J/MNRAS/475/193 Foundation Supernova Survey first data release (Foley+, 2018)
The Foundation Supernova Survey:
motivation, design, implementation, and first data release.
Foley R.J., Scolnic D., Rest A., Jha S.W., Pan Y.-C., Riess A.G.,
Challis P., Chambers K.C., Coulter D.A., Dettman K.G., Foley M.M.,
Fox O.D., Huber M.E., Jones D.O., Kilpatrick C.D., Kirshner R.P.,
Schultz A.S.B., Siebert M.R., Flewelling H.A., Gibson B., Magnier E.A.,
Miller J.A., Primak N., Smartt S.J., Smith K.W., Wainscoat R.J., Waters C.,
Willman M.
<Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc., 475, 193-219 (2018)>
=2018MNRAS.475..193F 2018MNRAS.475..193F (SIMBAD/NED BibCode)
ADC_Keywords: Surveys ; Supernovae ; Photometry, SDSS
Keywords: surveys - supernovae: general - dark energy - distance scale -
cosmology: observations
Abstract:
The Foundation Supernova Survey aims to provide a large,
high-fidelity, homogeneous, and precisely calibrated low-redshift Type
Ia supernova (SN Ia) sample for cosmology. The calibration of the
current low-redshift SN sample is the largest component of systematic
uncertainties for SN cosmology, and new data are necessary to make
progress. We present the motivation, survey design, observation
strategy, implementation, and first results for the Foundation
Supernova Survey. We are using the Pan-STARRS telescope to obtain
photometry for up to 800 SNe Ia at z≲0.1. This strategy has
several unique advantages: (1) the Pan-STARRS system is a superbly
calibrated telescopic system, (2) Pan-STARRS has observed 3/4 of the
sky in grizyP1 making future template observations unnecessary, (3) we
have a well-tested data-reduction pipeline, and (4) we have observed
∼3000 high-redshift SNe Ia on this system. Here, we present our
initial sample of 225 SN Ia grizP1 light curves, of which 180 pass all
criteria for inclusion in a cosmological sample. The Foundation
Supernova Survey already contains more cosmologically useful SNe Ia
than all other published low-redshift SN Ia samples combined. We
expect that the systematic uncertainties for the Foundation Supernova
Sample will be two to three times smaller than other low-redshift
samples. We find that our cosmologically useful sample has an
intrinsic scatter of 0.111mag, smaller than other low-redshift
samples. We perform detailed simulations showing that simply replacing
the current low-redshift SN Ia sample with an equally sized Foundation
sample will improve the precision on the dark energy equation-of-state
parameter by 35 per cent, and the dark energy figure of merit by
72 per cent.
Description:
As of May 2017, we have observed a total of 342 SNe with PS1. Of
these, 169 were snapshot observations that were not continued. We have
followed 225 SNe Ia, whose light curves are presented below. Most
observations are a series of 15s grizP1 exposures. Our earliest
observations were obtained in twilight as a pilot programme and had
100s exposures.
File Summary:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FileName Lrecl Records Explanations
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ReadMe 80 . This file
listlc.dat 85 117 List of supernovae with light curves in table2
table2.dat 73 3493 PS1 Photometry
table1.dat 137 274 Foundation supernova sample data
table3.dat 113 72 Uncatalogued redshifts
table4.dat 56 22 Significant redshift differences
table5.dat 70 15 Classification differences
table6.dat 111 224 Foundation sample light-curve parameters
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
See also:
B/sn : Asiago Supernova Catalogue (Barbon et al., 1999-)
II/33 : Sloan Digital Sky Survey-II Supernova Survey (Sako+, 2018)
II/366 : ASAS-SN catalog of variable stars (Jayasinghe+, 2018-2020)
Byte-by-byte Description of file: listlc.dat
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bytes Format Units Label Explanations
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1- 29 A29 --- SN Supernovae name
31- 32 I2 h RAh Right ascension (J2000)
34- 35 I2 min RAm Right ascension (J2000)
37- 41 F5.2 s RAs Right ascension (J2000)
43 A1 --- DE- Declination sign (J2000)
44- 45 I2 deg DEd Declination (J2000)
47- 48 I2 arcmin DEm Declination (J2000)
50- 54 F5.2 arcsec DEs Declination (J2000)
57- 85 A29 --- SName Simbad name
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Byte-by-byte Description of file: table2.dat
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bytes Format Units Label Explanations
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1- 29 A29 --- SN Supernovae name
31- 39 F9.3 d MJD Modified Julian date
41- 43 A3 --- Filter [gP1 rP1 iP1 zP1] Filter
45 A1 --- l_mag 3σ limit flag
46- 51 F6.3 mag mag Magnitude in filter
53- 57 F5.3 mag e_mag ?=- rms uncertainty on magnitude
59- 66 F8.1 --- Flux Flux (1)
68- 73 F6.1 --- e_Flux rms uncertainty on Flux (1)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note (1): Flux units are such that m=27.5-2.5log10(f).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Byte-by-byte Description of file: table1.dat
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bytes Format Units Label Explanations
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1- 7 A7 --- IAU Supernovae IAU name
9- 39 A31 --- DName Supernovae Discovery name
41- 71 A31 --- AName Supernovae Alternative names
73-102 A30 --- Gal Host galaxy name
103 A1 --- n_Gal [a] Note on Gal (1)
104-113 A10 --- r_disc Discovery reference (2)
115-124 A10 --- r_class Classification reference (2)
126-137 A12 --- Type Type
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note (1): 2017po is hosted by a galaxy pair. It is physically closer to the
smaller galaxy, CGCG 223-033 NED01, but we consider it to be more likely to
be hosted by the larger galaxy, UGC 10166.
Note (2): S16 = Smartt et al. (2016MNRAS.462.4094S 2016MNRAS.462.4094S).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Byte-by-byte Description of file: table3.dat
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bytes Format Units Label Explanations
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1- 29 A29 --- SN Supernovae name
31- 58 A28 --- Gal Host galaxy name
60- 68 F9.7 --- z Redshift
69- 76 F8.6 --- e_z Redshift uncertainty
79- 89 A11 --- From Derived from
91-113 A23 --- Tel Telescope/ATE (1)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note (1): If just a telescope is listed, the spectrum was obtained by us and
(re-)analysed for this study. If just an ATEL is listed, we simply list the
redshift reported in that ATEL. If both a telescope and ATEL are listed, we
analysed the publicly available spectrum, which was either submitted to TNS
or WISERep, and report our derived redshift.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Byte-by-byte Description of file: table4.dat
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bytes Format Units Label Explanations
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1- 21 A21 --- SN Supernova name
23- 27 F5.3 --- z Reported z
28 A1 --- n_z [ac] Note on z (1)
30- 38 F9.7 --- zup ?=- Updated z
39 A1 --- n_zup [b] Note on zup (1)
41- 49 F9.7 --- Dz Absolute z difference
51- 56 F6.3 mag muBias Malmquist bias
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note (1): Notes as follows:
a = Piascik & Steele (2016ATel.9023....1P 2016ATel.9023....1P) initially reported a redshift
of 0.04, but Zhang et al. (2016ATel.9025....1Z 2016ATel.9025....1Z) reported a redshift
of 0.037, which is only moderately different from our measured value
of 0.03557.
b = The SN is most similar to SN 2000cx (Li et al. 2001PASP..113.1178L 2001PASP..113.1178L)
at z=0.060±0.002. However, it is also somewhat similar to
SN 1991bg-like objects at z=0.047±0.007.
c = Fraser et al. (2007ATel.1021....1T 2007ATel.1021....1T) initially reported a redshift of 0.04,
but Morrell et al. (2007ATel.1024....1L 2007ATel.1024....1L) reported an NED redshift
of 0.033253, which is only slightly different from our preferred value
of 0.0332378.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Byte-by-byte Description of file: table5.dat
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bytes Format Units Label Explanations
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1- 21 A21 --- SN Supernovae name
23- 36 A14 ---- Class Reported class
38- 69 A32 --- Classup Updated class
70 A1 --- n_Classup [ab] Note on Classup (1)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note (1): Note on Classup:
a = Spectrum provided by C. Kilpatrick, private communication.
b = Elias-Rosa et al. (2015ATel.8016....1E 2015ATel.8016....1E) remark that at the nominal host
redshift the SN would have a low SiII ejecta velocity, and suggest that
the host galaxy was misidentified. However, the spectrum is more
consistent with SN 2006gz at the nominal redshift (see also Table 4).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Byte-by-byte Description of file: table6.dat
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bytes Format Units Label Explanations
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1- 29 A29 --- SN Supernovae name
32- 38 F7.5 --- zhelio Heliocentric redshift
40- 46 F7.5 --- e_zhelio rms uncertainty on zhelio
48- 54 F7.5 --- zCMB CMB redshift
56- 62 F7.5 --- e_zCMB rms uncertainty on zCMB
64- 71 F8.2 d MJDpeak Peak MJD
73- 76 F4.2 d e_MJDpeak rms uncertainty on Peak MJD
78- 82 F5.2 --- x1 Light-curve shape parameter
84- 87 F4.2 --- e_x1 rms uncertainty on x1
89- 94 F6.3 --- c Observed colour parameter
96-100 F5.3 --- e_c rms uncertainty on c
102-106 F5.2 mag Bmag B magnitude
108-111 F4.2 mag e_Bmag rms uncertainty on Bmag
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
History:
From electronic version of the journal
(End) Patricia Vannier [CDS] 22-Mar-2021