Absolute Calibration and Characterization of the Multiband Imaging Photometer for Spitzer. I. The Stellar Calibrator Sample and the 24 μm Calibration

By C. Engelbracht, M. Blaylock, Kate Y. L. Su, Jeonghee Rho, G. Rieke, J. Muzerolle, D. Padgett, D. Hines, Karl D. Gordon, D. Fadda and 16 more. 2007

264 citations recorded by the source corpus.

We present the stellar calibrator sample and the conversion from instrumental to physical units for the 24 μm channel of the Multiband Imaging Photometer for Spitzer (MIPS). The primary calibrators are A stars, and the calibration factor based on those stars is 4.54 × 10-2 MJy sr−1 (DN s−1)−1, with a nominal uncertainty of 2%. We discuss the data reduction procedures required to attain this accuracy; without these procedures, the calibration factor obtained using the automated pipeline at the Spitzer Science Center is 1.6% ± 0.6% lower. We extend this work to predict 24 μm flux densities for a sample of 238 stars that covers a larger range of flux densities and spectral types. We present a total of 348 measurements of 141 stars at 24 μm. This sample covers a factor of ∼460 in 24 μm flux density, from 8.6 mJy up to 4.0 Jy. We show that the calibration is linear over that range with respect to target flux and background level. The calibration is based on observations made using 3 s exposures; a preliminary analysis shows that the calibration factor may be 1% and 2% lower for 10 and 30 s exposures, respectively. We also demonstrate that the calibration is very stable: over the course of the mission, repeated measurements of our routine calibrator, HD 159330, show a rms scatter of only 0.4%. Finally, we show that the point‐spread function (PSF) is well measured and allows us to calibrate extended sources accurately; Infrared Astronomy Satellite (IRAS) and MIPS measurements of a sample of nearby galaxies are identical within the uncertainties.

Subfields: Astronomy and Astrophysics, Atomic and Molecular Physics, and Optics, Instrumentation

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/35db68d71dda7798213450d1f27356ef4314df32

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Astronomy and Astrophysics

In Atomic and Molecular Physics, and Optics

In Instrumentation

Citations in the corpus

SURVEYING THE AGENTS OF GALAXY EVOLUTION IN THE TIDALLY STRIPPED, LOW METALLICITY SMALL MAGELLANIC CLOUD (SAGE-SMC). I. OVERVIEW (2011, methodology): “The difference at 24 µm is due to updated processing and calibration factor after after the S3MC catalog was created (Engelbracht et al. 2007).”
The Behavior of the Aromatic Features in M101 H II Regions: Evidence for Dust Processing (2008, methodology): “The MIPS absolute uncertainties are 4% (Engelbracht et al. 2007), 5% (Gordon et al. 2007), and 12% (Stansberry et al. 2007).”
THE DISK POPULATION OF THE TAURUS STAR-FORMING REGION (2009, methodology): “Our quoted photometric errors include the Poisson errors in the source and background emission and the 2% and 4% uncertainties in the calibrations of IRAC and MIPS, respectively (Reach et al. 2005; Engelbracht et al. 2007).”
THE SPITZER–WISE SURVEY OF THE ECLIPTIC POLES (2011, methodology): “…in Section 3, due to the paucity of W3 and W4 calibrators in the EP-N, a set of bright K/M giant stars, with known IRAC and MIPS-24 photometry (Engelbracht et al. 2007; Cohen et al. 2003), that are located just outside of both polar CVZs were developed, including optical-infrared spectroscopy…”
A Spitzer View of Protoplanetary Disks in the γ Velorum Cluster (2008, background): “The absolute flux calibration uncertainty is ∼4% (Engelbracht et al. 2007).”
Debris Disks around Sun-like Stars (2007, methodology): “At 24 m, image flats are chosen as a function of scan mirror position to correct for dust spots (Engelbracht et al. 2007a).”
RADIAL DISTRIBUTION OF STARS, GAS, AND DUST IN SINGS GALAXIES. II. DERIVED DUST PROPERTIES (2009, background): “The estimated zero-point errors are 4%, 5% and 12% at 24, 70 and 160µm, respectively (Engelbracht et al. 2007; Gordon et al. 2007; Stansberry et al. 2007).”
The applicability of far-infrared fine-structure lines as star formation rate tracers over wide ranges of metallicities and galaxy types (2014, background): “…the MIPS 24 µm images shows that the mid-infrared emission from VII Zw 403, Mrk 209, UGC 4483, and NGC 625 is barely resolved with respect to the MIPS 24 µm beam (FWHM ∼ 6′′, Engelbracht et al. 2007), and, therefore, those galaxies are excluded from the sample for the spatially resolved analysis.”
Deep Spitzer 24 μm COSMOS Imaging. I. The Evolution of Luminous Dusty Galaxies—Confronting the Models (2009, result): “Relying on such corrections we believe that our flux absolute calibration should be accurate within a few percent, which is consistent with the results obtained by Engelbracht et al. (2007) and Rieke et al. (2008) as part of the calibration of the MIPS 24µm detector.”
The Disk Population of the Chamaeleon I Star-forming Region (2008, methodology): “Using bright, isolated stars in the IRAC and MIPS images, we measured aperture corrections between our adopted apertures and the larger ones employed by Reach et al. (2005) and Engelbracht et al. (2007).”
THE SPITZER LOCAL VOLUME LEGACY: SURVEY DESCRIPTION AND INFRARED PHOTOMETRY (2009, background): “MIPS calibration uncertainties are 4%, 5%, and 12% respectively at 24, 70, and 160 µm (Engelbracht et al. 2007, Gordon et al. 2007, and Stansberry et al. 2007).”
THE SPITZER SPACE TELESCOPE SURVEY OF THE ORION A AND B MOLECULAR CLOUDS. I. A CENSUS OF DUSTY YOUNG STELLAR OBJECTS AND A STUDY OF THEIR MID-INFRARED VARIABILITY (2012, methodology): “First, we multiplied the signal in the aperture by 1.146; this is the correction from a 12 pixel aperture to infinity (Engelbracht et al. 2007).”
Star Formation in NGC 5194 (M51a). II. The Spatially Resolved Star Formation Law (2007, methodology): “The accuracy of the MIPS 24µm photometric zeropoint is ±5% (Engelbracht et al. 2007), although as discussed later, other factors limit the accuracy of most of our aperture fluxes to roughly ±10% (also see Paper I).”
NEW DEBRIS DISKS AROUND YOUNG, LOW-MASS STARS DISCOVERED WITH THE SPITZER SPACE TELESCOPE (2009, unknown): “We also applied additional reduction techniques to remove instrumental artifacts and flux calibration as described by Engelbracht et al. (2007); Gordon et al. (2007) at 24 and 70 um, respectively.”
THE TUCANA/HOROLOGIUM, COLUMBA, AB DORADUS, AND ARGUS ASSOCIATIONS: NEW MEMBERS AND DUSTY DEBRIS DISKS (2011, methodology): “The MIPS Handbook lists 4% as the systematic 24 µm absolute flux calibration uncertainty (see also Engelbracht et al. 2007).”
Common-Resolution Convolution Kernels for Space- and Ground-Based Telescopes (2011, methodology): “Following Engelbracht et al. (2007); Gordon et al. (2007); Stansberry et al. (2007), we generate theoretical PSFs for the MIPS cameras, assuming a blackbody source at T = 25K.”
INFRARED SIGNATURES OF DISRUPTED MINOR PLANETS AT WHITE DWARFS (2009, methodology): “Most of the MIPS 24 µm detections are dominated by the photometric measurement errors, with a 10% calibration uncertainty employed for these data (Engelbracht et al. 2007).”
Modeling the evolution of infrared galaxies: a parametric backward evolution model (2010, methodology): “We took into account the uncertainties in the calibration estimated by the instrumental team, in our fit (Stansberry et al. 2007; Gordon et al. 2007; Engelbracht et al. 2007; Swinyard et al. 2010; Scott et al. 2010).”