Working with the HG-WELS data - Revision history

Rebull: /* TO-DO ITEMS */

2014-08-28T20:37:30Z

TO-DO ITEMS

Rebull: /* TO-DO ITEMS */

2014-08-28T17:42:46Z

TO-DO ITEMS

Rebull: /* TO-DO ITEMS */

2014-08-05T16:41:09Z

TO-DO ITEMS

Rebull: /* TO-DO ITEMS */

2014-08-01T23:44:22Z

TO-DO ITEMS

Rebull: /* TO-DO ITEMS */

2014-08-01T21:44:29Z

TO-DO ITEMS

Rebull: /* TO-DO ITEMS */

2014-08-01T21:12:51Z

TO-DO ITEMS

Rebull: /* TO-DO ITEMS */

2014-07-31T23:10:46Z

TO-DO ITEMS

Rebull: /* TO-DO ITEMS */

2014-07-31T23:09:55Z

TO-DO ITEMS

Rebull: /* TO-DO ITEMS */

2014-07-31T22:33:43Z

TO-DO ITEMS

Rebull: /* TO-DO ITEMS */

2014-07-31T22:29:58Z

TO-DO ITEMS

@@ Line 297: / Line 297: @@
 =TO-DO ITEMS=
 #DONE Luisa to clean up limits in code such that lower/upper limits make sense in catalog and plots
-#Luisa to fix photometry issues for those identified from the SED inspection as being bad. (Also, see if we can reconstruct some of he WISE 1-2 values, based on the saturation correction from Patel+ or just by looking more closely at data quality flags.)
+#DONE Luisa to fix photometry issues for those identified from the SED inspection as being bad. (Also, see if we can reconstruct some of he WISE 1-2 values, based on the saturation correction from Patel+ or just by looking more closely at data quality flags.)
-#Luisa to investigate whether it makes sense to swap DENIS K in for 2MASS K where there is no 2MASS K.
+#DONE Luisa to investigate whether it makes sense to swap DENIS K in for 2MASS K where there is no 2MASS K.
-#Luisa to remake the SEDs for those with fixed photometry.
+#DONE Luisa to remake the SEDs for those with fixed photometry.
 #(Luisa has made headway on) Make clear and complete lists of those objects that break into pieces in IRAS, those that have coordinate issues, and those that have SEDs inconsistent with stars. Keep track of which sources came from which original catalog such that we can report, e.g., "xx% of the sources published in de la Reza break into pieces when viewed with WISE."
 #Integrate notes from image inspection with the SED inspection (e.g., in more detail). Combine cells and information where needed to make as concise as possible.

@@ Line 296: / Line 296: @@
 =TO-DO ITEMS=
-#Luisa to clean up limits in code such that lower/upper limits make sense in catalog and plots
+#DONE Luisa to clean up limits in code such that lower/upper limits make sense in catalog and plots
 #Luisa to fix photometry issues for those identified from the SED inspection as being bad. (Also, see if we can reconstruct some of he WISE 1-2 values, based on the saturation correction from Patel+ or just by looking more closely at data quality flags.)
 #Luisa to investigate whether it makes sense to swap DENIS K in for 2MASS K where there is no 2MASS K.

@@ Line 302: / Line 302: @@
 #(Luisa has made headway on) Make clear and complete lists of those objects that break into pieces in IRAS, those that have coordinate issues, and those that have SEDs inconsistent with stars. Keep track of which sources came from which original catalog such that we can report, e.g., "xx% of the sources published in de la Reza break into pieces when viewed with WISE."
 #Integrate notes from image inspection with the SED inspection (e.g., in more detail). Combine cells and information where needed to make as concise as possible.
 #Extra credit options: add errors to SEDs. Add Rayleigh-Jeans line to SEDs.
 #WATCH FOR LIMITS. make plots of just detections, not limits.

@@ Line 297: / Line 297: @@
 =TO-DO ITEMS=
 #Luisa to clean up limits in code such that lower/upper limits make sense in catalog and plots
-#Fix photometry issues for those identified from the SED inspection as being bad. Investigate whether it makes sense to swap DENIS K in for 2MASS K where there is no 2MASS K. (Also, see if we can reconstruct some of he WISE 1-2 values, based on the saturation correction from Patel+ or just by looking more closely at data quality flags.) Remake the SEDs for those with fixed photometry.
+#Luisa to fix photometry issues for those identified from the SED inspection as being bad. (Also, see if we can reconstruct some of he WISE 1-2 values, based on the saturation correction from Patel+ or just by looking more closely at data quality flags.)
-#Make clear and complete lists of those objects that break into pieces in IRAS, those that have coordinate issues, and those that have SEDs inconsistent with stars. Keep track of which sources came from which original catalog such that we can report, e.g., "xx% of the sources published in de la Reza break into pieces when viewed with WISE."
+#Luisa to investigate whether it makes sense to swap DENIS K in for 2MASS K where there is no 2MASS K.
 #Integrate notes from image inspection with the SED inspection (e.g., in more detail). Combine cells and information where needed to make as concise as possible.
 #Extra credit options: add errors to SEDs. Add Rayleigh-Jeans line to SEDs.
 #WATCH FOR LIMITS. make plots of just detections, not limits.
 #Make some color-color and color-mag diagrams for subsets of data by original catalog, AND/OR color-code the points in the diagrams to match original source catalog.
@@ Line 309: / Line 310: @@
 #Do some analysis on the ensemble of points for K-[22] and [3.4]-[22] to see which distribution makes more sense, incorporates more objects, has lower scatter. Decide which we should use in the end.
 #Investigate whether [4.5]-[22] would be worth considering. Note that the correction for saturated WISE2 is much larger than the correction for WISE1.
-#worry about those with chi near to but not over 3. Are there any reasons we should take them as IR x sources?
+#Worry about those with chi near to but not over 3. Are there any reasons we should take them as IR x sources?
-#what about plots vs. chi?
+#What about plots vs. chi?

@@ Line 296: / Line 296: @@
 =TO-DO ITEMS=
 #Fix photometry issues for those identified from the SED inspection as being bad. Investigate whether it makes sense to swap DENIS K in for 2MASS K where there is no 2MASS K. (Also, see if we can reconstruct some of he WISE 1-2 values, based on the saturation correction from Patel+ or just by looking more closely at data quality flags.) Remake the SEDs for those with fixed photometry.
 #Make clear and complete lists of those objects that break into pieces in IRAS, those that have coordinate issues, and those that have SEDs inconsistent with stars. Keep track of which sources came from which original catalog such that we can report, e.g., "xx% of the sources published in de la Reza break into pieces when viewed with WISE."

← Older revision		Revision as of 23:09, 31 July 2014
Line 308:		Line 308:
	#Do some analysis on the ensemble of points for K-[22] and [3.4]-[22] to see which distribution makes more sense, incorporates more objects, has lower scatter. Decide which we should use in the end.		#Do some analysis on the ensemble of points for K-[22] and [3.4]-[22] to see which distribution makes more sense, incorporates more objects, has lower scatter. Decide which we should use in the end.
	#Investigate whether [4.5]-[22] would be worth considering. Note that the correction for saturated WISE2 is much larger than the correction for WISE1.		#Investigate whether [4.5]-[22] would be worth considering. Note that the correction for saturated WISE2 is much larger than the correction for WISE1.
		+	#worry about those with chi near to but not over 3. Are there any reasons we should take them as IR x sources?
		+	#what about plots vs. chi?

@@ Line 304: / Line 304: @@
 #Make some color-color and color-mag diagrams for subsets of data by original catalog, AND/OR color-code the points in the diagrams to match original source catalog.
 #Investigate the photometry on those with VERY large K-[22] or [3.4]-[22]. Are values greater than 6 real, physical values? What do those SEDs look like?
-#Do some analysis on the ensemble of points for K-[22] and [3.4]-[22] to see which distribution makes more sense, incorporates more objects, has lower scatter. Decide which we should use in the end.
+#Find objects where the chi is insanely large. Are those real? What do those SEDs look like? Are the chi values we calculate realistic?