1: 

2: %\documentclass{aastex}

3: 

4: %% preprint produces a one-column, single-spaced document:

5: \newcommand{\farcs}{\mbox{\ensuremath{.\!\!^{\prime\prime}}}}%  % fractional arcsecond symbol: 0.''0

6: 

7: \documentclass[12pt,preprint]{aastex}

8: 

9: %\documentclass{emulateapj}

10: 

11: %% preprint2 produces a double-column, single-spaced document:

12: 

13: % \documentclass[preprint2]{aastex}

14: 

15: %% You can insert a short comment on the title page using the command below.

16: 

17: \slugcomment{Accepted for the ApJS}

18: \shorttitle{PTI Calibrator Catalog}

19: \shortauthors{van Belle et al.}

20: 

21: %% This is the end of the preamble.  Indicate the beginning of the

22: %% paper itself with \begin{document}.

23: 

24: \begin{document}

25: \title{The Palomar Testbed Interferometer Calibrator Catalog}

26: \author{G. T. van Belle}

27: \affil{Michelson Science Center, California Institute of Technology,

28:       Pasadena, CA 91125} \email{gerard@ipac.caltech.edu}

29: 

30: \author{G. van Belle}

31: \affil{Department of Biostatistics, University of Washington,

32: Seattle, WA 98195-7232} \email{vanbelle@u.washington.edu}

33: 

34: \author{M. J. Creech-Eakman}

35: \affil{New Mexico Tech} \email{mce@kestrel.nmt.edu}

36: 

37: \author{J. Coyne}

38: \affil{University of Cambridge} \email{jc466@cam.ac.uk}

39: 

40: \author{A. F. Boden, R. L. Akeson, D. R. Ciardi, K. M. Rykoski, R. R. Thompson}

41: \affil{Michelson Science Center, California Institute of Technology,

42:       Pasadena, CA 91125} \email{bode, akeson, ciardi, kmr, thompson@ipac.caltech.edu}

43: 

44: \author{B. F. Lane}

45: \affil{Massachusetts Institute of Technology} \email{blane@MIT.EDU}

46: 

47: \and

48: 

49: \author{The PTI Collaboration}

50: \affil{Jet Propulsion Laboratory \& Michelson Science Center}

51: 

52: \begin{abstract}

53: 

54: The Palomar Testbed Interferometer (PTI) archive of observations

55: between 1998 and 2005 is examined for objects appropriate for

56: calibration of optical long-baseline interferometer observations -

57: stars that are predictably point-like and single. Approximately

58: 1,400 nights of data on 1,800 objects were examined for this

59: investigation. We compare those observations to an intensively

60: studied object that is a suitable calibrator, HD217014, and

61: statistically compare each candidate calibrator to that object by

62: computing both a Mahalanobis distance and a Principal Component

63: Analysis.  Our hypothesis is that the frequency distribution of

64: visibility data associated with calibrator stars differs from

65: non-calibrator stars such as binary stars. Spectroscopic binaries

66: resolved by PTI, objects known to be unsuitable for calibrator use,

67: are similarly tested to establish detection limits of this approach.

68: From this investigation, we find more than 350 observed stars

69: suitable for use as calibrators (with an additional $\approx 140$

70: being rejected), corresponding to $\gtrsim 95\%$ sky coverage for

71: PTI. This approach is noteworthy in that it rigorously establishes

72: calibration sources through a traceable, empirical methodology,

73: leveraging the predictions of spectral energy distribution modeling

74: but also verifying it with the rich body of PTI's on-sky

75: observations.

76: 

77: \end{abstract}

78: 

79: % see http://pasp.phys.uvic.ca/keywords01.html for keywords:

80: \keywords{instrumentation: interferometers, instrumentation: high angular resolution,

81: techniques: high angular resolution, techniques: interferometric, catalogs, stars: fundamental parameters

82: stars: imaging, binaries: general, infrared: stars}

83: 

84: \section{Introduction}

85: 

86: Visible and near-infrared interferometers are powerful tools for

87: measuring the minute angular sizes of nearby stars. However,

88: establishing absolute system responses in the presence of

89: atmospheric turbulence and instrument imperfections is a challenging

90: proposition that requires careful attention to detail when

91: constructing an observational approach.  Use of objects predicted to be point-like calibration

92: sources

93: is routinely employed in astronomical interferometry in the optical \citep{moz91,1998SPIE.3350..872B,2002A&A...393..183B, van05}.  However,

94: given the incomplete nature of our knowledge of these sources, it is not enough to merely

95: predict the expected fringe visibility from these objects - calibration sources need to be

96: rigorously evaluated for their actual observed interferometric visibility, and its appropriateness for

97: use in calibrating the instrument.

98: Herein we examine the body of calibration data taken

99: upon the sky from near-infrared, long-baseline interferometric

100: measurements taken with the Palomar Testbed Interferometer (PTI).

101: Similar efforts have begun for the Very Large Telescope Interferometer (VLTI) \citep{2005A&A...434.1201R}.

102: 

103: PTI is an 85 to 110 m H- and K-band (1.6 $\mu$m and 2.2 $\mu$m)

104: interferometer located at Palomar Observatory and is described in

105: detail in Colavita et al. (1999).  It has three 40-cm apertures used in pairwise

106: combination for measurement of stellar fringe visibility on sources that

107: range in angular size from 0.05 to 5.0 milliarcseconds, being able to resolve individual

108: sources $\theta \gtrsim 1.0$ mas in size.

109: PTI has been in nightly operation since 1997, with minimum downtime

110: for throughout the intervening years.

111: The data from PTI considered herein covers the range from the beginning of 1998 (when

112: the standardized data pipeline went into place) until the end of 2005 (when

113: the analysis of this manuscript was begun).  Over the 8 years of operation discussed

114: in this study, PTI was on the sky in its single-star visibility mode 1,390

115: nights\footnote{The remaining nights were spent on other instrument modes or

116: were lost to maintenance or weather.}, producing over

117: 83,000 125 second stellar `scans' on 1,818 individual objects.

118: PTI has a minimum K-band fringe

119: spacing of $\approx 4.3$ mas at the sky position of the calibration

120: objects, making many of these stars readily resolvable.

121: 

122: As is standard practice in optical interferometry, a typical set of

123: observations with PTI involves observation of target objects of scientific interest, bracketed

124: by calibration objects.  The calibration objects serve the purpose of characterizing

125: the point-response, or system visibility ($V^2_{sys}$),  of the interferometer in

126: conjunction with the atmosphere, and as such, the interleaved

127: calibrator-target-calibrator observations are done on timescales expected to be shorter than

128: the seeing evolution time of the atmosphere (typically less than 15 minutes).

129: By measuring $V^2_{sys}$, a properly normalized measurement of the target star's

130: visibility may be obtained for meaningful astrophysical interpretation \citep{van05}.

131: These calibration objects are selected {\it a priori} to

132: be as close to point-like as is possible, having visibilities measured by PTI to be very nearly unity.

133: The primary limitation on selection of truly point-like calibrators is the sensitivity of the instrument,

134: coupled with considerations of dynamic range.

135: Towards the end of having nearly point-like calibrators,

136: calibrator lists are vetted for binary systems, which are excluded due to the

137: sub-unity system response measured from such systems.  The decrease of the measured visibility from

138: the desired characterization of $V^2_{sys}$

139: is due to the interferometer's ability to resolve out even milli-arcsecond separation binaries.

140: 

141: Unfortunately, incomplete knowledge of the true physical nature of the calibration objects can

142: result in binary systems not being properly excluded during the vetting process that selects

143: potential calibrators.  Given this reality of calibrator selection, a number of additional

144: steps are taken to ensure rigorously defensible characterization of $V^2_{sys}$.

145: First, given the uncertain nature of possible calibrators, employing multiple calibrators for any given

146: target star observation is also standard operating procedure for PTI observations.  Second,

147: these clusters of calibrators are observed on multiple nights, since chance geometry may

148: make a binary system readily apparent on one night but not on another.  Finally, these objects

149: may be compared to known `good' calibrators for appropriateness as calibration objects, which this

150: study will examine in detail.

151: 

152: 

153: \section{Approach}

154: 

155: To establish a properly normalize the

156: squared visibility\footnote{Squared visibility is referred to herein as simply, `visibility',

157: which is consistent with other articles in the literature.}

158: for a science target in the expected [0:1] range,

159: the system response is used to account for

160: the effect of instrumental and atmospheric imperfections and

161: normalize the visibility measured for that target, $V^2_{\textrm{\tiny meas}}$:

162: \begin{equation}\label{eqn_measSys}

163: V^2_{\textrm{\tiny norm}}(\textrm{target}) = { V^2_{\textrm{\tiny meas}}(\textrm{target}) \over V^2_{\textrm{\tiny sys}} }

164: \end{equation}

165: The system visibility, $V^2_{\textrm{\tiny sys}}$, is established from measurements of point-like calibration

166: sources.  However, due to the extreme resolution of interferometric instruments, event nominally `unresolved'

167: objects need to have their measured $V^2_{\textrm{\tiny meas}}$ corrected for partial resolution:

168: \begin{equation}\label{eqn_measExp}

169: V^2_{\textrm{\tiny sys}} = { V^2_{\textrm{\tiny meas}}(\textrm{calibrator}) \over V^2_{\textrm{\tiny pred}}(\textrm{calibrator}) }

170: \end{equation}

171: Interleaved observations of targets and calibrators are done

172: on a time scale expected

173: to be less than the atmospheric seeing evolution time, which at the Palomar

174: site is typically 30 minutes or longer.  PTI's automated star queue duty cycle is 4 to 8 minutes per star,

175: so calibrator-target-calibrator interleaving is comfortably accomplished

176: with sufficient cadence to satisfy this requirement.

177: 

178: Assuming that a uniform disk brightness profile appropriately characterizes the stellar disk

179: of the calibration source, the predicted visibility $V^2_{\textrm{\tiny pred}}$

180: may be derived from some expectation of the star's angular size, $\theta$, and

181: the known system configuration parameters of baseline $B$ and wavelength, $\lambda$:

182: \begin{equation}\label{eqn_UDdisk}

183:  V^2_{\textrm{\tiny pred}}

184:      = \left[{2 J_1({\pi \theta B / \lambda }) \over {\pi \theta B / \lambda }}\right]^2

185: \end{equation}

186: In estimating $V^2_{\textrm{\tiny pred}}$, and by extension $V^2_{\textrm{\tiny sys}}$,

187: it is important to properly quantify errors in $B$, $\lambda$, and $\theta$,

188: and propagate them through the Bessel function.  The need for `point-like' calibrators

189: is prompted by potential unknown biases present in the {\it a priori} estimation

190: of the calibrator angular size, $\theta$, and to avoid non-linear effects found

191: in the Bessel function.

192: Proper error propagation is observed throughout all of these steps, including

193: propagation of uncertainties in angular size estimate, $\sigma_\theta$,

194: into $V^2_{\textrm{\tiny pred}}$ and measurement error, $\sigma_{V^2}$, for both $V^2_{\textrm{\tiny meas}}(\textrm{target})$

195: and $V^2_{\textrm{\tiny meas}}(\textrm{calibrator})$.

196: The particulars and implications

197: of this requirement are examined in much greater detail in \citet{van05}.

198: In practice, for calibrators previously uncharacterized by PTI, 2 or more calibration sources are used in tandem

199: to all for cross-calibration and elimination of bad calibrators.

200: 

201: 

202: 

203: For this study, the full list of stars observed by PTI from 1998 to 2005 was collected from

204: the PTI archive\footnote{Online at the Michelson Science Center, http://msc.caltech.edu.}.

205: A set of calibrator selection criteria was established (\S \ref{sec_CalSelCritera}), and

206: for

207: each of the objects in the archive that qualified as a potential calibrator,

208:  a spectral energy distribution (SED) fit was used to refine its predicted

209: angular size (\S \ref{sec_SED_fitting}).  Objects which were small enough for

210: use as calibrators were kept as possible calibrators.  The predicted angular size

211: could then be used to account for the partial resolution by the interferometer of

212: the object's angular size in attempting to normalize the object's

213: raw interferometer data (\S \ref{sec_NormPTIObsvns}).

214: The data obtained from the normalization step were then examined with Mahalanobis distance

215: and Principal Component Analysis tests for departures from

216: point-source response and evidence of hidden binarity (\S \ref{sec_StatTests}).

217: Finally, we will examine the likelihood that stars observed by PTI that appear to be solid

218: calibrators are actually undetected binaries (\S \ref{sec_UndetectedBinaries}).

219: 

220: 

221: \section{Calibrator Selection Criteria}\label{sec_CalSelCritera}

222: In order to maximize the likelihood that any random star observable by PTI is appropriate

223: for use as a calibrator, a number of criteria have been developed over the years of operation

224: of the instrument. Since each principal investigator selected his or her own calibration sources

225: for their projects, it is unclear the exact criteria that went into

226: the selection of both targets and calibrators found in the complete PTI archive.  However, since we

227: are evaluating the sources after the fact, we may vet the observed list of potential calibrators

228: using a single homogenous set of criteria:

229: \begin{itemize}

230: \item Potential calibration sources must be bright enough to be tracked by PTI in the appropriate available dynamic range.

231: This translates roughly to a $V$ band magnitude

232: of $\sim 10.0$ or brighter (for tip-tilt tracking), and a $K$ band magnitude of $\sim 5.0$

233: or brighter (for fringe tracking).

234: \item These sources need to be appropriately `point-like' in size, which conservatively for PTI is less

235: than $\lesssim 1.0$ mas in size, as discussed extensively in \citet{van05},

236: with final predicted size from detailed SED fitting (see \S \ref{sec_SED_fitting}).  This corresponds to a

237: measured visibility $V^2\gtrsim 0.90$ that serves well to characterize the system visibility

238: (interferometer plus atmosphere) and is statistically tolerant to errors and even biases in the

239: {\it a priori}

240: estimation of the calibrator size.

241: \item Finally, for system visibility characterization, these stars must be expected to

242: exhibit constant measured visibilities.

243: As such, they should not be known to be a binary system, or suspected to be one, according to

244: the astrometric references in the Hipparcos database \citep{1997A&A...323L..49P}.

245: The Hipparcos H59 multiplicity flag is of particular utility here, not only

246: calling out those objects for which a full astrometric solution has been obtained, but those

247: which have unexplained degrees of astrometric variability.

248: \end{itemize}

249: The 499 potential sources in the PTI database which satisfy these criteria

250: are found in Table \ref{tab_SED_photom}, the contents of which will be discussed in the next section.

251: The PTI data available for these sources will then be evaluated in \S \ref{sec_StatTests}

252: for evidence of binarity or departures in {\it a priori} size expectations that

253: make them unsuitable for use as calibrators.

254: 

255: 

256: 

257: \section{Spectral Energy Distribution Fitting}\label{sec_SED_fitting}

258: 

259: For each of the potential calibrator stars observed in this investigation, a

260: spectral energy distribution (SED) fit was performed.  This fit was

261: accomplished using photometry available in the literature as the

262: input values, with template spectra appropriate for the spectral

263: types indicated for the stars in question. The template spectra,

264: from \citet{pic98}, were adjusted by the fitting routine to account

265: for overall flux level, wavelength-dependent reddening, and expected

266: angular size.  Reddening corrections were based upon the empirical

267: reddening determination described by \citet{1989ApJ...345..245C}, which differs

268: little from van de Hulst's theoretical reddening curve number 15

269: \citep{joh68,dyc96}. Both narrowband and wideband photometry in the

270: 0.3 $\mu$m to 30 $\mu$m were used as available, including Johnson

271: $UBV$ (see, for example, \citet{1963AJ.....68..483E,1972ApJ...175..787E,1971A&A....12..442M}),

272: Stromgren $ubvy\beta$

273: \citep{1976HelR....1.....P}, 2Mass $JHK_s$ \citep{2003yCat.2246.....C}, Geneva \citep{1976A&AS...26..275R},

274: Vilnius $UPXYZS$ \citep{1972VilOB..34....3Z}, and $WBVR$ \citep{1991TrSht..63....4K}; flux calibrations

275: were based upon the values given in \citet{cox00}.  For each star, the

276: primary references for the photometric data are given in Table \ref{tab_SED_photom}.

277: 

278: 

279: \input{tab_1.tex}

280: 

281: Starting with a reference spectral type and luminosity class as cited by SIMBAD,

282: template spectra were fit to the photometric data.  Templates in adjacent

283: locations in spectral type and luminosity class were also

284: tested for best fit, with the fit with best $\chi^2$ being selected in the end

285: for use in this study.  For example, a star indicated by SIMBAD to be a G2IV would have its

286: photometry fit to the 9 templates of spectral type G1, G2 and G3, and for luminosity classes

287: V, IV, and III.

288: From the best SED fit, estimates were obtained for each star for their bolometric

289: flux ($F_{BOL}$), angular size ($\theta_{EST}$), and reddening ($A_V$);

290: effective temperature was fixed for each of the \citet{pic98} library spectra.

291: The results of

292: the fitting are given in Table \ref{tab_SED_fits}, and an example

293: SED fitting plot is given in Figure \ref{fig_HD217014}.

294: 

295: Also given in Table 2 are estimates of luminosity for each of these

296: stars.  The first estimate was derived from the bolometric flux from

297: the fitting, combined with a Hipparcos distance \citep{1997A&A...323L..49P}; a

298: small number of these objects ($N=11$) did not have such data available

299: and a distance was estimated from comparison of the apparent visible

300: brightness $m_V$ to the visible $M_V$ brightness expected from the

301: best-fit spectral type \citep{cox00}, and the SED fit reddening.  The second estimate was

302: established from the luminosity expected from the best-fit spectral type.

303: The agreement between these two disparate estimates

304: provided us with additional confidence in our fits, particularly

305: from the standpoint of selection of proper luminosity class for the SED fit.

306: 

307: \input{tab_2.tex}

308: 

309: \begin{figure}

310: \includegraphics[scale=.66,angle=270]{fig_1.eps}

311: \caption{\label{fig_HD217014} Spectral energy distribution fitting for HD 217014,

312: as discussed in \S \ref{sec_51Peg}, with a G2 IV spectral template \citep{pic98} being

313: fit to the wide- and narrow-band photometry available for the star.

314: Vertical bars are errors associated with

315: the photometric data; horizontal bars represent the bandwidth of each

316: photometric data point.}

317: \end{figure}

318: 

319: For our calibration

320: sources, the {\it a priori} estimate of their angular size $\theta_{EST}$ is

321: necessary to account for residual resolution that may be afforded by

322: an interferometer's extraordinarily long baselines.  With an

323: expected limb darkened size of $\theta_{EST} \leq 1.00$ mas from the

324: SED fit, calibrators have predicted $V^2_{\textrm{\tiny pred}}$ values of $>92$\% for a

325: 85-m baseline used at 2.2 $\mu$m, and $>86$\% for a 110-m baseline.  We shall consider this size

326: effectively identical to its uniform disk size, since for

327: most of our potential calibration sources,

328: their effective temperatures are in excess of $\sim 5000$K,

329: and the difference between the uniform disk and limb darkened sizes is at the few percent level

330: \citep{dav00,cla03b}, which is far less than our size estimate

331: error. Ideally, a calibration source would be sufficiently

332: point-like that its measured visibility $V^2_{\textrm{\tiny meas}}$ would be indistinguishable from unity, but

333: unfortunately the current system sensitivity does not afford that

334: option.  The uncertainty in the calibrator visibility represents one

335: of the fundamental limitations of the system visibility accuracy \citep{van05}.

336: However, our selection of calibrators has been carefully made to be sufficiently small ($\leq 1.00$ mas)

337: in diameter such that there are no concerns about a varying system

338: calibration due to unaccounted-for calibrator surface morphology,

339: and such that a $\leq 5\%$ uncertainty in angular size will translate to

340: less than a $\leq 1\%$ uncertainty in its predicted visibility $V^2_{\textrm{\tiny pred}}$ for PTI.

341: 

342: \section{Obtaining Normalized PTI Observations}\label{sec_NormPTIObsvns}

343: 

344: PTI generates its $V^2_{\textrm{\tiny meas}}$ observables through pairwise combination

345: of the starlight collected by two siderostats through a

346: 50/50 beam combiner optic; the combined starlight beams that result are

347: fed into a NICMOS3 detector dewar.  The PTI beamtrain

348: from the siderostats to the beam combiner

349: includes

350: pathlength compensation that equalizes the path for each telescope

351: from the star to the beam splitter to $\sim 20$ nm.  Temporally dithering the

352: pathlength compensation within one atmospheric coherence time

353: a distance of one wavelength about this `white light'

354: fringe position results in maximum constructive and destructive interference between

355: the two starlight beams.  Measurement of this temporally modulated

356: photometric signal leads to a characterization of the $V^2_{\textrm{\tiny meas}}$.

357: Discussion of the PTI fringe detection and tracking particulars

358: is given in significantly greater detail in \citet{col99}.

359: 

360: The $V^2_{\textrm{\tiny meas}}$ observables used in any typical PTI study are

361: the synthetic wideband $V^2_{\textrm{\tiny meas}}$ values, given by an incoherent

362: signal-to-noise (SNR)

363: weighted average of the individual

364: 5 narrowband channel $V^2_{\textrm{\tiny meas}}(\lambda)$ values in the PTI

365: spectrometer \citep{col99b}.  In a similar fashion,

366: incoherent

367: SNR-weighted average bandpasses $\lambda$ were determined from the raw data.

368: The PTI

369: H and K wavebands are excellent matches to the CIT photometric

370: system \citep{eli82,eli83}. Separate

371: calibrations and fits to the narrowband and synthetic wideband

372: $V^2_{\textrm{\tiny meas}}$ data sets yield statistically consistent results, with the

373: synthetic wideband data exhibiting superior SNR.

374: Since there is no need in this study for independent narrowband values,

375: we will consequently consider only the synthetic

376: wideband data.

377: 

378: The stars examined in this study were observed by PTI

379: at 1.6 and 2.2~$\mu$m on 1,390 observing nights between 1998 Jan

380: 1 and 2005 Dec 31.  For most of the nights, PTI's NS 110m baseline (37.1 m E, 103.3 m N, -3.3 m Z)

381: was utilized; the NW 86m baseline (-81.7 m E, -28.2 m N, 3.1 m Z) was used the second most, with the SW 87 m baseline

382: (-44.6 m E, 75.1 m N, -0.2 m Z)

383: being used least.

384: The specific baselines used, in terms of number of nights and number of scans, is

385: given in Table \ref{tab_PTI Data} for each star; a summary of the overall observations is given

386: in Table \ref{tab_obs_sum}.

387: The potential calibration objects were

388: observed multiple times during each of these nights, and each

389: observation, or scan, was approximately 125 s long. For each scan

390: we computed a mean $V^2_{\textrm{\tiny meas}}$ value from the scan data, and the error

391: in the $V^2_{\textrm{\tiny meas}}$ estimate from the rms internal scatter \citep{col99, col99b}.

392: 

393: \input{tab_3.tex}

394: 

395: \input{tab_4.tex}

396: 

397: 

398: 

399: 

400: \section{Statistical Tests for the Observational Data}\label{sec_StatTests}

401: 

402: \subsection{51 Peg: The PTI `Gold Standard' Calibrator}\label{sec_51Peg}

403: 

404: 51 Peg (HD 217014, HP 113357, HR 8729) is well-known throughout the astronomical community

405: as the first solar-like star for which an extrasolar planet

406: has been detected \citep{1995Natur.378..355M, 1997ApJ...481..926M}.

407: When the sinusoidal radial velocity signature was detected in 1995,

408: the $\sin i$ ambiguity in the mass term led some to suspect that

409: perhaps what was being observed was a  binary star system in a face-on orientation, rather

410: than a star-planet pairing.

411: 

412: Interferometric observations have the potential to

413: detect such binary star systems through spatially resolving and

414: directly detecting the individual components.

415: As such, when PTI operations began in 1996, a vigorous campaign of 51 Peg

416: observations was begun to attempt to detect any putative stellar

417: companion of the primary star.  Despite some ambiguous initial indications

418: associated with a new instrument learning curve,

419: in the end a rigorous evaluation of the PTI data excluded the

420: presence of a companion brighter than $\Delta K<4.27$ (corresponding

421: to a brightness ratio $r(K)>0.020$) at the 99\% confidence level,

422: corresponding to an upper mass limit

423: on the 51 Peg secondary of 0.22 $M_\odot$ \citep{bod98}.

424: Given the unusually detailed evaluation of the 18 nights available (at that time) of PTI data on

425: 51 Peg, it now constitutes a `gold standard' calibration source,

426: as far as being an object whose nature as a system possessing

427: a single star has been established to the limits of PTI's

428: detection ability.  For this particular investigation, we

429: may leverage that detailed investigation of 51 Peg to use it as a reference calibration object,

430: to which other potential calibrators may be compared.

431: 

432: \subsection{Known Bad Calibrators: PTI Binaries}\label{sec_PTIBinaries}

433: 

434: In contrast to 51 Peg, we may also select well-studied PTI sources

435: as known bad calibrators - namely, the binary stars that PTI has

436: observed over the years. The full roster of published PTI

437: binaries, along with 51 Peg, are summarized in Table

438: \ref{tab_PTI_binaries}.  Also included on this list is an unpublished

439: binary star, HD178449, which with a primary-secondary brightness ratio

440: of $\Delta K \sim 3.5-3.8$ represents the `worst case' binary for our various

441: methods to attempt to detect; as will be discussed in more

442: detail on \S \ref{sec_UndetectedBinaries},

443: this level of $\Delta K$ is consistent with

444: the median value of $V^2_{\textrm{\tiny meas}} \sim 0.93-0.95$

445: in Equation \ref{eqn_binaries}.

446: 

447: These known binary stars are of great utility to the evaluation of

448: our unknown potential calibrator objects.  By subjecting these known binary stars to our statistical

449: tests for appropriateness of a calibration star, we may test the sensitivity

450: of those tests to binaries of varying brightness ratio and separation.

451: 

452: \input{tab_5.tex}

453: 

454: 

455: \subsection{Moment Values for 51 Peg}\label{sec_51PegMoments}

456: 

457: For detailed statistical testing of the visibility data on each of

458: our potential calibrator stars found in Table \ref{tab_SED_fits}, we sought to

459: compare the ensemble of 51 Peg $V^2_{\textrm{\tiny norm}}$ points with the various sets

460: associated each potential calibrator star first by means of a

461: Mahalanobis distance comparison, and second through a Principal

462: Component Analysis. The variable of interest is an individual normalized PTI

463: observation, $V^2_{\textrm{\tiny norm},i}$, with associated error term

464: $\sigma_{V^2,i}$.  For each star we have a number of observations

465: of $V^2_{\textrm{\tiny norm}}$ that form a frequency

466: distribution. Our hypothesis is that the frequency distribution associated with

467: calibrator stars differs from non-calibrator stars such as binary stars. The challenge

468: is to characterize the frequency distribution. A very old technique is that of using

469: Pearson curves which are characterized by the first four moments of a distribution.

470: A function of the raw moments of the frequency distribution of $V^2_{\textrm{\tiny norm}}$ for each

471: star forms the input for our comparison with the first four moments of 51 Peg $V^2_{\textrm{\tiny norm}}$ data.

472: %Instead of using the raw moments we rescaled them to the observation level.

473: 

474: The observations were weighted by

475: $w^*_i=1/(\sigma_{V^2,i})^2$. If $W=\sum_i w_i $ for specific $k$

476: star, and $w_i=w^*_i/W$, then the weighted mean, $m_1$, of

477: $V^2_{\textrm{\tiny norm},i}$ is $m_{1k}=\sum_i w_iV^2_{\textrm{\tiny norm},i}$. The weighted

478: %, rescaled

479: second, third and fourth moments for this star are

480: \begin{equation}

481: m_{jk}=\left[\sum_i w_i(V^2_{\textrm{\tiny norm},i}-m_1)^j\right]^{1/j}

482: \end{equation}

483: for $j=2,3,4$. For $m_{3k}$ we retained the sign associated

484: with the third moment. The rescaled moments have a natural

485: interpretation; for example, $m_{2k}$, is the standard deviation of

486: the $V^2_{\textrm{\tiny norm}}$ values for star $k$.

487: 

488: These %rescaled

489: moments $m_{1k}, m_{2k}, m_{3k}, m_{4k}$ form the basis

490: for the calculation of the

491: Mahalanobis distance and the Principal Component Analysis distance from 51 Peg,

492: our `gold

493: standard'. The four %rescaled

494: moment values for 51 Peg were calculated to be,

495: \begin{eqnarray*}

496: m_{1,\textrm{\tiny 51 Peg}}&=&1.006659\\

497: m_{2,\textrm{\tiny 51 Peg}}&=&0.041568\\

498: m_{3,\textrm{\tiny 51 Peg}}&=&0.032527\\

499: m_{4,\textrm{\tiny 51 Peg}}&=&0.0919526

500: \end{eqnarray*}

501: 

502: The moments can be used to calculate $a_3=skewness$ and

503: $a_4=kurtosis$ statistics. For a Gaussian distribution the values

504: are $a_3=0$ and $a_4=3$. For the $V^2_{\textrm{\tiny norm}}$ values from 51 Peg these values are,

505: \begin{eqnarray*}

506: a_3=&{m_{3k} / {m_{2k}}^{3/2}}&= 1.32\\

507: a_4=&{m_{4k} / {m_{2k}}^{2}}&= 12.1

508: \end{eqnarray*}

509: Thus these data suggest that the 51 Peg $V^2_{\textrm{\tiny norm}}$

510: data are skewed to the right and leptokurtic.

511: 

512: The skewness of the 51 Peg data is a result of there being a few, but notable, outlying

513: data points with $V^2_{\textrm{\tiny norm}} \gg 1$, as seen in Figure \ref{fig_51PegV2norm}.  These data points are all associated with

514: periods of poor system visibility when the system visibility was low, typically

515: $V^2_{\textrm{\tiny sys}} < 0.60$, which is usually a result of poor seeing; of the 340 data points in the 51 Peg dataset, 20

516: were in the low system visibility category.   Up

517: until this point in the analysis, all of the

518: data from 51 Peg contributed to the statistical analysis, in order to examine all

519: nights in a homogenous manner, regardless of atmospheric conditions.

520: However, if we use that parameter as a guide and exclude data points with

521: $V^2_{\textrm{\tiny sys}} < 0.60$ from that analysis, we find $a_3 = -0.048$ with

522: $a_4 = 6.13$ --- a negligible amount of skewness.

523: 

524: \begin{figure}

525: \begin{center}

526: \includegraphics[scale=1.2,angle=0]{fig_2.eps}

527: \end{center}

528: \caption{\label{fig_51PegV2norm} Normalized visibility measurements ($V^2_{\textrm{\tiny norm}}$)

529: for 51 Peg,

530: as discussed in \S \ref{sec_51PegMoments}.}

531: \end{figure}

532: 

533: The leptokurtic nature of the 51 Peg $V^2_{\textrm{\tiny norm}}$

534: data is seen with both the full ensemble and the $V^2_{\textrm{\tiny sys}} > 0.60$ subset ---

535: in terms of shape, a leptokurtic distribution has a more acute peak around the mean

536: and longer tails.  A histogram of the full 51 Peg $V^2_{\textrm{\tiny norm}}$ dataset is seen in

537: Figure \ref{fig_51PegV2hist}, in bins of $\Delta V^2=0.05$. Two fits were compared to this

538: binned data: the first was single Gaussian, which resulted in a mean of $\overline{V}^2=1.004$

539: and a width of 0.030 on an amplitude of 90.9, and a reduced $\chi^2$ per degree of freedom of

540: $\chi^2/$DOF=5.44; the second

541: was two Gaussians, with an identical mean but widths of 0.024 and 0.098 on amplitdues of 82.8 and 12.5,

542: respectively, with $\chi^2/$DOF=1.32.  The second fit suggests that two sources of

543: noise are present in the data.  Restricting these fits to the $V^2_{\textrm{\tiny sys}} > 0.60$ subset,

544: we find that the single Gaussian fit has a width of 0.029 with a $\chi^2/$DOF=5.02, and

545: the two-Gaussian fit has widths of 0.080 and 0.023 with $\chi^2/$DOF=1.22; no notable change for either

546: fit resulted in the amplitudes or $\overline{V}^2$ values.

547: 

548: These latter fits suggest that

549: for those times when the interferometer is performing best (resulting in better

550: $V^2_{\textrm{\tiny sys}}$ values) the wider `pedestal' Gaussian of the two-Gaussian fit

551: reduces in width.  Since the instrument is operated in a fairly uniform manner and

552: reports lowered $V^2_{\textrm{\tiny sys}}$ values generally during

553: periods of particularly poor atmospheric seeing,

554: our suspicion is that the error pedestal is associated

555: with those occasional periods of poor seeing.  Such observations

556: do not get properly normalized due to limitations of the calibration process for coping with those

557: occasional rapid fluctuations in seeing, but are identifiable in the data set

558: in part due to their low $V^2_{\textrm{\tiny sys}}$ values.  Further examination of the 51 Peg dataset

559: can exclude other measurement outliers (and the spread on $V^2_{\textrm{\tiny norm}}$ will

560: then approach the $\sim 1.5$\% value seen in \citep{bod98}) but this is time-consuming and

561: potentially quite subjective.  As such, we will maintain the integrity of the normalized

562: visibilities being

563: examined for all sources and not cut for $V^2_{\textrm{\tiny sys}}$

564: in the following sections.

565: 

566: \begin{figure}

567: \begin{center}

568: \includegraphics[scale=1.2,angle=0]{fig_3.eps}

569: \end{center}

570: \caption{\label{fig_51PegV2hist} Histogram of the 51 Peg normalized visibility measurements

571: ($V^2_{\textrm{\tiny norm}}$)

572: as discussed in \S \ref{sec_51PegMoments}, in bins of $\Delta V^2=0.05$.  The dotted line is a single Gaussian fit, with

573: amplitude of 90.9 and width 0.0297, and the solid line is a two-Gaussian fit with amplitude/width

574: of 82.8/0.0242 and 12.5/0.098, respectively.  The $\chi^2$ per degree of freedom for the former is 5.44,

575: with $\chi^2/$DOF for the latter being 1.32.}

576: \end{figure}

577: 

578: \subsection{Mahalanobis and Principal Component Analysis Distances}

579: The Mahalanobis distance (MD) is a multivariate generalization of

580: one-dimensional Euclidean distance

581: \citep{1989AcA....39...85B, 1999MNRAS.303..284R}.

582: Given $N$ stars characterized by $M$ variables

583: (coordinates) $m_{jk}$, the sample distance of a particular star,

584: $k$, from the centroid of the distances is,

585: \begin{equation}

586: MD_k =

587: \sum_{j=1}^M{\left(\frac{m_{jk}-\overline{m_j}}{s_j}\right)^2}

588: \end{equation}

589: where $\overline{m_j}$ is the mean for the $j$th variable, and $s_j$

590: is its standard deviation. Alternatively, the MD of one star from a

591: specific star $k^*$, in this case 51 Peg say, is given by,

592: \begin{equation}

593: MD_k = \sum_{j=1}^M{\left(\frac{m_{jk}-m_{jk^*}}{s_j}\right)^2}

594: \end{equation}

595: where $m_{jk^*}$ are the coordinates for

596: star $k^*$. The Mahalanobis distances from 51 Peg for these stars

597: and their ranks are listed in Table 7, and

598: a histogram of the Mahalanobis distances is found in Figure \ref{fig_Maha}.

599: 

600: 

601: Principal Components Analysis (PCA) is a statistical method for

602: partitioning total variability in a sample into linear combinations

603: that are orthogonal to each other

604: \citep{1999MNRAS.303..284R}.

605: The

606: first principal component is generated to maximize the variation of

607: that linear combination; the second principal component is chosen

608: orthogonal to the first and with maximum variation conditional on

609: the orthogonality. For these data the four moments, $m_{1k}, m_{2k}, m_{3k}, m_{4k}$,

610: for each star $k$ again form the basis for the calculations.

611: 

612: The PCA is carried out on the correlation matrix so at this stage we

613: do not need to adjust for the variances. The principal component for

614: 51 Peg for the basis for the distance calculation of each star from

615: 51 Peg. Specifically, let $p_{jk}$ be the principal components for

616: star $k$ and $p_{jk^*}$ the principal component for reference star

617: $k^*$. Then the distance star $k$ is from the reference star is,

618: \begin{equation}

619: PD_k = \sum_{j=1}^M{\left(\frac{p_{jk}-p_{jk^*}}{sp_j}\right)^2}

620: \end{equation}

621: where $sp_j$ is the standard deviation for the $j$th principal

622: component. The PCA distances and their ranks are given in Table 7, and

623: a histogram of the PCA distances is found in Figure \ref{fig_PCA}.

624: 

625: The choice between Mahalanobis distance

626: and the PCA-based distance will be based on

627: convenience. The Mahalanobis distance has the advantage that it is

628: more immediately linked to the four moments of the distribution.

629: There is a very close correlation between the Mahalanobis distance

630: and the PCA-based distance as seen in Figure \ref{fig_PCAMaha}.

631: The PCA based approach has the advantage that the contribution of

632: each of the principal components can be calculated - e.g., for the

633: data considered here the first principal component accounts for 53 \% of the total

634: variability.

635: 

636: We find that the first of the known PTI binaries to appear among the ranked

637: potential calibrators of Table \ref{tab_BinaryRank} is HD 178449 - not unsurprising

638: given its large $\Delta K$ value.  The large brightness ratio makes the

639: object appear more like a calibrator than the other binary stars, and at

640: distances of $MD_{\textrm{\tiny HD178449}}=1.20$, $PD_{\textrm{\tiny HD178449}}=1.83$.

641: Consideration of the HD 178449 Maha and PCA ranks and an examination of

642: Figures 4 and 5 provides insight into the distributions for

643: both Maha and PCA distances.  Given that the sources were pre-selected to {\it likely}

644: be suitable as calibration sources, it is reasonable to expect that distributions

645: should peak at values corresponding to suitable calibrators.  If we select all

646: stars that fall towards the smaller values of those distribution, we can have

647: some confidence that we have statistically selected the stars that have been

648: demonstrated in this dataset to be suitable for use as calibrators.

649: As such, we established our cutoff at $MD, PD < 1.0$.  The resulting

650: calibrator list is available online at the MSC web site\footnote{http://msc.caltech.edu}.

651: 

652: It is important to note that the `rejection' of a star as a suitable calibrator

653: from this analysis does not necessarily indicate it is a heretofore unresolved

654: binary - merely that, within this particular dataset, the data indicate it is

655: unsuitable for use as a calibrator.  This {\it could} be due to some previously

656: undetected binarity, but could also be merely due to poor quality of data for that

657: particular object in the dataset.  A key indicator of this possibility is the fact that the

658: stars in Table \ref{tab_BinaryRank} that are listed as `acceptable' have, on average, a

659: larger expected angular size (0.449 mas) than those in the `reject' category (0.301 mas).

660: The smaller stars are, on average, more distant, and hence, are also on average dimmer - resulting in

661: lower signal-to-noise in the PTI system.  Such objects are more susceptible to poor seeing and/or weather conditions,

662: and are ultimately more likely to be rejected due to poor data quality that is unrelated to

663: actual system binarity.  For the purposes of this investigation, rejection of such sources is

664: acceptable in exchange for attempting to eliminate false positives for acceptable calibrators.

665: 

666: \begin{figure}

667: \includegraphics[scale=1.0]{fig_4.eps}

668: \caption{\label{fig_Maha} Histogram of Mahalanobis distances from HD217014 for potential calibrator stars.}

669: \end{figure}

670: 

671: \begin{figure}

672: \includegraphics[scale=1.0]{fig_5.eps}

673: \caption{\label{fig_PCA} Histogram of Principal Component Analysis distances from HD217014 for potential calibrator stars.}

674: \end{figure}

675: 

676: \begin{figure}

677: \includegraphics[scale=1.0]{fig_6.eps}

678: \caption{\label{fig_PCAMaha} Principal Component Analysis versus Mahalanobis distances from HD217014 for potential calibrator stars.}

679: \end{figure}

680: 

681: 

682: \begin{figure}

683: \begin{center}

684: \includegraphics[scale=0.60,angle=90]{fig_7.eps}

685: \end{center}

686: \caption{\label{fig_ATOFF} Equatorial sky coverage map of statistically vetted calibrators displayed

687: in an equal area

688: Aitoff projection.  Light grey circles represent $10^o$ radii cones projected onto the sky,

689: representing regions of

690: appropriate calibrator proximity to astrophysical targets; darker grey regions represent

691: areas with two or more calibrators within $10^o$.  For PTI's nominal sky accessibility

692: of $5^o < \delta < 55^o$, these calibrators represent $\gtrsim 96$\% sky coverage.}

693: \end{figure}

694: 

695: \input{tab_6.tex}

696: 

697: \section{Estimation of the Undetected Binary Rate}\label{sec_UndetectedBinaries}

698: 

699: One primary concern with the selection of potential calibration sources is choosing objects that

700: are previously undetected binaries.  For this reason, it is standard operating procedure

701: to observe no less than 2 calibration sources in conjunction with astrophysical targets,

702: allowing some means of cross-calibration between the potential calibrators.

703: Although we cannot know for certain which

704: of our previously unobserved calibration sources might have a heretofore undetected companion, we may attempt

705: to characterize the likelihood with which such an undetected companion would escape

706: detection once such a binary star system were to be placed on the observing queue.

707: 

708: We generated a synthetic, random sample of 4096 binary stars, starting with selecting

709: an object with a random spectral type consistent with our potential calibrator list, which is within

710: the range of B8 to K1.  Luminosity class for these objects was statically assigned to be either III or V, to test

711: the sensitivity of binary detection to primary star luminosity class.  Absolute V, K magnitudes, radii and masses for these primary

712: stars were then drawn from the standard MK type values found in \citet{bes88} and \citet{cox00}; apparent magnitude was

713: randomly assigned a value between $m_K = 3.5$ to $5.0$, which is consistent with the

714: apparent magnitudes of PTI calibrators.  Secondary stars were then randomly generated for

715: each of these primaries: spectral type was selected to be equal to or later than the primary star,

716: down to a class of M9\footnote{Implicit in this

717: condition is a `flat' mass ratio $q=M_1/M_2$ for binary stars, a topic which is discussed extensively

718: in \citet{duq91} and more recently in \citet{gol03}, which appears to be reasonable for this experiment.},

719: and for giant star primaries, luminosity class of the secondary objects was randomly assigned either III or V.

720: Absolute V, K magnitudes, radii and masses for these secondary

721: stars were then estimated also using the same references.  Orbital separation $a$ was then randomly assigned

722: to be between 2 and 50 Roche diameters; distance of the binary star pair was established from

723: the distance modulus, with an apparent angular separation resulting from the distance and true separation

724: of the primary and secondary.  Periods were established from the physical separation and the masses.

725: Orbital parameters, such as eccentricity $e$, inclination $i$, and longitude of the ascending node $\Omega$ were

726: randomly assigned.  Angular sizes of each component were estimated using the $V-K$ technique described in \citet{van99b};

727: given the $m_K = 3.5 - 5.0$ prior, the primaries were all well within the PTI calibrator selection criterion of $\theta<1.0$ mas.

728: Additionally, this sample well represents a potential sample of overlooked binary stars, with $a<0.1$ arcsec,

729: regardless of luminosity class.

730: 

731: Our overall goal was to test this subsample for PTI's ability

732: to detect deviations from what was expected to be normal calibrator object behavior.

733: The expected squared visibility in a narrow passband for a binary system is given by

734: \begin{equation}\label{eqn_binaries}

735: V^2(\lambda) = { V_1^2 + V_2^2r^2 +2 V_1 V_2 r \cos [ (2 \pi / \lambda){\bf B \cdot s}]\over (1+r)^2}

736: \end{equation}

737: where $V_1$ and $V_2$ are the visibility moduli for the two stars

738: alone as given by Equation \ref{eqn_UDdisk}, $r$ is the apparent

739: brightness ratio between the primary and secondary, $B$ is the

740: projected baseline vector at the system sky position, and $s$ is the

741: primary-secondary angular separation vector on the plane of the sky

742: \citep{hum95, bod99a}. $V_1$ and $V_2$ were estimated from the angular

743: sizes estimates. A

744: conservative detection limit would be a $3-\sigma$ threshold of

745: $\Delta V^2>0.06$, roughly three times PTI's limiting $V^2$

746: precision of $\sim 0.015-0.020$, where $\Delta V^2$ is the

747: difference between the expected single star $V^2$ as described in

748: Equation \ref{eqn_UDdisk} and the binary star $V^2$ from Equation

749: \ref{eqn_binaries}.  Objects with binary $V^2$ excursions less than

750: PTI's limiting $V^2$ precision would effectively be single stars as

751: far as PTI is concerned, and were excluded from consideration.

752: 

753: Figuring prominently into this characterization of PTI's ability to detect these synthetic binary stars is the

754: geometric orientation of the target systems relative to the instrument's baseline in use, contained in the

755: ${\bf B \cdot s}$ term of Equation \ref{eqn_binaries}. If PTI's baseline in use is orthogonal to the

756: primary-secondary separation vector, the departure from point-source source visibility

757: will potentially be undetectable, depending upon the brightness ratio.

758: Since the relative geometry between binary system and projected baseline varies with orbital phase,

759: these 4096 systems were then examined over the course of 20

760: random epochs between the years covered by this study, 1998-2005,

761: using PTI configurations consistent with the available baselines.  As the number of nights increases,

762: the likelihood that a binary system would remain undetected is given in Table \ref{tab_BinaryDetnFitting}.

763: 

764: Two categories of binary stars were problematic for PTI: First, stars with detectable $V^2$ excursions ($\Delta V^2_{max}\geq 0.06$)

765: but in poor geometric orientation, due to orbital phase or apparent sky separation relative to baseline used,

766: are found to escape initial detection by the array.  However, after a few ($\sim 5$) nights of observing,

767: virtually all of these objects exhibited a detectable excursion and would be detected as binaries.

768: Second, and more problematic, are the stars with $V^2$ excursions below the $3-\sigma$ threshold

769: of obvious detectability, but above PTI's limiting $V^2$

770: precision of $\sim 0.015-0.020$.  These objects would remain always unconfirmed as binaries, yet

771: their varying $V^2$ response could affect system calibration at the 2-4\% level.

772: 

773: \input{tab_7.tex}

774: 

775: For example, in a single night of observing with the NS baseline has approximately $\sim 30\%$ of the

776: binary systems with a main sequence primary are undetected.  However, this proportion drops rapidly to $\sim 5.5\%$ after

777: only 5 nights of observing, and to

778: $\sim 5\%$ after 20 nights of observing, as it does for using the three PTI baselines in sequence.

779: For binary systems with giant primaries, the limiting proportion of undetected binaries is higher,

780: at $\sim 12\%$ after 20 nights.  This larger value is consistent with a greater number of binary systems with a large

781: brightness ratio, specifically those systems with a main sequence secondary star.  This non-zero proportion of

782: undetected binary systems is compelling motivation to employ multiple calibrators

783: for any study with PTI, or any other interferometer.

784: As we shall see in \S \ref{sec_StatTests}, we have many stars that show PTI $V^2$ data that

785: are consistent with the point-response

786: of a single, rather than binary, star system.  The lingering uncertainty of undetected

787: binarity for minimally observed stars

788: can be drawn

789: from the percentages given in Table \ref{tab_BinaryDetnFitting}.

790: 

791: 

792: 

793: \section{Discussion}

794: 

795: Some of the objects categorized as `acceptable' calibrators due to their PTI $V^2$ are still found

796: to have references indicating possible binary nature or other astrophysical effects which may cause them

797: to be less-than suitable as calibrators; these objects are discussed below in \S

798: \ref{sec_acceptedCalibrators}.

799: Interferometer observations of hierarchical

800: systems have the potential to accidentally observe the wrong star and so appear to have a

801: variation in angular size.   Variations in metallicity will mean a potential calibrator

802: won't fit SED templates well

803: for predicting size.   Stars with extreme rotational velocity will potentially exhibit

804: angular size variations depending upon interferometer baseline utilized, and potentially

805: ``thrown off'' material (as seen with the Be star phenomena) will also affect visibility

806: measurements if the disk is detected.

807: Additionally,

808: evidence in the literature was uncovered for rejected calibrator candidates

809: and is discussed in \S \ref{sec_rejectedCalibrators}.

810: 

811: 

812: \subsection{Objects thought to be acceptable calibrators}\label{sec_acceptedCalibrators}

813: HD 905 is listed as a periodic variable star \citep{koen02}.

814: 

815: HD 1279 shows P Cygni type profiles in UV spectra taken with IUE \citep{snow94}.

816: 

817: HD 2758 is listed as a binary in the Tycho-2 catalog \citep{fabr02} with a companion at position angle 69.6

818: degrees and separation of 0\farcs44.

819: 

820: HD 3268 is listed in \cite{cayr97} as metal poor with [Fe/H] = -0.23.

821: 

822: HD 15335 is listed in \citet{1994AJ....108.2338H} as an 0\farcs020 astrometric binary,

823: detected via photographic plates obtained with the 61 cm Sproul refractor, although the comments cite it as ``astrom.,probable'',

824: and no secondary component magnitude is listed.  Follow-up work by \citet{2005ApJ...622.1102F} report a null result not only on detecting a

825: stellar companion, but also down to planetary mass.

826: 

827: Both HD 19994 and HD 90508 are indicated to be binary stars in \citet{1994AJ....107..306H}.  HD 19994 is notable in that it has a

828: Jupiter-mass planet \citep{2004A&A...415..391M}, and the F8V star's stellar companion is an M3V dwarf a few arcseconds away, which makes it undetectable

829: by PTI from a brightness ratio standpoint.  Similarly, HD 90508 is a F9V star with a M3V companion.

830: 

831: HD 24357 is listed in \cite{cayr97} as metal rich with [Fe/H] = 0.30.

832: 

833: HD 27524 is listed in \cite{cayr97} as metal poor with [Fe/H] = -0.46.

834: 

835: HD 28024 is listed in the Washington Double

836: Star Catalog as a visual double with 104\farcs3 separation

837: and a delta magnitude of 8.23 \citep{worl96}.  It has a GCVS

838: period of 0.148 days \citep{samus04} and in addition, it is cited as a delta Scuti

839: variable \citep{rodr00}. It also has high rotational velocity (see below).

840: 

841: HD 28677 is listed in the GCVS as a possible variable star, however,

842: no period or variability type is identified and this designation may

843: be in doubt \citep{samus04}. We also note that this star is listed in

844: a catalogue of binaries detected using lunar occultation and has a

845: separation from its companion of 16.2 $\pm$ 5.2 mas, at a position

846: angle of 205.9 degrees, with a delta magnitude of 0.0 $\pm$ 1.62

847: magnitudes at 547 nm \citep{mason95}. There is no evidence for

848: binarity in the PTI data, despite the 9 nights of available

849: calibrated PTI data (7 on the NS baseline, 2 on the NW baseline).

850: 

851: HD 28704 is listed in the Washington Double Star Catalog as being a hierarchical quadruple system with

852: separations from the primary ranging from 76\farcs4 to 113\farcs7 and delta magnitudes

853: with respect to the primary ranging from 0.71 to 7.3 \citep{worl96}.

854: 

855: HD 31662 is listed in the Washington Double Star Catalog as being a

856: visual double with separation 5\farcs4 and a delta magnitude of 5.47

857: \citep{worl96}.  There is no evidence for binarity in the PTI data.

858: 

859: HD 33167 has a large range of metallicities in the literature, from [Fe/H] = 0.09 \citep{cayr97} to

860: [Fe/H] = -0.36 to -0.37 (\citet{ibuk02} and \citet{mars95}, respectively).

861: 

862: HD 38558 is noted by \cite{adel01} to have variability of 0.01 magnitudes in the Hipparcos data.

863: 

864: HD 43042 is listed in the Washington Double Star Catalog as being a hierarchical quadruple system

865: with separations from the primary ranging from 32\farcs0 to 91\farcs2 and delta magnitudes with

866: respect to the primary ranging from 4.8 to 6.0 \citep{worl96}.

867: 

868: HD 51530 is listed in the Washington Double Star Catalog as being a

869: hierarchical triple system with separations from the primary of

870: 0\farcs5 and 28\farcs2 and a delta magnitude of the larger separated

871: component of 6.0 magnitudes \citep{worl96}.  There is no evidence for

872: binarity in the PTI data.

873: 

874: HD 58551 is noted to be extremely metal poor, with [Fe/H] = -0.6 \citep{bart84,cayr97}.

875: 

876: HD 58715 is noted as a double in the Hipparcos Input Catalogue with unknown separation and

877: magnitude difference \citep{turon93}. It is listed as an eruptive

878: Gamma Cas variable by \citep{samus04}

879: and has high rotational velocity (see below).

880: 

881: HD 58946 is listed as a hierarchical quadruple system spread over 5 arcminutes.  The closest

882: companion to the primary is separated by 3\farcs4 with a delta magnitude of 8.4 \citep{turon93}.

883: \citet{worl96} goes on to list the A component in the system as a spectroscopic binary.  However,

884: \citet{gall05} use the system as a constant RV source to demonstrate the stability of their

885: ELODIE instrument in searching for brown dwarfs and extrasolar planets. \citet{samus04} lists

886: it in the GCVS with unknown variability type.  And finally \citet{adel01} shows it to have 0.01 magnitudes

887: of variability, as measured by Hipparcos.

888: 

889: HD 71148 is listed in the GCVS \citep{samus04} as a previously misidentified variable star.  It

890: is metal poor with [Fe/H] = -0.15 \citep{ibuk02}.

891: 

892: HD 75332 has been studied extensively in radial velocity surveys searching for extrasolar

893: planets, however, no evidence for any are found to date \citep{2005ApJ...622.1102F}.

894: 

895: HD 75732 is a visual double with a separation of 85\farcs0 and a delta magnitude of 7.2.

896: It has been found to have planets \citep{2005ApJ...622.1102F}, which are well below the

897: sensitivity threshold of PTI to detect.

898: 

899: HD 89125 is a visual double with a separation of 7\farcs4 \citep{turon93}. Additionally, it is

900: seen to have low-metallicity ranging from [Fe/H] = -0.19 to -0.39 \citep{cayr97,mars88}.

901: 

902: HD 97334 is a hierarchical quadruple system with separations from the primary ranging from 88\farcs2

903: to 128\farcs4 and magnitude differences from 1.5 to 6.0 \citep{worl96}.

904: 

905: HD 97633 is flagged as a variable star by \citet{samus04} with the variable type and period unidentified.

906: Further, it is extremely metal-rich with [Fe/H] = 0.40 \citep{cayr97}.

907: 

908: HD 103095 is flagged as a suspected varaible star by \citet{samus04} with the variable type and

909: period unidentified.  It has also been studied by \citet{lath02} for binarity and was found to

910: have radial velocity measurements which varied at the 2-3 km s$^{-1}$ level, with no indication

911: of binarity or an orbital solution.

912: 

913: HD 119550 has also been studied by \citet{lath02} for binarity and was found to have radial

914: velocity measurements which varied at the 1 km s$^{-1}$ level, with no indication of

915: binarity or an orbital solution.

916: 

917: HD 128167 is flagged as a suspected variable star by \citet{samus04} with the variable type,

918: based on a reference, potentially a sigma bootes variable with an unidentified period.  It is

919: identified in the Washington Double Star catalog as a member of a hierarchical triple

920: system with separations from the primary of 248\farcs0 and

921: 237\farcs0 and 5.34 and 6.80 magnitudes respectively \citep{worl96}. Finally, it displays

922: a wide range of low metallicities, from [Fe/H] = -0.18 to -0.60 \citep{cayr97}.

923: 

924: Both HD 132254 and HD 134083 are flagged by \citet{nor04} as spectroscopic binaries,

925: although no other supporting evidence in the literature could be found

926: for this conclusion for either star.

927: Indeed, in \citet{2005A&A...443..337G}, HD 134083 is cited as having a constant radial velocity at the $\sim 50$ m/s level,

928: which would preclude any binary detectable by PTI.  HD 132254

929: was well-behaved enough for \citet{2004AN....325..439K} to list the object as a candidate RV standard.

930: 

931: HD 136118 has been studied extensively with radial velocity techniques and is know to have

932: a planet \citep{santos03, santos04}, which are well-below

933: the sensitivity threshold of PTI to detect.

934: 

935: HD 141187 is studied in a catalog of astrometric binaries, identified using Hipparcos and Tycho

936: data, to have nonlinear proper motion \citep{maka05}.  It is also seen to have high rotational

937: velocity (see below).

938: 

939: HD 154345 is listed in \citet{samus04} as a suspected variable star

940: in the GCVS, however no period of variability type is listed.

941: 

942: HD 166205 is flagged in \citet{mason99} as a suspected binary based on ground-based and

943: Hipparcos data, however the binarity was not able to be confirmed, so it is listed in

944: their Table 7 as a "problem star". Finally, it is flagged in \cite{adel01} as a variable

945: star in the Hipparcos survey with 0.01 magnitudes of variability.

946: 

947: HD 171834 is flagged as a binary with 0\farcs1 arcsecond separation and no notation of the

948: secondary's magnitude in \citet{worl96}.  It is also seen to have a low metallicity compared

949: to solar of [Fe/H] = -0.42 \citep{cayr97}.

950: 

951: HD 182488 has been studied extensively using the radial velocity technique and is found to

952: have no detectable planet or stellar companions \citet{2005ApJ...622.1102F}.

953: 

954: HD 186568 is a member of a hierarchical triple with separations of 15\farcs4 and 33\farcs9

955: and magnitude differences of 7.75 and 5.44 respectively \citep{worl96}.

956: 

957: HD 187691 is a member of a hierarchical quintuple system with

958: separations from the primary ranging from 20\farcs5 to 89\farcs7 and

959: magnitude differences of 7.69 to 8.59 \cite{worl96}. It was used by

960: \cite{mazeh96} as an RV standard in the study of orbits of three

961: spectroscopic binary systems.  \citet{2005ApJ...622.1102F} have

962: studied it extensively in their radial velocity searches for planets

963: and find no evidence for a companion.  And finally, it is flagged in

964: the GCVS as a rotating variable star with no period listed

965: \citep{samus04}.

966: 

967: HD 187923 is a member of a visual double system with a separation from the secondary

968: of 93\farcs9 and a magnitude difference of 5.57 \citep{worl96}.  It has been studied

969: extensively using radial velocity techniques and is found to have no companions

970: \citet{2005ApJ...622.1102F}.  It is flagged in the GCVS as variable, but no variability

971: type or period is identified \citep{samus04}.

972: 

973: HD 195564 is a member of a hierarchical triple system with separations of 4\farcs6 and

974: 100\farcs2 and magnitude differences of 5.5 and 4.2 respectively \citep{worl96}. It has

975: been studied extensively using radial velocity techniques and is found to have no

976: companions \citet{2005ApJ...622.1102F}.

977: 

978: HD 197076 is a member of a hierarchical triple system with

979: separations of 98\farcs8 and 125\farcs0 and magnitude differences of

980: 5.45 and 6.95 respectively \citep{worl96}. It has been studied

981: extensively using radial velocity techniques and is found to have no

982: companions \citet{2005ApJ...622.1102F}.

983: 

984: HD 198478 is a member of a visual double system with a separation of 20\farcs5 and a

985: magnitude difference of 5.32 \citep{worl96}.  It is flagged in the GCVS as being

986: a pulsating variable star \citep{samus04} and has an identified period of

987: 0.20472 days \citep{koen02}.

988: 

989: HD 210855 is a member of hierarchical triple system with separations of 79\farcs6 and

990: 56\farcs0 and magnitude differences of 5.26 and 8.46 respectively \citep{worl96}.

991: 

992: HD 214680 is a member of a visual double system with a separation of 60\farcs4 and

993: a magnitude difference of 5.14 \citep{worl96}. Further, it is flagged in the GCVS

994: as a beta Cephei variable star \citep{samus04}.

995: 

996: HD 218396 is flagged in the GCVS as a rotating ellipsoidal variable \citep{samus04} and

997: as a probable lambda Bootis variable by \cite{gerb03}.

998: 

999: HD 219080 is flagged as a new periodic variable star by \cite{koen02}.

1000: 

1001: HD 222439 is a member of a hierarchical triple system with separations of 46\farcs6 and

1002: 103\farcs2 and magnitude differences of 7.16 for both companions \citep{worl96}. Further,

1003: it is flagged in the GCVS as a variable star of unknown type \citep{samus04}.

1004: 

1005: In addition, the following stars have rotational velocities (v sin i) between 100 and 200 km/s: HD 7804, HD 18411,

1006: HD 20150, HD 26605, HD 27397, HD 27946, HD 28677, HD 30739, HD 32301, HD 32630, HD 37147, HD 50019, HD 56537,

1007: HD 60111, HD 67006, HD 79439, HD 83287, HD 85795, HD 87696, HD 92825, HD 102124, HD 107904, HD 108765,

1008: HD 110411, HD 111604, HD 116831, HD 122408, HD 125161, HD 125162, HD 132052, HD 141003, HD 143894,

1009: HD 147547, HD 152614, HD 161868, HD 166014, HD 166205, HD 168914, HD 169702, HD 177196, HD 177756,

1010: HD 192425, HD 204153, HD 206043, HD 210129, HD 213558, HD 214734, HD 214923, HD 216735, HD 222439.

1011: The following stars have rotational velocities higher than 200 km/s: HD 11946, HD 17573, HD 20418,

1012: HD 21686, HD 23630, HD 23862, HD 28024, HD 30823, HD 58715, HD 73262, HD 93702, HD 98058,

1013: HD 130109.  These data were taken mainly from Vizier catalogs associated with the following

1014: papers: \cite{gleb00}, \cite{royer02} and \cite{deme02}.

1015: Rapidly rotating stars have an additional uncertainty in their predicted angular size due

1016: to rotational distortion, which is on the order of $\sim 10-15$\% \citep{2006ApJ...637..494V}.

1017: However, if this was a significant factor, the statistical vetting of \S \ref{sec_StatTests}

1018: would have rejected these objects as valid calibrators.

1019: 

1020: 

1021: 

1022: \subsection{Objects rejected as acceptable calibrators}\label{sec_rejectedCalibrators}

1023: 

1024: HD 8357 is flagged by \citet{nor04} as a spectroscopic binary, with a mass ratio of $q=0.841 \pm 0.009$.

1025: 

1026: HD 8799 was found to be listed as a visual (but not physical) binary of unspecified separation in \citet{tok02}.

1027: 

1028: HD 13480 is flagged by \citet{nor04} as a spectroscopic binary, with a mass ratio of $q=1.062 \pm 0.010$.

1029: 

1030: HD 16234 is flagged by \citet{nor04} as a spectroscopic binary, with a mass ratio of $q=1.039 \pm 0.041$.

1031: 

1032: HD 18012 was examined by \citet{1987AJ.....94.1318L} using speckle interferometry at the 4m Mayall telescope, without any detection of a secondary companion.

1033: 

1034: HD 27483 is flagged by \citet{nor04} as a spectroscopic binary, with a mass ratio of $q=0.937 \pm 0.011$.

1035: 

1036: HD 27901 was examined by \citet{1993AJ....105..220M} using speckle interferometry, without any detection of a secondary companion.

1037: 

1038: HD 37594 is found to have a range of spectral classifications from A5mF2 \citep{bert67} to F0Vp \citep{abt95}

1039: as found by \cite{skiff05} indicating that the model fits to these data may be problematic.

1040: 

1041: HD 43587 is noted by \citet{2002ApJS..141..503N} as having a radial velocity RMS $>$ 0.1 km/s, and \citet{2005AJ....129.2420M} cite the object

1042: as a possible astrometric binary from Hipparcos proper motion discrepancies,

1043: with the factor $Q_0$ as discussed in that study, related to the lower bound of a possible secondary companion's

1044: mass, having a value of $\log Q_0$=-1.6 yr$^{-1}$.

1045: 

1046: HD 75137 is listed by \cite{turon93} to have a companion separated by 12\farcs4 with a magnitude

1047: difference of 7.5.  \cite{worl96} state that the primary in the system is a spectroscopic binary with

1048: an orbital period of 8.2 days.  It also has high rotational velocity (see below).

1049: 

1050: HD 79969 is noted by \citet{2004AJ....127.1727H}, using speckle

1051: interferometry, to have a secondary companion.  The orbital axis is 0\farcs66 $\pm$ 0\farcs007 with a period of 34.2 years \cite{henry93}.

1052: 

1053: HD 118232 is flagged as a suspected variable star by \cite{samus04}

1054: with the variable type and period unidentified.  A visual inspection

1055: of the PTI visibility data for the 9 nights this object was observed

1056: shows 7 that are qualitatively identical to the associated

1057: calibrators, and 2 that are marginally offset $\Delta V^2 \approx

1058: 0.05$ from those calibrators.

1059: 

1060: HD 120510 is flagged by \citet{nor04} as a spectroscopic binary,

1061: with a mass ratio of $q=1.000 \pm 0.009$.

1062: 

1063: HD 122676 is noted by \citet{2002ApJS..141..503N} as having a radial velocity RMS $>$ 0.1 km/s.

1064: 

1065: HD 123999 is flagged by \citet{nor04} as a spectroscopic binary, with a mass ratio of $q=0.963 \pm 0.010$.

1066: 

1067: HD 141187 is noted by \citet{2005AJ....129.2420M} as a possible astrometric binary from Hipparcos proper motion discrepancies,

1068: with $\log Q_0$=-1.1 yr$^{-1}$.

1069: 

1070: HD 149630 is noted by \citet{2005AJ....129.2420M} as a possible astrometric binary from Hipparcos proper motion discrepancies,

1071: with $\log Q_0$=-1.0 yr$^{-1}$.

1072: 

1073: HD 152308 is noted in \citet{1991bsc..book.....H} as having ``suspected variable radial velocity''.

1074: It appears in the GCVS catalog as a rotating variable star \cite{samus04} and has an identified

1075: period of 0.9366 days \cite{rens01}.

1076: 

1077: HD 157935 has a radial velocity of -51.9 km s$^{-1}$ quoted in \citet{1995A&AS..114..269D} (no error given, but a radial velocity quality

1078: of `B' on a scale of `A' to `E', where `A' is best), but a value of $-54.7 \pm 1.6$ km s$^{-1}$  listed in \citet{nor04} - possibly

1079: an indication of a variable radial velocity.

1080: 

1081: 

1082: HD 181655 is noted by \citet{2002ApJS..141..503N} as having a stable radial velocity with RMS $<$ 100 m/s.

1083: 

1084: HD 195050 is noted by \citet{2005AJ....129.2420M} as a possible astrometric binary from Hipparcos proper motion discrepancies,

1085: with $\log Q_0$=-1.1 yr$^{-1}$. It is also seen to have high rotational velocity (see below).

1086: 

1087: HD 120048, HD 120509, HD 136643, HD 158063, HD 186547, and HD 234677 are all listed in the radial velocity study of

1088: \citet{2005A&A...430..165F} as having ``no evidence for radial-velocity variations''.

1089: 

1090: HD 216538 is flagged by \cite{samus04} as a long-period pulsating B star.

1091: 

1092: HD 216831 is a member of a visual double system with a separation of

1093: 49\farcs6 and a magnitude difference of 3.76 \cite{worl96}. Further,

1094: it was examined by \citet{mca87} using speckle interferometry at the

1095: 3.6m CFHT, without any detection of a secondary companion. Finally,

1096: it has anomalously high metallicity compared to solar of [Fe/H] =

1097: 0.40 \citep{cayr97}.

1098: 

1099: HD 223346 is flagged to have anomalously low metallicity compared to solar of

1100: [Fe/H] = -0.42 \citep{ibuk02}.

1101: 

1102: HD 223421 is flagged to have anomalously low metallicity compared to solar

1103: ranging from [Fe/H] = -0.20 to -0.35 (see for example \cite{ibuk02} and \cite{cayr97}).

1104: It is flagged as a probable spectroscopic binary in a catalog of

1105: overluminous F-type stars, though identification was problematic \citep{grif03}.

1106: 

1107: In addition, the following stars have rotational velocities (v sin i) between 100 and 200

1108: km/s: HD 20677, HD 23850, HD 27322, HD 27901, HD 45542, HD 75137, HD 82621, HD 141187,

1109: HD 141851, HD 144874, HD 178449, HD 195050, HD 204403. The following stars have rotational

1110: velocities higher than 200 km/s:  HD 149630 and HD 184606.

1111: These data were taken mainly from Vizier catalogs associated with the following

1112: papers: \cite{gleb00}, \cite{royer02} and \cite{deme02}.

1113: 

1114: 

1115: \section{Conclusion}

1116: 

1117: We have examined 8 years of PTI visibility data for candidate

1118: single, point-like stellar calibrator sources.  To vet the

1119: appropriate sources, we subjected the data to a rigorous statistical

1120: evaluation, comparing the sources to a well-understood and

1121: intensively studied standard PTI calibrator, HD217014.  Of the

1122: candidates that satisfied the {\it a priori} selection criteria,

1123: approximately 350 were found to be `well-behaved' in an empirical,

1124: statistical sense, with $\sim 140$ being rejected.  These vetted

1125: calibrator objects represent $\gtrsim 96$\% sky coverage for PTI

1126: in the declination range $5^o < \delta < 55^o$ and

1127: form a set of well-characterized calibrator anchors for future PTI

1128: observations, archival studies, and observations at other

1129: interferometric facilities.

1130: 

1131: This research has made use of NASA's Astrophysics Data System. This

1132: research has made use of the SIMBAD and VizieR databases, operated

1133: at CDS, Strasbourg, France.

1134: Photometric data was obtained in part from the General Catalog of

1135: Photometric Data \citep{1997A&AS..124..349M}.

1136: This publication makes use of data

1137: products from the Two Micron All Sky Survey, which is a joint

1138: project of the University of Massachusetts and the Infrared

1139: Processing and Analysis Center/California Institute of Technology,

1140: funded by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration and the

1141: National Science Foundation.

1142: 

1143: Science operations with PTI are conducted through the efforts of the

1144: PTI Collaboration (http://msc.caltech.edu/missions/Palomar/), and we

1145: acknowledge the invaluable contributions of our PTI colleagues.

1146: Funding for PTI was provided to the Jet Propulsion Laboratory under

1147: its TOPS (Towards Other Planetary Systems), ASEPS (Astronomical

1148: Studies of Extrasolar Planetary Systems), and Origins programs and

1149: from the JPL Director's Discretionary Fund. Portions of this work

1150: were performed at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California

1151: Institute of Technology under contract with the National Aeronautics

1152: and Space Administration.

1153: 

1154: 

1155: \begin{thebibliography}{}

1156: \bibitem[Abt \& Morrell(1995)]{abt95} Abt, H. A. \& Morrell, N. I. 1995, \apjs, 99, 135

1157: \bibitem[Adelman(2001)]{adel01} Adelman, S. J. 2001, \aa, 367, 297

1158: \bibitem[Alcaino(1965)]{1965LowOB...6..167A} Alcaino, G.\ 1965, Lowell Observatory Bulletin, 6, 167

1159: \bibitem[Allen(1973)]{1973MNRAS.161..145A} Allen, D.~A.\ 1973, \mnras, 161, 145

1160: \bibitem[Anthony-Twarog \& Twarog(1994)]{1994AJ....107.1577A} Anthony-Twarog, B.~J., \& Twarog, B.~A.\ 1994, \aj, 107, 1577

1161: \bibitem[Appenzeller(1966)]{1966ZA.....64..269A} Appenzeller, I.\ 1966, Zeitschrift fur Astrophysics, 64, 269

1162: \bibitem[Ardeberg et al.(1973)]{1973A&AS....9..163A} Ardeberg, A., Sarg, K., \& Wramdemark, S.\ 1973, \aaps, 9, 163

1163: \bibitem[Arellano Ferro et al.(1990)]{1990A&AS...83..225F} Arellano Ferro, A., Parrao, L., Schuster, W., Gonzalez-Bedolla, S., Peniche, R., \& Pena, J.~H.\ 1990, \aaps, 83, 225

1164: \bibitem[Argue(1963)]{1963MNRAS.125..557A} Argue, A.~N.\ 1963, \mnras, 125, 557

1165: \bibitem[Argue(1966)]{1966MNRAS.133..475A} Argue, A.~N.\ 1966, \mnras, 133, 475

1166: \bibitem[Arp(1958)]{1958AJ.....63..118A} Arp, H.~C.\ 1958, \aj, 63, 118

1167: \bibitem[Baize(1989)]{bai89} Baize, P.\ 1989, \aaps, 81, 415

1168: \bibitem[Bakos(1968)]{1968AJ.....73..187B} Bakos, G.~A.\ 1968, \aj, 73, 187

1169: \bibitem[Barry(1969)]{1969PASP...81..339B} Barry, D.~C.\ 1969, \pasp, 81, 339

1170: \bibitem[Bartkevicius(1984)]{bart84} Bartkevicius, A. 1984, Vilnius Astronomijos Observatorijos Biuletenis, 68, 3

1171: \bibitem[Bartkowiak \& Jakimiec(1989)]{1989AcA....39...85B} Bartkowiak, A., \& Jakimiec, M.\ 1989, Acta Astronomica, 39, 85

1172: \bibitem[Beichman et al.(1988)]{1988iras....1.....B} Beichman, C.~A., Neugebauer, G., Habing, H.~J., Clegg, P.~E., \& Chester, T.~J.\ 1988, Infrared astronomical satellite (IRAS) catalogs and atlases.~Volume 1:  Explanatory supplement, 1

1173: \bibitem[Bertaud \& Floquet(1967)]{bert67} Bertaud, C. \& Floquet, M. 1967, J. Obs., 50, 425

1174: \bibitem[Bessell \& Brett(1988)]{bes88} Bessell, M.~S., \& Brett, J.~M.  1988, \pasp, 100, 1134

1175: \bibitem[Blaauw et al.(1976)]{1976A&AS...23..393B} Blaauw, A., West, R.~M., Bartaya, R.~A., \& Tolbert, C.~R.\ 1976, \aaps, 23, 393

1176: \bibitem[Blanco et al.(1979)]{1979A&AS...36..297B} Blanco, C., Marilli, E., \& Catalano, S.\ 1979, \aaps, 36, 297

1177: \bibitem[Boden \& Lane(2001)]{bod01} Boden, A.~F., \& Lane, B.~F.  2001, \apj, 547, 1071

1178: \bibitem[Boden et al.(1998a)]{1998SPIE.3350..872B} Boden, A.~F., Colavita, M.~M., van Belle, G.~T., \& Shao, M.\ 1998, \procspie, 3350, 872

1179: \bibitem[Boden et al.(1998b)]{bod98}Boden, A.F, et al., 1998, \apjl, 504, L39

1180: \bibitem[Boden et al.(1999a)]{bod99a} Boden, A.~F., et al. 1999, \apj, 515, 356

1181: \bibitem[Boden et al.(1999b)]{bod99b} Boden, A.~F., et al. 1999, \apj, 527, 360

1182: \bibitem[Boden et al.(2000)]{bod00} Boden, A.~F., Creech-Eakman, M.~J., \& Queloz, D.\ 2000, \apj, 536, 880

1183: \bibitem[Boden et al.(2005)]{bod05} Boden, A.~F., Torres, G., \& Hummel, C.~A. 2005, \apj, 627, 464

1184: \bibitem[Bok et al.(1972)]{1972AJ.....77..733B} Bok, B.~J., Bok, P.~F., \& Miller, E.~W.\ 1972, \aj, 77, 733

1185: \bibitem[Bond(1970)]{1970ApJS...22..117B} Bond, H.~E.\ 1970, \apjs, 22, 117

1186: \bibitem[Bond(1980)]{1980ApJS...44..517B} Bond, H.~E.\ 1980, \apjs, 44, 517

1187: \bibitem[Bord{\'e} et al.(2002)]{2002A&A...393..183B} Bord{\'e}, P., Coud{\'e} du Foresto, V., Chagnon, G., \& Perrin, G.\ 2002, \aap, 393, 183

1188: \bibitem[Bouigue et al.(1961)]{1961AnTou..28...33B} Bouigue, R., Boulon, J., \& Pedoussaut, A.\ 1961, Annales de l'Observatoire Astron.~et Meteo.~de Toulouse, 28, 33

1189: \bibitem[Bouigue et al.(1963)]{1963AnTou..29...17B} Bouigue, R., Boulon, J., \& Pedoussaut, A.\ 1963, Annales de l'Observatoire Astron.~et Meteo.~de Toulouse, 29, 17

1190: \bibitem[Bouigue(1959)]{1959AnTou..27...47B} Bouigue, R.\ 1959, Annales de l'Observatoire Astron.~et Meteo.~de Toulouse, 27, 47

1191: \bibitem[Breger(1968)]{1968AJ.....73...84B} Breger, M.\ 1968, \aj, 73, 84

1192: \bibitem[Breger(1974)]{1974ApJ...188...53B} Breger, M.\ 1974, \apj, 188, 53

1193: \bibitem[Bronkalla \& Notni(1961)]{1961AN....286..179B} Bronkalla, W., \& Notni, P.\ 1961, Astronomische Nachrichten, 286, 179

1194: \bibitem[Burnichon \& Garnier(1976)]{1976A&AS...24...89B} Burnichon, M.~L., \& Garnier, R.\ 1976, \aaps, 24, 89

1195: \bibitem[Cameron(1966)]{1966GeoOM..21.....C} Cameron, R.~C.\ 1966, Georgetown Observatory Monogram, 21,

1196: \bibitem[Cardelli et al.(1989)]{1989ApJ...345..245C} Cardelli, J.~A., Clayton, G.~C., \& Mathis, J.~S.\ 1989, \apj, 345, 245

1197: \bibitem[Carney \& Aaronson(1979)]{1979AJ.....84..867C} Carney, B.~W., \& Aaronson, M.\ 1979, \aj, 84, 867

1198: \bibitem[Carney(1978)]{1978AJ.....83.1087C} Carney, B.~W.\ 1978, \aj, 83, 1087

1199: \bibitem[Carney(1979)]{1979ApJ...233..211C} Carney, B.~W.\ 1979, \apj, 233, 211

1200: \bibitem[Carney(1983)]{1983AJ.....88..610C} Carney, B.~W.\ 1983, \aj, 88, 610

1201: \bibitem[Cayrel de Strobel et al.(1997)]{cayr97} Cayrel de Strobel, G., et al. 1997, \aaps, 144, 299.

1202: \bibitem[Celis S.(1975)]{1975A&AS...22....9C} Celis S., L.\ 1975, \aaps, 22, 9

1203: \bibitem[Claret \& Hauschildt(2003)]{cla03b} Claret, A., \& Hauschildt, P.~H.\ 2003, \aap, 412, 241

1204: \bibitem[Colavita et al.(1999)]{col99}Colavita, M.M., et al., 1999, \apj, 510, 505

1205: \bibitem[Colavita(1999)]{col99b}Colavita, M.M., 1999, \pasp, 111, 111

1206: \bibitem[Coleman(1982)]{1982AJ.....87..369C} Coleman, L.~A.\ 1982, \aj, 87, 369

1207: \bibitem[Cousins \& Stoy(1962)]{1962RGOB...64..103C} Cousins, A.~W.~J., \& Stoy, R.~H.\ 1962, Royal Greenwich Observatory Bulletin, 64, 103

1208: \bibitem[Cousins(1962)]{1962MNSSA..21...20C} Cousins, A.~W.~J.\ 1962, Monthly Notes of the Astronomical Society of South Africa, 21, 20

1209: \bibitem[Cousins(1962)]{1962MNSSA..21...61C} Cousins, A.~W.~J.\ 1962, Monthly Notes of the Astronomical Society of South Africa, 21, 61

1210: \bibitem[Cousins(1963)]{1963MNSSA..22...12C} Cousins, A.~W.~J.\ 1963, Monthly Notes of the Astronomical Society of South Africa, 22, 12

1211: \bibitem[Cousins(1963)]{1963MNSSA..22...58C} Cousins, A.~W.~J.\ 1963, Monthly Notes of the Astronomical Society of South Africa, 22, 58

1212: \bibitem[Cousins(1963)]{1963MNSSA..22..130C} Cousins, A.~W.~J.\ 1963, Monthly Notes of the Astronomical Society of South Africa, 22, 130

1213: \bibitem[Cousins(1964)]{1964MNSSA..23...10C} Cousins, A.~W.~J.\ 1964, Monthly Notes of the Astronomical Society of South Africa, 23, 10

1214: \bibitem[Cousins(1964)]{1964MNSSA..23..175C} Cousins, A.~W.~J.\ 1964, Monthly Notes of the Astronomical Society of South Africa, 23, 175

1215: \bibitem[Cousins(1965)]{1965MNSSA..24..120C} Cousins, A.~W.~J.\ 1965, Monthly Notes of the Astronomical Society of South Africa, 24, 120

1216: \bibitem[Cousins(1973)]{1973MNSSA..32..117C} Cousins, A.~W.~J.\ 1973, Monthly Notes of the Astronomical Society of South Africa, 32, 117

1217: \bibitem[Cousins(1984)]{1984SAAOC...8...59C} Cousins, A.~W.~J.\ 1984, South African Astronomical Observatory Circular, 8, 59

1218: \bibitem[Cousins(1987)]{1987SAAOC..11...93C} Cousins, A.~W.~J.\ 1987, South African Astronomical Observatory Circular, 11, 93

1219: \bibitem[Cowley et al.(1967)]{1967AJ.....72.1334C} Cowley, A.~P., Hiltner, W.~A., \& Witt, A.~N.\ 1967, \aj, 72, 1334

1220: \bibitem[Cox(2000)]{cox00} Cox, A.~N.\ 2000, Allen's astrophysical quantities, 4th ed.~Publisher: New York: AIP Press; Springer, 2000.~Editedy by Arthur N.~Cox.~ ISBN: 0387987460,

1221: \bibitem[Crawford \& Barnes(1969)]{1969AJ.....74..818C} Crawford, D.~L., \& Barnes, J.~V.\ 1969, \aj, 74, 818

1222: \bibitem[Crawford \& Barnes(1970)]{1970AJ.....75..978C} Crawford, D.~L., \& Barnes, J.~V.\ 1970, \aj, 75, 978

1223: \bibitem[Crawford \& Barnes(1974)]{1974AJ.....79..687C} Crawford, D.~L., \& Barnes, J.~V.\ 1974, \aj, 79, 687

1224: \bibitem[Crawford \& Perry(1966)]{1966AJ.....71..206C} Crawford, D.~L., \& Perry, C.~L.\ 1966, \aj, 71, 206

1225: \bibitem[Crawford \& Perry(1976)]{1976AJ.....81..419C} Crawford, D.~L., \& Perry, C.~L.\ 1976, \aj, 81, 419

1226: \bibitem[Crawford et al.(1967)]{1966AJ.....71..709C} Crawford, D.~L., Barnes, J.~V., Faure, B.~Q., \& Golson, J.~C.\ 1967, \aj, 71, 709

1227: \bibitem[Crawford et al.(1971)]{1971AJ.....76.1058C} Crawford, D.~L., Barnes, J.~V., \& Golson, J.~C.\ 1971, \aj, 76, 1058

1228: \bibitem[Crawford et al.(1972)]{1972A&AS....5..109C} Crawford, D.~L., Barnes, J.~V., Gibson, J., Golson, J.~C., Perry, C.~L., \& Crawford, M.~L.\ 1972, \aaps, 5, 109

1229: \bibitem[Crawford et al.(1973)]{1973AJ.....78..738C} Crawford, D.~L., Barnes, J.~V., Golson, J.~C., \& Hube, D.~P.\ 1973, \aj, 78, 738

1230: \bibitem[Crawford(1963)]{1963ApJ...137..523C} Crawford, D.~L.\ 1963, \apj, 137, 523

1231: \bibitem[Crawford(1975)]{1975AJ.....80..955C} Crawford, D.~L.\ 1975, \aj, 80, 955

1232: \bibitem[Cutri et al.(2003)]{2003yCat.2246.....C} Cutri, R.~M., et al. 2003, VizieR Online Data Catalog, 2246,

1233: \bibitem[Danziger \& Dickens(1967)]{1967ApJ...149...55D} Danziger, I.~J., \& Dickens, R.~J.\ 1967, \apj, 149, 55

1234: \bibitem[Danziger \& Faber(1972)]{1972A&A....18..428D} Danziger, I.~J., \& Faber, S.~M.\ 1972, \aap, 18, 428

1235: \bibitem[Davis et al.(2000)]{dav00} Davis, J., Tango, W.~J., \& Booth, A.~J.\ 2000, \mnras, 318, 387

1236: \bibitem[de Medeiros et al.(2002)]{deme02} de Medeiros, J. R., Udry, S., Burki, G. \& Mayor, M. 2002, \aa, 395, 97

1237: \bibitem[de Vaucouleurs(1959)]{1959P&SS....2...26D} de Vaucouleurs, G.\ 1959, \planss, 2, 26

1238: \bibitem[Deutschman et al.(1976)]{1976ApJS...30...97D} Deutschman, W.~A., Davis, R.~J., \& Schild, R.~E.\ 1976, \apjs, 30, 97

1239: \bibitem[Dickens et al.(1968)]{1968AJ.....73....6D} Dickens, R.~J., Kraft, R.~P., \& Krzeminski, W.\ 1968, \aj, 73, 6

1240: \bibitem[Duflot et al.(1995)]{1995A&AS..114..269D} Duflot, M., Figon, P., \& Meyssonnier, N.\ 1995, \aaps, 114, 269

1241: \bibitem[Duquennoy \& Mayor(1991)]{duq91} Duquennoy, A., \& Mayor, M.\ 1991, \aap, 248, 485

1242: \bibitem[Dyck et al.(1996)]{dyc96} Dyck, H.~M., Benson, J.~A., van Belle, G.~T., \& Ridgway, S.~T.\ 1996, \aj, 111, 1705 %\bibitem[Mathis(1980)]{mat80}Mathis, J.S., 1980, ARA\&A, 28, 37

1243: \bibitem[Echevarria et al.(1979)]{1979RMxAA...4..287E} Echevarria, J., Roth, M., \& Warman, J.\ 1979, Revista Mexicana de Astronomia y Astrofisica, 4, 287

1244: \bibitem[Eggen(1963)]{1963AJ.....68..483E} Eggen, O.~J.\ 1963, \aj, 68, 483

1245: \bibitem[Eggen(1965)]{1965AJ.....70...19E} Eggen, O.~J.\ 1965, \aj, 70, 19

1246: \bibitem[Eggen(1966)]{1966RGOB..120..333E} Eggen, O.~J.\ 1966, Royal Greenwich Observatory Bulletin, 120, 333

1247: \bibitem[Eggen(1971)]{1971PASP...83..741E} Eggen, O.~J.\ 1971, \pasp, 83, 741

1248: \bibitem[Eggen(1972)]{1972ApJ...175..787E} Eggen, O.~J.\ 1972, \apj, 175, 787

1249: \bibitem[Eggen(1973)]{1973PASP...85..542E} Eggen, O.~J.\ 1973, \pasp, 85, 542

1250: \bibitem[Elias et al.(1982)]{eli82}Elias, J., Frogel, J., Matthews, K., Neugebauer, G., 1982, \aj, 87, 1029

1251: \bibitem[Elias et al.(1983)]{eli83}Elias, J., Frogel, J., Hyland, A., Jones, T., 1983, \aj, 88, 1027

1252: \bibitem[Elliott(1974)]{1974AJ.....79.1082E} Elliott, J.~E.\ 1974, \aj, 79, 1082

1253: \bibitem[Epps(1972)]{1972RGOB..176..127E} Epps, E.~A.\ 1972, Royal Greenwich Observatory Bulletin, 176, 127

1254: \bibitem[Erro(1969)]{1969BITon...5...89I} Erro, B.~I.\ 1969, Boletin del Instituto de Tonantzintla, 5, 89

1255: \bibitem[Evans(1966)]{1966RGOB..110..185E} Evans, D.~S.\ 1966, Royal Greenwich Observatory Bulletin, 110, 185

1256: \bibitem[Fabregat \& Reglero(1990)]{1990A&AS...82..531F} Fabregat, J., \& Reglero, V.\ 1990, \aaps, 82, 531

1257: \bibitem[Fabricius et al.(2002)]{fabr02} Fabricius, C. et al. 2002, \aa, 384, 180.

1258: \bibitem[Famaey et al.(2005)]{2005A&A...430..165F} Famaey, B., Jorissen, A., Luri, X., Mayor, M., Udry, S., Dejonghe, H., \& Turon, C.\ 2005, \aap, 430, 165

1259: \bibitem[Fernie et al.(1971)]{1971PASP...83...79F} Fernie, J.~D., Hagen, J.~P.~J., Hagen, G.~L., \& McClure, L.\ 1971, \pasp, 83, 79

1260: \bibitem[Fernie(1969)]{1969JRASC..63..133F} Fernie, J.~D.\ 1969, \jrasc, 63, 133

1261: \bibitem[Fernie(1976)]{1976PASP...88..116F} Fernie, J.~D.\ 1976, \pasp, 88, 116

1262: \bibitem[Fernie(1983)]{1983ApJS...52....7F} Fernie, J.~D.\ 1983, \apjs, 52, 7

1263: \bibitem[Fischer \& Valenti(2005)]{2005ApJ...622.1102F} Fischer, D.~A., \& Valenti, J.\ 2005, \apj, 622, 1102

1264: \bibitem[Fitch(1955)]{1955ApJ...121..690F} Fitch, W.~S.\ 1955, \apj, 121, 690

1265: \bibitem[Franco(1989)]{1989A&AS...80..127F} Franco, G.~A.~P.\ 1989, \aaps, 80, 127

1266: \bibitem[Galland et al.(2005)]{2005A&A...443..337G} Galland, F., Lagrange, A.-M., Udry, S., Chelli, A., Pepe, F., Queloz, D., Beuzit, J.-L., \& Mayor, M. 2005, \aap, 443, 337

1267: \bibitem[Galland et al.(2005)]{gall05} Galland, F. et al. 2005, \aa, 443, 337

1268: \bibitem[Garmany \& Ianna(1977)]{1977A&AS...28..295G} Garmany, C.~D., \& Ianna, P.~A.\ 1977, \aaps, 28, 295

1269: \bibitem[Gascoigne(1962)]{1962MNRAS.124..201G} Gascoigne, S.~C.~B.\ 1962, \mnras, 124, 201

1270: \bibitem[Gehrels \& Owings(1962)]{1962ApJ...135..906G} Gehrels, T., \& Owings, D.\ 1962, \apj, 135, 906

1271: \bibitem[Gerbaldi, Faraggiana \& Lai(2003)]{gerb03} Gerbaldi, M., Faraggiana, R. \& Lai, O. 2003, \aa, 412, 447

1272: \bibitem[Gezari et al.(1996)]{gez96}Gezari, D.Y., Pitts, P.S., Schmitz, M., 1996, Catalog of Infrared Observations, edition 3.5

1273: \bibitem[Giclas et al.(1971)]{1971LowPM.C......0G} Giclas, H.~L., Burnham, R., \& Thomas, N.~G.\ 1971, Flagstaff, Arizona: Lowell Observatory, 1971,

1274: \bibitem[Giclas(1954)]{1954AJ.....59..128G} Giclas, H.~L.\ 1954, \aj, 59, 128

1275: \bibitem[Glass(1974)]{1974MNSSA..33...53G} Glass, I.~S.\ 1974, Monthly Notes of the Astronomical Society of South Africa, 33, 53

1276: \bibitem[Glass(1975)]{1975MNRAS.171P..19G} Glass, I.~S.\ 1975, \mnras, 171, 19P

1277: \bibitem[Glebocki, Gnacinski \& Stawikowski(2000)]{gleb00} Glebocki, R., Gnacinski, P. \& Stawikowski, A. 2000, Acta Astron., 50, 509

1278: \bibitem[Goldberg et al.(2003)]{gol03} Goldberg, D., Mazeh, T., \& Latham, D.~W.\ 2003, \apj, 591, 397

1279: \bibitem[Grant(1959)]{1959ApJ...129...62G} Grant, G.\ 1959, \apj, 129, 62

1280: \bibitem[Gray \& Olsen(1991)]{1991A&AS...87..541G} Gray, R.~O., \& Olsen, E.~H.\ 1991, \aaps, 87, 541

1281: \bibitem[Griffin \& Suchkov(2003)]{grif03} Griffin, R. F. \& Suchkov, A. A. 2003, \apjs, 147, 103

1282: \bibitem[Gronbech \& Olsen(1976)]{1976A&AS...25..213G} Gronbech, B., \& Olsen, E.~H.\ 1976, \aaps, 25, 213

1283: \bibitem[Gronbech et al.(1976)]{1976A&AS...26..155G} Gronbech, B., Olsen, E.~H., \& Stromgren, B.\ 1976, \aaps, 26, 155

1284: \bibitem[Guetter \& Hewitt(1984)]{1984PASP...96..441G} Guetter, H.~H., \& Hewitt, A.~V.\ 1984, \pasp, 96, 441

1285: \bibitem[Guetter(1980)]{1980PASP...92..215G} Guetter, H.~H.\ 1980, \pasp, 92, 215

1286: \bibitem[Gutierrez-Moreno \& et al.(1966)]{1966PDAUC...1....1G} Gutierrez-Moreno, A., \& et al.\ 1966, Publications of the Department of Astronomy University of Chile, 1, 1

1287: \bibitem[H{\"a}ggkvist \& Oja(1966)]{1966ArA.....4..137H} H{\"a}ggkvist, L., \& Oja, T.\ 1966, Arkiv for Astronomi, 4, 137

1288: \bibitem[H{\"a}ggkvist \& Oja(1969)]{1969ArA.....5..125H} H{\"a}ggkvist, L., \& Oja, T.\ 1969, Arkiv for Astronomi, 5, 125

1289: \bibitem[H{\"a}ggkvist \& Oja(1969)]{1969ArA.....5..303H} H{\"a}ggkvist, L., \& Oja, T.\ 1969, Arkiv for Astronomi, 5, 303

1290: \bibitem[H{\"a}ggkvist(1966)]{1966ArA.....4..165H} H{\"a}ggkvist, L.\ 1966, Arkiv for Astronomi, 4, 165

1291: \bibitem[Haggkvist \& Oja(1970)]{1970Priv..........H} Haggkvist, T., \& Oja, T.\ 1970, Private Communication,

1292: \bibitem[Haggkvist \& Oja(1973)]{1973A&AS...12..381H} Haggkvist, L., \& Oja, T.\ 1973, \aaps, 12, 381

1293: \bibitem[Hale(1994)]{1994AJ....107..306H} Hale, A.\ 1994, \aj, 107, 306

1294: \bibitem[Hardie et al.(1960)]{1960ApJ...132..361H} Hardie, R.~H., Seyfert, C.~K., \& Gulledge, I.~S.\ 1960, \apj, 132, 361

1295: \bibitem[Hardie(1958)]{1958ApJ...127..620H} Hardie, R.\ 1958, \apj, 127, 620

1296: \bibitem[Harmanec et al.(1980)]{1980BAICz..31..144H} Harmanec, P., Horn, J., Koubsky, P., Zdarsky, F., Kriz, S., \& Pavlovski, K.\ 1980, Bulletin of the Astronomical Institutes of Czechoslovakia, 31, 144

1297: \bibitem[Harris \& Upgren(1964)]{1964ApJ...140..151H} Harris, D.~L., \& Upgren, A.~R.\ 1964, \apj, 140, 151

1298: \bibitem[Harris(1955)]{1955ApJ...121..554H} Harris, D.~L.\ 1955, \apj, 121, 554

1299: \bibitem[Harris(1956)]{1956ApJ...123..371H} Harris, D.~L.\ 1956, \apj, 123, 371

1300: \bibitem[Hartkopf et al.(1996)]{1996AJ....111..370H} Hartkopf, W.~I., Mason, B.~D., \& McAlister, H.~A.\ 1996, \aj, 111, 370

1301: \bibitem[Hartkopf et al.(2001)]{2001AJ....122.3472H} Hartkopf, W.~I., Mason, B.~D., \& Worley, C.~E.\ 2001, \aj, 122, 3472

1302: \bibitem[Hauck \& Mermilliod(1998)]{1998A&AS..129..431H} Hauck, B., \& Mermilliod, M.\ 1998, \aaps, 129, 431

1303: \bibitem[Haug \& Walter(1970)]{1970A&AS....1...29H} Haug, U., \& Walter, K.\ 1970, \aaps, 1, 29

1304: \bibitem[Haug(1970)]{1970A&AS....1...35H} Haug, U.\ 1970, \aaps, 1, 35

1305: \bibitem[Haupt \& Schroll(1974)]{1974A&AS...15..311H} Haupt, H.~F., \& Schroll, A.\ 1974, \aaps, 15, 311

1306: \bibitem[Heck \& Manfroid(1975)]{1975A&AS...22..323H} Heck, A., \& Manfroid, J.\ 1975, \aaps, 22, 323

1307: \bibitem[Heck \& Manfroid(1980)]{1980A&AS...42..311H} Heck, A., \& Manfroid, J.\ 1980, \aaps, 42, 311

1308: \bibitem[Heintz(1994)]{1994AJ....108.2338H} Heintz, W.~D.\ 1994, \aj, 108, 2338

1309: \bibitem[Henden(1980)]{1980MNRAS.192..621H} Henden, A.~A.\ 1980, \mnras, 192, 621

1310: \bibitem[Henry \& McCarthy(1993)]{henry93} Henry, T.J. \& McCarthy, D.W. Jr. 1993, \aj, 106,773

1311: \bibitem[Hilditch et al.(1976)]{1976MmRAS..82...95H} Hilditch, R.~W., Hill, G., \& Barnes, J.~V.\ 1976, \memras, 82, 95

1312: \bibitem[Hill \& Barnes(1982)]{1982PDAO...16...71H} Hill, G., \& Barnes, J.~V.\ 1982, Publications of the Dominion Astrophysical Observatory Victoria, 16, 71

1313: \bibitem[Hiltner \& Johnson(1956)]{1956ApJ...124..367H} Hiltner, W.~A., \& Johnson, H.~L.\ 1956, \apj, 124, 367

1314: \bibitem[Hiltner(1956)]{1956ApJS....2..389H} Hiltner, W.~A.\ 1956, \apjs, 2, 389

1315: \bibitem[Hoag et al.(1961)]{1961PUSNO..17..343H} Hoag, A.~A., Johnson, H.~L., Iriarte, B., Mitchell, R.~I., Hallam, K.~L., \& Sharpless, S.\ 1961, Publications of the U.S.~Naval Observatory Second Series, 17, 343

1316: \bibitem[Hoffleit \& Jaschek(1991)]{1991bsc..book.....H} Hoffleit, D., \& Jaschek, C.~|.\ 1991, New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Observatory, |c1991, 5th rev.ed., edited by Hoffleit, Dorrit; Jaschek, Carlos |v(coll.)

1317: \bibitem[Hogg(1958)]{1958MtSOM...2....1H} Hogg, A.~R.\ 1958, Mount Stromlo Observatory Mimeographs, 2, 1

1318: \bibitem[Horch et al.(2004)]{2004AJ....127.1727H} Horch, E.~P., Meyer, R.~D., \& van Altena, W.~F.\ 2004, \aj, 127, 1727

1319: \bibitem[Hummel et al.(1995)]{hum95} Hummel, C.~A., Armstrong, J.~T., Buscher, D.~F., Mozurkewich, D., Quirrenbach, A., \& Vivekanand, M.\ 1995, \aj, 110, 376

1320: \bibitem[Hummel et al.(2001)]{hum01} Hummel, C.~A., Carquillat, J.-M., Ginestet, N., Griffin, R.~F., Boden, A.~F., Hajian, A.~R., Mozurkewich, D., \& Nordgren, T.~E.\ 2001, \aj, 121, 1623

1321: \bibitem[Ibukiyama \& Arimoto(2002)]{ibuk02} Ibukiyama, A. \& Arimoto, N. 2002, \aa, 394, 927

1322: \bibitem[Iriarte et al.(1965)]{1965S&T....30...21I} Iriarte, B., Johnson, H.~L., Mitchell, R.~I., \& Wisniewski, W.~K.\ 1965, \skytel, 30, 21

1323: \bibitem[Iriarte(1969)]{1969BOTT....5...89I} Iriarte, B.\ 1969, Boletin de los Observatorios Tonantzintla y Tacubaya, 5, 89

1324: \bibitem[Iriarte(1970)]{1970BOTT....5..317I} Iriarte, B.\ 1970, Boletin de los Observatorios Tonantzintla y Tacubaya, 5, 317

1325: \bibitem[Irwin(1961)]{1961ApJS....6..253I} Irwin, J.~B.\ 1961, \apjs, 6, 253

1326: \bibitem[Jennens \& Helfer(1975)]{1975MNRAS.172..667J} Jennens, P.~A., \& Helfer, H.~L.\ 1975, \mnras, 172, 667

1327: \bibitem[Jerzykiewicz \& Serkowski(1966)]{1966PASP...78..546J} Jerzykiewicz, M., \& Serkowski, K.\ 1966, \pasp, 78, 546

1328: \bibitem[Jerzykiewicz(1971)]{1971AcA....21..501J} Jerzykiewicz, M.\ 1971, Acta Astronomica, 21, 501

1329: \bibitem[Johansen \& Gyldenkerne(1970)]{1970A&AS....1..165J} Johansen, K.~T., \& Gyldenkerne, K.\ 1970, \aaps, 1, 165

1330: \bibitem[Johnson \& Harris(1954)]{1954ApJ...120..196J} Johnson, H.~L., \& Harris, D.~L.\ 1954, \apj, 120, 196

1331: \bibitem[Johnson \& Knuckles(1955)]{1955ApJ...122..209J} Johnson, H.~L., \& Knuckles, C.~F.\ 1955, \apj, 122, 209

1332: \bibitem[Johnson \& Knuckles(1957)]{1957ApJ...126..113J} Johnson, H.~L., \& Knuckles, C.~F.\ 1957, \apj, 126, 113

1333: \bibitem[Johnson \& Mitchell(1958)]{1958ApJ...128...31J} Johnson, H.~L., \& Mitchell, R.~I.\ 1958, \apj, 128, 31

1334: \bibitem[Johnson \& Morgan(1953)]{1953ApJ...117..313J} Johnson, H.~L., \& Morgan, W.~W.\ 1953, \apj, 117, 313

1335: \bibitem[Johnson et al.(1966)]{1966CoLPL...4...99J} Johnson, H.~L., Iriarte, B., Mitchell, R.~I., \& Wisniewskj, W.~Z.\ 1966, Communications of the Lunar and Planetary Laboratory, 4, 99

1336: \bibitem[Johnson et al.(1968)]{1968ApJ...152..465J} Johnson, H.~L., MacArthur, J.~W., \& Mitchell, R.~I.\ 1968, \apj, 152, 465

1337: \bibitem[Johnson(1952)]{1952ApJ...116..640J} Johnson, H.~L.\ 1952, \apj, 116, 640

1338: \bibitem[Johnson(1953)]{1953ApJ...117..361J} Johnson, H.~L.\ 1953, \apj, 117, 361

1339: \bibitem[Johnson(1955)]{1955AnAp...18..292J} Johnson, H.~L.\ 1955, Annales d'Astrophysique, 18, 292

1340: \bibitem[Johnson(1964)]{1964BOTT....3..305J} Johnson, H.~L.\ 1964, Boletin de los Observatorios Tonantzintla y Tacubaya, 3, 305

1341: \bibitem[Johnson(1965)]{1965ApJ...141..923J} Johnson, H.~L.\ 1965, \apj, 141, 923

1342: \bibitem[Johnson(1965)]{1965CoLPL...3...73J} Johnson, H.~L.\ 1965, Communications of the Lunar and Planetary Laboratory, 3, 73

1343: \bibitem[Johnson(1968)]{joh68} Johnson, H.~L., 1968, in Stars and Stellar Systems, 7, Nebulae and Interstellar Matter, ed. B.M. Middlehurst \& L.H. Aller (Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press), chap. 5

1344: \bibitem[Joner et al.(1995)]{1995PASP..107...27J} Joner, M.~D., Taylor, B.~J., Powell, J.~M., \& Johnson, S.~B.\ 1995, \pasp, 107, 27

1345: \bibitem[Jones(1969)]{1969AcA....19...53J} Jones, D.~H.~P.\ 1969, Acta Astronomica, 19, 53

1346: \bibitem[Jordi et al.(1996)]{1996A&AS..115..401J} Jordi, C., Figueras, F., Torra, J., \& Asiain, R.\ 1996, \aaps, 115, 401

1347: \bibitem[Kharchenko et al.(2004)]{2004AN....325..439K} Kharchenko, N.~V., Piskunov, A.~E., \& Scholz, R.-D.\ 2004, Astronomische Nachrichten, 325, 439

1348: \bibitem[Kilkenny \& Malcolm(1984)]{1984MNRAS.209..169K} Kilkenny, D., \& Malcolm, G.\ 1984, \mnras, 209, 169

1349: \bibitem[Kilkenny \& Menzies(1986)]{1986MNRAS.222..373K} Kilkenny, D., \& Menzies, J.~W.\ 1986, \mnras, 222, 373

1350: \bibitem[Kilkenny(1987)]{1987MNRAS.228..713K} Kilkenny, D.\ 1987, \mnras, 228, 713

1351: \bibitem[Knude(1977)]{1977A&AS...30..297K} Knude, J.~K.\ 1977, \aaps, 30, 297

1352: \bibitem[Knude(1981)]{1981A&AS...44..225K} Knude, J.\ 1981, \aaps, 44, 225

1353: \bibitem[Koch(1960)]{1960AJ.....65..127K} Koch, R.~H.\ 1960, \aj, 65, 127

1354: \bibitem[Koen \& Eyer(2002)]{koen02} Koen, C. \& Eyer, L.  2002, \mnras, 331, 45

1355: \bibitem[Konacki \& Lane(2004)]{kon04} Konacki, M., \& Lane, B.~F.\ 2004, \apj, 610, 443

1356: \bibitem[Koresko et al.(1998)]{kor98} Koresko, C.~D., et al. 1998, \apjl, 509, L45

1357: \bibitem[Kornilov et al.(1991)]{1991TrSht..63....4K} Kornilov, V.~G., Volkov, I.~M., Zakharov, A.~I., Kozyreva, L.~N., Kornilova, L.~N., \& et al.\ 1991, Trudy Gosudarstvennogo Astronomicheskogo Instituta, 63, 4

1358: \bibitem[Kozok(1985)]{1985A&AS...61..387K} Kozok, J.~R.\ 1985, \aaps, 61, 387

1359: \bibitem[Kubiak(1973)]{1973AcA....23...23K} Kubiak, M.\ 1973, Acta Astronomica, 23, 23

1360: \bibitem[Kubinec(1973)]{1973PW&SO...1c...1K} Kubinec, W.~R.\ 1973, Publications of the Warner \& Swasey Observatory, 1, 1

1361: \bibitem[Lake(1962)]{1962MNSSA..21...56L} Lake, R.\ 1962, Monthly Notes of the Astronomical Society of South Africa, 21, 56

1362: \bibitem[Lake(1962)]{1962MNSSA..21..191L} Lake, R.\ 1962, Monthly Notes of the Astronomical Society of South Africa, 21, 191

1363: \bibitem[Lake(1964)]{1964MNSSA..23...14L} Lake, R.\ 1964, Monthly Notes of the Astronomical Society of South Africa, 23, 14

1364: \bibitem[Lake(1964)]{1964MNSSA..23..136L} Lake, R.\ 1964, Monthly Notes of the Astronomical Society of South Africa, 23, 136

1365: \bibitem[Lake(1965)]{1965MNSSA..24...41L} Lake, R.\ 1965, Monthly Notes of the Astronomical Society of South Africa, 24, 41

1366: \bibitem[Landolt(1967)]{1967AJ.....72.1012L} Landolt, A.~U.\ 1967, \aj, 72, 1012

1367: \bibitem[Latham et al.(2002)]{lath02} Latham, D. W., et al. 2002, \aj, 124, 1144

1368: \bibitem[Lee(1968)]{1968ApJ...152..913L} Lee, T.~A.\ 1968, \apj, 152, 913

1369: \bibitem[Lindgren \& Bern(1980)]{1980A&AS...42..335L} Lindgren, H., \& Bern, K.\ 1980, \aaps, 42, 335

1370: \bibitem[Ljunggren \& Oja(1961)]{1961UppAn...4j...1L} Ljunggren, B., \& Oja, T.\ 1961, Uppsala Astronomical Observatory Annals, 4, 1

1371: \bibitem[Ljunggren \& Oja(1965)]{1965ArA.....3..439L} Ljunggren, B., \& Oja, T.\ 1965, Arkiv for Astronomi, 3, 439

1372: \bibitem[Ljunggren(1966)]{1966ArA.....3..535L} Ljunggren, B.\ 1966, Arkiv for Astronomi, 3, 535

1373: \bibitem[Loden et al.(1980)]{1980A&AS...41...85L} Loden, K., Lindblad, P.~O., Schober, J., \& Urban, A.\ 1980, \aaps, 41, 85

1374: \bibitem[Lu et al.(1987)]{1987AJ.....94.1318L} Lu, P.~K., Demarque, P., van Altena, W., McAlister, H., \& Hartkopf, W.\ 1987, \aj, 94, 1318

1375: \bibitem[Lucke(1974)]{1974ApJS...28...73L} Lucke, P.~B.\ 1974, \apjs, 28, 73

1376: \bibitem[Lutz \& Lutz(1977)]{1977AJ.....82..431L} Lutz, T.~E., \& Lutz, J.~H.\ 1977, \aj, 82, 431

1377: \bibitem[Lutz(1971)]{1971PASP...83..488L} Lutz, T.~E.\ 1971, \pasp, 83, 488

1378: \bibitem[Makarov \& Kaplan(2005)]{2005AJ....129.2420M} Makarov, V.~V., \& Kaplan, G.~H.\ 2005, \aj, 129, 2420

1379: \bibitem[Makarov \& Kaplan(2005)]{maka05} Makarov, V. V. \& Kaplan, G. H. 2005, \aj, 129, 2420

1380: \bibitem[Malmquist K.G.~\& Ljunggren B.~And Oja T.(1960)]{1960UppAn...4h...1M} Malmquist K.G., \& Ljunggren B.~And Oja T.\ 1960, Uppsala Astronomical Observatory Annals, 4, 1

1381: \bibitem[Manfroid \& Sterken(1987)]{1987A&AS...71..539M} Manfroid, J., \& Sterken, C.\ 1987, \aaps, 71, 539

1382: \bibitem[Marcy et al.(1997)]{1997ApJ...481..926M} Marcy, G.~W., Butler, R.~P., Williams, E., Bildsten, L., Graham, J.~R., Ghez, A.~M., \& Jernigan, J.~G.\ 1997, \apj, 481, 926

1383: \bibitem[Markkanen(1977)]{1977HelR....1.....M} Markkanen, T.\ 1977, Observatory and Astrophysics Laboratory University of Helsinki Report, 1,

1384: \bibitem[Marlborough(1964)]{1964AJ.....69..215M} Marlborough, J.~M.\ 1964, \aj, 69, 215

1385: \bibitem[Marsakov \& Shevelev(1988)]{mars88} Marsakov, V. A. \& Shevelev, Y. G. 1988, BICDS, 35, 129

1386: \bibitem[Marsakov \& Shevelev(1995)]{mars95} Marsakov, V. A. \& Shevelev, Y. G. 1995, BICDS, 47, 13

1387: \bibitem[Mason et al.(1993)]{1993AJ....105..220M} Mason, B.~D., McAlister, H.~A., Hartkopf, W.~I., \& Bagnuolo, W.~G.\ 1993, \aj, 105, 220

1388: \bibitem[Mason(1995)]{mason95} Mason, B. D. 1995, \pasp, 107, 299

1389: \bibitem[Mason(1997)]{1997AJ....114..808M} Mason, B.~D.\ 1997, \aj, 114, 808

1390: \bibitem[Mason et al.(1999)]{mason99} Mason, B.~D., et al.\ 1999, \aj, 117, 1890

1391: \bibitem[Mayor \& Queloz(1995)]{1995Natur.378..355M} Mayor, M., \& Queloz, D.\ 1995, \nat, 378, 355

1392: \bibitem[Mayor et al.(2004)]{2004A&A...415..391M} Mayor, M., Udry, S., Naef, D., Pepe, F., Queloz, D., Santos, N.~C., \& Burnet, M.\ 2004, \aap, 415, 391

1393: \bibitem[Mazeh, Latham \& Stefanik(1996)]{mazeh96} Mazeh, T., Latham, D. W. \& Stefanik, R. P. 1996, \apj, 466, 415

1394: \bibitem[McAlister et al.(1987)]{mca87} McAlister, H.~A., Hartkopf, W.~I., Hutter, D.~J., Shara, M.~M., \& Franz, O.~G.\ 1987, \aj, 93, 183

1395: \bibitem[McClure(1970)]{1970AJ.....75...41M} McClure, R.~D.\ 1970, \aj, 75, 41

1396: \bibitem[McClure(1976)]{1976AJ.....81..182M} McClure, R.~D.\ 1976, \aj, 81, 182

1397: \bibitem[McMillan et al.(1976)]{1976PASP...88..495M} McMillan, R.~S., Breger, M., Ferland, G.~J., \& Loumos, G.~L.\ 1976, \pasp, 88, 495

1398: \bibitem[McNamara(1976)]{1976PASP...88..144M} McNamara, B.~J.\ 1976, \pasp, 88, 144

1399: \bibitem[Mechler(1976)]{1976AJ.....81..107M} Mechler, G.~E.\ 1976, \aj, 81, 107

1400: \bibitem[Mendoza \& Gonzalez(1974)]{1974RMxAA...1...67M} Mendoza, E.~E., \& Gonzalez, S.~F.\ 1974, Revista Mexicana de Astronomia y Astrofisica, 1, 67

1401: \bibitem[Mendoza et al.(1978)]{1978AJ.....83..606M} Mendoza, E.~E., Gomez, V.~T., \& Gonzalez, S.\ 1978, \aj, 83, 606

1402: \bibitem[Mendoza et al.(1990)]{1990A&AS...84...29M} Mendoza, E.~E., Rolland, A., \& Rodriguez, E.\ 1990, \aaps, 84, 29

1403: \bibitem[Mendoza V.(1958)]{1958ApJ...128..207M} Mendoza V., E.~E.\ 1958, \apj, 128, 207

1404: \bibitem[Mendoza(1967)]{1967BOTT....4..106M} Mendoza, E.~E.\ 1967, Boletin de los Observatorios Tonantzintla y Tacubaya, 4, 106

1405: \bibitem[Mendoza(1967)]{1967BOTT....4..149M} Mendoza, E.~E.\ 1967, Boletin de los Observatorios Tonantzintla y Tacubaya, 4, 149

1406: \bibitem[Mendoza(1969)]{1969BOTT....5...57M} Mendoza, E.~E.\ 1969, Boletin de los Observatorios Tonantzintla y Tacubaya, 5, 57

1407: \bibitem[Mendoza(1970)]{1970BOTT....5..269M} Mendoza, E.~E.\ 1970, Boletin de los Observatorios Tonantzintla y Tacubaya, 5, 269

1408: \bibitem[Mermilliod(1986)]{1986EgUBV.........M} Mermilliod, J.-C.\ 1986, Catalogue of Eggen's UBV data.~(1986),

1409: \bibitem[Mermilliod et al.(1997)]{1997A&AS..124..349M} Mermilliod, J.-C., Mermilliod, M., \& Hauck, B.\ 1997, \aaps, 124, 349

1410: \bibitem[Miczaika(1954)]{1954AJ.....59..233M} Miczaika, G.~R.\ 1954, \aj, 59, 233

1411: \bibitem[Millis(1969)]{1969LowOB...7..113M} Millis, R.~L.\ 1969, Lowell Observatory Bulletin, 7, 113

1412: \bibitem[Moffett \& Barnes(1979)]{1979PASP...91..180M} Moffett, T.~J., \& Barnes, T.~G.\ 1979, \pasp, 91, 180

1413: \bibitem[Moffett \& Barnes(1980)]{1980ApJS...44..427M} Moffett, T.~J., \& Barnes, T.~G.\ 1980, \apjs, 44, 427

1414: \bibitem[Moreno(1971)]{1971A&A....12..442M} Moreno, H.\ 1971, \aap, 12, 442

1415: \bibitem[Mozurkewich et al.(1991)]{moz91}Mozurkewich, D., et al., 1991, \aj, 101, 2207

1416: \bibitem[Mumford(1956)]{1956AJ.....61..213M} Mumford, G.~S.\ 1956, \aj, 61, 213

1417: \bibitem[Nakagiri \& Yamashita(1979)]{1979AnTok..17..221N} Nakagiri, M., \& Yamashita, Y.\ 1979, Annals of the Tokyo Astronomical Observatory, 17, 221

1418: \bibitem[Naur(1955)]{1955ApJ...122..182N} Naur, P.\ 1955, \apj, 122, 182

1419: \bibitem[Neckel(1974)]{1974A&AS...18..169N} Neckel, H.\ 1974, \aaps, 18, 169

1420: \bibitem[Nekrasova \& Nikonov(1965)]{1965IzKry..34...69N} Nekrasova, S.~V., \& Nikonov, V.~B.\ 1965, Izvestiya Ordena Trudovogo Krasnogo Znameni Krymskoj Astrofizicheskoj Observatorii, 34, 69

1421: \bibitem[Nicolet(1978)]{1978A&AS...34....1N} Nicolet, B.\ 1978, \aaps, 34, 1

1422: \bibitem[Niconov et al.(1957)]{1957IzKry..17...42N} Niconov, V.~B., Nekrasova, S.~V., Polosuina, N.~S., Rachkouvsky, N.~D., \& Chuvajev, W.~K.\ 1957, Izvestiya Ordena Trudovogo Krasnogo Znameni Krymskoj Astrofizicheskoj Observatorii, 17, 42

1423: \bibitem[Nidever et al.(2002)]{2002ApJS..141..503N} Nidever, D.~L., Marcy, G.~W., Butler, R.~P., Fischer, D.~A., \& Vogt, S.~S.\ 2002, \apjs, 141, 503

1424: \bibitem[Nikrasova et al.(1962)]{1962IzKry..27..228N} Nikrasova, V., Nikonov, V.~B., Polosukhina, N.~S., \& Rybka, E.\ 1962, Izvestiya Ordena Trudovogo Krasnogo Znameni Krymskoj Astrofizicheskoj Observatorii, 27, 228

1425: \bibitem[Nordstr{\"o}m et al.(2004)]{nor04} Nordstr{\"o}m, B., et al.\ 2004, \aap, 418, 989

1426: \bibitem[Norris et al.(1985)]{1985ApJS...58..463N} Norris, J., Bessell, M.~S., \& Pickles, A.~J.\ 1985, \apjs, 58, 463

1427: \bibitem[Oblak(1978)]{1978A&AS...34..453O} Oblak, E.\ 1978, \aaps, 34, 453

1428: \bibitem[Oblak(1990)]{1990A&AS...83..467O} Oblak, E.\ 1990, \aaps, 83, 467

1429: \bibitem[Oja(1963)]{1963ArA.....3..273O} Oja, T.\ 1963, Arkiv for Astronomi, 3, 273

1430: \bibitem[Oja(1983)]{1983A&AS...52..131O} Oja, T.\ 1983, \aaps, 52, 131

1431: \bibitem[Oja(1984)]{1984A&AS...57..357O} Oja, T.\ 1984, \aaps, 57, 357

1432: \bibitem[Oja(1985)]{1985A&AS...59..461O} Oja, T.\ 1985, \aaps, 59, 461

1433: \bibitem[Oja(1985)]{1985A&AS...61..331O} Oja, T.\ 1985, \aaps, 61, 331

1434: \bibitem[Oja(1986)]{1986A&AS...65..405O} Oja, T.\ 1986, \aaps, 65, 405

1435: \bibitem[Oke(1964)]{1964ApJ...140..689O} Oke, J.~B.\ 1964, \apj, 140, 689

1436: \bibitem[Olsen(1977)]{1977A&AS...29..313O} Olsen, E.~H.\ 1977, \aaps, 29, 313

1437: \bibitem[Olsen(1982)]{1982A&AS...48..165O} Olsen, E.~H.\ 1982, \aaps, 48, 165

1438: \bibitem[Olsen(1983)]{1983A&AS...54...55O} Olsen, E.~H.\ 1983, \aaps, 54, 55

1439: \bibitem[Olsen(1993)]{1993A&AS..102...89O} Olsen, E.~H.\ 1993, \aaps, 102, 89

1440: \bibitem[Olsen(1994)]{1994A&AS..104..429O} Olsen, E.~H.\ 1994, \aaps, 104, 429

1441: \bibitem[Olsen(1994)]{1994A&AS..106..257O} Olsen, E.~H.\ 1994, \aaps, 106, 257

1442: \bibitem[Olson(1974)]{1974AJ.....79.1424O} Olson, E.~C.\ 1974, \aj, 79, 1424

1443: \bibitem[Oosterhoff(1960)]{1960BAN....15..199O} Oosterhoff, P.~T.\ 1960, \bain, 15, 199

1444: \bibitem[Pan et al.(2004)]{pan04} Pan, X., Shao, M., \& Kulkarni, S.~R.\ 2004, \nat, 427, 326

1445: \bibitem[Parsons \& Montemayor(1982)]{1982ApJS...49..175P} Parsons, S.~B., \& Montemayor, T.~J.\ 1982, \apjs, 49, 175

1446: \bibitem[Pena et al.(1993)]{1993RMxAA..25..129P} Pena, J.~H., Peniche, R., Mujica, R., Ibanoglu, C., Ertan, A.~Y., Tumer, O., Tunca, Z., \& Evren, S.\ 1993, Revista Mexicana de Astronomia y Astrofisica, 25, 129

1447: \bibitem[Penprase(1992)]{1992ApJS...83..273P} Penprase, B.~E.\ 1992, \apjs, 83, 273

1448: \bibitem[Penston(1973)]{1973MNRAS.164..133P} Penston, M.~J.\ 1973, \mnras, 164, 133

1449: \bibitem[Perry(1969)]{1969AJ.....74..139P} Perry, C.~L.\ 1969, \aj, 74, 139

1450: \bibitem[Perry(1969)]{1969AJ.....74..705P} Perry, C.~L.\ 1969, \aj, 74, 705

1451: \bibitem[Perryman et al.(1997)]{1997A&A...323L..49P} Perryman, M.~A.~C., et al.\ 1997, \aap, 323, L49

1452: \bibitem[Pfleiderer et al.(1966)]{1966ZA.....64..116P} Pfleiderer, J., Dachs, J., \& Haug, U.\ 1966, Zeitschrift fur Astrophysics, 64, 116

1453: \bibitem[Philip \& Philip(1973)]{1973ApJ...179..855P} Philip, A.~G.~D., \& Philip, K.\ 1973, \apj, 179, 855

1454: \bibitem[Pickles(1998)]{pic98} Pickles, A.~J.\ 1998, \pasp, 110, 863

1455: \bibitem[Piirola(1976)]{1976HelR....1.....P} Piirola, V.\ 1976, Observatory and Astrophysics Laboratory University of Helsinki Report, 1,

1456: \bibitem[Pourbaix et al.(2004)]{pour04} Pourbaix, D. et al. 2004, \aa, 424, 272

1457: \bibitem[Przybylski \& Kennedy(1965)]{1965MNRAS.131...95P} Przybylski, A., \& Kennedy, P.~M.\ 1965, \mnras, 131, 95

1458: \bibitem[Reglero \& Fabregat(1991)]{1991A&AS...90...25R} Reglero, V., \& Fabregat, J.\ 1991, \aaps, 90, 25

1459: \bibitem[Reglero et al.(1987)]{1987A&AS...71..421R} Reglero, V., Gimenez, A., de Castro, E., \& Fernandez-Figueroa, M.~J.\ 1987, \aaps, 71, 421

1460: \bibitem[Renson \& Catalano(2001)]{rens01} Renson, P. \& Catalano, F. A. 2001, \aa, 378, 113

1461: \bibitem[Richichi \& Percheron(2005)]{2005A&A...434.1201R} Richichi, A., \& Percheron, I.\ 2005, \aap, 434, 1201

1462: \bibitem[Rodriguez et al.(2000)]{rodr00} Rodriguez, E., Lopez-Gonzalez, M. J., Lopez de Coca, P. 2000, \aaps, 144, 469

1463: \bibitem[Roman(1955)]{1955ApJS....2..195R} Roman, N.~G.\ 1955, \apjs, 2, 195

1464: \bibitem[Ronen et al.(1999)]{1999MNRAS.303..284R} Ronen, S., Aragon-Salamanca, A., \& Lahav, O.\ 1999, \mnras, 303, 284

1465: \bibitem[Royer et al.(2002)]{royer02} Royer, F. et al. 2002, \aa, 393, 897

1466: \bibitem[Rufener(1976)]{1976A&AS...26..275R} Rufener, F.\ 1976, \aaps, 26, 275

1467: \bibitem[Rybka(1969)]{1969AcA....19..229R} Rybka, E.\ 1969, Acta Astronomica, 19, 229

1468: \bibitem[S{\"o}derhjelm(1999)]{1999A&A...341..121S} S{\"o}derhjelm, S. 1999, \aap, 341, 121

1469: \bibitem[Samus et al.(2004)]{samus04} Samus, N. N. et al. 2004, Combined Catalog of Variable Stars (GCVS4.2 2004 Ed.), Inst. of Astronomy of Russian Academy of Sciences

1470: \bibitem[Sandage(1964)]{1964ApJ...139..442S} Sandage, A.\ 1964, \apj, 139, 442

1471: \bibitem[Santos et al.(2003)]{santos03} Santos, N. C., et al. 2003, \aa, 398, 363

1472: \bibitem[Santos, Israelian \& Mayor(2004)]{santos04} Santos, N. C., Israelian, G. \& Mayor, M. 2004, \aa, 415, 1153

1473: \bibitem[Schild(1973)]{1973AJ.....78...37S} Schild, R.~E.\ 1973, \aj, 78, 37

1474: \bibitem[Schuster \& Nissen(1986)]{1986IBVS.2943....1S} Schuster, W.~J., \& Nissen, P.~E.\ 1986, Informational Bulletin on Variable Stars, 2943, 1

1475: \bibitem[Schuster \& Nissen(1988)]{1988A&AS...73..225S} Schuster, W.~J., \& Nissen, P.~E.\ 1988, \aaps, 73, 225

1476: \bibitem[Schuster et al.(1993)]{1993A&AS...97..951S} Schuster, W.~J., Parrao, L., \& Contreras Martinez, M.~E.\ 1993, \aaps, 97, 951

1477: \bibitem[Serkowski(1961)]{1961LowOB...5..157S} Serkowski, K.\ 1961, Lowell Observatory Bulletin, 5, 157

1478: \bibitem[Shao(1964)]{1964AJ.....69..858S} Shao, C.~Y.\ 1964, \aj, 69, 858

1479: \bibitem[Sharpless(1952)]{1952ApJ...116..251S} Sharpless, S.\ 1952, \apj, 116, 251

1480: \bibitem[Sharpless(1962)]{1962ApJ...136..767S} Sharpless, S.\ 1962, \apj, 136, 767

1481: \bibitem[Shobbrook et al.(1969)]{1969MNRAS.145..131S} Shobbrook, R.~R., Herbison-Evans, D., Johnston, I.~D., \& Lomb, N.~R.\ 1969, \mnras, 145, 131

1482: \bibitem[Sj{\"o}gren(1964)]{1964ArA.....3..339S} Sj{\"o}gren, U.\ 1964, Arkiv for Astronomi, 3, 339

1483: \bibitem[Skiff(2005)]{skiff05} Skiff, B. A. 2005, General Catalogue of Stellar Spectral Classifications, Lowell Observatory

1484: \bibitem[Slettebak et al.(1961)]{1961ApJ...134..195S} Slettebak, A., Bahner, K., \& Stock, J.\ 1961, \apj, 134, 195

1485: \bibitem[Snow et al.(1994)]{snow94} Snow, T. P., Lamers, H. J. G. L. M., Lindholm, D. M. \& Odelle, A. P.  1994, \apjs, 95, 163

1486: \bibitem[Sowell \& Wilson(1993)]{1993PASP..105...36S} Sowell, J.~R., \& Wilson, J.~W.\ 1993, \pasp, 105, 36

1487: \bibitem[Stetson(1991)]{1991AJ....102..589S} Stetson, P.~B.\ 1991, \aj, 102, 589

1488: \bibitem[Stobie(1970)]{1970MNRAS.148....1S} Stobie, R.~S.\ 1970, \mnras, 148, 1

1489: \bibitem[Stokes(1972)]{1972MNRAS.159..165S} Stokes, N.~R.\ 1972, \mnras, 159, 165

1490: \bibitem[Stokes(1972)]{1972MNRAS.160..155S} Stokes, N.~R.\ 1972, \mnras, 160, 155

1491: \bibitem[Stoy(1963)]{1963MNSSA..22..157S} Stoy, R.~H.\ 1963, Monthly Notes of the Astronomical Society of South Africa, 22, 157

1492: \bibitem[Sturch \& Helfer(1972)]{1972AJ.....77..726S} Sturch, C.~R., \& Helfer, H.~L.\ 1972, \aj, 77, 726

1493: \bibitem[Sturch(1972)]{1972PASP...84..666S} Sturch, C.\ 1972, \pasp, 84, 666

1494: \bibitem[Szabados L.(1977)]{1977MiBud..70....1S} Szabados L.\ 1977, Mitteilungen der Sternwarte der Ungarischen Akademie der Wissenschaften Budapest, 70, 1

1495: \bibitem[Szabados(1981)]{1981CoKon..77....1S} Szabados, L.\ 1981, Commmunications of the Konkoly Observatory Hungary, 77, 1

1496: \bibitem[Taylor \& Joner(1992)]{1992PASP..104..911T} Taylor, B.~J., \& Joner, M.~D.\ 1992, \pasp, 104, 911

1497: \bibitem[Tifft(1963)]{1963MNRAS.125..199T} Tifft, W.~G.\ 1963, \mnras, 125, 199

1498: \bibitem[Tokovinin \& Smekhov(2002)]{tok02} Tokovinin, A.~A., \& Smekhov, M.~G.\ 2002, \aap, 382, 118

1499: \bibitem[Tokovinin et al.(2006)]{toko06} Tokovinin, A. et al. 2006, \aa, 450, 681

1500: \bibitem[Tolbert(1964)]{1964ApJ...139.1105T} Tolbert, C.~R.\ 1964, \apj, 139, 1105

1501: \bibitem[Torres et al.(2002)]{tor02} Torres, G., Boden, A.~F., Latham, D.~W., Pan, M., \& Stefanik, R.~P.\ 2002, \aj, 124, 1716

1502: \bibitem[Turon et al.(1993)]{turon93} Turon, C. et al. 1993, BICDS, 43, 5

1503: \bibitem[van Belle(1999)]{van99b} van Belle, G.~T.\ 1999, \pasp, 111, 1515

1504: \bibitem[van Belle et al.(1999)]{van99}van Belle, G.T., Lane, B.F., Thompson, R.R., The PTI Collaboration, 1999, \aj, 117, 521

1505: \bibitem[van Belle \& van Belle(2005)]{van05} van Belle, G.~T., \& van Belle, G.\ 2005, \pasp, 117, 1263

1506: \bibitem[van Belle et al.(2006)]{2006ApJ...637..494V} van Belle, G.~T., et al.\ 2006, \apj, 637, 494

1507: \bibitem[van den Bergh(1967)]{1967AJ.....72...70V} van den Bergh, S.\ 1967, \aj, 72, 70

1508: \bibitem[Veeder(1974)]{1974AJ.....79.1056V} Veeder, G.~J.\ 1974, \aj, 79, 1056

1509: \bibitem[Walker(1971)]{1971PASP...83..177W} Walker, R.~L.\ 1971, \pasp, 83, 177

1510: \bibitem[Wallerstein \& Helfer(1961)]{1961ApJ...133..562W} Wallerstein, G., \& Helfer, H.~L.\ 1961, \apj, 133, 562

1511: \bibitem[Wallerstein et al.(1963)]{1963ApJ...137..280W} Wallerstein, G., Greenstein, J.~L., Parker, R., Helfer, H.~L., \& Aller, L.~H.\ 1963, \apj, 137, 280

1512: \bibitem[Warren \& Hesser(1977)]{1977ApJS...34..115W} Warren, W.~H., \& Hesser, J.~E.\ 1977, \apjs, 34, 115

1513: \bibitem[Warren(1973)]{1973AJ.....78..192W} Warren, W.~H.\ 1973, \aj, 78, 192

1514: \bibitem[Wesselink et al.(1980)]{1980IBVS.1800....1W} Wesselink, T., van Paradijs, J., Staller, R.~F.~A., Meurs, E.~J.~A., \& Kester, D.\ 1980, Informational Bulletin on Variable Stars, 1800, 1

1515: \bibitem[Westerlund(1963)]{1963MNRAS.127...83W} Westerlund, B.~E.\ 1963, \mnras, 127, 83

1516: \bibitem[Westin(1982)]{1982A&AS...49..561W} Westin, T.~N.~G.\ 1982, \aaps, 49, 561

1517: \bibitem[Wickramasinghe \& Warren(1976)]{1976MNRAS.177P..59W} Wickramasinghe, D.~T., \& Warren, P.~R.\ 1976, \mnras, 177, 59P

1518: \bibitem[Williams(1966)]{1966AJ.....71..615W} Williams, J.~A.\ 1966, \aj, 71, 615

1519: \bibitem[Wolf \& Morrison(1975)]{1975PASP...87..231W} Wolf, S.~C., \& Morrison, N.~D.\ 1975, \pasp, 87, 231

1520: \bibitem[Wolff \& Wolff(1971)]{1971AJ.....76..422W} Wolff, S.~C., \& Wolff, R.~J.\ 1971, \aj, 76, 422

1521: \bibitem[Worley \& Douglass(1996)]{worl96} Worley, C. E. \& Douglass, G. G. 1996, \aaps, 125, 523

1522: \bibitem[Wramdemark(1973)]{1973A&AS...11..365W} Wramdemark, S.\ 1973, \aaps, 11, 365

1523: \bibitem[Zdanavicius et al.(1972)]{1972VilOB..34....3Z} Zdanavicius, K., et al.\ 1972, Vilnius Astronomijos Observatorijos Biuletenis, 34, 3

1524: \bibitem[Zhang(1983)]{1983AJ.....88..825Z} Zhang, E.-H.\ 1983, \aj, 88, 825

1525: \bibitem[Zissell(1972)]{1972AJ.....77..610Z} Zissell, R.\ 1972, \aj, 77, 610

1526: 

1527: \end{thebibliography}

1528: 

1529: 

1530: \end{document}

1531: