Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

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

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 1607.01013 v2 pith:YV7CRW33 submitted 2016-07-04 astro-ph.EP

classification astro-ph.EP
keywords blissmappingknotssensitivitymcmcmodelphotometryspitzer
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

0 comments
abstract

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.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. De-jittering Ariel: an optimized algorithm

    astro-ph.EP 2025-04 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    An image-shape-based detrending algorithm removes simulated spacecraft jitter from Ariel photometry and spectroscopy, reducing 1-hour noise from 214 ppm to 12 ppm against a 20 ppm requirement.

Pith tools