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

2: 

3: \documentclass{emulateapj}

4: \usepackage{units,times,natbib}

5: \usepackage{amsmath}

6: 

7: %% This is emulateapj reformatting of the AASTEX sample document

8: %%

9: %\documentclass{emulateapj}

10: 

11: %% This are the packages to load

12: 

13: %\usepackage{units,times,natbib}

14: %\usepackage{amsmath}

15: 

16: %% to make citations look like this: (Name, year; Name, year)

17: %% {opening bracket}{closing bracket}{divider between two citations}

18: %% {year}{divider between name and age}{don't know}

19: %\bibpunct{(}{)}{;}{a}{}{;}

20: 

21: %% These are my own symbols

22: \newcommand{\conform}{$\hat{=}$ }

23: \def\Ha{H$\alpha$}

24: \def\alp{\mbox{$\alpha$}}

25: \def\fdeg{\hbox{$.\mkern-4mu^\circ$}}

26: \def\farcmin{\hbox{$.\mkern-4mu^\prime$}}

27: \def\farcsec{\hbox{$.\!\!^{\prime\prime}$}}

28: \def\frasec{\hbox{$.\!\!^{\text{s}}$}}

29: \def\earth{\hbox{$\oplus$}}

30: \def\deg{\hbox{$^\circ$}}

31: \def\arcmin{\hbox{$^\prime$}}

32: \def\arcsec{\hbox{$^{\prime\prime}$}}

33: \def\rahrs{\hbox{$^{\text{h}}$}}

34: \def\ramin{\hbox{$^{\text{m}}$}}

35: \def\rasec{\hbox{$^{\text{s}}$}}

36: %\def\mag{\hbox{$^\text{m}$}}

37: \def\solar{\mbox{$_{\normalsize\odot}$}}

38: \def\fs{\hbox{$.\!\!^{\rm s}$}}

39: \def\x{$\times$}

40: \def\ap{$\approx$~}

41: \def\hst{{\em HST }}

42: \def\vi{$V$-$I$}

43: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

44: % GOULIERMIS SYMBOLS

45: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

46: \newcommand{\gapprox}{$\stackrel {>}{_{\sim}}$}

47: \newcommand{\lapprox}{$\stackrel {<}{_{\sim}}$}

48: \def\alp{\mbox{$\alpha$}}

49: \def\farcd{\hbox{$.\mkern-4mu^\circ$}}

50: \def\farcm{\hbox{$.\mkern-4mu^\prime$}}

51: \def\farcs{\hbox{$.\!\!^{\prime\prime}$}}

52: \def\earth{\hbox{$\oplus$}}

53: \def\arcmin{\hbox{$^\prime$}}

54: \def\arcsec{\hbox{$^{\prime\prime}$}}

55: \def\solar{\mbox{$_{\normalsize\odot}$}}

56: \def\fs{\hbox{$.\!\!^{\rm s}$}}

57: \def\deg{\hbox{$^\circ$}}

58: \newcommand{\lsim}{\ \raise

59: -2.truept\hbox{\rlap{\hbox{$\sim$}}\raise5.truept\hbox{$<$}\ }}

60: \newcommand{\gsim}{\ \raise

61: -2.truept\hbox{\rlap{\hbox{$\sim$}}\raise5.truept\hbox{$>$}\ }}

62: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

63: 

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

65: 

66: %\hyphenation{author another re-commend-ed Post-Script photo-metry}

67: %\journalinfo{}

68: %\submitted{}

69: \slugcomment{Accepted for Publication in ApJ}

70: 

71: %% If you wish, you may supply running head information, although

72: %% this information may be modified by the editorial offices.

73: %% The left head contains a list of authors,

74: %% usually a maximum of three (otherwise use et al.).  The right

75: %% head is a modified title of up to roughly 44 characters.

76: %% Running heads will not print in the manuscript style.

77: 

78: \shorttitle{The IMF of NGC~602 in the SMC with HST/ACS} 

79: \shortauthors{M. Schmalzl et al.}

80: 

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

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

83: 

84: \begin{document}

85: 

86: %% LaTeX will automatically break titles if they run longer than

87: %% one line. However, you may use \\ to force a line break if

88: %% you desire.

89: 

90: \title{The Initial Mass Function of the Stellar Association NGC~602 in

91: the Small Magellanic Cloud with Hubble Space Telescope ACS

92: Observations\altaffilmark{1}}

93: 

94: \altaffiltext{1}{Research supported by the Deutsche

95: Forschungsgemeinschaft (German Research Foundation)}

96: 

97: %% Use \author, \affil, and the \and command to format

98: %% author and affiliation information.

99: %% Note that \email has replaced the old \authoremail command

100: %% from AASTeX v4.0. You can use \email to mark an email address

101: %% anywhere in the paper, not just in the front matter.

102: %% As in the title, use \\ to force line breaks.

103: 

104: \author{Markus Schmalzl, Dimitrios A. Gouliermis}

105: \affil{Max-Planck-Institute for Astronomy, K\"onigstuhl 17, 69117

106: Heidelberg, Germany;\\ schmalzl@mpia.de, dgoulier@mpia.de}

107: 

108: \author{Andrew E. Dolphin}

109: \affil{Raytheon Corporation, 870 Winter Street Waltham, MA

110: 02451, USA; adolphin@raytheon.com}

111: 

112: \and

113: 

114: \author{Thomas Henning}

115: \affil{Max-Planck-Institute for Astronomy, K\"onigstuhl 17, 69117

116: Heidelberg, Germany; henning@mpia.de}

117: 

118: %\email{dgoulier@mpia.de}

119: 

120: 

121: \begin{abstract}

122: 

123: We present our photometric study of the stellar association NGC~602 in

124: the wing of the Small Magellanic Cloud (SMC). The data were taken in

125: the filters $F555W$ and $F814W$ using the {\em Advanced Camera for

126: Surveys} (ACS) on-board the {\em Hubble} Space Telescope (HST). 

127: Photometry was performed using the ACS module of the stellar photometry

128: package DOLPHOT.  We detected more than 5,500 stars with a magnitude

129: range of 14~\lsim~$m_{555}$~\lsim~28~mag. Three prominent stellar

130: concentrations are identified with star counts in the observed field,

131: the association NGC~602 itself, and two clusters, one of them not being

132: currently in any known catalog. The Color-Magnitude Diagrams (CMDs) of

133: both clusters show features typical for young open clusters, while that

134: of the association reveals bright main sequence (MS) and faint

135: pre-main sequence (PMS) stars as the members of the system. We construct

136: the initial mass spectrum (IMS) of the association by applying an

137: age-independent method of counting the PMS stars within evolutionary

138: tracks, while for the bright MS stars we transform their magnitudes to

139: masses with the use of mass-luminosity relations. The IMS of NGC~602 is

140: found to be well represented by a single-power law, corresponding to an

141: Initial Mass Function (IMF) of slope $\Gamma \approx -1.2$ for

142: 1~\lsim~$M$/M{\solar}~\lsim~45. This indicates that the shape of the IMF

143: of a star forming system in the SMC for stars with masses higher than

144: 1~M{\solar} seems to be quite similar to the field IMF in the solar

145: neighborhood.

146: 

147: \end{abstract}

148: 

149: \keywords{galaxies: star clusters --- Magellanic Clouds --- open

150: clusters: individual(\objectname{NGC~602}) --- stars: evolution ---

151: stars: pre-main-sequence stars: luminosity function, mass function}

152: 

153: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% SECTION %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

154: 

155: \section{Introduction}

156: 

157: The Small Magellanic Cloud (SMC), the second closest undisrupted

158: neighboring dwarf galaxy to our own (after the Large Magellanic Cloud;

159: LMC) is an ideal laboratory to investigate star formation at an

160: environment similar to the early universe. Its metallicity is by a

161: factor of 5 lower than the solar metallicity (Luck et al. 1998; Ven

162: 1999), and its dust-to-gas ratio is measured to be up to 10 times lower

163: than in the Milky Way (e.g. Stanimirovic et al. 2000). Therefore, the

164: SMC may be considered as an excellent local template for studying

165: primordial star formation, providing insight into the processes at work

166: in the early universe. The recent star formation process in the SMC is

167: characterized by a rich sample of {\sc H~ii} regions (Henize 1956;

168: Davies et al. 1976) linked to young stellar systems, the {\em stellar

169: associations}, known for their early-type stellar content and loose

170: structure (e.g. Kontizas et al. 1999). The small distance of the SMC

171: from us ($\approx$~60~kpc) allows us to resolve from space individual

172: stars down to $M_{V}\approx$~10~mag, and consequently the study of its

173: low-mass young stellar content and the corresponding Initial Mass

174: Function (IMF) becomes unusually accessible.

175: 

176: Stellar associations contain the richest sample of young bright stars in

177: a galaxy. Our knowledge on the young massive stars of the Magellanic

178: Clouds (MCs) has been collected from ground-based studies of young

179: stellar associations (see e.g. Massey 2006 and references therein).

180: However, our knowledge of the low-mass stellar membership and the

181: corresponding IMF in star-forming regions of the MCs is quite

182: incomplete. A first attempt to define the low-mass population of a

183: stellar association in the MCs was made by Gouliermis et al. (2005).  In

184: their photometric study of the LMC association LH~52 with data from the

185: {\em Wide-Field Planetary Camera 2} (WFPC2), these authors test the

186: hypothesis that sub-solar-mass stars {\em can be} detected in the MCs.

187: They found that all faint main sequence stars, which are observed in the

188: area of the association, belong to the general field of the LMC and not

189: to the system. The field-subtracted mass function of LH~52, which

190: accounts for its IMF was found by these authors with a slope $\Gamma

191: \sim -1.1$ for main sequence stars down to $M \simeq 1$~M{\solar}. This

192: slope is comparable, but somewhat more shallow than a typical Salpeter

193: (1955; $\Gamma \sim -1.35$) IMF. An IMF well reproduced by a power law

194: with a slope consistent with Salpeter's was also found by Sirianni et

195: al. (2002) in the central regions (within 30\arcsec) of the young SMC

196: star cluster NGC~330.

197: 

198: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%  TABLE %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

199: \begin{deluxetable}{ccccc}

200: \tablewidth{0pt}

201: \tablecaption{Log of the observations

202: \label{t:obs}}

203: \tablecomments{Datasets refer to HST archive catalog. Exposure 

204: times (T$_{\rm expo}$) per filter are given in seconds. Units of right

205: ascension are hours, minutes, and seconds, and units of declination are

206: degrees, arcminutes, and arcseconds.}

207: \tablehead{\colhead{Visit} & \colhead{RA} & \colhead{DEC} & 

208: \multicolumn{2}{c}{T$_{\rm expo}$}\\[1ex]

209: \colhead{Dataset} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{(J2000.0)}& \colhead{F555W} & 

210: \colhead{F814W}}

211: \startdata

212: J92F05 & 01~29~28.21 & $-$73~33~16.7& 430 & 453 \\[.5ex]

213:        & 01~29~28.52 & $-$73~33~16.4& 430 & 453 \\[.5ex]

214:        & 01~29~27.89 & $-$73~33~16.9& 430 & 453 \\[.5ex]

215:        & 01~29~27.57 & $-$73~33~17.1& 430 & 453 \\[.5ex]

216:        & 01~29~27.57 & $-$73~33~17.1& 3 & 2 \\[.5ex]

217:        & 01~29~27.25 & $-$73~33~17.4& 430 & 453 \\[2ex]

218: J92FA6 & 01~29~27.57 & $-$73~33~17.1& 3 & 2

219: \enddata

220: \end{deluxetable}

221: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

222: 

223: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%  TABLE %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

224: \begin{deluxetable}{lcccccc}

225: \tablewidth{0pt}

226: \tablecaption{Sample from the photometric catalog of stars found in this

227: study in the region of NGC~602/N~90 with HST/ACS imaging

228: \label{t:catalog}}

229: \tablehead{

230: \colhead{}& 

231: \colhead{R.A.}& 

232: \colhead{DECL.}&

233: \colhead{$m_{555}$}& 

234: \colhead{$\sigma_{555}$}& 

235: \colhead{$m_{814}$}&

236: \colhead{$\sigma_{814}$}\\

237: \colhead{\#}& 

238: \colhead{(J2000.0)}& 

239: \colhead{(J2000.0)}& 

240: \colhead{(mag)}& 

241: \colhead{(mag)}& 

242: \colhead{(mag)}& 

243: \colhead{(mag)}

244: }

245: \startdata

246:       1& 01~29~54.828& $-$73~32~31.524&  14.690&   0.004&  13.217&   0.003\\

247:       2& 01~29~24.581& $-$73~33~16.236&  13.881&   0.002&  14.128&   0.003\\

248:       3& 01~29~14.220& $-$73~31~53.256&  14.717&   0.003&  13.354&   0.002\\

249:       4& 01~29~33.310& $-$73~33~44.496&  14.270&   0.002&  14.508&   0.004\\

250:       5& 01~29~31.051& $-$73~33~43.056&  15.371&   0.004&  15.612&   0.007\\

251:       6& 01~29~28.301& $-$73~31~57.432&  15.341&   0.004&  15.288&   0.006\\

252:       7& 01~29~36.485& $-$73~34~12.108&  16.412&   0.007&  14.993&   0.005\\

253:       8& 01~29~32.837& $-$73~33~39.024&  15.467&   0.004&  15.673&   0.007\\

254:       9& 01~29~31.992& $-$73~33~30.924&  15.594&   0.005&  15.796&   0.007\\

255:      10& 01~29~27.768& $-$73~32~59.496&  15.730&   0.005&  15.699&   0.007\\

256:      11& 01~29~18.286& $-$73~32~33.468&  16.052&   0.006&  15.322&   0.006\\

257:      12& 01~29~31.094& $-$73~33~43.272&  15.816&   0.005&  16.074&   0.008\\

258:      13& 01~29~31.411& $-$73~33~42.336&  15.663&   0.005&  15.871&   0.008\\

259:      14& 01~29~14.249& $-$73~31~53.220&  17.910&   0.020&  16.655&   0.018\\

260:      15& 01~29~32.942& $-$73~34~10.956&  16.232&   0.006&  16.377&   0.010

261: \enddata

262: 

263: %% Include any \tablenotetext{key}{text}

264: %% TEXT\tablenotemark{key}

265: 

266: %% \tablecomments{text} between the \enddata and

267: %% \end{deluxetable} commands

268: 

269: \tablecomments{Magnitudes are given in the Vega system. Units of right

270: ascension are hours, minutes, and seconds, and units of declination are

271: degrees, arcminutes, and arcseconds. Table \ref{t:catalog} is available

272: in its entirety in the electronic edition of the {\em Astrophysical

273: Journal}. A portion is shown here for guidance regarding its form and

274: content.} 

275: 

276: %\tablerefs{ref list}

277: 

278: \end{deluxetable}

279: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

280: 

281: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% FIGURE %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

282: \begin{figure*}[t!]

283: \plotone{f1.eps}

284: \caption{Color-composite image of the field around NGC~602, constructed

285: from observations with HST/ACS in the filters $F555W$, $F814W$ and $F658N$.

286: The association itself lies at the center of the field, located almost

287: in the middle of the shell-like emission nebula N~90. Directly north

288: of the association lies the open cluster B~164 (Bruck 1976), and the

289: newly discovered ``cluster A'' covers the north-western edge of the field.

290: All three systems are confirmed as statistically significant stellar

291: concentrations from star counts shown in Figure~\ref{f:sc}. Credit:

292: NASA, ESA, and the Hubble Heritage Team (STScI/AURA)-ESA/Hubble

293: Collaboration.\label{f:rgb}}

294: \end{figure*}

295: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% FIGURE %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

296: 

297: 

298: The investigation by Gouliermis et al. (2005) revealed, for the first

299: time, that the low-mass stellar content of stellar associations in the

300: MCs is still in its pre-main sequence (PMS) phase, as is the case of

301: nearby galactic associations (Brice{\~n}o et al. 2007). Gouliermis et

302: al. (2006a) discovered in LH~52 about 500 low-mass PMS stars down to

303: $\sim$ 0.5 M{\solar}, easily distinguishable in the $m_{555}-m_{814}$,

304: $m_{555}$ Color-Magnitude Diagram (CMD), extending the sub-solar stellar

305: membership of MCs stellar associations to their PMS populations.

306: Naturally, these stars should be considered as the best tracers of the

307: sub-solar IMF in the MCs, but the WFPC2 data, being limited by

308: completeness, allowed the construction of the PMS IMF of LH~52 only for

309: the mass range 0.8 - 1.4~M{\solar}. This IMF was found to correspond to

310: a power-law with a slope of $\Gamma \sim -1.26$. Previous PMS studies in

311: the MCs focus on the surrounding field of supernova 1987A (e.g. Panagia

312: et al. 2000), where the sample is limited, and the star-burst of 30

313: Doradus (e.g. Zinnecker 1998; Sirianni et al. 2000; Brandner et al.

314: 2001), where crowding and high extinction limit the detection of stars

315: to 1 - 2~M{\solar} (Romaniello et al. 2006). 

316: 

317: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% TABLE %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

318: \begin{deluxetable}{cccccc}

319: \tablewidth{0pt}

320: \tablecaption{Populations Summary in the Identified Stellar Systems

321: \label{t:roi}}

322: \tablehead{

323: \colhead{Name} & 

324: \colhead{$n_{\rm stars}$} & 

325: \colhead{$\rho$ (pc$^{-2}$)} &

326: \colhead{$f_{\rm PMS}$} & 

327: \colhead{$f_{\rm UMS}$} & 

328: \colhead{$f_{\rm LMS}$}

329: }

330: \startdata

331: NGC~602   & 855 & 5.6 & {\bf 0.86} & 0.07 & 0.04\\

332: B~164     & 356 & 2.9 & 0.03       & 0.27 & {\bf 0.62}\\

333: Cluster~A & 171 & 2.0 & 0.05       & 0.21 & {\bf 0.63}\\

334: Field     & 230 & 1.1 & 0.16       & 0.08 & {\bf~0.66}

335: \enddata

336: 

337: \tablecomments{The total stellar numbers of the systems,

338: $n_{\rm stars}$, are field-subtracted (see \S~4.3.1), and refer to

339: the area of each system defined with star counts. The total number of

340: field stars, shown in the last row, refers to the area defined as the

341: best representative of the field due to its emptiness.  The fractions

342: $f$ give the number of one stellar species over the total stellar

343: numbers in every area. The most significant numbers are highlighted. It

344: is interesting to note that both B~164 and Cluster~A have almost

345: identical numbers of UMS and LMS stars, and that their LMS fractions are

346: comparable to that of the field.} 

347: 

348: \end{deluxetable}

349: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

350: %\tablecomments{The number of stars $n_{\text{stars}}$ refers to all stars.}

351: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

352: 

353: Over the last years, stellar associations in the SMC gained increasing

354: scientific interest, as the investigation of their bright OB stars was

355: complimented by new studies on their PMS stars (e.g. Nota et al. 2006;

356: Gouliermis et al. 2006b; Sabbi et al. 2007; Hennekemper et al. 2008).

357: These studies were facilitated by the unique combination of

358: high-resolving power with a wide field-of-view provided by the {\em

359: Advanced Camera for Surveys} (ACS) on-board {\em HST}. In the present

360: study we deal with the IMF of the young stellar association NGC~602,

361: related to the bright {\sc H~ii} region LHA~115-N90, or in short N~90

362: (Henize 1956). The region NGC~602/N~90, being located in the wing of the

363: SMC, has the advantage of avoiding the densest parts of the galaxy. As a

364: consequence, the confusion of its stellar content with that of the

365: general SMC field, which extends in a wide depth along the

366: line-of-sight, is rather low. McCumber et al. (2005) found in their

367: investigation on field stars in the SMC wing that after a long period of

368: constant star formation, there was a burst in activity within the last

369: 1~Gyr. The lack of $\gamma$-ray, X-ray or far-UV sources in the region

370: of NGC~602/N~90 suggests that this excess in the star formation of the

371: area was possibly triggered by encounters with the LMC and/or the Milky

372: Way. Most likely, all major star-forming events in the SMC are initiated

373: by these tidal interactions. In the first part of our investigation of

374: the region NGC~602/N~90 (Gouliermis et al. 2007) we present the results

375: of our photometric study from observations with the {\em Infrared Array

376: Camera} (IRAC) on-board the {\em Spitzer Space Telescope}. We report the

377: detection of 22 candidate Young Stellar Objects (YSOs), which are

378: located at the edge of N~90, suggesting that they are the products of

379: star formation triggered by the central association NGC~602.

380: 

381: The recent release of the HST/ACS observations of the region of

382: NGC~602/N~90 offers a unique opportunity for the comprehensive

383: photometric analysis of both its bright and faint stellar content, and

384: the construction of the complete IMF throughout the whole observed mass

385: range. Our photometry, which reaches the limit of $m_{555}$~\gsim~26.5~mag,

386: providing one of the most complete stellar samples ever collected for

387: star-forming regions in the SMC, is described in \S~2. We investigate

388: the morphology of the observed region and the spatial distribution of

389: the detected stars in \S~3, and in \S~4 we discuss the nature of the

390: detected stellar species and present the CMDs of the three major stellar

391: concentrations in the observed field. In \S~4 we also present the

392: subtraction of the contribution of the field from the observed CMDs, and

393: we estimate the reddening towards the identified systems. A detailed

394: description of the stellar members of the association NGC~602 is also

395: given in \S~4. The Luminosity Functions of the identified stellar

396: systems are constructed in \S~5. In \S~6 a comprehensive construction of

397: the IMF of NGC~602, as well as of the two additional star clusters in

398: the region is presented. Conclusions are given in \S~7.

399: 

400: 

401: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% SECTION %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

402: \section{Observations and Photometry}

403: \label{s:obs}

404: 

405: The data used in our analysis are obtained with the Wide Field Channel

406: (WFC) of the ACS within the \hst GO Program 10248 on July 14 (Dataset:

407: J92F05) and July 18 (Dataset: J92FA6) 2004. Images are taken in the

408: $F555W$ and $F814W$ filters. A single ACS/WFC pointing covering \ap

409: 3\farcmin4\x3\farcmin4 was centered on NGC~602/N~90. At the distance of

410: the SMC this field-of-view (FoV) corresponds to an extent of \ap

411: 57\x57~pc. The first visit (J92F05) includes five long exposures taken

412: with a dithering pattern in order to cover the inter-chip gap of the

413: camera and one short exposure with a single pointing to cope with the

414: saturation of the brightest stars. Within the second visit (J92FA6) a

415: short exposure was also taken in order to remove cosmic rays that were

416: unintentionally included during the first visit. In Table~\ref{t:obs} we

417: give a summary of the different data sets used in this investigation. A

418: color-composite image of the observed field is shown in

419: Fig.~\ref{f:rgb}.

420: 

421: 

422: Photometry was performed with the ACS module of the package

423: DOLPHOT\footnote{The ACS module of DOLPHOT is an adaptation of the

424: photometry package HSTphot (Dolphin 2000). It can be downloaded from

425: {\tt http://purcell.as.arizona.edu/dolphot/}.} (Ver. 1.0), especially

426: designed for ACS. We followed the photometric process, as it is

427: described by Gouliermis et al. (2006b). The pipeline-reduced FITS files

428: were obtained from the \hst Data Archive. We used the package {\em

429: multidrizzle} (Koekemoer et al. 2002) following the ACS data handbook to

430: clean the images of residual warm pixels and cosmic rays and to

431: construct a deep reference drizzled image to be used for the photometry.

432: All exposures were photometered simultaneously, using the $F814W$

433: drizzled frame as the position reference. Photometric calibrations and

434: transformations were made according to Sirianni et al. (2005). Charge

435: Transfer Efficiency corrections were applied according to ACS~ISR~04-06.

436: We cleaned our photometric catalog from bad detections using DOLPHOT's

437: star quality parameters, as described also by Gouliermis et al. (2006b).

438: The final photometric catalog includes 5,626 stars in total detected in

439: both filters. The full length of this catalog with the RA, DEC

440: coordinates (in J2000) and their magnitudes in each filter (in the Vega

441: system) of these stars is available in electronic form in

442: Table~\ref{t:catalog}. Astrometric solutions for the detected stars are

443: derived from the $F814W$ drizzled frame with the use of the application

444: {\em xy2sky} of the WCSTools package\footnote{The WCSTools package is

445: available at CfA at {\tt

446: http://tdc-www.harvard.edu/software/wcstools/}.}.

447: 

448: Typical uncertainties of our photometry as a function of the magnitude

449: for both filters are given in Fig.~\ref{f:err}. The completeness of the

450: data was evaluated by artificial star experiments with the use of lists

451: of almost 400,000 artificial stars created with the utility {\em

452: acsfakelist} of DOLPHOT. The completeness is found to be spatially

453: variable, depending on the crowding of each region. This is shown in

454: Fig.~\ref{f:cp}, where the completeness factors for the whole observed

455: field, as well as of the area selected as the most representative of the

456: background field, due to its emptiness, are plotted for both filters.

457: The area, which from here on we refer to as simply the ``field'', is

458: selected as the most {\em empty area} of the western part of the

459: observed FoV.  This selection was based on our recent results from {\em

460: Spitzer}/IRAC, which show that this part of NGC~602/N~90 is the less

461: contaminated by dust emission (Gouliermis et al. 2007).

462: 

463: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% FIGURE %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

464: \begin{figure}[t!]

465: \epsscale{1.15}

466: \plotone{f2.eps}

467: \caption{Typical photometric uncertainties in both $m_{555}$ and

468: $m_{814}$ bands as derived by DOLPHOT from all data sets. \label{f:err}}

469: \end{figure}

470: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% FIGURE %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

471: %The bifurcation in the errors is due to varying depth within the

472: %observed field.

473: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

474: 

475: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% FIGURE %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

476: \begin{figure}[t!]

477: \epsscale{1.15}

478: \plotone{f3.eps}

479: \caption{Completeness for all stars in the observed FoV and in the area

480: selected as the most representative of the local field the SMC. The

481: field being less contaminated by the nebula and less crowded than the

482: association NGC~602 exhibits a higher completeness than the overall FoV.

483: \label{f:cp}}

484: \end{figure}

485: 

486: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% FIGURE %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

487: 

488: % F555W INCLUDES

489: %H$_\beta$ ($\unit[495.9]{nm}$) 

490: %[O{\sc iii}] ($\unit[500.7]{nm}$)

491: 

492: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% SECTION %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

493: \section{Morphology of the region of NGC~602/N~90}

494: 

495: The prominent bright stellar concentration almost at the center of the

496: observed ACS/WFC field, shown in Fig.~\ref{f:rgb}, is the association

497: NGC~602. The bright emission nebula, N~90, can also be seen in the

498: image, because of the H$\alpha$ emission, included in the $F658N$ filter

499: (centered at 658.4~nm). A small contribution from [N{\sc ii}] is also

500: included in this filter. The association is surrounded by a ring-like

501: feature highlighted by the gas emission, and ribbon-like structures

502: pointing towards the center can be seen to the southeastern and

503: northwestern of the ring. These structures have been identified by

504: Gouliermis et al. (2007) as the SMC analogs of the ``Pillars of

505: creation'' originally detected in the Galactic {\sc H~ii} region M~16

506: (Hester et al. 1996). They clearly indicate ongoing star formation on

507: the rim of the ring-like structure, probably driven by the stellar winds

508: and UV radiation of the brightest stars in NGC~602. 

509: 

510: The stellar association is not the only stellar concentration inside the

511: observed FoV. North of the association lies the open cluster B~164

512: (Bruck 1976) which is also known as NGC~602b (Westerlund 1964). Next to

513: B~164 and to the west lies a third stellar concentration. It shows to be

514: a cluster, which does not belong to any catalog of known objects in this

515: region. From here on we refer to this cluster as ``Cluster~A''. All

516: three stellar systems are easily revealed by the spatial distribution of

517: all stars detected with our photometry in the region, as discussed in

518: the next section.

519: 

520: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% FIGURE %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

521: \begin{figure}[t]

522: \epsscale{1.15}

523: \plotone{f4.eps}

524: \caption{Isodensity contour map for all stars with photometric errors

525: $\sigma_V\leq$~0.1~mag using grid elements of size 7\arcsec,

526: shown as the small box at the bottom-left corner of the map. The first

527: isopleth corresponds to the mean background density. The next isopleths

528: are plotted in steps of the standard deviation $\sigma$. The bluish

529: contours correspond to stellar density equal or higher than the

530: 3$\sigma$ level. All three stellar systems in the region are revealed as

531: significant stellar concentrations.\label{f:sc}}

532: \end{figure}

533: 

534: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% FIGURE %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

535: 

536: %Center of WFC Chip 1: RA: 1\rahrs29\ramin42\frasec52, DEC:

537: %$-$73\deg33\arcmin12\farcsec86, J2000. 

538: 

539: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% SUBSECTION %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

540: \subsection{Spatial Distribution of the Stars in NGC~602/N~90\label{s:iso}}

541: 

542: In order to reveal the spatial distribution of the detected stars and

543: the morphology of any stellar concentrations in the observed region, we

544: performed star counts on our photometric catalog (a sample of this

545: catalog is shown in Table~\ref{t:catalog}). Stars with photometric

546: uncertainties $\sigma_{V}\geq$~0.1~mag were not

547: considered. The constructed isodensity contour map is shown in

548: Fig.~\ref{f:sc}. The coordinate system used for this map, as well as

549: the ones shown later is the Cartesian (X,Y) system of the pixel

550: coordinates of WFC, transformed to seconds of arc, in respect to the

551: central pixel of the FoV.

552: 

553: Star counts were performed in a quadrilateral grid divided in elements

554: with sizes 140~$\times$~140 WFC~pix$^2$ each, which correspond to

555: 7\arcsec\x7\arcsec\ (or $\approx$~2~pc~$\times$~2~pc at the distance of

556: the SMC). This size was selected as the optimum to map any fine

557: structure, which might exist within the clusters. The selection of

558: larger size for the grid elements would reveal a smoother version of the

559: map of Fig. ~\ref{f:sc}. The first isopleth in the contour map indicates

560: the mean background density, whereas the subsequent levels are drawn in

561: steps of 1$\sigma$, where $\sigma$ is the standard deviation of the

562: background density. All contours with density equal or higher than the

563: 3$\sigma$ level, which is chosen as the density threshold of the

564: statistically significant stellar concentrations are drawn with bluish

565: colors. All three star clusters in the region are revealed in this map

566: with NGC~602 being the dominant stellar system, seen almost at its

567: center. The density peaks for both B~164 and Cluster~A do exceed the

568: 3$\sigma$ limit as well. Smaller compact density peaks can be seen in

569: the map below the 3$\sigma$ limit. They are typical density

570: fluctuations, due to the small size selected for the grid elements. 

571: 

572: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% SECTION %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

573: \section{Stellar Populations in the Region of NGC~602/N~90}

574: 

575: 

576: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% SUBSECTION %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

577: \subsection{Color-Magnitude Diagram\label{s:cmd}}

578: 

579: The $m_{555}-m_{814}$, $m_{555}$ color-magnitude diagram (CMD) of all

580: stars in our photometric catalog is shown in Fig.~\ref{f:cmd}, which

581: indicates that our photometry provides accurate magnitudes (with

582: $\sigma_{555}$~\lsim~0.1~mag) for stars with $m_{555}$~\lsim~26.5~mag.

583: Different groups of stellar types can easily be distinguished in this

584: CMD.  There is a prominent well populated main sequence (MS), which

585: extends from the detection limit up to $m_{555}\approx$~14~mag, and a

586: rich population of pre-main sequence (PMS) stars located on the red part

587: of the MS. We select regions of the CMD, each covering different types

588: of stars.  The tentative limits of these regions are also shown in

589: Fig.~\ref{f:cmd}. We split the MS into its upper (brighter) and lower

590: (fainter) parts (UMS and LMS respectively). According to the ZAMS

591: isochrone from the model grid designed by Girardi et al. (2002) for the

592: ACS filter system, the limit between UMS and LMS stars of

593: $m_{555}=22.6$~mag corresponds to a stellar mass of

594: $M\approx$~1.2~M{\solar}. 

595: 

596: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% FIGURE %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

597: \begin{figure}[t!]

598: \epsscale{1.15}

599: \plotone{f5.eps}

600: \caption{The $m_{555}-m_{814}$, $m_{555}$ CMD of all stars detected in

601: the region of NGC~602/N~90. Stars with photometric uncertainties larger

602: than 0.1~mag (Fig.~\ref{f:err}) are shown as grey dots. The drawn lines

603: indicate the tentative limits, which separate the different stellar

604: species included in the catalog of detected stars: The Upper Main

605: Sequence (UMS), the Lower Main Sequence (LMS), and the Pre-Main Sequence

606: (PMS) stars.\label{f:cmd}}

607: \end{figure}

608: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% FIGURE %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

609: 

610: The brighter limit of the PMS region in the CMD is being chosen around

611: $m_{555}\approx$~22.3~mag. Probably, a brighter limit would allow us to

612: include the brighter PMS stars and the transition region between PMS and

613: MS (turn-on), but this part of the CMD is contaminated by the old

614: stellar population of the field of the galaxy (e.g. McCumber et al.

615: 2005), as seen by its loose red giant branch (RGB). The low numbers of

616: widely scattered stars in the RGB part of the CMD and the absence of any

617: clearly detectable turn-off indicates that only a small fraction of the

618: evolved field stars can be seen in the observed region, probably due to

619: extinction by the dust. Indeed, {\em Spitzer}/IRAC observations of

620: NGC~602/N~90 have shown in the 8~\micron\ band strong dust emission from

621: the area, which surrounds the central ``hole'' in the {\sc H~ii} region,

622: where NGC~602 is located (Gouliermis et al. 2007).

623: 

624: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% FIGURE %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

625: \begin{figure*}[t!]

626: \epsscale{1.1}

627: \plottwo{f6a.eps}{f6b.eps}

628: \caption{Isodensity contour maps for the region of NGC~602/N~90 from

629: star counts of different stellar populations (LMS, UMS, PMS; see \S

630: 4.1), as they are revealed in the observed CMD. The maps of the whole

631: region (bottom panels) have a grid resolution of 12\arcsec, while the

632: enlarged ones (top panels) of 5\arcsec. In all maps the first drawn

633: density isopleth corresponds to the 3$\sigma$ significance.\label{f:c}}

634: \end{figure*}

635: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% FIGURE %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

636: 

637: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% SUBSECTION %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

638: \subsection{Stellar Populations in the  Systems of the Region\label{s:sys}}

639: 

640: Isodensity contour maps from counts of the three most important stellar

641: types in the CMD of Fig.~\ref{f:cmd} exhibit a strong spatial

642: distinction between UMS, LMS and PMS stars. This is shown in the bottom

643: panels of Fig.~\ref{f:c} (Figs.~\ref{f:c}a, \ref{f:c}b, \ref{f:c}d and

644: \ref{f:c}e). The contour maps of this figure are constructed with the

645: same method as the map of Fig.~\ref{f:sc} (see \S~3.1), and the lowest

646: density isopleth shown corresponds to 3$\sigma$ above the local

647: background density. These maps reveal again all three important stellar

648: systems in the region (NGC~602, B~164 and Cluster~A), but they

649: demonstrate that these systems are dominated by different types of

650: stars. 

651: 

652: All three systems are detected by star counts of UMS stars. Although

653: B~164 and Cluster~A are found to contain significant samples of LMS

654: stars, they are not revealed at all in the map of the PMS stars

655: (Fig.~\ref{f:c}d). On the other hand, the faint stellar populations of

656: the association NGC~602 are certainly PMS and not LMS stars. This

657: demonstrates that both B~164 and Cluster~A seem to be evolved small

658: clusters, but NGC~602 is a younger stellar association, with a

659: significant number of PMS stellar members. Consequently, in order to

660: reveal the extent of each system based on its dominant stellar

661: populations we construct their contour maps from star counts of these

662: populations alone, shown in the top panels of Fig.~\ref{f:c}. The map

663: constructed for B~164 and Cluster~A from the UMS and LMS stars is shown

664: in Fig.~\ref{f:c}c, while the one for NGC~602 (from counts of the UMS

665: and PMS stars) is shown on Fig.~\ref{f:c}f. We define the boundaries of

666: each stellar system from the 3$\sigma$ isopleth in these maps. The size

667: of each system is defined by a rectangle, which contains this isopleth.

668: 

669: We show in Table~\ref{t:roi} the numbers of stars counted within the

670: measured limits of each system (after the field contribution subtracted,

671: see 4.3.1), the surface density and the corresponding fractions of PMS,

672: UMS, and LMS stars included in these limits. These fractions show a

673: clear concentration of PMS stars in NGC~602, while Cluster~A and B~164

674: clearly host the largest amount of LMS stars. Although, both Cluster~A

675: and B~164 show to host larger numbers of UMS stars, it is NGC~602 that

676: hosts the brightest MS stars in the region, as it will be shown later

677: from the CMDs of the systems. Considering that the limits for the UMS

678: stars in the CMD have been selected to include stars down to

679: $m_{555}\approx$~22.5~mag, the larger fraction of UMS stars in Cluster~A

680: and B~164 is due to their fainter UMS members.

681: 

682: %The contour plots are sensitive to the size and the location of the

683: %grid.

684: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% SUBSECTION %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

685: % disentangles the different populations in the stellar systems

686: \subsection{The Star Clusters B~164 and Cluster~A}

687: \label{s:pop}

688: 

689: According to our selection of different stellar types in the observed

690: CMD (\S~4.1), about 55\% of the stars in our catalog are LMS stars. 

691: Fig.~\ref{f:c}a shows that these stars are mostly concentrated in B~164

692: and Cluster~A, but in a rather loose manner (there are only three

693: isopleths above the local background). On the other hand, the

694: concentration of UMS stars in these clusters shows a peak at 9$\sigma$

695: above the local background in B~164 (Fig.~\ref{f:c}b). The detailed

696: contour map of the area around these clusters, shown in Fig.~\ref{f:c}c,

697: shows the prominent concentration of both UMS and LMS stars in both of

698: them (and mostly in B~164) indicating their evolved nature. The absence

699: of PMS stars in both clusters as seen in the map of Fig.~\ref{f:c}d,

700: certainly affects their individual CMDs. In order to construct these

701: CMDs we consider the contribution of the stellar population of the

702: general field of SMC in the region, as it is observed within the

703: observed ACS pointing. We apply a Monte Carlo method for the subtraction

704: of this contribution from the CMD observed in the specific area of each

705: cluster.

706: 

707: \subsubsection{Subtraction of Contaminating Field Stars}

708: 

709: The typical procedure for the field subtraction of a CMD with the use of

710: the Monte Carlo method divides the CMD in a grid and performs a

711: comparison between the numbers of stars found in each grid element of

712: the observed CMD of the cluster and the one of the region selected as

713: representative of the general field. Although this method is efficient

714: for compact populous star clusters, it might produce unwanted artifacts

715: for smaller not compact clusters or associations. Therefore, our Monte

716: Carlo method for the field subtraction of the observed CMDs of the

717: clusters slightly differs from the typical procedure. Our

718: field-subtraction procedure does not use a predefined grid on the whole

719: extent of the CMDs, but an individual subregion of the CMD is considered

720: around every single star observed in the area of the cluster.  Each such

721: subregion has the shape of an ellipse with semi-axes $\Delta(V-I)=

722: 0.15$~mag and $\Delta V=0.5$~mag.

723: 

724: The corresponding numbers of field and cluster stars inside each of

725: these ellipses ($n_{\rm F}$ for the field and $n_{\rm C}$ for the

726: cluster) are counted, and corrected for incompleteness according to the

727: completeness factors estimated per magnitude range for each of the

728: considered areas. The number of field stars per ellipse expected to be

729: present in the CMD of the cluster, $n_{\rm F}^*$, is given by the number

730: of field stars, $n_{\rm F}$, normalized to the surface of the area of

731: the cluster. The probability that the central star of each ellipse is

732: actually a field star is given by $n_{\rm F}^*/n_{\rm C}$. If e.g.

733: $n_{\rm F}^*=0$ then all the stars inside the ellipse are cluster stars

734: and the probability is 0, while if $n_{\rm F}^*/n_{\rm C}\geq 1$ then we

735: can assume that this star is actually a field star. For intermediate

736: values, $0 < n_{\rm F}^*/n_{\rm C} < 1$, it is randomly decided whether

737: to account this star for a field star or not.

738: 

739: We applied this method to decontaminate the CMD of the area of each

740: system from the contribution of the field. The field-subtracted CMDs of

741: both Cluster A and B~164 are shown in Fig.~\ref{f:cmdab}. Their most

742: remarkable feature is the clear MS, which extends from the detection

743: limit up to the brightest stars in the clusters, with magnitudes

744: $m_{555}\approx$~16.8~mag for Cluster~A and $m_{555}\approx$~15.5~mag

745: for B~164. An older limit for the age of both clusters can be estimated

746: based on their bright MS stars, with isochrone fitting. We used the

747: models by Girardi et al. (2002), especially designed for the filter

748: system of ACS, and we found an age of $\approx$~160~Myr for Cluster~A,

749: while B~164 is found be not older than $\approx$~80~Myr. It should be

750: noted that if the only bright red star seen in the CMD of Cluster~A is

751: also considered, an age of $\tau \sim$~80~Myr may also represent this

752: cluster. If indeed the two clusters have similar ages, and considering

753: that they are very close to each other, one may speculate that both

754: clusters form a double system, product of the same star formation event.

755: However, the available data are not sufficient to support or dismiss

756: this hypothesis.

757: 

758: In Fig.~\ref{f:cmdab} both CMDs are shown with the corresponding

759: isochrones overplotted. In these CMDs, as well as in all CMDs shown here

760: we assume a distance modulus $\mu_{\rm 0} \simeq 18.9 \pm 0.1$~mag

761: (Dolphin et al. 2001). The largest observed stellar masses for MS stars

762: in each cluster can be estimated from the evolutionary models

763: considered.  These masses are $\sim$~4.3~M{\solar} for Cluster~A and

764: $\sim$~5.7~M{\solar} for B~164.

765: 

766: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% FIGURE %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

767: \begin{figure}[tb!]

768: \epsscale{1.2}

769: \plotone{f7.eps}

770: \caption{The $m_{555}-m_{814}$, $m_{555}$ CMD of the stars in the

771: regions of Cluster~A and B~164, after the contribution of the field has

772: been statistically subtracted with the Monte Carlo method. Their

773: prominent MS shows that both clusters are most probably evolved open

774: clusters. The overplotted isochrones from the grid of evolutionary

775: models by Girardi et al. (2002) represent the older limits in the age

776: estimation of each cluster.

777: \label{f:cmdab}}

778: \end{figure}

779: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% FIGURE %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

780: 

781: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% FIGURE %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

782: \begin{figure}[t!]

783: \epsscale{1.2}

784: \plotone{f8.eps}

785: \caption{The $E(B-V)$ color excess distributions derived from the bright

786: MS stars with $m_{555}< 21.25$~mag in NGC~602 and the clusters B~164

787: and Cluster~A. The peaks of the distributions were estimated assuming

788: that they correspond to a Gaussian distribution. The obtained values are

789: for NGC~602 $E(B-V)=0.06\pm0.02$~mag, for Cluster~A

790: $E(B-V)=0.04\pm0.02$~mag, and for B~164 $E(B-V)=0.07\pm0.02$~mag. These

791: values show that all three clusters suffer from rather low optical

792: extinction. \label{f:red}}

793: \end{figure}

794: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% FIGURE %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

795: 

796: \subsubsection{Interstellar Reddening\label{s:red}}

797: 

798: For the isochrones plotted in Fig.~\ref{f:cmdab} no specific

799: interstellar reddening was considered. The comparison of the loci of the

800: individual UMS stars to the models allowed us an accurate determination

801: of the reddening within the area of each cluster. The corresponding

802: distributions of the stars in Cluster~A and B~164 according to their

803: reddening are shown in Fig.~\ref{f:red} (the distribution for NGC~602 is

804: also shown for comparison; see \S~4.4). These plots show that a mean

805: color excess of $E(B-V)= 0.04 \pm 0.02$~mag can be considered for

806: Cluster~A and $E(B-V)= 0.07 \pm 0.02$~mag for B~164. These values, as

807: well as the one for NGC~602, are in excellent agreement with previous

808: reddening measurements, which vary between $E(B-V)\simeq 0.03$ and

809: $0.07$~mag for clusters located in the Wing of the SMC (Piatti et al.

810: 2007), and between $E(B-V)\simeq 0.05$ and $0.09$~mag for southern

811: fields of the galaxy (No{\"e}l et al. 2007). They are also in good

812: agreement with previous measurements on SMC intermediate-age clusters

813: (e.g. Alcaino et al. 2003; Hunter et al. 2003; Rochau et al. 2007). The

814: reddening values found for Cluster~A and B~164 correspond to an

815: extinction of $A_V\approx$~0.1~mag and $A_V\approx$~0.2~mag respectively

816: assuming an extinction law $A_V=R_V\;E(B-V)$ with $R_V=3.1$ (e.g.

817: Koornneef 1983). 

818: 

819: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% SUBSECTION %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

820: % describes NGC 602 in detail

821: \subsection{The Stellar Association NGC~602}

822: \label{s:popngc}

823: 

824: As mentioned earlier (\S~4.2) NGC~602 does not host significant numbers

825: of LMS stars (Fig.~\ref{f:c}a), but rather a large concentration of PMS

826: stars (Fig.~\ref{f:c}e). The system is also characterized by a prominent

827: UMS stellar population (Fig.~\ref{f:c}d). Fig.~\ref{f:c}f shows in more

828: detail the morphology of the system based on the spatial distribution of

829: both UMS and PMS stars. This map shows clear signatures of

830: sub-clustering within the system (as is the case for Cluster~A and

831: B~164, shown in Fig.~\ref{f:c}c), which is demonstrated by the clumpy

832: behavior of the density in the map. Although, this phenomenon could be

833: due to the selection of a finer grid resolution in the star counts (with

834: a grid element size of $\approx$~5\farcs0 instead of 12\farcs0, which

835: was used for the larger maps), from the positions of the UMS stars we

836: verified that they are indeed concentrated in smaller subregions within

837: NGC~602, the most prominent being the one located to the south-east

838: (bottom-right) of the map in Fig.~\ref{f:c}f. This subgroup has also an

839: over-density of PMS stars located with an offset of \ap5\arcsec\ in

840: respect to the density peak of the UMS stars. A second important

841: subgroup of UMS stars is located \ap 10\arcsec\ east of the first, and

842: as shown in Fig.~\ref{f:c}f it is somewhat elongated.

843: 

844: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% FIGURE %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

845: \begin{figure}[t!]

846: \epsscale{1.2}

847: \plotone{f9.eps}

848: \caption{The $m_{555}-m_{814}$, $m_{555}$ CMD of the stars in the area

849: of the association NGC~602 (without any subtraction of the contribution

850: of the field), and of the area selected as the most representative of

851: the general background field of the SMC. In the latter, features which

852: are characteristic of the SMC wing stellar population, such as a turnoff

853: at $\approx$~22~mag (McCumber et al. 2005), corresponding to the

854: overplotted isochrone of age $\sim$~1~Gyr, can be distinguished.

855: \label{f:cmdnf}}

856: \end{figure}

857: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% FIGURE %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

858: 

859: 

860: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% FIGURE %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

861: \begin{figure}[t!]

862: \epsscale{1.15}

863: \plotone{f10.eps}

864: \caption{The $m_{555}-m_{814}$, $m_{555}$ CMD of the stars in NGC~602,

865: after the contribution of the field has been statistically subtracted

866: with the Monte Carlo method. A clear upper MS (down to $m_{555}\simeq

867: 21.5$~mag), as well as a sequence of faint PMS stars (with $m_{555}\gsim

868: 21.5$~mag) can be easily distinguished to represent the stellar

869: populations of the association.  The loci of the PMS stars show a

870: prominent broadening.  This makes the estimation of the age of these

871: stars rather difficult. A discussion on the origins of such a spread in

872: the positions of PMS stars in the CMD is presented in \S~\ref{s:popngc}.

873: Characteristic isochrones from the grid of PMS models by Siess et al.

874: (2000) are overplotted. The birth-line and the ZAMS from the same grid

875: of models are also plotted. \label{f:cmdngc}}

876: \end{figure}

877: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% FIGURE %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

878: 

879: The CMD of the region of NGC~602 is shown in Fig.~\ref{f:cmdnf} in

880: comparison to the CMD of the region of the field. NGC~602 shows a more

881: well populated and brighter UMS than Cluster~A and B~164, clearly

882: suggesting its youthfulness. We identified the 10 brightest stars of

883: NGC~602 as early-type with spectral types between O5.5 and B0.5. These

884: ``photometric spectral types'' are consistent ($\pm 0.5$ spectral type)

885: with those previously derived by Hutchings et al. (1991) from optical

886: and UV spectroscopy. Moreover, the most prominent feature in its CMD is

887: the large number of stars in the PMS part, which is completely empty in

888: the CMDs of both Cluster~A and B~164 and of the field\footnote{The

889: selection of the region of the field could not be made without including

890: some PMS stars. The reason is that no control field was observed away

891: from NGC~602 and therefore we selected the most ``empty'' and remote

892: part of the observed FoV as the best representative of the field. The

893: inclusion of PMS stars in the field may lead to the underestimation of

894: the the number of PMS stars in NGC~602. However, as derived from the

895: numbers of Table 3, this cannot affect more than 5\% of the total PMS

896: members of NGC~602.}. For the subtraction of the contribution of the

897: field population in the CMD of NGC~602 we applied the same Monte Carlo

898: method (described in \S~4.3.1) as for Cluster~A and B~164. The derived

899: ``clean'' CMD of the stars of NGC~602 alone, shown in

900: Fig.~\ref{f:cmdngc}, clearly indicates that all the observed LMS stars

901: belong to the field and not the association. The distribution of

902: interstellar reddening for the UMS stars of NGC~602 (Fig.~\ref{f:red})

903: also shows very low extinction. The mean color excess obtained assuming

904: a Gaussian distribution is $E(B-V)=0.06\pm0.02$~mag.

905: 

906: In the CMD of Fig.~\ref{f:cmdngc} it can be seen that the positions of

907: the PMS stars show a spread as if they belong to groups of different

908: ages. The observed broadening of the loci of the PMS stars in the CMD

909: implies a wide span in ages of over 10 Myr. Three indicative isochrones

910: of ages 2, 4 and 10~Myr are overplotted in Fig.~\ref{f:cmdngc} to

911: demonstrate this spread. If the CMD broadening of the PMS stars is

912: produced by an age-spread or not is very important in understanding the

913: star formation history of the region. The existence of an age-spread

914: would suggest that these stars {\em did not} originate from a single

915: star formation event, but they were formed over a longer period of time.

916: On the other hand if all PMS stars are the product of a single star

917: formation event, then there should be other factors that affect their

918: CMD positions.

919: 

920: The importance of the age of PMS stars lies on the fact that these stars

921: are the live records of star formation that took place in a star forming

922: region within the last \lsim~30~Myr (e.g. Brice{\~n}o et al.\ 2007). 

923: Consequently, if we assume that different age-groups of PMS stars can be

924: easily distinguished by their locations in the CMD, they should be the

925: best tracers of any sequential star formation event that might have

926: taken place within their host stellar systems. The age-spread of PMS

927: stars in young stellar systems of our Galaxy has been discussed by e.g.

928: Palla (2005), who notes that the star formation history of the ONC

929: extends long in the past, although at a reduced rate, and by Preibisch

930: \& Zinnecker (2007), who found no evidence for an age dispersion in

931: Upper Scorpius OB association, although small age spreads of

932: $\approx$~12~Myr cannot be excluded. 

933: 

934: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% FIGURE %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

935: \begin{figure}[t]

936: \epsscale{1.15}

937: \plotone{f11.eps}

938: \caption{The $m_{555}$-luminosity functions (LFs) for all three stellar

939: systems.  The limit of the 50\% completeness is indicated in each LF by

940: the dotted lines. The measured numbers of stars are shown with the

941: dashed lines, while the thick lines show the LFs after the stellar

942: numbers have been corrected for incompleteness. In all shown LFs the

943: contribution of field stars has been statistically

944: subtracted.\label{f:lum}}

945: \end{figure}

946: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% FIGURE %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

947: 

948: However, considering that PMS stars have a rather peculiar behavior, as

949: there are several effects that change their position in the CMD, the

950: retrieval of any signature of age-spread in a PMS population with

951: single-epoch photometry alone is not a trivial task. Hennekemper et al.

952: (2008) using the same observational material of another SMC association,

953: NGC~346, showed that there are various physical properties of the PMS

954: stars of the system, which affect their loci in the CMD. This produces a

955: broadening, which could be misinterpreted as an age-spread. These

956: properties, typical for T~Tauri stars of our Galaxy, are unresolved

957: binarity, variability and differential extinction. Although it is most

958: certain that these characteristics are responsible for most of the

959: observed CMD broadening of the PMS stars (Hennekemper et al. 2008), one

960: cannot exclude the possibility that there might be also a true

961: age-spread among these stars, hidden in the CMD of NGC~602. We currently

962: explore this possibility in another paper by modeling the observed CMD

963: with the construction of synthetic CMDs for NGC~602 (M. Schmalzl et al.,

964: in preparation).

965: 

966: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% SECTION %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

967: \section{Luminosity Functions}

968: \label{s:lum}

969: 

970: We constructed the luminosity function (LF) of all three stellar systems

971: by counting the stars in magnitude bins of 0.5~mag in both $m_{555}$ and

972: $m_{814}$.  The $m_{555}$-LFs of the systems are shown in

973: Fig.~\ref{f:lum} for the field subtracted stellar samples shown in

974: Figs.~\ref{f:cmdab} and \ref{f:cmdngc}. The LFs of the counted numbers

975: of stars are shown with dashed lines, while the LFs shown with thick

976: lines are corrected for incompleteness. The dotted vertical line for

977: every plot marks the 50\% completeness limit for each system. The LFs of

978: both Cluster~A and B~164 are very similar, and they both suffer from

979: lower number statistics than the LF of NGC~602 shown in the bottom panel

980: of Fig.~\ref{f:lum}. In the latter one can identify a small dip at

981: $m_{555}\approx$~22~mag. This feature has been theoretically predicted as a

982: direct consequence of the stellar evolution of young star clusters,

983: since the stars at $m_{555}\approx$~21~mag gain brightness very fast,

984: depleting thus this part of the CMD (Stahler \& Fletcher 1991; Fletcher

985: \& Stahler 1994).

986: 

987: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% SECTION %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

988: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% SECTION %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

989: \section{MASS FUNCTION}

990: 

991: 

992: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% SUBSECTION %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

993: % describes what a mass function is

994: \subsection{Mass Spectrum}

995: \label{s:msintro}

996: 

997: The stellar Initial Mass Function (IMF), $\xi(\log M)$, is the

998: distribution of the stars in a stellar system according to their masses,

999: by the time of their formation. The IMF gives the number of stars of the

1000: system per unit logarithmic (base 10) mass, $d\log{M}$, per unit area. 

1001: There are several functional forms proposed to represent the IMF (see

1002: Kroupa 2002 for a review), but its intermediate- and high-mass part

1003: (down to $M \simeq 1$~M{\solar}) is generally characterized by a

1004: single-power law of the form $\xi(\log M)\sim M^\Gamma$. Typical

1005: logarithmic derivative is $\Gamma \approx -1.35$, as estimated for stars

1006: in the solar neighborhood with masses 0.4~\lsim~$M$/M{\solar}~\lsim~10

1007: (Salpeter 1955). If the stars are counted in unit mass intervals, $dM$,

1008: per unit area, then their Initial Mass Spectrum (IMS), $f(M)$, is

1009: constructed.  IMS is generally described also by a power law of the form

1010: $f(M)\sim M^\alpha$. The IMS and IMF are connected by the relation

1011: (Miller \& Scalo 1979): \begin{equation} f(M)=\xi(\log M)\frac{{\rm

1012: d}\log{M}}{{\rm d}M} \end{equation} Consequently, the relation for their

1013: indexes (slopes) is: \begin{equation}

1014: 	\alpha=\Gamma-1

1015: 	\label{e:ims2imf}

1016: \end{equation}

1017: 

1018: For the construction of the IMF or IMS a mass luminosity (ML) relation

1019: based on isochrone models is required for the translation of the

1020: observed stellar luminosities to masses. However, as shown in \S~4.4,

1021: the loci of the PMS stars in the CMD of NGC~602 are well spread,

1022: producing a broadening which covers a wide range of isochrones

1023: (Fig.~\ref{f:cmdngc}). Since the observed CMD broadening of PMS stars is

1024: not solely due to age differences, but also due to the characteristics

1025: of these stars (Hennekemper et al. 2008), a construction of a unique ML

1026: relation is rather impossible. Specifically, the observed optical

1027: magnitudes of young PMS stars are affected by several factors,

1028: especially the extinction/emission produced by the accretion disk and/or

1029: envelope (e.g. Herbst et al. 2002; Sherry et al. 2004; Brice{\~n}o et

1030: al. 2005). At ages less than $10^7$~yr all low-mass PMS stars are

1031: variable, and the strength of this photometric variability depends on

1032: the star's magnetic activity, the amount of circumstellar matter, and

1033: the accretion rate. Classical T~Tauri stars are actively accreting gas

1034: from circumstellar disks, producing irregular photometric variability

1035: with amplitudes up to 3 mag in the $V$ band (Herbst et al. 1994).

1036: Naturally, such variations affect the estimation of the luminosities and

1037: the effective temperatures for these PMS stars, as well as of their

1038: individual circumstellar and differential reddening. Therefore, any

1039: attempt to fit isochrone models to the observed CMD and to determine the

1040: ages to these stars will be biased\footnote{See Hennekemper et al.

1041: (2008; \S~3) for a discussion on the limitations in the age estimation

1042: for the PMS stars in the SMC association NGC~346.}.

1043: 

1044: As a consequence a ML relation cannot be used for the determination of

1045: the masses of the observed PMS stars in NGC~602. Therefore, in the

1046: following sections we study the IMS of the association, as we

1047: constructed it by applying an age-independent approach of counting the

1048: PMS stars within PMS evolutionary tracks (e.g. Gouliermis et al. 2006a).

1049: For this method we use two different grids of evolutionary tracks, by

1050: Palla \& Stahler (1999) and Siess et al. (2000), for stellar masses

1051: between 0.1 and 6 M{\solar}. Both grids cover an age range starting at

1052: the birth-line up to $\approx$~20~Myr, and they are available in the

1053: standard Johnson-Cousins photometric system. In order to compare our CMD

1054: to these models we transformed our ACS $m_{\rm 555}$ and $m_{\rm 814}$

1055: magnitudes to the standard $V$ and $I$ respectively with the use of the

1056: transformations provided by Sirianni et al. (2005; \S~8.3, and Appendix

1057: D). In Fig.~\ref{f:boxes} we show the transformed $V-I$, $V$ CMD of

1058: NGC~602 with the case of counting PMS stars between tracks from the

1059: models by Siess et al. (2000). Although the lowest metallicity

1060: considered for this grid of models is $Z=0.01$ ($\simeq$~2.5 times

1061: higher than that of the SMC) it fits our data better than the one from

1062: Palla \& Stahler (1999), which assumes the metallicity of the SMC of

1063: $Z=0.004$. Both grids agree for low mass stars up to

1064: $\approx$~2.5~M{\solar}. For higher masses the models by Palla \&

1065: Stahler (1999) show a shift to the blue. This can be demonstrated by the

1066: comparison of the ZAMS from both grids of models (Fig.~\ref{f:boxes}).

1067: The most massive part of the IMS, for stars with $M$~\gsim~6~M{\solar},

1068: is occupied by evolved MS stars, and therefore another grid of models

1069: for such stars, was used. These models were compiled by Girardi et al.

1070: (2002) for the standard photometric filter system and the metallicity of

1071: the SMC. It should be noted that the ZAMS of Siess et al. (2000)

1072: coincides better with the one from Girardi et al. (2002), which match

1073: very well the observed MS of the system.

1074: 

1075: For the construction of the IMS we count all stars with a completeness

1076: $\geq$~50\%, and therefore only stars with $m_{555}$~\lsim~24.5~mag,

1077: corresponding to $M$~\gsim~1.1~M{\solar} are counted. Considering that

1078: each evolutionary track corresponds to a specific mass, we constructed

1079: the IMS by counting the PMS stars between evolutionary tracks based on

1080: their loci in the CMD. We constructed thus, a histogram with bins

1081: defined by the available PMS tracks. It should be noted that building a

1082: histogram is the simplest, but by no means optimum, way of analyzing the

1083: distribution of masses. Given the uncertainties in our photometry,

1084: produced by the characteristics of the PMS stars, which translate into

1085: corresponding mass uncertainties, it is possible that some of the

1086: objects in every bin might actually have masses slightly outside the bin

1087: range. Moreover, Ma{\'{\i}}z Apell{\'a}niz \& {\'U}beda (2005) found

1088: significant numerical biases in the determination of the slope of power

1089: laws from uniformly binned data using linear regression. These biases

1090: are caused by the correlation between the number of stars per bin and

1091: the assigned weights, and are especially important when the number of

1092: stars per bin is small. This result implies the existence of systematic

1093: errors in the values of IMFs calculated in this way. As an alternative,

1094: those authors proposed to use variable-size bins and divide the stars

1095: evenly among them. Such variable-size bins yield very small biases that

1096: are only weakly dependent on the number of stars per bin. 

1097: 

1098: Taking into account the above, in order to avoid artificial features in

1099: the distribution of the masses, we smoothed our counts by folding them

1100: with an adaptive kernel function using a simple boxcar average procedure

1101: of 3 mass-bins width. This process smoothes out any random fluctuations

1102: due to the fact that some stars could belong to neighboring bins due to

1103: the photometric uncertainties and inaccuracies of the evolutionary

1104: tracks. Furthermore, in order to properly eliminate any numerical biases

1105: in the estimation of the IMS slope due to the bin sizes, the stellar

1106: numbers per mass-bin, $\tilde N$, which are used for the IMS, are the

1107: counted incompleteness-corrected stellar numbers, $N$, but normalized to

1108: a bin-size of 1~M{\solar}, by dividing them to the sizes $\Delta M$

1109: of their corresponding bins.

1110: 

1111: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% SUBSECTION %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1112: % shows the mass spectrum of NGC 602

1113: \subsection{The Initial Mass Spectrum of NGC~602}

1114: \label{s:ms}

1115: 

1116: The constructed IMS of NGC~602 with the use of evolutionary tracks from

1117: both Palla \& Stahler (1999) and Siess et al. (2000) is shown in

1118: Fig.~\ref{f:ims}. Small changes in the slope of this IMS, which are

1119: apparent in the figure, especially the ``knee''-like feature at

1120: $\approx$~2.5~M{\solar}, imply that maybe a multi-power law is

1121: appropriate to represent this IMS. However our modeling of the IMS with

1122: a weighted linear fit proved that a single-power law of the form $\tilde

1123: N\sim M^\alpha$ describes best this IMS. The slopes derived for the IMS

1124: constructed with the use of models by Palla \& Stahler (1999) and Siess

1125: et al. (2000) show that the use of both grids gives more or less the

1126: same results within the derived uncertainties. Specifically, the derived

1127: slope for the IMS constructed with the use of the tracks by Palla \&

1128: Stahler (1999) is found to be $\alpha \simeq -2.0 \pm 0.3$, and the

1129: slope derived with the use of the tracks by Siess et al. (2000) $\alpha

1130: \simeq -2.4 \pm 0.2$ for the mass range 1~\lsim~$M/$M{\solar}~\lsim~45.

1131: It should be noted that if we compare the derived IMS slopes for

1132: specific narrower mass ranges, the largest difference between the used

1133: models is seen in the lower mass range of 1~\lsim~$M$/M{\solar}~$<$~2.5

1134: (although these differences are covered by the fitting errors). This is,

1135: however, expected from the great differences between the ZAMS of Palla

1136: \& Stahler (1999) and the one of Siess et al. (2000) shown in

1137: Fig.~\ref{f:cmdngc}, which affects mostly stars with $M \gsim

1138: 2.5$~M{\solar}.

1139:  

1140: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% FIGURE %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1141: \begin{figure}[t]

1142: \epsscale{1.15}

1143: \plotone{f12.eps}

1144: \caption{Construction of the Initial Mass Spectrum (IMS) of NGC~602 by

1145: counting stars between evolutionary tracks. The PMS tracks by Siess et

1146: al. (2000) are shown in this plot. The ZAMS of both Siess et al. (2000)

1147: and Palla \& Stahler (1999) are shown to demonstrate their differences

1148: for stars with $V \lsim 20$~mag. The ZAMS from the grids of models by

1149: Girardi et al. (2002), which is found to fit very well the one by Siess

1150: et al. (2000) is plotted for the upper MS of the CMD. This ZAMS has been

1151: used for the construction of a mass-luminosity relation for the bright

1152: MS stars with $M \gsim 6$~M{\solar} for the derivation of their masses.

1153: Different PMS tracks and the stars included between them are plotted in

1154: different colors to be easier distinguished.\label{f:boxes}}

1155: \end{figure}

1156: 

1157: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% FIGURE %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1158: \begin{figure}

1159: \epsscale{1.15}

1160: \plotone{f13.eps}

1161: \caption{The Initial Mass Spectrum (IMS) of NGC~602 as constructed by

1162: counting PMS stars between evolutionary tracks and with the use of a ML

1163: relation from the models by Girardi et al. (2002) for the brightest MS

1164: stars. The derived IMS is shown in each panel from counting PMS stars

1165: between tracks from both the models of Siess et al. (2000) (top IMS) and

1166: Palla \& Stahler (1999) (bottom IMS). The shades at the top panel

1167: correspond to a Kroupa (2002) IMS with $\alpha=-2.3\pm0.3$, while the

1168: ones at the bottom panel to a Scalo (1998) one with $-2.7 \lsim \alpha

1169: \lsim -2.3$. Stellar numbers $\tilde N$ are corrected to a bin-size of

1170: 1~M{\solar}. A slope of $\alpha\simeq-2.2\pm0.3$ is found to represent

1171: very well the IMS as it is constructed with the use of all considered

1172: grids of models.

1173: \label{f:ims}}

1174: \end{figure}

1175: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% END FIGURE %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1176: 

1177: Taking into account the results from the application of the linear

1178: regression for the IMS constructed with the use of both libraries of

1179: evolutionary tracks, the IMS of NGC~602 is best described by the

1180: function \begin{equation} \tilde N \sim M^{-2.2\pm0.3} \label{e:sie1}

1181: \end{equation} for the whole observed mass range of $\sim$~1~M{\solar}

1182: up to $\approx$~45~M{\solar}. The derived mean slope has a remarkable

1183: coincidence with the slope of $\alpha=-2.35$ found by Salpeter (1955)

1184: for the solar neighborhood, and with the results of Kroupa (2002) who

1185: suggests a slope of $\alpha=-2.3\pm0.3$ for the mass range of

1186: 0.5~\lsim~$M$/M{\solar}~\lsim~100 as the average field star IMF. The IMS

1187: of Kroupa (2002) is represented by the shaded region overplotted at the

1188: top panel of Fig.~\ref{f:ims}.

1189: 

1190: A third IMS to be considered for comparing the IMS of NGC~602 is by

1191: Scalo (1998) with a slope of $\alpha=-2.7\pm0.5$ for

1192: 1~\lsim~$M$/M{\solar}~\lsim~10 and $\alpha=-2.3\pm0.5$ for

1193: 10~\lsim~$M$/M{\solar}~\lsim~100. The slopes we find for the IMS of

1194: NGC~602 are comparable also with this IMS for $M\gtrsim 10$~M{\solar}.

1195: For smaller masses the slopes are more different, but still consistent

1196: within the errors. The IMS of Scalo (1998) is represented by the shaded

1197: region overplotted at the bottom panel of Fig.~\ref{f:ims}. It is worth

1198: noting that our single-power law slope for the IMS of NGC~602 agrees

1199: very well with the one found by Gouliermis et al. (2006a) for the stellar

1200: association LH~52 in the Large Magellanic Cloud, $\alpha=-2.3\pm1.0$.

1201: These authors could estimate the IMS slope only for a narrow mass range

1202: (0.8~\lsim~$M$/M{\solar}~\lsim~1.4) due to observational limitations. A

1203: multi-power law was found by Preibisch et al. (2002) for the IMS of the whole

1204: Upper Sco OB association with the use of data from 2dF, {\em ROSAT}, and

1205: {\em Hipparcos}. These authors found a slope of $\alpha=-2.8\pm0.5$ for

1206: 0.6~\lsim~$M$/M{\solar}~\lsim~2 and $\alpha=-2.6\pm0.5$ for

1207: 2~\lsim~$M$/M{\solar}~\lsim~20. Both these slopes are systematically

1208: steeper than the one we found for NGC~602.

1209: 

1210: 

1211: \subsection{Mass Spectra of Cluster~A and B~164}

1212: 

1213: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% FIGURE %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1214: \begin{figure}[t]

1215: \epsscale{1.15}

1216: \plotone{f14.eps}

1217: \caption{The mass spectrum of both B~164 and Cluster~A, constructed

1218: using ML-relations based on the evolutionary models by Girardi et al. (2002). 

1219: Points derived from incomplete data (with completeness $<$~50\%) are

1220: shown with arrows. The mass spectrum of both clusters is well

1221: represented by a single-power law comparable to a Salpeter

1222: IMS.\label{f:imfab}}

1223: \end{figure}

1224: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% FIGURE %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1225: 

1226: As it is seen earlier from their CMDs, both B~164 and Cluster~A are open

1227: clusters without any significant PMS population. Therefore, the

1228: construction of their mass spectra is more straightforward, since it can

1229: be done with the use of mass-luminosity (ML) relations. These relations

1230: can be derived from certain models for evolved MS stars (Girardi et al.

1231: 2002), and they provide an accurate transformation of luminosities into

1232: masses for the stars of these clusters. Naturally, the choice of the

1233: appropriate isochrones, as the most representative for the age of the

1234: systems, is crucial for this procedure. For this selection we used the

1235: upper age limits found earlier (\S~\ref{s:pop}) to be $\approx$~160~Myr

1236: for Cluster~A and $\approx$~80~Myr for B~164. After obtaining the masses

1237: of the cluster members we constructed the corresponding IMS of each

1238: cluster, based on the results of Ma{\'{\i}}z Apell{\'a}niz \& {\'U}beda

1239: (2005), by counting the stars into variable-size mass-bins.

1240: 

1241: A single-power law is also found to represent the IMS of both clusters

1242: for the whole observed mass range with $M \gsim$~1.5~M$_\odot$. The

1243: best-fitting slopes of the corresponding IMS are found to be:

1244: \begin{equation} \tilde N \sim M^{-2.2\pm 0.2}~~{\rm

1245: for~B~164,}~~~~~\tilde N \sim M^{-2.9\pm 0.5}~~{\rm for~Cluster~A}

1246: \label{e:pal} \end{equation} The IMS slope of Cluster~A is found

1247: significantly steeper than that of B~164. Specifically, it is

1248: interesting to note that the IMS of B~164 is more similar to the one by

1249: Kroupa (2002) ($\alpha=-2.3\pm0.5$), whereas the IMS of Cluster~A fits

1250: better to the one by Preibisch et al. (2002) (between $\alpha=-2.8$ and

1251: $-2.6$ $\pm0.5$) or by Scalo (1998) ($\alpha=-2.7\pm0.5$). 

1252: 

1253: %Still, the derived statistical errors, for both clusters, are quite

1254: %large, so that a finer measurement of their IMS slopes was not possible.

1255: 

1256: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% SECTION %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1257: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% SECTION %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1258: \section{CONCLUSIONS}

1259: \label{s:conclusions}

1260: 

1261: We present our photometric study from data obtained in the filters

1262: $F555W$ and $F814W$ with HST/ACS in wide-field mode of the star forming

1263: region NGC~602/N~90 in the wing of the SMC. Our aim is to take advantage

1264: of the high-resolution efficiency of ACS for the construction of the IMF

1265: of the association NGC~602 for the whole observed stellar population of

1266: the system. We use the ACS module of the photometric package DOLPHOT,

1267: which is especially designed for imaging with the ACS and we provide the

1268: full photometric catalog of all stars detected with short and long

1269: exposures in one ACS/WFC field that covers a region of about $3\farcm4

1270: \times 3\farcm4$ centered on the young stellar association NGC~602. The

1271: region is found to host a mixture of stellar populations. Star counts

1272: revealed that there are three prominent stellar concentrations in the

1273: observed field: The association NGC~602 itself at the center, and two

1274: young open clusters, B~164 (Bruck 1976), and one currently un-cataloged,

1275: which we name ``Cluster~A'', both located at the northern edge of the

1276: observed area. The CMDs of all three systems are contaminated by the

1277: stellar population of the general field of SMC in the region. We

1278: selected the most empty (and less contaminated from dust emission, as

1279: seen with {\em Spitzer}; Gouliermis et al. 2007) part of the observed

1280: area as the most representative of the general SMC field. We, then,

1281: applied a Monte Carlo method for decontaminating the CMDs of all three

1282: identified stellar systems from the contribution of the field.

1283: 

1284: The CMDs of B~164 and Cluster~A show features typical for young open

1285: clusters, with a fully populated main sequence extending from the bright

1286: part (with only a couple of bright stars in each cluster) down to the

1287: detection limit of $m_{555} \sim 28$~mag. By comparing the brightest MS

1288: stars of both B~164 and Cluster~A we were able to confine their maximum

1289: age to be around 80~Myr and 160~Myr respectively. If we consider one red

1290: super-giant in the CMD of Cluster~A as cluster member, then both

1291: clusters have the same age and their close separation suggests that they

1292: were possibly formed during the same star formation event.  On the other

1293: hand, NGC~602 is a much younger system with some bright nebulosity still

1294: in its vicinity. The CMD of the association reveals that the stellar

1295: members of NGC~602 belong to a rich upper bright main

1296: sequence\footnote{The 10 brightest stars in the system are identified as

1297: early-type with spectral types between O5.5 and B0.5} down to $m_{555}

1298: \sim 21$~mag and to a prominent red sequence of faint pre-main sequence

1299: stars down to the detection limit. In general, the observed sequence of

1300: PMS stars corresponds to an age of roughly 4~Myr. However, there is also

1301: a significant amount of PMS stars that can be fitted by a $\sim$~10~Myr

1302: model. The ``field'', the area selected as the most representative of

1303: the general SMC field, is characterized by a well populated low main

1304: sequence and a rather poor red giant branch with a turnoff at $m_{555}

1305: \sim 22$~mag. Few stars brighter than the turnoff, and few PMS stars

1306: were also included in this area, since it is located within the observed

1307: FoV. 

1308: 

1309: We constructed the luminosity functions of all three stellar systems, by

1310: counting the stars in magnitude bins of 0.5 mag in both $m_{555}$ and

1311: $m_{814}$. Concerning the mass spectrum of the association, the PMS

1312: stars in the CMD of NGC~602 show a prominent broadening, which does not

1313: allow a direct measurement of the masses of these stars through a single

1314: ML-relation. This broadening might be the result of an age spread, but

1315: it could also be due to the characteristics of the PMS stars, such as

1316: variability and extinction. In any case the accurate measurement of

1317: their age and the estimation of their masses becomes a rather difficult

1318: task.  Therefore, we constructed the initial mass spectrum of the

1319: association with an age-independent method based on counting the PMS

1320: stars between evolutionary tracks. We used the grids of models by both

1321: Palla \& Stahler (1999) and Siess et al. (2000). For the bright main

1322: sequence stars we used a ML-relation obtained from the evolutionary

1323: models by Girardi et al. (2002). The IMS of the association is found to

1324: be well represented by a single-power law, corresponding to an IMF of

1325: slope $\Gamma \approx -1.2$ for 1~\lsim~$M$/M{\solar}~\lsim~45, similar

1326: to the field IMF in the solar neighborhood (Salpeter 1955; Kroupa 2002).

1327: No significant differences are found between the IMF derived with the

1328: use of Palla \& Stahler (1999) models and the one from the models by

1329: Siess et al. (2000), although these grids of models are found to be

1330: quite different from each other for stars with $m_{555}$~\lsim~20~mag.

1331: We also constructed the mass spectra of the clusters B~164 and

1332: Cluster~A, and we found that the mass spectrum of B~164 corresponds to a

1333: mass function similar to NGC~602 with $\Gamma \approx -1.2$, while the

1334: one of Cluster~A is found to be steeper with $\Gamma \approx -1.9$.

1335: 

1336: The study of NGC~602/N~90 with observations from {\em Spitzer}/IRAC by

1337: Gouliermis et al. (2007) showed evidence of ongoing star formation on

1338: the rim of the {\sc H~ii} region. Candidate YSOs were identified by

1339: these authors, located around the region of NGC~602, and their formation

1340: is most likely triggered through a sequential event initiated at the

1341: central association. This hypothesis is currently under investigation

1342: within our study of the recent star formation history of this region

1343: through the reconstruction of the observed sequence of PMS stars in and

1344: around the association in synthetic CMDs (M. Schmalzl et al., in

1345: preparation).

1346: 

1347: \acknowledgments

1348: 

1349: D. A. Gouliermis kindly acknowledges the support of the German Research

1350: Foundation (Deu\-tsche For\-schungs\-ge\-mein\-schaft - DFG) through the

1351: grant GO~1659/1-1. We would like to thank the unknown referee for

1352: her/his constructive suggestions that helped to improve the manuscript

1353: significantly. This paper is based on observations made with the

1354: NASA/ESA {\em Hubble Space Telescope}, obtained from the data archive at

1355: the Space Telescope Science Institute. STScI is operated by the

1356: Association of Universities for Research in Astronomy, Inc. under NASA

1357: contract NAS 5-26555. This research has made use of NASA's Astrophysics

1358: Data System, Aladin (Bonnarel et al.\ 2000) and the SIMBAD database,

1359: operated at CDS, Strasbourg, France.

1360: 

1361: %\email{aastex-help@aas.org}.

1362: 

1363: %% To help institutions obtain information on the effectiveness of their

1364: %% telescopes, the AAS Journals has created a group of keywords for telescope

1365: %% facilities. A common set of keywords will make these types of searches

1366: %% significantly easier and more accurate. In addition, they will also be

1367: %% useful in linking papers together which utilize the same telescopes

1368: %% within the framework of the National Virtual Observatory.

1369: %% See the AASTeX Web site at http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/AAS/AASTeX

1370: %% for information on obtaining the facility keywords.

1371: 

1372: %% After the acknowledgments section, use the following syntax and the

1373: %% \facility{} macro to list the keywords of facilities used in the research

1374: %% for the paper.  Each keyword will be checked against the master list during

1375: %% copy editing.  Individual instruments can be provided in parentheses,

1376: %% after the keyword, but they will not be verified.

1377: 

1378: % Facilities: \facility{Nickel}, \facility{HST(STIS)}, \facility{CXO(ASIS)}.

1379: 

1380: Facilities: \facility{HST(ACS)}.

1381: 

1382: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%  BIBLIOGRAPHY  %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1383: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1384: %\newpage

1385: \begin{references}

1386: 

1387: \reference{} Alcaino, G., Alvarado, F., Borissova, J., \& Kurtev, R.\

1388: 2003, \aap, 400, 917

1389: 

1390: \reference{} Bonnarel, F., et al.\ 2000, \aaps, 143, 33

1391: 

1392: \reference{} Brandner W., Grebel, E. K., Barb\'{a}, R. H., et al. 2001,

1393: AJ, 122, 858

1394: 

1395: \reference{} Brice{\~n}o, C., Calvet, N., Hern{\'a}ndez, J., Vivas,

1396: A.~K., Hartmann, L., Downes, J.~J., \& Berlind, P.\ 2005, \aj, 129, 907

1397: 

1398: \reference{} Brice{\~n}o, C., Preibisch, T., Sherry, W.~H., Mamajek,

1399: E.~A., Mathieu, R.~D., Walter, F.~M., \& Zinnecker, H.\ 2007, Protostars

1400: and Planets V, 345

1401: 

1402: \reference{} Bruck, M.~T. 1976, Occasional Reports of the Royal

1403: Observatory Edinburgh, 1, 1

1404: 

1405: \reference{} Davies, R.~D., Elliott, K.~H., Meaburn, J. 1976, \memras,

1406: 81, 89

1407: 

1408: \reference{} Dolphin, A.~E. 2000, PASP, 112, 1383

1409: 

1410: \reference{} Dolphin, A.~E., et al.\ 2001, \apj, 562, 303

1411: 

1412: \reference{} Fletcher, A.~B., \& Stahler, S.~W.\ 1994, \apj, 435, 329

1413: 

1414: 

1415: \reference{} Girardi, L., et al.\ 2002, \aap, 391, 195

1416: 

1417: \reference{} Gouliermis, D., Brandner, W., \& Henning, T.\ 2005, \apj,

1418: 623, 846

1419: 

1420: \reference{} Gouliermis, D., Brandner, W., \& Henning, T.\ 2006a, \apjl,

1421: 636, L133

1422: 

1423: \reference{} Gouliermis, D.~A., Dolphin, A.~E., Brandner, W., \&

1424: Henning, T.\ 2006b, \apjs, 166, 549

1425: 

1426: \reference{} Gouliermis, D.~A., Quanz, S.~P., Henning, T. 2007, ApJ,

1427: 665, 306

1428: 

1429: \reference{} Henize, K.~G. 1956, ApJS, 2, 315

1430: 

1431: \reference{} Hennekemper, E., Gouliermis, D.~A., Henning, T., Brandner,

1432: W., Dolphin, A. E. 2008, ApJ, 672, 914

1433: 

1434: \reference{} Herbst, W., Herbst, D. K., Grossman, E. J., \& Weinstein, D.

1435: 1994, AJ, 108, 1906

1436: 

1437: \reference{} Herbst, W., et al. 2002, A\&A, 396, 513

1438: 

1439: \reference{} Hester, J.~J., et al.\ 1996, \aj, 111, 2349

1440: 

1441: \reference{} Hutchings, J.~B., Cartledge, S., Pazder, J., \& Thompson,

1442: I.~B.\ 1991, \aj, 101, 933

1443: 

1444: \reference{} Hunter, D.~A., Elmegreen, B.~G., Dupuy, T.~J., \&

1445: Mortonson, M.\ 2003, \aj, 126, 1836

1446: 

1447: \reference{} Koekemoer, A.~M., Fruchter, A.~S., Hook, R.~N., Hack, W.

1448: 2002, The 2002 HST Calibration Workshop : Hubble after the Installation

1449: of the ACS and the NICMOS Cooling System, Proceedings of a Workshop held

1450: at the Space Telescope Science Institute, Baltimore, Maryland, October

1451: 17 and 18, 2002.~ Edited by Santiago Arribas, Anton Koekemoer, and Brad

1452: Whitmore.~Baltimore, MD: Space Telescope Science Institute, p.337

1453: 

1454: \reference{} Koornneef, J. 1983, \aap, 128, 84

1455: 

1456: \reference{} Kontizas, E., Kontizas, M., Gouliermis, D., Dapergolas, A.,

1457: Korakitis, R., Morgan, D.~H. 1999, IAU Symposium 190, New Views of the

1458: Magellanic Clouds, eds. Y.-H. Chu et al., 410

1459: 

1460: \reference{} Kroupa, P.\ 2002, Science, 295, 82

1461: 

1462: \reference{} Luck, R.~E., Moffett, T.~J., Barnes, III, T.~G., Gieren,

1463: W.~P. 1998, AJ, 115, 605

1464: 

1465: \reference{} Ma{\'{\i}}z Apell{\'a}niz, J., \& {\'U}beda, L.\ 2005,

1466: \apj, 629, 873

1467: 

1468: \reference{} Massey, P.\ 2006, The Local Group as an Astrophysical

1469: Laboratory, 164

1470: 

1471: \reference{} McCumber, M.~P., Garnett, D.~R., Dufour, R.~J. 2005, AJ,

1472: 130, 1083

1473: 

1474: \reference{} Miller, G.~E., \& Scalo, J.~M. 1979, \apjs, 41, 513

1475: 

1476: \reference{} No{\"e}l, N.~E.~D., Gallart, C., Costa, E., \& M{\'e}ndez,

1477: R.~A.\ 2007, \aj, 133, 2037

1478: 

1479: \reference{} Nota, A., et al.\ 2006, \apjl, 640, L29

1480: 

1481: \reference{} Palla, F.\ 2005, Massive Star Birth: A Crossroads of

1482: Astrophysics, 227, 196

1483: 

1484: \reference{} Palla, F., \& Stahler, S.~W.\ 1999, ApJ, 525, 772

1485: 

1486: \reference{} Panagia, N., Romaniello, M., Scuderi, S., \& Kirshner,

1487: R.~P.\ 2000, ApJ, 539, 197

1488: 

1489: \reference{} Piatti, A.~E., Sarajedini, A., Geisler, D., Gallart, C., \&

1490: Wischnjewsky, M.\ 2007, \mnras, 382, 1203

1491: 

1492: \reference{} Preibisch, T., Brown, A.~G.~A., Bridges, T., Guenther, E.,

1493: \& Zinnecker, H.\ 2002, \aj, 124, 404

1494: 

1495: \reference{} Rochau, B., Gouliermis, D.~A., Brandner, W., Dolphin,

1496: A.~E., \& Henning, T.\ 2007, \apj, 664, 322

1497: 

1498: \reference{} Romaniello, M., Scuderi, S., Panagia, N., et al. 2006,

1499: A\&A, 446, 955

1500: 

1501: \reference{} Sabbi, E., et al.\ 2007, \aj, 133, 44 (Erratum: 2007, \aj,

1502: 133, 2430)

1503: 

1504: \reference{} Salpeter, E.~E.\ 1955, \apj, 121, 161

1505: 

1506: \reference{} Scalo, J.\ 1998, The Stellar 

1507: Initial Mass Function (38th Herstmonceux Conference), 142, 201 

1508: 

1509: \reference{} Sherry, W.~H., Walter, F.~M., \& Wolk, S.~J.\ 2004, \aj,

1510: 128, 2316

1511: 

1512: \reference{} Siess, L., Dufour, E., Forestini, M. 2000, \aap, 358, 593

1513: 

1514: \reference{} Sirianni, M., Nota, A., Leitherer, C., De Marchi, G., \&

1515: Clampin, M.\ 2000, \apj, 533, 203

1516: 

1517: \reference{} Sirianni, M., Nota, A., De Marchi, G., Leitherer, C., \&

1518: Clampin, M.\ 2002, ApJ, 579, 275

1519: 

1520: \reference{} Sirianni, M., et al.\ 2005, \pasp, 117, 1049

1521: 

1522: \reference{} Stahler, S.~W., \& Fletcher, A.~B.\ 1991, Memorie della

1523: Societa Astronomica Italiana, 62, 767

1524: 

1525: \reference{} Stanimirovic, S., Staveley-Smith, L., van der Hulst, J.~M.,

1526: Bontekoe, T.~R., Kester, D.~J.~M., Jones, P.~A. 2000, MNRAS, 315, 791

1527: 

1528: \reference{} Venn, K.~A. 1999, ApJ, 518, 405

1529: 

1530: \reference{} Westerlund, B.~E.\ 1964, MNRAS, 127, 429

1531: 

1532: \reference{} Zinnecker, H.\ 1998, Highlights in Astronomy, 11, 136

1533: 

1534: \end{references}

1535: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1536: 

1537: \end{document}

1538: