Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

ngc1097 #5

Closed
11 tasks done
ashleythomasbarnes opened this issue Jan 19, 2022 · 1 comment
Closed
11 tasks done

ngc1097 #5

ashleythomasbarnes opened this issue Jan 19, 2022 · 1 comment

Comments

@ashleythomasbarnes
Copy link
Owner

ashleythomasbarnes commented Jan 19, 2022

The QA report checklist for this galaxy
Please complete as you progress through the QA
All data for galaxies can be obtained here

Checklist


  • 7m - check residual map
  • 7m - check baseline of 7m image (i.e. in continuum subtraction okay?)
  • 7m - check for negative bowls in 7m image
  • 7m - check for artefacts in 7m image (linear features in map, large fluxes etc)

  • 7m+tp - check baseline of 7m image (i.e. in continuum subtraction okay?)
  • 7m+tp - check for negative bowls in 7m image
  • 7m+tp - check for artefacts in 7m image (linear features in map, large fluxes etc)
  • 7m+tp - compare to the single dish image (fluxes okay?)

  • Dataset science ready?

@ashleythomasbarnes ashleythomasbarnes added this to Galaxies to be completed for QA in Phangs ACA QA Jan 19, 2022
@ashleythomasbarnes ashleythomasbarnes self-assigned this Jan 19, 2022
@ausero ausero self-assigned this Feb 4, 2022
@ausero
Copy link
Collaborator

ausero commented Feb 4, 2022

HCN

  • TP: Strong line with emission packed in the central region (little spatial structure). Decent baselines; some occasional broad but slight bowls, likely because of the large velocity range. Some striping, but nothing important. Flux ~ 61 Jy*km/s.
  • 7m image: Strong central emission, the rotation gradient is clearly seen. It looks great: good baselines, no significant negative sidelobes. Flux ~ 51 Jy*km/s. Beam ~ 18.5" x 10.2" (quite elongated!).
  • 7m residuals: OK. Usual low level truncation over the region with emission. Otherwise, fine. Flux ~ 0.8 units*km/s (whatever than means in this case).
  • 7m mask: Imported from CO, I assume. Seems OK. It follows and fits a bit tightly the emission in the image cube, but it also includes extended, peripheral features where HCN is clearly undetected. This leaves space for some improvement, although it doesn't seem it would have an important effect.
  • 7m+TP (round): Flux ~ 57 Jy*km/s. Nothing to report.
  • Consistency: Total spectra have similar shapes and integrated values.

HCO+

  • TP: Similar to HCN, possibly somewhat better quality. Flux~43 Jy*km/s.
  • 7m image: Looks great. Just some broad but shallow bowl in a spot close to the center. Flux ~ 35 Jy*km/s. Beam ~ 17.9" x 10.4" .
  • 7m residuals: Similar to HCN. Flux ~ 0.14 units*km/s.
  • 7m mask: Similar to HCN. It seemed that some extended features were relatively more visible in HCO+ than in HCN.
  • 7m+TP (round): Flux ~ 38 Jy*km/s. Nothing to report.
  • Consistency: Total spectra have similar shapes and integrated values.

CS

  • TP: Faint detection: not clear on a pixel level, but significant integrated over the central region and/or over wide velocity ranges. Baselines are OK. Flux ~ 17 Jy*km/s.
  • 7m image: OK. Faint detection, by spatial structure apparent on a channel-by-channel basis. Very shallow negative sidelobes if at all, and narrower than for HCO+ or HCN. Flux ~14 Jy*km/s. Beam ~ 16.3" x 9.1".
  • 7m residuals: Similar to other lines. Flux ~ 0.7 units*km/s.
  • 7m mask: Difficult to check the agreement with the emission cube on a channel-by-channel basis.
  • 7m+TP (round): OK. There might be some persistent sidelobes. Flux ~16 Jy*km/s.
  • Consistency: Total spectra have similar shapes and integrated values.

@ausero ausero closed this as completed Feb 4, 2022
@ausero ausero moved this from Galaxies to be completed for QA to No issues [pass for QA] in Phangs ACA QA Feb 9, 2022
@ausero ausero moved this from No issues [pass for QA] to Minor issues [pass for QA] in Phangs ACA QA Feb 9, 2022
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
Phangs ACA QA
Minor issues [pass for QA]
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants