1: \documentclass{aastex}
2: \usepackage{apj}
3: \shorttitle{DIRECT Stellar Catalog. I}
4: \shortauthors{Macri {\it et al.}}
5: \def \nd {\nodata}
6: \def \ng {NGC$\,$}
7: \def \de {^{\circ}}
8: \def \hr {^{\rm h}}
9: \def \mi {^{\rm m}}
10: \def \se {^{\rm s}}
11: \def \ebv {\langle E(B\!-V)\rangle}
12: \def \evi {\langle E(V\!-I)\rangle}
13: \def \vi {V\!-\!I}
14: \def \bv {B\!-\!V}
15: \def \bvi {B\!V\!I}
16: \def \rvi {{\cal R}_{\vi}}
17: \begin{document}
18: \title{The DIRECT Project: Catalogs of Stellar Objects in Nearby Galaxies.
19: I. The Central Part of M33\altaffilmark{1}}
20:
21: \author{L.M.~Macri, K.Z.~Stanek\altaffilmark{2}, D.D.~Sasselov\altaffilmark{3}
22: \& M.~Krockenberger}
23: \affil{Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics, 60 Garden St., Cambridge MA
24: 02138, USA}
25: \email{lmacri, kstanek, sasselov, krocken@cfa.harvard.edu}
26:
27: \and
28:
29: \author{J.~Kaluzny}
30: \affil{N. Copernicus Astronomical Center, Bartycka 18, PL-00-716 Warszawa,
31: Poland}
32: \email{jka@camk.edu.pl}
33:
34: \altaffiltext{1}{Based on observations collected at the Fred L. Whipple
35: Observatory 1.2-m telescope and at the Michigan-Dartmouth-MIT 1.3-m telescope.
36: \baselineskip=18pt}
37: \altaffiltext{2}{Hubble Fellow}
38: \altaffiltext{3}{Alfred P. Sloan Foundation Fellow}
39: \begin{abstract}
40:
41: The DIRECT project aims to determine direct distances to two important galaxies
42: in the cosmological distance ladder -- M31 and M33 -- using detached eclipsing
43: binaries (DEBs) and Cepheids. The search for these variables requires
44: time-series photometry of large areas of the target galaxies and yields
45: magnitudes and positions for tens of thousands of stellar objects, which may be
46: of use to the astronomical community at large.
47:
48: During the first phase of the project, between September 1996 and October 1997,
49: we were awarded 95 nights on the F. L. Whipple Observatory 1.2~m telescope and
50: 36 nights on the Michigan-Dartmouth-MIT 1.3~m telescope to search for DEBs and
51: Cepheids in the M31 and M33 galaxies. This paper, the first in our series of
52: stellar catalogs, lists the positions, three-color photometry, and variability
53: indices of 57,581 stars with $14.4 < V < 23.6$ in the central part of M33. The
54: catalog is available from our FTP site.
55: \end{abstract}
56:
57: \keywords{galaxies: individual (M33) --- galaxies: stellar content}
58:
59: \section{Introduction}
60:
61: The DIRECT project \citep{ka98,st98} started in 1996 with the long-term goal of
62: obtaining distances to two important galaxies in the cosmological distance
63: ladder -- M31 and M33 -- using detached eclipsing binaries (DEBs) and Cepheids.
64: These two nearby galaxies are the stepping stones in most of the current effort
65: to understand the evolving universe at large scales. Not only are they
66: essential to the calibration of the extragalactic distance scale, but they also
67: constrain population synthesis models for early galaxy formation and
68: evolution. However, accurate distances are essential to make these calibrations
69: free from large systematic uncertainties.
70:
71: The search for detached eclipsing binaries and Cepheids in our target fields
72: requires the detection of a large number of stellar objects in our CCD frames
73: and the repeated measurement of their fluxes over a relatively large time
74: baseline, usually of the order of 1-2 years. Since the goal of the project
75: is not simply the detection of these variables but the determination of
76: accurate distances to the target galaxies, we must also undertake a rigorous
77: absolute calibration of our photometry. The resulting catalogs of objects
78: contain tens of thousands of objects, out of which we only select a few
79: hundreds for distance-scale work. However, the astronomical community at
80: large may benefit from the existence of an accurate, well-calibrated list of
81: objects in these nearby, often-studied galaxies. This is our rationale for
82: the publication of these series of catalog papers.
83:
84: Messier 33 (NGC 598) is one of the main components of the Local Group of
85: galaxies. It is classified as a SA(s)cd galaxy in the Third Reference Catalog
86: of Galaxies \citet{rc3} and as a Sc(s)II-III in the Revised Shapley-Ames
87: Catalog \citet{rsa}. It is located at a R.A. of $1\hr 34\mi$ and a Declination
88: of $30\de 40\mi$ (J2000.0), and it has major and minor $B_{25}$ isophotal
89: diameters of $71\arcmin$ and $42\arcmin$, respectively. It has been extensively
90: studied, appearing in more than 1000 publications. One of first was that of
91: \citet{hu26}, who stated in the abstract of his paper that ``... [i]ts great
92: angular diameter and high degree of resolution, suggesting that it is one of
93: the nearest objects of its kind, offer exceptional opportunities for detailed
94: investigation.''
95:
96: The present work will describe the details of the observations (\S2), the
97: reduction and absolute calibration of the data (\S3), the creation of the
98: stellar catalog (\S4) and the results of our consistency checks (\S5) for
99: three CCD fields in the central part of M33. The analysis of the variable stars
100: located in these fields will be analyzed in two upcoming papers by \citet{ma00}
101: and \citet{st01}.
