1 / 31

The Planet Pipeline (and Citizen Science) Data curation and mining of

The Planet Pipeline (and Citizen Science) Data curation and mining of Solar System images from WFPC2 Hubble Cycle 18 Legacy Archival Research proposal 12142 Max Mutchler, Mike Wong, Alberto Conti, Susana Deustua, Pamela Gay,

nitesh
Download Presentation

The Planet Pipeline (and Citizen Science) Data curation and mining of

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. The Planet Pipeline (and Citizen Science) Data curation and mining of Solar System images from WFPC2 Hubble Cycle 18 Legacy Archival Research proposal 12142 Max Mutchler, Mike Wong, Alberto Conti, Susana Deustua, Pamela Gay, Corey Lehan, Justin Higgins, Sean McKenna, Dan Golombek, John Grunsfeld EPSC-DPS joint meeting in Nantes, 3 Oct 2011

  2. Our goal is to optimally re-process all WFPC2 Solar System images. Our processed images and object catalogs will be ingested into MAST as High Level Science Products (similar to the existing Jupiter HLSP at left). Our “Planet Pipeline” search interface will be optimized for mining Solar System data.

  3. The barriers • Hubble’s WFPC2 is just a weird camera • Pipeline does no rejection of cosmic rays and detector artifacts (optimized for combining fixed targets) • WFPC2 drizzled mosaics all at low-res WF scale, at random orientations • Can’t reliably find all HST Solar System data in our archive • Not much useful planetary observation info in image headers 3

  4. Hubble’s WFPC2: both the camera and it’s archival images are kinda weird Archival mosaics are drizzled to WF pixel scale -- which means PC pixels are binned by 2X No rejection of cosmic rays or detector artifacts -- or worse, bad rejections! Also -- what is on the WF chips? How many of the WF chips have never been inspected by anyone?

  5. Hubble’s WFPC2: both the camera and it’s archival images are kinda weird Archival mosaics are drizzled to WF pixel scale -- which means PC pixels are binned by 2X No rejection of cosmic rays or detector artifacts -- or worse, bad rejections! Also -- what is on the WF chips? How many of the WF chips have never been inspected by anyone? Wide Field 2 (WF2) Wide Field 3 (WF3) Planetary Camera (PC1) Wide Field 4 (WF4)

  6. Our science-ready images are mosaics which are clean, resampled, distortion-free, and include cataloged secondary objects and features, with planetary parameters embedded in their headers

  7. Our science-ready images are mosaics which are clean, resampled, distortion-free, and include cataloged secondary objects and features, with planetary parameters embedded in their headers

  8. Our science-ready images are mosaics which are clean, resampled, distortion-free, and include cataloged secondary objects and features, with planetary parameters embedded in their headers

  9. New and improved database • r new and improved database of moving target data Will eventually link our prepared WFPC2 images... and ACS, and WFC3... • Standardized target names and categories for reliable querying • Enriched with observation data from JPL Horizons and PDS Rings Node • Eventually a complete catalog of all objects in each image • Web search form online this week (our prepared data to be added later) 9

  10. You are encouraged to help us verify our database with a “vanity search”

  11. 12

  12. 13

  13. PDS Rings Node “finder chart”

  14. In addition to providing finder charts for each observation, we’d like to actually catalog the contents of each image -- what is actually detected (and what is the data quality)?

  15. Where citizen science enters our pipeline processing: visual inspections to verify rejections, identify objects

  16. The standard calibration pipelines are not optimized for moving targets Single-image cosmic ray rejection: requires visual verification, iteration, and masking

  17. The standard calibration pipelines are not optimized for moving targets Single-image cosmic ray rejection: requires visual verification, iteration, and masking

  18. Inspection leverage: discerning real objects from artifacts • before/after rejection • chronological: expected vs random motion • stretch: linear vs unsharp • finder chart (verify known moons) • small “slices” to limit fatigue... and enable citizen science 21

  19. Chronological blink pairs

  20. 450 pixel slices on PC (red) and WF (green) bin WF by 2X to search entire chip at once? then 450x450 would include a bit of PC for reference? But difficult to catalog moons or deproject with slices... may need final mosaics for that...

  21. What we hope to enable • r new and improved database of moving target data Will eventually link our prepared WFPC2 images... and ACS, and WFC3... • Lower barriers to subsequent steps: deconvolutions, deprojections, etc. • Lower barriers for scientists to conduct the widest possible range of future HST Solar System archival research • Lower barriers for teachers and students wishing to use “real data” • More ambitious citizen science projects with HST data • Incorporate ACS and WFC3 moving targets... and JWST • Please send us your ideas suggestions on any of the above • IceHunters (KBO search) was born the last time I asked this at a workshop • see Pamela Gay’s talk tomorrow

More Related