Paper detail

A Monte-Carlo Method for Making SDSS $u$-Band Magnitude more accurate

We develop a new Monte-Carlo-based method to convert the SDSS (Sloan Digital Sky Survey) $u$-band magnitude to the SCUSS (South Galactic Cap of $u$-band Sky Survey) $u$-band magnitude. Due to more accuracy of SCUSS $u$-band measurements, the converted $u$-band magnitude becomes more accurate comparing with the original SDSS $u$-band magnitude, in particular at the faint end. The average $u$ (both SDSS and SCUSS) magnitude error of numerous main-sequence stars with $0.2<g-r<0.8$ increase as $g$-band magnitude becomes fainter. When $g=19.5$, the average magnitude error of SDSS $u$ is 0.11. When $g=20.5$, the average SDSS $u$ error is up to 0.22. However, at this magnitude, the average magnitude error of SCUSS $u$ is just half as much as that of SDSS $u$. The SDSS $u$-band magnitudes of main-sequence stars with $0.2<g-r<0.8$ and $18.5<g<20.5$ are converted, therefore the maximum average error of converted $u$-band magnitudes is 0.11. The potential application of this conversion is to derive more accurate photometric metallicity calibration from SDSS observation, especially for those distant stars. Thus, we can explore stellar metallicity distributions either in the Galactic halo or some stream stars.

preprint2016arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access7 authors2 topics

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.