Paper detail

Knot a Bad Idea: Testing BLISS Mapping for Spitzer Space Telescope Photometry

Much of transiting exoplanet science relies on high-precision photometry. The current generation of instruments can exhibit sensitivity variations greater than the astrophysical signals. For the InfraRed Array Camera (IRAC) on the Spitzer Space Telescope, a popular way to handle this is BiLinearly-Interpolated Subpixel Sensitivity (BLISS) mapping. As part of a Markov Chain Monte Carlo (MCMC), BLISS mapping estimates the sensitivity at many locations (knots) on the pixel, then interpolates to the target star's centroids. We show that such embedded optimization schemes can misfit or bias parameters. Thus, we construct a model of $\textit{Spitzer}$ eclipse light curves to test the accuracy and precision of BLISS mapping. We compare standard BLISS mapping to a variant where the knots are fit during the MCMC, as well as to a polynomial model. Both types of BLISS mapping give similar eclipse depths, and we find that standard knots behave like real parameters. Standard BLISS mapping is therefore a reasonable shortcut to fitting for knots in an MCMC. BLISS maps become inaccurate when the photon noise is low, but typically approximate the real sensitivity well. We also find there is no perfect method for choosing the ideal number of BLISS knots to use on given data. BLISS mapping gives fits that are usually more accurate than precise (i.e. they are overly conservative), and the routine is more precise than polynomial models for significant eclipses or pixels with more varied sensitivities. BLISS mapping has better predictive power for most of these particular synthetic data, depending on how one treats time-correlated residuals. Overall, we conclude that BLISS mapping can be a reasonable sensitivity model for IRAC photometry.

preprint2016arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access2 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.