more technically detailed description of the properties in the SEDs section than is summarized here.

There is a galaxy, ESO 257 – G 019 that is mentioned because it appears in the observation field. It has not been studied, and some basic astrometric data about it is listed.

In conclusion, 6 previously identified young stars were rediscovered. There are 16 new YSOs that were discovered and evaluated with ground-based data in the near IR from 2MASS to constrain the SEDs of the candidates. The new young star candidates were graded into confidence groups. Additional data will be needed, such as optical photometry where it is missing and optical spectroscopy to obtain spectral types.

Talk:C-WAYS Spring work

2012-05-06T16:03:19Z

Novatne: /* Beltran 2009 The stellar population and complex structure of the bright-rimmed cloud IC 1396N */

== Getman 2006 X-Ray Study of Triggered Star Formation and Protostars in IC 1396N ==

An observation of IC 1396N with Chandra, so X-ray light. How long (total time) was the observation? 30 ks = 30 kilo seconds = 30,000 seconds = 500 min = 8.33 hours - '''Is this a long observation? I got the impression from the reading that it was short.'''

''Intro - What will be useful in this section for us?''

'''The cometary globule this study looks at is BRC 38?'''

Nice list of indicators of star formation in IC 1396N. Things we should know about

-IRAS source 21391 +5802

-H2O masers

-molecular outflows

-HH flows

-clusters of IR embedded sources

-radio mm portostars

Explanation of RDI - easy to understand.
Explanation of why an x-ray study - I was surprised. Didn't think about magnetic fields being active in YSO.

----
"2.1 - 2.3 Chandra Observation & Source List - The meat for us!"

The most important things here are the tables and figures. Locations given for the found sources and correlations to 2MASS. '''Will we eventually understand what each of these columns mean?'''

2.1 - Interesting that 8 corrections were made to the data. EIGHT pg 317-8
Data reduced to 117 point sources (listed in table 1); 66 of those correlated with 2MASS; 5 newly identified

----
''Sections 3, 4 & 5 - Interesting things about IC 1396N''

3.1-3.4 Data reduced to sources coming from star formation. 25 sources are probable members of the globule. Sources classified as class 0, I, II, III.

4.1- 4.3 It was interesting that there was flaring going on. '''Are YSO variable in the their light output, like a variable star?''' 4.3 was hard to understand. I have to sort out wavelengths and energies associated with each em light band.

5.1-5.3 Figure 10 a - This is a great picture of results of using different types of observations and even of resolution. Why correlation with other studies is needed.
Figure 10 c - Source 66 and 68 are so much brighter than the others. Interesting. It was also interesting that #66 is the brightest x-ray object in IC 1396N. '''What does it mean that it is 'one of the most heavily absorbed sources'?'''

Questions

1. Does this symbol mean of the Sun? M⊙ = mass in relation to the Sun?

2. What is IMF - initial mass function? pg 328, last full paragraph

3. What is MedE? pg 331 5.2

4. What is intervening column density? pg 332 5.3 2nd paragraph

5. What is extinction? pg 332 5.3 3rd paragraph

----
"Section 6 & 7 - Science questions and summary"

Section 6 pulls the info from the study into the larger science questions - What do these results say about triggered star formation and the two initiation methods mentioned? It seems that RDI (radiation driven implosion) is supported.

I like section 7's summary. Easy to understand and I like the list of classifications of the 25 YSO.

----

== Beltran 2009 The stellar population and complex structure of the bright-rimmed cloud IC 1396N ==

This article discusses the structure of this cloud and gives positions of everything it talks about. 18 pages worth of tables! Their conclusions are also different than the previous paper about star formation.

I found it interesting that individual sources we read about in the previous article have been resolved into several sources by the time this one was written.

Questions

1. They mention that bluer YSO mean older and redder are younger -- this is opposite of main sequence stars

2. '''What is on source images and off sources images? Why do you do this?''' this is to try and adjust for background light

The images went through 5 set of corrections or adjustments before photometry

3.2 The authors conclude not all star formation is triggered star formation in this cloud. Then what else is there?

3.3.1 All this info about H2 knots. Dense material. '''Does the red and blue shift indicate spinning?''' No, it is looking at a jet face on but not perpendicular

3.3.2 H2 flows are complicated. A lot of assumptions are made.

4. 736 sources found in all three bands - J, H K' 128 sources found only in HK' 67 sources found only in K' 79 sources found only in JH

Different conclusions from Getman. An age gradient is not found in the south-north direction of the globule; not all star formation in globule is by triggered star formation. NO alternative method given.

== '''Spitzer Observations of IC 2118''' The Witch Head Nebula ==

Summary:

The Witch Head Nebula (WHN) is thought to be a site of triggered star formation. Observations in 7 IR bands using SST and 4 bands in optical yields IR excesses in 4 of 6 previously known T Tauri stars and discovery of 6 new candidate YSOs.

This article has a nice introduction that covers a bit of stellar formation overview due to 2 mechanisms: gravitational collapse and “triggered” from nearby events like supernova. The Initial Mass Function (IMF) and the star formation efficiency are supported by the inventory of YSOs formed in a cloud, which then supports closer study of the initial conditions of star formation.

A detailed comparison of the two formation mechanisms with respect to the IMF and stellar formation efficiency will assist with understanding the mechanics of star formation itself.

The data analysis section was highly detailed and technical. This section gave me the greatest comprehension challenge and also the greatest number of questions that require a bit more clarification.

The selection of YSO candidates focused on finding sources having an infrared excess characteristic of YSOs surrounded by a dust disk. A high source contamination rate was expected. Filtering mechanisms form the literature based on Spitzer colors were used to distinguish likely galaxies from likely members. Optical information was used to further winnow the candidate list.

Both color-color and color-magnitude diagrams from IRAC were used to select sources. 459 sources were identified having colors consistent with galaxies dominated by Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAHs). 765 more sources having colors consistent with active galactic nuclei (AGN), only 27 sources are not flagged as background contaminants and have colors compatible with YSOs and with IRAC excess. The list of 27 sources not flagged as contaminants bears further scrutiny. 18 of the YSO candidates have magnitudes fainter than 12. As the brightness decreases, the probability of the object being background contamination increases.

The wealth of data allowed these data to additionally constrain the YSO selection. 18 faint sources all fall in the region occupied by main-sequence stars or background galaxies. The 9 remaining YSOs with magnitudes less than 12 all appear redder, near or above a 30 Myr isochrones. These are strongly suspected to be contaminants. The 9 brighter objects are included in the list of their (the authors) IRAC selected YSO candidates. There are restrictions imposed with the consequence that leads to a distance assumption that may be problematic. The details of this challenge appear in the bottom half of page 13 for further detailed description, should curiosity require investigation.

All 9 of the IRAC selected YSO candidates are seen at MIPS-24. There is a bit more technical justification about why seeing these candidates in MIPS-24 at one of the two distances proposed (~210 pc and ~440pc).

Most of the sources seen in the observations at 24 or 70 μm are foreground stars or background galaxies.

POSS and 2MASS and optical images for each candidate were used to verify that they did not appear extended in any of these bands. All YSO candidates passed the checks and appear to be point sources in all available bands.

The MIPS selection was technically detailed and the objects seemed to fall into either Class II or Class III with weak excesses. There appears to be three distinct groups of object: 1) objects of zero color (likely foreground or background stars), 2) objects that are faint and red (likely galaxies) and 3) objects that are bright and red (likely YSOs). There doesn’t appear to be any sources between the photospehric Class III and Class II objects. The chosen selection process may have gathered the YSO candidates into the group of brightest or reddest object, lending further support that the assertion of faint object being most likely background galaxies (bottom of page 14). Why is this so??

There is a good amount of detailed description of how the candidates were sorted out from the other sources. From the list of 10 YSO candidates, six are new discoveries. One of the Class II T Tauri stars is a flat disk. The fit for the edge-on-disk candidate was not the same as for the non-disk candidates, since the slope changes significantly depending on whether the MIPS points are included in the fit for the edge-on disk. I think I’d like to understand the slope correlation a bit better…

All of the YSO candidates are located in the head of the nebula, the most massive molecular cloud of the WHN. The distributions lend further support o the assertion that the IRAC and MIPS selected bright object are likely YSOs. The expected YSO candidates for the regions further south were not found. Apparently the conditions in this region do not support substantial star formation. The head of the nebula is about 3 times more massive than any of the other clouds.

There is a nice explanation of at least two intertwined mysteries that enshroud the WHN. The distance to it, and the external source that is responsible for the surface sculpture, illumination and possible trigger mechanism. There is a nice explanation of how the possible two sources (the Trapezium and Rigel) at different distances could solve the mysteries. There are arguments for both explanations, and the conclusion is that there is no clear answer. GAIA (galactic mapping mission proposed to launch in 2013) highlighted text abovecould provide a definitive answer by deriving accurate parallaxes to some objects.

The conclusion for the work states that the inventory of YSOs and candidates has doubles as a result of using Spitzer data to search for objects with IR excess in the region. SEDs are used extensively to identify YSO candidates. If the region is a triggered star formation mechanism, then trends of age or mass as they relate to location may be established. Since there are so few objects, since the distance is uncertain and since the spectral types for most of these objects is unknown, this correlation cannot be done rigorously.

Additional follow-up spectroscopic data are needed to confirm or refute the YSO status for the six new objects.

The new edge –on disk candidate in particular warrants further study, since such objects are relatively rare.

GAIA will be needed to resolve the mystery of the distance to the WHN.

Questions:

What:
1. I want to verify that I understand correctly that bands UVRcIc stand for: Ultraviolet, Visible, Red and Infrared, respectively.
2. Fat fielding issues
3. 100 MJy/ sr
4. Median boxcar filter
5. NaNs
6. UV RcIc
7. “real matches “
8. false source associations
9. centroiding
10. ELAIS
11. U and 70 micro meters
12. Optical Mv
13. VLBA and VLBI
14. mas/yr

How and HUH?

1. APEXZ portion of MOPEX
2. Zero point used to convert flux densities to magnitudes
3. …as a final check on our measurements.
4. …through observation of Landolt standards. Does this mean that the additional epoc was just for verification of data integrity?
5. …deviate significantly from zero

Why?
1. The data were further processed…
2. …we wished to add reddened stellar models to the plots

'''New Young Star Candidate in the Taurus-Aruiga Region as Selected from WISE'''

Summary: WISE data is used to search for YSO candidates in Taurus from a 260 square degree patch of sky to encompass previously identified Taurus members. Near and mid IR colors are used to select objects with apparent IR excesses and incorporate other catalogs of ancillary data. There is likely to be contamination lingering in this candidate list, and follow up spectra are warranted.

Even though Spitzer is good at finding new young stars, some are located surprisingly far from the traditional location based on CO gas or IRAS dust maps. A 44 square degree survey of Taurus was done with Spitzer. It was found that any solely near and mid IR color selection was filled with contamination from galaxies and asymptotic giant brand (AGB) stars. The use of ancillary data was crucial to establishing a list of high quality new members of Taurus. WISE surveyed the entire sky; the depth of coverage in the Taurus region is somewhat degraded relative to regions of comparable ecliptic latitude due to Moon avoidance maneuvers. Since the cloud is only 140 pc away, both surveys (Spitzer and WISE) should easily detect legitimate Taurus members.

New Taurus candidates were selected with IR excesses using WISE colors with the Koenig et al method. There are three lists: 1) recovered young stars, 2) rejected objects, and 3) candidate new Taurus members.

A substantial multi-wavelength database was assembled for point sources throughout the Taurus region. Not every source has photometry at all bands due to variations in depth and spatial coverage among the surveys involved.

The WISE data acquisition and reduction are discussed in Wright et al, Jarrett et al and in the Explanatory Supplement to the WISE preliminary Data Release Products. Any sources with contamination and confusion flags were rejected, as were “DHOP” (what’s this?) characters.

There were about 2.38 MILLION sources. Signal to Noise Ratio (SNR) measurements were used to drastically shrink the catalog to about 7,000 sources. The SNR cut was used in W4 to limit the contamination. Since the contamination rate for any color selection is expected to be relatively large, ancillary data are crucial for culling the list to high - quality candidates. A rough total of about 2,000 contaminants per square degree were determined. Approximately 1,760 YSO candidates were obtained before imposing additional requirements (which were???) to the SNR be imposed on all four WISE channels reduced the number to 1,014.

Ancillary data were used to weed out contaminants from the list of potential YSO candidates. Only 27 sources on the list of potential YSOs found matches with SDSS spectra.

Of the 1,014 potential YSOs, 196 of them have matches to previously identified stars. 18 of these are listed as unconfirmed candidates in Rebull et al (2010).

Manual Inspection was used to sort objects into “likely contaminant” or “perhaps YSO” bins. The four criteria used to categorize were: 1) matching objects in SIMBAD, 2) matches to objects identified as contaminants in Rebull at al (2010), 3) matches to the 2MASS Extended Source Catalog, and 4) identification as extended in the SDSS pipeline. SEDs were then generated using all the photometric date in the database, and the SEDs were inspected. Based on experience, the SEDs were then categorized as still possible YSO candidates, or likely extragalactic objects. This process may have dropped viable YSO candidates similar to MHO-1 (huh?) or Haro 6-39 (huh?). This process left about 130 candidates. The sources were identified as either being likely subjected to source contamination (HOW?) resolved as a likely galaxy (HOW?) or still apparently clean, point sources (HOW?) This brought the number of candidates down to about 94 objects. All SEDs for the 94 appear in the Appendix.

Projected location of the previously identified YSOs is generally highly clustered along the filamentary distribution of gas and dust, and the new objects are less clustered. The goal was to look for new YSOs outside the canonical groupings of previously known Taurus members. This could also be an indication of persistent contamination in the surviving list of YSOs candidates. There is more discussion about the location of previously identified YSOs and contaminants.

Previous YSOs are generally found in regions of high Av, and background galaxies are found in regions of low Av. The new objects are not particularly clustered, but not evenly distributed either. Most of the previously identified YSOs are bright and most of the contaminants are faint. The new YSO candidates span the range of bright and faint.

The list of objects by type: recovery of 196 previously identified young stars with IR excess, 686 likely to be galaxies, 13 foreground stars, 1 planetary nebula, 24 objects that are likely to be confusing and 94 new YSO candidates that are widely distributed in space.

Questions:

1. What s the “J” in 2MASS J04360131
2. What is color near zero?
3. What is the reddening factor?
4. What is the meaning of “...in the right regime for JHKs diagram”
5. What is “z measurement”?
6. What are large inner disk holes?

'''New Young Star Candidates in CG4 and Sa101'''
The introduction to this paper also has some very good background about the Gum Nebula and the stellar formation mechanisms thought to apply within it. Previous studies by Reipurth and Pettersson are summarized, with a conclusion that stars associated with the Cometary Globule 4 (CG4) and Sa 101 are associated with the Gum Nebula. The distances to all considered objects are uncertain; the distances vary from 300 to 500 pc. The extrema of the distance estimates were tested, though the results are not strongly dependent on distance. The region contains previously identified young stars, so it is likely that there are more young stars of lower mass or more embedded than those previously discovered.

The data sections, like the other two papers summarized, are highly technical and summarizing all the details doesn’t seem fruitful beyond this very minimal overview. More detailed reading should be the way to get more detail about the data analysis.

For the IRAC data, two exposures were taken with three dithers per position. The two observational locations were reduced independently even though they overlap on the sky. Some of the very bright stars in the filed of view had instrumental effects that rendered the data very difficult to work with. There is quite a bit of detailed description of calibration technique, correlation and photometry and error reduction methods.

The MIPS 24 and 70 micron data were combined. The 24-micron data were affected by the bright objects and required additional processing. The background levels between the two observations were problematic, and a description of how this was addressed was discussed. Optimized data reduction to obtain brighter source measurements led to many sources fainter than the bright sources in the image being excluded from the catalog because the scientific goals are aimed at brighter objects. There is a good, technical justification of the filtering choices made to process the data.

The optical data used the observed Landolt (1992) standard stars of two or three fields several times per night for photometric calibration. For each target, aperture photometry was performed using multiple size apertures. There is a discussion of the correction used for a noticeable variation of the point-spread function (PSF) that is location dependent on the CCD.

The bandmerging of the photometric data was first merged from all four IRAC channels with the near IR 2MASS data for each observation. This was then merged together with the source lists from each observation. The MIPS data was then included, and then the optical data was merged. A very detailed discussion of how this was done follows.

YSO candidate properties are discussed in the subset of optical, near IR, B-band and SEDs. Optical data can greatly aid in the confirmation or refutation of YSO candidacy because they provide constraints on the Wien side of the SED. Objects with optical data that have already been ruled out as SOs based on the IRAC properties are all well below the 30 Myr isochrones scaled to 500 pc. Deeper optical data are desirable to obtain magnitude estimates for the remaining YSO candidates. The degree of reddening is difficult to estimate because the spectral types for most of the sources are not available. The candidates have infrared excess with a moderate degree of reddening. Young stars that are actively accreting from their circumstellar disks can have excess UV emission in the U or B bands or longer. These bands are also the most sensitive to reddening. Figure 13 is discussed with respect to mass accretion. The coordinates of the YSOs are listed in Table 1. The SEDs of the 22 YSO candidates are displayed in figures 14 - 16. A spectral type of MO was assumed for the remaining objects. A redden model of each object is shown and normalized to the Ks band where possible. These are presented as a guide to the eye rather than a robust fit to the object to allow the immediate IR excesses to be immediately apparent. There is quite a bit of more technically detailed description of the properties in the SEDs section than is summarized here.

There is a galaxy, ESO 257 – G 019 that is mentioned because it appears in the observation field. It has not been studied, and some basic astrometric data about it is listed.

In conclusion, 6 previously identified young stars were rediscovered. There are 16 new YSOs that were discovered and evaluated with ground-based data in the near IR from 2MASS to constrain the SEDs of the candidates. The new young star candidates were graded into confidence groups. Additional data will be needed, such as optical photometry where it is missing and optical spectroscopy to obtain spectral types.

Talk:C-WAYS Spring work

2012-05-06T16:02:37Z

Novatne: /* Discussion papers */

== Getman 2006 X-Ray Study of Triggered Star Formation and Protostars in IC 1396N ==

An observation of IC 1396N with Chandra, so X-ray light. How long (total time) was the observation? 30 ks = 30 kilo seconds = 30,000 seconds = 500 min = 8.33 hours - '''Is this a long observation? I got the impression from the reading that it was short.'''

''Intro - What will be useful in this section for us?''

'''The cometary globule this study looks at is BRC 38?'''

Nice list of indicators of star formation in IC 1396N. Things we should know about

-IRAS source 21391 +5802

-H2O masers

-molecular outflows

-HH flows

-clusters of IR embedded sources

-radio mm portostars

Explanation of RDI - easy to understand.
Explanation of why an x-ray study - I was surprised. Didn't think about magnetic fields being active in YSO.

----
"2.1 - 2.3 Chandra Observation & Source List - The meat for us!"

The most important things here are the tables and figures. Locations given for the found sources and correlations to 2MASS. '''Will we eventually understand what each of these columns mean?'''

2.1 - Interesting that 8 corrections were made to the data. EIGHT pg 317-8
Data reduced to 117 point sources (listed in table 1); 66 of those correlated with 2MASS; 5 newly identified

----
''Sections 3, 4 & 5 - Interesting things about IC 1396N''

3.1-3.4 Data reduced to sources coming from star formation. 25 sources are probable members of the globule. Sources classified as class 0, I, II, III.

4.1- 4.3 It was interesting that there was flaring going on. '''Are YSO variable in the their light output, like a variable star?''' 4.3 was hard to understand. I have to sort out wavelengths and energies associated with each em light band.

5.1-5.3 Figure 10 a - This is a great picture of results of using different types of observations and even of resolution. Why correlation with other studies is needed.
Figure 10 c - Source 66 and 68 are so much brighter than the others. Interesting. It was also interesting that #66 is the brightest x-ray object in IC 1396N. '''What does it mean that it is 'one of the most heavily absorbed sources'?'''

Questions

1. Does this symbol mean of the Sun? M⊙ = mass in relation to the Sun?

2. What is IMF - initial mass function? pg 328, last full paragraph

3. What is MedE? pg 331 5.2

4. What is intervening column density? pg 332 5.3 2nd paragraph

5. What is extinction? pg 332 5.3 3rd paragraph

----
"Section 6 & 7 - Science questions and summary"

Section 6 pulls the info from the study into the larger science questions - What do these results say about triggered star formation and the two initiation methods mentioned? It seems that RDI (radiation driven implosion) is supported.

I like section 7's summary. Easy to understand and I like the list of classifications of the 25 YSO.

----

== Beltran 2009 The stellar population and complex structure of the bright-rimmed cloud IC 1396N ==

This article discusses the structure of this cloud and gives positions of everything it talks about. 18 pages worth of tables! Their conclusions are also different than the previous paper about star formation.

I found it interesting that individual sources we read about in the previous article have been resolved into several sources by the time this one was written.

Questions

1. They mention that bluer YSO mean older and redder are younger -- this is opposite of main sequence stars

2. '''What is on source images and off sources images? Why do you do this?''' this is to try and adjust for background light

The images went through 5 set of corrections or adjustments before photometry

3.2 The authors conclude not all star formation is triggered star formation in this cloud. Then what else is there?

3.3.1 All this info about H2 knots. Dense material. '''Does the red and blue shift indicate spinning?''' No, it is looking at a jet face on but not perpendicular

3.3.2 H2 flows are complicated. A lot of assumptions are made.

4. 736 sources found in all three bands - J, H K' 128 sources found only in HK' 67 sources found only in K' 79 sources found only in JH

Different conclusions from Getman. An age gradient is not found in the south-north direction of the globule; not all star formation in globule is by triggered star formation. NO alternative method given.

'''Spitzer Observations of IC 2118''' The Witch Head Nebula

Summary:

The Witch Head Nebula (WHN) is thought to be a site of triggered star formation. Observations in 7 IR bands using SST and 4 bands in optical yields IR excesses in 4 of 6 previously known T Tauri stars and discovery of 6 new candidate YSOs.

This article has a nice introduction that covers a bit of stellar formation overview due to 2 mechanisms: gravitational collapse and “triggered” from nearby events like supernova. The Initial Mass Function (IMF) and the star formation efficiency are supported by the inventory of YSOs formed in a cloud, which then supports closer study of the initial conditions of star formation.

A detailed comparison of the two formation mechanisms with respect to the IMF and stellar formation efficiency will assist with understanding the mechanics of star formation itself.

The data analysis section was highly detailed and technical. This section gave me the greatest comprehension challenge and also the greatest number of questions that require a bit more clarification.

The selection of YSO candidates focused on finding sources having an infrared excess characteristic of YSOs surrounded by a dust disk. A high source contamination rate was expected. Filtering mechanisms form the literature based on Spitzer colors were used to distinguish likely galaxies from likely members. Optical information was used to further winnow the candidate list.

Both color-color and color-magnitude diagrams from IRAC were used to select sources. 459 sources were identified having colors consistent with galaxies dominated by Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAHs). 765 more sources having colors consistent with active galactic nuclei (AGN), only 27 sources are not flagged as background contaminants and have colors compatible with YSOs and with IRAC excess. The list of 27 sources not flagged as contaminants bears further scrutiny. 18 of the YSO candidates have magnitudes fainter than 12. As the brightness decreases, the probability of the object being background contamination increases.

The wealth of data allowed these data to additionally constrain the YSO selection. 18 faint sources all fall in the region occupied by main-sequence stars or background galaxies. The 9 remaining YSOs with magnitudes less than 12 all appear redder, near or above a 30 Myr isochrones. These are strongly suspected to be contaminants. The 9 brighter objects are included in the list of their (the authors) IRAC selected YSO candidates. There are restrictions imposed with the consequence that leads to a distance assumption that may be problematic. The details of this challenge appear in the bottom half of page 13 for further detailed description, should curiosity require investigation.

All 9 of the IRAC selected YSO candidates are seen at MIPS-24. There is a bit more technical justification about why seeing these candidates in MIPS-24 at one of the two distances proposed (~210 pc and ~440pc).

Most of the sources seen in the observations at 24 or 70 μm are foreground stars or background galaxies.

POSS and 2MASS and optical images for each candidate were used to verify that they did not appear extended in any of these bands. All YSO candidates passed the checks and appear to be point sources in all available bands.

The MIPS selection was technically detailed and the objects seemed to fall into either Class II or Class III with weak excesses. There appears to be three distinct groups of object: 1) objects of zero color (likely foreground or background stars), 2) objects that are faint and red (likely galaxies) and 3) objects that are bright and red (likely YSOs). There doesn’t appear to be any sources between the photospehric Class III and Class II objects. The chosen selection process may have gathered the YSO candidates into the group of brightest or reddest object, lending further support that the assertion of faint object being most likely background galaxies (bottom of page 14). Why is this so??

There is a good amount of detailed description of how the candidates were sorted out from the other sources. From the list of 10 YSO candidates, six are new discoveries. One of the Class II T Tauri stars is a flat disk. The fit for the edge-on-disk candidate was not the same as for the non-disk candidates, since the slope changes significantly depending on whether the MIPS points are included in the fit for the edge-on disk. I think I’d like to understand the slope correlation a bit better…

All of the YSO candidates are located in the head of the nebula, the most massive molecular cloud of the WHN. The distributions lend further support o the assertion that the IRAC and MIPS selected bright object are likely YSOs. The expected YSO candidates for the regions further south were not found. Apparently the conditions in this region do not support substantial star formation. The head of the nebula is about 3 times more massive than any of the other clouds.

There is a nice explanation of at least two intertwined mysteries that enshroud the WHN. The distance to it, and the external source that is responsible for the surface sculpture, illumination and possible trigger mechanism. There is a nice explanation of how the possible two sources (the Trapezium and Rigel) at different distances could solve the mysteries. There are arguments for both explanations, and the conclusion is that there is no clear answer. GAIA (galactic mapping mission proposed to launch in 2013) highlighted text abovecould provide a definitive answer by deriving accurate parallaxes to some objects.

The conclusion for the work states that the inventory of YSOs and candidates has doubles as a result of using Spitzer data to search for objects with IR excess in the region. SEDs are used extensively to identify YSO candidates. If the region is a triggered star formation mechanism, then trends of age or mass as they relate to location may be established. Since there are so few objects, since the distance is uncertain and since the spectral types for most of these objects is unknown, this correlation cannot be done rigorously.

Additional follow-up spectroscopic data are needed to confirm or refute the YSO status for the six new objects.

The new edge –on disk candidate in particular warrants further study, since such objects are relatively rare.

GAIA will be needed to resolve the mystery of the distance to the WHN.

Questions:

What:
1. I want to verify that I understand correctly that bands UVRcIc stand for: Ultraviolet, Visible, Red and Infrared, respectively.
2. Fat fielding issues
3. 100 MJy/ sr
4. Median boxcar filter
5. NaNs
6. UV RcIc
7. “real matches “
8. false source associations
9. centroiding
10. ELAIS
11. U and 70 micro meters
12. Optical Mv
13. VLBA and VLBI
14. mas/yr

How and HUH?

1. APEXZ portion of MOPEX
2. Zero point used to convert flux densities to magnitudes
3. …as a final check on our measurements.
4. …through observation of Landolt standards. Does this mean that the additional epoc was just for verification of data integrity?
5. …deviate significantly from zero

Why?
1. The data were further processed…
2. …we wished to add reddened stellar models to the plots

'''New Young Star Candidate in the Taurus-Aruiga Region as Selected from WISE'''

Summary: WISE data is used to search for YSO candidates in Taurus from a 260 square degree patch of sky to encompass previously identified Taurus members. Near and mid IR colors are used to select objects with apparent IR excesses and incorporate other catalogs of ancillary data. There is likely to be contamination lingering in this candidate list, and follow up spectra are warranted.

Even though Spitzer is good at finding new young stars, some are located surprisingly far from the traditional location based on CO gas or IRAS dust maps. A 44 square degree survey of Taurus was done with Spitzer. It was found that any solely near and mid IR color selection was filled with contamination from galaxies and asymptotic giant brand (AGB) stars. The use of ancillary data was crucial to establishing a list of high quality new members of Taurus. WISE surveyed the entire sky; the depth of coverage in the Taurus region is somewhat degraded relative to regions of comparable ecliptic latitude due to Moon avoidance maneuvers. Since the cloud is only 140 pc away, both surveys (Spitzer and WISE) should easily detect legitimate Taurus members.

New Taurus candidates were selected with IR excesses using WISE colors with the Koenig et al method. There are three lists: 1) recovered young stars, 2) rejected objects, and 3) candidate new Taurus members.

A substantial multi-wavelength database was assembled for point sources throughout the Taurus region. Not every source has photometry at all bands due to variations in depth and spatial coverage among the surveys involved.

The WISE data acquisition and reduction are discussed in Wright et al, Jarrett et al and in the Explanatory Supplement to the WISE preliminary Data Release Products. Any sources with contamination and confusion flags were rejected, as were “DHOP” (what’s this?) characters.

There were about 2.38 MILLION sources. Signal to Noise Ratio (SNR) measurements were used to drastically shrink the catalog to about 7,000 sources. The SNR cut was used in W4 to limit the contamination. Since the contamination rate for any color selection is expected to be relatively large, ancillary data are crucial for culling the list to high - quality candidates. A rough total of about 2,000 contaminants per square degree were determined. Approximately 1,760 YSO candidates were obtained before imposing additional requirements (which were???) to the SNR be imposed on all four WISE channels reduced the number to 1,014.

Ancillary data were used to weed out contaminants from the list of potential YSO candidates. Only 27 sources on the list of potential YSOs found matches with SDSS spectra.

Of the 1,014 potential YSOs, 196 of them have matches to previously identified stars. 18 of these are listed as unconfirmed candidates in Rebull et al (2010).

Manual Inspection was used to sort objects into “likely contaminant” or “perhaps YSO” bins. The four criteria used to categorize were: 1) matching objects in SIMBAD, 2) matches to objects identified as contaminants in Rebull at al (2010), 3) matches to the 2MASS Extended Source Catalog, and 4) identification as extended in the SDSS pipeline. SEDs were then generated using all the photometric date in the database, and the SEDs were inspected. Based on experience, the SEDs were then categorized as still possible YSO candidates, or likely extragalactic objects. This process may have dropped viable YSO candidates similar to MHO-1 (huh?) or Haro 6-39 (huh?). This process left about 130 candidates. The sources were identified as either being likely subjected to source contamination (HOW?) resolved as a likely galaxy (HOW?) or still apparently clean, point sources (HOW?) This brought the number of candidates down to about 94 objects. All SEDs for the 94 appear in the Appendix.

Projected location of the previously identified YSOs is generally highly clustered along the filamentary distribution of gas and dust, and the new objects are less clustered. The goal was to look for new YSOs outside the canonical groupings of previously known Taurus members. This could also be an indication of persistent contamination in the surviving list of YSOs candidates. There is more discussion about the location of previously identified YSOs and contaminants.

Previous YSOs are generally found in regions of high Av, and background galaxies are found in regions of low Av. The new objects are not particularly clustered, but not evenly distributed either. Most of the previously identified YSOs are bright and most of the contaminants are faint. The new YSO candidates span the range of bright and faint.

The list of objects by type: recovery of 196 previously identified young stars with IR excess, 686 likely to be galaxies, 13 foreground stars, 1 planetary nebula, 24 objects that are likely to be confusing and 94 new YSO candidates that are widely distributed in space.

Questions:

1. What s the “J” in 2MASS J04360131
2. What is color near zero?
3. What is the reddening factor?
4. What is the meaning of “...in the right regime for JHKs diagram”
5. What is “z measurement”?
6. What are large inner disk holes?

'''New Young Star Candidates in CG4 and Sa101'''
The introduction to this paper also has some very good background about the Gum Nebula and the stellar formation mechanisms thought to apply within it. Previous studies by Reipurth and Pettersson are summarized, with a conclusion that stars associated with the Cometary Globule 4 (CG4) and Sa 101 are associated with the Gum Nebula. The distances to all considered objects are uncertain; the distances vary from 300 to 500 pc. The extrema of the distance estimates were tested, though the results are not strongly dependent on distance. The region contains previously identified young stars, so it is likely that there are more young stars of lower mass or more embedded than those previously discovered.

The data sections, like the other two papers summarized, are highly technical and summarizing all the details doesn’t seem fruitful beyond this very minimal overview. More detailed reading should be the way to get more detail about the data analysis.

For the IRAC data, two exposures were taken with three dithers per position. The two observational locations were reduced independently even though they overlap on the sky. Some of the very bright stars in the filed of view had instrumental effects that rendered the data very difficult to work with. There is quite a bit of detailed description of calibration technique, correlation and photometry and error reduction methods.

The MIPS 24 and 70 micron data were combined. The 24-micron data were affected by the bright objects and required additional processing. The background levels between the two observations were problematic, and a description of how this was addressed was discussed. Optimized data reduction to obtain brighter source measurements led to many sources fainter than the bright sources in the image being excluded from the catalog because the scientific goals are aimed at brighter objects. There is a good, technical justification of the filtering choices made to process the data.

The optical data used the observed Landolt (1992) standard stars of two or three fields several times per night for photometric calibration. For each target, aperture photometry was performed using multiple size apertures. There is a discussion of the correction used for a noticeable variation of the point-spread function (PSF) that is location dependent on the CCD.

The bandmerging of the photometric data was first merged from all four IRAC channels with the near IR 2MASS data for each observation. This was then merged together with the source lists from each observation. The MIPS data was then included, and then the optical data was merged. A very detailed discussion of how this was done follows.

YSO candidate properties are discussed in the subset of optical, near IR, B-band and SEDs. Optical data can greatly aid in the confirmation or refutation of YSO candidacy because they provide constraints on the Wien side of the SED. Objects with optical data that have already been ruled out as SOs based on the IRAC properties are all well below the 30 Myr isochrones scaled to 500 pc. Deeper optical data are desirable to obtain magnitude estimates for the remaining YSO candidates. The degree of reddening is difficult to estimate because the spectral types for most of the sources are not available. The candidates have infrared excess with a moderate degree of reddening. Young stars that are actively accreting from their circumstellar disks can have excess UV emission in the U or B bands or longer. These bands are also the most sensitive to reddening. Figure 13 is discussed with respect to mass accretion. The coordinates of the YSOs are listed in Table 1. The SEDs of the 22 YSO candidates are displayed in figures 14 - 16. A spectral type of MO was assumed for the remaining objects. A redden model of each object is shown and normalized to the Ks band where possible. These are presented as a guide to the eye rather than a robust fit to the object to allow the immediate IR excesses to be immediately apparent. There is quite a bit of more technically detailed description of the properties in the SEDs section than is summarized here.

There is a galaxy, ESO 257 – G 019 that is mentioned because it appears in the observation field. It has not been studied, and some basic astrometric data about it is listed.

In conclusion, 6 previously identified young stars were rediscovered. There are 16 new YSOs that were discovered and evaluated with ground-based data in the near IR from 2MASS to constrain the SEDs of the candidates. The new young star candidates were graded into confidence groups. Additional data will be needed, such as optical photometry where it is missing and optical spectroscopy to obtain spectral types.

Talk:C-WAYS Spring work

2012-05-06T16:01:42Z

Novatne: /* Discussion papers */ new section

== Getman 2006 X-Ray Study of Triggered Star Formation and Protostars in IC 1396N ==

An observation of IC 1396N with Chandra, so X-ray light. How long (total time) was the observation? 30 ks = 30 kilo seconds = 30,000 seconds = 500 min = 8.33 hours - '''Is this a long observation? I got the impression from the reading that it was short.'''

''Intro - What will be useful in this section for us?''

'''The cometary globule this study looks at is BRC 38?'''

Nice list of indicators of star formation in IC 1396N. Things we should know about

-IRAS source 21391 +5802

-H2O masers

-molecular outflows

-HH flows

-clusters of IR embedded sources

-radio mm portostars

Explanation of RDI - easy to understand.
Explanation of why an x-ray study - I was surprised. Didn't think about magnetic fields being active in YSO.

----
"2.1 - 2.3 Chandra Observation & Source List - The meat for us!"

The most important things here are the tables and figures. Locations given for the found sources and correlations to 2MASS. '''Will we eventually understand what each of these columns mean?'''

2.1 - Interesting that 8 corrections were made to the data. EIGHT pg 317-8
Data reduced to 117 point sources (listed in table 1); 66 of those correlated with 2MASS; 5 newly identified

----
''Sections 3, 4 & 5 - Interesting things about IC 1396N''

3.1-3.4 Data reduced to sources coming from star formation. 25 sources are probable members of the globule. Sources classified as class 0, I, II, III.

4.1- 4.3 It was interesting that there was flaring going on. '''Are YSO variable in the their light output, like a variable star?''' 4.3 was hard to understand. I have to sort out wavelengths and energies associated with each em light band.

5.1-5.3 Figure 10 a - This is a great picture of results of using different types of observations and even of resolution. Why correlation with other studies is needed.
Figure 10 c - Source 66 and 68 are so much brighter than the others. Interesting. It was also interesting that #66 is the brightest x-ray object in IC 1396N. '''What does it mean that it is 'one of the most heavily absorbed sources'?'''

Questions

1. Does this symbol mean of the Sun? M⊙ = mass in relation to the Sun?

2. What is IMF - initial mass function? pg 328, last full paragraph

3. What is MedE? pg 331 5.2

4. What is intervening column density? pg 332 5.3 2nd paragraph

5. What is extinction? pg 332 5.3 3rd paragraph

----
"Section 6 & 7 - Science questions and summary"

Section 6 pulls the info from the study into the larger science questions - What do these results say about triggered star formation and the two initiation methods mentioned? It seems that RDI (radiation driven implosion) is supported.

I like section 7's summary. Easy to understand and I like the list of classifications of the 25 YSO.

----

== Beltran 2009 The stellar population and complex structure of the bright-rimmed cloud IC 1396N ==

This article discusses the structure of this cloud and gives positions of everything it talks about. 18 pages worth of tables! Their conclusions are also different than the previous paper about star formation.

I found it interesting that individual sources we read about in the previous article have been resolved into several sources by the time this one was written.

Questions

1. They mention that bluer YSO mean older and redder are younger -- this is opposite of main sequence stars

2. '''What is on source images and off sources images? Why do you do this?''' this is to try and adjust for background light

The images went through 5 set of corrections or adjustments before photometry

3.2 The authors conclude not all star formation is triggered star formation in this cloud. Then what else is there?

3.3.1 All this info about H2 knots. Dense material. '''Does the red and blue shift indicate spinning?''' No, it is looking at a jet face on but not perpendicular

3.3.2 H2 flows are complicated. A lot of assumptions are made.

4. 736 sources found in all three bands - J, H K' 128 sources found only in HK' 67 sources found only in K' 79 sources found only in JH

Different conclusions from Getman. An age gradient is not found in the south-north direction of the globule; not all star formation in globule is by triggered star formation. NO alternative method given.

== Discussion papers ==

'''Spitzer Observations of IC 2118''' The Witch Head Nebula

Summary:

The Witch Head Nebula (WHN) is thought to be a site of triggered star formation. Observations in 7 IR bands using SST and 4 bands in optical yields IR excesses in 4 of 6 previously known T Tauri stars and discovery of 6 new candidate YSOs.

This article has a nice introduction that covers a bit of stellar formation overview due to 2 mechanisms: gravitational collapse and “triggered” from nearby events like supernova. The Initial Mass Function (IMF) and the star formation efficiency are supported by the inventory of YSOs formed in a cloud, which then supports closer study of the initial conditions of star formation.

A detailed comparison of the two formation mechanisms with respect to the IMF and stellar formation efficiency will assist with understanding the mechanics of star formation itself.

The data analysis section was highly detailed and technical. This section gave me the greatest comprehension challenge and also the greatest number of questions that require a bit more clarification.

The selection of YSO candidates focused on finding sources having an infrared excess characteristic of YSOs surrounded by a dust disk. A high source contamination rate was expected. Filtering mechanisms form the literature based on Spitzer colors were used to distinguish likely galaxies from likely members. Optical information was used to further winnow the candidate list.

Both color-color and color-magnitude diagrams from IRAC were used to select sources. 459 sources were identified having colors consistent with galaxies dominated by Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAHs). 765 more sources having colors consistent with active galactic nuclei (AGN), only 27 sources are not flagged as background contaminants and have colors compatible with YSOs and with IRAC excess. The list of 27 sources not flagged as contaminants bears further scrutiny. 18 of the YSO candidates have magnitudes fainter than 12. As the brightness decreases, the probability of the object being background contamination increases.

The wealth of data allowed these data to additionally constrain the YSO selection. 18 faint sources all fall in the region occupied by main-sequence stars or background galaxies. The 9 remaining YSOs with magnitudes less than 12 all appear redder, near or above a 30 Myr isochrones. These are strongly suspected to be contaminants. The 9 brighter objects are included in the list of their (the authors) IRAC selected YSO candidates. There are restrictions imposed with the consequence that leads to a distance assumption that may be problematic. The details of this challenge appear in the bottom half of page 13 for further detailed description, should curiosity require investigation.

All 9 of the IRAC selected YSO candidates are seen at MIPS-24. There is a bit more technical justification about why seeing these candidates in MIPS-24 at one of the two distances proposed (~210 pc and ~440pc).

Most of the sources seen in the observations at 24 or 70 μm are foreground stars or background galaxies.

POSS and 2MASS and optical images for each candidate were used to verify that they did not appear extended in any of these bands. All YSO candidates passed the checks and appear to be point sources in all available bands.

The MIPS selection was technically detailed and the objects seemed to fall into either Class II or Class III with weak excesses. There appears to be three distinct groups of object: 1) objects of zero color (likely foreground or background stars), 2) objects that are faint and red (likely galaxies) and 3) objects that are bright and red (likely YSOs). There doesn’t appear to be any sources between the photospehric Class III and Class II objects. The chosen selection process may have gathered the YSO candidates into the group of brightest or reddest object, lending further support that the assertion of faint object being most likely background galaxies (bottom of page 14). Why is this so??

There is a good amount of detailed description of how the candidates were sorted out from the other sources. From the list of 10 YSO candidates, six are new discoveries. One of the Class II T Tauri stars is a flat disk. The fit for the edge-on-disk candidate was not the same as for the non-disk candidates, since the slope changes significantly depending on whether the MIPS points are included in the fit for the edge-on disk. I think I’d like to understand the slope correlation a bit better…

All of the YSO candidates are located in the head of the nebula, the most massive molecular cloud of the WHN. The distributions lend further support o the assertion that the IRAC and MIPS selected bright object are likely YSOs. The expected YSO candidates for the regions further south were not found. Apparently the conditions in this region do not support substantial star formation. The head of the nebula is about 3 times more massive than any of the other clouds.

There is a nice explanation of at least two intertwined mysteries that enshroud the WHN. The distance to it, and the external source that is responsible for the surface sculpture, illumination and possible trigger mechanism. There is a nice explanation of how the possible two sources (the Trapezium and Rigel) at different distances could solve the mysteries. There are arguments for both explanations, and the conclusion is that there is no clear answer. GAIA (galactic mapping mission proposed to launch in 2013) highlighted text abovecould provide a definitive answer by deriving accurate parallaxes to some objects.

The conclusion for the work states that the inventory of YSOs and candidates has doubles as a result of using Spitzer data to search for objects with IR excess in the region. SEDs are used extensively to identify YSO candidates. If the region is a triggered star formation mechanism, then trends of age or mass as they relate to location may be established. Since there are so few objects, since the distance is uncertain and since the spectral types for most of these objects is unknown, this correlation cannot be done rigorously.

Additional follow-up spectroscopic data are needed to confirm or refute the YSO status for the six new objects.

The new edge –on disk candidate in particular warrants further study, since such objects are relatively rare.

GAIA will be needed to resolve the mystery of the distance to the WHN.

Questions:

What:
1. I want to verify that I understand correctly that bands UVRcIc stand for: Ultraviolet, Visible, Red and Infrared, respectively.
2. Fat fielding issues
3. 100 MJy/ sr
4. Median boxcar filter
5. NaNs
6. UV RcIc
7. “real matches “
8. false source associations
9. centroiding
10. ELAIS
11. U and 70 micro meters
12. Optical Mv
13. VLBA and VLBI
14. mas/yr

How and HUH?

1. APEXZ portion of MOPEX
2. Zero point used to convert flux densities to magnitudes
3. …as a final check on our measurements.
4. …through observation of Landolt standards. Does this mean that the additional epoc was just for verification of data integrity?
5. …deviate significantly from zero

Why?
1. The data were further processed…
2. …we wished to add reddened stellar models to the plots

'''New Young Star Candidate in the Taurus-Aruiga Region as Selected from WISE'''

Summary: WISE data is used to search for YSO candidates in Taurus from a 260 square degree patch of sky to encompass previously identified Taurus members. Near and mid IR colors are used to select objects with apparent IR excesses and incorporate other catalogs of ancillary data. There is likely to be contamination lingering in this candidate list, and follow up spectra are warranted.

Even though Spitzer is good at finding new young stars, some are located surprisingly far from the traditional location based on CO gas or IRAS dust maps. A 44 square degree survey of Taurus was done with Spitzer. It was found that any solely near and mid IR color selection was filled with contamination from galaxies and asymptotic giant brand (AGB) stars. The use of ancillary data was crucial to establishing a list of high quality new members of Taurus. WISE surveyed the entire sky; the depth of coverage in the Taurus region is somewhat degraded relative to regions of comparable ecliptic latitude due to Moon avoidance maneuvers. Since the cloud is only 140 pc away, both surveys (Spitzer and WISE) should easily detect legitimate Taurus members.

New Taurus candidates were selected with IR excesses using WISE colors with the Koenig et al method. There are three lists: 1) recovered young stars, 2) rejected objects, and 3) candidate new Taurus members.

A substantial multi-wavelength database was assembled for point sources throughout the Taurus region. Not every source has photometry at all bands due to variations in depth and spatial coverage among the surveys involved.

The WISE data acquisition and reduction are discussed in Wright et al, Jarrett et al and in the Explanatory Supplement to the WISE preliminary Data Release Products. Any sources with contamination and confusion flags were rejected, as were “DHOP” (what’s this?) characters.

There were about 2.38 MILLION sources. Signal to Noise Ratio (SNR) measurements were used to drastically shrink the catalog to about 7,000 sources. The SNR cut was used in W4 to limit the contamination. Since the contamination rate for any color selection is expected to be relatively large, ancillary data are crucial for culling the list to high - quality candidates. A rough total of about 2,000 contaminants per square degree were determined. Approximately 1,760 YSO candidates were obtained before imposing additional requirements (which were???) to the SNR be imposed on all four WISE channels reduced the number to 1,014.

Ancillary data were used to weed out contaminants from the list of potential YSO candidates. Only 27 sources on the list of potential YSOs found matches with SDSS spectra.

Of the 1,014 potential YSOs, 196 of them have matches to previously identified stars. 18 of these are listed as unconfirmed candidates in Rebull et al (2010).

Manual Inspection was used to sort objects into “likely contaminant” or “perhaps YSO” bins. The four criteria used to categorize were: 1) matching objects in SIMBAD, 2) matches to objects identified as contaminants in Rebull at al (2010), 3) matches to the 2MASS Extended Source Catalog, and 4) identification as extended in the SDSS pipeline. SEDs were then generated using all the photometric date in the database, and the SEDs were inspected. Based on experience, the SEDs were then categorized as still possible YSO candidates, or likely extragalactic objects. This process may have dropped viable YSO candidates similar to MHO-1 (huh?) or Haro 6-39 (huh?). This process left about 130 candidates. The sources were identified as either being likely subjected to source contamination (HOW?) resolved as a likely galaxy (HOW?) or still apparently clean, point sources (HOW?) This brought the number of candidates down to about 94 objects. All SEDs for the 94 appear in the Appendix.

Projected location of the previously identified YSOs is generally highly clustered along the filamentary distribution of gas and dust, and the new objects are less clustered. The goal was to look for new YSOs outside the canonical groupings of previously known Taurus members. This could also be an indication of persistent contamination in the surviving list of YSOs candidates. There is more discussion about the location of previously identified YSOs and contaminants.

Previous YSOs are generally found in regions of high Av, and background galaxies are found in regions of low Av. The new objects are not particularly clustered, but not evenly distributed either. Most of the previously identified YSOs are bright and most of the contaminants are faint. The new YSO candidates span the range of bright and faint.

The list of objects by type: recovery of 196 previously identified young stars with IR excess, 686 likely to be galaxies, 13 foreground stars, 1 planetary nebula, 24 objects that are likely to be confusing and 94 new YSO candidates that are widely distributed in space.

Questions:

1. What s the “J” in 2MASS J04360131
2. What is color near zero?
3. What is the reddening factor?
4. What is the meaning of “...in the right regime for JHKs diagram”
5. What is “z measurement”?
6. What are large inner disk holes?

'''New Young Star Candidates in CG4 and Sa101'''
The introduction to this paper also has some very good background about the Gum Nebula and the stellar formation mechanisms thought to apply within it. Previous studies by Reipurth and Pettersson are summarized, with a conclusion that stars associated with the Cometary Globule 4 (CG4) and Sa 101 are associated with the Gum Nebula. The distances to all considered objects are uncertain; the distances vary from 300 to 500 pc. The extrema of the distance estimates were tested, though the results are not strongly dependent on distance. The region contains previously identified young stars, so it is likely that there are more young stars of lower mass or more embedded than those previously discovered.

The data sections, like the other two papers summarized, are highly technical and summarizing all the details doesn’t seem fruitful beyond this very minimal overview. More detailed reading should be the way to get more detail about the data analysis.

For the IRAC data, two exposures were taken with three dithers per position. The two observational locations were reduced independently even though they overlap on the sky. Some of the very bright stars in the filed of view had instrumental effects that rendered the data very difficult to work with. There is quite a bit of detailed description of calibration technique, correlation and photometry and error reduction methods.

The MIPS 24 and 70 micron data were combined. The 24-micron data were affected by the bright objects and required additional processing. The background levels between the two observations were problematic, and a description of how this was addressed was discussed. Optimized data reduction to obtain brighter source measurements led to many sources fainter than the bright sources in the image being excluded from the catalog because the scientific goals are aimed at brighter objects. There is a good, technical justification of the filtering choices made to process the data.

The optical data used the observed Landolt (1992) standard stars of two or three fields several times per night for photometric calibration. For each target, aperture photometry was performed using multiple size apertures. There is a discussion of the correction used for a noticeable variation of the point-spread function (PSF) that is location dependent on the CCD.

The bandmerging of the photometric data was first merged from all four IRAC channels with the near IR 2MASS data for each observation. This was then merged together with the source lists from each observation. The MIPS data was then included, and then the optical data was merged. A very detailed discussion of how this was done follows.

YSO candidate properties are discussed in the subset of optical, near IR, B-band and SEDs. Optical data can greatly aid in the confirmation or refutation of YSO candidacy because they provide constraints on the Wien side of the SED. Objects with optical data that have already been ruled out as SOs based on the IRAC properties are all well below the 30 Myr isochrones scaled to 500 pc. Deeper optical data are desirable to obtain magnitude estimates for the remaining YSO candidates. The degree of reddening is difficult to estimate because the spectral types for most of the sources are not available. The candidates have infrared excess with a moderate degree of reddening. Young stars that are actively accreting from their circumstellar disks can have excess UV emission in the U or B bands or longer. These bands are also the most sensitive to reddening. Figure 13 is discussed with respect to mass accretion. The coordinates of the YSOs are listed in Table 1. The SEDs of the 22 YSO candidates are displayed in figures 14 - 16. A spectral type of MO was assumed for the remaining objects. A redden model of each object is shown and normalized to the Ks band where possible. These are presented as a guide to the eye rather than a robust fit to the object to allow the immediate IR excesses to be immediately apparent. There is quite a bit of more technically detailed description of the properties in the SEDs section than is summarized here.

There is a galaxy, ESO 257 – G 019 that is mentioned because it appears in the observation field. It has not been studied, and some basic astrometric data about it is listed.

In conclusion, 6 previously identified young stars were rediscovered. There are 16 new YSOs that were discovered and evaluated with ground-based data in the near IR from 2MASS to constrain the SEDs of the candidates. The new young star candidates were graded into confidence groups. Additional data will be needed, such as optical photometry where it is missing and optical spectroscopy to obtain spectral types.

C-WAYS Summer visit logistics

2012-04-30T20:07:13Z

Novatne: /* Software to install */

Lauren BRC 27

2012-03-02T22:14:03Z

Novatne: /* Lauren's first draft text */

I found one article, published in July of 2011, that is not on the list. The title is 2MASS Wide field extinction map.
I skimmed it, don't know if there's anything useful in it yet. I will go back through SIMBAD again to be sure that I have completely scoured that source for new papers.

[[http://web.ipac.caltech.edu/staff/rebull/working/aa16915-11.pdf]]

--[[User:Novatne|Novatne]] 09:48, 17 February 2012 (PST)

=Lauren's first draft text=

'''Science background and Context:'''

'''BRC 27''' is a star forming region within the molecular cloud CMa R1, located at 07h03m39s -11d23m43s. This star forming region is believed to be a Radiation Driven Implosion (RDI) morphology, although what triggered the star formation is not certain at this time (Gregorio-Hetem et al, 2009). Previous works have identified stars using various techniques and different sources. Wiramihardja et al in 1986 used UBV photographic photometry, Sugitani et al in 1991 used IRAS sources. Soares and Bica in 2002 and 2003 determined a distance of 1.2 parsecs and an age of 1.5 Myr for the stars in BRC 27. The distance was consistent with the findings of Schevchenko in 1999. A wide field X-ray study of the CMa OB1/ R star forming region done by Gregorio- Hetem et al. (2009) was conducted to find low mass YSOs that may have been previously undetected. Chauhan et al in 2009 used BVIc photometry to compare the ages of stars inside and outside the rims. They suggest that there is evidence of an RDI mechanism. We note that Chauhan et al used archival IRAC, but not MIPS data, and moreover did not use the IRAC data as a primary mechanism to select YSO candidates; they used near-IR JHK colors to identify candidates. Johnson et al (2012)2012) and Rebull et al. (2012, in prep) used the mid-IR IRAC and MIPS colors to search for YSOs in a ~5'x5' footprint. They identified IR excesses around 21/33 previously-known YSO candidates and identified 19 entirely new YSO candidates. We will use WISE photometric data to survey a larger region (~10-15 arcmin diameter) around this relatively small ~5'x5' 4-band IRAC footprint from Spitzer to (a) look for IR excesses around previously-identified YSO candidates, and (b) look for new YSO candidates using the WISE bands. Because there are several prior shallow wide-field studies in this area, there are previously-identified YSOs here, and we also expect to find new YSO candidates. Since the WISE data survey will cover a larger region than the relatively small ~5'x5' 4-band IRAC footprint above, it will enable us to put the previous data into context by looking at the larger environment around BRC 27 itself -- e.g., the following questions: in the 4-band Spitzer area, the surface density of YSOs is ~1.6 per square arcminute (Johnson et al. 2012, Rebull et al. 2012); is there as high a surface density of YSOs outside of the IRAC footprint? How quickly does the YSO surface density fall off? Are there proportionally more Class IIs than Class Is farther from the center of the BRC? Because the Spitzer observations include 'flanking fields' of serendipitous data, when these data are available, we will use the Spitzer data in addition to the WISE data, enabling a better determination of the nature of the object, and setting up a "teachable moment" comparing the spatial resolution differences of the various observations, including those from the literature.

'''Education and Outreach:'''

Team Reedley College

A small group of college freshman and sophomores will meet weekly. For the first few weeks, the students will be instructed on the basics of star formation and stellar evolution. Once the students understand the basics, they will begin reading the appropriate journals and conduct web research for discussion. Once the data processing instruction has been completed, the students will work together and separately on the data analysis portion of the project.

The weekly meetings will introduce the students to:
• Star formation mechanism and stellar life cycle
• Spectral analysis
• Black body curves
• Photometry

In the fall of 2012, the weekly meetings will be include to the processing of data. --[[User:Novatne|Novatne]] 14:51, 18 February 2012 (PST)

=Luisa's tweaking=
'''Science background and Context:'''

'''BRC 27''' is a star forming region within the molecular cloud CMa R1, located at 07h03m39s -11d23m43s. This star forming region is believed to be triggered star formation, specifically a Radiation Driven Implosion (RDI) morphology (see, e.g., Sugitani et al. 1991), although exactly what object(s) triggered the star formation is not certain at this time (Gregorio-Hetem et al, 2009). Several previous studies have identified stars using various techniques and different sources. Wiramihardja et al. (1986) used UBV photographic photometry in this larger area. Sugitani et al. (1991) -- the origin of the BRC nomenclature -- used IRAS sources combined with Palomar Observatory Sky Survey plates to identify bright rimmed clouds likely to be sites of triggered star formation. Soares and Bica (2002, 2003) determined a distance of ~1.2 parsecs and an age of ~1.5 Myr for the stars in BRC 27 using an early version of the Two-Micron All-Sky Survey (2MASS) catalog. This distance is consistent with the findings of Shevchenko et al. (1999), who used photoelectric photometry(!) and objective prism spectroscopy in this region to identify YSOs. A wide field X-ray study of the CMa OB1/ R! star forming region done by Gregorio-Hetem et al. (2009) identified several low mass YSOs using X-rays. IF YOU ARE GOING TO CITE SPECIFIC NUMBERS FOR OBJECTS FOUND VIA X-RAYS, YOU NEED TO SPECIFY NUMBER OF OBJECTS FOUND IN THE OTHER STUDIES. A TABLE OR PLOT IS MAYBE IN ORDER. HOWEVER, THIS MAY BE A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF WORK -- (A) [http://coolwiki.ipac.caltech.edu/index.php/Identification_of_Previously_Known_Objects_on_Candidate_List |THIS] IS LAST YEAR'S THRASHING, AND (B) I ONLY HAVE OBJECTS IN MY CATALOG CLOSE TO Z CMa BECAUSE THAT'S ALL WE CARED ABOUT LAST YEAR. YOUR CALL AS TO WHETHER OR NOT TO KEEP THESE NEXT 2 SENTENCES. Their work found approximately 40 members near Z Ma and approximately 60 members near GU CMa. Both of these regions are close to BRC 27. STRIKE THIS NEXT SENTENCE, BECAUSE MORGAN ET AL HAS SUCH A LOW SPATIAL RESOLUTION THAT THEY ARE NOT SEEING THE INDIVIDUAL SOURCES THAT WE ARE SEEING. Morgan et al. used the Submillimeter Common User Bolometer Array (SCUBA) in 2008 to survey 44 bright-rimmed clouds to identify a dense core in BRC 27. Chauhan et al. (2009) used BVIc photometry, as well as 2MASS JHK and Spitzer IRAC data, to identify stars and compare the ages of stars inside and outside the rims. They suggest that there is evidence of an RDI mechanism. We note that Chauhan et al. (2009) used archival IRAC, but not MIPS data, and moreover did not use the IRAC data as a primary mechanism to select YSO candidates; they used near-IR JHK colors to identify candidates. Johnson et al. (2012) and Rebull et al. (2012, in prep) used the mid-IR IRAC and MIPS colors to search for YSOs in a ~5'x5' footprint. They identified IR excesses around 21/33 previously-known YSO candidates and identified 19 entirely new YSO candidates. We will use WISE photometric data to survey a larger region (~10-15 arcmin diameter) around this relatively small ~5'x5' 4-band IRAC footprint from Spitzer to (a) look for IR excesses around previously-identified YSO candidates, and (b) look for new YSO candidates using the WISE bands. Because there are several prior shallow wide-field studies in this area, there are previously-identified YSOs here, and we also expect to find new YSO candidates. Since the WISE data survey will cover a larger region than the relatively small ~5'x5' 4-band IRAC footprint above, it will enable us to put the previous data into context by looking at the larger environment around BRC 27 itself -- e.g., the following questions: in the 4-band Spitzer area, the surface density of YSOs is ~1.6 per square arcminute (Johnson et al. 2012, Rebull et al. 2012); is there as high a surface density of YSOs outside of the IRAC footprint? How quickly does the YSO surface density fall off? Are there proportionally more Class IIs than Class Is farther from the center of the BRC?

SOME OF THE CONCEPTS I INCLUDED IN THE ABOVE ARE MORE GENERIC, AND APPLY TO MORE THAN JUST BRC 27, THOUGH THE SURFACE DENSITY I CITE IS DEFINITELY CUSTOMIZED TO BRC 27. THIS NEXT CONCEPT IS ALSO GENERIC:
Because the Spitzer observations include 'flanking fields' of serendipitous data, when these data are available, we will use the Spitzer data in addition to the WISE data, enabling a better determination of the nature of the object, and setting up a "teachable moment" comparing the spatial resolution differences of the various observations, including those from the literature.

'''Education and Outreach:'''

Team Reedley College

A small group of college freshman and sophomores will meet weekly. For the first few weeks, the students will be instructed on the basics of star formation and stellar evolution. Once the students understand the basics, they will begin reading the appropriate journals and conduct web research for discussion. Once the data processing instruction has been completed, the students will work together and separately on the data analysis portion of the project.

The weekly meetings will introduce the students to:
• Star formation mechanism and stellar life cycle
• Spectral analysis
• Black body curves
• Photometry

In the fall of 2012, the weekly meetings will be include to the processing of data. --[[User:Novatne|Novatne]] 14:51, 18 February 2012 (PST)

Jackie BRC 38

2012-02-29T00:29:22Z

Novatne: /* Articles */

==Location of BRC 38==
I need a picture in my head. I found these helpful. The first is the one Luisa already put up. The 2nd is from APOD (http://apod.nasa.gov/apod/ap110425.html). The 3rd is from Getman et al. 2006 

[[image:tr37where.png|250px]] [[image:brc38.png | 250px]][[image:brc_38_Getman2006paper.png|300px]]

== Information about BRC 38==
Bright Rimmed Cloud 38 in IC 1396. Since it is located in the north part of IC 1396 is it often referred to as IC 1396N. 
It has a C shape with the southern edge as the brightest part (Pottasch et al. 1956). 
Location with intermediate mass protostars, though some (Ogura & Sugitani 1999) suggest there is probably a lot of low mass formation going on too. Wang et al. 2009 believes potential for high mass stars forming here also. 
H2 jets found (Saraceno et al. 1996; Nisini et al. 2001) 
Herbig-Haro objects found (Repurth et al. 2003 
Observed in many wavelengths - it would be good to get the specific wavelengths in each band
: optical (IPHAS, several optical - including Yerkes in the 1950s - coming from Chicago I have to cheer!!),
: infrared (2MASS,
: radio (IRAM & BIMA)
: x-ray
 
==Draft Proposal==
1. What is the structure of brc 38? - classification of cloud (type A I believe) & why; H2 jets and Herbig-Haro objects & what they indicate; 
2. What is the distance of the brc?

3. What is known about YSO in this region - this might be H alpha emission stars (??); 
a. How many have been found with what kind of detection (type of detector - X-ray, infrared, visible, etc); 
b. What kind (low mass, intermediate, high mass); 
c. Where in the brc are YSO located? 
d. What kind of formation process is indicated - triggered or collapse? 

4. What do we expect to find in this section? 

== Questions ==
I am sure there are a lot more!! After fooling around with wiki editing, this is all that is left in my head at present.

1. One IRAS (Infrared Astronomical Satellite) location (IRAS 21391+5802) seems to be the central point or at least this location that keeps coming up. What is this? 
2. LWS spectrum - is this as simple as long wavelength? 
3. Still unclear on what exactly the following are. I have looked them up but they are not clear in my head - maser, Herbig-Haro objects, FIR colors, MIP colors 
4. When we talk about BRC 38, are we talking about the whole C rim and globular area it half encircles? Where does the IRAS source 21391+5802 fit in our picture? 
5. Is submillimeter wavelengths (SUBA) infrared or microwave? 
6. Is HD 206267 affecting the whole region with its radiation? 

== Search phrases ==
*BRC 38
*sfo 38
*21:40:42+52:16:13
*21391+5802
*IC 1396N
*Cepheus OB2
*IMYSO

== Articles ==

{| {{table}}
{| border="1"
| align="center" style="background:#f0f0f0;"|'''Author Date'''
| align="center" style="background:#f0f0f0;"|'''Article Title'''
| align="center" style="background:#f0f0f0;"|'''Comments'''
| align="center" style="background:#f0f0f0;"|'''URL'''

|-
| 1a. Nagano et al. 2012 ||Wide Field Survey of Emission-line Stars in IC 1396||Nagano reports a total of 639 Hα emission-line stars were detected in an area of 4.2 deg2 and their i′-photometry was measured. Their spatial distribution exhibits several aggregates near the elephant trunk globule (Rim A) and bright-rimmed clouds at the edge of the H ii region (Rim B and SFO 37, 38, 39, 41), and near HD 206267, which is the main exciting star of the H ii region.” || [[Media:Nagano_2012.pdf]]

|-
| 1b. saurin et al. 2012 ||the embedded cluster or assoiciation trumpter 37 in ir 1396||'''Luisa adds:''' no individual data tables to use; they are interested in statistical properties of the regions. good 'big picture' kind of thing, but no real use for us in terms of our specific project. '''Peggy adds:''' 2MASS observations of BRC 38, Primary focus Trumpler 37, but analyzed 2Mass photometry of 11 BRCs in IC 1396 including BRC 38. All associated with IRAS sources (prob protostars) massive nearby star HR 8281 may have triggered sequential star formation via winds and UV. Photometric errors </= 0.1 mag removed for stars less than 0.5 arcmin radius for BRC 38 b/c high absorption? Relatively high central densities = small star clusters. Getman et al 2007 found sequential star formation evidence for BRC 38, spatial gradient stellar age in direction to triggering star as well as YSOs. BRC 38 stellar mass of ~15Mo assumed representative of area. Lists ra/dec, angular and linear dist to HR 8281 --Peggy Piper 12:23, 21 February 2012 (PST) ||http://arxiv.org/pdf/1201.2704.pdf
|-
| 2.. Barensten et al. 2011||T tauri candidates and accretion rates using IPHAS: method and application to IC 1396||'''Luisa adds:''' YES this is a useful paper. data tables of objects they think are young. their shortlist may or may not overlap with the fields we care about in brc 34 and 38, but still very useful to include. if, when we get to that point of needing these objects, they still haven't released the full IPHAS catalog, i will email these guys and ask for source lists in the regions we care about (34 and 38) '''Peggy adds:''' Includes BRC 38 which is called cloud E; Looking for YSOs in all of 1396; list 158 candidates; uses IPHAS survey data - Halpha, r, I filters on isaac newton telescope Specifically looking for T Tauri through Halpha emissions. Also includes 2 MASS and Spitzer data but only for T Tauri candidates? Find increasing accretion rates, disc excesses and younger ages as move away from HD 206267 towards Cloud A (BRC 38 is Cloud E)--Peggy Piper 12:47, 21 February 2012 (PST) ||http://arxiv.org/pdf/1103.1646v1.pdf
|-
| 3. choudhury et al. 2010||Triggered star formation and YSO population in Bright Rimmed SRO 38||'''Luisa adds:''' YES this is useful, if for no other reason than they used the Spitzer data. they definitely have data tables too. 44 YSOs identified in brc 38 - evidence for radiation driven implosion (RDI); spitzer IRAC & MIPS data, optical BVRI ||http://arxiv.org/pdf/1005.1841v1.pdf
|-
| Morgan et al. 2010||Ammonia observations of bright-rimmed clouds: establishing a sample of triggered protostars||'''Luisa adds:''' Radio. ignore at least for now Radio observations (Green Bank) of brcs; furthering earlier work of morgan, confirming brc is triggered star formation site ||http://arxiv.org/pdf/1006.0833v1.pdf
|-
| Crimier et al. 2010||Physical structure of the envelopes of intermediate-mass protostars||'''Luisa adds''': too theoretical. ignore. a study that says that the mass of the final star of a protostar is linked to the mass of the envelope around the protostar, not the density of the parent cloud - backbground on IM protostars??||http://arxiv.org/pdf/1005.0947v1.pdf
|-
| Ogura 2010||Triggered star formation assoicated with HII regions||'''Luisa adds''': overview. conference proceedings. meat of this analysis already in other journal articles, i am pretty sure. ignore for now. Not really about BRC 38 but discusses curent state of triggered star formation theory||[http://articles.adsabs.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/nph-iarticle_query?2010ASInC...1...19O&data_type=PDF_HIGH&whole_paper=YES&type=PRINTER&filetype=.pdf ASI Conference Series, 2010, Vol 1, pp 19-25]
|-
| 4. beltran et al. 2009||The stellar population and complex structure of the bright-rimmed cloud ic 1396N||'''Luisa adds''': YES very useful! A study through JHK filters; 736 sources found in all 3 bands (filters); h2 emission shows jet like structure||http://arxiv.org/pdf/0902.4543v1.pdf
|-
| Morgan L. K., Urquhart J. S., Thompson M. A., 2009 ON LAST YEAR'S LIST||CO observations towards bright-rimmed clouds||'''Luisa adds:''' Radio. ignore at least for now Luisa's old notes: JCMT (CO) observations. both 27 and 34 in here. 22 arcsec resolution! (see Resolution and their fig 2 here.) Likely last of his thesis, or first of his postdoc. (Look, his address changed, so this was published while he was a postdoc, but it's the same collaborators as before at his old institution, so my guess it's leftover thesis work.) They think 27 has been triggered, 34 not; this provides a nice compare-and-contrast opportunity for our write-up. Quick read.||[http://cdsbib.u-strasbg.fr/cgi-bin/cdsbib?2009MNRAS.400.1726M 2009, MNRAS, 400, 1726]
|-
| 5. fuente et al. 2009||Dissecting an intermediate-mass (IM) prostar||'''luisa adds:''' hm. very narrowly focused paper, seems to be just on one object and radio. was ready to say ignore it, but it is probably worth a quick skim to see if they mention anything substantive about the 'YSO BIMA 3' and 'cluster BIMA 2' mentioned in the abstract. A look at IRAS 21391+5802 emissions of N2H+, CH3CN, CS, BIMA (1.2mm & 3.1mm)||http://arxiv.org/pdf/0909.2267v1.pdf
|-
| Wang et al. 2009||The relation between 13CO j=2-1 line width in moelcular clouds and bolometric luminosity of associated IRAS sources||'''Luisa adds:''' Radio. ignore at least for now IRAS 21391+5802 - suggests that it is a star forming cluster where high-mass stars will form||http://arxiv.org/pdf/0909.3312v1.pdf
|-
| 6. Chauhan et al. 2009 ON LAST YEAR'S LIST||Triggered star formation & evolution of t-tauri stars in and around BRC||'''Luisa adds:''' YES this is a useful paper -- they are using JHK to select YSOs and including IRAC (but not MIPS) in their assessment of youth. we will be using longer-wavelength infrared to find the objects, so we will find a different set of objects. (ps they also didn't do that hot a job with source matching to the literature. we can do better.) Study that looked at ages of star forming clusters. Seems to have a lot of background material on BRC 38 ||[http://arxiv.org/pdf/0903.2122v1.pdf 2009, MNRAS, 396, 964]
|-
| Morgan et al. 2007 ON LAST YEAR'S LIST||A scuba survey of BRC||'''Luisa adds:''' Radio. ignore at least for now BRC 38 included in this study with SUBA data (submillimeter - microwave??); Luisa's notes: SCUBA submm survey (450+850 um) plus IRAS (12, 25, 60, 100 um), MSX, and 2MASS (erroneously identified as 2mm but really 2 micron). both 27 and 34 in here. next part of a PhD thesis. lots of nice overview, summary (as would be expected for a thesis) spread throughout article. seems to be a really long paper, but is almost all figures in the appendix. relevant issues: how the objects they are talking about (at long and short wavelengths) compare to what we see in our images (see Resolution and their, e.g., fig 4). Forward reference to Spitzer data analysis like ours but then says have already looked for GLIMPSE, 24 um obs. They are only looking at low-res flux densities. Appendix may be useful for scavenging additional targets if we want to do more analysis on more targets.||[http://arxiv.org/pdf/0711.0775v1.pdf 2008, A&A, 477, 557]
|-
| Neri et al. 2007||The IC 1396N proto-cluster at a scale of ~250 AU||'''Luisa adds:''' radio. ignore for now at least. observations in millimeter range to help develop understanding of formation of clusters vs individual star formation||http://arxiv.org/pdf/0705.2663v1.pdf
|-
| 7. Getman et al. 2007||X-ray study of triggered star formation and protostars in IC 1396N||'''Luisa adds:''' YES this is useful x-ray sources in the globule of ic 1396N; good pictures to help with the visualization of 1396N and these sources; evidence of sequential star formation||http://arxiv.org/pdf/astro-ph/0607006v2.pdf
|-
| Patel et al. 2007||Submillimeter array observations of 321 ghz water maser emission in cepheus a||'''Luisa adds:''' Radio. ignore at least for now No don\'t think there is anything here||http://arxiv.org/pdf/astro-ph/0702696v1.pdf
|-
| 8. Connelley et al. 2006||Infrared Nebulae around Young stellar objects||'''Luisa adds:''' check this to see if there is anything point source-y in here. IRAS 21391+5802 - images show jet-like nebula and large patches of nebulosity||http://arxiv.org/pdf/astro-ph/0611634v1.pdf
|-
| Valdettaro et al. 2005 ON LAST YEAR'S LIST||h2o maser emission from bright rimmed clouds in the northern hemisphere||'''Luisa adds:''' Radio. ignore at least for now H2O maser studied in brc 38; points to paper Valdettaro et al. 2005b which is supposed to be about analysis of BRC 38. Luisa's old notes: 22.2 GHz (=1.35 cm if I did my math right). Really nice intro summarizing the big picture. Following up on Morgan and similar work asserting high-mass stars forming in BRCs by looking for masers. Our objects observed, not detected. Finding lots of non-detections, suggesting that low-mass stars forming instead. Nice, short writeup of basically a non-result, and I think they've gotten the interpretation spot-on. ||[http://arxiv.org/pdf/astro-ph/0508446v1.pdf 2005, A&A, 443, 535]
|-
| Beltran et al. 2004||The dense moelcular cores in IRAS 21391 +5802 region||'''Luisa adds:''' Radio and it sounds like theoretical models. ignore. Three sources found with BIMA (??) observations in 21391+5802; Hard to read as they are trying to use data to fit/model how gas is emitted from the core||http://arxiv.org/pdf/astro-ph/0407102v1.pdf
|-
| 9. Reipurth et al. 2003||Blowout from IC 1396N: The emergence of Herbig-Haro objects in the vicinity of bright-rimmed clouds||'''Luisa adds:''' Reipurth et al usually work in Ha or forbidden emission lines to find HH objects. look to see if they have a list of objects in the region we care about, or if this is a more general paper. Herbig-Haro flow (HH 777) found coming out of ic 1396N; located at 214041.6+581638 (in IR, I think)||[http://iopscience.iop.org/1538-4357/593/1/L47/pdf/17405.web.pdf 2002, ApJ, 123:2597-2626]
|-
| 10. Ogura, et el 2002 ON LAST YEAR"S LIST||Halpha emission stars and Herbig-Haro objects in and around BRC||'''Luisa adds:''' YES this is useful - finding YSOs via Halpha Part of Luisa's Notes from last year: Most recent of the Sugitani series of four. Using Halpha to look for YSOs, following up their other work. relevant issues: using multiple wavelengths to find YSOs (see Finding cluster members), spatial resolution (see Resolution), caveats with finding candidates. Nice intro, summary of larger issues, discussion of results. ||http://iopscience.iop.org/1538-3881/123/5/2597/pdf/201506.web.pdf
|-
| 11. Beltran et al. 2002||IRAS 21391+5802: The Molecular Outflow and its Exciting source||'''Luisa adds:''' this is probably worth looking at to see if there is anything point source-y in here. VLA and BIMA observations of dust and gas surrounding IRAS source; 3 sources isolated with BIMA, each a YSO
'''Lauren adds:''' Really good text about the intermediate mass star morphology and evolution compared to that of the low mass stars. There is a table at the end that has point source information of BIMA observations of 5 epochs with bandwidth and spectral resolution. A table with 5 sources and flux density and spectral index, another table with millimeter flux densitites, for 3 BIMA sources, and a table with CO outflow properties.
||http://arxiv.org/pdf/astro-ph/0203206v1.pdf
|-
| Codella et al. 2001||Star formation in the BRC of IC 1396N||'''Luisa adds:''' radio. ignore for now. The density of several different molecular outflows (dense areas of particular molecules)in the globule looked at with 30m IRAM and OVRO interferometer. Demonstrates this area very complex. ||[http://www.aanda.org/index.php?option=com_article&access=bibcode&Itemid=129&bibcode=2001A%26A...376..271CFUL Astron. Astrophys., 376, 271-287 (2001)]
|-
| 12. Nisini et al. 2001||Multiple H2 protostellar jets in the bright-rimmed globule IC 1396-N||'''Luisa adds:''' jets can be HH objects, or can create them. probably useful to scan this in conjunction with some of the other outflow/hh object papers on this list. 1st detection of H2 jets from YSO. Are these HH objects?
'''Lauren adds:'''The H2 excitation inside the globule could be from either shocks driven by the outflow of YSOs or to UV induced fluorescence from the external ionized region. Evidence suggests that the jets are likely shocked gas along stellar jets. The conclusion states that the emissions originate from non-dissociative shocks, and that they are associated with the most embedded and youngest objects of the field. The near IR confirms the existence of a cluster of young embedded sources and highly efficient star formation activity. Triggered mechanisms are not favored, due to the ionization front.
||[http://cdsads.u-strasbg.fr/cgi-bin/nph-bib_query?2001A%26A...376..553N&db_key=AST&nosetcookie=1 A&A 376, 553{560]
|-
| 13. Slysh et al. 1999||Prootoplanetary disk and/or bipolar outflow traced by h2o masers in ic 1396n||'''Luisa adds:''' theoretical papers you can probably ignore. did not look at background discussion, but don't let me stop you if you are motivated! Description of 3 models that may explain how masers form; Gives background on IC 1396 '''Lauren adds:''' I agree with Luisa, and if there's time - I'll read it more thoroughly.

||http://iopscience.iop.org/0004-637X/526/1/236/pdf/39770.web.pdf
|-
| Ogura & Sugitani 1999||A large number of Halpha Emission Stars associated with BRCs||'''Luisa adds:''' conference proceedings, old at that. i'm sure this analysis is already written up in their later papers. ignore this one. Supports \"small-scale sequential star formation\"; suggests low-mass stars formating in area of high-mass star forming area||[http://articles.adsabs.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/nph-iarticle_query?1999sf99.proc..381O&data_type=PDF_HIGH&whole_paper=YES&type=PRINTER&filetype=.pdf Proceedings of Star Formation, 1999, pg 381-382]
|-
| Sugitani et al. 1999||Small-Scale Sequential Star Formtion in Bright-Rimmed Clouds||'''Luisa adds:''' conference proceedings, old at that. i'm sure this analysis is already written up in their later papers. ignore this one. Discussion of small-scale sequential star formation hypothesis||[http://articles.adsabs.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/nph-iarticle_query?1999sf99.proc..358S&data_type=PDF_HIGH&whole_paper=YES&type=PRINTER&filetype=.pdf Proceedings of Star Formation, 1999, pg 358-364]
|-
| 14. Saraceno et al. 1996||LWS observations of the bright-rimmed globule IC 1396N||'''Luisa adds:''' LWS is defintiely from ISO, which was a European ir mission prior to spitzer. spectrum of co, oh, h2o are detected in the ISO-LWS spectrum - not sure what that is??
'''Lauren adds:''' 1st far IR spectrum of the IRAS source associated with IC 1396N. About 16 pc from O6 star HD 206267. The 1396 region is about 750 pc away, RDI mechanism, 10 thousand years ago. ISO satellite collected spectra in 1996 with the LWS spectrometer – yeah – I don’t know what they’re actually trying to describe in this article – seems that they think they may have made an error in determining a geometry of something - but then, I am still so steep in the learning curve that reality has taken a rather interesting “slant”…
||[http://articles.adsabs.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/nph-iarticle_query?1996A%26A...315L.293S&data_type=PDF_HIGH&whole_paper=YES&type=PRINTER&filetype=.pdf Astron. Astrophys. 315, L293–L296 (1996)]
|-
| Saraceno et al. 1996|| An evolutionary diagram for young stellar objects||'''Luisa adds:''' deep, DEEP background, IGNORE THIS. background - but not sure I understand it||[http://articles.adsabs.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/nph-iarticle_query?1996A%26A...309..827S&data_type=PDF_HIGH&whole_paper=YES&type=PRINTER&filetype=.pdf Astron. Astrophys, 309, 827-839]
|-
| 15. Weikard et al. 1996||the structure of the IC 1396 region||'''Luisa adds:''' seems like this would be useful. Discussion of structure of 1c 1396 and the central star O6.5 (HD 206267) radiation on clumping and structure/location of yso; shows locations of yso in brc 38 from their data
'''Lauren adds:''' Observational data taken with: Nagoya 4 meter millimeter wave telescope; POM-2 2.5 meter millimeter telescope;KOSMA 3 meter sub-millimeter radio telescope; with reduction data in: CO, H 1 and IRAS Conclusion states that a nearby strong heating source is indicated.
||[http://articles.adsabs.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/nph-iarticle_query?1996A%26A...309..581W&data_type=PDF_HIGH&whole_paper=YES&type=PRINTER&filetype=.pdf Astron. Astrophys, 309, 581-611]
|-
| Sugitani et al. 1991 ON LAST YEAR"S LIST||A catalog of BRC with iras point sources||'''Luisa adds:''' discovery paper of BRCs, but no source lists of individual YSOs in the region. you guys should've read this already, but not relevant to the assembly of previously known YSOs in the region. Just a list of point sources they invesigated - brc 38 on the list Part of Luisa's old notes: the original SFO, origin of "BRC" terminology, numbers 1-44. covers the northern hemisphere. has nice intro/summary of what's going on in BRCs, CGs, etc. Nice approach of combining two large surveys -- POSS and IRAS; nice clear discussion of weed-down process. ||[http://articles.adsabs.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/nph-iarticle_query?1991ApJS...77...59S&data_type=PDF_HIGH&whole_paper=YES&type=PRINTER&filetype=.pdf 1991, ApJS, 77, 59]
|-
| Sugitani et al. 1989||Star formation in bright-rimmed globules: evidence for radiation-driven implosion||'''Luisa adds:''' this sets up their subsequent work. you can safely ignore this. Argument for rdiation-driven implosion method of star formation.||[http://articles.adsabs.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/nph-iarticle_query?1989ApJ...342L..87S&data_type=PDF_HIGH&whole_paper=YES&type=PRINTER&filetype=.pdf 1989, ApJ, 342:L87-90]
|-
| Pottasch et al. 1956||a study of bright rims in diffuse nebulae||'''Luisa adds:''' so old that not really useful for assembling list of YSOs in region. skip. Early work describing the location, shape of, density of, brightness of bright rim clouds in several nebula, including IC 1396 and Brc 38||[http://articles.adsabs.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/nph-iarticle_query?1956BAN....13...77P&data_type=PDF_HIGH&whole_paper=YES&type=PRINTER&filetype=.pdf Bulletin of Astro. Instit. of the Netherlands, Vol 13, 471, 77-88]
|-
|
|}

Jackie BRC 38

2012-02-29T00:14:17Z

Novatne: /* Articles */

==Location of BRC 38==
I need a picture in my head. I found these helpful. The first is the one Luisa already put up. The 2nd is from APOD (http://apod.nasa.gov/apod/ap110425.html). The 3rd is from Getman et al. 2006 

[[image:tr37where.png|250px]] [[image:brc38.png | 250px]][[image:brc_38_Getman2006paper.png|300px]]

== Information about BRC 38==
Bright Rimmed Cloud 38 in IC 1396. Since it is located in the north part of IC 1396 is it often referred to as IC 1396N. 
It has a C shape with the southern edge as the brightest part (Pottasch et al. 1956). 
Location with intermediate mass protostars, though some (Ogura & Sugitani 1999) suggest there is probably a lot of low mass formation going on too. Wang et al. 2009 believes potential for high mass stars forming here also. 
H2 jets found (Saraceno et al. 1996; Nisini et al. 2001) 
Herbig-Haro objects found (Repurth et al. 2003 
Observed in many wavelengths - it would be good to get the specific wavelengths in each band
: optical (IPHAS, several optical - including Yerkes in the 1950s - coming from Chicago I have to cheer!!),
: infrared (2MASS,
: radio (IRAM & BIMA)
: x-ray
 
==Draft Proposal==
1. What is the structure of brc 38? - classification of cloud (type A I believe) & why; H2 jets and Herbig-Haro objects & what they indicate; 
2. What is the distance of the brc?

3. What is known about YSO in this region - this might be H alpha emission stars (??); 
a. How many have been found with what kind of detection (type of detector - X-ray, infrared, visible, etc); 
b. What kind (low mass, intermediate, high mass); 
c. Where in the brc are YSO located? 
d. What kind of formation process is indicated - triggered or collapse? 

4. What do we expect to find in this section? 

== Questions ==
I am sure there are a lot more!! After fooling around with wiki editing, this is all that is left in my head at present.

1. One IRAS (Infrared Astronomical Satellite) location (IRAS 21391+5802) seems to be the central point or at least this location that keeps coming up. What is this? 
2. LWS spectrum - is this as simple as long wavelength? 
3. Still unclear on what exactly the following are. I have looked them up but they are not clear in my head - maser, Herbig-Haro objects, FIR colors, MIP colors 
4. When we talk about BRC 38, are we talking about the whole C rim and globular area it half encircles? Where does the IRAS source 21391+5802 fit in our picture? 
5. Is submillimeter wavelengths (SUBA) infrared or microwave? 
6. Is HD 206267 affecting the whole region with its radiation? 

== Search phrases ==
*BRC 38
*sfo 38
*21:40:42+52:16:13
*21391+5802
*IC 1396N
*Cepheus OB2
*IMYSO

== Articles ==

{| {{table}}
{| border="1"
| align="center" style="background:#f0f0f0;"|'''Author Date'''
| align="center" style="background:#f0f0f0;"|'''Article Title'''
| align="center" style="background:#f0f0f0;"|'''Comments'''
| align="center" style="background:#f0f0f0;"|'''URL'''

|-
| 1a. Nagano et al. 2012 ||Wide Field Survey of Emission-line Stars in IC 1396||Nagano reports a total of 639 Hα emission-line stars were detected in an area of 4.2 deg2 and their i′-photometry was measured. Their spatial distribution exhibits several aggregates near the elephant trunk globule (Rim A) and bright-rimmed clouds at the edge of the H ii region (Rim B and SFO 37, 38, 39, 41), and near HD 206267, which is the main exciting star of the H ii region.” || [[Media:Nagano_2012.pdf]]

|-
| 1b. saurin et al. 2012 ||the embedded cluster or assoiciation trumpter 37 in ir 1396||'''Luisa adds:''' no individual data tables to use; they are interested in statistical properties of the regions. good 'big picture' kind of thing, but no real use for us in terms of our specific project. '''Peggy adds:''' 2MASS observations of BRC 38, Primary focus Trumpler 37, but analyzed 2Mass photometry of 11 BRCs in IC 1396 including BRC 38. All associated with IRAS sources (prob protostars) massive nearby star HR 8281 may have triggered sequential star formation via winds and UV. Photometric errors </= 0.1 mag removed for stars less than 0.5 arcmin radius for BRC 38 b/c high absorption? Relatively high central densities = small star clusters. Getman et al 2007 found sequential star formation evidence for BRC 38, spatial gradient stellar age in direction to triggering star as well as YSOs. BRC 38 stellar mass of ~15Mo assumed representative of area. Lists ra/dec, angular and linear dist to HR 8281 --Peggy Piper 12:23, 21 February 2012 (PST) ||http://arxiv.org/pdf/1201.2704.pdf
|-
| 2.. Barensten et al. 2011||T tauri candidates and accretion rates using IPHAS: method and application to IC 1396||'''Luisa adds:''' YES this is a useful paper. data tables of objects they think are young. their shortlist may or may not overlap with the fields we care about in brc 34 and 38, but still very useful to include. if, when we get to that point of needing these objects, they still haven't released the full IPHAS catalog, i will email these guys and ask for source lists in the regions we care about (34 and 38) '''Peggy adds:''' Includes BRC 38 which is called cloud E; Looking for YSOs in all of 1396; list 158 candidates; uses IPHAS survey data - Halpha, r, I filters on isaac newton telescope Specifically looking for T Tauri through Halpha emissions. Also includes 2 MASS and Spitzer data but only for T Tauri candidates? Find increasing accretion rates, disc excesses and younger ages as move away from HD 206267 towards Cloud A (BRC 38 is Cloud E)--Peggy Piper 12:47, 21 February 2012 (PST) ||http://arxiv.org/pdf/1103.1646v1.pdf
|-
| 3. choudhury et al. 2010||Triggered star formation and YSO population in Bright Rimmed SRO 38||'''Luisa adds:''' YES this is useful, if for no other reason than they used the Spitzer data. they definitely have data tables too. 44 YSOs identified in brc 38 - evidence for radiation driven implosion (RDI); spitzer IRAC & MIPS data, optical BVRI ||http://arxiv.org/pdf/1005.1841v1.pdf
|-
| Morgan et al. 2010||Ammonia observations of bright-rimmed clouds: establishing a sample of triggered protostars||'''Luisa adds:''' Radio. ignore at least for now Radio observations (Green Bank) of brcs; furthering earlier work of morgan, confirming brc is triggered star formation site ||http://arxiv.org/pdf/1006.0833v1.pdf
|-
| Crimier et al. 2010||Physical structure of the envelopes of intermediate-mass protostars||'''Luisa adds''': too theoretical. ignore. a study that says that the mass of the final star of a protostar is linked to the mass of the envelope around the protostar, not the density of the parent cloud - backbground on IM protostars??||http://arxiv.org/pdf/1005.0947v1.pdf
|-
| Ogura 2010||Triggered star formation assoicated with HII regions||'''Luisa adds''': overview. conference proceedings. meat of this analysis already in other journal articles, i am pretty sure. ignore for now. Not really about BRC 38 but discusses curent state of triggered star formation theory||[http://articles.adsabs.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/nph-iarticle_query?2010ASInC...1...19O&data_type=PDF_HIGH&whole_paper=YES&type=PRINTER&filetype=.pdf ASI Conference Series, 2010, Vol 1, pp 19-25]
|-
| 4. beltran et al. 2009||The stellar population and complex structure of the bright-rimmed cloud ic 1396N||'''Luisa adds''': YES very useful! A study through JHK filters; 736 sources found in all 3 bands (filters); h2 emission shows jet like structure||http://arxiv.org/pdf/0902.4543v1.pdf
|-
| Morgan L. K., Urquhart J. S., Thompson M. A., 2009 ON LAST YEAR'S LIST||CO observations towards bright-rimmed clouds||'''Luisa adds:''' Radio. ignore at least for now Luisa's old notes: JCMT (CO) observations. both 27 and 34 in here. 22 arcsec resolution! (see Resolution and their fig 2 here.) Likely last of his thesis, or first of his postdoc. (Look, his address changed, so this was published while he was a postdoc, but it's the same collaborators as before at his old institution, so my guess it's leftover thesis work.) They think 27 has been triggered, 34 not; this provides a nice compare-and-contrast opportunity for our write-up. Quick read.||[http://cdsbib.u-strasbg.fr/cgi-bin/cdsbib?2009MNRAS.400.1726M 2009, MNRAS, 400, 1726]
|-
| 5. fuente et al. 2009||Dissecting an intermediate-mass (IM) prostar||'''luisa adds:''' hm. very narrowly focused paper, seems to be just on one object and radio. was ready to say ignore it, but it is probably worth a quick skim to see if they mention anything substantive about the 'YSO BIMA 3' and 'cluster BIMA 2' mentioned in the abstract. A look at IRAS 21391+5802 emissions of N2H+, CH3CN, CS, BIMA (1.2mm & 3.1mm)||http://arxiv.org/pdf/0909.2267v1.pdf
|-
| Wang et al. 2009||The relation between 13CO j=2-1 line width in moelcular clouds and bolometric luminosity of associated IRAS sources||'''Luisa adds:''' Radio. ignore at least for now IRAS 21391+5802 - suggests that it is a star forming cluster where high-mass stars will form||http://arxiv.org/pdf/0909.3312v1.pdf
|-
| 6. Chauhan et al. 2009 ON LAST YEAR'S LIST||Triggered star formation & evolution of t-tauri stars in and around BRC||'''Luisa adds:''' YES this is a useful paper -- they are using JHK to select YSOs and including IRAC (but not MIPS) in their assessment of youth. we will be using longer-wavelength infrared to find the objects, so we will find a different set of objects. (ps they also didn't do that hot a job with source matching to the literature. we can do better.) Study that looked at ages of star forming clusters. Seems to have a lot of background material on BRC 38 ||[http://arxiv.org/pdf/0903.2122v1.pdf 2009, MNRAS, 396, 964]
|-
| Morgan et al. 2007 ON LAST YEAR'S LIST||A scuba survey of BRC||'''Luisa adds:''' Radio. ignore at least for now BRC 38 included in this study with SUBA data (submillimeter - microwave??); Luisa's notes: SCUBA submm survey (450+850 um) plus IRAS (12, 25, 60, 100 um), MSX, and 2MASS (erroneously identified as 2mm but really 2 micron). both 27 and 34 in here. next part of a PhD thesis. lots of nice overview, summary (as would be expected for a thesis) spread throughout article. seems to be a really long paper, but is almost all figures in the appendix. relevant issues: how the objects they are talking about (at long and short wavelengths) compare to what we see in our images (see Resolution and their, e.g., fig 4). Forward reference to Spitzer data analysis like ours but then says have already looked for GLIMPSE, 24 um obs. They are only looking at low-res flux densities. Appendix may be useful for scavenging additional targets if we want to do more analysis on more targets.||[http://arxiv.org/pdf/0711.0775v1.pdf 2008, A&A, 477, 557]
|-
| Neri et al. 2007||The IC 1396N proto-cluster at a scale of ~250 AU||'''Luisa adds:''' radio. ignore for now at least. observations in millimeter range to help develop understanding of formation of clusters vs individual star formation||http://arxiv.org/pdf/0705.2663v1.pdf
|-
| 7. Getman et al. 2007||X-ray study of triggered star formation and protostars in IC 1396N||'''Luisa adds:''' YES this is useful x-ray sources in the globule of ic 1396N; good pictures to help with the visualization of 1396N and these sources; evidence of sequential star formation||http://arxiv.org/pdf/astro-ph/0607006v2.pdf
|-
| Patel et al. 2007||Submillimeter array observations of 321 ghz water maser emission in cepheus a||'''Luisa adds:''' Radio. ignore at least for now No don\'t think there is anything here||http://arxiv.org/pdf/astro-ph/0702696v1.pdf
|-
| 8. Connelley et al. 2006||Infrared Nebulae around Young stellar objects||'''Luisa adds:''' check this to see if there is anything point source-y in here. IRAS 21391+5802 - images show jet-like nebula and large patches of nebulosity||http://arxiv.org/pdf/astro-ph/0611634v1.pdf
|-
| Valdettaro et al. 2005 ON LAST YEAR'S LIST||h2o maser emission from bright rimmed clouds in the northern hemisphere||'''Luisa adds:''' Radio. ignore at least for now H2O maser studied in brc 38; points to paper Valdettaro et al. 2005b which is supposed to be about analysis of BRC 38. Luisa's old notes: 22.2 GHz (=1.35 cm if I did my math right). Really nice intro summarizing the big picture. Following up on Morgan and similar work asserting high-mass stars forming in BRCs by looking for masers. Our objects observed, not detected. Finding lots of non-detections, suggesting that low-mass stars forming instead. Nice, short writeup of basically a non-result, and I think they've gotten the interpretation spot-on. ||[http://arxiv.org/pdf/astro-ph/0508446v1.pdf 2005, A&A, 443, 535]
|-
| Beltran et al. 2004||The dense moelcular cores in IRAS 21391 +5802 region||'''Luisa adds:''' Radio and it sounds like theoretical models. ignore. Three sources found with BIMA (??) observations in 21391+5802; Hard to read as they are trying to use data to fit/model how gas is emitted from the core||http://arxiv.org/pdf/astro-ph/0407102v1.pdf
|-
| 9. Reipurth et al. 2003||Blowout from IC 1396N: The emergence of Herbig-Haro objects in the vicinity of bright-rimmed clouds||'''Luisa adds:''' Reipurth et al usually work in Ha or forbidden emission lines to find HH objects. look to see if they have a list of objects in the region we care about, or if this is a more general paper. Herbig-Haro flow (HH 777) found coming out of ic 1396N; located at 214041.6+581638 (in IR, I think)||[http://iopscience.iop.org/1538-4357/593/1/L47/pdf/17405.web.pdf 2002, ApJ, 123:2597-2626]
|-
| 10. Ogura, et el 2002 ON LAST YEAR"S LIST||Halpha emission stars and Herbig-Haro objects in and around BRC||'''Luisa adds:''' YES this is useful - finding YSOs via Halpha Part of Luisa's Notes from last year: Most recent of the Sugitani series of four. Using Halpha to look for YSOs, following up their other work. relevant issues: using multiple wavelengths to find YSOs (see Finding cluster members), spatial resolution (see Resolution), caveats with finding candidates. Nice intro, summary of larger issues, discussion of results. ||http://iopscience.iop.org/1538-3881/123/5/2597/pdf/201506.web.pdf
|-
| 11. Beltran et al. 2002||IRAS 21391+5802: The Molecular Outflow and its Exciting source||'''Luisa adds:''' this is probably worth looking at to see if there is anything point source-y in here. VLA and BIMA observations of dust and gas surrounding IRAS source; 3 sources isolated with BIMA, each a YSO||http://arxiv.org/pdf/astro-ph/0203206v1.pdf
|-
| Codella et al. 2001||Star formation in the BRC of IC 1396N||'''Luisa adds:''' radio. ignore for now. The density of several different molecular outflows (dense areas of particular molecules)in the globule looked at with 30m IRAM and OVRO interferometer. Demonstrates this area very complex. ||[http://www.aanda.org/index.php?option=com_article&access=bibcode&Itemid=129&bibcode=2001A%26A...376..271CFUL Astron. Astrophys., 376, 271-287 (2001)]
|-
| 12. Nisini et al. 2001||Multiple H2 protostellar jets in the bright-rimmed globule IC 1396-N||'''Luisa adds:''' jets can be HH objects, or can create them. probably useful to scan this in conjunction with some of the other outflow/hh object papers on this list. 1st detection of H2 jets from YSO. Are these HH objects?
'''Lauren adds:'''The H2 excitation inside the globule could be from either shocks driven by the outflow of YSOs or to UV induced fluorescence from the external ionized region. Evidence suggests that the jets are likely shocked gas along stellar jets. The conclusion states that the emissions originate from non-dissociative shocks, and that they are associated with the most embedded and youngest objects of the field. The near IR confirms the existence of a cluster of young embedded sources and highly efficient star formation activity. Triggered mechanisms are not favored, due to the ionization front.
||[http://cdsads.u-strasbg.fr/cgi-bin/nph-bib_query?2001A%26A...376..553N&db_key=AST&nosetcookie=1 A&A 376, 553{560]
|-
| 13. Slysh et al. 1999||Prootoplanetary disk and/or bipolar outflow traced by h2o masers in ic 1396n||'''Luisa adds:''' theoretical papers you can probably ignore. did not look at background discussion, but don't let me stop you if you are motivated! Description of 3 models that may explain how masers form; Gives background on IC 1396 '''Lauren adds:''' I agree with Luisa, and if there's time - I'll read it more thoroughly.

||http://iopscience.iop.org/0004-637X/526/1/236/pdf/39770.web.pdf
|-
| Ogura & Sugitani 1999||A large number of Halpha Emission Stars associated with BRCs||'''Luisa adds:''' conference proceedings, old at that. i'm sure this analysis is already written up in their later papers. ignore this one. Supports \"small-scale sequential star formation\"; suggests low-mass stars formating in area of high-mass star forming area||[http://articles.adsabs.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/nph-iarticle_query?1999sf99.proc..381O&data_type=PDF_HIGH&whole_paper=YES&type=PRINTER&filetype=.pdf Proceedings of Star Formation, 1999, pg 381-382]
|-
| Sugitani et al. 1999||Small-Scale Sequential Star Formtion in Bright-Rimmed Clouds||'''Luisa adds:''' conference proceedings, old at that. i'm sure this analysis is already written up in their later papers. ignore this one. Discussion of small-scale sequential star formation hypothesis||[http://articles.adsabs.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/nph-iarticle_query?1999sf99.proc..358S&data_type=PDF_HIGH&whole_paper=YES&type=PRINTER&filetype=.pdf Proceedings of Star Formation, 1999, pg 358-364]
|-
| 14. Saraceno et al. 1996||LWS observations of the bright-rimmed globule IC 1396N||'''Luisa adds:''' LWS is defintiely from ISO, which was a European ir mission prior to spitzer. spectrum of co, oh, h2o are detected in the ISO-LWS spectrum - not sure what that is??
'''Lauren adds:''' 1st far IR spectrum of the IRAS source associated with IC 1396N. About 16 pc from O6 star HD 206267. The 1396 region is about 750 pc away, RDI mechanism, 10 thousand years ago. ISO satellite collected spectra in 1996 with the LWS spectrometer – yeah – I don’t know what they’re actually trying to describe in this article – seems that they think they may have made an error in determining a geometry of something - but then, I am still so steep in the learning curve that reality has taken a rather interesting “slant”…
||[http://articles.adsabs.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/nph-iarticle_query?1996A%26A...315L.293S&data_type=PDF_HIGH&whole_paper=YES&type=PRINTER&filetype=.pdf Astron. Astrophys. 315, L293–L296 (1996)]
|-
| Saraceno et al. 1996|| An evolutionary diagram for young stellar objects||'''Luisa adds:''' deep, DEEP background, IGNORE THIS. background - but not sure I understand it||[http://articles.adsabs.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/nph-iarticle_query?1996A%26A...309..827S&data_type=PDF_HIGH&whole_paper=YES&type=PRINTER&filetype=.pdf Astron. Astrophys, 309, 827-839]
|-
| 15. Weikard et al. 1996||the structure of the IC 1396 region||'''Luisa adds:''' seems like this would be useful. Discussion of structure of 1c 1396 and the central star O6.5 (HD 206267) radiation on clumping and structure/location of yso; shows locations of yso in brc 38 from their data
'''Lauren adds:''' Observational data taken with: Nagoya 4 meter millimeter wave telescope; POM-2 2.5 meter millimeter telescope;KOSMA 3 meter sub-millimeter radio telescope; with reduction data in: CO, H 1 and IRAS Conclusion states that a nearby strong heating source is indicated.
||[http://articles.adsabs.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/nph-iarticle_query?1996A%26A...309..581W&data_type=PDF_HIGH&whole_paper=YES&type=PRINTER&filetype=.pdf Astron. Astrophys, 309, 581-611]
|-
| Sugitani et al. 1991 ON LAST YEAR"S LIST||A catalog of BRC with iras point sources||'''Luisa adds:''' discovery paper of BRCs, but no source lists of individual YSOs in the region. you guys should've read this already, but not relevant to the assembly of previously known YSOs in the region. Just a list of point sources they invesigated - brc 38 on the list Part of Luisa's old notes: the original SFO, origin of "BRC" terminology, numbers 1-44. covers the northern hemisphere. has nice intro/summary of what's going on in BRCs, CGs, etc. Nice approach of combining two large surveys -- POSS and IRAS; nice clear discussion of weed-down process. ||[http://articles.adsabs.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/nph-iarticle_query?1991ApJS...77...59S&data_type=PDF_HIGH&whole_paper=YES&type=PRINTER&filetype=.pdf 1991, ApJS, 77, 59]
|-
| Sugitani et al. 1989||Star formation in bright-rimmed globules: evidence for radiation-driven implosion||'''Luisa adds:''' this sets up their subsequent work. you can safely ignore this. Argument for rdiation-driven implosion method of star formation.||[http://articles.adsabs.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/nph-iarticle_query?1989ApJ...342L..87S&data_type=PDF_HIGH&whole_paper=YES&type=PRINTER&filetype=.pdf 1989, ApJ, 342:L87-90]
|-
| Pottasch et al. 1956||a study of bright rims in diffuse nebulae||'''Luisa adds:''' so old that not really useful for assembling list of YSOs in region. skip. Early work describing the location, shape of, density of, brightness of bright rim clouds in several nebula, including IC 1396 and Brc 38||[http://articles.adsabs.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/nph-iarticle_query?1956BAN....13...77P&data_type=PDF_HIGH&whole_paper=YES&type=PRINTER&filetype=.pdf Bulletin of Astro. Instit. of the Netherlands, Vol 13, 471, 77-88]
|-
|
|}

Jackie BRC 38

2012-02-28T23:56:34Z

Novatne: /* Articles */

==Location of BRC 38==
I need a picture in my head. I found these helpful. The first is the one Luisa already put up. The 2nd is from APOD (http://apod.nasa.gov/apod/ap110425.html). The 3rd is from Getman et al. 2006 

[[image:tr37where.png|250px]] [[image:brc38.png | 250px]][[image:brc_38_Getman2006paper.png|300px]]

== Information about BRC 38==
Bright Rimmed Cloud 38 in IC 1396. Since it is located in the north part of IC 1396 is it often referred to as IC 1396N. 
It has a C shape with the southern edge as the brightest part (Pottasch et al. 1956). 
Location with intermediate mass protostars, though some (Ogura & Sugitani 1999) suggest there is probably a lot of low mass formation going on too. Wang et al. 2009 believes potential for high mass stars forming here also. 
H2 jets found (Saraceno et al. 1996; Nisini et al. 2001) 
Herbig-Haro objects found (Repurth et al. 2003 
Observed in many wavelengths - it would be good to get the specific wavelengths in each band
: optical (IPHAS, several optical - including Yerkes in the 1950s - coming from Chicago I have to cheer!!),
: infrared (2MASS,
: radio (IRAM & BIMA)
: x-ray
 
==Draft Proposal==
1. What is the structure of brc 38? - classification of cloud (type A I believe) & why; H2 jets and Herbig-Haro objects & what they indicate; 
2. What is the distance of the brc?

3. What is known about YSO in this region - this might be H alpha emission stars (??); 
a. How many have been found with what kind of detection (type of detector - X-ray, infrared, visible, etc); 
b. What kind (low mass, intermediate, high mass); 
c. Where in the brc are YSO located? 
d. What kind of formation process is indicated - triggered or collapse? 

4. What do we expect to find in this section? 

== Questions ==
I am sure there are a lot more!! After fooling around with wiki editing, this is all that is left in my head at present.

1. One IRAS (Infrared Astronomical Satellite) location (IRAS 21391+5802) seems to be the central point or at least this location that keeps coming up. What is this? 
2. LWS spectrum - is this as simple as long wavelength? 
3. Still unclear on what exactly the following are. I have looked them up but they are not clear in my head - maser, Herbig-Haro objects, FIR colors, MIP colors 
4. When we talk about BRC 38, are we talking about the whole C rim and globular area it half encircles? Where does the IRAS source 21391+5802 fit in our picture? 
5. Is submillimeter wavelengths (SUBA) infrared or microwave? 
6. Is HD 206267 affecting the whole region with its radiation? 

== Search phrases ==
*BRC 38
*sfo 38
*21:40:42+52:16:13
*21391+5802
*IC 1396N
*Cepheus OB2
*IMYSO

== Articles ==

{| {{table}}
{| border="1"
| align="center" style="background:#f0f0f0;"|'''Author Date'''
| align="center" style="background:#f0f0f0;"|'''Article Title'''
| align="center" style="background:#f0f0f0;"|'''Comments'''
| align="center" style="background:#f0f0f0;"|'''URL'''

|-
| 1a. Nagano et al. 2012 ||Wide Field Survey of Emission-line Stars in IC 1396||Nagano reports a total of 639 Hα emission-line stars were detected in an area of 4.2 deg2 and their i′-photometry was measured. Their spatial distribution exhibits several aggregates near the elephant trunk globule (Rim A) and bright-rimmed clouds at the edge of the H ii region (Rim B and SFO 37, 38, 39, 41), and near HD 206267, which is the main exciting star of the H ii region.” || [[Media:Nagano_2012.pdf]]

|-
| 1b. saurin et al. 2012 ||the embedded cluster or assoiciation trumpter 37 in ir 1396||'''Luisa adds:''' no individual data tables to use; they are interested in statistical properties of the regions. good 'big picture' kind of thing, but no real use for us in terms of our specific project. '''Peggy adds:''' 2MASS observations of BRC 38, Primary focus Trumpler 37, but analyzed 2Mass photometry of 11 BRCs in IC 1396 including BRC 38. All associated with IRAS sources (prob protostars) massive nearby star HR 8281 may have triggered sequential star formation via winds and UV. Photometric errors </= 0.1 mag removed for stars less than 0.5 arcmin radius for BRC 38 b/c high absorption? Relatively high central densities = small star clusters. Getman et al 2007 found sequential star formation evidence for BRC 38, spatial gradient stellar age in direction to triggering star as well as YSOs. BRC 38 stellar mass of ~15Mo assumed representative of area. Lists ra/dec, angular and linear dist to HR 8281 --Peggy Piper 12:23, 21 February 2012 (PST) ||http://arxiv.org/pdf/1201.2704.pdf
|-
| 2.. Barensten et al. 2011||T tauri candidates and accretion rates using IPHAS: method and application to IC 1396||'''Luisa adds:''' YES this is a useful paper. data tables of objects they think are young. their shortlist may or may not overlap with the fields we care about in brc 34 and 38, but still very useful to include. if, when we get to that point of needing these objects, they still haven't released the full IPHAS catalog, i will email these guys and ask for source lists in the regions we care about (34 and 38) '''Peggy adds:''' Includes BRC 38 which is called cloud E; Looking for YSOs in all of 1396; list 158 candidates; uses IPHAS survey data - Halpha, r, I filters on isaac newton telescope Specifically looking for T Tauri through Halpha emissions. Also includes 2 MASS and Spitzer data but only for T Tauri candidates? Find increasing accretion rates, disc excesses and younger ages as move away from HD 206267 towards Cloud A (BRC 38 is Cloud E)--Peggy Piper 12:47, 21 February 2012 (PST) ||http://arxiv.org/pdf/1103.1646v1.pdf
|-
| 3. choudhury et al. 2010||Triggered star formation and YSO population in Bright Rimmed SRO 38||'''Luisa adds:''' YES this is useful, if for no other reason than they used the Spitzer data. they definitely have data tables too. 44 YSOs identified in brc 38 - evidence for radiation driven implosion (RDI); spitzer IRAC & MIPS data, optical BVRI ||http://arxiv.org/pdf/1005.1841v1.pdf
|-
| Morgan et al. 2010||Ammonia observations of bright-rimmed clouds: establishing a sample of triggered protostars||'''Luisa adds:''' Radio. ignore at least for now Radio observations (Green Bank) of brcs; furthering earlier work of morgan, confirming brc is triggered star formation site ||http://arxiv.org/pdf/1006.0833v1.pdf
|-
| Crimier et al. 2010||Physical structure of the envelopes of intermediate-mass protostars||'''Luisa adds''': too theoretical. ignore. a study that says that the mass of the final star of a protostar is linked to the mass of the envelope around the protostar, not the density of the parent cloud - backbground on IM protostars??||http://arxiv.org/pdf/1005.0947v1.pdf
|-
| Ogura 2010||Triggered star formation assoicated with HII regions||'''Luisa adds''': overview. conference proceedings. meat of this analysis already in other journal articles, i am pretty sure. ignore for now. Not really about BRC 38 but discusses curent state of triggered star formation theory||[http://articles.adsabs.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/nph-iarticle_query?2010ASInC...1...19O&data_type=PDF_HIGH&whole_paper=YES&type=PRINTER&filetype=.pdf ASI Conference Series, 2010, Vol 1, pp 19-25]
|-
| 4. beltran et al. 2009||The stellar population and complex structure of the bright-rimmed cloud ic 1396N||'''Luisa adds''': YES very useful! A study through JHK filters; 736 sources found in all 3 bands (filters); h2 emission shows jet like structure||http://arxiv.org/pdf/0902.4543v1.pdf
|-
| Morgan L. K., Urquhart J. S., Thompson M. A., 2009 ON LAST YEAR'S LIST||CO observations towards bright-rimmed clouds||'''Luisa adds:''' Radio. ignore at least for now Luisa's old notes: JCMT (CO) observations. both 27 and 34 in here. 22 arcsec resolution! (see Resolution and their fig 2 here.) Likely last of his thesis, or first of his postdoc. (Look, his address changed, so this was published while he was a postdoc, but it's the same collaborators as before at his old institution, so my guess it's leftover thesis work.) They think 27 has been triggered, 34 not; this provides a nice compare-and-contrast opportunity for our write-up. Quick read.||[http://cdsbib.u-strasbg.fr/cgi-bin/cdsbib?2009MNRAS.400.1726M 2009, MNRAS, 400, 1726]
|-
| 5. fuente et al. 2009||Dissecting an intermediate-mass (IM) prostar||'''luisa adds:''' hm. very narrowly focused paper, seems to be just on one object and radio. was ready to say ignore it, but it is probably worth a quick skim to see if they mention anything substantive about the 'YSO BIMA 3' and 'cluster BIMA 2' mentioned in the abstract. A look at IRAS 21391+5802 emissions of N2H+, CH3CN, CS, BIMA (1.2mm & 3.1mm)||http://arxiv.org/pdf/0909.2267v1.pdf
|-
| Wang et al. 2009||The relation between 13CO j=2-1 line width in moelcular clouds and bolometric luminosity of associated IRAS sources||'''Luisa adds:''' Radio. ignore at least for now IRAS 21391+5802 - suggests that it is a star forming cluster where high-mass stars will form||http://arxiv.org/pdf/0909.3312v1.pdf
|-
| 6. Chauhan et al. 2009 ON LAST YEAR'S LIST||Triggered star formation & evolution of t-tauri stars in and around BRC||'''Luisa adds:''' YES this is a useful paper -- they are using JHK to select YSOs and including IRAC (but not MIPS) in their assessment of youth. we will be using longer-wavelength infrared to find the objects, so we will find a different set of objects. (ps they also didn't do that hot a job with source matching to the literature. we can do better.) Study that looked at ages of star forming clusters. Seems to have a lot of background material on BRC 38 ||[http://arxiv.org/pdf/0903.2122v1.pdf 2009, MNRAS, 396, 964]
|-
| Morgan et al. 2007 ON LAST YEAR'S LIST||A scuba survey of BRC||'''Luisa adds:''' Radio. ignore at least for now BRC 38 included in this study with SUBA data (submillimeter - microwave??); Luisa's notes: SCUBA submm survey (450+850 um) plus IRAS (12, 25, 60, 100 um), MSX, and 2MASS (erroneously identified as 2mm but really 2 micron). both 27 and 34 in here. next part of a PhD thesis. lots of nice overview, summary (as would be expected for a thesis) spread throughout article. seems to be a really long paper, but is almost all figures in the appendix. relevant issues: how the objects they are talking about (at long and short wavelengths) compare to what we see in our images (see Resolution and their, e.g., fig 4). Forward reference to Spitzer data analysis like ours but then says have already looked for GLIMPSE, 24 um obs. They are only looking at low-res flux densities. Appendix may be useful for scavenging additional targets if we want to do more analysis on more targets.||[http://arxiv.org/pdf/0711.0775v1.pdf 2008, A&A, 477, 557]
|-
| Neri et al. 2007||The IC 1396N proto-cluster at a scale of ~250 AU||'''Luisa adds:''' radio. ignore for now at least. observations in millimeter range to help develop understanding of formation of clusters vs individual star formation||http://arxiv.org/pdf/0705.2663v1.pdf
|-
| 7. Getman et al. 2007||X-ray study of triggered star formation and protostars in IC 1396N||'''Luisa adds:''' YES this is useful x-ray sources in the globule of ic 1396N; good pictures to help with the visualization of 1396N and these sources; evidence of sequential star formation||http://arxiv.org/pdf/astro-ph/0607006v2.pdf
|-
| Patel et al. 2007||Submillimeter array observations of 321 ghz water maser emission in cepheus a||'''Luisa adds:''' Radio. ignore at least for now No don\'t think there is anything here||http://arxiv.org/pdf/astro-ph/0702696v1.pdf
|-
| 8. Connelley et al. 2006||Infrared Nebulae around Young stellar objects||'''Luisa adds:''' check this to see if there is anything point source-y in here. IRAS 21391+5802 - images show jet-like nebula and large patches of nebulosity||http://arxiv.org/pdf/astro-ph/0611634v1.pdf
|-
| Valdettaro et al. 2005 ON LAST YEAR'S LIST||h2o maser emission from bright rimmed clouds in the northern hemisphere||'''Luisa adds:''' Radio. ignore at least for now H2O maser studied in brc 38; points to paper Valdettaro et al. 2005b which is supposed to be about analysis of BRC 38. Luisa's old notes: 22.2 GHz (=1.35 cm if I did my math right). Really nice intro summarizing the big picture. Following up on Morgan and similar work asserting high-mass stars forming in BRCs by looking for masers. Our objects observed, not detected. Finding lots of non-detections, suggesting that low-mass stars forming instead. Nice, short writeup of basically a non-result, and I think they've gotten the interpretation spot-on. ||[http://arxiv.org/pdf/astro-ph/0508446v1.pdf 2005, A&A, 443, 535]
|-
| Beltran et al. 2004||The dense moelcular cores in IRAS 21391 +5802 region||'''Luisa adds:''' Radio and it sounds like theoretical models. ignore. Three sources found with BIMA (??) observations in 21391+5802; Hard to read as they are trying to use data to fit/model how gas is emitted from the core||http://arxiv.org/pdf/astro-ph/0407102v1.pdf
|-
| 9. Reipurth et al. 2003||Blowout from IC 1396N: The emergence of Herbig-Haro objects in the vicinity of bright-rimmed clouds||'''Luisa adds:''' Reipurth et al usually work in Ha or forbidden emission lines to find HH objects. look to see if they have a list of objects in the region we care about, or if this is a more general paper. Herbig-Haro flow (HH 777) found coming out of ic 1396N; located at 214041.6+581638 (in IR, I think)||[http://iopscience.iop.org/1538-4357/593/1/L47/pdf/17405.web.pdf 2002, ApJ, 123:2597-2626]
|-
| 10. Ogura, et el 2002 ON LAST YEAR"S LIST||Halpha emission stars and Herbig-Haro objects in and around BRC||'''Luisa adds:''' YES this is useful - finding YSOs via Halpha Part of Luisa's Notes from last year: Most recent of the Sugitani series of four. Using Halpha to look for YSOs, following up their other work. relevant issues: using multiple wavelengths to find YSOs (see Finding cluster members), spatial resolution (see Resolution), caveats with finding candidates. Nice intro, summary of larger issues, discussion of results. ||http://iopscience.iop.org/1538-3881/123/5/2597/pdf/201506.web.pdf
|-
| 11. Beltran et al. 2002||IRAS 21391+5802: The Molecular Outflow and its Exciting source||'''Luisa adds:''' this is probably worth looking at to see if there is anything point source-y in here. VLA and BIMA observations of dust and gas surrounding IRAS source; 3 sources isolated with BIMA, each a YSO||http://arxiv.org/pdf/astro-ph/0203206v1.pdf
|-
| Codella et al. 2001||Star formation in the BRC of IC 1396N||'''Luisa adds:''' radio. ignore for now. The density of several different molecular outflows (dense areas of particular molecules)in the globule looked at with 30m IRAM and OVRO interferometer. Demonstrates this area very complex. ||[http://www.aanda.org/index.php?option=com_article&access=bibcode&Itemid=129&bibcode=2001A%26A...376..271CFUL Astron. Astrophys., 376, 271-287 (2001)]
|-
| 12. Nisini et al. 2001||Multiple H2 protostellar jets in the bright-rimmed globule IC 1396-N||'''Luisa adds:''' jets can be HH objects, or can create them. probably useful to scan this in conjunction with some of the other outflow/hh object papers on this list. 1st detection of H2 jets from YSO. Are these HH objects? ||[http://cdsads.u-strasbg.fr/cgi-bin/nph-bib_query?2001A%26A...376..553N&db_key=AST&nosetcookie=1 A&A 376, 553{560]
|-
| 13. Slysh et al. 1999||Prootoplanetary disk and/or bipolar outflow traced by h2o masers in ic 1396n||'''Luisa adds:''' theoretical papers you can probably ignore. did not look at background discussion, but don't let me stop you if you are motivated! Description of 3 models that may explain how masers form; Gives background on IC 1396 '''Lauren adds:''' I agree with Luisa, and if there's time - I'll read it more thoroughly.

||http://iopscience.iop.org/0004-637X/526/1/236/pdf/39770.web.pdf
|-
| Ogura & Sugitani 1999||A large number of Halpha Emission Stars associated with BRCs||'''Luisa adds:''' conference proceedings, old at that. i'm sure this analysis is already written up in their later papers. ignore this one. Supports \"small-scale sequential star formation\"; suggests low-mass stars formating in area of high-mass star forming area||[http://articles.adsabs.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/nph-iarticle_query?1999sf99.proc..381O&data_type=PDF_HIGH&whole_paper=YES&type=PRINTER&filetype=.pdf Proceedings of Star Formation, 1999, pg 381-382]
|-
| Sugitani et al. 1999||Small-Scale Sequential Star Formtion in Bright-Rimmed Clouds||'''Luisa adds:''' conference proceedings, old at that. i'm sure this analysis is already written up in their later papers. ignore this one. Discussion of small-scale sequential star formation hypothesis||[http://articles.adsabs.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/nph-iarticle_query?1999sf99.proc..358S&data_type=PDF_HIGH&whole_paper=YES&type=PRINTER&filetype=.pdf Proceedings of Star Formation, 1999, pg 358-364]
|-
| 14. Saraceno et al. 1996||LWS observations of the bright-rimmed globule IC 1396N||'''Luisa adds:''' LWS is defintiely from ISO, which was a European ir mission prior to spitzer. spectrum of co, oh, h2o are detected in the ISO-LWS spectrum - not sure what that is??
'''Lauren adds:''' 1st far IR spectrum of the IRAS source associated with IC 1396N. About 16 pc from O6 star HD 206267. The 1396 region is about 750 pc away, RDI mechanism, 10 thousand years ago. ISO satellite collected spectra in 1996 with the LWS spectrometer – yeah – I don’t know what they’re actually trying to describe in this article – seems that they think they may have made an error in determining a geometry of something - but then, I am still so steep in the learning curve that reality has taken a rather interesting “slant”…
||[http://articles.adsabs.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/nph-iarticle_query?1996A%26A...315L.293S&data_type=PDF_HIGH&whole_paper=YES&type=PRINTER&filetype=.pdf Astron. Astrophys. 315, L293–L296 (1996)]
|-
| Saraceno et al. 1996|| An evolutionary diagram for young stellar objects||'''Luisa adds:''' deep, DEEP background, IGNORE THIS. background - but not sure I understand it||[http://articles.adsabs.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/nph-iarticle_query?1996A%26A...309..827S&data_type=PDF_HIGH&whole_paper=YES&type=PRINTER&filetype=.pdf Astron. Astrophys, 309, 827-839]
|-
| 15. Weikard et al. 1996||the structure of the IC 1396 region||'''Luisa adds:''' seems like this would be useful. Discussion of structure of 1c 1396 and the central star O6.5 (HD 206267) radiation on clumping and structure/location of yso; shows locations of yso in brc 38 from their data
'''Lauren adds:''' Observational data taken with: Nagoya 4 meter millimeter wave telescope; POM-2 2.5 meter millimeter telescope;KOSMA 3 meter sub-millimeter radio telescope; with reduction data in: CO, H 1 and IRAS Conclusion states that a nearby strong heating source is indicated.
||[http://articles.adsabs.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/nph-iarticle_query?1996A%26A...309..581W&data_type=PDF_HIGH&whole_paper=YES&type=PRINTER&filetype=.pdf Astron. Astrophys, 309, 581-611]
|-
| Sugitani et al. 1991 ON LAST YEAR"S LIST||A catalog of BRC with iras point sources||'''Luisa adds:''' discovery paper of BRCs, but no source lists of individual YSOs in the region. you guys should've read this already, but not relevant to the assembly of previously known YSOs in the region. Just a list of point sources they invesigated - brc 38 on the list Part of Luisa's old notes: the original SFO, origin of "BRC" terminology, numbers 1-44. covers the northern hemisphere. has nice intro/summary of what's going on in BRCs, CGs, etc. Nice approach of combining two large surveys -- POSS and IRAS; nice clear discussion of weed-down process. ||[http://articles.adsabs.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/nph-iarticle_query?1991ApJS...77...59S&data_type=PDF_HIGH&whole_paper=YES&type=PRINTER&filetype=.pdf 1991, ApJS, 77, 59]
|-
| Sugitani et al. 1989||Star formation in bright-rimmed globules: evidence for radiation-driven implosion||'''Luisa adds:''' this sets up their subsequent work. you can safely ignore this. Argument for rdiation-driven implosion method of star formation.||[http://articles.adsabs.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/nph-iarticle_query?1989ApJ...342L..87S&data_type=PDF_HIGH&whole_paper=YES&type=PRINTER&filetype=.pdf 1989, ApJ, 342:L87-90]
|-
| Pottasch et al. 1956||a study of bright rims in diffuse nebulae||'''Luisa adds:''' so old that not really useful for assembling list of YSOs in region. skip. Early work describing the location, shape of, density of, brightness of bright rim clouds in several nebula, including IC 1396 and Brc 38||[http://articles.adsabs.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/nph-iarticle_query?1956BAN....13...77P&data_type=PDF_HIGH&whole_paper=YES&type=PRINTER&filetype=.pdf Bulletin of Astro. Instit. of the Netherlands, Vol 13, 471, 77-88]
|-
|
|}

Jackie BRC 38

2012-02-28T23:47:38Z

Novatne: /* Articles */

==Location of BRC 38==
I need a picture in my head. I found these helpful. The first is the one Luisa already put up. The 2nd is from APOD (http://apod.nasa.gov/apod/ap110425.html). The 3rd is from Getman et al. 2006 

[[image:tr37where.png|250px]] [[image:brc38.png | 250px]][[image:brc_38_Getman2006paper.png|300px]]

== Information about BRC 38==
Bright Rimmed Cloud 38 in IC 1396. Since it is located in the north part of IC 1396 is it often referred to as IC 1396N. 
It has a C shape with the southern edge as the brightest part (Pottasch et al. 1956). 
Location with intermediate mass protostars, though some (Ogura & Sugitani 1999) suggest there is probably a lot of low mass formation going on too. Wang et al. 2009 believes potential for high mass stars forming here also. 
H2 jets found (Saraceno et al. 1996; Nisini et al. 2001) 
Herbig-Haro objects found (Repurth et al. 2003 
Observed in many wavelengths - it would be good to get the specific wavelengths in each band
: optical (IPHAS, several optical - including Yerkes in the 1950s - coming from Chicago I have to cheer!!),
: infrared (2MASS,
: radio (IRAM & BIMA)
: x-ray
 
==Draft Proposal==
1. What is the structure of brc 38? - classification of cloud (type A I believe) & why; H2 jets and Herbig-Haro objects & what they indicate; 
2. What is the distance of the brc?

3. What is known about YSO in this region - this might be H alpha emission stars (??); 
a. How many have been found with what kind of detection (type of detector - X-ray, infrared, visible, etc); 
b. What kind (low mass, intermediate, high mass); 
c. Where in the brc are YSO located? 
d. What kind of formation process is indicated - triggered or collapse? 

4. What do we expect to find in this section? 

== Questions ==
I am sure there are a lot more!! After fooling around with wiki editing, this is all that is left in my head at present.

1. One IRAS (Infrared Astronomical Satellite) location (IRAS 21391+5802) seems to be the central point or at least this location that keeps coming up. What is this? 
2. LWS spectrum - is this as simple as long wavelength? 
3. Still unclear on what exactly the following are. I have looked them up but they are not clear in my head - maser, Herbig-Haro objects, FIR colors, MIP colors 
4. When we talk about BRC 38, are we talking about the whole C rim and globular area it half encircles? Where does the IRAS source 21391+5802 fit in our picture? 
5. Is submillimeter wavelengths (SUBA) infrared or microwave? 
6. Is HD 206267 affecting the whole region with its radiation? 

== Search phrases ==
*BRC 38
*sfo 38
*21:40:42+52:16:13
*21391+5802
*IC 1396N
*Cepheus OB2
*IMYSO

== Articles ==

{| {{table}}
{| border="1"
| align="center" style="background:#f0f0f0;"|'''Author Date'''
| align="center" style="background:#f0f0f0;"|'''Article Title'''
| align="center" style="background:#f0f0f0;"|'''Comments'''
| align="center" style="background:#f0f0f0;"|'''URL'''

|-
| 1a. Nagano et al. 2012 ||Wide Field Survey of Emission-line Stars in IC 1396||Nagano reports a total of 639 Hα emission-line stars were detected in an area of 4.2 deg2 and their i′-photometry was measured. Their spatial distribution exhibits several aggregates near the elephant trunk globule (Rim A) and bright-rimmed clouds at the edge of the H ii region (Rim B and SFO 37, 38, 39, 41), and near HD 206267, which is the main exciting star of the H ii region.” || [[Media:Nagano_2012.pdf]]

|-
| 1b. saurin et al. 2012 ||the embedded cluster or assoiciation trumpter 37 in ir 1396||'''Luisa adds:''' no individual data tables to use; they are interested in statistical properties of the regions. good 'big picture' kind of thing, but no real use for us in terms of our specific project. '''Peggy adds:''' 2MASS observations of BRC 38, Primary focus Trumpler 37, but analyzed 2Mass photometry of 11 BRCs in IC 1396 including BRC 38. All associated with IRAS sources (prob protostars) massive nearby star HR 8281 may have triggered sequential star formation via winds and UV. Photometric errors </= 0.1 mag removed for stars less than 0.5 arcmin radius for BRC 38 b/c high absorption? Relatively high central densities = small star clusters. Getman et al 2007 found sequential star formation evidence for BRC 38, spatial gradient stellar age in direction to triggering star as well as YSOs. BRC 38 stellar mass of ~15Mo assumed representative of area. Lists ra/dec, angular and linear dist to HR 8281 --Peggy Piper 12:23, 21 February 2012 (PST) ||http://arxiv.org/pdf/1201.2704.pdf
|-
| 2.. Barensten et al. 2011||T tauri candidates and accretion rates using IPHAS: method and application to IC 1396||'''Luisa adds:''' YES this is a useful paper. data tables of objects they think are young. their shortlist may or may not overlap with the fields we care about in brc 34 and 38, but still very useful to include. if, when we get to that point of needing these objects, they still haven't released the full IPHAS catalog, i will email these guys and ask for source lists in the regions we care about (34 and 38) '''Peggy adds:''' Includes BRC 38 which is called cloud E; Looking for YSOs in all of 1396; list 158 candidates; uses IPHAS survey data - Halpha, r, I filters on isaac newton telescope Specifically looking for T Tauri through Halpha emissions. Also includes 2 MASS and Spitzer data but only for T Tauri candidates? Find increasing accretion rates, disc excesses and younger ages as move away from HD 206267 towards Cloud A (BRC 38 is Cloud E)--Peggy Piper 12:47, 21 February 2012 (PST) ||http://arxiv.org/pdf/1103.1646v1.pdf
|-
| 3. choudhury et al. 2010||Triggered star formation and YSO population in Bright Rimmed SRO 38||'''Luisa adds:''' YES this is useful, if for no other reason than they used the Spitzer data. they definitely have data tables too. 44 YSOs identified in brc 38 - evidence for radiation driven implosion (RDI); spitzer IRAC & MIPS data, optical BVRI ||http://arxiv.org/pdf/1005.1841v1.pdf
|-
| Morgan et al. 2010||Ammonia observations of bright-rimmed clouds: establishing a sample of triggered protostars||'''Luisa adds:''' Radio. ignore at least for now Radio observations (Green Bank) of brcs; furthering earlier work of morgan, confirming brc is triggered star formation site ||http://arxiv.org/pdf/1006.0833v1.pdf
|-
| Crimier et al. 2010||Physical structure of the envelopes of intermediate-mass protostars||'''Luisa adds''': too theoretical. ignore. a study that says that the mass of the final star of a protostar is linked to the mass of the envelope around the protostar, not the density of the parent cloud - backbground on IM protostars??||http://arxiv.org/pdf/1005.0947v1.pdf
|-
| Ogura 2010||Triggered star formation assoicated with HII regions||'''Luisa adds''': overview. conference proceedings. meat of this analysis already in other journal articles, i am pretty sure. ignore for now. Not really about BRC 38 but discusses curent state of triggered star formation theory||[http://articles.adsabs.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/nph-iarticle_query?2010ASInC...1...19O&data_type=PDF_HIGH&whole_paper=YES&type=PRINTER&filetype=.pdf ASI Conference Series, 2010, Vol 1, pp 19-25]
|-
| 4. beltran et al. 2009||The stellar population and complex structure of the bright-rimmed cloud ic 1396N||'''Luisa adds''': YES very useful! A study through JHK filters; 736 sources found in all 3 bands (filters); h2 emission shows jet like structure||http://arxiv.org/pdf/0902.4543v1.pdf
|-
| Morgan L. K., Urquhart J. S., Thompson M. A., 2009 ON LAST YEAR'S LIST||CO observations towards bright-rimmed clouds||'''Luisa adds:''' Radio. ignore at least for now Luisa's old notes: JCMT (CO) observations. both 27 and 34 in here. 22 arcsec resolution! (see Resolution and their fig 2 here.) Likely last of his thesis, or first of his postdoc. (Look, his address changed, so this was published while he was a postdoc, but it's the same collaborators as before at his old institution, so my guess it's leftover thesis work.) They think 27 has been triggered, 34 not; this provides a nice compare-and-contrast opportunity for our write-up. Quick read.||[http://cdsbib.u-strasbg.fr/cgi-bin/cdsbib?2009MNRAS.400.1726M 2009, MNRAS, 400, 1726]
|-
| 5. fuente et al. 2009||Dissecting an intermediate-mass (IM) prostar||'''luisa adds:''' hm. very narrowly focused paper, seems to be just on one object and radio. was ready to say ignore it, but it is probably worth a quick skim to see if they mention anything substantive about the 'YSO BIMA 3' and 'cluster BIMA 2' mentioned in the abstract. A look at IRAS 21391+5802 emissions of N2H+, CH3CN, CS, BIMA (1.2mm & 3.1mm)||http://arxiv.org/pdf/0909.2267v1.pdf
|-
| Wang et al. 2009||The relation between 13CO j=2-1 line width in moelcular clouds and bolometric luminosity of associated IRAS sources||'''Luisa adds:''' Radio. ignore at least for now IRAS 21391+5802 - suggests that it is a star forming cluster where high-mass stars will form||http://arxiv.org/pdf/0909.3312v1.pdf
|-
| 6. Chauhan et al. 2009 ON LAST YEAR'S LIST||Triggered star formation & evolution of t-tauri stars in and around BRC||'''Luisa adds:''' YES this is a useful paper -- they are using JHK to select YSOs and including IRAC (but not MIPS) in their assessment of youth. we will be using longer-wavelength infrared to find the objects, so we will find a different set of objects. (ps they also didn't do that hot a job with source matching to the literature. we can do better.) Study that looked at ages of star forming clusters. Seems to have a lot of background material on BRC 38 ||[http://arxiv.org/pdf/0903.2122v1.pdf 2009, MNRAS, 396, 964]
|-
| Morgan et al. 2007 ON LAST YEAR'S LIST||A scuba survey of BRC||'''Luisa adds:''' Radio. ignore at least for now BRC 38 included in this study with SUBA data (submillimeter - microwave??); Luisa's notes: SCUBA submm survey (450+850 um) plus IRAS (12, 25, 60, 100 um), MSX, and 2MASS (erroneously identified as 2mm but really 2 micron). both 27 and 34 in here. next part of a PhD thesis. lots of nice overview, summary (as would be expected for a thesis) spread throughout article. seems to be a really long paper, but is almost all figures in the appendix. relevant issues: how the objects they are talking about (at long and short wavelengths) compare to what we see in our images (see Resolution and their, e.g., fig 4). Forward reference to Spitzer data analysis like ours but then says have already looked for GLIMPSE, 24 um obs. They are only looking at low-res flux densities. Appendix may be useful for scavenging additional targets if we want to do more analysis on more targets.||[http://arxiv.org/pdf/0711.0775v1.pdf 2008, A&A, 477, 557]
|-
| Neri et al. 2007||The IC 1396N proto-cluster at a scale of ~250 AU||'''Luisa adds:''' radio. ignore for now at least. observations in millimeter range to help develop understanding of formation of clusters vs individual star formation||http://arxiv.org/pdf/0705.2663v1.pdf
|-
| 7. Getman et al. 2007||X-ray study of triggered star formation and protostars in IC 1396N||'''Luisa adds:''' YES this is useful x-ray sources in the globule of ic 1396N; good pictures to help with the visualization of 1396N and these sources; evidence of sequential star formation||http://arxiv.org/pdf/astro-ph/0607006v2.pdf
|-
| Patel et al. 2007||Submillimeter array observations of 321 ghz water maser emission in cepheus a||'''Luisa adds:''' Radio. ignore at least for now No don\'t think there is anything here||http://arxiv.org/pdf/astro-ph/0702696v1.pdf
|-
| 8. Connelley et al. 2006||Infrared Nebulae around Young stellar objects||'''Luisa adds:''' check this to see if there is anything point source-y in here. IRAS 21391+5802 - images show jet-like nebula and large patches of nebulosity||http://arxiv.org/pdf/astro-ph/0611634v1.pdf
|-
| Valdettaro et al. 2005 ON LAST YEAR'S LIST||h2o maser emission from bright rimmed clouds in the northern hemisphere||'''Luisa adds:''' Radio. ignore at least for now H2O maser studied in brc 38; points to paper Valdettaro et al. 2005b which is supposed to be about analysis of BRC 38. Luisa's old notes: 22.2 GHz (=1.35 cm if I did my math right). Really nice intro summarizing the big picture. Following up on Morgan and similar work asserting high-mass stars forming in BRCs by looking for masers. Our objects observed, not detected. Finding lots of non-detections, suggesting that low-mass stars forming instead. Nice, short writeup of basically a non-result, and I think they've gotten the interpretation spot-on. ||[http://arxiv.org/pdf/astro-ph/0508446v1.pdf 2005, A&A, 443, 535]
|-
| Beltran et al. 2004||The dense moelcular cores in IRAS 21391 +5802 region||'''Luisa adds:''' Radio and it sounds like theoretical models. ignore. Three sources found with BIMA (??) observations in 21391+5802; Hard to read as they are trying to use data to fit/model how gas is emitted from the core||http://arxiv.org/pdf/astro-ph/0407102v1.pdf
|-
| 9. Reipurth et al. 2003||Blowout from IC 1396N: The emergence of Herbig-Haro objects in the vicinity of bright-rimmed clouds||'''Luisa adds:''' Reipurth et al usually work in Ha or forbidden emission lines to find HH objects. look to see if they have a list of objects in the region we care about, or if this is a more general paper. Herbig-Haro flow (HH 777) found coming out of ic 1396N; located at 214041.6+581638 (in IR, I think)||[http://iopscience.iop.org/1538-4357/593/1/L47/pdf/17405.web.pdf 2002, ApJ, 123:2597-2626]
|-
| 10. Ogura, et el 2002 ON LAST YEAR"S LIST||Halpha emission stars and Herbig-Haro objects in and around BRC||'''Luisa adds:''' YES this is useful - finding YSOs via Halpha Part of Luisa's Notes from last year: Most recent of the Sugitani series of four. Using Halpha to look for YSOs, following up their other work. relevant issues: using multiple wavelengths to find YSOs (see Finding cluster members), spatial resolution (see Resolution), caveats with finding candidates. Nice intro, summary of larger issues, discussion of results. ||http://iopscience.iop.org/1538-3881/123/5/2597/pdf/201506.web.pdf
|-
| 11. Beltran et al. 2002||IRAS 21391+5802: The Molecular Outflow and its Exciting source||'''Luisa adds:''' this is probably worth looking at to see if there is anything point source-y in here. VLA and BIMA observations of dust and gas surrounding IRAS source; 3 sources isolated with BIMA, each a YSO||http://arxiv.org/pdf/astro-ph/0203206v1.pdf
|-
| Codella et al. 2001||Star formation in the BRC of IC 1396N||'''Luisa adds:''' radio. ignore for now. The density of several different molecular outflows (dense areas of particular molecules)in the globule looked at with 30m IRAM and OVRO interferometer. Demonstrates this area very complex. ||[http://www.aanda.org/index.php?option=com_article&access=bibcode&Itemid=129&bibcode=2001A%26A...376..271CFUL Astron. Astrophys., 376, 271-287 (2001)]
|-
| 12. Nisini et al. 2001||Multiple H2 protostellar jets in the bright-rimmed globule IC 1396-N||'''Luisa adds:''' jets can be HH objects, or can create them. probably useful to scan this in conjunction with some of the other outflow/hh object papers on this list. 1st detection of H2 jets from YSO. Are these HH objects? ||[http://cdsads.u-strasbg.fr/cgi-bin/nph-bib_query?2001A%26A...376..553N&db_key=AST&nosetcookie=1 A&A 376, 553{560]
|-
| 13. Slysh et al. 1999||Prootoplanetary disk and/or bipolar outflow traced by h2o masers in ic 1396n||'''Luisa adds:''' theoretical papers you can probably ignore. did not look at background discussion, but don't let me stop you if you are motivated! Description of 3 models that may explain how masers form; Gives background on IC 1396||http://iopscience.iop.org/0004-637X/526/1/236/pdf/39770.web.pdf
|-
| Ogura & Sugitani 1999||A large number of Halpha Emission Stars associated with BRCs||'''Luisa adds:''' conference proceedings, old at that. i'm sure this analysis is already written up in their later papers. ignore this one. Supports \"small-scale sequential star formation\"; suggests low-mass stars formating in area of high-mass star forming area||[http://articles.adsabs.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/nph-iarticle_query?1999sf99.proc..381O&data_type=PDF_HIGH&whole_paper=YES&type=PRINTER&filetype=.pdf Proceedings of Star Formation, 1999, pg 381-382]
|-
| Sugitani et al. 1999||Small-Scale Sequential Star Formtion in Bright-Rimmed Clouds||'''Luisa adds:''' conference proceedings, old at that. i'm sure this analysis is already written up in their later papers. ignore this one. Discussion of small-scale sequential star formation hypothesis||[http://articles.adsabs.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/nph-iarticle_query?1999sf99.proc..358S&data_type=PDF_HIGH&whole_paper=YES&type=PRINTER&filetype=.pdf Proceedings of Star Formation, 1999, pg 358-364]
|-
| 14. Saraceno et al. 1996||LWS observations of the bright-rimmed globule IC 1396N||'''Luisa adds:''' LWS is defintiely from ISO, which was a European ir mission prior to spitzer. spectrum of co, oh, h2o are detected in the ISO-LWS spectrum - not sure what that is??
'''Lauren adds:''' 1st far IR spectrum of the IRAS source associated with IC 1396N. About 16 pc from O6 star HD 206267. The 1396 region is about 750 pc away, RDI mechanism, 10 thousand years ago. ISO satellite collected spectra in 1996 with the LWS spectrometer – yeah – I don’t know what they’re actually trying to describe in this article – seems that they think they may have made an error in determining a geometry of something - but then, I am still so steep in the learning curve that reality has taken a rather interesting “slant”…
||[http://articles.adsabs.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/nph-iarticle_query?1996A%26A...315L.293S&data_type=PDF_HIGH&whole_paper=YES&type=PRINTER&filetype=.pdf Astron. Astrophys. 315, L293–L296 (1996)]
|-
| Saraceno et al. 1996|| An evolutionary diagram for young stellar objects||'''Luisa adds:''' deep, DEEP background, IGNORE THIS. background - but not sure I understand it||[http://articles.adsabs.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/nph-iarticle_query?1996A%26A...309..827S&data_type=PDF_HIGH&whole_paper=YES&type=PRINTER&filetype=.pdf Astron. Astrophys, 309, 827-839]
|-
| 15. Weikard et al. 1996||the structure of the IC 1396 region||'''Luisa adds:''' seems like this would be useful. Discussion of structure of 1c 1396 and the central star O6.5 (HD 206267) radiation on clumping and structure/location of yso; shows locations of yso in brc 38 from their data
'''Lauren adds:''' Observational data taken with: Nagoya 4 meter millimeter wave telescope; POM-2 2.5 meter millimeter telescope;KOSMA 3 meter sub-millimeter radio telescope; with reduction data in: CO, H 1 and IRAS Conclusion states that a nearby strong heating source is indicated.
||[http://articles.adsabs.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/nph-iarticle_query?1996A%26A...309..581W&data_type=PDF_HIGH&whole_paper=YES&type=PRINTER&filetype=.pdf Astron. Astrophys, 309, 581-611]
|-
| Sugitani et al. 1991 ON LAST YEAR"S LIST||A catalog of BRC with iras point sources||'''Luisa adds:''' discovery paper of BRCs, but no source lists of individual YSOs in the region. you guys should've read this already, but not relevant to the assembly of previously known YSOs in the region. Just a list of point sources they invesigated - brc 38 on the list Part of Luisa's old notes: the original SFO, origin of "BRC" terminology, numbers 1-44. covers the northern hemisphere. has nice intro/summary of what's going on in BRCs, CGs, etc. Nice approach of combining two large surveys -- POSS and IRAS; nice clear discussion of weed-down process. ||[http://articles.adsabs.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/nph-iarticle_query?1991ApJS...77...59S&data_type=PDF_HIGH&whole_paper=YES&type=PRINTER&filetype=.pdf 1991, ApJS, 77, 59]
|-
| Sugitani et al. 1989||Star formation in bright-rimmed globules: evidence for radiation-driven implosion||'''Luisa adds:''' this sets up their subsequent work. you can safely ignore this. Argument for rdiation-driven implosion method of star formation.||[http://articles.adsabs.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/nph-iarticle_query?1989ApJ...342L..87S&data_type=PDF_HIGH&whole_paper=YES&type=PRINTER&filetype=.pdf 1989, ApJ, 342:L87-90]
|-
| Pottasch et al. 1956||a study of bright rims in diffuse nebulae||'''Luisa adds:''' so old that not really useful for assembling list of YSOs in region. skip. Early work describing the location, shape of, density of, brightness of bright rim clouds in several nebula, including IC 1396 and Brc 38||[http://articles.adsabs.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/nph-iarticle_query?1956BAN....13...77P&data_type=PDF_HIGH&whole_paper=YES&type=PRINTER&filetype=.pdf Bulletin of Astro. Instit. of the Netherlands, Vol 13, 471, 77-88]
|-
|
|}

Jackie BRC 38

2012-02-28T23:30:40Z

Novatne: /* Articles */

==Location of BRC 38==
I need a picture in my head. I found these helpful. The first is the one Luisa already put up. The 2nd is from APOD (http://apod.nasa.gov/apod/ap110425.html). The 3rd is from Getman et al. 2006 

[[image:tr37where.png|250px]] [[image:brc38.png | 250px]][[image:brc_38_Getman2006paper.png|300px]]

== Information about BRC 38==
Bright Rimmed Cloud 38 in IC 1396. Since it is located in the north part of IC 1396 is it often referred to as IC 1396N. 
It has a C shape with the southern edge as the brightest part (Pottasch et al. 1956). 
Location with intermediate mass protostars, though some (Ogura & Sugitani 1999) suggest there is probably a lot of low mass formation going on too. Wang et al. 2009 believes potential for high mass stars forming here also. 
H2 jets found (Saraceno et al. 1996; Nisini et al. 2001) 
Herbig-Haro objects found (Repurth et al. 2003 
Observed in many wavelengths - it would be good to get the specific wavelengths in each band
: optical (IPHAS, several optical - including Yerkes in the 1950s - coming from Chicago I have to cheer!!),
: infrared (2MASS,
: radio (IRAM & BIMA)
: x-ray
 
==Draft Proposal==
1. What is the structure of brc 38? - classification of cloud (type A I believe) & why; H2 jets and Herbig-Haro objects & what they indicate; 
2. What is the distance of the brc?

3. What is known about YSO in this region - this might be H alpha emission stars (??); 
a. How many have been found with what kind of detection (type of detector - X-ray, infrared, visible, etc); 
b. What kind (low mass, intermediate, high mass); 
c. Where in the brc are YSO located? 
d. What kind of formation process is indicated - triggered or collapse? 

4. What do we expect to find in this section? 

== Questions ==
I am sure there are a lot more!! After fooling around with wiki editing, this is all that is left in my head at present.

1. One IRAS (Infrared Astronomical Satellite) location (IRAS 21391+5802) seems to be the central point or at least this location that keeps coming up. What is this? 
2. LWS spectrum - is this as simple as long wavelength? 
3. Still unclear on what exactly the following are. I have looked them up but they are not clear in my head - maser, Herbig-Haro objects, FIR colors, MIP colors 
4. When we talk about BRC 38, are we talking about the whole C rim and globular area it half encircles? Where does the IRAS source 21391+5802 fit in our picture? 
5. Is submillimeter wavelengths (SUBA) infrared or microwave? 
6. Is HD 206267 affecting the whole region with its radiation? 

== Search phrases ==
*BRC 38
*sfo 38
*21:40:42+52:16:13
*21391+5802
*IC 1396N
*Cepheus OB2
*IMYSO

== Articles ==

{| {{table}}
{| border="1"
| align="center" style="background:#f0f0f0;"|'''Author Date'''
| align="center" style="background:#f0f0f0;"|'''Article Title'''
| align="center" style="background:#f0f0f0;"|'''Comments'''
| align="center" style="background:#f0f0f0;"|'''URL'''

|-
| 1a. Nagano et al. 2012 ||Wide Field Survey of Emission-line Stars in IC 1396||Nagano reports a total of 639 Hα emission-line stars were detected in an area of 4.2 deg2 and their i′-photometry was measured. Their spatial distribution exhibits several aggregates near the elephant trunk globule (Rim A) and bright-rimmed clouds at the edge of the H ii region (Rim B and SFO 37, 38, 39, 41), and near HD 206267, which is the main exciting star of the H ii region.” || [[Media:Nagano_2012.pdf]]

|-
| 1b. saurin et al. 2012 ||the embedded cluster or assoiciation trumpter 37 in ir 1396||'''Luisa adds:''' no individual data tables to use; they are interested in statistical properties of the regions. good 'big picture' kind of thing, but no real use for us in terms of our specific project. '''Peggy adds:''' 2MASS observations of BRC 38, Primary focus Trumpler 37, but analyzed 2Mass photometry of 11 BRCs in IC 1396 including BRC 38. All associated with IRAS sources (prob protostars) massive nearby star HR 8281 may have triggered sequential star formation via winds and UV. Photometric errors </= 0.1 mag removed for stars less than 0.5 arcmin radius for BRC 38 b/c high absorption? Relatively high central densities = small star clusters. Getman et al 2007 found sequential star formation evidence for BRC 38, spatial gradient stellar age in direction to triggering star as well as YSOs. BRC 38 stellar mass of ~15Mo assumed representative of area. Lists ra/dec, angular and linear dist to HR 8281 --Peggy Piper 12:23, 21 February 2012 (PST) ||http://arxiv.org/pdf/1201.2704.pdf
|-
| 2.. Barensten et al. 2011||T tauri candidates and accretion rates using IPHAS: method and application to IC 1396||'''Luisa adds:''' YES this is a useful paper. data tables of objects they think are young. their shortlist may or may not overlap with the fields we care about in brc 34 and 38, but still very useful to include. if, when we get to that point of needing these objects, they still haven't released the full IPHAS catalog, i will email these guys and ask for source lists in the regions we care about (34 and 38) '''Peggy adds:''' Includes BRC 38 which is called cloud E; Looking for YSOs in all of 1396; list 158 candidates; uses IPHAS survey data - Halpha, r, I filters on isaac newton telescope Specifically looking for T Tauri through Halpha emissions. Also includes 2 MASS and Spitzer data but only for T Tauri candidates? Find increasing accretion rates, disc excesses and younger ages as move away from HD 206267 towards Cloud A (BRC 38 is Cloud E)--Peggy Piper 12:47, 21 February 2012 (PST) ||http://arxiv.org/pdf/1103.1646v1.pdf
|-
| 3. choudhury et al. 2010||Triggered star formation and YSO population in Bright Rimmed SRO 38||'''Luisa adds:''' YES this is useful, if for no other reason than they used the Spitzer data. they definitely have data tables too. 44 YSOs identified in brc 38 - evidence for radiation driven implosion (RDI); spitzer IRAC & MIPS data, optical BVRI ||http://arxiv.org/pdf/1005.1841v1.pdf
|-
| Morgan et al. 2010||Ammonia observations of bright-rimmed clouds: establishing a sample of triggered protostars||'''Luisa adds:''' Radio. ignore at least for now Radio observations (Green Bank) of brcs; furthering earlier work of morgan, confirming brc is triggered star formation site ||http://arxiv.org/pdf/1006.0833v1.pdf
|-
| Crimier et al. 2010||Physical structure of the envelopes of intermediate-mass protostars||'''Luisa adds''': too theoretical. ignore. a study that says that the mass of the final star of a protostar is linked to the mass of the envelope around the protostar, not the density of the parent cloud - backbground on IM protostars??||http://arxiv.org/pdf/1005.0947v1.pdf
|-
| Ogura 2010||Triggered star formation assoicated with HII regions||'''Luisa adds''': overview. conference proceedings. meat of this analysis already in other journal articles, i am pretty sure. ignore for now. Not really about BRC 38 but discusses curent state of triggered star formation theory||[http://articles.adsabs.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/nph-iarticle_query?2010ASInC...1...19O&data_type=PDF_HIGH&whole_paper=YES&type=PRINTER&filetype=.pdf ASI Conference Series, 2010, Vol 1, pp 19-25]
|-
| 4. beltran et al. 2009||The stellar population and complex structure of the bright-rimmed cloud ic 1396N||'''Luisa adds''': YES very useful! A study through JHK filters; 736 sources found in all 3 bands (filters); h2 emission shows jet like structure||http://arxiv.org/pdf/0902.4543v1.pdf
|-
| Morgan L. K., Urquhart J. S., Thompson M. A., 2009 ON LAST YEAR'S LIST||CO observations towards bright-rimmed clouds||'''Luisa adds:''' Radio. ignore at least for now Luisa's old notes: JCMT (CO) observations. both 27 and 34 in here. 22 arcsec resolution! (see Resolution and their fig 2 here.) Likely last of his thesis, or first of his postdoc. (Look, his address changed, so this was published while he was a postdoc, but it's the same collaborators as before at his old institution, so my guess it's leftover thesis work.) They think 27 has been triggered, 34 not; this provides a nice compare-and-contrast opportunity for our write-up. Quick read.||[http://cdsbib.u-strasbg.fr/cgi-bin/cdsbib?2009MNRAS.400.1726M 2009, MNRAS, 400, 1726]
|-
| 5. fuente et al. 2009||Dissecting an intermediate-mass (IM) prostar||'''luisa adds:''' hm. very narrowly focused paper, seems to be just on one object and radio. was ready to say ignore it, but it is probably worth a quick skim to see if they mention anything substantive about the 'YSO BIMA 3' and 'cluster BIMA 2' mentioned in the abstract. A look at IRAS 21391+5802 emissions of N2H+, CH3CN, CS, BIMA (1.2mm & 3.1mm)||http://arxiv.org/pdf/0909.2267v1.pdf
|-
| Wang et al. 2009||The relation between 13CO j=2-1 line width in moelcular clouds and bolometric luminosity of associated IRAS sources||'''Luisa adds:''' Radio. ignore at least for now IRAS 21391+5802 - suggests that it is a star forming cluster where high-mass stars will form||http://arxiv.org/pdf/0909.3312v1.pdf
|-
| 6. Chauhan et al. 2009 ON LAST YEAR'S LIST||Triggered star formation & evolution of t-tauri stars in and around BRC||'''Luisa adds:''' YES this is a useful paper -- they are using JHK to select YSOs and including IRAC (but not MIPS) in their assessment of youth. we will be using longer-wavelength infrared to find the objects, so we will find a different set of objects. (ps they also didn't do that hot a job with source matching to the literature. we can do better.) Study that looked at ages of star forming clusters. Seems to have a lot of background material on BRC 38 ||[http://arxiv.org/pdf/0903.2122v1.pdf 2009, MNRAS, 396, 964]
|-
| Morgan et al. 2007 ON LAST YEAR'S LIST||A scuba survey of BRC||'''Luisa adds:''' Radio. ignore at least for now BRC 38 included in this study with SUBA data (submillimeter - microwave??); Luisa's notes: SCUBA submm survey (450+850 um) plus IRAS (12, 25, 60, 100 um), MSX, and 2MASS (erroneously identified as 2mm but really 2 micron). both 27 and 34 in here. next part of a PhD thesis. lots of nice overview, summary (as would be expected for a thesis) spread throughout article. seems to be a really long paper, but is almost all figures in the appendix. relevant issues: how the objects they are talking about (at long and short wavelengths) compare to what we see in our images (see Resolution and their, e.g., fig 4). Forward reference to Spitzer data analysis like ours but then says have already looked for GLIMPSE, 24 um obs. They are only looking at low-res flux densities. Appendix may be useful for scavenging additional targets if we want to do more analysis on more targets.||[http://arxiv.org/pdf/0711.0775v1.pdf 2008, A&A, 477, 557]
|-
| Neri et al. 2007||The IC 1396N proto-cluster at a scale of ~250 AU||'''Luisa adds:''' radio. ignore for now at least. observations in millimeter range to help develop understanding of formation of clusters vs individual star formation||http://arxiv.org/pdf/0705.2663v1.pdf
|-
| 7. Getman et al. 2007||X-ray study of triggered star formation and protostars in IC 1396N||'''Luisa adds:''' YES this is useful x-ray sources in the globule of ic 1396N; good pictures to help with the visualization of 1396N and these sources; evidence of sequential star formation||http://arxiv.org/pdf/astro-ph/0607006v2.pdf
|-
| Patel et al. 2007||Submillimeter array observations of 321 ghz water maser emission in cepheus a||'''Luisa adds:''' Radio. ignore at least for now No don\'t think there is anything here||http://arxiv.org/pdf/astro-ph/0702696v1.pdf
|-
| 8. Connelley et al. 2006||Infrared Nebulae around Young stellar objects||'''Luisa adds:''' check this to see if there is anything point source-y in here. IRAS 21391+5802 - images show jet-like nebula and large patches of nebulosity||http://arxiv.org/pdf/astro-ph/0611634v1.pdf
|-
| Valdettaro et al. 2005 ON LAST YEAR'S LIST||h2o maser emission from bright rimmed clouds in the northern hemisphere||'''Luisa adds:''' Radio. ignore at least for now H2O maser studied in brc 38; points to paper Valdettaro et al. 2005b which is supposed to be about analysis of BRC 38. Luisa's old notes: 22.2 GHz (=1.35 cm if I did my math right). Really nice intro summarizing the big picture. Following up on Morgan and similar work asserting high-mass stars forming in BRCs by looking for masers. Our objects observed, not detected. Finding lots of non-detections, suggesting that low-mass stars forming instead. Nice, short writeup of basically a non-result, and I think they've gotten the interpretation spot-on. ||[http://arxiv.org/pdf/astro-ph/0508446v1.pdf 2005, A&A, 443, 535]
|-
| Beltran et al. 2004||The dense moelcular cores in IRAS 21391 +5802 region||'''Luisa adds:''' Radio and it sounds like theoretical models. ignore. Three sources found with BIMA (??) observations in 21391+5802; Hard to read as they are trying to use data to fit/model how gas is emitted from the core||http://arxiv.org/pdf/astro-ph/0407102v1.pdf
|-
| 9. Reipurth et al. 2003||Blowout from IC 1396N: The emergence of Herbig-Haro objects in the vicinity of bright-rimmed clouds||'''Luisa adds:''' Reipurth et al usually work in Ha or forbidden emission lines to find HH objects. look to see if they have a list of objects in the region we care about, or if this is a more general paper. Herbig-Haro flow (HH 777) found coming out of ic 1396N; located at 214041.6+581638 (in IR, I think)||[http://iopscience.iop.org/1538-4357/593/1/L47/pdf/17405.web.pdf 2002, ApJ, 123:2597-2626]
|-
| 10. Ogura, et el 2002 ON LAST YEAR"S LIST||Halpha emission stars and Herbig-Haro objects in and around BRC||'''Luisa adds:''' YES this is useful - finding YSOs via Halpha Part of Luisa's Notes from last year: Most recent of the Sugitani series of four. Using Halpha to look for YSOs, following up their other work. relevant issues: using multiple wavelengths to find YSOs (see Finding cluster members), spatial resolution (see Resolution), caveats with finding candidates. Nice intro, summary of larger issues, discussion of results. ||http://iopscience.iop.org/1538-3881/123/5/2597/pdf/201506.web.pdf
|-
| 11. Beltran et al. 2002||IRAS 21391+5802: The Molecular Outflow and its Exciting source||'''Luisa adds:''' this is probably worth looking at to see if there is anything point source-y in here. VLA and BIMA observations of dust and gas surrounding IRAS source; 3 sources isolated with BIMA, each a YSO||http://arxiv.org/pdf/astro-ph/0203206v1.pdf
|-
| Codella et al. 2001||Star formation in the BRC of IC 1396N||'''Luisa adds:''' radio. ignore for now. The density of several different molecular outflows (dense areas of particular molecules)in the globule looked at with 30m IRAM and OVRO interferometer. Demonstrates this area very complex. ||[http://www.aanda.org/index.php?option=com_article&access=bibcode&Itemid=129&bibcode=2001A%26A...376..271CFUL Astron. Astrophys., 376, 271-287 (2001)]
|-
| 12. Nisini et al. 2001||Multiple H2 protostellar jets in the bright-rimmed globule IC 1396-N||'''Luisa adds:''' jets can be HH objects, or can create them. probably useful to scan this in conjunction with some of the other outflow/hh object papers on this list. 1st detection of H2 jets from YSO. Are these HH objects? ||[http://cdsads.u-strasbg.fr/cgi-bin/nph-bib_query?2001A%26A...376..553N&db_key=AST&nosetcookie=1 A&A 376, 553{560]
|-
| 13. Slysh et al. 1999||Prootoplanetary disk and/or bipolar outflow traced by h2o masers in ic 1396n||'''Luisa adds:''' theoretical papers you can probably ignore. did not look at background discussion, but don't let me stop you if you are motivated! Description of 3 models that may explain how masers form; Gives background on IC 1396||http://iopscience.iop.org/0004-637X/526/1/236/pdf/39770.web.pdf
|-
| Ogura & Sugitani 1999||A large number of Halpha Emission Stars associated with BRCs||'''Luisa adds:''' conference proceedings, old at that. i'm sure this analysis is already written up in their later papers. ignore this one. Supports \"small-scale sequential star formation\"; suggests low-mass stars formating in area of high-mass star forming area||[http://articles.adsabs.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/nph-iarticle_query?1999sf99.proc..381O&data_type=PDF_HIGH&whole_paper=YES&type=PRINTER&filetype=.pdf Proceedings of Star Formation, 1999, pg 381-382]
|-
| Sugitani et al. 1999||Small-Scale Sequential Star Formtion in Bright-Rimmed Clouds||'''Luisa adds:''' conference proceedings, old at that. i'm sure this analysis is already written up in their later papers. ignore this one. Discussion of small-scale sequential star formation hypothesis||[http://articles.adsabs.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/nph-iarticle_query?1999sf99.proc..358S&data_type=PDF_HIGH&whole_paper=YES&type=PRINTER&filetype=.pdf Proceedings of Star Formation, 1999, pg 358-364]
|-
| 14. Saraceno et al. 1996||LWS observations of the bright-rimmed globule IC 1396N||'''Luisa adds:''' LWS is defintiely from ISO, which was a European ir mission prior to spitzer. spectrum of co, oh, h2o are detected in the ISO-LWS spectrum - not sure what that is??||[http://articles.adsabs.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/nph-iarticle_query?1996A%26A...315L.293S&data_type=PDF_HIGH&whole_paper=YES&type=PRINTER&filetype=.pdf Astron. Astrophys. 315, L293–L296 (1996)]
|-
| Saraceno et al. 1996|| An evolutionary diagram for young stellar objects||'''Luisa adds:''' deep, DEEP background, IGNORE THIS. background - but not sure I understand it||[http://articles.adsabs.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/nph-iarticle_query?1996A%26A...309..827S&data_type=PDF_HIGH&whole_paper=YES&type=PRINTER&filetype=.pdf Astron. Astrophys, 309, 827-839]
|-
| 15. Weikard et al. 1996||the structure of the IC 1396 region||'''Luisa adds:''' seems like this would be useful. Discussion of structure of 1c 1396 and the central star O6.5 (HD 206267) radiation on clumping and structure/location of yso; shows locations of yso in brc 38 from their data
'''Lauren adds:''' Observational data taken with: Nagoya 4 meter millimeter wave telescope; POM-2 2.5 meter millimeter telescope;KOSMA 3 meter sub-millimeter radio telescope; with reduction data in: CO, H 1 and IRAS Conclusion states that a nearby strong heating source is indicated.
||[http://articles.adsabs.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/nph-iarticle_query?1996A%26A...309..581W&data_type=PDF_HIGH&whole_paper=YES&type=PRINTER&filetype=.pdf Astron. Astrophys, 309, 581-611]
|-
| Sugitani et al. 1991 ON LAST YEAR"S LIST||A catalog of BRC with iras point sources||'''Luisa adds:''' discovery paper of BRCs, but no source lists of individual YSOs in the region. you guys should've read this already, but not relevant to the assembly of previously known YSOs in the region. Just a list of point sources they invesigated - brc 38 on the list Part of Luisa's old notes: the original SFO, origin of "BRC" terminology, numbers 1-44. covers the northern hemisphere. has nice intro/summary of what's going on in BRCs, CGs, etc. Nice approach of combining two large surveys -- POSS and IRAS; nice clear discussion of weed-down process. ||[http://articles.adsabs.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/nph-iarticle_query?1991ApJS...77...59S&data_type=PDF_HIGH&whole_paper=YES&type=PRINTER&filetype=.pdf 1991, ApJS, 77, 59]
|-
| Sugitani et al. 1989||Star formation in bright-rimmed globules: evidence for radiation-driven implosion||'''Luisa adds:''' this sets up their subsequent work. you can safely ignore this. Argument for rdiation-driven implosion method of star formation.||[http://articles.adsabs.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/nph-iarticle_query?1989ApJ...342L..87S&data_type=PDF_HIGH&whole_paper=YES&type=PRINTER&filetype=.pdf 1989, ApJ, 342:L87-90]
|-
| Pottasch et al. 1956||a study of bright rims in diffuse nebulae||'''Luisa adds:''' so old that not really useful for assembling list of YSOs in region. skip. Early work describing the location, shape of, density of, brightness of bright rim clouds in several nebula, including IC 1396 and Brc 38||[http://articles.adsabs.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/nph-iarticle_query?1956BAN....13...77P&data_type=PDF_HIGH&whole_paper=YES&type=PRINTER&filetype=.pdf Bulletin of Astro. Instit. of the Netherlands, Vol 13, 471, 77-88]
|-
|
|}

Lauren BRC 27

2012-02-24T22:11:47Z

Novatne: /* Lauren's first draft text */

I found one article, published in July of 2011, that is not on the list. The title is 2MASS Wide field extinction map.
I skimmed it, don't know if there's anything useful in it yet. I will go back through SIMBAD again to be sure that I have completely scoured that source for new papers.

[[http://web.ipac.caltech.edu/staff/rebull/working/aa16915-11.pdf]]

--[[User:Novatne|Novatne]] 09:48, 17 February 2012 (PST)

=Lauren's first draft text=

'''Science background and Context:'''

'''BRC 27''' is a star forming region within the molecular cloud CMa R1, located at 07h03m39s -11d23m43s. This star forming region is believed to be a Radiation Driven Implosion (RDI) morphology, although what triggered the star formation is not certain at this time (Gregorio-Hetem et al, 2009). Previous works has identified stars using various techniques and different sources. Wiramihardja et al in 1986 used UBV photographic photometry, Sugitani et al in 1991 used IRAS sources. Soares and Bica in 2002 and 2003 determined a distance of 1.2 parsecs and an age of 1.5 Myr for the stars in BRC 27. The distance was consistent with the findings of Schevchenko in 1999. A wide field X-ray study of the CMa OB1/ R! star forming region done by Gregorio- Hetem et al. (2009) was conducted to find low mass YSO that may have been previously undetected. Chauhan et al, in 2009 used BVIc photometry to compare the ages of stars inside and outside the rims. They suggest that there is evidence of an RDI mechanism. We note that Chauhan et al used archival IRAC, but not MIPS data, and moreover did not use the IRAC data as a primary mechanism to select YSO candidates; they used near-IR JHK colors to identify candidates. Johnson et al (2012)2012) and Rebull et al. (2012, in prep) used the mid-IR IRAC and MIPS colors to search for YSOs in a ~5'x5' footprint. They identified IR excesses around 21/33 previously-known YSO candidates and identified 19 entirely new YSO candidates. We will use WISE photometric data to survey a larger region (~10-15 arcmin diameter) around this relatively small ~5'x5' 4-band IRAC footprint from Spitzer to (a) look for IR excesses around previously-identified YSO candidates, and (b) look for new YSO candidates using the WISE bands. Because there are several prior shallow wide-field studies in this area, there are previously-identified YSOs here, and we also expect to find new YSO candidates. Since the WISE data survey will cover a larger region than the relatively small ~5'x5' 4-band IRAC footprint above, it will enable us to put the previous data into context by looking at the larger environment around BRC 27 itself -- e.g., the following questions: in the 4-band Spitzer area, the surface density of YSOs is ~1.6 per square arcminute (Johnson et al. 2012, Rebull et al. 2012); is there as high a surface density of YSOs outside of the IRAC footprint? How quickly does the YSO surface density fall off? Are there proportionally more Class IIs than Class Is farther from the center of the BRC? Because the Spitzer observations include 'flanking fields' of serendipitous data, when these data are available, we will use the Spitzer data in addition to the WISE data, enabling a better determination of the nature of the object, and setting up a "teachable moment" comparing the spatial resolution differences of the various observations, including those from the literature.

'''Education and Outreach:'''

Team Reedley College

A small group of college freshman and sophomores will meet weekly. For the first few weeks, the students will be instructed on the basics of star formation and stellar evolution. Once the students understand the basics, they will begin reading the appropriate journals and conduct web research for discussion. Once the data processing instruction has been completed, the students will work together and separately on the data analysis portion of the project.

The weekly meetings will introduce the students to:
• Star formation mechanism and stellar life cycle
• Spectral analysis
• Black body curves
• Photometry

In the fall of 2012, the weekly meetings will be include to the processing of data. --[[User:Novatne|Novatne]] 14:51, 18 February 2012 (PST)

=Luisa's tweaking=
'''Science background and Context:'''

'''BRC 27''' is a star forming region within the molecular cloud CMa R1, located at 07h03m39s -11d23m43s. This star forming region is believed to be triggered star formation, specifically a Radiation Driven Implosion (RDI) morphology (see, e.g., Sugitani et al. 1991), although exactly what object(s) triggered the star formation is not certain at this time (Gregorio-Hetem et al, 2009). Several previous studies have identified stars using various techniques and different sources. Wiramihardja et al. (1986) used UBV photographic photometry in this larger area. Sugitani et al. (1991) -- the origin of the BRC nomenclature -- used IRAS sources combined with Palomar Observatory Sky Survey plates to identify bright rimmed clouds likely to be sites of triggered star formation. Soares and Bica (2002, 2003) determined a distance of ~1.2 parsecs and an age of ~1.5 Myr for the stars in BRC 27 using an early version of the Two-Micron All-Sky Survey (2MASS) catalog. This distance is consistent with the findings of Shevchenko et al. (1999), who used photoelectric photometry(!) and objective prism spectroscopy in this region to identify YSOs. A wide field X-ray study of the CMa OB1/ R! star forming region done by Gregorio-Hetem et al. (2009) identified several low mass YSOs using X-rays. IF YOU ARE GOING TO CITE SPECIFIC NUMBERS FOR OBJECTS FOUND VIA X-RAYS, YOU NEED TO SPECIFY NUMBER OF OBJECTS FOUND IN THE OTHER STUDIES. A TABLE OR PLOT IS MAYBE IN ORDER. HOWEVER, THIS MAY BE A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF WORK -- (A) [http://coolwiki.ipac.caltech.edu/index.php/Identification_of_Previously_Known_Objects_on_Candidate_List |THIS] IS LAST YEAR'S THRASHING, AND (B) I ONLY HAVE OBJECTS IN MY CATALOG CLOSE TO Z CMa BECAUSE THAT'S ALL WE CARED ABOUT LAST YEAR. YOUR CALL AS TO WHETHER OR NOT TO KEEP THESE NEXT 2 SENTENCES. Their work found approximately 40 members near Z Ma and approximately 60 members near GU CMa. Both of these regions are close to BRC 27. STRIKE THIS NEXT SENTENCE, BECAUSE MORGAN ET AL HAS SUCH A LOW SPATIAL RESOLUTION THAT THEY ARE NOT SEEING THE INDIVIDUAL SOURCES THAT WE ARE SEEING. Morgan et al. used the Submillimeter Common User Bolometer Array (SCUBA) in 2008 to survey 44 bright-rimmed clouds to identify a dense core in BRC 27. Chauhan et al. (2009) used BVIc photometry, as well as 2MASS JHK and Spitzer IRAC data, to identify stars and compare the ages of stars inside and outside the rims. They suggest that there is evidence of an RDI mechanism. We note that Chauhan et al. (2009) used archival IRAC, but not MIPS data, and moreover did not use the IRAC data as a primary mechanism to select YSO candidates; they used near-IR JHK colors to identify candidates. Johnson et al. (2012) and Rebull et al. (2012, in prep) used the mid-IR IRAC and MIPS colors to search for YSOs in a ~5'x5' footprint. They identified IR excesses around 21/33 previously-known YSO candidates and identified 19 entirely new YSO candidates. We will use WISE photometric data to survey a larger region (~10-15 arcmin diameter) around this relatively small ~5'x5' 4-band IRAC footprint from Spitzer to (a) look for IR excesses around previously-identified YSO candidates, and (b) look for new YSO candidates using the WISE bands. Because there are several prior shallow wide-field studies in this area, there are previously-identified YSOs here, and we also expect to find new YSO candidates. Since the WISE data survey will cover a larger region than the relatively small ~5'x5' 4-band IRAC footprint above, it will enable us to put the previous data into context by looking at the larger environment around BRC 27 itself -- e.g., the following questions: in the 4-band Spitzer area, the surface density of YSOs is ~1.6 per square arcminute (Johnson et al. 2012, Rebull et al. 2012); is there as high a surface density of YSOs outside of the IRAC footprint? How quickly does the YSO surface density fall off? Are there proportionally more Class IIs than Class Is farther from the center of the BRC?

SOME OF THE CONCEPTS I INCLUDED IN THE ABOVE ARE MORE GENERIC, AND APPLY TO MORE THAN JUST BRC 27, THOUGH THE SURFACE DENSITY I CITE IS DEFINITELY CUSTOMIZED TO BRC 27. THIS NEXT CONCEPT IS ALSO GENERIC:
Because the Spitzer observations include 'flanking fields' of serendipitous data, when these data are available, we will use the Spitzer data in addition to the WISE data, enabling a better determination of the nature of the object, and setting up a "teachable moment" comparing the spatial resolution differences of the various observations, including those from the literature.

'''Education and Outreach:'''

Team Reedley College

A small group of college freshman and sophomores will meet weekly. For the first few weeks, the students will be instructed on the basics of star formation and stellar evolution. Once the students understand the basics, they will begin reading the appropriate journals and conduct web research for discussion. Once the data processing instruction has been completed, the students will work together and separately on the data analysis portion of the project.

The weekly meetings will introduce the students to:
• Star formation mechanism and stellar life cycle
• Spectral analysis
• Black body curves
• Photometry

In the fall of 2012, the weekly meetings will be include to the processing of data. --[[User:Novatne|Novatne]] 14:51, 18 February 2012 (PST)

C-WAYS Proposal

2012-02-18T22:53:29Z

Novatne: /* Proposal nitty gritty - first round, 1/27/12 */

=Instructions=

[[2012 proposal instructions]]

=Proposal nitty gritty - first round, 1/27/12=

Everyone should read last year's BRC proposal if you haven't already.

As per the instructions for this year's proposal, we need to have:

*Abstract - write that last!
*Science introduction and context - general overview - Debbie
*including summary of literature on each of the BRCs:
**BRC 38 - Jackie
**BRC 27 - Lauren
**BRC 34 - Robert
*Analysis plan - Peggy
*Edu plan - everyone

For most of this, you will now need to get into literature searching.
Tips for literature searching on the wiki [[How_can_I_find_out_what_scientists_already_know_about_a_particular_astronomy_topic_or_object%3F |are here]], with a link at the bottom of that page with more words.
In summary:
*use ADS.
*use SIMBAD.
they are interlinked, but searching in both doesn't always give you
the same results.
in SIMBAD, you can search by position, and you should use a
~10 arcmin radius to look for objects. what other named objects are
nearby? there may be other useful papers calling those other objects
by those other names.
To get articles, remember that you don't HAVE to go to the journal.
For 'old enough' papers, they will be free.
For newer papers, look for an arXiv link on the ADS abstract page.
If you still can't get it, or want the final typeset journal version,
send me an email with the ADS link, and I'll send back the PDF.
ADS will cough up abstracts to proposals, abstracts from conferences
without conference proceedings, conference proceedings, and refereed
journal articles. that list is from least useful to most useful.

somewaht confusingly, sorry, links to some of the papers i list below are collected on [[C-WAYS_Spring_work |this page]], sorry. in the interest of getting this out to you, i didn't want to spend the time going to retrieve and link all of the abstract links again. we will ultimately be adding some of the papers you find to this spring work page, so this makes sense in the long run, but sorry for any additional confusion.

So that everyone understands the big picture, read the intro to
Sugitani K., Fukui Y., Ogura K., 1991, ApJS, 77, 59. = SFO, because it
is the discovery paper for the BRC catalog.

'''Intro - Debbie''' -
look closely at last year's prop intro. go find the papers they
reference. look at the SFO paper, and others they reference. look at
the YSO background inforamtion on the wiki.

'''BRC 38 - Jackie''' -
You have the biggest literature search problem, because we've done the
least collective work here.
You have leads for five papers from the wiki discussion about bouncing
target selection:
*Chauhan et al below.
*Garmire & Gordon - chandra proposal - look for a paper by these guys reporting these results, but it might not exist
*Valdettaro etal - also turns up in one of the other BRC searches.
*choudhury et al.
*Morgan et al.
[[BRC_Spring_work |this page]] which i grabbed and updated to be the meat of
[[C-WAYS_Spring_work |this page]]
lists all the literature we decided to care about before. if you find a paper, the first thing you should do is look at this list to see if we grabbed and kept it or grabbed and discarded it before. assess (and keep track of) any new ones! it is likely there more you can find. yell if you need help. don't forget to try a SIMBAD search by position. ('''UPDATE 1/30/12:''' [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Negz3lERk6I Screencapture tutorial] on literature searching, with particular emphasis on SIMBAD-based searching. Nearly 10 minutes long, sorry.)
'''UPDATE 1/31/12:''' see email re: [http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2011MNRAS.415..103B Barentsen et al. 2011, MNRAS, 415, 103], [http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1996A%26A...309..581W Weikard et al 1996, A&A, 309, 581] and [http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1956BAN....13...77P Pottasch 1956, BAN, 13, 77]. Based on what i can see, brc 34 = "D" in their nomenclature and brc 38 = "E", but you should definitely check me on this. Barentsen et al are looking for YSOs using Halpha in the whole entire region, and we can check on their selection using the WISE data in the environs of the two clouds we care about.
'''UPDATE 2/2/12:''' Can you tell I'm going through some backlogged papers? I just found [http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2009A%26A...504...97B Beltran et al. (2009)], which does deep JHK imaging in BRC38=IC1396N. This is another really good paper, with lots of good observations.
*I have listed the articles [[Jackie_BRC_38]] that I have found and some info about BRC 38 that I have gleamed. Please look it over, edit, correct, answer questions, ask questions - Jackie

'''BRC 27 - Lauren''' -
you are looking for any literature we missed last time, or new stuff
that has appeared in the last 13 months.
[[BRC_Spring_work |this page]] which i grabbed and updated to be the meat of
[[C-WAYS_Spring_work |this page]]
lists all the literature we decided to care about before.
if you find a paper, the first thing you should do is look at this
list to see if we grabbed and kept it or grabbed and discarded it
before. assess (and keep track of) any new ones!
don't forget to try a SIMBAD search by position. ('''UPDATE 1/30/12''': [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Negz3lERk6I Screencapture tutorial] on literature searching, with particular emphasis on SIMBAD-based searching. Nearly 10 minutes long, sorry.)
papers i know you will want to scan:

*Chauhan N, Pandey A.K., Ogura K., Ojha D.K., Bhatt B.C., Ghosh S.K., Rawat P.S., 2009, MNRAS, 396, 964. - does JHK + spitzer search for brc 27, 38 but we know they didn't do that great a job in 27, so they probably didn't do a great job in 38! but we need to mention in the proposal that this work exists and that we will compare our results to theirs.
*Gregorio-Hetem J., Montmerle T., Rodrigues C. V., Marciotto E., Preibisch T., Zinnecker H., 2009, A&A, 2009, 506, 711.
*Shevchenko V. S., Ezhkova O. V., Ibrahimov M. A., van den Ancker M. E., Tjin A, Djie H. R. E., 1999, MNRAS, 310, 210.
*Wiramihardja S.D., Kogure T., Nakano M., Yoshida S., 1986, PASJ, 38, 395.

*My first draft of the science background and education plan is now on [[Lauren_BRC 27]]

'''BRC 34- Robert''' -
you are looking for any literature we missed last time, or new stuff
that has appeared in the last 13 months.
[[BRC_Spring_work |this page]] which i grabbed and updated to be the meat of
[[C-WAYS_Spring_work |this page]] lists all the literature we decided to care about before.
you will note that very few mention BRC 34!
The only one that was terribly useful was Ogura et al. 2002, AJ, 123,
2597, and even that, not very much.
don't forget to try a SIMBAD search by position.
if you exhaust the available literature without finding more, go help
jackie with BRC 38. ('''UPDATE 1/30/12''': [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Negz3lERk6I Screencapture tutorial] on literature searching, with particular emphasis on SIMBAD-based searching. Nearly 10 minutes long, sorry.)
'''UPDATE 1/31/12:''' see email re: [http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2011MNRAS.415..103B Barentsen et al. 2011, MNRAS, 415, 103], [http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1996A%26A...309..581W Weikard et al 1996, A&A, 309, 581] and [http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1956BAN....13...77P Pottasch 1956, BAN, 13, 77]. Based on what i can see, brc 34 = "D" in their nomenclature and brc 38 = "E", but you should definitely check me on this. Barentsen et al are looking for YSOs using Halpha in the whole entire region, and we can check on their selection using the WISE data in the environs of the two clouds we care about.

'''analysis - Peggy''' -
[[Analysis Work Space]]

look at the proposal from last time.
look at Rebull et al., 2011, ApJS, 196, 4 (the taurus/WISE paper) i
gave you for that methodology.
scan the appendix of Koenig et al., 2012, ApJ, 744, 130 -- we will get
into this in more detail later, but this is the color selection
mechanism using WISE colors.
mention that we will re-reduce the Spitzer data for brc 38 if need be,
and redo photometry on the serendipitously obtained spitzer off-source
fields in the area if we need to -- the gang last year wasn't too
concerned about those objects. (you can use similar words from last
time involving MOPEX and APT). don't worry about reading the makovoz
and marleau paper - way thick reading and not all that relevant. can
cite Laher et al 2012 in prep for APT (dunno if we did that last year
or not).
we will merge with 2MASS, AKARI, anything else we can find.
don't forget that we will have ground based optical data from JD to
contribute as well. will need to get words from him on that.
other important words - BRC 27 data already in the WISE public
release; rest will be available in March 2012. i can give you a figure
with that comparison when we get there.
'''UPDATE 2/1:''' FWIW, that Barentsen et al 2011 paper is IPHAS data, so you can add in to your analysis section that we will include IPHAS data for at least brc 34 and 38. their website says a new delivery is expected in 2012, so we'll do a new search if we can, else we'll just use the more limited stuff from the published paper.

'''Edu section''' - you're all on your own :)

FOR NEXT WEEK - read the proposal and (intro to the) SFO paper, get into your proposal section and see how much progress you can make on your proposal section. if you run out of stuff to do, ask if others need help.

=Education Section=
Below is a rough draft for my education section. Comments/suggestions are appreciated!

"New Philadelphia High School (D. French). New Philadelphia High School Students will be participating in the NITARP research project as an extra-curricular activity and may apply for the Ohio Flex Credit option. Students will be selected via an application process in March or April 2012.

''I'm wondering what your application criteria will be. I have gone for kids with high interest level vs great academic records in the past. Do we want to find a common ground here, or are we ok with having different types of kids on different teams?''--Peggy Piper 12:41, 17 February 2012 (PST)

"Students will participate in weekly research meetings to discuss background information, journal articles, and to work on data reduction and analysis. They will be responsible for keeping a science notebook for recording notes, comments, and for keeping applicable journal articles. Students will use the NITARP CoolWiki page to obtain additional background information and communicate with other team members. After the January 2012 AAS meeting, they will present their research to the New Philadelphia Board of Education as well as other possible venues and outreach activities."
--[[User:French|French]] 08:38, 16 February 2012 (PST)

Lauren BRC 27

2012-02-18T22:51:13Z

Novatne:

C-WAYS Proposal

2012-02-18T22:49:22Z

Novatne: /* Proposal nitty gritty - first round, 1/27/12 */

=Instructions=

[[2012 proposal instructions]]

=Proposal nitty gritty - first round, 1/27/12=

Everyone should read last year's BRC proposal if you haven't already.

As per the instructions for this year's proposal, we need to have:

*Abstract - write that last!
*Science introduction and context - general overview - Debbie
*including summary of literature on each of the BRCs:
**BRC 38 - Jackie
**BRC 27 - Lauren
**BRC 34 - Robert
*Analysis plan - Peggy
*Edu plan - everyone

For most of this, you will now need to get into literature searching.
Tips for literature searching on the wiki [[How_can_I_find_out_what_scientists_already_know_about_a_particular_astronomy_topic_or_object%3F |are here]], with a link at the bottom of that page with more words.
In summary:
*use ADS.
*use SIMBAD.
they are interlinked, but searching in both doesn't always give you
the same results.
in SIMBAD, you can search by position, and you should use a
~10 arcmin radius to look for objects. what other named objects are
nearby? there may be other useful papers calling those other objects
by those other names.
To get articles, remember that you don't HAVE to go to the journal.
For 'old enough' papers, they will be free.
For newer papers, look for an arXiv link on the ADS abstract page.
If you still can't get it, or want the final typeset journal version,
send me an email with the ADS link, and I'll send back the PDF.
ADS will cough up abstracts to proposals, abstracts from conferences
without conference proceedings, conference proceedings, and refereed
journal articles. that list is from least useful to most useful.

somewaht confusingly, sorry, links to some of the papers i list below are collected on [[C-WAYS_Spring_work |this page]], sorry. in the interest of getting this out to you, i didn't want to spend the time going to retrieve and link all of the abstract links again. we will ultimately be adding some of the papers you find to this spring work page, so this makes sense in the long run, but sorry for any additional confusion.

So that everyone understands the big picture, read the intro to
Sugitani K., Fukui Y., Ogura K., 1991, ApJS, 77, 59. = SFO, because it
is the discovery paper for the BRC catalog.

'''Intro - Debbie''' -
look closely at last year's prop intro. go find the papers they
reference. look at the SFO paper, and others they reference. look at
the YSO background inforamtion on the wiki.

'''BRC 38 - Jackie''' -
You have the biggest literature search problem, because we've done the
least collective work here.
You have leads for five papers from the wiki discussion about bouncing
target selection:
*Chauhan et al below.
*Garmire & Gordon - chandra proposal - look for a paper by these guys reporting these results, but it might not exist
*Valdettaro etal - also turns up in one of the other BRC searches.
*choudhury et al.
*Morgan et al.
[[BRC_Spring_work |this page]] which i grabbed and updated to be the meat of
[[C-WAYS_Spring_work |this page]]
lists all the literature we decided to care about before. if you find a paper, the first thing you should do is look at this list to see if we grabbed and kept it or grabbed and discarded it before. assess (and keep track of) any new ones! it is likely there more you can find. yell if you need help. don't forget to try a SIMBAD search by position. ('''UPDATE 1/30/12:''' [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Negz3lERk6I Screencapture tutorial] on literature searching, with particular emphasis on SIMBAD-based searching. Nearly 10 minutes long, sorry.)
'''UPDATE 1/31/12:''' see email re: [http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2011MNRAS.415..103B Barentsen et al. 2011, MNRAS, 415, 103], [http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1996A%26A...309..581W Weikard et al 1996, A&A, 309, 581] and [http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1956BAN....13...77P Pottasch 1956, BAN, 13, 77]. Based on what i can see, brc 34 = "D" in their nomenclature and brc 38 = "E", but you should definitely check me on this. Barentsen et al are looking for YSOs using Halpha in the whole entire region, and we can check on their selection using the WISE data in the environs of the two clouds we care about.
'''UPDATE 2/2/12:''' Can you tell I'm going through some backlogged papers? I just found [http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2009A%26A...504...97B Beltran et al. (2009)], which does deep JHK imaging in BRC38=IC1396N. This is another really good paper, with lots of good observations.
*I have listed the articles [[Jackie_BRC_38]] that I have found and some info about BRC 38 that I have gleamed. Please look it over, edit, correct, answer questions, ask questions - Jackie

'''BRC 27 - Lauren''' -
you are looking for any literature we missed last time, or new stuff
that has appeared in the last 13 months.
[[BRC_Spring_work |this page]] which i grabbed and updated to be the meat of
[[C-WAYS_Spring_work |this page]]
lists all the literature we decided to care about before.
if you find a paper, the first thing you should do is look at this
list to see if we grabbed and kept it or grabbed and discarded it
before. assess (and keep track of) any new ones!
don't forget to try a SIMBAD search by position. ('''UPDATE 1/30/12''': [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Negz3lERk6I Screencapture tutorial] on literature searching, with particular emphasis on SIMBAD-based searching. Nearly 10 minutes long, sorry.)
papers i know you will want to scan:

*Chauhan N, Pandey A.K., Ogura K., Ojha D.K., Bhatt B.C., Ghosh S.K., Rawat P.S., 2009, MNRAS, 396, 964. - does JHK + spitzer search for brc 27, 38 but we know they didn't do that great a job in 27, so they probably didn't do a great job in 38! but we need to mention in the proposal that this work exists and that we will compare our results to theirs.
*Gregorio-Hetem J., Montmerle T., Rodrigues C. V., Marciotto E., Preibisch T., Zinnecker H., 2009, A&A, 2009, 506, 711.
*Shevchenko V. S., Ezhkova O. V., Ibrahimov M. A., van den Ancker M. E., Tjin A, Djie H. R. E., 1999, MNRAS, 310, 210.
*Wiramihardja S.D., Kogure T., Nakano M., Yoshida S., 1986, PASJ, 38, 395.

My first draft of the Science background and education and outreach is now on [[Lauren_BRC 27]]

'''BRC 34- Robert''' -
you are looking for any literature we missed last time, or new stuff
that has appeared in the last 13 months.
[[BRC_Spring_work |this page]] which i grabbed and updated to be the meat of
[[C-WAYS_Spring_work |this page]] lists all the literature we decided to care about before.
you will note that very few mention BRC 34!
The only one that was terribly useful was Ogura et al. 2002, AJ, 123,
2597, and even that, not very much.
don't forget to try a SIMBAD search by position.
if you exhaust the available literature without finding more, go help
jackie with BRC 38. ('''UPDATE 1/30/12''': [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Negz3lERk6I Screencapture tutorial] on literature searching, with particular emphasis on SIMBAD-based searching. Nearly 10 minutes long, sorry.)
'''UPDATE 1/31/12:''' see email re: [http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2011MNRAS.415..103B Barentsen et al. 2011, MNRAS, 415, 103], [http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1996A%26A...309..581W Weikard et al 1996, A&A, 309, 581] and [http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1956BAN....13...77P Pottasch 1956, BAN, 13, 77]. Based on what i can see, brc 34 = "D" in their nomenclature and brc 38 = "E", but you should definitely check me on this. Barentsen et al are looking for YSOs using Halpha in the whole entire region, and we can check on their selection using the WISE data in the environs of the two clouds we care about.

'''analysis - Peggy''' -
[[Analysis Work Space]]

look at the proposal from last time.
look at Rebull et al., 2011, ApJS, 196, 4 (the taurus/WISE paper) i
gave you for that methodology.
scan the appendix of Koenig et al., 2012, ApJ, 744, 130 -- we will get
into this in more detail later, but this is the color selection
mechanism using WISE colors.
mention that we will re-reduce the Spitzer data for brc 38 if need be,
and redo photometry on the serendipitously obtained spitzer off-source
fields in the area if we need to -- the gang last year wasn't too
concerned about those objects. (you can use similar words from last
time involving MOPEX and APT). don't worry about reading the makovoz
and marleau paper - way thick reading and not all that relevant. can
cite Laher et al 2012 in prep for APT (dunno if we did that last year
or not).
we will merge with 2MASS, AKARI, anything else we can find.
don't forget that we will have ground based optical data from JD to
contribute as well. will need to get words from him on that.
other important words - BRC 27 data already in the WISE public
release; rest will be available in March 2012. i can give you a figure
with that comparison when we get there.
'''UPDATE 2/1:''' FWIW, that Barentsen et al 2011 paper is IPHAS data, so you can add in to your analysis section that we will include IPHAS data for at least brc 34 and 38. their website says a new delivery is expected in 2012, so we'll do a new search if we can, else we'll just use the more limited stuff from the published paper.

'''Edu section''' - you're all on your own :)

FOR NEXT WEEK - read the proposal and (intro to the) SFO paper, get into your proposal section and see how much progress you can make on your proposal section. if you run out of stuff to do, ask if others need help.

=Education Section=
Below is a rough draft for my education section. Comments/suggestions are appreciated!

"New Philadelphia High School (D. French). New Philadelphia High School Students will be participating in the NITARP research project as an extra-curricular activity and may apply for the Ohio Flex Credit option. Students will be selected via an application process in March or April 2012.

''I'm wondering what your application criteria will be. I have gone for kids with high interest level vs great academic records in the past. Do we want to find a common ground here, or are we ok with having different types of kids on different teams?''--Peggy Piper 12:41, 17 February 2012 (PST)

"Students will participate in weekly research meetings to discuss background information, journal articles, and to work on data reduction and analysis. They will be responsible for keeping a science notebook for recording notes, comments, and for keeping applicable journal articles. Students will use the NITARP CoolWiki page to obtain additional background information and communicate with other team members. After the January 2012 AAS meeting, they will present their research to the New Philadelphia Board of Education as well as other possible venues and outreach activities."
--[[User:French|French]] 08:38, 16 February 2012 (PST)

C-WAYS Proposal

2012-02-18T22:48:56Z

Novatne: /* Proposal nitty gritty - first round, 1/27/12 */

=Instructions=

[[2012 proposal instructions]]

=Proposal nitty gritty - first round, 1/27/12=

Everyone should read last year's BRC proposal if you haven't already.

