Version 1 of the Hubble Source Catalog
Authors: Bradley C. Whitmore (STScI), Sahar S. Allam (STScI, Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory), Tamas Budavari (JHU), Stefano Casertano (STScI), Ronald A. Downes (STScI), Thomas Donaldson (STScI), S. Michael Fall (STScI), Stephen H. Lubow (STScI), Lee Quick (STScI), Louis-Gregory Strolger (STScI), Geoff Wallace (STScI), Richard L. White (STScI)
Abstract: The Hubble Source Catalog is designed to help optimize science from the Hubble Space Telescope by combining the tens of thousands of visit-based source lists in the Hubble Legacy Archive into a single master catalog. Version 1 of the Hubble Source Catalog includes WFPC2, ACS/WFC, WFC3/UVIS, and WFC3/IR photometric data generated using SExtractor software to produce the individual source lists. The catalog includes roughly 80 million detections of 30 million objects involving 112 different detector/filter combinations, and about 160 thousand HST exposures. Source lists from Data Release 8 of the Hubble Legacy Archive are matched using an algorithm developed by Budavari & Lubow (2012). The mean photometric accuracy for the catalog as a whole is better than 0.10 mag, with relative accuracy as good as 0.02 mag in certain circumstances (e.g., bright isolated stars). The relative astrometric residuals are typically within 10 mas, with a value for the mode (i.e., most common value) of 2.3 mas. The absolute astrometric accuracy is better than $\sim$0.1 arcsec for most sources, but can be much larger for a fraction of fields that could not be matched to the PanSTARRS, SDSS, or 2MASS reference systems. In this paper we describe the database design with emphasis on those aspects that enable the users to fully exploit the catalog while avoiding common misunderstandings and potential pitfalls. We provide usage examples to illustrate some of the science capabilities and data quality characteristics, and briefly discuss plans for future improvements to the Hubble Source Catalog.
Ask questions about this paper to our AI assistant
You can also chat with multiple papers at once here.
⚠The license of the paper does not allow us to build upon its content and the AI assistant only knows about the paper metadata rather than the full article.
Assess the quality of the AI-generated content by voting
Why do we need votes?
Votes are used to determine whether we need to re-run our summarizing tools. If the count reaches -10, our tools can be restarted.
Some bits of the article are not summarized yet, you can re-run the summarizing process by clicking on the Run button below.
⚠The license of this specific paper does not allow us to build upon its content and the summarizing tools will be run using the paper metadata rather than the full article. However, it still does a good job, and you can also try our tools on papers with more open licenses.
Look for similar papers (in beta version)
By clicking on the button above, our algorithm will scan all papers in our database to find the closest based on the contents of the full papers and not just on metadata. Please note that it only works for papers that we have generated summaries for and you can rerun it from time to time to get a more accurate result while our database grows.
Disclaimer: The AI-based summarization tool and virtual assistant provided on this website may not always provide accurate and complete summaries or responses. We encourage you to carefully review and evaluate the generated content to ensure its quality and relevance to your needs.