Paper detail

An 850-micron SCUBA map of the Groth Strip and reliable source extraction

We present an 850-micron map and list of candidate sources in a 70 arcmin^2 sub-area of the Groth Strip observed using SCUBA. We initially detect 7 candidate sources with signal-to-noise ratios (SNRs) between 3.0 and 3.5 and 4 candidate sources with SNR > 3.5. Simulations suggest that on average in a map this size one expects 1.6 false positive sources for SNR > 3.5 and 4.5 for 3 < SNR < 3.5. Flux boosting in maps is a well known effect and we have developed a simple Bayesian prescription for estimating the unboosted flux distribution and used this method to determine the best flux estimates of our sources. This method is easily adapted for any other modest signal-to-noise survey in which there is prior knowledge of the source counts. We performed follow-up photometry in an attempt to confirm or reject 5 of our source candidates. We confirm the reality of 2 of the SCUBA sources, although at lower levels than suggested in the map and we find that the photometry results are consistent with and confirm the de-boosted map fluxes. Our final candidate source list contains 3 sources, including the 2 confirmed detections and 1 further candidate source with SNR > 3.5 which has a reasonable chance of being real.

preprint2004arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access5 authors1 topic

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.