Paper detail

The Gaia spectrophotometric standard stars survey -II. Instrumental effects of six ground-based observing campaigns

The Gaia SpectroPhotometric Standard Stars (SPSS) survey started in 2006, it was awarded almost 450 observing nights, and accumulated almost 100,000 raw data frames, with both photometric and spectroscopic observations. Such large observational effort requires careful, homogeneous, and automated data reduction and quality control procedures. In this paper, we quantitatively evaluate instrumental effects that might have a significant (i.e.,$\geq$1%) impact on the Gaia SPSS flux calibration. The measurements involve six different instruments, monitored over the eight years of observations dedicated to the Gaia flux standards campaigns: DOLORES@TNG in La Palma, EFOSC2@NTT and ROSS@REM in La Silla, CAFOS@2.2m in Calar Alto, BFOSC@Cassini in Loiano, and LaRuca@1.5m in San Pedro Martir. We examine and quantitatively evaluate the following effects: CCD linearity and shutter times, calibration frames stability, lamp flexures, second order contamination, light polarization, and fringing. We present methods to correct for the relevant effects, which can be applied to a wide range of observational projects at similar instruments.

preprint2015arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access19 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.

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.