Jan 07, 2016
The SDSS is Two Surveys
The Fuzzy Blob Survey
The Squiggly Line Survey
The Site
The telescope•2.5 m mirror
1.3 MegaPixels
$150
4.3 Megapixels
$850
100 GigaPixels
$10,000,000
Digital Cameras
CCDs
CCDs: Drift Scan Mode
NGC 450
NGC 1055
NGC 4437
NGC 5792
NGC 1032
NGC 4753
NGC 60
NGC 5492
NGC 936
NGC 5750
NGC 3521
NGC 2967
NGC 5719
UGC 01962
NGC 1087
NGC 5334
UGC 05205
UGC 07332
UGCA 285
Arp 240
UCG 08584
NGC 799NGC 800
NGC 428
UGC 10770
Measuring Quantities From the Images:Measuring Quantities From the Images:The Photo pipelineThe Photo pipeline
Most People use Magnitudesm = –2.5 Log (flux) + C
How do you measure brightness?
We use Luptitudes
m = –2.5 ln (10) [asinh( ) + ln(b)] f/f0
2b
OK, but how do you measure flux?
Isophotal magnitudes:What we don’t do
OK, but how do we measure flux?
Petrosian Radius:Surface brightnessRatio =0.2
Petrosion flux:Flux within 2 Petrosian Radii
Some Other Measures
PSF magnitudes
Fiber magnitudes
Galaxy Models
de Vaucouleurs magnitudes:assume profile associated with ellipiticals
Exponential magnitudes:Assume profile associated with spirals
I=I0 exp {-7.67[(r/re)1/4]}
I=I0 exp {-1.68(r/re)}
Model magnitudes pick best
Which Magnitudes to Use?
Photometry of Distant QSOs
PSF magnitudes
Colors of Stars PSF magnitudes
Photometry of Nearby Galaxies
Petrosian magnitudes
Photometry of Distant Galaxies
Petrosian magnitudes
Other Image Parameters
• Size
• Type
psfMag – expMag > 0.145
• Many hundreds of others
SPECTRA
OBAFGKMLT
h
e
ine
irl/Guy
iss
eong
ime
Galaxy Spectra
Galaxies =Star+gas
QSO spectra
Z=0.1
QSO spectra
Z=1
QSO spectra
Z=2
QSO spectra
Z=3
QSO spectra
Z=4
QSO spectra
Z=5
Types of MapsTypes of Maps
• Main Galaxy Sample• LRG sample• Photo-z sample• QSO sample• QSO absorption systems• Galactic Halo• Ly-α systems• Asteroids• Space Junk
EDR PhotoZ
Tamás BudaváriThe Johns Hopkins
University
István Csabai – Eötvös University, Budapest
Alex Szalay – The Johns Hopkins University
Andy Connolly – University of Pittsburgh
Template fittingTemplate fittingComparing known
spectra to photometry
++ no need for calibrators, physics in templates
++ more physical outcome, spectral type, luminosity
–– template spectra are not perfect, e.g. CWW
Empirical methodEmpirical methodRedshifts from calibrators
with similar colors
++ quick processing time
–– new calibrator set and fit required for new data
–– cannot extrapolate, yields dubious results
Pros and Cons
Empirical Methods
• Nearest neighbor– Assign redshift of closest calibrator
• Polynomial fitting function– Quadratic fit, systematic errors
• Kd-tree– Quadratic fit in cells
z = 0.033 z = 0.027 z = 0.023
Template Fitting
• Physical inversion– More than just redshift– Yield consistent spectral type,
luminosity & redshift– Estimated covariances
• SED Reconstruction– Spectral templates that match
the photometry better– ASQ algorithm dynamically
creates and trains SEDs
Ltype
z
u’g’r’i’z’
Trained LRG Template
• Great calibrator set up to z = 0.5 – 0.6 !
• Reconstructed SED redder than CWW Ell
Trained LRG Template
Photometric Redshifts• 4 discrete templates
– Red sample z = 0.028• z > 0.2 z = 0.026
– Blue sample z = 0.05
• Continuous type– Red sample z = 0.029
• z > 0.2 z = 0.035
– Blue sample z = 0.04
• Outliers– Excluded 2% of galaxies
• Sacrifice?– Ell type galaxies have better
estimates with only 1 SED– Maybe a decision tree?
z = 0.028
z = 0.029 z = 0.04
z = 0.05
PhotoZ Plates
• The Goal– Deeper spectroscopic sample
of blue SDSS galaxies• Blind test• New calibrator set
• Selection– Based on photoz results– Color cuts to get
• High-z objects• Not red galaxies
Plate 672
• The first results– Galaxies are indeed
blue
– … and higher redshift!
• Scatter is big but…– … that’s why needed the
photoz plates
LRGs
z = 0.085
Plate 672
• Redshift distributions compare OK# of g = 519– Photometric redshifts (Run 752 & 756)
– Spectroscopic redshifts (Histogram scaled)
Measures of the Clustering
• The two point correlation function ξ(r)
• The power Spectrum
• N-point Statistics
• Counts in Cells
• Topological measures
• Maximum Likelihood parameter estimation
Constraining CosmologicalParameters from Apparent Redshift-space Clusterings
Taka MatsubaraAlex Szalay
Redshift Survey Data → or →
Constraining Cosmological Parameters
(Traditional) Quadratic Methods
)(kP )(r,... , , , , , , 8BM nbh
• Effective for spatially homogeneous, isotropic samples.• However, evaluation of in real (comoving) space is not straightforward. (z-evolution, redshift-space distortion)
)(kP
)()2,1( r
2z
1z
12 r
),,()2,1( 1221 zzRedshift-space:
:space-real ,1z
Example:
Anisotropy of the clustering
Velocity distortions
real space redshift space
Finger-of-God (non-linear scales)
Squashing by infall (linear scales)
pec0 vrHcz
b/6.0
Geometric distortions (non-small z) real space redshift space
)(zH
)(zd A
)1()1()1()( M2
M3
0 zzHzH
z
A zH
zdH
Hzd
0M0
M0 )(1sinh
1
1)(
Likelihood analysis of cosmological parameters without direct determination of or)(kP )(r
LLL ii || (Bayesian)
,...,,,,,, , 8M nbhbii
x
Linear regime → : Gaussian, fully determined by a correlation matrix
modeljiijC
Huge matrix ← a novel, fast algorithm to calculate Cij for arbirtrary z : under development
|iL
Results
single determination
Normal ±3% ±19% ±16% ±4% ±2% ±0.5% ±0.5%
Red ±2% ±4% ±9% ±2% ±1% ±0.3% ±0.4%
QSO ±14% ±15% ±76% ±20% ±14% ±5% ±6%
M MB b8nh
simultaneous determination (marginalized)
Normal ±14% ±57% ±51% ±2%
Red ±9% ±10% ±33% ±0.9%
QSO ±170% ±75% ±360% ±69%
M MB b
Direct determinations of cosmological parameters
A novel, fast algorithm to calculate correlation matrix in redshift space
Normal galaxies : dense, low-z, small sample volume
QSOs : sparse, high-z, large sample volume
Red galaxies : intermediate → best constraints on cosmological parameters
Summary
0.00.0 1.0
1.0
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
ΩM
ΩΛ
Visualization
• CAVE VR system at Argonne National Laboratory
• SDSS VS v. 1.0 Windows based visualization system
• Tool directly tied to the skyserver for general visualization of multi-dimensional data
Accessing the Data
• Two databases
• Skyserver (MS SQL)– Skyserver.fnal.gov
• SDSSQT– Download from www.sdss.org
• Lab astro.uchicago.edu/~subbarao/chautauqua.html