4.6 Article

PHotometry Assisted Spectral Extraction (PHASE) and identification of SNLS supernovae

期刊

ASTRONOMY & ASTROPHYSICS
卷 491, 期 2, 页码 567-585

出版社

EDP SCIENCES S A
DOI: 10.1051/0004-6361:200810210

关键词

techniques: spectroscopic; stars: supernovae: general; methods: data analysis; cosmology: observations

资金

  1. CNRS/IN2P3
  2. CNRS/INSU
  3. PNC

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Aims. We present new extraction and identification techniques for supernova (SN) spectra developed within the Supernova Legacy Survey (SNLS) collaboration. Methods. The new spectral extraction method takes full advantage of photometric information from the Canada-France-Hawa telescope (CFHT) discovery and reference images by tracing the exact position of the supernova and the host signals on the spectrogram. When present, the host spatial profile is measured on deep multi-band reference images and is used to model the host contribution to the full (supernova + host) signal. The supernova is modelled as a Gaussian function of width equal to the seeing. A chi(2) minimisation provides the flux of each component in each pixel of the 2D spectrogram. For a host-supernova separation greater than greater than or similar to 1 pixel, the two components are recovered separately and we do not use a spectral template in contrast to more standard analyses. This new procedure permits a clean extraction of the supernova separately from the host in about 70% of the 3rd year ESO/VLT spectra of the SNLS. A new supernova identification method is also proposed. It uses the SALT2 spectrophotometric template to combine the photometric and spectral data. A galaxy template is allowed for spectra for which a separate extraction of the supernova and the host was not possible. Results. These new techniques have been tested against more standard extraction and identification procedures. They permit a secure type and redshift determination in about 80% of cases. The present paper illustrates their performances on a few sample spectra.

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

4.6
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