102:
103: \section{Observations}
104:
105: Our observations of the central region of M33 were primarily carried out at the
106: Fred L. Whipple Observatory (hereafter FLWO) 1.2-m telescope. We used
107: ``AndyCam'' \citep{sz00}, a thinned, back-illuminated, AR-coated Loral $2048^2$
108: pixel CCD camera with a plate scale of $0.317\arcsec/$pixel, or an effective
109: field of view of $10\farcm 8$. The filters used during our program were
110: standard Johnson $B$ and $V$ and Cousins $I$. Additional $I$-band data were
111: collected at the Michigan-Dartmouth-MIT Observatory 1.3-m McGraw-Hill
112: telescope. We used ``Wilbur'' \citep{me93}, a thick, front-illuminated Loral
113: $2048^2$ pixel CCD camera. The plate scale and field of view were almost
114: identical to that of ``AndyCam.''
115:
116: We observed three fields located north, south and south-west of the center of
117: M33, which we labeled M33A, B and C. The J2000.0 center coordinates of the
118: fields are: M33A, R.A. = $01\hr 34\mi 05.1\se$, Dec.= $30\de 43' 43''$; M33B,
119: R.A. = $01\hr 33\mi 55.9\se$, Dec.= $30\de 34' 04''$; M33C, R.A. = $01\hr 33\mi
120: 16.0\se$, Dec.= $30\de 35' 15''$. Figure 1 shows the boundaries of these fields
121: overlaid on a digitized image of the galaxy from the POSS-I survey\footnote{
122: The Digitized Sky Surveys were produced at the Space Telescope Science
123: Institute under U.S. Government grant NAGW-2166. The National Geographic
124: Society -- Palomar Observatory Sky Atlas (POSS-I) was made by the California
125: Institute of Technology with grants from the National Geographic Society.},
126: while Figure 2 shows a mosaic of the survey fields, created with our CCD
127: data. At FLWO, we obtained $V$ and $I$ data on 42 nights and $B$ data on 13
128: nights. At MDM, we obtained $I$ data on 10 nights. Exposure times were 1200s
129: in $B$, 900s in $V$ and 600s in $I$. Fields were observed repeatedly on each
130: night in $V$ and $I$, so the actual number of exposures per field in those
131: filters is around 110 and 60, respectively. Standard star fields from
132: \citet{la92} were observed on one photometric night. Table 1 presents a log of
133: our observations.
134:
135:
136: \section{Data reduction and calibration}
137:
138: \subsection{PSF photometry}
139:
140: Paper I of the DIRECT variable star series \citep{ka98} contains a detailed
141: description of the data reduction and PSF photometry. Only a brief summary of
142: these procedures is presented here. The CCD frames were processed using
143: standard CCDPROC routines under IRAF\footnote{IRAF is distributed by the
144: National Optical Astronomy Observatories, which are operated by the
145: Associations of Universities for Research in Astronomy, Inc., under cooperative
146: agreement with the NSF.}. Photometry was obtained using the DAOPHOT and ALLSTAR
147: programs \citep{st87,st92}, using a Tcl/Tk-based automated reduction pipeline.
148:
149: Point-spread functions (PSFs) were calculated from bright and isolated stars
150: present in each frame, following an iterative process. Figure 3 shows a
151: histogram of the seeing for the three filters; median FWHM values were
152: $1.5\arcsec$ for I and $1.8\arcsec$ for B and V. After running DAOPHOT and
153: ALLSTAR on all frames, we selected an image of particularly good quality (in
154: terms of seeing and depth) as a ``template'' frame. ALLSTAR was run again in
155: ``fixed-position'' mode on all other images, using the transformed object list
156: from the template frame as input. The resulting photometry lists were
157: transformed back into the coordinate and instrumental magnitude system of the
158: template image. The latter was accomplished by computing a local magnitude
159: offset for each star, using high SNR stars ($\sigma < 0.03$~mag) located within
160: a radius of 350 pixels. In cases where few stars met these conditions, the
161: search radius was increased to 750 pixels, or a global median offset was used
162: as a last resort. The magnitude offset between each frame and the template
163: image was recorded in a log file for future use (see below). The typical
164: uncertainty in this offset was 0.02~mag.
165:
166: Thus, for each field and filter combination, the output of our automated
167: reduction pipeline consisted of one ALLSTAR file for each frame, with positions
168: and PSF magnitudes in the coordinate and photometric systems of its template
169: frame. The ALLSTAR files pertaining to a particular field and filter
170: combination were matched and merged, to arrive at nine final photometry
171: databases (3 fields $\times$ 3 filters).
172:
173: The instrumental PSF magnitudes present in the databases had to transformed
174: into the standard system. This procedure can be separated into three steps: i)
175: transform PSF magnitudes in the instrumental system of the template frame to
176: PSF magnitudes in the instrumental system of the photometric frame; ii)
177: transform PSF magnitudes in the instrumental system of the photometric frame to
178: aperture magnitudes in the instrumental system of the photometric frame; iii)
179: transform the instrumental system of the photometric frame to the standard
180: system. These steps are described in detail below.
181:
182: \subsection{Aperture corrections}
183:
184: The first step of the photometric calibration process was the transformation of
185: the PSF magnitudes of the photometry database from the magnitude scale of the
186: template frame to the magnitude scale of another frame, taken under photometric
187: conditions (hereafter referred to as the ``photometric frame''). This was
188: easily achieved by applying a magnitude offset of equal size and opposite sign
189: to the one which had already been determined (as part of our automated
190: pipeline) to exist between the template frame and the photometric frame.
191:
192: The second step of the process was the transformation of PSF magnitudes into
193: aperture magnitudes, through the determination of aperture correction
194: coefficients. Given the crowded nature of our fields, their rapidly-varying sky
195: backgrounds, and the relatively poor seeing of our photometric night, a
196: thorough approach was required. We chose one frame for each field
197: and filter from the photometric night, and used the master star lists and the
198: PSFs derived by our automated pipeline to remove all objects present in these
199: images, with the exception of bright, isolated stars. Aperture photometry was
200: carried out on these star-subtracted frames at a variety of radii (ranging
201: from 10 to 20 pixels, or 3 to 6$\arcsec$). The local sky was characterized
202: using an annulus extending from 30 to 40 pixels.
203:
204: The aperture photometry measurements of all bright stars in a particular frame
205: were examined simultaneously by visually inspecting their curves of growth
206: (i.e., plots of aperture magnitude versus radius). Objects with unusual growth
207: curves were discarded. The aperture photometry measurements of the remaining
208: bright stars (hereafter, ``input stars'') were analyzed using DAOGROW
209: \citep{ste90}. This program performs an analytical fit to the growth curves of
210: all input stars in all frames, and the resulting function is used to determine
211: a mean growth curve for each frame. DAOGROW then uses the best combination of
212: aperture photometry and growth curve for each input star to calculate its
213: aperture magnitude at the outermost radius (in our case, 20 pixels). Lastly,
214: the PSF and aperture magnitudes of all input stars in each frame are used to
215: derive a mean value of the aperture correction, which is applied to all
216: objects. The aperture correction coefficients derived using this procedure
217: ranged from $-0.10$ to $+0.24$~mag, with typical uncertainties of 0.03~mag.
218:
219: \subsection{Photometric solutions}
220:
221: Once the instrumental PSF magnitudes in each of the nine databases were
222: converted to instrumental aperture magnitudes, the last step required to
223: transform them into standard magnitudes was the derivation of photometric
224: zeropoints. On 1997 October 9, a photometric night of average seeing quality
225: for our program (I: $1.8\arcsec$; B and V: $2.0\arcsec$), we observed six
226: fields from \citet{la92}, containing a total of forty-three standard stars, at
227: airmasses ranging from 1.12 to 2.12. We performed photometry on the standard
228: stars using DAOPHOT with the same settings used for the program stars, namely
229: an aperture radius of 20 pixels and a sky annulus extending from 30 to 40
230: pixels. We used the IRAF PHOTCAL routines to solve for a photometric solution
231: of the form
232:
233: \vskip -8pt
234: \begin{equation}
235: M_{std,i} = m_{obs,i} + \chi_i - k'_i X + \xi_{ij} (M_{std,i} - M_{std,j})
236: \end{equation}
237: \vskip 3pt
238:
239: \noindent{where $M_{std,i}$ and $M_{std,j}$ are the magnitudes of a star in
240: the standard system in the $i$ and $J$ filters, while $m_{obs,i}$ is the
241: instrumental magnitudes of the same star in the $i$ filter. $\chi_i$ is the
242: magnitude zeropoint at $X=0$, $k'_i$ is the airmass coefficient for the $i$
243: filter, and $\xi_{ij}$ is the color term. The V-band solution was calculated
244: using both B-V and V-I for the color term; the latter one was used by default
245: in the calibration process, unless only B and V data were available for a
246: particular object. The B-band solution was calculated using B-V for the color
247: term, while the I-band solution was calculated using V-I for the color
248: term. The values and uncertainties of the coefficients of each term are
249: presented in Table 2; based on those numbers, we estimate a total uncertainty
250: of $\pm 0.02$~mag in our solutions.}
251:
252: Based on the uncertainties associated with PSF magnitude offsets
253: ($\pm0.02$~mag, \S3.1), aperture correction coefficients ($\pm0.03$~mag,
254: \S3.2) and photometric solutions ($\pm0.02$~mag, previous paragraph), we
255: estimate a total random uncertainty in our photometric zeropoints of
256: $\pm0.04$~mag.
257:
258: \section{The star catalog}
259:
260: Once the photometric calibrations were applied, we merged the $BVI$ databases
261: of each field into a single catalogs. Objects were matched from the master B, V
262: and I star lists of each field and were kept only if they had been detected in
263: the V band and in either of the B or I bands. Next, we transformed the object
264: coordinates into the FK5 system using stars from the USNO-A2.0 catalog
265: \citep{mo98}. We solved for a cubic-order transformation using software
266: developed by \citet{min99}. The solutions used 30-70 stars and had {\it rms}
267: values of $0.4\arcsec$.
268:
269: Lastly, the catalogs of the three fields were merged into a single, master
270: catalog. There was --by design-- significant overlap between fields A and B as
271: well as between fields C and B; objects in these regions were matched to test
272: the internal consistency of our astrometric and photometric calibrations (see
273: \S5). To avoid duplication of these objects, we only kept the entry from
274: field B.
275:
276: As described in \citet{ka98}, the magnitude uncertainties reported by
277: DAOPHOT/ALLSTAR are under-estimated for bright stars and over-estimated for
278: faint ones. The errors were re-scaled following the precepts established in
279: that paper. Lastly, we calculated mean BVI magnitudes and V-band $J_S$
280: variability indices \citep{ste96}. The catalog is presented in Table 3; it
281: lists IDs, celestial coordinates, mean B, V and I magnitudes and
282: uncertainties, and $J_S$ indices for 57,581 stars present in our fields.
283: The catalog can also be retrieved from the DIRECT FTP site at {\tt http://cfa-www.harvard.edu/$\sim$kstanek/DIRECT}.
284:
285: Figure 4 shows the differential luminosity function of the objects in our
286: catalog. The turnovers in these luminosity functions indicate incompleteness
287: below $\sim22$~mag for B and V, and $\sim20$~mag for I. Figure 5 shows
288: color-magnitude diagrams of our catalog stars. A faint plume of foreground
289: stars from our own Galaxy can be seen in the region $0.4 < B-V < 1.2$, $V <
290: 20$. The feature is substantially diminished relative to the one seen in the
291: CMD of M31 in \citet{ka98} due to the difference in galactic latitude between
292: these two objects ($l\sim -22\de$ for M31 and $l\sim -31\de$ for M33).
293:
294: We flagged objects as candidate variables if they met two requirements:
295: a $J_S$ index larger than 0.75, and a V-band magnitude uncertainty larger
296: than 0.04~mag. The second criterion was introduced to remove bright stars
297: with small variability from our sample of candidate variables (in this
298: data set, it removed 107 stars with $V < 19.5$~mag). Our final sample
299: of candidate variables consists of 1,298 stars. The panels of Figure 6 show
300: some global properties of the variable stars present in our catalog.
301:
302: \section{Test of photometric and astrometric calibrations}
303:
304: We used $\sim 5000$ objects present in the overlap regions between the survey
305: fields to check our astrometric and photometric calibration procedures. We
306: compared the celestial coordinates of these objects and found small offsets
307: between fields of the order of $0\farcs4 - 0\farcs7$, which are consistent
308: with the {\it rms} residuals of the astrometric solutions.
309:
310: We performed an internal test of our photometric calibration by comparing the
311: mean B, V and I magnitudes of bright stars present in the overlap regions.
312: We imposed magnitude cuts of 19.5, 19.5 and 19.0~mag in B, V, and I,
313: respectively, which restricted the number of matches to about 200, 300 and
314: 400, respectively. On average, the offsets were $<0.01$~mag. This indicates
315: that PSF variations across the field were properly taken into account by
316: DAOPHOT and our pipeline, and that the aperture corrections were properly
317: determined. Table 4 lists the values of the offsets and their standard
318: deviations; Figure 7 shows plots of these comparisons.
319:
320: We peformed two external tests of our photometric calibration. In the first
321: test, we matched about 200 objects in common between our Field C and Field 4
322: of \citet{wfm90}. We compared the mean B, V and I magnitudes of stars brighter
323: than 20.0~mag in each of the filters (about 25 stars/filter) and found offsets
324: of the order of $-0.03$~mag (brighter DIRECT magnitudes). In the second
325: external test of our photometric calibration, we matched about 4000 objects in
326: common between our Field A and one of the fields of \citet {be01}. We compared
327: the mean B and V magnitudes of stars brighter than 18.5~mag (about 35
328: stars/filter) and again found offsets of the order of $-0.03$~mag (brighter
329: DIRECT magnitudes). Table 4 lists the results of these comparisons, which
330: are also plotted on Figures 8 and 9.
331:
332: \section{Artificial star tests}
333:
334: The differences between our photometry and the \citet{wfm90} and \citet{be01}
335: photometry are small but consistent. Furthermore, both groups used larger
336: telescopes (CFHT and WIYN, respectively) under significantly better seeing
337: conditions that us. Therefore, we decided to undertake artificial star tests
338: to quantify the level of photometric bias that could arise due to the poorer
339: spatial resolution of our images.
340:
341: We used DAOPHOT to inject 2,500 artificial stars into the nine master frames,
342: using the PSFs previosly derived by our automated reduction pipeline and
343: taking into account photon noise and other detector characteristics. We
344: analyzed the frames using the same procedures as in the automated pipeline.
345: The results were quite similar for the three frames pertaining to each band,
346: and thus the data files were merged to improve the statistics. Our results
347: are presented in Table 5 and in Figure 10.
348:
349: Bright stars ($15<m<18$) are affected by crowding at the $0.01-0.04$~mag
350: level. The bias becomes stronger for fainter objects ($m>18$), reaching
351: $0.05-0.08$~mag. At a given magnitude, the bias increases from B to V to I.
352: In all cases, the offset induced by crowding is in the same direction as the
353: offset found between our data and other catalogs.
354:
355: \section{Summary}
356:
357: We have observed three fields in the central part of M33 at the Fred
358: L. Whipple Observatory 1.2-m and the Michigan-Dartmouth-MIT Observatory 1.3-m
359: telescopes. We have performed PSF photometry of objects in these fields,
360: calibrated in the standard system with a zeropoint accuracy of $\pm 0.04$~mag.
361:
362: We have compiled a catalog of positions, B, V and I magnitudes, and V-band
363: variability indices for 57,581 stars with $14.4 < V< 23.6$. The catalog is
364: available from our FTP site.
365:
366: The analysis of the variable star content of these fields will be presented in
367: two upcoming papers by \citet{ma00} and \citet{st01}.
368:
369: We would like to thank the telescope allocation committees of the FLWO and
370: MDM Observatories for the generous amounts of telescope time devoted to this
371: project. We would also like to thank Peter Stetson, for his photometry
372: software; Doug Mink, for help with the astrometry; and David Bersier, for
373: providing us his photometry in advance of publication. LMM would like to thank
374: John Huchra for his support and comments. KZS was supported by a Hubble
375: Fellowship grant HF-01124.01-99A from the Space Telescope Science Institute,
376: which is operated by the Association of Universities for Research in
377: Astronomy, Inc., under NASA contract NAS5-26555. DDS acknowledges support
378: from the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation and from NSF grant No. AST-9970812. JK
379: was supported by KBN grant 2P03D003.17
380:
381: \begin{thebibliography}{}
382:
383: \bibitem[Bersier et al.\,(2001)]{be01} Bersier, D., Wood, P.R., Mould, J.R.,
384: Hoessel, J.G., Tanvir, N.R. \& Hughes, S.M.G.~2001, in preparation
385:
386: \bibitem[de Vaucouleurs et al.\,(1991)]{rc3} de Vaucouleurs, G., de
387: Vaucouleurs, A., Corwin Jr., H., Buta, R., Paturel, G.~\& Fouqu\'e, P.~1991,
388: {\it Third Reference Catalogue of Bright Galaxies} (Berlin: Springer-Verlag
389:
390: \bibitem[Hubble\,(1926)]{hu26} Hubble, E.P.~1926, \apj, 63, 236
391:
392: \bibitem[Kaluzny et al.\,(1998)]{ka98} Kaluzny, J., Stanek, K.Z.,
393: Krockenberger, M., Sasselov, D.D., Tonry, J.L. \& Mateo, M.~1998, \aj, 115,
394: 1016
395:
396: \bibitem[Landolt\,(1992)]{la92} Landolt, A.U.~1992, \aj, 104, 340
397:
398: \bibitem[Macri et al.\,(2001)]{ma00} Macri, L.M., Stanek, K.Z., Krockenberger,
399: M., Sasselov, D.D. \& Kaluzny, J.~2001, \aj, in preparation
400:
401: \bibitem[Metzger et al.\,(1993)]{me93} Metzger, M.R., Tonry, J.L. \& Luppino,
402: G.A.~1993, in ASP Conf Ser. 52, Astronomical Data Analysis Software and Systems
403: II, eds. R.J. Hanisch, R.J.V. Brissenden \& J. Barnes (San Francisco: ASP),
404: p. 300
405:
406: \bibitem[Mink\,(1999)]{min99} Mink, D.J.~1999, in ASP Conf. Ser. 172,
407: Astronomical Data Analysis Software and Systems VIII, eds. G. Hunt \&
408: H.E. Payne (San Francisco: ASP), p. 249
409:
410: \bibitem[Monet et al.\,(1998)]{mo98} Monet, D., et al.~1998, USNO-A2.0,
411: (Washington: U.S. Naval Observatory)
412:
413: \bibitem[Sandage \& Tammann\,(1981)]{rsa} Sandage, A.~and Tammann, G.~1981,
414: Revised Shapley-Ames Catalog of Bright Galaxies (Washington: Carnegie)
415:
416: \bibitem[Stanek et al.\,(1998)]{st98} Stanek, K.Z., Kaluzny, J., Krockenberger,
417: M., Sasselov, D.D., Tonry, J.L. \& Mateo, M.~1998, \aj, 115, 1894
418:
419: \bibitem[Stanek et al.\,(2001)]{st01} Stanek, K.Z., Macri, L.M., Sasselov,
420: D.D., Krockenberger, M., \& Kaluzny, J.~2001, \aj, in preparation
421:
422: \bibitem[Stetson\,(1987)]{st87} Stetson, P.B.~1987, \pasp, 99 191
423:
424: \bibitem[Stetson\,(1990)]{ste90} Stetson, P.B.~1990, \pasp, 102, 932
425:
426: \bibitem[Stetson\,(1992)]{st92} Stetson, P.B.~1992, in ASP Conf. Ser. 25,
427: Astronomical Data Analysis Software and Systems I, eds. D.M. Worrall,
428: C. Bimesderfer \& J. Barnes (San Francisco: ASP), p. 297
429:
430: \bibitem[Stetson\,(1996)]{ste96} Stetson, P.B.~1996, \pasp, 108, 851
431:
432: \bibitem[Szentgyorgyi et al.\,(2000)]{sz00} Szentgyorgyi, A.H., et al.~2000, in
433: preparation.
434:
435: \bibitem[Wilson, Freedman \& Madore\,(1990)]{wfm90} Wilson, C., Freedman, W.L.
436: \& Madore, B.F.~1990, \aj, 99, 149
437:
438: \end{thebibliography}
439:
440: \clearpage
441:
442: \begin{figure}
443: \plotone{f01.ps}
444: \caption{Palomar Observatory Sky Survey image of M33, showing the size and
445: location of fields A-C. Each box is approximately 10$\farcm$8 on a side. North
446: is up and East is to the left.}
447: \end{figure}
448:
449: \clearpage
450:
451: \begin{figure}
452: \plotone{f02.ps}
453: \caption{Mosaic of the central part of M33, created from CCD images of
454: our fields.}
455: \end{figure}
456:
457: \clearpage
458:
459: \begin{figure}
460: \plotone{f03.ps}
461: \caption{Histogram of seeing values for the frames acquired for this project.
462: Solid, dotted and dashed lines represent the B, V and I band histograms,
463: respectively.}
464: \end{figure}
465:
466: \clearpage
467:
468: \begin{figure}
469: \plotone{f04.ps}
470: \caption{Differential luminosity functions for the stars present in our
471: catalog, for the B (solid), V (dashed) and I (dotted) bands. Our completeness
472: limits are $\sim22$~mag for B and V and $\sim20$~mag for I.}
473: \end{figure}
474:
475: \clearpage
476:
477: \begin{figure}
478: \plotone{f05.ps}
479: \caption{Color-magnitude diagrams for the stars present in our catalog. The
480: dashed lines indicate the extent of our data, set by our limiting magnitudes
481: of $B\sim 24$ and $I\sim 22$.}
482: \end{figure}
483:
484: \clearpage
485:
486: \begin{figure}
487: \epsscale{0.9}
488: \plotone{f06.ps}
489: \caption{Global properties of candidate variables present in our catalog. Top
490: left: Distribution of $J_S$ with V mag. The dashed line indicates our threshold
491: of $J_S=0.75$. Top right: Number of stars in the catalog as a function of $J_S$
492: value. The dashed line indicates our threshold of $J_S=0.75$. Bottom left:
493: Color-magnitude diagram of candidate variables. The dotted line indicates the
494: extent of our data. Bottom right: Effect of imposing a $\sigma_V > 0.04$~mag
495: cut in our definition of variability; a large percentage of bright stars are
496: dropped from the candidate variable sample.}
497: \end{figure}
498:
499: \clearpage
500:
501: \begin{figure}
502: \epsscale{0.95}
503: \plotone{f07.ps}
504: \caption{Comparison of mean magnitudes for bright stars ($B <
505: 19.5$~mag; $V < 19.5$~mag; $I < 19.0$~mag) located in the overlap
506: regions between fields A-B and C-B. The photometric zeropoints and
507: aperture correction coefficients are determined independently for each
508: field, so these comparisons allow us to check the internal consistency
509: of our reductions. The average values and {\it r.m.s.} deviations of the
510: offsets are listed in the top-left corner of each panel and in Table
511: 4.}
512: \end{figure}
513:
514: \clearpage
515:
516: \begin{figure}
517: \plotone{f08.ps}
518: \caption{Comparison of mean magnitudes for bright stars ($B,V,I <
519: 20$~mag) in common between Field C and Field 4 of \citet{wfm90}. The
520: average values and {\it r.m.s.} deviations of the offsets are listed in the
521: top-left corner of each panel and in Table 4.}
522: \end{figure}
523:
524: \clearpage
525:
526: \begin{figure}
527: \plotone{f09.ps}
528: \caption{Comparison of mean magnitudes for bright stars ($B,V <
529: 18.5$~mag) in common between Field A and one of the fields of
530: \citet{be01}. The average values and {\it r.m.s.} deviations of the offsets
531: are listed in the top-left corner of each panel and in Table 4.}
532: \end{figure}
533:
534: \clearpage
535:
536: \begin{figure}
537: \plotone{f10.ps}
538: \caption{Results of the artificial star tests. Individual stars are plotted
539: using small dots, while median values for one-magnitude intervals are indicated
540: with solid circles. They are also listed in Table 5.}
541: \end{figure}
542:
543: \clearpage
544:
545: \vskip -1in
546: \begin{deluxetable}{llcccr}
547: \tabletypesize{\footnotesize}
548: \baselineskip=9pt
549: \tablecolumns{6}
550: \tablewidth{0pt}
551: \tablenum{1}
552: \tablecaption{Log of Observations}
553: \tablehead{\colhead{UT Date} & \colhead{MJD} & \colhead{Field} & \colhead{Band}
554: & \colhead{Tel.} & \colhead{Seeing}}
555: \startdata
556: 1996/09/03 & 329.7615 & M33A & I & F & 1.40 \\
557: & 329.7786 & M33A & I & F & 1.24 \\
558: 1996/09/06 & 332.7220 & M33A & V & F & 2.18 \\
559: & 332.7504 & M33A & V & F & 2.25 \\
560: & 332.7735 & M33A & V & F & 1.77 \\
561: & 332.7803 & M33A & V & F & 1.84 \\
562: & 332.8479 & M33B & B & F & 2.03 \\
563: & 332.8697 & M33B & V & F & 1.82 \\
564: & 332.8814 & M33B & V & F & 1.37 \\
565: & 332.8932 & M33B & V & F & 1.43 \\
566: & 332.9114 & M33C & V & F & 1.39 \\
567: & 332.9182 & M33C & V & F & 1.57 \\
568: & 332.9434 & M33C & V & F & 1.82 \\
569: & 332.9612 & M33C & I & F & 1.28 \\
570: & 332.9669 & M33B & I & F & 1.36 \\
571: & 332.9753 & M33A & I & F & 1.28 \\
572: & 332.9873 & M33A & V & F & 1.34 \\
573: 1996/09/07 & 333.8863 & M33A & V & F & 1.68 \\
574: & 333.8930 & M33A & V & F & 1.70 \\
575: & 333.9047 & M33A & I & F & 1.07 \\
576: & 333.9130 & M33B & I & F & 1.22 \\
577: \multicolumn{6}{l}{\it Continues in electronic form}\\
578: \enddata
579: \tablecomments{Telescope code: F=FLWO; M=MDM.\\
580: $\dagger$: Photometric night -- Standards observed.}
581: \end{deluxetable}
582:
583: \begin{deluxetable}{llllrl}
584: \tabletypesize{\normalsize}
585: \baselineskip=12pt
586: \tablecolumns{7}
587: \tablewidth{0pt}
588: \tablenum{2}
589: \tablecaption{Photometric solution for 1997 Oct 09}
590: \tablehead{\multicolumn{2}{c}{Filter} & \colhead{$\chi$} &
591: \colhead{$k'$} & \colhead{$\xi$} & \colhead{\it rms}}
592: \startdata
593: B & (B-V) & $-22.953\pm0.025$ & $0.212\pm0.017$ & $-0.033\pm0.011$ & 0.030 \\
594: V & (B-V) & $-22.714\pm0.014$ & $0.123\pm0.009$ & $ 0.035\pm0.006$ & 0.016 \\
595: V & (V-I) & $-22.720\pm0.013$ & $0.127\pm0.009$ & $ 0.032\pm0.005$ & 0.016 \\
596: I & (V-I) & $-22.719\pm0.016$ & $0.064\pm0.010$ & $-0.051\pm0.007$ & 0.021 \\
597: \enddata
598: \end{deluxetable}
599:
600: \begin{deluxetable}{lccccccccccccr}
601: \tabletypesize{\scriptsize}
602: \tablecolumns{14}
603: \tablewidth{0pt}
604: \tablenum{3}
605: \tablecaption{Catalog of stars in the central part of M33}
606: \tablehead{\colhead{ID} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{R.A.} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{Dec.} & \colhead{V} &\colhead{I} &\colhead{B} &
607: \colhead{$\sigma_V$} & \colhead{$\sigma_I$} & \colhead{$\sigma_B$} & \colhead{$J_S$}}
608: \startdata
609: D33 J013251.1+303923.7 & 01 & 32 & 51.11 & 30 & 39 & 23.65 & 19.97 & 18.14 & \nd & 0.03 & 0.03 & \nd & 0.12\\
610: D33 J013251.1+303741.8 & 01 & 32 & 51.13 & 30 & 37 & 41.81 & 21.61 & 21.65 & \nd & 0.11 & 0.28 & \nd & 0.12\\
611: D33 J013251.1+303954.9 & 01 & 32 & 51.14 & 30 & 39 & 54.86 & 21.72 & 19.50 & \nd & 0.12 & 0.13 & \nd & 0.06\\
612: D33 J013251.2+303736.4 & 01 & 32 & 51.17 & 30 & 37 & 36.44 & 20.20 & 19.61 & \nd & 0.04 & 0.08 & \nd & 0.09\\
613: D33 J013251.2+303907.1 & 01 & 32 & 51.20 & 30 & 39 & 07.09 & 22.87 & 21.82 & \nd & 0.26 & 0.27 & \nd & -0.02\\
614: D33 J013251.2+303648.7 & 01 & 32 & 51.20 & 30 & 36 & 48.67 & 21.32 & 21.57 & \nd & 0.10 & 0.17 & \nd & 0.04\\
615: D33 J013251.2+303959.6 & 01 & 32 & 51.22 & 30 & 39 & 59.58 & 22.64 & 21.32 & \nd & 0.52 & 0.28 & \nd & 0.64\\
616: D33 J013251.2+303607.0 & 01 & 32 & 51.22 & 30 & 36 & 06.95 & 23.13 & 20.14 & \nd & 0.22 & 0.15 & \nd & 0.04\\
617: D33 J013251.2+303944.1 & 01 & 32 & 51.22 & 30 & 39 & 44.10 & 21.63 & \nd & 22.44 & 0.14 & \nd & 0.11 & -0.02\\
618: D33 J013251.2+303757.4 & 01 & 32 & 51.22 & 30 & 37 & 57.43 & 22.21 & 21.01 & \nd & 0.18 & 0.17 & \nd & 0.08\\
619: D33 J013251.2+303855.7 & 01 & 32 & 51.25 & 30 & 38 & 55.68 & 22.79 & 21.24 & \nd & 0.30 & 0.25 & \nd & -0.12\\
620: D33 J013251.2+303947.4 & 01 & 32 & 51.25 & 30 & 39 & 47.45 & 22.91 & 21.56 & \nd & 0.28 & 0.23 & \nd & 0.11\\
621: D33 J013251.3+303646.9 & 01 & 32 & 51.25 & 30 & 36 & 46.87 & 22.00 & 20.37 & \nd & 0.15 & 0.13 & \nd & -0.09\\
622: D33 J013251.3+303936.8 & 01 & 32 & 51.27 & 30 & 39 & 36.79 & 22.67 & 21.10 & \nd & 0.23 & 0.19 & \nd & 0.08\\
623: D33 J013251.3+304013.5 & 01 & 32 & 51.30 & 30 & 40 & 13.51 & 22.31 & 22.10 & 22.35 & 0.19 & 0.34 & 0.09 & -0.05\\
624: D33 J013251.3+303952.3 & 01 & 32 & 51.30 & 30 & 39 & 52.34 & 22.64 & 21.34 & \nd & 0.22 & 0.18 & \nd & 0.02\\
625: D33 J013251.3+303913.1 & 01 & 32 & 51.31 & 30 & 39 & 13.11 & 20.88 & 19.28 & 21.86 & 0.06 & 0.05 & 0.03 & 0.14\\
626: D33 J013251.3+303802.8 & 01 & 32 & 51.32 & 30 & 38 & 02.76 & 22.27 & 20.93 & \nd & 0.18 & 0.19 & \nd & -0.00\\
627: D33 J013251.3+303719.3 & 01 & 32 & 51.32 & 30 & 37 & 19.27 & 22.70 & 19.79 & \nd & 0.23 & 0.08 & \nd & 0.22\\
628: D33 J013251.3+303650.6 & 01 & 32 & 51.32 & 30 & 36 & 50.61 & 22.88 & 21.59 & \nd & 0.29 & 0.22 & \nd & 0.04\\
629: D33 J013251.3+303539.1 & 01 & 32 & 51.33 & 30 & 35 & 39.12 & 21.94 & 21.27 & \nd & 0.24 & 0.25 & \nd & 0.45\\
630: D33 J013251.3+303842.9 & 01 & 32 & 51.34 & 30 & 38 & 42.87 & 22.89 & 20.45 & \nd & 0.28 & 0.17 & \nd & 0.26\\
631: D33 J013251.3+303701.1 & 01 & 32 & 51.34 & 30 & 37 & 01.06 & 22.35 & 19.72 & \nd & 0.18 & 0.11 & \nd & 0.04\\
632: D33 J013251.3+303940.1 & 01 & 32 & 51.35 & 30 & 39 & 40.07 & 23.18 & 20.55 & 23.67 & 0.30 & 0.11 & 0.17 & 0.05\\
633: D33 J013251.3+303644.0 & 01 & 32 & 51.35 & 30 & 36 & 43.95 & 20.57 & 18.78 & \nd & 0.06 & 0.04 & \nd & -0.04\\
634: D33 J013251.3+303823.0 & 01 & 32 & 51.35 & 30 & 38 & 23.03 & 20.75 & 21.09 & 20.79 & 0.06 & 0.23 & 0.02 & -0.07\\
635: D33 J013251.3+304009.5 & 01 & 32 & 51.35 & 30 & 40 & 09.48 & 22.86 & \nd & 23.20 & 0.36 & \nd & 0.19 & 0.56\\
636: D33 J013251.3+303703.3 & 01 & 32 & 51.35 & 30 & 37 & 03.29 & 23.24 & 21.51 & \nd & 0.35 & 0.28 & \nd & 0.11\\
637: D33 J013251.4+303814.2 & 01 & 32 & 51.35 & 30 & 38 & 14.21 & 23.15 & 21.93 & 23.66 & 0.35 & 0.31 & 0.25 & 0.10\\
638: D33 J013251.4+303726.9 & 01 & 32 & 51.35 & 30 & 37 & 26.87 & 21.33 & 20.82 & 21.44 & 0.09 & 0.11 & 0.04 & 0.05\\
639: \multicolumn{14}{l}{\it Continues in electronic form} \\
640: \enddata
641: \end{deluxetable}
642:
643: \begin{deluxetable}{clcc}
644: \tabletypesize{\normalsize}
645: \baselineskip=12pt
646: \tablecolumns{4}
647: \tablewidth{0pt}
648: \tablenum{4}
649: \tablecaption{Photometry comparisons}
650: \tablehead{\colhead{Band} & \colhead{$\Delta$~mag} & \colhead{$m_{lim}$} & \colhead{N}}
651: \startdata
652: \multicolumn{4}{l}{\it Internal -- overlap regions} \\
653: V & $-0.003\pm0.003$ & 19.5 & 327 \\
654: I & $+0.014\pm0.002$ & 19.0 & 357 \\
655: B & $-0.003\pm0.004$ & 19.5 & 160 \\\hline
656: \multicolumn{4}{l}{\it \citet{wfm90}} \\
657: V & $-0.041\pm0.058$ & 20.0 & 26 \\
658: I & $-0.032\pm0.068$ & 20.0 & 30 \\
659: B & $-0.024\pm0.108$ & 20.0 & 20 \\\hline
660: \multicolumn{4}{l}{\it \citet{be01}} \\
661: V & $-0.031\pm0.047$ & 18.5 & 39 \\
662: B & $-0.038\pm0.033$ & 18.5 & 31 \\
663: \enddata
664: \end{deluxetable}
665:
666: \begin{deluxetable}{ccccc}
667: \tabletypesize{\normalsize}
668: \baselineskip=12pt
669: \tablecolumns{5}
670: \tablewidth{0pt}
671: \tablenum{5}
672: \tablecaption{Artificial star tests -- Results}
673: \tablehead{\colhead{Band} & \colhead{Mag.} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{$\Delta$~mag (meas-input)} \\
674: \colhead{} & \colhead{} & \colhead{median} & \colhead {mean} & \colhead{$\sigma$}}
675: \startdata
676: V & 15.5 & -0.004 & -0.007 & 0.019\\
677: & 16.5 & -0.009 & -0.016 & 0.025\\
678: & 17.5 & -0.016 & -0.026 & 0.040\\
679: & 18.5 & -0.028 & -0.034 & 0.053\\
680: & 19.5 & -0.041 & -0.052 & 0.092\\
681: & 20.5 & -0.062 & -0.081 & 0.158\\\hline
682: I & 15.5 & -0.014 & -0.020 & 0.025\\
683: & 16.5 & -0.025 & -0.032 & 0.040\\
684: & 17.5 & -0.039 & -0.050 & 0.066\\
685: & 18.5 & -0.063 & -0.076 & 0.084\\
686: & 19.5 & -0.076 & -0.089 & 0.146\\
687: & 20.5 & -0.081 & -0.128 & 0.248\\\hline
688: B & 16.5 & -0.006 & -0.012 & 0.021\\
689: & 17.5 & -0.013 & -0.020 & 0.034\\
690: & 18.5 & -0.019 & -0.030 & 0.048\\
691: & 19.5 & -0.029 & -0.039 & 0.076\\
692: & 20.5 & -0.039 & -0.055 & 0.132\\
693: & 21.5 & -0.046 & -0.068 & 0.225\\
694: \enddata
695: \end{deluxetable}
696: \end{document}
697: