1:
2: \documentclass[12pt,preprint]{aastex}
3: %\documentclass{emulateapj}
4: \usepackage{graphicx}
5: \usepackage{lscape}
6:
7: %% manuscript produces a one-column, double-spaced document:
8:
9: %% \documentclass[manuscript]{aastex}
10:
11: %% preprint2 produces a double-column, single-spaced document:
12:
13: %% \documentclass[preprint2]{aastex}
14:
15: %% Sometimes a paper's abstract is too long to fit on the
16: %% title page in preprint2 mode. When that is the case,
17: %% use the longabstract style option.
18:
19: %% \documentclass[preprint2,longabstract]{aastex}
20:
21: \slugcomment{Submitted for publication in the Astronomical Journal}
22:
23: \shorttitle{}
24: \shortauthors{Allende Prieto et al.}
25:
26: \begin{document}
27:
28:
29: \title{The SEGUE Stellar Parameter Pipeline. III. Comparison with
30: High-Resolution Spectroscopy of SDSS/SEGUE Field Stars\footnote{Based on
31: observations obtained with the Hobby-Eberly Telescope
32: (a joint project of the University of Texas at Austin,
33: the Pennsylvania State University, Stanford University,
34: Ludwig-Maximilians-Universit\"at M\"unchen,
35: and Georg-August-Universit\"at G\"ottingen),
36: the W. M. Keck Observatory
37: (operated as a scientific partnership among the California Institute
38: of Technology, the University of California and the National Aeronautics and
39: Space Administration),
40: and the Subaru Telescope (operated by the
41: National Astronomical Observatory of Japan).}}
42:
43:
44: \author{Carlos Allende Prieto}
45: \affil{McDonald Observatory and Department of Astronomy, University of Texas,
46: Austin, TX 78712}
47: \email{callende@astro.as.utexas.edu}
48:
49: \author{Thirupathi Sivarani, Timothy C. Beers, Young Sun Lee}
50: \affil{Department of Physics \& Astronomy, CSCE:
51: Center for the Study of Cosmic Evolution, and
52: JINA: Joint Institute for Nuclear Astrophysics, Michigan State
53: University, East Lansing, MI 48824, USA}
54: \email{thirupathi, beers, lee@pa.msu.edu}
55:
56: \author{Lars Koesterke, Matthew Shetrone, Christopher Sneden, David L. Lambert}
57: \affil{McDonald Observatory and Department of Astronomy, University of Texas,
58: Austin, TX 78712}
59: \email{lars, shetrone , chris , dll@astro.as.utexas.edu}
60:
61: \author{Ronald Wilhelm}
62: \affil{Department of Physics, Texas Tech University, Lubbock, TX 79409}
63: \email{ron.wilhelm@ttu.edu}
64:
65: \author{Constance M. Rockosi, David K. Lai}
66: \affil{UCO/Lick Observatory, 1156 High Street, Santa Cruz, CA 95064}
67: \email{crockosi, david@ucolick.org}
68:
69: \author{Brian Yanny}
70: \affil{Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory, P.O. Box 500, Batavia, IL 60510}
71: \email{yanny@fnal.gov}
72:
73: \author{Inese I. Ivans}
74: \affil{The Observatories of the Carnegie Institution of Washington, Pasadena, CA; and Princeton
75: University Observatory, Princeton, NJ}
76: \email{iii@ociw.edu}
77:
78: \author{Jennifer A. Johnson}
79: \affil{Department of Astronomy, Ohio State University, Columbus, OH}
80: \email{jaj@astronomy.ohio-state.edu}
81:
82: \author{Wako Aoki}
83: \affil{National Astronomical Observatory, Mitaka, Tokyo 181-8588, Japan}
84: \email{aoki.wako@nao.ac.jp}
85:
86: \author{Coryn A. L. Bailer-Jones, Paola Re Fiorentin}
87: \affil{Max-Planck-Institute for Astronomy, K\"onigstuhl 17, D-69117,
88: Heidelberg, Germany}
89:
90:
91: \begin{abstract}
92:
93: We report high-resolution spectroscopy of 125 field stars previously observed as
94: part of the Sloan Digital Sky Survey and its program for Galactic studies, the
95: Sloan Extension for Galactic Understanding and Exploration (SEGUE). These
96: spectra are used to measure radial velocities and to derive atmospheric
97: parameters, which we compare with those reported by the SEGUE Stellar Parameter
98: Pipeline (SSPP). The SSPP obtains estimates of these quantities based on SDSS
99: $ugriz$ photometry and low-resolution ($R \sim 2000$) spectroscopy. For F- and
100: G-type stars observed with high signal-to-noise ratios ($S/N$), we empirically
101: determine the typical random uncertainties in the radial velocities, effective
102: temperatures, surface gravities, and metallicities delivered by the SSPP to be
103: 2.4 km s$^{-1}$, 130 K (2.2 \%), 0.21 dex, and 0.11 dex, respectively, with
104: systematic uncertainties of a similar magnitude in the effective temperatures
105: and metallicities. We estimate random errors for lower $S/N$ spectra based on
106: numerical simulations.
107:
108: \end{abstract}
109:
110:
111: \keywords{methods: data analysis --- stars: abundances, fundamental parameters
112: --- surveys --- techniques: spectroscopic}
113:
114:
115: \section{Introduction}
116:
117: Starting from the sixth public data release (DR-6; Adelman-McCarthy et al.
118: 2007), the Sloan Digital Sky Survey (SDSS) provides estimates of the atmospheric
119: parameters for a subset of the stars observed spectroscopically in the survey
120: (those in the approximate range of temperature $4500 \le T_{\rm eff} \le
121: 7500$~K). Following completion of the main survey (SDSS-I), the SDSS
122: instrumentation has been devoted to several programs, including SEGUE: Sloan
123: Extension for Galactic Understanding and Exploration, a massive survey of the
124: stellar content of the Milky Way. Collectively, the suite of computer programs
125: employed to determine atmospheric parameters from SEGUE data is known as the
126: SEGUE Stellar Parameter Pipeline (SSPP). Because each of the public data
127: releases of the SDSS includes and supersedes previous releases, DR-6 also
128: includes atmospheric parameters for archival stellar observations in SDSS-I.
129: These stellar parameters are derived by a series of methods, some of which
130: consider purely spectroscopic information (continuum-normalized spectra), solely
131: photometry (available in the survey's $ugriz$ system for all targets), or a
132: combination of photometry and spectroscopy. Paper I in this series describes the
133: SSPP in detail (Lee et al. 2007a). Paper II compares the predictions of the SSPP
134: radial velocities and atmospheric parameters with likely members of Galactic
135: globular and open clusters (Lee et al. 2007b).
136:
137: The SDSS uses a CCD camera (Gunn et al. 1998) on a dedicated 2.5m telescope
138: (Gunn et al. 2006) at Apache Point Observatory, New Mexico, to obtain images in
139: five broad optical bands ($ugriz$; Fukugita et al.~1996) over approximately
140: 10,000~deg$^2$ of the high Galactic latitude sky. The survey data-processing
141: software measures the properties of each detected object in the imaging data in
142: all five bands, and determines and applies both astrometric and photometric
143: calibrations (Lupton et al. 2001; Pier et al. 2003; Ivezi\'c et al.~2004).
144: Photometric calibration is provided by simultaneous observations with a 20-inch
145: telescope at the same site (Hogg et al.~2001; Smith et al.~2002; Stoughton et
146: al.~2002; Tucker et al.~2006). A technical summary is provided by
147: York et al. (2000).
148:
149: SDSS-I and the ongoing SEGUE survey have already built the largest-ever catalog
150: of stars in the Milky Way. To date, this includes photometry in five bands for
151: over 200 million stars and spectroscopy for nearly 300,000 stars
152: (Adelman-McCarthy et al. 2007). The SDSS spectrographs deliver a resolving power
153: $\lambda/$FWHM $\sim 2000$ over the wavelength range 380-900 nm. Data reduction
154: is fully automated, and the SSPP employs the final products from the SDSS
155: pipeline as input to produce atmospheric parameters (effective temperature,
156: surface gravity, and metallicity) for stars with
157: spectral types A, F, G, and K. The best results are obtained for F- and G-type
158: stars spanning the effective temperature range $5000 < T_{\rm eff}
159: < 7000$~K.
160:
161: The quality of the SSPP atmospheric parameters is evaluated using different
162: approaches, as already described in Paper I: comparing with previously published
163: spectral libraries, well-studied open and globular clusters, and with
164: high-resolution observations of field stars. Existing spectral libraries are
165: useful in order to evaluate and calibrate the SSPP methods that rely on
166: spectroscopy alone. Allende Prieto et al. (2006) employed the low-resolution
167: Indo-US library (Valdes et al. 2004), and high-resolution spectra from the
168: Elodie library (Prugniel \& Soubiran 2001) and the S$^4$N archive (Allende
169: Prieto et al. 2004). Because the $ugriz$ system was introduced with the SDSS,
170: the stars included in existing spectral libraries lack photometry in this
171: system. In addition, these are relatively bright stars, typically with $V<14$
172: mag, brighter than the bright magnitude limit of the SDSS imaging. The bright
173: magnitude limit for the SDSS is set by the saturation threshold of the detectors
174: at the sidereal driftscan rate of the survey. Obtaining data for these brighter
175: stars would require special-purpose observations with a very different
176: instrument configuration, which would call into question their value as
177: calibration observations for the otherwise homogeneous imaging survey.
178:
179: Star clusters provide stringent tests of the SSPP, as the same metallicity
180: should be derived for stars that explore wide ranges of masses and luminosities.
181: Paper II in this series examines SSPP results for likely members of clusters
182: included in DR-6. One cannot choose clusters with any given metallicity, but has
183: to take what is provided by nature and accessible from Apache Point.
184: Furthermore, the effective temperatures and surface gravities for the members of
185: any given cluster are very strongly correlated, depending on age and chemical
186: composition. This leads to a patchy coverage of the parameter space. Field stars,
187: on the other hand, can be chosen to provide better coverage
188: and, therefore, naturally complement the clusters. Among the stars
189: spectroscopically observed with SDSS, those in the range $14 < V
190: <16.5$ mag can be observed at high spectral resolution with large-aperture telescopes
191: and modest integration times. Due to the vast size of the SDSS stellar
192: sample, these stars can be selected to more uniformly cover the parameter space
193: of stellar properties, and have the additional benefit that photometry is
194: already available for them in the SDSS native system.
195:
196: This paper, the third in the SSPP series, is devoted to the analysis of 125 SDSS
197: stars newly observed at high-resolution with the Hobby-Eberly, Keck, and Subaru
198: telescopes. Section 2 describes the sample selection and the observations. The
199: determination of radial velocities and atmospheric parameters, based on these
200: observations, are discussed in \S 3 and \S 4, respectively. Section 5 describes
201: the results for several well-known standard stars observed with the Hobby-Eberly
202: Telescope. Section 6 compares the parameters derived from high-resolution
203: spectroscopy with those from the SSPP. Section 7 describes numerical experiments
204: that explore how the parameters degrade at lower signal-to-noise ratios. Our
205: conclusions are summarized in \S 8.
206:
207:
208: \section{Observations}
209:
210: The majority of the data presented in this paper were obtained with the
211: Hobby-Eberly Telescope (HET; Ramsey et al. 1998), located in West Texas, making
212: use of its High Resolution Spectrograph (HRS; Tull 1998). Additional spectra
213: were obtained with the Keck Observatory, using both the High Resolution Echelle
214: Spectrometer (HIRES; Vogt et al. 1994) and the Echelle Spectrograph and Imager
215: (ESI; Sheinis et al. 2002), and with the Subaru telescope and the
216: High Dispersion Spectrograph (HDS; Noguchi et al. 2002), both located on Mauna
217: Kea, Hawaii. Table \ref{table1} summarizes the basic information concerning the
218: spectroscopic observations; more details are provided below.
219:
220:
221: \subsection{Sample selection}
222:
223: Field stars with previous spectroscopic observations from SDSS-I or SEGUE were
224: selected for follow-up spectroscopy at higher resolution. Based on preliminary
225: SSPP atmospheric parameters, targets were initially chosen to span the range
226: $5200 < T_{\rm eff} < 7000 $ K, $1.5 < \log g < 5.5$, and $-2.5<$ [Fe/H]$<
227: 0.5$\footnote{Here and throughout the paper we equate metallicity with iron
228: abundance, and use the notation [Fe/H]$\equiv \log \left( \frac{\rm N(Fe)}{\rm
229: N(H)} \right) -
230: \left( \frac{\rm N(Fe)}{\rm N(H)} \right)_{\odot}$, where N represents the number
231: density of atoms.}. Our targets are relatively bright; most satisfy $g < 15.5$
232: mag. In addition, a number of cooler red giants were also included in the
233: sample, expanding the initial range of temperatures.
234:
235: %fig1
236:
237: Figure \ref{sample} illustrates the coverage of parameter space occupied by our
238: targets. Some 300 stars were placed in the HET queue between November 2005 and
239: October 2006, despite the fact that time was only allocated for observations of
240: about 100 of them. This over-booking strategy allows for very efficient use of
241: the HET queue schedule (Shetrone et al. 2007). The time on Keck and Subaru was
242: used mainly to increase the target density at low metallicities and cooler
243: temperatures.
244:
245: \subsection{HET spectra}
246:
247: On the HET, a 316 grooves mm$^{-1}$ cross-dispersing grating, and a $2"$-wide
248: slit collecting 80\% of the light from the $3"$-diameter science fibers, were
249: chosen to provide nearly full spectral coverage between 400 and 800 nm at a
250: resolving power $R=\lambda/{\rm FWHM} \simeq 15000$. Some 280 spectra of 115
251: stars were obtained. The observations were scheduled at low priority on the HET
252: queue, and most were obtained during bright time. Below we discuss only the 81
253: stars that appeared single-lined, did not exhibit the characteristics broad
254: lines, and had at least one spectrum with no obvious signs of background light
255: (since no sky fibers were used), and a $S/N$ per pixel at 520 nm
256: in excess of 20/1.
257:
258: Data reduction was performed independently at the University of Texas and at
259: Michigan State University (MSU). The reduction at Texas was done automatically,
260: with a pipeline based on IRAF\footnote{IRAF is distributed by the National
261: Optical Astronomy Observatories, which is operated by the Association of
262: Universities for Research in Astronomy, Inc. under cooperative agreement with
263: the National Science Foundation.} scripts, while a more interactive procedure,
264: also based on IRAF packages, was employed at MSU. Both reductions included bias
265: removal and flatfield correction, but the former corrected for scattered light
266: with the task {\tt apscatter}, while the latter removed the background for each
267: order from neighboring areas. The results are generally in excellent agreement.
268: Multiple observations were typically obtained for each object. With the
269: exception of nine stars with the lowest $S/N$, individual exposures were
270: analyzed independently, and the derived atmospheric parameters averaged.
271:
272:
273: \subsection{Keck-HIRES spectra}
274:
275: Fourteen objects were observed with the red configuration of the Keck I
276: High Resolution Echelle Spectrometer (HIRES) and new 3-chip CCD
277: mosaic, with an on-chip binning of $1\times2$. The C1 decker, which
278: has a $7.0 \times 0.861"$ slit, was used. This setting yields a
279: resolving power of $R \sim 40000$.
280: The spectra cover a wavelength range of 414--849 nm.
281: Most of the objects had more than two exposures, and exposure times of
282: 300--1500 sec. The data were reduced at Carnegie Observatories,
283: using version 4.0.1. of the MAuna Kea Echelle Extraction
284: data reduction package (MAKEE\footnote{MAKEE was developed by T. A.
285: Barlow for the reduction of Keck I HIRES data taken with the
286: new 3-chip CCD mosaic. It is freely available from the Keck Observatory}).
287: The final $S/N$ per pixel was approximately 80/1 at 520 nm.
288:
289: \subsection{Keck-ESI spectra}
290:
291: The Keck~II ESI spectrograph was used in the echellete mode.
292: %The spectrograph is mounted on KeckII telescope at the Cassegrain focus.
293: Twenty seven objects were observed with exposure times
294: ranging from 300 to 1200 sec.
295: The resolving power is approximately 7000, using
296: a slit width of 0.74\arcsec. The wavelength coverage is 390-1100 nm.
297: %The scale at the detector plane is about
298: %0.15\arcsec/pixel. The ESI CCD is a high-resistivity MIT-Lincoln Labs 2048 x 4096
299: %device with 15 \micron pixels.
300: % The CCD was used in the low gain setting, which has a
301: %gain and read out noise of 1.29$e-/DN$ and 2.7e- respectively.
302: Data reduction was performed at Santa Cruz
303: using IRAF scripts (see Lai et al. 2004).
304: %The wavelength calibration for spectra obtained with ESI is
305: %accurate to about 5 km s$^{-1}$, and
306: The $S/N$ per pixel was in the range 30/1--60/1 at 520 nm.
307:
308: \subsection{Subaru spectra}
309:
310: The Subaru HDS was used to observe nine of our program objects with a resolving
311: power of $R \sim 45000$, covering 300-580 nm. The blue cross disperser was chosen for the
312: observations, with 400 grooves mm$^{-1}$ and blaze angle of 4.76\degr.
313: Most of the objects had only one exposure.
314: %The dector is a mosaic of 2 EEV CCDs of size 4100x2048 and pixel size of 13.5\micron.
315: %The gain of the CCDs are 1.782 and 1.6665e-/DN.
316: Standard data reduction procedures (bias subtraction, flat-fielding, background
317: subtraction, extraction, and wavelength calibration) were carried out with the
318: IRAF echelle package. Suspected cosmic-ray hits are removed using the technique
319: described by Aoki et al. (2005). The $S/N$ per pixel was roughly 80/1 at 520 nm.
320:
321:
322: \section{Radial Velocities}
323:
324: Following the same strategy as for the data reduction, the radial velocities for
325: HET spectra were measured independently at Texas and MSU by three different
326: methods. There were 10 observations of four radial velocity standards, which are
327: discussed in Section \ref{standards}.
328:
329: For the Keck-ESI and the MSU reductions of the HET spectra, radial velocities
330: were derived from cross correlations with the solar spectrum between 480 and 530
331: nm (Wallace, Hinkle, \& Livingston 1998). After the spectra were analyzed and the
332: atmospheric parameters determined, as explained below (\S \ref{sivapar}), the
333: cross-correlation was repeated using the best-fitting models as templates.
334: Heliocentric corrections were estimated using the IRAF task {\it rvcor}. The
335: radial velocities for the Keck-HIRES data were estimated by cross correlation
336: using the positions of about 100 Fe I and 10 Fe II lines. Heliocentric
337: corrections were already applied during data reduction by the MAKEE package.
338:
339: Radial velocities were derived for the Texas-reduced HET spectra by measuring
340: the central wavelengths of several hundred Fe I lines and comparing to
341: laboratory values (Nave et al. 1994). The distribution was then fit by a
342: Gaussian plus a background parabola, in order to determine the mean, the sigma,
343: and the error of the mean. The heliocentric correction was estimated with the
344: IRAF task {\it rvcor}, then applied in order to obtain the final radial
345: velocity.
346:
347: The Texas-reduced HET spectra were also cross-correlated with a library of
348: synthetic spectra smoothed to the appropriate resolution, in order to measure
349: the Doppler shifts. The library covers a region of 4 nm around H$\beta$, and
350: samples uniformly in $T_{\rm eff}$ the spectral types F to mid-K (4500 to
351: 7500~K), with surface gravities $1.0<\log g<5.0$, and metallicities $-2.5 < $
352: [Fe/H] $ <0.5$. Each synthetic spectrum was cross-correlated with each HET
353: spectrum, and the peak of the cross-correlation was fit with a Gaussian using
354: the IDL routine {\it xc} (Allende Prieto 2007). The Doppler shift is estimated
355: as the mean value for the 10\% of the synthetic spectra that best fit the
356: observed spectrum. The heliocentric correction was computed with the routine
357: {\it baryvel} (see Stumpff 1980) from the IDL astro library\footnote{See http:
358: //idlastro.gsfc.nasa.gov/}, and applied. We note that heliocentric corrections
359: derived in this manner differed by those from IRAF's rvcor task by no more than
360: 0.2 km s$^{-1}$.
361:
362: In summary, three different procedures for radial velocity estimation were
363: applied to the HET spectra: (1) cross-correlation with the solar spectrum in the
364: 480--530 nm region, (2) direct measurement of the wavelength shifts of atomic
365: iron lines, and (3) cross-correlation with a library of synthetic spectra in the
366: vicinity of H$\beta$. Cross-correlation with the solar spectrum was the only
367: method applied to the Subaru and Keck spectra. This method and the Fe I method
368: agree with one another slightly better than with the third technique (for HET
369: stars): excluding the spectra of SDSS J033530.56-010038
370: %(spSpec 53350-2049-020)
371: and SDSS J074151.21+275319,
372: %(spSpec 52339-0888-599),
373: we find an rms scatter of 1.6 km s$^{-1}$.
374: Thus, we adopt the average of these two methods for
375: all HET stars and exclude these two stars in the comparison with the radial
376: velocities from the SSPP. The radial velocities for the HET stars are listed in
377: Table \ref{params}; those for the rest of the sample are listed in Table
378: \ref{params2}.
379:
380:
381: \section{Analysis}
382:
383: The majority of our program stars were observed with HET-HRS using a single
384: setting, but the rest of the spectra from Keck and Subaru fill important gaps in
385: the parameter space. The HET data were analyzed by an automated spectral fitting
386: technique at the University of Texas. The rest of the spectra were analyzed by a
387: second method for automated spectral fitting (Keck-ESI), or by more traditional
388: methods, using line equivalent widths (Subaru-HDS and Keck-HIRES) at MSU. In
389: order to take advantage of both the homogeneity of the HET spectra, and the
390: expanded coverage of the rest of the observations, we separately consider these
391: two data sets, designated below as ``HET'' and ``OTHERS''. One star,
392: SDSS J180922.45+223712,
393: %53534-2184-058,
394: was observed both with HET and Subaru.
395:
396: \subsection{HET analysis}
397: \label{carlospar}
398:
399: The determination of atmospheric parameters for HET spectra at Texas was based
400: on fitting the spectroscopic observations in the range 500-521 nm. This region includes many
401: individual lines, but it is dominated by transitions of neutral iron, calcium
402: and magnesium. The spectra were continuum-normalized. The search for the optimal
403: solution is based on the Nelder-Mead algorithm (Nelder \& Mead 1965), with model
404: spectra interpolated using a third-order Bezier scheme, but otherwise the same
405: code and strategy described by Allende Prieto et al. (2006) is used. The code is also
406: the same used by the SSPP for the methods described in \S 4.1 of Paper I. The
407: main difference between the {\tt ki13} grid used in the SSPP and the one
408: employed here is the spectral resolution, which is now $R=7700$, instead of
409: $R=1000$. With only three fitting parameters (effective temperature, surface
410: gravity and overall metal abundance), a scaled solar composition is implicit in
411: the analysis, considering an enhancement of the $\alpha$ elements for [Fe/H]$ <
412: 0$. Note that the same Nelder-Mead algorithm, but a different implementation, is used
413: for the analysis of the Keck-ESI data at MSU, as described below.
414:
415: %fig2
416:
417: It should be emphasized that although the HET-HRS spectra have a resolving power
418: of $R=15000$, the analysis is performed at a lower resolution. By smoothing both
419: the observed and the synthetic spectra to $R=7700$, we effectively eliminate the
420: effects of stellar rotation, and potential variations with time in the PSF of
421: the spectrograph, increasing the original signal-to-noise ratio per pixel and
422: speeding up the calculations. The sacrifice in resolution has a negligible
423: impact on the final accuracy of the derived atmospheric parameters, as checked
424: from the analysis of several hundred spectra from the Elodie library at both
425: $R=15,000$ and $R=7700$. Figure \ref{fits} illustrates the fits for three
426: program stars and for the metal-poor standard HD~84937, all observed on the HET.
427: The internal consistency of the derived atmospheric parameters for different
428: observations of the same target is excellent, typically $\sigma=$ 32 K, 0.05
429: dex, and 0.02 dex for $T_{\rm eff}$, $\log g$, and [Fe/H], respectively.
430:
431:
432: The analysis is simplified by assuming a relationship between the abundance
433: ratio of the alpha elements to iron and the iron abundance (Beers et al. 1999;
434: Eq. 2 in Allende Prieto et al. 2006), but it is well known that such a
435: relationship does not apply to all stars in the Galaxy. For example, Reddy et
436: al. (2006) find different slopes for the change in [$\alpha$/Fe] with [Fe/H] for
437: stars in the thin- and thick-disk populations. The halo values are most likely
438: similar to those for the thick disk. Using the average of [Mg/Fe], [Si/Fe],
439: [Ca/Fe], and [Ti/Fe], Reddy et al. find that approximately linear trends apply,
440: although they differ somewhat from the relationship adopted in our calculations.
441: Inspection of their fits suggest slopes of $-0.14$ dex/dex and $-0.07$ dex/dex,
442: and intercepts at [Fe/H]$=0$ of $+0.00$ and $+0.17$, for the thin- and
443: thick-disk populations, respectively. Oxygen may not follow the same behavior
444: (Ram\'{\i}rez et al. 2007), as it appears to exhibit a more pronounced slope for
445: thin-disk stars, but Mg and Ca are the relevant elements for the spectral window
446: we are using. In any case, the use of a single relationship for all of the alpha
447: elements is only an approximation.
448:
449: Our adopted relationship predicts [$\alpha$/Fe]$= +0.27$, +0.13, and +0.00 at
450: [Fe/H]$=-1.0$, $-0.5$, and 0.0, respectively, while the results of Reddy et al.
451: indicate [$\alpha$/Fe]$= +0.14$, +0.07, and 0.00 for the thin-disk population,
452: and [$\alpha$/Fe]$= +0.24$, +0.21, and +0.17 for the thick-disk population,
453: respectively, at the same metallicities. Halo stars exhibit similar
454: [$\alpha$/Fe] ratios as thick-disk stars with [Fe/H]$< -0.7$. These differences
455: have only a small impact on our results. The parameters for thin-disk stars with
456: [Fe/H]$\sim -1$ (provided they exist), or for thick-disk stars with solar
457: metallicity (provided they exist), would have a maximum systematic error of 0.2
458: dex in surface gravity and metallicity, and 100~K in $T_{\rm eff}$. At the
459: intermediate metallicities where the two populations overlap, errors would
460: amount to about half of the maximum values.
461:
462: %fig3
463:
464: The analysis procedure was tested and calibrated using two spectral libraries
465: from the literature: S$^4$N (Allende Prieto et al. 2004), and the Elodie.3
466: library (Prugniel \& Soubiran 2001). Our comparison is limited to stars in these
467: libraries with effective temperatures between $4500<T_{\rm eff}<7000$ K, and, in
468: the case of the Elodie library, with reliable parameters ($Q_{Teff} \ge 2$,
469: $Q_{\log g} \ge 1$, and $Q_{\rm [Fe/H]} \ge 3$, where $Q$ represents {\it
470: reliability} as defined by the Elodie team). We estimate random and systematic
471: uncertainties by fitting Gaussian models to the differences between the
472: parameters derived for the spectra in these libraries, and their associated
473: catalogs. Our results are systematically different from the S$^4$N catalog
474: parameters by $+5$\% in $T_{\rm eff}$, +0.20 dex in $\log g$, and $-0.23$ dex in
475: [Fe/H]. After correcting for these zero-point offsets, the differences between
476: our parameters and those in the libraries' catalogs are illustrated in Figure
477: \ref{figcor}; statistics are presented in Table \ref{libraries}, where
478: the $\sigma_{\rm rms}$ is derived from Gaussian fittings.
479:
480: The larger scatter found for the Elodie library is expected, since the
481: corresponding catalog values do not have a homogeneous source, but are mostly
482: compiled from the literature. In addition, the quality of the original spectra
483: in this library is lower than those in the S$^4$N library. The $1\sigma$
484: uncertainties derived from the comparison with the S$^4$N library are adopted as
485: external errors, and added in quadrature to the internal estimates.
486:
487: The empirically determined corrections from the S$^4$N library for surface
488: gravity and metallicity work as well for the Elodie library. While the first
489: library is dominated by spectra of thin-disk stars, the second balances
490: thin-disk, thick-disk, and halo populations, spanning metallicities between
491: $-3.0$ and $+0.5$. With the zero points determined from the comparison with the
492: S$^4$N library, our effective temperatures are roughly 2\% lower than those in
493: the Elodie library. This difference is expected, since the temperatures in the
494: S$^4$N catalog were obtained from the infrared flux method (IRFM) calibrations
495: of Alonso et al. (1996, 1999), while most of the values reported in the Elodie
496: catalog are from spectroscopic analyses. It is well known that the spectroscopic
497: (excitation balance of neutral iron lines, as described in
498: \S \ref{sivapar}) temperature scale is about 150~K warmer than the IRFM scale for
499: these spectral types (see, e.g., Heiter \& Luck 2003, Yong et al. 2004). For
500: consistency with the results for the OTHERS sample, described below, the warmer
501: (Elodie) temperature scale is adopted.
502:
503:
504: \subsection{OTHERS analysis}
505: \label{sivapar}
506:
507: The atmospheric parameters for the Keck-ESI spectra were derived at MSU, using a
508: grid of synthetic spectra and the IDL optimization routine AMOEBA (see Press et
509: al. 1986), which also employs the Nelder-Mead algorithm.
510:
511: A total of 13662 synthetic spectra were generated with a sampling step of
512: $\delta\lambda = 5 \times 10^{-4}$ nm, covering the wavelength range 480--530
513: nm. The parameter space spans the range 3500 to 9750~K in $T_{\rm eff}$, 0.0 to
514: 5.0 in $\log g$, and $-2.5$ to 0.0 in [Fe/H], for $\xi =$ 1, 2, 3 km s$^{-1}$.
515: The stellar model atmospheres used for the synthetic spectra are the NEWODF
516: models by Castelli \& Kurucz (2003), which include updated opacities for TiO
517: (Schwenke 1998) and H$_{2}$O (Partridge \& Schwenke 1997). The NEWODF models use
518: solar abundances by Grevesse \& Sauval (1998) and no convective overshooting
519: (Castelli et al. 1997). The synthetic spectra are generated using the {\tt
520: turbospectrum} synthesis code (Alvarez \& Plez 1998), and employ recent
521: calculations of the broadening of Balmer lines (Barklem et al. 2000), and strong
522: metallic lines (Barklem \& Aspelund-Johansson 2005 and references therein) by
523: collisions with hydrogen atoms. The linelists employed come from a variety of
524: sources. Atomic line data are taken mainly from the VALD compilation (Kupka et
525: al. 1999) as of 2002, and in some cases updated from the literature. The atomic
526: linelist also includes hyperfine splitting for interesting lines. Linelists for
527: the molecular species CH, CN, TiO, CaH and OH were provided by B. Plez (see Plez
528: 1998; Plez \& Cohen 2005), while the data for the NH, C$_{2}$ and MgH molecules
529: are from Kurucz (see http: //kurucz.harvard.edu/LINELISTS/LINESMOL/). The
530: solar abundances compiled by Asplund, Grevesse \& Sauval (2005) were adopted.
531: Finally, the synthetic spectra were reduced to a resolution of $R = 7000$ by
532: convolving with a Gaussian. The SSPP parameters were supplied as initial
533: guesses.
534:
535: The analysis of the Keck-HIRES and Subaru-HDS data was performed at MSU using
536: the equivalent widths of Fe I and Fe II lines to constrain $T_{\rm eff}$, $\log
537: g$, [Fe/H], and the microturbulence. The $T_{\rm eff}$ is determined from the
538: excitation equilibrium of Fe I lines, by forcing a null trend in the excitation
539: potential versus Fe I abundance. The $\log g$ is determined from the ionization
540: equilibrium of Fe I and Fe II lines. The microturbulence is estimated by forcing
541: a null trend in the equivalent width versus abundance relation. In our analysis
542: we used only lines with equivalent widths $\le 120$m\AA\ , so as to avoid the
543: non-linear part of the curve of growth. The atomic data for the Fe I and Fe II
544: lines are from the VALD compilation, and from fits to the solar spectrum. We
545: also checked our estimations by fitting the Balmer line profiles. We have
546: removed three objects from the Keck-HIRES sample; two of them exhibited very
547: broad lines, apparently due to rapid rotation, while one object was a
548: double-lined spectroscopic binary. For one star, SDSS J205025.83-011103.8, the
549: SSPP did not return measurements.
550:
551:
552: \section{Standard Stars}
553: \label{standards}
554:
555: The HET sample contains four well-known radial velocity standard stars that have
556: multiple and recent high-resolution analyses in the literature. The stars
557: HD~8648 and HD~84737 have been reported by Nidever et al. (2002) as constant in
558: radial velocity to better than 0.1 km s$^{-1}$ over several years; their
559: heliocentric radial velocities are 0.92 and 4.90 km s$^{-1}$, respectively.
560: Nordstr\"om et al. (2004) provide values consistent with these measurements. The
561: radial velocity of HD~71148 has been measured by Nordstr\"om et al. as $-32.6
562: \pm 0.1$ km s$^{-1}$, with consistent measurements reported by Barnes, Moffett
563: \& Slovak (1986). Nordstr\"om et al. also included HD~84937 in their sample, with a
564: radial velocity of $-14.5 \pm 0.2$ km s$^{-1}$, in good agreement with previous
565: data from Carney et al. (2001).
566:
567: The average velocities measured from the HET spectra of HD~8648 (5
568: observations), HD~84737 (1 observation), HD~71148 (2 observations), and HD~84937
569: (2 observations) are $0.34$, $4.03$, $-33.39$, and $-12.31$ km s$^{-1}$,
570: respectively. This indicates that a negligible offset exists between the HET
571: values and those adopted from the literature: $-0.01 \pm 0.74$ km s$^{-1}$, with
572: an rms scatter of 1.47 km s$^{-1}$.
573:
574: HD~8648 has been spectroscopically studied by Mishenina et al. (2004) and
575: Valenti \& Fisher (2005). HD~71148 has been analyzed by Fuhrmann (2004), Lambert
576: \& Reddy (2004), Mishenina et al. (2004), and Valenti \& Fisher (2005). HD~84737
577: was observed by Chen et al. (2002), Luck \& Heiter (2006), and Valenti \&
578: Fisher (2005). Finally, the spectrum of the halo subdwarf HD~84937 has been
579: analyzed, among others, by Korn, Shi, \& Gehren (2003), Nissen et al. (2007), and
580: Ryde \& Lambert (2004). The agreement among these studies on the atmospheric
581: parameters for each star is excellent -- the rms scatter is less than 80~K for
582: $T_{\rm eff}$, 0.1 dex for $\log g$, and 0.05 dex for [Fe/H]. We adopt
583: average values of these parameters for our analysis.
584:
585: A comparison between our adopted literature parameters and those derived from
586: our own analysis of high-resolution HET spectra is provided in Table \ref{stds}.
587: The effective temperatures of these stars span a limited range, as do
588: their surface gravities, but these objects provide one way to assess the
589: adopted zero points for our atmospheric parameters. On average, our temperatures
590: are 18~K warmer, our gravities $-0.05$ dex lower, and our metallicities
591: $-0.02$~dex lower than the average literature values. These tiny differences
592: indicate no detectable offsets in our derived atmospheric parameters. The rms
593: scatter between our parameters and the literature values are 96~K (2 \%),
594: 0.15~dex, and 0.04~dex, in $T_{\rm eff}$, $\log g$, and [Fe/H], respectively.
595: These estimates are also in excellent agreement with the results based on
596: comparison with the S$^4$N library shown in Table \ref{libraries}. Most of our
597: standard stars have near solar metallicity; the same applies to the stars in
598: the S$^4$N library. However, the agreement with the literature values for HD~84937,
599: at [Fe/H] $\simeq -2.1$, for $T_{\rm eff}$ and [Fe/H], does not seem to degrade
600: significantly. The surface gravity, on the other hand, does exhibit a larger
601: difference, of about 0.2~dex, which suggests a lower precision for this
602: parameter at low metallicity, at least for the HET spectra.
603:
604: %fig4
605:
606: \section{Comparison With SSPP Estimates}
607:
608: \subsection{Radial velocities}
609:
610: Our two preferred radial velocity determinations for the HET spectra agree with
611: one another with an rms scatter of 1.6 km s$^{-1}$ (average difference of 0.9 km
612: s$^{-1})$. This value is consistent with the scatter inferred for the four
613: radial velocity standards, as described in \S \ref{standards}. The radial
614: velocities measured in the SDSS spectra we compare to in this section are not
615: derived directly by the SSPP but, in most cases, they come from matching
616: templates from the Elodie library as part of the spectro-1d pipeline.
617: Nonetheless, the SSPP makes some choices regarding the adopted radial velocity,
618: as explained in Paper I and II, and therefore we refer to the finally adopted
619: radial velocity for the SDSS spectra as the SSPP values below.
620:
621: The mean
622: $S/N$ per pixel of the SDSS/SEGUE spectra in this set is
623: typically higher than 50/1.
624: The SSPP radial velocities exhibit an rms scatter of 5.1 km s$^{-1}$
625: relative to the average of our two preferred methods. Nevertheless,
626: this value is not representative for most stars, but
627: it is inflated by three outliers
628: (SDSS J233852.54+140945.7, SDSS J013627.14+231453.6,
629: and SDSS J012106.89+263648.0).
630: %(1894-296, 2044-228, 2040-617).
631: A more reliable indication of the typical
632: scatter is derived by least-squares fitting of a Normal curve to the differences,
633: which, as Figure \ref{velo} illustrates, yields $\sigma= 2.9$ km s$^{-1}$.
634: This indicates a typical uncertainty
635: of about 2.4 km s$^{-1}$ for the SSPP radial velocities.
636: This level of accuracy is better than in
637: earlier public data releases because of improvements to the DR6
638: version of the spectro-1d pipeline, primarily to the wavelength
639: solutions, and is consistent with the estimated the plate-to-plate scatter
640: in the radial velocity zero point (Adelman-McCarthy et al. 2007).
641:
642:
643: The SDSS radial velocities involved in our comparison have been systematically
644: corrected by $+7.3$ km s$^{-1}$, based on preliminary results from this program,
645: as described by Adelman-McCarthy et al. (2007),
646: and therefore we limit our discussion to the variance.
647: %In the current version
648: %of the pipeline, the zero point of the SSPP radial velocity scale agrees better
649: %with the zero point of the Fe I method (average offset is just 0.08 km s$^{-1}$)
650: %than with that of the solar spectrum cross-correlation (offset of 0.9 km
651: %s$^{-1}$).
652: The unusually large errors for a few stars are likely related to some
653: issue with the SSPP or the SDSS spectra rather than on the HET side.
654: There are a few more examples among the stars observed with KeckI-ESI.
655: The (internal) error bars delivered by the SSPP for the stars in the HET sample
656: range between 0.7 and 2.0 km s$^{-1}$, with a mean value of about 1.3 km
657: s$^{-1}$, or about half our empirical external estimate.
658:
659:
660: \subsection{Atmospheric parameters}
661:
662: The SSPP parameters derived for SDSS spectra discussed in this section are the
663: average values provided as part of SDSS DR-6 in the public data base
664: (Adelman-McCarthy et al. 2007). In Paper I, we compare the high-resolution
665: parameters against the individual methods integrated into the SSPP, in order to
666: estimate their associated systematic and random errors. These will be used in
667: future updates of the SSPP to weight the results from individual methods
668: appropriately.
669:
670: Figure \ref{pipes} shows the main result of this paper, the comparison between
671: the estimated stellar atmospheric parameters obtained from the high-resolution
672: spectra with those from the SSPP based on SDSS data. Table \ref{compare}
673: summarizes the mean and standard deviation of the differences between the
674: high-resolution results (HI) and those from the SSPP.
675:
676: There is better agreement between the zero points of the SSPP parameters and the
677: high-resolution results for the OTHERS sample than for the HET results. However,
678: the rms scatter is significant smaller for the HET sample than for the OTHERS
679: sample. Despite the fact that we have chosen the high (spectroscopic) $T_{\rm
680: eff}$ scale for calibrating the HET results, we find that the SSPP indicates
681: even higher temperatures, by about 170~K; this value is comparable to the
682: scatter found for this parameter. For SDSS J180922.45+223712, the star observed
683: both with HET and Subaru, the HET and OTHERS analyses yielded disparate
684: effective temperatures of 5906 K and 6380 K, surface gravities of 4.40 dex and
685: 5.00 dex, and metallicities of $-2.33$ and $-2.20$, respectively. The SSPP
686: $T_{\rm eff}$ estimate is intermediate to the two values, 6252 K. We note that
687: this is one of the stars with the lowest $S/N$ among the HET sample.
688:
689: The larger scatter for the OTHERS sample is not attributable to the more
690: extended coverage of the parameter space; if we restrict the OTHERS sample to
691: the same range covered by the HET observations, the results do not vary
692: significantly. It is probably related to the different analysis techniques. For
693: example, the Keck-HIRES and Subaru analysis employs Fe I and Fe II lines, which
694: are mainly in the region around 390--450 nm, were the $S/N$ is lower than in the
695: redder region where the HET analysis is performed. The traditional analysis of
696: Fe I and Fe II lines uses weak lines, while the HET analysis also includes
697: stronger features, which may be more reliable at low $S/N$. In addition, the
698: effect of microturbulence is explicitly considered in the traditional analysis,
699: while the HET (and also ESI), as well as the SSPP techniques, consider a fixed
700: microturbulence value, and therefore are likely to be on the same scale. In
701: addition, the residuals for the OTHERS sample appear markedly non-Gaussian, and
702: the scatter determined from Gaussian fittings enhances the estimated width of
703: the distributions. In particular, the $\sigma_{\rm rms}$ for $\log g$ is 0.35
704: dex, while the value estimated from a Gaussian model is 0.41 dex (Table
705: \ref{compare}).
706:
707: As previously explained, the uncertainties for the HET spectra are determined by
708: adding in quadrature the uncertainties inferred from the comparison with the
709: S$^4$N library, as shown in Table \ref{libraries}, and the $1\sigma$ scatter
710: among the values derived from the analysis of individual exposures of each star.
711: The latter contribution is, for most stars, negligible. The SSPP uncertainties
712: correspond to the standard error of the mean ($\sigma/\sqrt{N}$) for the results
713: from the different methods assembled in the pipeline.
714:
715: %fig5
716:
717: Figure \ref{error} shows histograms of the distribution of uncertainty estimates
718: in the HET sample for both the SSPP (solid lines) and the high-resolution HET
719: data (dashed lines). It is unlikely that the parameters obtained from our
720: analysis of high-resolution spectra are more uncertain than those reported by
721: the SSPP. The vertical lines indicate the empirical estimates derived for the
722: SSPP parameters from the comparison with the HET values (see Table
723: \ref{compare}). The conclusion from this comparison is that the (internal)
724: SSPP error bars significantly underestimate the actual uncertainties, at least
725: for the SDSS/SEGUE spectra with relatively high signal-to-noise ratio ($ >
726: 50/1$). Typically, the quoted SSPP uncertainties in the effective temperature
727: ($\sim 50$ K) are about $2-3$ times too small, while those in surface gravity
728: ($\sim 0.12$ dex) and metallicity ($\sim 0.08$ dex) are about half of their
729: actual external errors.
730:
731: \section{Uncertainties as a function of S/N}
732:
733: The comparison in Figure \ref{pipes} and Table \ref{compare} involves a
734: set of SDSS/SEGUE spectra with quite high $S/N$. Nevertheless, most of
735: the stellar spectra acquired in these projects have a significantly lower $S/N$
736: ratio, typically with a wavelength-averaged value of $10/1--30/1$. To estimate
737: the effect of lower $S/N$ on the derived atmospheric parameters, we have
738: introduced noise into the original observations.
739:
740: We followed the same recipe described by Allende Prieto (2007) to create new
741: sets of spectra degraded to a $S/N$ at 500 nm ($S/N_{\rm 500}$) of 5/1, 10/1,
742: 20/1, and 40/1. All sets were analyzed using only one of the methods included in
743: the SSPP: spectral fitting with the {\tt ki13} grid, which is described in
744: Paper I (see also Allende Prieto et al. 2006). We found that the derived
745: effective temperatures agree with those determined from HET spectra with an rms
746: scatter of 13\%, 5\%, 4 \%, and 3.2 \% at $S/N_{\rm 500}$ of 5/1, 10/1, 20/1,
747: and 40/1, respectively. The derived surface gravities agreed with the
748: high-resolution values with an rms scatter of 0.70, 0.55, 0.42, and 0.30 dex,
749: while the metallicities agreed with an rms scatter of 0.71 dex, 0.29 dex, 0.15
750: dex, and 0.13 dex for a $S/N_{\rm 500}$ of 5/1, 10/1, 20/1, and 40/1,
751: respectively. Because the {\tt ki13} method and the HET analysis share a number
752: of elements (search algorithm and code, and spectral synthesis data and code),
753: and the spectral windows they exploit overlap, uncertainties could be slightly
754: underestimated at high $S/N$, but the figures derived at $S/N=40/1$ are in line
755: with those for the original SDSS spectra analyzed with the SSPP (Table
756: \ref{compare}).
757:
758: \section{Conclusions}
759:
760: We report on an analysis of high-resolution spectroscopic observations of a
761: sample of stars previously observed with the SDSS instrumentation as part of
762: SDSS-I or SEGUE. These new data are used to derive radial velocities and
763: atmospheric parameters, and to scrutinize the performance of the SSPP Pipeline
764: described in Paper I in this series. The sample we have examined includes 81
765: stars observed with the HET-HRS, 25 stars obtained with Keck-ESI, 11 stars
766: observed with Keck-HIRES, and 9 stars from Subaru-HDS.
767:
768: Through a comparison with external spectroscopic libraries, and by employing
769: multiple methods of analysis for the HET sample, we estimate that our reference
770: radial velocities are accurate to 1.6 km s$^{-1}$. Our values for the stellar
771: atmospheric parameters, effective temperature, surface gravity, and metallicity,
772: are accurate to 1.5 \% ($\sim 90$~K), 0.13~dex and 0.05~dex, respectively. These
773: figures are derived from the comparison with the parameters for nearby stars in
774: the S$^4$N catalog, but we find they are still valid for the moderately high
775: $S/N$ of the HET spectra. Using the HET sample to benchmark the SSPP,
776: subtracting in quadrature the uncertainties in the results for the former, we
777: conclude that the SDSS/SEGUE radial velocities are typically accurate to 2.4 km
778: s$^{-1}$ for high signal-to-noise SDSS spectra ($S/N > 50/1$). A similar comparison
779: of the atmospheric parameters returned by the SSPP with those obtained from HET
780: spectra leads to the conclusion that the SSPP effective temperatures, surface
781: gravities, and metallicities for bright targets show random errors of 2.2\%
782: ($\sim 130$ K), 0.21 dex, and 0.11 dex, respectively. Systematic offsets of a
783: similar size are detected for the effective temperatures and metallicities. We
784: evaluate the expected random uncertainties as a function of $S/N$ by repeating
785: the analysis after introducing noise in the SDSS spectra. More extended tests
786: are underway and will be reported elsewhere.
787:
788: Our study also finds that the internal uncertainties delivered by the SSPP
789: for both radial velocities and atmospheric parameters need to be systematically
790: increased by a factor of $2-3$ in order to be consistent with our derived external
791: errors. The uncertainties in the average SSPP atmospheric parameters are simply
792: derived as the standard error of the mean for a Normal distribution from the
793: multiple techniques applied to any particular target. The fact that many methods
794: share the same spectroscopic indicators (e.g. Balmer lines or SDSS color indices
795: to gauge $T_{\rm eff}$), and models (e.g. Kurucz's model atmospheres) may cause
796: unaccounted correlations that result in underestimated uncertainties.
797:
798: The validation and calibration of the SSPP is an ongoing project. Several
799: additional open and globular clusters have recently had data obtained with SDSS
800: instrumentation, and will be considered in future papers. A sample of up to
801: several hundred very low-metallicity stars from SDSS/SEGUE is presently being
802: observed with the HET, which we will add to our calibration sample. Additional
803: stars of intermediate metallicity, and with hotter and cooler temperatures than
804: considered in the present work, will be added to our calibration
805: sample based on observations with a number of large-aperture telescopes.
806: Our goal is to produce an SSPP validation catalog for on
807: the order of 500 stars, which will be used to refine and adjust the individual
808: parameter estimation techniques employed by the SSPP, and thus establish a
809: definitive atmospheric parameter estimation scale for application to the large
810: (and growing) SDSS/SEGUE stellar samples, as well as to other future surveys.
811:
812: \acknowledgments
813:
814: Funding for the SDSS and SDSS-II has been provided by the Alfred P. Sloan
815: Foundation, the Participating Institutions, the National Science Foundation, the
816: U.S. Department of Energy, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration,
817: the Japanese Monbukagakusho, the Max Planck Society, and the Higher Education
818: Funding Council for England. The SDSS Web Site is http://www.sdss.org/.
819:
820: The SDSS is managed by the Astrophysical Research Consortium for the
821: Participating Institutions. The Participating Institutions are the American
822: Museum of Natural History, Astrophysical Institute Potsdam, University of Basel,
823: University of Cambridge, Case Western Reserve University, University of Chicago,
824: Drexel University, Fermilab, the Institute for Advanced Study, the Japan
825: Participation Group, Johns Hopkins University, the Joint Institute for Nuclear
826: Astrophysics, the Kavli Institute for Particle Astrophysics and Cosmology, the
827: Korean Scientist Group, the Chinese Academy of Sciences (LAMOST), Los Alamos
828: National Laboratory, the Max-Planck-Institute for Astronomy (MPIA), the
829: Max-Planck-Institute for Astrophysics (MPA), New Mexico State University, Ohio
830: State University, University of Pittsburgh, University of Portsmouth, Princeton
831: University, the United States Naval Observatory, and the University of
832: Washington.
833:
834: The Hobby-Eberly Telescope (HET) is a joint project of the University of Texas
835: at Austin, the Pennsylvania State University, Stanford University,
836: Ludwig-Maximilians-Universit\"at M\"unchen, and Georg-August-Universit\"at
837: G\"ottingen. The HET is named in honor of its principal benefactors, William P.
838: Hobby and Robert E. Eberly. Some of the data presented herein were obtained at
839: the W.M. Keck Observatory, which is operated as a scientific partnership among
840: the California Institute of Technology, the University of California and the
841: National Aeronautics and Space Administration. The Observatory was made possible
842: by the generous financial support of the W.M. Keck Foundation. The authors wish
843: to recognize and acknowledge the very significant cultural role and reverence
844: that the summit of Mauna Kea has always had within the indigenous Hawaiian
845: community. We are most fortunate to have the opportunity to conduct observations
846: from this mountain.
847:
848:
849: NASA grants (NAG5-13057, NAG5-13147) to C.~A.~P. and D. L. L.
850: are thankfully acknowledged.
851: T.~C.~B., Y.~S.~L., B.~M., and T.~S. acknowledge support from the US National
852: Science Foundation under grants AST 04-06784 and AST 07-07776, as well as from
853: grant PHY 02-16783; Physics Frontier Center/Joint Institute for Nuclear
854: Astrophysics (JINA). D. L. L.'s research is supported in part by the
855: Welch Foundation of Houston, Texas.
856:
857:
858: \newpage
859:
860:
861: \begin{thebibliography}{}
862:
863: %\bibitem[Abazajian et al.(2004)]{2004AJ....128..502A} Abazajian, K., et
864: %al.\ 2004, \aj, 128, 502
865:
866: \bibitem[]{885}
867: Adelman-McCarthy, J.~K., et al.\ 2007, \apjs, in press
868: ({\tt www.sdss.org/dr6/})
869:
870: \bibitem[Allende Prieto(2007)]{} Allende Prieto, C.\
871: 2007, AJ, 134, 1843
872:
873: \bibitem[Allende Prieto et al.(2004)]{2004A&A...420..183A} Allende Prieto,
874: C., Barklem, P.~S., Lambert, D.~L., \& Cunha, K.\ 2004, \aap, 420, 183
875:
876: \bibitem[Allende Prieto et al.(2006)]{2006ApJ...636..804A} Allende Prieto,
877: C., Beers, T.~C., Wilhelm, R., Newberg, H.~J., Rockosi, C.~M., Yanny, B.,
878: \& Lee, Y.~S.\ 2006, \apj, 636, 804
879:
880: \bibitem[Alonso et al.(1996)]{1996A&A...313..873A} Alonso, A., Arribas, S.,
881: \& Martinez-Roger, C.\ 1996, \aap, 313, 873
882:
883: \bibitem[Alonso et al.(1999)]{1999A&AS..140..261A} Alonso, A., Arribas, S.,
884: \& Mart{\'{\i}}nez-Roger, C.\ 1999, \aaps, 140, 261
885:
886: \bibitem[Alvarez \& Plez(1998)]{1998A&A...330.1109A} Alvarez, R., \& Plez,
887: B.\ 1998, \aap, 330, 1109
888:
889: \bibitem[Aoki et al.(2005)]{aoki05} Aoki, W., et al.\ 2005, \apj, 632, 611
890:
891: \bibitem[Asplund et al.(2005)]{2005ASPC..336...25A} Asplund, M., Grevesse,
892: N., \& Sauval, A.~J.\ 2005, Cosmic Abundances as Records of Stellar
893: Evolution and Nucleosynthesis, 336, 25
894:
895: \bibitem[Barklem \& Aspelund-Johansson(2005)]{2005A&A...435..373B} Barklem,
896: P.~S., \& Aspelund-Johansson, J.\ 2005, \aap, 435, 373
897:
898: \bibitem[Barklem et al.(2000)]{2000A&A...363.1091B} Barklem, P.~S.,
899: Piskunov, N., \& O'Mara, B.~J.\ 2000, \aap, 363, 1091
900:
901: \bibitem[Barnes et al.(1986)]{1986PASP...98..223B} Barnes, T.~G., III,
902: Moffett, T.~J., \& Slovak, M.~H.\ 1986, \pasp, 98, 223
903:
904: \bibitem[Beers et al.(1999)]{1999AJ....117..981B} Beers, T.~C., Rossi, S.,
905: Norris, J.~E., Ryan, S.~G., \& Shefler, T.\ 1999, \aj, 117, 981
906:
907: \bibitem[Carney et al.(2001)]{2001AJ....122.3419C} Carney, B.~W., Latham,
908: D.~W., Laird, J.~B., Grant, C.~E., \& Morse, J.~A.\ 2001, \aj, 122, 3419
909:
910: \bibitem[Castelli et al.(1997)]{1997A&A...318..841C} Castelli, F., Gratton,
911: R.~G., \& Kurucz, R.~L.\ 1997, \aap, 318, 841
912:
913: \bibitem[Castelli \& Kurucz(2003)]{2003IAUS..210P.A20C} Castelli, F., \&
914: Kurucz, R.~L.\ 2003, Modelling of Stellar Atmospheres, 210, 20P
915:
916: \bibitem[Chen et al.(2002)]{2002A&A...390..225C} Chen, Y.~Q., Nissen,
917: P.~E., Zhao, G., \& Asplund, M.\ 2002, \aap, 390, 225
918:
919: \bibitem[Fuhrmann(2004)]{2004AN....325....3F} Fuhrmann, K.\ 2004,
920: Astronomische Nachrichten, 325, 3
921:
922: \bibitem[Fukugita et al.(1996)]{1996AJ....111.1748F} Fukugita, M.,
923: Ichikawa, T., Gunn, J.~E., Doi, M., Shimasaku, K., \& Schneider, D.~P.\
924: 1996, \aj, 111, 1748
925:
926: %\bibitem[Gregg et al.(2006)]{2006hstc.conf..209G} Gregg, M.~D., et al.\
927: %2006, The 2005 HST Calibration Workshop: Hubble After the Transition to
928: %Two-Gyro Mode, 209
929:
930: \bibitem[Grevesse \& Sauval(1998)]{1998SSRv...85..161G} Grevesse, N., \&
931: Sauval, A.~J.\ 1998, Space Science Reviews, 85, 161
932:
933:
934: \bibitem[Gunn et al.(1998)]{1998AJ....116.3040G} Gunn, J.~E., et al.\ 1998,
935: \aj, 116, 3040
936:
937: \bibitem[Gunn et al.(2006)]{2006AJ....131.2332G} Gunn, J.~E., et al.\ 2006,
938: \aj, 131, 2332
939:
940: \bibitem[Heiter \& Luck(2003)]{2003AJ....126.2015H} Heiter, U., \& Luck,
941: R.~E.\ 2003, \aj, 126, 2015
942:
943: \bibitem[Hogg et al.(2001)]{2001AJ....122.2129H} Hogg, D.~W., Finkbeiner,
944: D.~P., Schlegel, D.~J., \& Gunn, J.~E.\ 2001, \aj, 122, 2129
945:
946: \bibitem[Ivezi{\'c} et al.(2004)]{2004AN....325..583I} Ivezi{\'c}, {\v Z}.,
947: et al.\ 2004, Astronomische Nachrichten, 325, 583
948:
949: \bibitem[Korn et al.(2003)]{2003A&A...407..691K} Korn, A.~J., Shi, J., \&
950: Gehren, T.\ 2003, \aap, 407, 691
951:
952: \bibitem[Kupka et al.(1999)]{1999A&AS..138..119K} Kupka, F., Piskunov, N.,
953: Ryabchikova, T.~A., Stempels, H.~C., \& Weiss, W.~W.\ 1999, \aaps, 138, 119
954:
955: \bibitem[]{} Lai, D.~K., Bolte, M.~A., Johnson, J.~A., \& Lucatello, S. 2004,
956: \aj, 128, 2402
957:
958: \bibitem[Lambert \& Reddy(2004)]{2004MNRAS.349..757L} Lambert, D.~L., \&
959: Reddy, B.~E.\ 2004, \mnras, 349, 757
960:
961: \bibitem[]{} Lee, Y. S., et al., 2007a, \aj, submitted (Paper I)
962:
963: \bibitem[]{} Lee, Y. S., et al., 2007b, \aj, submitted (Paper II)
964:
965: \bibitem[Luck \& Heiter(2006)]{2006AJ....131.3069L} Luck, R.~E., \& Heiter,
966: U.\ 2006, \aj, 131, 3069
967:
968: \bibitem[Lupton et al.(2001)]{2001ASPC..238..269L} Lupton, R., Gunn, J.~E.,
969: Ivezi{\'c}, {\v Z}., Knapp, G.~R., \& Kent, S.\ 2001, Astronomical Data Analysis
970: Software and Systems X, 238, 269
971:
972: \bibitem[Mishenina et al.(2004)]{2004A&A...418..551M} Mishenina, T.~V.,
973: Soubiran, C., Kovtyukh, V.~V., \& Korotin, S.~A.\ 2004, \aap, 418, 551
974:
975: \bibitem[Nave et al.(1994)]{1994ApJS...94..221N} Nave, G., Johansson, S.,
976: Learner, R.~C.~M., Thorne, A.~P., \& Brault, J.~W.\ 1994, \apjs, 94, 221
977:
978: \bibitem[]{} Nelder, J., \& Mead, R., 1965, Computer Journal, 7, 308
979:
980: \bibitem[Nidever et al.(2002)]{2002ApJS..141..503N} Nidever, D.~L., Marcy,
981: G.~W., Butler, R.~P., Fischer, D.~A., \& Vogt, S.~S.\ 2002, \apjs, 141, 503
982:
983: \bibitem[Nissen et al.(2007)]{2007A&A...469..319N} Nissen, P.~E., Akerman,
984: C., Asplund, M., Fabbian, D., Kerber, F., Kaufl, H.~U., \& Pettini, M.\
985: 2007, \aap, 469, 319
986:
987: \bibitem[Noguchi et al.(2002)]{2002PASJ...54..855N} Noguchi, K., et al.\
988: 2002, \pasj, 54, 855
989:
990: \bibitem[Nordstr{\"o}m et al.(2004)]{2004A&A...418..989N} Nordstr{\"o}m,
991: B., et al.\ 2004, \aap, 418, 989
992:
993: \bibitem[Partridge \& Schwenke(1997)]{1997JChPh.106.4618P} Partridge, H.,
994: \& Schwenke, D.~W.\ 1997, \jcp, 106, 4618
995:
996: \bibitem[Pier et al.(2003)]{2003AJ....125.1559P} Pier, J.~R., Munn, J.~A.,
997: Hindsley, R.~B., Hennessy, G.~S., Kent, S.~M., Lupton, R.~H., \&
998: Ivezi{\'c}, {\v Z}.\ 2003, \aj, 125, 1559
999:
1000: \bibitem[Plez(1998)]{1998A&A...337..495P} Plez, B.\ 1998, \aap, 337, 495
1001:
1002: \bibitem[Plez \& Cohen(2005)]{2005A&A...434.1117P} Plez, B., \& Cohen,
1003: J.~G.\ 2005, \aap, 434, 1117
1004:
1005: \bibitem[]{} Press, W. H., Flannery, B. P., Teukolsky, S. A., \&
1006: Vetterling, W. T. 1986, Numerical Recipes, Cambridge:
1007: Cambridge University Press
1008:
1009: \bibitem[Prugniel \& Soubiran(2001)]{2001A&A...369.1048P} Prugniel, P., \&
1010: Soubiran, C.\ 2001, \aap, 369, 1048
1011:
1012: \bibitem[Ram{\'{\i}}rez et al.(2007)]{2007A&A...465..271R} Ram{\'{\i}}rez,
1013: I., Allende Prieto, C., \& Lambert, D.~L.\ 2007, \aap, 465, 271
1014:
1015: \bibitem[]{} Ramsey, L.W., et al. 1998, Proc. SPIE, 3352, 34
1016:
1017: \bibitem[Reddy et al.(2006)]{2006MNRAS.367.1329R} Reddy, B.~E., Lambert,
1018: D.~L., \& Allende Prieto, C.\ 2006, \mnras, 367, 1329
1019:
1020: \bibitem[Ryde \& Lambert(2004)]{2004A&A...415..559R} Ryde, N., \& Lambert,
1021: D.~L.\ 2004, \aap, 415, 559
1022:
1023: %\bibitem[S{\'a}nchez-Bl{\'a}zquez et al.(2006)]{2006MNRAS.371..703S}
1024: %S{\'a}nchez-Bl{\'a}zquez, P., et al.\ 2006, \mnras, 371, 703
1025:
1026: \bibitem[Schwenke(1998)]{1998cpmg.conf..321S} Schwenke, D.~W.\ 1998,
1027: Chemistry and Physics of Molecules and Grains in Space.~ Faraday
1028: Discussions No.~109, 321
1029:
1030: \bibitem[Sheinis et al.(2002)]{2002PASP..114..851S} Sheinis, A.~I., Bolte,
1031: M., Epps, H.~W., Kibrick, R.~I., Miller, J.~S., Radovan, M.~V., Bigelow,
1032: B.~C., \& Sutin, B.~M.\ 2002, \pasp, 114, 851
1033:
1034: \bibitem[Shetrone et al.(2007)]{2007PASP..119..556S} Shetrone, M., et al.\
1035: 2007, \pasp, 119, 556
1036:
1037: \bibitem[Smith et al.(2002)]{2002AJ....123.2121S} Smith, J.~A., et al.\
1038: 2002, \aj, 123, 2121
1039:
1040: \bibitem[Stoughton et al.(2002)]{2002AJ....123..485S} Stoughton, C., et
1041: al.\ 2002, \aj, 123, 485
1042:
1043: \bibitem[Stumpff(1980)]{1980A&AS...41....1S} Stumpff, P.\ 1980, \aaps, 41, 1
1044:
1045: \bibitem[Tucker et al.(2006)]{2006AN....327..821T} Tucker, D.~L., et al.\
1046: 2006, Astronomische Nachrichten, 327, 821
1047:
1048: \bibitem[]{} Tull, R.G., 1998, Proc. SPIE, 3355, 387
1049:
1050: \bibitem[Valdes et al.(2004)]{2004ApJS..152..251V} Valdes, F., Gupta, R.,
1051: Rose, J.~A., Singh, H.~P., \& Bell, D.~J.\ 2004, \apjs, 152, 251
1052:
1053: \bibitem[Valenti \& Fischer(2005)]{2005ApJS..159..141V} Valenti, J.~A., \&
1054: Fischer, D.~A.\ 2005, \apjs, 159, 141
1055:
1056: \bibitem[]{} Vogt, S.S. et al., 1994, Proc. SPIE, 2198, 362
1057:
1058: \bibitem[Wallace et al.(1998)]{1998assp.book.....W} Wallace, L., Hinkle,
1059: K., \& Livingston, W.\ 1998, An atlas of the spectrum of the solar
1060: photosphere from 13,500 to 28,000 cm-1 (3570 to 7405 A), Publisher: Tucson,
1061: AZ: National Optical Astronomy Observatories
1062:
1063: \bibitem[Yong et al.(2004)]{2004ApJ...603..697Y} Yong, D., Lambert, D.~L.,
1064: Allende Prieto, C., \& Paulson, D.~B.\ 2004, \apj, 603, 697
1065:
1066: \bibitem[]{} York, D.G., et al. 2000, \aj, 120, 1579
1067:
1068:
1069: \end{thebibliography}
1070:
1071: %figures
1072:
1073: \clearpage
1074:
1075: \begin{figure}[t!]
1076: \centering
1077: \includegraphics[width=12.cm,angle=0]{./f1.ps}
1078: \protect\caption[ ]{
1079: Distribution of the sample of SDSS/SEGUE stars with available high-resolution
1080: spectra over the parameter space considered herein.
1081: }
1082: \label{sample}
1083: \end{figure}
1084:
1085: %\begin{figure*}[ht!]
1086: %\centering
1087: %\includegraphics[width=11.cm,angle=90]{./reduction.ps}
1088: %\protect\caption[ ]{
1089: %Comparison of the two versions of the reduced and normalized spectrum
1090: %of sp9-0952-260. The spectrum reduced by the Texas pipeline is shown in
1091: %black, while that extracted interactively at MSU is in red.
1092: %}
1093: %\label{reduction}
1094: %\end{figure*}
1095:
1096:
1097: \begin{figure*}[ht!]
1098: \centering
1099: \includegraphics[width=11.cm,angle=90]{./f2.ps}
1100: \protect\caption[ ]{
1101: Fittings to individual HET observations for
1102: three of the program stars, and the metal-poor standard star HD~84937. The
1103: dots correspond to the observations; the solid lines identify the
1104: best-fitting models, obtained from cubic Bezier interpolation in the original
1105: grid.}
1106: \label{fits}
1107: \end{figure*}
1108:
1109:
1110: \begin{figure*}[ht!]
1111: \centering
1112: \includegraphics[width=8.cm,angle=0]{./f3a.ps}
1113: \includegraphics[width=8.cm,angle=0]{./f3b.ps}
1114: \protect\caption[ ]{
1115: Comparison between our derived parameters for the spectra in the
1116: S$^4$N and the Elodie.3 libraries with those in the catalogs associated
1117: with the libraries (see \S \ref{carlospar}).
1118: The dashed lines indicate a slope of unity; the
1119: solid lines are linear fits to the data. The insets show the
1120: differences between the fit and catalog parameters, as well as Gaussian
1121: models employed to make robust estimates of the median and standard
1122: deviation, as shown in Table \ref{libraries}.
1123: }
1124: \label{figcor}
1125: \end{figure*}
1126:
1127: \begin{figure*}[ht!]
1128: \centering
1129: \includegraphics[width=14.cm,angle=0]{./f4.ps}
1130: \protect\caption[ ]{
1131: Histogram of the differences between the radial velocities determined
1132: by the SSPP from SDSS spectra, and those measured on the HET-HRS spectra.
1133: The solid line illustrates a Gaussian model fit by least-squares to the data.
1134: The three outliers are SDSS J233852.54+140945.7, SDSS J013627.14+231453.6,
1135: and SDSS J012106.89+263648.0.
1136: }
1137: \label{velo}
1138: \end{figure*}
1139:
1140: \begin{figure*}[ht!]
1141: \centering
1142: \includegraphics[width=8.cm,angle=0]{./f5a.ps}
1143: \includegraphics[width=8.cm,angle=0]{./f5b.ps}
1144: \protect\caption[ ]{
1145: Comparison between our derived parameters for the high-resoltuion
1146: spectra and the results of the SSPP based on SDSS data. The dashed lines indicate a slope of unity; the
1147: solid lines are linear fits to the data. The insets show the
1148: differences between the fit and catalog parameters, as well as Gaussian
1149: models employed to make robust estimates of the median and standard
1150: deviation, as shown in Table \ref{libraries}.
1151: }
1152: \label{pipes}
1153: \end{figure*}
1154:
1155: \begin{figure}[ht!]
1156: \centering
1157: \includegraphics[width=12.cm,angle=0]{./f6.ps}
1158: \protect\caption[ ]{
1159: Distribution of estimated (internal) uncertainties in the SSPP parameters (solid
1160: lines) and
1161: those from high-resolution spectroscopy (dashed) for the HET sample.
1162: The vertical lines mark the more realistic external errors
1163: for the SSPP parameters, as empirically derived from the comparison with our
1164: analysis of HET spectra. }
1165: \label{error}
1166: \end{figure}
1167:
1168:
1169: %tables
1170:
1171: \clearpage
1172: \begin{landscape}
1173:
1174: \begin{deluxetable}{lrrclll}
1175: \tablecolumns{7}
1176: \tablewidth{0pc}
1177: \tablecaption{Observations}
1178: \tablehead{
1179: \colhead{Telescope} & \colhead{Instrument} & \colhead{Resolving Power} &
1180: \colhead{Slit Width [arcsec]} &
1181: \colhead{Wavelength Coverage [nm]} & \colhead{S/N [per pixel]} & \colhead{No. of objects} }
1182: \startdata
1183: HET & HRS & 15000 & 2.00 & 450-770 & 20-50 & 81 \\
1184: Keck I & HIRES & 40000 & 0.86 & 414-850 & 80 & 11 \\
1185: Keck II & ESI & 7000 & 0.75 & 380-1000 & 30-60 & 25 \\
1186: Subaru & HDS & 50000 & 0.72 & 300-580 & 80 & 9
1187: \enddata
1188: \label{table1}
1189: \end{deluxetable}
1190:
1191: \end{landscape}
1192:
1193: \begin{deluxetable}{rrrr}
1194: \tablecolumns{4}
1195: \tablewidth{0pc}
1196: \tablecaption{Average and $1\sigma$ Scatter Between
1197: Derived Parameters (FIT) and the Library Catalogs (LIB)}
1198: \tablehead{
1199: \colhead{Parameter/Library} & \colhead{$<{\rm FIT} - {\rm LIB}>$} &
1200: \colhead{$\sigma({\rm FIT} - {\rm LIB})$} & \colhead{N} }
1201: \startdata
1202: $T_{\rm eff}$-S$^4$N (K) & $-0.10$\% & 1.67\% & 55 \\
1203:
1204: log $g$-S$^4$N (dex) & 0.008 & 0.129 & \\
1205:
1206: [Fe/H]-S$^4$N (dex) & $-0.001$ & 0.049 & \\
1207:
1208: \tableline
1209:
1210: $T_{\rm eff}$-Elodie (K) & $-2.23$\% & 2.66\% & 282 \\
1211:
1212: log $g$-Elodie (dex) & 0.017 & 0.271 & \\
1213:
1214: [Fe/H]-Elodie (dex) & $-0.020$ & 0.100 & \\
1215:
1216: \enddata
1217: \label{libraries}
1218: \end{deluxetable}
1219:
1220: \begin{landscape}
1221:
1222: %\tabletypesize{\scriptsize} \tablewidth{0in} \rotate
1223: %\renewcommand{\tabcolsep}{2pt}
1224:
1225: \begin{deluxetable}{rrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr}
1226: \tabletypesize{\scriptsize}
1227: \tablecolumns{17}
1228: \tablewidth{0pc}
1229: \tablecaption{Comparison of SSPP Velocities and Atmospheric Parameters (HET
1230: Sample)}
1231: \tablehead{
1232: \colhead{} & \colhead{} & \multicolumn{7}{c}{SSPP} & \colhead{} &
1233: \multicolumn{7}{c}{HET} \\
1234: \cline{3-9} \cline{11-17} \\
1235: \colhead{Star} & \colhead{MJD-PLATE-FIBER} & \colhead{$V_R$}
1236: & \colhead{$T_{\rm eff}$} & \colhead{$\sigma$}
1237: & \colhead{$\log g$} & \colhead{$\sigma$}
1238: & \colhead{[Fe/H]} & \colhead{$\sigma$}
1239: & \colhead{} & \colhead{$V_R$}
1240: & \colhead{$T_{\rm eff}$} & \colhead{$\sigma$}
1241: & \colhead{$\log g$} & \colhead{$\sigma$}
1242: & \colhead{[Fe/H]} & \colhead{$\sigma$} }
1243: \startdata
1244: SDSS J171652.50+603926.9 & 51703-0353-605 & $-$53.60 & 6303 & 158 & 4.06 & 0.03 & $-$0.03 & 0.05 & & $-$50.54 & 5672 & 82 & 3.37 & 0.13 & $-$0.35 & 0.05\\
1245: SDSS J225801.77+000643.1 & 51792-0380-236 & 3.80 & 6965 & 88 & 3.97 & 0.31 & $-$0.58 & 0.01 & & 3.97 & 6838 & 99 & 4.26 & 0.13 & $-$0.31 & 0.05\\
1246: SDSS J010746.51+011402.6 & 51816-0396-605 & $-$40.60 & 5682 & 475 & 4.74 & 0.12 & 0.01 & 0.11 & & $-$43.37 & 5461 & 180 & 4.79 & 0.13 & $-$0.12 & 0.07\\
1247: SDSS J014149.73+010720.2 & 51788-0401-407 & 15.70 & 4715 & 85 & 3.37 & 0.70 & $-$0.64 & 0.01 & & 15.81 & 4876 & 73 & 3.15 & 0.16 & $-$0.45 & 0.06\\
1248: SDSS J014215.40+011400.6 & 51788-0401-410 & 43.50 & 5789 & 79 & 4.38 & 0.12 & $-$0.31 & 0.10 & & 43.68 & 5417 & 82 & 3.98 & 0.13 & $-$0.54 & 0.06\\
1249: SDSS J024740.30+011144.9 & 51871-0409-449 & $-$8.90 & 5802 & 60 & 4.56 & 0.11 & $-$0.12 & 0.09 & & $-$10.17 & 5868 & 87 & 4.61 & 0.13 & $-$0.02 & 0.05\\
1250: SDSS J025046.89+010910.8 & 51871-0409-562 & $-$70.20 & 5994 & 61 & 4.36 & 0.12 & $-$0.73 & 0.13 & & $-$76.74 & 5527 & 187 & 3.84 & 0.28 & $-$0.87 & 0.16\\
1251: SDSS J005826.06+150153.6 & 51821-0421-439 & $-$28.10 & 5163 & 28 & 3.62 & 0.73 & $-$0.32 & 0.07 & & $-$28.51 & 5003 & 162 & 3.32 & 0.45 & $-$0.24 & 0.09\\
1252: SDSS J074705.19+414452.1 & 51885-0434-133 & 73.90 & 5209 & 206 & 3.67 & 0.42 & $-$0.42 & 0.11 & & 77.84 & 5048 & 74 & 3.34 & 0.13 & $-$0.33 & 0.05\\
1253: SDSS J082253.87+471742.0 & 51868-0441-497 & $-$8.00 & 6504 & 111 & 3.36 & 0.63 & $-$0.64 & 0.09 & & $-$5.67 & 6042 & 87 & 3.99 & 0.13 & $-$0.65 & 0.05\\
1254: SDSS J103146.22+012710.5 & 52316-0504-016 & 12.30 & 5881 & 130 & 3.99 & 0.01 & $-$0.67 & 0.17 & & 14.64 & 5437 & 45 & 3.76 & 0.07 & $-$0.96 & 0.04\\
1255: SDSS J115520.82+654309.8 & 52316-0598-443 & $-$10.40 & 6116 & 74 & 4.13 & 0.11 & $-$0.92 & 0.20 & & $-$7.01 & 5632 & 85 & 3.80 & 0.13 & $-$0.89 & 0.05\\
1256: SDSS J134901.58+640924.7 & 52079-0604-572 & $-$3.00 & 6091 & 5 & 4.33 & 0.30 & $-$0.00 & 0.01 & & 3.91 & 5819 & 92 & 4.16 & 0.15 & $-$0.09 & 0.06\\
1257: SDSS J151241.70+593151.5 & 52345-0613-280 & $-$58.00 & 5649 & 117 & 4.36 & 0.23 & $-$0.60 & 0.08 & & $-$61.13 & 5683 & 89 & 4.53 & 0.13 & $-$0.91 & 0.05\\
1258: SDSS J213818.93+123547.8 & 52221-0732-345 & $-$45.70 & 5174 & 44 & 3.70 & 0.11 & $-$0.78 & 0.01 & & $-$44.19 & 5192 & 77 & 3.73 & 0.13 & $-$0.70 & 0.05\\
1259: SDSS J224610.22+145156.7 & 52263-0740-364 & 23.20 & 6386 & 674 & 4.09 & 0.60 & $-$0.13 & 0.08 & & 19.17 & 5455 & 325 & 4.11 & 0.57 & $-$0.48 & 0.23\\
1260: SDSS J231427.17+134821.9 & 52251-0744-179 & $-$82.30 & 4982 & 71 & 3.15 & 0.73 & $-$0.37 & 0.08 & & $-$82.23 & 5091 & 74 & 3.68 & 0.14 & $-$0.28 & 0.05\\
1261: SDSS J233720.38+140953.8 & 52234-0747-136 & $-$12.70 & 6424 & 39 & 4.17 & 0.16 & $-$0.32 & 0.07 & & $-$12.15 & 6444 & 120 & 4.47 & 0.18 & $-$0.14 & 0.05\\
1262: SDSS J233611.87+140923.9 & 52234-0747-212 & $-$5.40 & 6054 & 2 & 3.97 & 0.12 & $-$0.69 & 0.06 & & $-$5.64 & 5941 & 86 & 4.06 & 0.13 & $-$0.43 & 0.05\\
1263: SDSS J124826.99+614358.8 & 52373-0781-015 & $-$26.70 & 6204 & 38 & 4.24 & 0.11 & $-$0.44 & 0.10 & & $-$20.32 & 5952 & 86 & 3.97 & 0.13 & $-$0.32 & 0.05\\
1264: SDSS J155509.18+495003.3 & 52352-0812-578 & $-$50.60 & 5766 & 34 & 4.35 & 0.14 & $-$0.50 & 0.07 & & $-$48.44 & 5638 & 82 & 4.33 & 0.13 & $-$0.37 & 0.05\\
1265: SDSS J111901.08+054319.4 & 52326-0835-601 & $-$2.60 & 5729 & 67 & 4.50 & 0.22 & $-$0.37 & 0.08 & & $-$4.64 & 5644 & 81 & 4.47 & 0.13 & $-$0.22 & 0.05\\
1266: SDSS J074151.21+275319.8 & 52339-0888-599 & 6.40 & 7171 & 52 & 3.84 & 0.12 & $-$0.42 & 0.05 & & 12.77 & 6475 & 93 & 4.48 & 0.13 & $-$0.20 & 0.05\\
1267: SDSS J074300.91+285106.6 & 52663-0889-204 & 51.00 & 6515 & 129 & 4.29 & 0.11 & $-$0.78 & 0.17 & & 53.38 & 6348 & 92 & 4.25 & 0.13 & $-$0.50 & 0.05\\
1268: SDSS J112848.08+580740.4 & 52409-0952-260 & $-$12.40 & 5811 & 63 & 4.44 & 0.20 & $-$0.47 & 0.08 & & $-$13.56 & 5428 & 283 & 4.02 & 0.47 & $-$0.48 & 0.21\\
1269: SDSS J161511.43+352900.2 & 52764-1056-124 & 31.50 & 6457 & 38 & 4.10 & 0.13 & $-$0.24 & 0.07 & & 32.17 & 6220 & 90 & 4.00 & 0.13 & $-$0.13 & 0.05\\
1270: SDSS J235427.13+351233.4 & 53262-1880-087 & $-$56.30 & 6271 & 45 & 3.71 & 0.25 & $-$1.66 & 0.04 & & $-$57.76 & 5888 & 99 & 3.67 & 0.14 & $-$1.55 & 0.05\\
1271: SDSS J234952.45+365447.3 & 53262-1880-428 & $-$80.90 & 6269 & 51 & 3.84 & 0.09 & $-$1.73 & 0.05 & & $-$85.73 & 6018 & 87 & 4.21 & 0.13 & $-$1.67 & 0.05\\
1272: SDSS J233946.60+433049.4 & 53228-1884-428 & 1.10 & 6690 & 62 & 4.25 & 0.09 & $-$0.30 & 0.07 & & 0.64 & 6477 & 98 & 4.15 & 0.13 & $-$0.25 & 0.05\\
1273: SDSS J211622.82+114002.5 & 53237-1890-527 & 4.80 & 6031 & 61 & 4.33 & 0.14 & $-$0.27 & 0.09 & & 3.79 & 5888 & 101 & 4.30 & 0.14 & $-$0.23 & 0.05\\
1274: SDSS J233852.54+140945.7 & 53240-1894-296 & $-$269.90 & 5253 & 50 & 2.62 & 0.17 & $-$1.48 & 0.10 & & $-$243.22 & 5016 & 72 & 2.49 & 0.13 & $-$1.52 & 0.05\\
1275: SDSS J004436.24+160203.6 & 53242-1896-445 & $-$138.80 & 5621 & 32 & 3.94 & 0.18 & $-$0.65 & 0.06 & & $-$139.80 & 5413 & 78 & 3.83 & 0.13 & $-$0.85 & 0.05\\
1276: SDSS J004416.51+244246.6 & 53327-2038-154 & $-$303.10 & 5594 & 56 & 2.52 & 0.33 & $-$2.46 & 0.04 & & $-$304.35 & 5594 & 197 & 3.11 & 0.14 & $-$2.18 & 0.18\\
1277: SDSS J003916.49+242339.5 & 53327-2038-226 & $-$5.00 & 6512 & 38 & 4.21 & 0.08 & $-$0.47 & 0.05 & & $-$0.74 & 6371 & 95 & 4.09 & 0.13 & $-$0.36 & 0.05\\
1278: SDSS J003749.37+252708.4 & 53327-2038-382 & $-$15.20 & 6411 & 27 & 4.08 & 0.08 & $-$0.64 & 0.04 & & $-$15.61 & 6141 & 89 & 3.92 & 0.13 & $-$0.62 & 0.05\\
1279: SDSS J004537.38+253506.3 & 53327-2038-564 & 14.60 & 6159 & 3 & 3.62 & 0.21 & $-$0.69 & 0.08 & & 15.06 & 5751 & 175 & 3.65 & 0.34 & $-$0.72 & 0.14\\
1280: SDSS J011751.77+243604.4 & 53384-2040-083 & $-$85.80 & 5857 & 67 & 4.39 & 0.22 & $-$1.62 & 0.10 & & $-$84.87 & 4906 & 737 & 3.29 & 1.07 & $-$1.93 & 0.38\\
1281: SDSS J012049.43+254940.8 & 53384-2040-595 & $-$127.40 & 5482 & 50 & 2.89 & 0.15 & $-$0.53 & 0.07 & & $-$126.97 & 5474 & 79 & 2.92 & 0.13 & $-$0.63 & 0.05\\
1282: SDSS J012106.89+263648.0 & 53384-2040-617 & $-$56.30 & 5730 & 41 & 4.22 & 0.07 & $-$0.29 & 0.30 & & $-$41.61 & 5858 & 87 & 4.29 & 0.13 & 0.15 & 0.05\\
1283: SDSS J012116.42+261354.0 & 53384-2040-637 & $-$12.10 & 6495 & 35 & 4.04 & 0.04 & $-$0.67 & 0.04 & & $-$13.12 & 6149 & 129 & 3.88 & 0.18 & $-$0.62 & 0.08\\
1284: SDSS J012441.76+305553.3 & 53387-2041-008 & 43.00 & 5544 & 22 & 3.66 & 0.07 & $-$0.81 & 0.08 & & 39.99 & 5508 & 79 & 3.64 & 0.13 & $-$0.60 & 0.05\\
1285: SDSS J012945.31+375221.6 & 53378-2042-009 & 26.50 & 6500 & 52 & 4.06 & 0.12 & $-$0.74 & 0.12 & & 27.53 & 6305 & 91 & 4.07 & 0.13 & $-$0.47 & 0.05\\
1286: SDSS J012314.37+384749.1 & 53378-2042-461 & $-$264.90 & 6445 & 93 & 3.80 & 0.26 & $-$1.86 & 0.11 & & $-$267.98 & 6391 & 92 & 3.83 & 0.13 & $-$1.70 & 0.05\\
1287: SDSS J013930.32+222533.4 & 53327-2044-122 & 77.70 & 5546 & 49 & 4.51 & 0.11 & $-$0.96 & 0.15 & & 74.52 & 5330 & 79 & 4.15 & 0.14 & $-$0.92 & 0.05\\
1288: SDSS J013924.06+231006.8 & 53327-2044-167 & $-$17.80 & 5686 & 29 & 4.19 & 0.12 & $-$0.34 & 0.10 & & $-$15.74 & 5649 & 99 & 4.29 & 0.15 & $-$0.20 & 0.06\\
1289: SDSS J013627.14+231453.6 & 53327-2044-228 & $-$145.40 & 4901 & 92 & 1.60 & 0.14 & $-$1.86 & 0.26 & & $-$122.72 & 4590 & 66 & 1.49 & 0.13 & $-$2.12 & 0.05\\
1290: SDSS J021317.01+220622.7 & 53327-2046-061 & 5.00 & 6516 & 37 & 4.28 & 0.08 & $-$0.56 & 0.06 & & 5.14 & 6337 & 70 & 4.11 & 0.08 & $-$0.41 & 0.04\\
1291: SDSS J033530.56$-$010038.3 & 53350-2049-020 & 1.70 & 5756 & 10 & 4.23 & 0.13 & $-$0.81 & 0.09 & & $-$2.05 & 5633 & 150 & 4.33 & 0.28 & $-$0.56 & 0.07\\
1292: SDSS J032930.11$-$010721.1 & 53350-2049-241 & 50.60 & 5589 & 52 & 4.11 & 0.11 & $-$0.45 & 0.16 & & 49.16 & 5455 & 37 & 3.85 & 0.06 & $-$0.24 & 0.03\\
1293: SDSS J053442.39+003826.7 & 53401-2052-533 & 33.80 & 6116 & 112 & 4.35 & 0.19 & $-$0.43 & 0.12 & & 36.93 & 6035 & 27 & 4.58 & 0.15 & $-$0.44 & 0.04\\
1294: SDSS J073240.79+351717.7 & 53446-2053-023 & 20.90 & 6676 & 47 & 3.91 & 0.13 & $-$0.50 & 0.05 & & 20.14 & 6359 & 338 & 3.75 & 0.56 & $-$0.52 & 0.19\\
1295: SDSS J073034.52+352545.9 & 53446-2053-130 & 18.00 & 6279 & 65 & 4.28 & 0.11 & $-$0.80 & 0.09 & & 16.21 & 5893 & 138 & 3.88 & 0.14 & $-$0.77 & 0.11\\
1296: SDSS J072801.58+354503.3 & 53446-2053-171 & 9.10 & 6347 & 45 & 3.88 & 0.08 & $-$0.89 & 0.07 & & 9.28 & 6077 & 88 & 3.63 & 0.13 & $-$0.73 & 0.05\\
1297: SDSS J072753.81+345437.5 & 53446-2053-226 & $-$26.40 & 6790 & 84 & 3.92 & 0.26 & $-$0.57 & 0.08 & & $-$25.61 & 6589 & 99 & 4.09 & 0.13 & $-$0.44 & 0.07\\
1298: SDSS J072653.66+370019.9 & 53446-2053-346 & 30.70 & 6814 & 72 & 4.06 & 0.09 & $-$0.49 & 0.04 & & 33.23 & 6641 & 132 & 4.13 & 0.13 & $-$0.41 & 0.07\\
1299: SDSS J072940.24+370322.8 & 53446-2053-505 & $-$8.30 & 6686 & 66 & 3.86 & 0.28 & $-$0.47 & 0.07 & & $-$8.11 & 6508 & 94 & 4.26 & 0.14 & $-$0.32 & 0.05\\
1300: SDSS J074512.81+170144.2 & 53431-2054-056 & 71.40 & 6957 & 50 & 3.90 & 0.09 & $-$0.27 & 0.07 & & 67.66 & 6911 & 100 & 4.24 & 0.13 & $-$0.15 & 0.05\\
1301: SDSS J074139.58+172517.2 & 53431-2054-259 & 29.40 & 6888 & 39 & 3.75 & 0.06 & $-$0.42 & 0.06 & & 32.07 & 6813 & 122 & 3.80 & 0.34 & $-$0.24 & 0.07\\
1302: SDSS J074638.40+183420.8 & 53431-2054-552 & 25.50 & 6414 & 34 & 3.94 & 0.07 & $-$0.91 & 0.06 & & 23.75 & 6182 & 89 & 3.73 & 0.13 & $-$0.86 & 0.05\\
1303: SDSS J074112.78+205959.2 & 53378-2078-014 & 38.50 & 5724 & 61 & 3.54 & 0.15 & $-$0.87 & 0.07 & & 33.57 & 5770 & 85 & 3.78 & 0.13 & $-$0.61 & 0.05\\
1304: SDSS J074125.25+212940.8 & 53378-2078-040 & 30.20 & 6694 & 48 & 3.91 & 0.13 & $-$0.33 & 0.07 & & 27.83 & 6424 & 93 & 3.69 & 0.13 & $-$0.26 & 0.05\\
1305: SDSS J074017.97+205439.5 & 53378-2078-044 & 11.00 & 6698 & 35 & 3.96 & 0.10 & $-$0.29 & 0.07 & & 7.55 & 6502 & 94 & 3.83 & 0.13 & $-$0.19 & 0.05\\
1306: SDSS J073938.60+202314.9 & 53378-2078-049 & 42.00 & 6436 & 92 & 4.01 & 0.16 & $-$0.65 & 0.07 & & 42.37 & 6188 & 89 & 3.94 & 0.13 & $-$0.58 & 0.05\\
1307: SDSS J073752.70+205855.3 & 53378-2078-136 & 14.20 & 6397 & 45 & 3.90 & 0.08 & $-$0.86 & 0.06 & & 12.70 & 6036 & 87 & 3.53 & 0.13 & $-$0.86 & 0.05\\
1308: SDSS J074010.36+213755.0 & 53378-2078-598 & 32.50 & 6408 & 12 & 3.97 & 0.10 & $-$0.79 & 0.05 & & 33.91 & 6113 & 190 & 3.66 & 0.25 & $-$0.79 & 0.16\\
1309: SDSS J074125.25+212940.8 & 53379-2079-040 & 31.60 & 6705 & 52 & 3.84 & 0.08 & $-$0.27 & 0.08 & & 28.54 & 6367 & 92 & 4.02 & 0.13 & $-$0.23 & 0.05\\
1310: SDSS J165640.62+393244.5 & 53524-2181-218 & 16.90 & 5537 & 38 & 4.58 & 0.09 & $-$0.36 & 0.12 & & 12.44 & 5617 & 82 & 4.59 & 0.13 & $-$0.10 & 0.05\\
1311: SDSS J174638.20+243308.0 & 53536-2183-131 & 5.40 & 5495 & 46 & 4.17 & 0.09 & $-$0.47 & 0.21 & & 7.11 & 5682 & 177 & 4.33 & 0.26 & 0.13 & 0.12\\
1312: SDSS J174431.30+252145.3 & 53536-2183-197 & $-$52.40 & 5913 & 7 & 3.69 & 0.12 & $-$0.87 & 0.10 & & $-$51.91 & 5748 & 85 & 3.72 & 0.14 & $-$0.98 & 0.05\\
1313: SDSS J180922.45+223712.4 & 53534-2184-058 & $-$366.10 & 6251 & 75 & 4.00 & 0.27 & $-$2.21 & 0.11 & & $-$371.02 & 5906 & 226 & 4.40 & 0.19 & $-$2.33 & 0.15\\
1314: SDSS J180831.36+223720.1 & 53534-2184-083 & $-$71.60 & 6065 & 74 & 3.93 & 0.20 & $-$0.32 & 0.08 & & $-$77.42 & 5736 & 259 & 3.73 & 0.37 & $-$0.36 & 0.19\\
1315: SDSS J180924.48+231156.0 & 53534-2184-107 & $-$200.10 & 5148 & 42 & 2.64 & 0.19 & $-$1.35 & 0.10 & & $-$195.85 & 4976 & 72 & 2.45 & 0.13 & $-$1.48 & 0.05\\
1316: SDSS J180534.75+244052.7 & 53534-2184-413 & $-$45.10 & 5489 & 69 & 4.76 & 0.10 & $-$0.29 & 0.10 & & $-$44.64 & 5488 & 80 & 4.56 & 0.14 & $-$0.12 & 0.05\\
1317: SDSS J180418.33+234842.1 & 53534-2184-429 & $-$166.20 & 6310 & 75 & 4.41 & 0.18 & $-$1.43 & 0.07 & & $-$170.78 & 5824 & 84 & 3.97 & 0.13 & $-$1.63 & 0.05\\
1318: SDSS J180623.33+245131.0 & 53534-2184-451 & 9.20 & 6274 & 60 & 4.34 & 0.12 & $-$0.49 & 0.07 & & 3.60 & 6084 & 103 & 4.19 & 0.13 & $-$0.41 & 0.09\\
1319: SDSS J202718.90+125957.9 & 53558-2248-060 & 54.20 & 5789 & 22 & 4.28 & 0.08 & $-$0.63 & 0.10 & & 52.61 & 5625 & 277 & 4.07 & 0.43 & $-$0.48 & 0.22\\
1320: SDSS J202244.17+131606.3 & 53558-2248-221 & $-$41.70 & 6103 & 65 & 4.30 & 0.14 & $-$1.30 & 0.12 & & $-$47.53 & 5696 & 75 & 3.94 & 0.09 & $-$1.31 & 0.05\\
1321: SDSS J202301.63+123634.9 & 53558-2248-247 & 44.20 & 6472 & 86 & 3.91 & 0.10 & $-$0.40 & 0.08 & & 42.07 & 6265 & 131 & 3.89 & 0.18 & $-$0.25 & 0.06\\
1322: SDSS J202039.15+140755.2 & 53558-2248-345 & $-$30.00 & 5499 & 106 & 4.85 & 0.08 & $-$0.51 & 0.11 & & $-$30.08 & 5406 & 78 & 4.56 & 0.13 & $-$0.21 & 0.05\\
1323: SDSS J220537.22+202904.8 & 53557-2251-305 & 41.70 & 5325 & 38 & 3.54 & 0.18 & $-$0.99 & 0.07 & & 39.62 & 5244 & 77 & 3.68 & 0.14 & $-$1.01 & 0.05\\
1324: SDSS J012811.36+385641.0 & 53712-2336-052 & $-$63.70 & 4737 & 4 & 2.40 & 0.48 & $-$0.87 & 0.17 & & $-$61.84 & 4903 & 72 & 2.65 & 0.14 & $-$0.58 & 0.05\\
1325: \enddata
1326: \label{params}
1327: \end{deluxetable}
1328:
1329:
1330: \begin{deluxetable}{rrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr}
1331: \tabletypesize{\scriptsize}
1332: \tablecolumns{17}
1333: \tablewidth{0pc}
1334: \tablecaption{Comparison of SSPP Velocities and Atmospheric Parameters (OTHERS
1335: Sample)}
1336: \tablehead{
1337: \colhead{} & \colhead{} & \multicolumn{7}{c}{SSPP} & \colhead{} &
1338: \multicolumn{7}{c}{OTHERS} \\
1339: \cline{3-9} \cline{11-17} \\
1340: \colhead{Star} & \colhead{MJD-PLATE-FIBER} & \colhead{$V_R$}
1341: & \colhead{$T_{\rm eff}$} & \colhead{$\sigma$}
1342: & \colhead{$\log g$} & \colhead{$\sigma$}
1343: & \colhead{[Fe/H]} & \colhead{$\sigma$}
1344: & \colhead{} & \colhead{$V_R$}
1345: & \colhead{$T_{\rm eff}$} & \colhead{$\sigma$}
1346: & \colhead{$\log g$} & \colhead{$\sigma$}
1347: & \colhead{[Fe/H]} & \colhead{$\sigma$} }
1348: \startdata
1349: \multicolumn{17}{c}{Keck-HIRES} \\
1350: \tableline
1351: SDSS J131137.14+000803.4 & 51986-0294-623 & $-$22.40 & 5060 & 75 & 2.95 & 0.12 & $-$0.58 & 0.02 & & $-$18.40 & 4950 & 190 & 3.00 & 0.15 & $-$1.35 & 0.04\\
1352: SDSS J132847.82+010708.6 & 51959-0297-569 & $-$48.60 & 5565 & 44 & 2.85 & 0.27 & $-$1.90 & 0.06 & & $-$45.60 & 5000 & 70 & 2.70 & 0.06 & $-$2.28 & 0.01\\
1353: SDSS J135432.19+000511.3 & 51943-0300-038 & 34.80 & 5898 & 43 & 4.39 & 0.15 & $-$0.75 & 0.10 & & 34.50 & 5750 & 100 & 4.20 & 0.08 & $-$1.31 & 0.02\\
1354: SDSS J135636.71$-$001705.0 & 51942-0301-235 & $-$27.80 & 5712 & 38 & 4.36 & 0.15 & $-$0.74 & 0.10 & & $-$21.40 & 5680 & 95 & 4.50 & 0.08 & $-$1.17 & 0.02\\
1355: SDSS J145319.68+010742.5 & 51994-0309-410 & 152.40 & 5422 & 53 & 2.58 & 0.33 & $-$2.20 & 0.07 & & 148.40 & 5000 & 80 & 2.10 & 0.06 & $-$2.60 & 0.02\\
1356: SDSS J004029.17+160416.2 & 52342-0527-500 & 50.10 & 5254 & 46 & 4.25 & 0.06 & $-$0.65 & 0.07 & & 52.40 & 5250 & 160 & 4.30 & 0.13 & $-$1.30 & 0.03\\
1357: SDSS J132832.61+020839.7 & 52435-0791-093 & $-$5.10 & 6271 & 64 & 4.19 & 0.13 & $-$0.74 & 0.13 & & $-$5.50 & 5900 & 115 & 3.50 & 0.13 & $-$1.28 & 0.02\\
1358: SDSS J003602.17$-$104336.3 & 52378-0844-489 & $-$48.70 & 5713 & 12 & 4.07 & 0.36 & $-$0.56 & 0.15 & & $-$47.20 & 6100 & 145 & 5.00 & 0.12 & $-$0.81 & 0.03\\
1359: SDSS J144705.99+555654.8 & 52764-1326-430 & $-$0.50 & 5054 & 95 & 4.78 & 0.12 & $-$0.47 & 0.13 & & $-$0.00 & 5113 & 195 & 5.06 & 0.16 & $-$0.98 & 0.04\\
1360: SDSS J121821.60+053460.0 & 52786-1328-023 & $-$27.00 & 5635 & 14 & 4.56 & 0.13 & $-$0.73 & 0.09 & & $-$26.70 & 5700 & 155 & 4.20 & 0.16 & $-$0.97 & 0.03\\
1361: SDSS J204227.48$-$002849.8 & 52786-1328-593 & $-$54.20 & 5075 & 75 & 4.88 & 0.09 & $-$0.78 & 0.04 & & $-$50.60 & 5400 & 170 & 5.00 & 0.14 & $-$0.80 & 0.03\\
1362: \tableline
1363: \multicolumn{17}{c}{Subaru} \\
1364: \tableline
1365: SDSS J204101.22$-$002322.5 & 52146-0654-011 & $-$150.20 & 6629 & 93 & 3.70 & 0.36 & $-$2.18 & 0.29 & & $-$146.63 & 6400 & 200 & 4.30 & 0.16 & $-$2.30 & 0.02\\
1366: SDSS J204728.84+001553.8 & 51817-0418-567 & $-$44.60 & 6779 & 81 & 3.85 & 0.16 & $-$2.82 & 0.04 & & $-$50.05 & 6250 & 150 & 3.80 & 0.08 & $-$3.10 & 0.02\\
1367: SDSS J205322.46$-$000749.9 & 52466-0982-480 & $-$419.20 & 6384 & 55 & 3.82 & 0.19 & $-$2.21 & 0.09 & & $-$418.39 & 6170 & 150 & 3.70 & 0.14 & $-$2.40 & 0.03\\
1368: SDSS J205458.93+004404.5 & 53289-1960-416 & $-$66.60 & 5095 & 54 & 2.860 & 0.22 & $-$0.57 & 0.08 & & $-$67.70 & 5180 & 150 & 3.10 & 0.12 & $-$0.38 & 0.03\\
1369: SDSS J031249.63+001325.4 & 53401-2052-197 & 10.30 & 6462 & 183 & 3.65 & 0.35 & $-$0.74 & 0.17 & & 13.53 & 6690 & 130 & 4.20 & 0.10 & $-$0.11 & 0.03\\
1370: SDSS J010531.72$-$002041.9 & 53534-2184-058 & $-$366.10 & 6252 & 74 & 4.04 & 0.33 & $-$2.21 & 0.11 & & $-$371.12 & 6380 & 120 & 5.00 & 0.10 & $-$2.20 & 0.02\\
1371: SDSS J005227.41$-$002619.5 & 53534-2184-120 & $-$337.10 & 5076 & 39 & 2.01 & 0.24 & $-$2.31 & 0.04 & & $-$334.18 & 5140 & 95 & 2.50 & 0.08 & $-$2.31 & 0.02\\
1372: SDSS J003802.72$-$001420.0 & 53534-2184-136 & $-$85.40 & 5993 & 52 & 4.20 & 0.11 & $-$0.99 & 0.08 & & $-$86.53 & 6150 & 65 & 4.60 & 0.05 & $-$0.78 & 0.01\\
1373: SDSS J001652.51+001658.3 & 53713-2314-090 & $-$273.80 & 6923 & 45 & 4.33 & 0.24 & $-$2.58 & 0.08 & & $-$272.56 & 6800 & 200 & 4.50 & 0.13 & $-$2.90 & 0.04\\
1374: \tableline
1375: \multicolumn{17}{c}{Keck-ESI} \\
1376: \tableline
1377: SDSS J234216.79$-$000603.1 & 52435-0981-085 & 48.70 & 6747 & 82 & 3.13 & 0.29 & $-$2.03 & 0.16 & & 19.90 & 6856 & 144 & 3.25 & 0.14 & $-$2.00 & 0.08\\
1378: SDSS J205025.83$-$011103.8 & 52435-0981-123 & 12.10 & \nodata & \nodata & \nodata & \nodata & \nodata & \nodata & & 48.32 & 4625 & 148 & 4.55 & 0.29 & $-$1.25 & 0.08\\
1379: SDSS J003159.54$-$001113.1 & 52443-0983-164 & $-$22.20 & 4666 & 26 & 4.43 & 0.24 & $-$1.19 & 0.18 & & $-$23.34 & 4627 & 172 & 4.54 & 0.34 & $-$1.25 & 0.09\\
1380: SDSS J221855.69+000921.2 & 52442-0984-332 & $-$48.30 & 5880 & 26 & 3.73 & 0.41 & $-$1.87 & 0.08 & & $-$39.81 & 5858 & 104 & 3.77 & 0.13 & $-$1.75 & 0.06\\
1381: SDSS J222116.19+005913.6 & 52589-1066-557 & $-$39.10 & 5982 & 79 & 2.08 & 0.37 & $-$1.29 & 0.02 & & $-$45.09 & 5875 & 119 & 1.29 & 0.05 & $-$1.27 & 0.05\\
1382: SDSS J222725.18+003204.6 & 52523-1082-180 & $-$31.10 & 5953 & 87 & 2.72 & 0.45 & $-$2.30 & 0.06 & & $-$34.82 & 6031 & 111 & 2.54 & 0.09 & $-$2.00 & 0.07\\
1383: SDSS J222542.47$-$003708.2 & 52591-1084-108 & $-$210.10 & 6154 & 103 & 3.80 & 0.28 & $-$1.97 & 0.19 & & $-$198.35 & 6227 & 116 & 3.08 & 0.12 & $-$1.98 & 0.07\\
1384: SDSS J222005.05+011452.3 & 52531-1085-309 & 2.10 & 4694 & 96 & 3.09 & 0.20 & $-$1.05 & 0.06 & & 70.08 & 4637 & 108 & 3.78 & 0.18 & $-$1.77 & 0.08\\
1385: SDSS J142409.29+533723.9 & 52929-1088-353 & $-$228.90 & 6718 & 45 & 3.86 & 0.30 & $-$2.67 & 0.10 & & $-$240.26 & 6782 & 167 & 3.83 & 0.19 & $-$2.25 & 0.11\\
1386: SDSS J145758.20+504733.6 & 52591-1093-155 & $-$183.90 & 6411 & 96 & 3.53 & 0.31 & $-$2.27 & 0.10 & & $-$194.14 & 6687 & 114 & 4.19 & 0.14 & $-$2.00 & 0.07\\
1387: SDSS J145543.59+510630.1 & 52932-1116-001 & $-$12.10 & 5218 & 95 & 4.01 & 0.12 & $-$0.70 & 0.09 & & $-$33.26 & 5083 & 164 & 4.33 & 0.28 & $-$0.76 & 0.05\\
1388: SDSS J232541.95+001413.6 & 52993-1133-277 & 194.10 & 5987 & 46 & 2.81 & 0.45 & $-$2.25 & 0.13 & & 207.14 & 6209 & 104 & 2.56 & 0.09 & $-$2.00 & 0.07\\
1389: SDSS J002140.87+004820.4 & 53228-1138-391 & $-$107.70 & 5544 & 68 & 2.36 & 0.39 & $-$2.41 & 0.08 & & $-$102.12 & 5537 & 92 & 2.54 & 0.09 & $-$2.00 & 0.07\\
1390: SDSS J003828.39+003656.6 & 53228-1138-414 & $-$95.10 & 5815 & 50 & 2.97 & 0.51 & $-$2.47 & 0.04 & & $-$101.10 & 6057 & 81 & 2.48 & 0.07 & $-$2.25 & 0.06\\
1391: SDSS J003928.61+010850.4 & 53228-1138-626 & 39.30 & 5824 & 49 & 3.36 & 0.56 & $-$2.23 & 0.01 & & 39.54 & 5797 & 88 & 2.51 & 0.08 & $-$2.00 & 0.06\\
1392: SDSS J011135.53$-$002103.5 & 52592-1143-047 & $-$137.80 & 6309 & 81 & 3.57 & 0.09 & $-$2.23 & 0.14 & & $-$171.93 & 6795 & 154 & 3.85 & 0.18 & $-$2.00 & 0.09\\
1393: SDSS J020100.13$-$004259.0 & 53238-1144-402 & 5.40 & 4721 & 32 & 1.50 & 0.28 & $-$2.73 & 0.15 & & $-$3.70 & 5331 & 104 & 2.20 & 0.09 & $-$2.25 & 0.09\\
1394: SDSS J021748.78+002916.7 & 52992-1485-513 & $-$83.90 & 6548 & 47 & 3.51 & 0.45 & $-$2.32 & 0.20 & & $-$86.04 & 6711 & 110 & 3.88 & 0.13 & $-$2.25 & 0.07\\
1395: SDSS J212748.24+003203.8 & 52932-1492-535 & $-$54.20 & 5572 & 33 & 2.35 & 0.30 & $-$2.50 & 0.04 & & $-$57.35 & 5538 & 85 & 2.18 & 0.07 & $-$2.25 & 0.07\\
1396: SDSS J212935.16+121439.5 & 52937-1494-542 & $-$333.50 & 5649 & 78 & 2.72 & 0.40 & $-$2.46 & 0.04 & & $-$328.87 & 5799 & 81 & 2.16 & 0.06 & $-$1.99 & 0.06\\
1397: SDSS J053234.96$-$003713.6 & 52944-1495-328 & $-$92.40 & 6344 & 59 & 3.87 & 0.23 & $-$2.10 & 0.12 & & $-$92.83 & 6789 & 160 & 3.85 & 0.18 & $-$2.00 & 0.10\\
1398: SDSS J180922.45+223712.4 & 52914-1498-034 & $-$11.10 & 6330 & 50 & 3.49 & 0.19 & $-$1.77 & 0.06 & & $-$14.50 & 6559 & 109 & 3.23 & 0.11 & $-$1.75 & 0.06\\
1399: SDSS J181001.41+230554.9 & 52941-1505-094 & $-$48.00 & 4778 & 198 & 2.67 & 0.95 & $-$1.64 & 0.92 & & $-$46.50 & 4632 & 157 & 2.24 & 0.15 & $-$2.00 & 0.14\\
1400: SDSS J180728.56+223130.5 & 52944-1508-342 & 88.50 & 6695 & 74 & 3.90 & 0.15 & $-$2.62 & 0.10 & & 75.54 & 7146 & 172 & 3.83 & 0.19 & $-$2.25 & 0.11\\
1401: SDSS J012617.95+060724.8 & 52945-1521-435 & $-$181.50 & 5170 & 45 & 1.83 & 0.13 & $-$2.42 & 0.05 & & $-$196.13 & 5306 & 102 & 1.29 & 0.05 & $-$2.25 & 0.09\\
1402: \enddata
1403: \label{params2}
1404: \end{deluxetable}
1405:
1406: \end{landscape}
1407:
1408:
1409:
1410: \begin{deluxetable}{lrrrrrrr}
1411: \tablecolumns{8}
1412: \tablewidth{0pc}
1413: \tablecaption{Parameters for the Standard Stars}
1414: \tablehead{
1415: \colhead{} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{Literature} & \colhead{} &
1416: \multicolumn{3}{c}{HET} \\
1417: \cline{2-4} \cline{6-8} \\
1418: \colhead{Star} &
1419: \colhead{$T_{\rm eff}$} & \colhead{$\log g$} & \colhead{ [Fe/H]} &
1420: \colhead{} &
1421: \colhead{$T_{\rm eff}$} & \colhead{$\log g$} & \colhead{ [Fe/H]} }
1422: \startdata
1423: HD 8648 & 5790 & 4.28 & 0.13 & & 5833 & 4.36 & 0.09 \\
1424: HD 71148 & 5775 & 4.35 & $-0.03$ & & 5892 & 4.41 & $-0.04$ \\
1425: HD 84737 & 5906 & 4.22 & 0.12 & & 5929 & 4.12 & 0.07 \\
1426: HD 84937 & 6334 & 4.01 & $-2.11$ & & 6221 & 3.76 & $-2.07$
1427: \enddata
1428: \label{stds}
1429: \end{deluxetable}
1430:
1431: \begin{landscape}
1432:
1433: \begin{deluxetable}{lrrrr}
1434: \tablecolumns{5}
1435: \tablewidth{0pc}
1436: \tablecaption{Comparison of Derived Stellar Atmospheric Parameters}
1437: \tablehead{
1438: \colhead{Analysis} & \colhead{Parameter} & \colhead{$<{\rm SSPP}-{\rm HI}>$} &
1439: \colhead{$\sigma({\rm SSPP}-{\rm HI})$} & \colhead{N} }
1440: \startdata
1441: HET & Teff (K) & $3.11$\% & 2.75\% & 81 \\
1442:
1443: & logg (dex) & $0.08$ & 0.25 & \\
1444:
1445: & [Fe/H] (dex) & $-0.09$ & 0.12 & \\
1446:
1447: \tableline
1448:
1449: OTHERS (Keck, Subaru) & Teff (K) & $-0.58$\% & 3.14\% & 44 \\
1450:
1451: & logg (dex) & $-0.03$ & 0.46 & \\
1452:
1453: & [Fe/H] (dex) & $-0.03$ & 0.41 & \\
1454:
1455: \enddata
1456: \label{compare}
1457: \end{deluxetable}
1458:
1459: \end{landscape}
1460:
1461:
1462: \clearpage
1463: \end{document}
1464: