4.4 Article

unWISE Coadds: The Five-year Data Set

Journal

Publisher

IOP PUBLISHING LTD
DOI: 10.1088/1538-3873/ab3df4

Keywords

atlases; infrared: general; methods: data analysis; surveys; techniques: image processing

Funding

  1. NASA Astrophysics Data Analysis Program [NNH17AE75I]
  2. Hubble Fellowship [HST-HF2-51415.001-A]
  3. National Aeronautics and Space Administration
  4. Planetary Science Division of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration
  5. Office of Science of the U.S. Department of Energy [DE-AC02-05CH11231]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

We present full-sky coadded maps created by uniformly combining the first five years of Wide-field Infrared Survey Explorer (WISE) and NEOWISE imaging at 3.4 ?m (W1) and 4.6 ?m (W2). By incorporating both pre-hibernation WISE exposures from 2010 to 2011 and the first four years (2013?2017) of post-hibernation exposures from the NEOWISE-Reactivation mission, we are able to provide W1/W2 coadds that span a 15 longer time baseline and are substantially deeper than the standard AllWISE data products. Our new five-year ?full-depth? coadds are now the deepest ever all-sky maps at 3?5 ?m, permitting detection of sources ?2 (?0.7 mag) fainter than AllWISE at 5? significance. We additionally present an updated set of ?time-resolved? W1/W2 coadds, which separately stack each of ?10 sky passes at each inertial sky location, enabling motion and variability measurements for faint infrared sources over a long ?7.5 yr time baseline. We highlight new processing improvements relative to our previous ?unWISE? coadd releases, focusing on astrometric calibration and artifact flagging. The deep WISE stacks presented here are already being used to perform target selection for the Dark Energy Spectroscopic Instrument, and our full-sky coadded WISE/NEOWISE products will be key precursor data sets for upcoming wide-field infrared missions including SPHEREx and NEOCam.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available