4.7 Article

K2P2-A PHOTOMETRY PIPELINE FOR THE K2 MISSION

期刊

ASTROPHYSICAL JOURNAL
卷 806, 期 1, 页码 -

出版社

IOP Publishing Ltd
DOI: 10.1088/0004-637X/806/1/30

关键词

asteroseismology; methods: data analysis; stars: solar-type; techniques: image processing; techniques: photometric

资金

  1. Danish National Research Foundation [DNRF106]
  2. ASTERISK project - European Research Council [267864]
  3. UK Science and Technology Facilities Council (STFC)
  4. Science and Technology Facilities Council [ST/M00077X/1] Funding Source: researchfish
  5. STFC [ST/M00077X/1] Funding Source: UKRI

向作者/读者索取更多资源

With the loss of a second reaction wheel, resulting in the inability to point continuously and stably at the same field of view, the NASA Kepler satellite recently entered a new mode of observation known as the K2 mission. The data from this redesigned mission present a specific challenge; the targets systematically drift in position on an similar to 6 hr timescale, inducing a significant instrumental signal in the photometric time series-this greatly impacts the ability to detect planetary signals and perform asteroseismic analysis. Here we detail our version of a reduction pipeline for K2 target pixel data, which automatically. defines masks for all targets in a given frame; extracts the target's flux. and position time series; corrects the time series based on the apparent movement on the CCD (either in 1D or 2D), combined with the correction of instrumental and/or planetary signals via the Kepler Asteroseismic Science Operations Center (KASOC) filter, thus rendering the time series ready for asteroseismic analysis; computes power spectra for all targets;. and identifies potential contaminations between targets. From a test of our pipeline on a sample of targets from the K2 campaign 0, the recovery of data for multiple targets increases the amount of potential light curves by a factor of >= 10. Our pipeline could be applied to the upcoming TESS and PLATO 2.0 missions.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据