Paper detail

An Investigation of the Absolute Proper Motions of the SCUSS Catalog

Absolute proper motions for $\sim$ 7.7 million objects were derived based on data from the South Galactic Cap u-band Sky Survey (SCUSS) and astrometric data derived from uncompressed Digitized Sky Surveys that the Space Telescope Science Institute (STScI) created from the Palomar and UK Schmidt survey plates. We put a great deal of effort into correcting the position-, magnitude-, and color-dependent systematic errors in the derived absolute proper motions. The spectroscopically confirmed quasars were used to test the internal systematic and random error of the proper motions. The systematic errors of the overall proper motions in the SCUSS catalog are estimated as -0.08 and -0.06 mas/yr for μα cos δ and μδ, respectively. The random errors of the proper motions in the SCUSS catalog are estimated independently as 4.2 and 4.4 mas/yr for μα cos δ and μδ. There are no obvious position-, magnitude-, and color-dependent systematic errors of the SCUSS proper motions. The random error of the proper motions goes up with the magnitude from about 3 mas/yr at u < 18.0 mag to about 7 mas/yr at u = 22.0 mag. The proper motions of stars in SCUSS catalog are compared with those in the SDSS catalog, and they are highly consistent.

preprint2015arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access24 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.

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.