As per the instructions for this year's proposal, we need to have:

*Abstract - write that last!
*Science introduction and context - general overview - Debbie
*including summary of literature on each of the BRCs:
**BRC 38 - Jackie
**BRC 27 - Lauren
**BRC 34 - Robert
*Analysis plan - Peggy
*Edu plan - everyone

For most of this, you will now need to get into literature searching.
Tips for literature searching on the wiki [[How_can_I_find_out_what_scientists_already_know_about_a_particular_astronomy_topic_or_object%3F |are here]], with a link at the bottom of that page with more words.
In summary:
*use ADS.
*use SIMBAD.
they are interlinked, but searching in both doesn't always give you
the same results.
in SIMBAD, you can search by position, and you should use a
~10 arcmin radius to look for objects. what other named objects are
nearby? there may be other useful papers calling those other objects
by those other names.
To get articles, remember that you don't HAVE to go to the journal.
For 'old enough' papers, they will be free.
For newer papers, look for an arXiv link on the ADS abstract page.
If you still can't get it, or want the final typeset journal version,
send me an email with the ADS link, and I'll send back the PDF.
ADS will cough up abstracts to proposals, abstracts from conferences
without conference proceedings, conference proceedings, and refereed
journal articles. that list is from least useful to most useful.

somewaht confusingly, sorry, links to some of the papers i list below are collected on [[C-WAYS_Spring_work |this page]], sorry. in the interest of getting this out to you, i didn't want to spend the time going to retrieve and link all of the abstract links again. we will ultimately be adding some of the papers you find to this spring work page, so this makes sense in the long run, but sorry for any additional confusion.

So that everyone understands the big picture, read the intro to
Sugitani K., Fukui Y., Ogura K., 1991, ApJS, 77, 59. = SFO, because it
is the discovery paper for the BRC catalog.

'''Intro - Debbie''' -
look closely at last year's prop intro. go find the papers they
reference. look at the SFO paper, and others they reference. look at
the YSO background inforamtion on the wiki.

'''BRC 38 - Jackie''' -
You have the biggest literature search problem, because we've done the
least collective work here.
You have leads for five papers from the wiki discussion about bouncing
target selection:
*Chauhan et al below.
*Garmire & Gordon - chandra proposal - look for a paper by these guys reporting these results, but it might not exist
*Valdettaro etal - also turns up in one of the other BRC searches.
*choudhury et al.
*Morgan et al.
[[BRC_Spring_work |this page]] which i grabbed and updated to be the meat of
[[C-WAYS_Spring_work |this page]]
lists all the literature we decided to care about before. if you find a paper, the first thing you should do is look at this list to see if we grabbed and kept it or grabbed and discarded it before. assess (and keep track of) any new ones! it is likely there more you can find. yell if you need help. don't forget to try a SIMBAD search by position. ('''UPDATE 1/30/12:''' [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Negz3lERk6I Screencapture tutorial] on literature searching, with particular emphasis on SIMBAD-based searching. Nearly 10 minutes long, sorry.)
'''UPDATE 1/31/12:''' see email re: [http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2011MNRAS.415..103B Barentsen et al. 2011, MNRAS, 415, 103], [http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1996A%26A...309..581W Weikard et al 1996, A&A, 309, 581] and [http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1956BAN....13...77P Pottasch 1956, BAN, 13, 77]. Based on what i can see, brc 34 = "D" in their nomenclature and brc 38 = "E", but you should definitely check me on this. Barentsen et al are looking for YSOs using Halpha in the whole entire region, and we can check on their selection using the WISE data in the environs of the two clouds we care about.
'''UPDATE 2/2/12:''' Can you tell I'm going through some backlogged papers? I just found [http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2009A%26A...504...97B Beltran et al. (2009)], which does deep JHK imaging in BRC38=IC1396N. This is another really good paper, with lots of good observations.
*I have listed the articles [[Jackie_BRC_38]] that I have found and some info about BRC 38 that I have gleamed. Please look it over, edit, correct, answer questions, ask questions - Jackie

'''BRC 27 - Lauren''' -
you are looking for any literature we missed last time, or new stuff
that has appeared in the last 13 months.
[[BRC_Spring_work |this page]] which i grabbed and updated to be the meat of
[[C-WAYS_Spring_work |this page]]
lists all the literature we decided to care about before.
if you find a paper, the first thing you should do is look at this
list to see if we grabbed and kept it or grabbed and discarded it
before. assess (and keep track of) any new ones!
don't forget to try a SIMBAD search by position. ('''UPDATE 1/30/12''': [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Negz3lERk6I Screencapture tutorial] on literature searching, with particular emphasis on SIMBAD-based searching. Nearly 10 minutes long, sorry.)
papers i know you will want to scan:

*Chauhan N, Pandey A.K., Ogura K., Ojha D.K., Bhatt B.C., Ghosh S.K., Rawat P.S., 2009, MNRAS, 396, 964. - does JHK + spitzer search for brc 27, 38 but we know they didn't do that great a job in 27, so they probably didn't do a great job in 38! but we need to mention in the proposal that this work exists and that we will compare our results to theirs.
*Gregorio-Hetem J., Montmerle T., Rodrigues C. V., Marciotto E., Preibisch T., Zinnecker H., 2009, A&A, 2009, 506, 711.
*Shevchenko V. S., Ezhkova O. V., Ibrahimov M. A., van den Ancker M. E., Tjin A, Djie H. R. E., 1999, MNRAS, 310, 210.
*Wiramihardja S.D., Kogure T., Nakano M., Yoshida S., 1986, PASJ, 38, 395.

My first draft of the Science background and education and outreach is now on [[Lauren_BRC 27]]

'''BRC 34- Robert''' -
you are looking for any literature we missed last time, or new stuff
that has appeared in the last 13 months.
[[BRC_Spring_work |this page]] which i grabbed and updated to be the meat of
[[C-WAYS_Spring_work |this page]] lists all the literature we decided to care about before.
you will note that very few mention BRC 34!
The only one that was terribly useful was Ogura et al. 2002, AJ, 123,
2597, and even that, not very much.
don't forget to try a SIMBAD search by position.
if you exhaust the available literature without finding more, go help
jackie with BRC 38. ('''UPDATE 1/30/12''': [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Negz3lERk6I Screencapture tutorial] on literature searching, with particular emphasis on SIMBAD-based searching. Nearly 10 minutes long, sorry.)
'''UPDATE 1/31/12:''' see email re: [http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2011MNRAS.415..103B Barentsen et al. 2011, MNRAS, 415, 103], [http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1996A%26A...309..581W Weikard et al 1996, A&A, 309, 581] and [http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1956BAN....13...77P Pottasch 1956, BAN, 13, 77]. Based on what i can see, brc 34 = "D" in their nomenclature and brc 38 = "E", but you should definitely check me on this. Barentsen et al are looking for YSOs using Halpha in the whole entire region, and we can check on their selection using the WISE data in the environs of the two clouds we care about.

'''analysis - Peggy''' -
[[Analysis Work Space]]

look at the proposal from last time.
look at Rebull et al., 2011, ApJS, 196, 4 (the taurus/WISE paper) i
gave you for that methodology.
scan the appendix of Koenig et al., 2012, ApJ, 744, 130 -- we will get
into this in more detail later, but this is the color selection
mechanism using WISE colors.
mention that we will re-reduce the Spitzer data for brc 38 if need be,
and redo photometry on the serendipitously obtained spitzer off-source
fields in the area if we need to -- the gang last year wasn't too
concerned about those objects. (you can use similar words from last
time involving MOPEX and APT). don't worry about reading the makovoz
and marleau paper - way thick reading and not all that relevant. can
cite Laher et al 2012 in prep for APT (dunno if we did that last year
or not).
we will merge with 2MASS, AKARI, anything else we can find.
don't forget that we will have ground based optical data from JD to
contribute as well. will need to get words from him on that.
other important words - BRC 27 data already in the WISE public
release; rest will be available in March 2012. i can give you a figure
with that comparison when we get there.
'''UPDATE 2/1:''' FWIW, that Barentsen et al 2011 paper is IPHAS data, so you can add in to your analysis section that we will include IPHAS data for at least brc 34 and 38. their website says a new delivery is expected in 2012, so we'll do a new search if we can, else we'll just use the more limited stuff from the published paper.

'''Edu section''' - you're all on your own :)

FOR NEXT WEEK - read the proposal and (intro to the) SFO paper, get into your proposal section and see how much progress you can make on your proposal section. if you run out of stuff to do, ask if others need help.

=Education Section=
Below is a rough draft for my education section. Comments/suggestions are appreciated!

"New Philadelphia High School (D. French). New Philadelphia High School Students will be participating in the NITARP research project as an extra-curricular activity and may apply for the Ohio Flex Credit option. Students will be selected via an application process in March or April 2012.

''I'm wondering what your application criteria will be. I have gone for kids with high interest level vs great academic records in the past. Do we want to find a common ground here, or are we ok with having different types of kids on different teams?''--Peggy Piper 12:41, 17 February 2012 (PST)

"Students will participate in weekly research meetings to discuss background information, journal articles, and to work on data reduction and analysis. They will be responsible for keeping a science notebook for recording notes, comments, and for keeping applicable journal articles. Students will use the NITARP CoolWiki page to obtain additional background information and communicate with other team members. After the January 2012 AAS meeting, they will present their research to the New Philadelphia Board of Education as well as other possible venues and outreach activities."
--[[User:French|French]] 08:38, 16 February 2012 (PST)

C-WAYS Proposal

2012-02-18T22:48:03Z

Novatne: /* Proposal nitty gritty - first round, 1/27/12 */

=Instructions=

[[2012 proposal instructions]]

=Proposal nitty gritty - first round, 1/27/12=

Everyone should read last year's BRC proposal if you haven't already.

As per the instructions for this year's proposal, we need to have:

*Abstract - write that last!
*Science introduction and context - general overview - Debbie
*including summary of literature on each of the BRCs:
**BRC 38 - Jackie
**BRC 27 - Lauren
**BRC 34 - Robert
*Analysis plan - Peggy
*Edu plan - everyone

For most of this, you will now need to get into literature searching.
Tips for literature searching on the wiki [[How_can_I_find_out_what_scientists_already_know_about_a_particular_astronomy_topic_or_object%3F |are here]], with a link at the bottom of that page with more words.
In summary:
*use ADS.
*use SIMBAD.
they are interlinked, but searching in both doesn't always give you
the same results.
in SIMBAD, you can search by position, and you should use a
~10 arcmin radius to look for objects. what other named objects are
nearby? there may be other useful papers calling those other objects
by those other names.
To get articles, remember that you don't HAVE to go to the journal.
For 'old enough' papers, they will be free.
For newer papers, look for an arXiv link on the ADS abstract page.
If you still can't get it, or want the final typeset journal version,
send me an email with the ADS link, and I'll send back the PDF.
ADS will cough up abstracts to proposals, abstracts from conferences
without conference proceedings, conference proceedings, and refereed
journal articles. that list is from least useful to most useful.

somewaht confusingly, sorry, links to some of the papers i list below are collected on [[C-WAYS_Spring_work |this page]], sorry. in the interest of getting this out to you, i didn't want to spend the time going to retrieve and link all of the abstract links again. we will ultimately be adding some of the papers you find to this spring work page, so this makes sense in the long run, but sorry for any additional confusion.

So that everyone understands the big picture, read the intro to
Sugitani K., Fukui Y., Ogura K., 1991, ApJS, 77, 59. = SFO, because it
is the discovery paper for the BRC catalog.

'''Intro - Debbie''' -
look closely at last year's prop intro. go find the papers they
reference. look at the SFO paper, and others they reference. look at
the YSO background inforamtion on the wiki.

'''BRC 38 - Jackie''' -
You have the biggest literature search problem, because we've done the
least collective work here.
You have leads for five papers from the wiki discussion about bouncing
target selection:
*Chauhan et al below.
*Garmire & Gordon - chandra proposal - look for a paper by these guys reporting these results, but it might not exist
*Valdettaro etal - also turns up in one of the other BRC searches.
*choudhury et al.
*Morgan et al.
[[BRC_Spring_work |this page]] which i grabbed and updated to be the meat of
[[C-WAYS_Spring_work |this page]]
lists all the literature we decided to care about before. if you find a paper, the first thing you should do is look at this list to see if we grabbed and kept it or grabbed and discarded it before. assess (and keep track of) any new ones! it is likely there more you can find. yell if you need help. don't forget to try a SIMBAD search by position. ('''UPDATE 1/30/12:''' [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Negz3lERk6I Screencapture tutorial] on literature searching, with particular emphasis on SIMBAD-based searching. Nearly 10 minutes long, sorry.)
'''UPDATE 1/31/12:''' see email re: [http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2011MNRAS.415..103B Barentsen et al. 2011, MNRAS, 415, 103], [http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1996A%26A...309..581W Weikard et al 1996, A&A, 309, 581] and [http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1956BAN....13...77P Pottasch 1956, BAN, 13, 77]. Based on what i can see, brc 34 = "D" in their nomenclature and brc 38 = "E", but you should definitely check me on this. Barentsen et al are looking for YSOs using Halpha in the whole entire region, and we can check on their selection using the WISE data in the environs of the two clouds we care about.
'''UPDATE 2/2/12:''' Can you tell I'm going through some backlogged papers? I just found [http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2009A%26A...504...97B Beltran et al. (2009)], which does deep JHK imaging in BRC38=IC1396N. This is another really good paper, with lots of good observations.
*I have listed the articles [[Jackie_BRC_38]] that I have found and some info about BRC 38 that I have gleamed. Please look it over, edit, correct, answer questions, ask questions - Jackie

'''BRC 27 - Lauren''' -
you are looking for any literature we missed last time, or new stuff
that has appeared in the last 13 months.
[[BRC_Spring_work |this page]] which i grabbed and updated to be the meat of
[[C-WAYS_Spring_work |this page]]
lists all the literature we decided to care about before.
if you find a paper, the first thing you should do is look at this
list to see if we grabbed and kept it or grabbed and discarded it
before. assess (and keep track of) any new ones!
don't forget to try a SIMBAD search by position. ('''UPDATE 1/30/12''': [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Negz3lERk6I Screencapture tutorial] on literature searching, with particular emphasis on SIMBAD-based searching. Nearly 10 minutes long, sorry.)
papers i know you will want to scan:

*Chauhan N, Pandey A.K., Ogura K., Ojha D.K., Bhatt B.C., Ghosh S.K., Rawat P.S., 2009, MNRAS, 396, 964. - does JHK + spitzer search for brc 27, 38 but we know they didn't do that great a job in 27, so they probably didn't do a great job in 38! but we need to mention in the proposal that this work exists and that we will compare our results to theirs.
*Gregorio-Hetem J., Montmerle T., Rodrigues C. V., Marciotto E., Preibisch T., Zinnecker H., 2009, A&A, 2009, 506, 711.
*Shevchenko V. S., Ezhkova O. V., Ibrahimov M. A., van den Ancker M. E., Tjin A, Djie H. R. E., 1999, MNRAS, 310, 210.
*Wiramihardja S.D., Kogure T., Nakano M., Yoshida S., 1986, PASJ, 38, 395.

I found one article that wasn't on the list from last year. [[Lauren_BRC 27]]
My first draft of the Science background and education and outreach is now on [[Lauren_BRC 27]]

'''BRC 34- Robert''' -
you are looking for any literature we missed last time, or new stuff
that has appeared in the last 13 months.
[[BRC_Spring_work |this page]] which i grabbed and updated to be the meat of
[[C-WAYS_Spring_work |this page]] lists all the literature we decided to care about before.
you will note that very few mention BRC 34!
The only one that was terribly useful was Ogura et al. 2002, AJ, 123,
2597, and even that, not very much.
don't forget to try a SIMBAD search by position.
if you exhaust the available literature without finding more, go help
jackie with BRC 38. ('''UPDATE 1/30/12''': [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Negz3lERk6I Screencapture tutorial] on literature searching, with particular emphasis on SIMBAD-based searching. Nearly 10 minutes long, sorry.)
'''UPDATE 1/31/12:''' see email re: [http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2011MNRAS.415..103B Barentsen et al. 2011, MNRAS, 415, 103], [http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1996A%26A...309..581W Weikard et al 1996, A&A, 309, 581] and [http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1956BAN....13...77P Pottasch 1956, BAN, 13, 77]. Based on what i can see, brc 34 = "D" in their nomenclature and brc 38 = "E", but you should definitely check me on this. Barentsen et al are looking for YSOs using Halpha in the whole entire region, and we can check on their selection using the WISE data in the environs of the two clouds we care about.

'''analysis - Peggy''' -
[[Analysis Work Space]]

look at the proposal from last time.
look at Rebull et al., 2011, ApJS, 196, 4 (the taurus/WISE paper) i
gave you for that methodology.
scan the appendix of Koenig et al., 2012, ApJ, 744, 130 -- we will get
into this in more detail later, but this is the color selection
mechanism using WISE colors.
mention that we will re-reduce the Spitzer data for brc 38 if need be,
and redo photometry on the serendipitously obtained spitzer off-source
fields in the area if we need to -- the gang last year wasn't too
concerned about those objects. (you can use similar words from last
time involving MOPEX and APT). don't worry about reading the makovoz
and marleau paper - way thick reading and not all that relevant. can
cite Laher et al 2012 in prep for APT (dunno if we did that last year
or not).
we will merge with 2MASS, AKARI, anything else we can find.
don't forget that we will have ground based optical data from JD to
contribute as well. will need to get words from him on that.
other important words - BRC 27 data already in the WISE public
release; rest will be available in March 2012. i can give you a figure
with that comparison when we get there.
'''UPDATE 2/1:''' FWIW, that Barentsen et al 2011 paper is IPHAS data, so you can add in to your analysis section that we will include IPHAS data for at least brc 34 and 38. their website says a new delivery is expected in 2012, so we'll do a new search if we can, else we'll just use the more limited stuff from the published paper.

'''Edu section''' - you're all on your own :)

FOR NEXT WEEK - read the proposal and (intro to the) SFO paper, get into your proposal section and see how much progress you can make on your proposal section. if you run out of stuff to do, ask if others need help.

=Education Section=
Below is a rough draft for my education section. Comments/suggestions are appreciated!

"New Philadelphia High School (D. French). New Philadelphia High School Students will be participating in the NITARP research project as an extra-curricular activity and may apply for the Ohio Flex Credit option. Students will be selected via an application process in March or April 2012.

''I'm wondering what your application criteria will be. I have gone for kids with high interest level vs great academic records in the past. Do we want to find a common ground here, or are we ok with having different types of kids on different teams?''--Peggy Piper 12:41, 17 February 2012 (PST)

"Students will participate in weekly research meetings to discuss background information, journal articles, and to work on data reduction and analysis. They will be responsible for keeping a science notebook for recording notes, comments, and for keeping applicable journal articles. Students will use the NITARP CoolWiki page to obtain additional background information and communicate with other team members. After the January 2012 AAS meeting, they will present their research to the New Philadelphia Board of Education as well as other possible venues and outreach activities."
--[[User:French|French]] 08:38, 16 February 2012 (PST)

Lauren BRC 27

2012-02-17T19:28:47Z

Novatne:

C-WAYS Proposal

2012-02-17T18:39:49Z

Novatne: /* Proposal nitty gritty - first round, 1/27/12 */

=Instructions=

[[2012 proposal instructions]]

=Proposal nitty gritty - first round, 1/27/12=

Everyone should read last year's BRC proposal if you haven't already.

As per the instructions for this year's proposal, we need to have:

*Abstract - write that last!
*Science introduction and context - general overview - Debbie
*including summary of literature on each of the BRCs:
**BRC 38 - Jackie
**BRC 27 - Lauren
**BRC 34 - Robert
*Analysis plan - Peggy
*Edu plan - everyone

For most of this, you will now need to get into literature searching.
Tips for literature searching on the wiki [[How_can_I_find_out_what_scientists_already_know_about_a_particular_astronomy_topic_or_object%3F |are here]], with a link at the bottom of that page with more words.
In summary:
*use ADS.
*use SIMBAD.
they are interlinked, but searching in both doesn't always give you
the same results.
in SIMBAD, you can search by position, and you should use a
~10 arcmin radius to look for objects. what other named objects are
nearby? there may be other useful papers calling those other objects
by those other names.
To get articles, remember that you don't HAVE to go to the journal.
For 'old enough' papers, they will be free.
For newer papers, look for an arXiv link on the ADS abstract page.
If you still can't get it, or want the final typeset journal version,
send me an email with the ADS link, and I'll send back the PDF.
ADS will cough up abstracts to proposals, abstracts from conferences
without conference proceedings, conference proceedings, and refereed
journal articles. that list is from least useful to most useful.

somewaht confusingly, sorry, links to some of the papers i list below are collected on [[C-WAYS_Spring_work |this page]], sorry. in the interest of getting this out to you, i didn't want to spend the time going to retrieve and link all of the abstract links again. we will ultimately be adding some of the papers you find to this spring work page, so this makes sense in the long run, but sorry for any additional confusion.

So that everyone understands the big picture, read the intro to
Sugitani K., Fukui Y., Ogura K., 1991, ApJS, 77, 59. = SFO, because it
is the discovery paper for the BRC catalog.

'''Intro - Debbie''' -
look closely at last year's prop intro. go find the papers they
reference. look at the SFO paper, and others they reference. look at
the YSO background inforamtion on the wiki.

'''BRC 38 - Jackie''' -
You have the biggest literature search problem, because we've done the
least collective work here.
You have leads for five papers from the wiki discussion about bouncing
target selection:
*Chauhan et al below.
*Garmire & Gordon - chandra proposal - look for a paper by these guys reporting these results, but it might not exist
*Valdettaro etal - also turns up in one of the other BRC searches.
*choudhury et al.
*Morgan et al.
[[BRC_Spring_work |this page]] which i grabbed and updated to be the meat of
[[C-WAYS_Spring_work |this page]]
lists all the literature we decided to care about before. if you find a paper, the first thing you should do is look at this list to see if we grabbed and kept it or grabbed and discarded it before. assess (and keep track of) any new ones! it is likely there more you can find. yell if you need help. don't forget to try a SIMBAD search by position. ('''UPDATE 1/30/12:''' [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Negz3lERk6I Screencapture tutorial] on literature searching, with particular emphasis on SIMBAD-based searching. Nearly 10 minutes long, sorry.)
'''UPDATE 1/31/12:''' see email re: [http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2011MNRAS.415..103B Barentsen et al. 2011, MNRAS, 415, 103], [http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1996A%26A...309..581W Weikard et al 1996, A&A, 309, 581] and [http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1956BAN....13...77P Pottasch 1956, BAN, 13, 77]. Based on what i can see, brc 34 = "D" in their nomenclature and brc 38 = "E", but you should definitely check me on this. Barentsen et al are looking for YSOs using Halpha in the whole entire region, and we can check on their selection using the WISE data in the environs of the two clouds we care about.
'''UPDATE 2/2/12:''' Can you tell I'm going through some backlogged papers? I just found [http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2009A%26A...504...97B Beltran et al. (2009)], which does deep JHK imaging in BRC38=IC1396N. This is another really good paper, with lots of good observations.
*I have listed the articles [[Jackie_BRC_38]] that I have found and some info about BRC 38 that I have gleamed. Please look it over, edit, correct, answer questions, ask questions - Jackie

'''BRC 27 - Lauren''' -
you are looking for any literature we missed last time, or new stuff
that has appeared in the last 13 months.
[[BRC_Spring_work |this page]] which i grabbed and updated to be the meat of
[[C-WAYS_Spring_work |this page]]
lists all the literature we decided to care about before.
if you find a paper, the first thing you should do is look at this
list to see if we grabbed and kept it or grabbed and discarded it
before. assess (and keep track of) any new ones!
don't forget to try a SIMBAD search by position. ('''UPDATE 1/30/12''': [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Negz3lERk6I Screencapture tutorial] on literature searching, with particular emphasis on SIMBAD-based searching. Nearly 10 minutes long, sorry.)
papers i know you will want to scan:

*Chauhan N, Pandey A.K., Ogura K., Ojha D.K., Bhatt B.C., Ghosh S.K., Rawat P.S., 2009, MNRAS, 396, 964. - does JHK + spitzer search for brc 27, 38 but we know they didn't do that great a job in 27, so they probably didn't do a great job in 38! but we need to mention in the proposal that this work exists and that we will compare our results to theirs.
*Gregorio-Hetem J., Montmerle T., Rodrigues C. V., Marciotto E., Preibisch T., Zinnecker H., 2009, A&A, 2009, 506, 711.
*Shevchenko V. S., Ezhkova O. V., Ibrahimov M. A., van den Ancker M. E., Tjin A, Djie H. R. E., 1999, MNRAS, 310, 210.
*Wiramihardja S.D., Kogure T., Nakano M., Yoshida S., 1986, PASJ, 38, 395.

I found one article that wasn't on the list from last year. [[Lauren_BRC 27]]

'''BRC 34- Robert''' -
you are looking for any literature we missed last time, or new stuff
that has appeared in the last 13 months.
[[BRC_Spring_work |this page]] which i grabbed and updated to be the meat of
[[C-WAYS_Spring_work |this page]] lists all the literature we decided to care about before.
you will note that very few mention BRC 34!
The only one that was terribly useful was Ogura et al. 2002, AJ, 123,
2597, and even that, not very much.
don't forget to try a SIMBAD search by position.
if you exhaust the available literature without finding more, go help
jackie with BRC 38. ('''UPDATE 1/30/12''': [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Negz3lERk6I Screencapture tutorial] on literature searching, with particular emphasis on SIMBAD-based searching. Nearly 10 minutes long, sorry.)
'''UPDATE 1/31/12:''' see email re: [http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2011MNRAS.415..103B Barentsen et al. 2011, MNRAS, 415, 103], [http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1996A%26A...309..581W Weikard et al 1996, A&A, 309, 581] and [http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1956BAN....13...77P Pottasch 1956, BAN, 13, 77]. Based on what i can see, brc 34 = "D" in their nomenclature and brc 38 = "E", but you should definitely check me on this. Barentsen et al are looking for YSOs using Halpha in the whole entire region, and we can check on their selection using the WISE data in the environs of the two clouds we care about.

'''analysis - Peggy''' -
[[Analysis Work Space]]

look at the proposal from last time.
look at Rebull et al., 2011, ApJS, 196, 4 (the taurus/WISE paper) i
gave you for that methodology.
scan the appendix of Koenig et al., 2012, ApJ, 744, 130 -- we will get
into this in more detail later, but this is the color selection
mechanism using WISE colors.
mention that we will re-reduce the Spitzer data for brc 38 if need be,
and redo photometry on the serendipitously obtained spitzer off-source
fields in the area if we need to -- the gang last year wasn't too
concerned about those objects. (you can use similar words from last
time involving MOPEX and APT). don't worry about reading the makovoz
and marleau paper - way thick reading and not all that relevant. can
cite Laher et al 2012 in prep for APT (dunno if we did that last year
or not).
we will merge with 2MASS, AKARI, anything else we can find.
don't forget that we will have ground based optical data from JD to
contribute as well. will need to get words from him on that.
other important words - BRC 27 data already in the WISE public
release; rest will be available in March 2012. i can give you a figure
with that comparison when we get there.
'''UPDATE 2/1:''' FWIW, that Barentsen et al 2011 paper is IPHAS data, so you can add in to your analysis section that we will include IPHAS data for at least brc 34 and 38. their website says a new delivery is expected in 2012, so we'll do a new search if we can, else we'll just use the more limited stuff from the published paper.

'''Edu section''' - you're all on your own :)

FOR NEXT WEEK - read the proposal and (intro to the) SFO paper, get into your proposal section and see how much progress you can make on your proposal section. if you run out of stuff to do, ask if others need help.

=Education Section=
Below is a rough draft for my education section. Comments/suggestions are appreciated!

"New Philadelphia High School (D. French). New Philadelphia High School Students will be participating in the NITARP research project as an extra-curricular activity and may apply for the Ohio Flex Credit option. Students will be selected via an application process in March or April 2012.

"Students will participate in weekly research meetings to discuss background information, journal articles, and to work on data reduction and analysis. They will be responsible for keeping a science notebook for recording notes, comments, and for keeping applicable journal articles. Students will use the NITARP CoolWiki page to obtain additional background information and communicate with other team members. After the January 2012 AAS meeting, they will present their research to the New Philadelphia Board of Education as well as other possible venues and outreach activities."
--[[User:French|French]] 08:38, 16 February 2012 (PST)

Lauren BRC 27

2012-02-17T18:24:43Z

Novatne:

Lauren BRC 27

2012-02-17T18:16:33Z

Novatne:

Lauren BRC 27

2012-02-17T18:09:13Z

Novatne: