1: %\documentstyle[12pt,aaspp4,psfig,natbib]{article}

2: %\documentstyle[12pt,aastex,epsfig]{article}

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

4: \usepackage{color}

5: \usepackage{graphicx}

6: 

7: \special{papersize=8.5in,11in}

8: 

9: \begin{document}

10: 

11: %%

12: %% Arguments to these comment notifiers can not exceed a single paragraph.

13: %% If you use one of these to comment out a large chunk of text which has

14: %% paragraph breaks, expect to experience hard to diagnose TeX errors ...

15: %%

16: \def\NB#1{[NB: {\it #1}]}

17: \def\DK#1{[DK: {\it #1}]}   % use to leave DK messages

18: \def\DT#1{[DT: {\it #1}]}   % use to leave DT messages

19: \def\JO#1{[JO: {\it #1}]}   % use to leave JO messages

20: \def\NS#1{[NS: {\it #1}]}   % use to leave NS messages

21: 

22: \def \etal {{\it et~al.}}

23: \def \nhi  {$N_{HI}$}

24: \def \ndi  {$N_{DI}$}

25: \def \lnhi  {$Log~N_{HI}$}

26: \def \lndi  {$Log~N_{DI}$}

27: \def \nhe  {$N_{HeII}$}

28: \def \qone {PKS~1937--1009}

29: \def \qtwo {Q1009+2956}

30: \def \qthree {Q0130--4021}

31: \def \qfour {HS~0105+1619}

32: \def \qfive {QSO 1243+3047}

33: \def \qhst {PG~1718+4807}

34: 

35: \def \ETA {$\eta $}

36: \def \het {$^3$He}

37: \def \hef {$^4$He}

38: \def \lisv {$^7$Li}

39: \def \yp      {Y$_p$}

40: 

41: \def \btemp {$b_{temp}$}

42: \def \bturb {$b_{turb}$}

43: \def \ly    {Lyman}

44: \def \mf    {$\times 10^{-5}$}

45: 

46: \def \ob {$\Omega _b$}

47: 

48: %\newcommand{\N}[1]{{N({\rm #1})}}

49: %\newcommand{\cm}[1]{\, {\rm cm^{#1}}}

50: 

51: % Basic Units

52: \newcommand{\kms}{km s$^{-1}$}

53: \newcommand{\cmm}{cm$^{-2}$}

54: \newcommand{\cmmm}{cm$^{-3}$}

55: \newcommand{\escsh}{$\mathrm{ergs}

56:         \mathrm{\ s}^{-1}

57:         \mathrm{\ cm}^{-2}

58:         \mathrm{\ sr}^{-1}

59:         \mathrm{\ Hz}^{-1}$}

60: 

61: % Mathematics

62: \newcommand{\chisquared}{$\chi^{2}$}

63: 

64: % Cosmology Related

65: \newcommand{\omegatotal}{$\Omega _{total}$}

66: \newcommand{\omegam}{$\Omega _m$}

67: \newcommand{\omegalambda}{$\Omega _{\Lambda}$}

68: \newcommand{\omegabaryon}{$\Omega _b$}

69: \newcommand{\omegabaryonhsquared}{$\Omega _bh^{2}$}

70: \newcommand{\hubbleconstant}{$H_{0}$}

71: \newcommand{\lcdm}{$\Lambda$CDM}

72: \newcommand{\ocdm}{OCDM}

73: 

74: \newcommand{\pk} {$P(k)$}

75: 

76: % Ly Alpha Forest Related

77: \newcommand{\lya}{Ly$\alpha$}

78: \newcommand{\lyb}{Ly$\beta$}

79: \newcommand{\lyg}{Ly$\gamma$}

80: \newcommand{\lyd}{Ly$\delta$}

81: \newcommand{\lyaf} {Lyman-$\alpha$ forest}

82: %\newcommand{\nhi}{$N_{\rm H I}$}

83: \newcommand{\zabs}{$z_{abs}$}

84: \newcommand{\zem}{$z_{em}$}

85: \newcommand{\da}{$D_A$}

86: 

87: % UV background related

88: \newcommand{\jtwentyone} {$J_{21}$}

89: \newcommand{\jzero}{$J_0$}

90: \newcommand{\jnu}{$J_{912}$}

91: \newcommand{\jovi}{$J_{197??}$}

92: 

93: 

94: \title{

95: Relative Flux Calibration of Keck HIRES Echelle Spectra\altaffilmark{1}} 

96: 

97: \author{ 

98: Nao Suzuki\altaffilmark{2},

99: David Tytler\altaffilmark{3},

100: David Kirkman,

101: John M. O'Meara,

102: \& Dan Lubin \\

103: Center for Astrophysics and Space Sciences;\\

104: University of California, San Diego; \\

105: MS 0424; La Jolla; CA 92093-0424\\}

106: 

107: \altaffiltext{1} {Based on data obtained with the Kast spectrograph 

108: on the Lick Observatory 3-m Shane telescope and with the HIRES and 

109: ESI spectrographs

110: at the W.M. Keck Observatory that

111: is a joint facility of the University of California, the California

112: Institute of Technology and NASA.}

113: \altaffiltext{2} {E-mail: suzuki@ucsd.edu}

114: \altaffiltext{3} {E-mail: tytler@ucsd.edu}

115: 

116: \begin{abstract}

117: 

118: We describe a new method to calibrate the relative flux levels in

119: spectra from the HIRES echelle spectrograph on the Keck-I telescope.

120: Standard data reduction techniques that transfer the instrument response

121: between HIRES integrations leave errors in the flux of 5 -- 10\%, because

122: the effective response varies. The flux errors are most severe near

123: the ends of each spectral order, where there can be discontinuous jumps.  

124: The source of these errors is uncertain, but may include changes in the

125: vignetting connected to the optical alignment. 

126: Our new flux calibration method uses a calibrated

127: reference spectrum of each target to calibrate individual HIRES

128: integrations. We determine the instrument response independently for

129: each integration, and hence we avoid the need to transfer the

130: instrument response between HIRES integrations.  The procedure can be

131: applied to any HIRES spectrum, or any other spectrum. While the 

132: accuracy of the method depends upon many factors, we have been able to

133: flux calibrate a HIRES spectrum to 1\% over scales of 200~\AA\ that include 

134: order joins. We illustrate the method with spectra of \qfive\ towards which 

135: we have measured the deuterium to hydrogen abundance ratio.

136: 

137: \keywords{quasars: absorption lines -- quasars: individual (\qfive )

138: -- cosmology: observations -- instrumentation: spectrographs --

139: methods: data analysis --  techniques: spectroscopic}

140: % from the AJ list http://www.astro.washington.edu/astroj/aj_sub.html

141: 

142: \end{abstract}

143: 

144: \section{Introduction}

145: 

146: In recent decades, the combination of large aperture telescopes and

147: high resolution spectrographs have allowed for precision analysis of a

148: variety of astrophysical objects.  Echelle spectrographs are the

149: instrument of choice for high resolution, and most large telescopes

150: now have one \citep{vogt87, diego90, dekker00, noguchi98, tull98,

151: mclean98}.

152: 

153: Echelle gratings can give spectra with high spectral resolution, with

154: a large slit width, and a large wavelength range in a single setting

155: \citep*{schroeder87}.

156: % Schroder, D.J. 1987 {\sl Astronomical Optics}, Academic Press

157: An echelle grating disperses the spectrum into many tens of spectral

158: orders, which are then cross dispersed by a second dispersive element

159: so that the orders can be placed, one above the other, on a

160: rectangular CCD detector.  It is difficult to combine the spectra from

161: the many spectral orders of an echelle to produce a single continuous

162: spectrum.  This difficulty arises because the response varies rapidly 

163: across each

164: order, and at a given wavelength is usually different in different

165: orders.

166: 

167: %The range of wavelengths in an order that are not covered in

168: %any other orders is called the free spectral range of that

169: %order. There is always significant light outside the free spectral

170: %range of each order, and this light can be recorded on a large

171: %detector.  Prisms or conventional gratings are used to cross-disperse

172: %these spectral orders, so that many orders can be placed, one above

173: %the other, on a rectangular CCD detector.

174: 

175: 

176: %The blaze

177: %function of the echelle and the vignetting in the spectrograph can

178: %produce large differences between the flux recorded at the blaze

179: %peak and the flux recorded at the edge of the free spectral range.

180: %Near the ends of two adjacent orders, the recorded spectra then have

181: %opposite slopes: as we move along a spectrum increasing the

182: %wavelength, the signal in one order declines while, at the same

183: %wavelength, the signal in the next order is increasing.

184: 

185: High quality relative flux calibration of echelle spectra is highly

186: desirable in many scientific applications.  For example, accurate flux

187: levels over a large range of wavelengths makes it much easier to place

188: continuum levels on spectra with pervasive blended absorption, such as

189: the Lyman alpha forest absorption seen in high redshift QSO spectra.

190: 

191: %, and brings three related

192: %benefits.  

193: %First, it ensures that the flux in a pixel, or a group of

194: %adjacent pixels, is not at an erroneous level because of local flux

195: %calibration errors.  Second, errors are easier to describe and more

196: %reliable when the main source of error in a spectrum is the photon

197: %noise, without a significant systematic component from errors in the

198: %flux calibration.  

199: 

200: %Third, accurate flux levels over a large range of

201: %wavelengths makes it much easier to place continuum levels on spectra

202: %with pervasive blended absorption, such as the Lyman alpha forest

203: %absorption seen in high redshift QSO spectra.

204: 

205: In this paper, we discuss the relative flux calibration of spectra

206: from the HIRES echelle spectrograph on the Keck-I telescope

207: \citep{vogt94}.  We do not discuss absolute flux

208: calibration, as it requires additional calibration data and

209: is not necessary for our absorption line work.

210: We intend that a spectrum with relative flux calibration has the correct

211: shape over some range of wavelengths, and differs from an absolute calibration

212: in only the normalization.

213: 

214: We developed the methods described in this paper to improve our

215: measurements of the primordial Deuterium to Hydrogen abundance ratio

216: in QSO absorption systems, for which the bulk of our spectra come from

217: HIRES.  We have found that we obtain more accurate and reliable

218: estimates of the absorption column densities when we use

219: spectra with accurate relative flux.  High quality flux calibration

220: was not a major design goal for HIRES, and we have found that special

221: steps must be taken to obtain the quality of calibration that we need

222: for our work on D/H.  The usual

223: \citep{iraf_echelle,iraf_slit,echelle_starlink}

224: methods of echelle flux calibration appear inadequate

225: for reasons that we do not fully understand.  This inadequacy

226: motivated the development of the methods we describe.

227: 

228: We would like to both minimize the flux errors in our spectra, and to

229: estimate the size of errors which remain after our calibrations.

230: We shall find that the flux calibration errors depend on wavelength and

231: they are correlated on various wavelength scales. We would like to estimate 

232: the size of the errors on these different scales.

233: We would also like to make the error in the relative flux calibration 

234: less than the photon noise on some relevant scale. For example, when we 

235: fit a flat

236: continuum level to a 50 pixel segment of a HIRES spectrum with signal to 

237: noise ratio of 100 per pixel, the photon noise on the continuum level is 0.14\%.

238: 

239: We found that is harder to approach a given accuracy in relative flux

240: calibration in many places.  These places include the regions

241: where echelle orders join, regions where spectra have lower signal to noise

242: ratio, 

243: wavelengths in the near UV, and in general as the wavelength range increases.  

244: It is very hard to get flux calibration errors of $<1$\% over 

245: even a wavelength range of $<40$~\AA\ within one HIRES order. 

246: Fortunately for our absorption line work, errors that vary

247: smoothly over wavelength scales $> 40$ \AA\ are not as serious as

248: smaller scale errors.

249: 

250: In this paper, we describe a way of calibrating the relative flux in a

251: HIRES spectrum using well calibrated reference spectra of the same

252: target to transfer flux information from other spectrographs to the

253: HIRES spectra.  We force each HIRES spectrum to have the shape of

254: these reference spectra.  This method should correct a variety of flux

255: calibration errors, both from variable vignetting and differences in

256: spectrum extraction and reduction.  The method could also be applied

257: to spectra from various spectrographs, and not just echelles.  This

258: method is based on that introduced by \citet*{burles97,burles98b}

259: %Burles \& Tytler (1997, 1998b),

260: and applied with improvements to \qfour\ in \citet{omeara01}.

261: %O'Meara \etal\ (2001),  and further refined for Q1243+3047 

262: %\citet{kirkman03}.

263: 

264: The paper is organized as follows: we first describe the nature of

265: inconsistencies between repeated HIRES observations of a target, and

266: how this impacts flux calibration.  Second, we describe the spectra we

267: used to illustrate our flux calibration method. Third, we describe at

268: first in overview, and then in detail, our methods for flux

269: calibration.  Fourth, we describe how we combine the HIRES orders that

270: we have flux calibrated individually. Finally, we discuss the accuracy

271: and errors of our method.

272: 

273: 

274: \section{Description of the HIRES flux calibration problem}

275: 

276: 

277: The usual methods of flux calibration appear inadequate when applied to

278: HIRES spectra.  When we determine the instrument response by observing

279: a spectrophotometric standard star, different exposures of the same

280: star give different instrument response functions, even when we

281: believe that the exposures were taken with the same instrument

282: configuration.  For example, in Figure \ref{X2}, we show the signal

283: extracted from two HIRES integrations of G191-B2B.  The exposures were

284: taken on consecutive nights, with similar instrument configurations.

285: On the second night the star was 0.07 degrees higher in the sky and

286: the image rotator (Appendix \ref{rotator}) physical angle differed by

287: 0.071 degrees to compensate for the change in parallactic angle.  The

288: spectra were both extracted with Tom Barlow's MAKEE software (April

289: 2001 version). We show the ``raw" ADU from the CCD before division by

290: the flat field integration or any other calibration.

291: 

292: The differences between the two exposures shown in Figure \ref{X2} are

293: large and unexpected.  In particular, even though the exposures were

294: taken on different nights, we did not expect to see large ($\sim

295: 10$\%) differences within a single order, even after the two exposures

296: were normalized to have the same mean flux in that order.

297: The differences are largest ($\sim$ 10\%) at the ends of the order.

298: Similar differences (both in shape and magnitude) are present in each

299: observed spectral order.  However, the form of the difference is not

300: precisely the same for each order, as demonstrated in Figure

301: \ref{X22c}.  \citet{barlow97} also noted the possibility of systematic

302: flux errors of 10\% near order overlaps.

303: 

304: Flux differences have also been reported for the Subaru telescope

305: HDS echelle spectrograph

306: that sometimes shows 10\% changes during observations \citep{aoki02}.

307: 

308: We have examined approximately 20 other pairs of standard star integrations 

309: from HIRES that have similar instrumental setups.

310: Most show differences of order 10\%, though the exact shape of the

311: differences is not always the same.  In addition to the ``U" shaped

312: ratios (seen in Figure \ref{X2}), we see three other shapes for

313: ratios: near flat ratios, tilted and ogive (or ``fallen S") shapes.  In

314: each case, the shapes of the ratios vary gradually order-to-order in a

315: systematic way, such that adjacent orders have similar shapes. The

316: shapes of the ratios vary much more between pairs of integrations than

317: they do from order-to-order for a given pair of integrations.

318: 

319: Approximately 30\% of integration pairs give flat ratios that indicate

320: that the instrumental response was very similar for the two

321: integrations, which should make flux calibration simple.  A cursory

322: examination did not show any predictors (e.g. telescope elevation,

323: rotator angle, position of target on the slit, seeing) as to which

324: pairs would be similar and which different.

325: 

326: In Figure \ref{X16}, we show HIRES integrations on two stars that we

327: flux calibrated in the usual manner, each using a response function

328: determined from a HIRES exposure of a standard star.

329: The spectra that we calibrated differ from the known flux levels by large

330: amounts over a wide range of wavelengths. The main deviations are

331: systematic across each HIRES order.  We also see large differences at

332: the order overlap wavelengths.  Different ways of combining spectral

333: orders leave different flux calibration errors. If we take the

334: mean of the signals then the flux will jump in a single pixel, by up

335: to 10\%, where each order begins and ends.  There will be

336: approximately 70 such jumps in a complete HIRES spectrum with 36

337: orders.

338: 

339: In the past, we have attempted to reduce the flux errors

340: by fitting continua to each order, and dividing by these continua,

341: before we take the mean flux in a wavelength overlap. This method is

342: unsatisfactory because it is very hard to ensure that the continua

343: that we fit to adjacent orders have both the same flux levels and the

344: same shapes, and we loose flux information.

345: 

346: For some unknown reason, long integrations on a QSO show

347: smaller differences than short integrations on a bright star. A dependence on

348: integration time might relate to some averaging, perhaps related to

349: the target position on the slit. A dependence on brightness might

350: relate to the 100 times lower signal in the QSO integrations, and

351: perhaps subsequent differences in the spectrum extraction.  We still

352: have difficulty flux calibrating QSO exposures, even though they

353: appear to be more stable than exposures on standard stars, because usual

354: procedures still require that we determine the instrument response from a

355: standard star exposure.

356: 

357: The variations we see in standard star exposures indicate that there

358: is some instability in either Keck+HIRES, in our data reduction

359: processes, or in both.  We have investigated two possible origins for the

360: instability: variable vignetting inside of HIRES, and inadequate the

361: extraction of the spectra. We do not see a clear signature of either

362: in our spectra, but we do know that the vignetting is expected to change.

363: 

364: We have explored the possibility of

365: extraction errors by varying the type of profile used during

366: extraction, and the profile width, but found no differences from the

367: standard extraction results from MAKEE.

368: We also measured flux ratios from the raw counts in the CCD images that were

369: similar to those in the spectra extracted by MAKEE.

370: 

371: We know that the vignetting inside HIRES changes with the position

372: angle of the sky image on the HIRES slit and with the telescope

373: elevation (Appendix \ref{rotator}).  

374: When the image rotator is used there are two main options.

375: We can use the image rotator in ``Vertical angle mode" to keep the

376: vertical angle along the slit, so that the position angle varies with

377: the position of the target in the sky.  The rotator can also be used

378: to keep a desired position angle along the slit.  If the rotator is

379: not used, the relevant angle is the telescope elevation.  The

380: variation in vignetting arises from a known mechanical and optical

381: misalignment between the Keck-I telescope and HIRES, and the expected

382: amount of change in the vignetting, from ray tracing kindly provided

383: by Steve Vogt, is approximately 10\%, consistent with our

384: observations.

385: 

386: We can account for why the ratios of HIRES spectra have similar shapes

387: across all orders if the variable vignetting happens after the

388: echelle, and before leaving the cross-disperser. In this part of HIRES

389: the light from the red end of each order is separated from that in the

390: blue end, but all orders are coincident. We might explain the shape of

391: the ratios, and the similarity from order-to-order, if a varying

392: amount of light misses the top and bottom of the cross-disperser (the

393: grooves are vertical), where the red and blue ends of the orders land.

394: This variation could arise when the cone of light from the telescope

395: tips up and down in the vertical plane that connects the center of the

396: tertiary mirror and the HIRES slit.

397: 

398: However, we suspect that vignetting is not the sole cause of the

399: variations in the flux, because we have seen variations in spectra

400: taken under apparently identical instrumental conditions (same

401: elevation, image rotator setting, and target location on the slit) on

402: consecutive nights, as we saw in Figure \ref{X2}.

403: 

404: The changes might also come from differences in the extraction of the

405: spectra from the CCD image, e.g. if we do not extract a fixed

406: proportion of the flux recorded at each wavelength.  Differences in

407: the extraction of spectra, including multiple integrations on a given

408: target, are likely whenever there

409: are changes in conditions, such as the location of the target along

410: the slit, the seeing, the sky brightness and the amount of signal

411: recorded.  However, extraction problems seem an unlikely explanation

412: for standard stars that have high signal to noise ratio.

413: 

414: 

415: 

416: \section{Spectra we will use to Illustrate our Method}

417: 

418: Here, we introduce the spectra that we will use to illustrate our

419: method of relative flux calibration. This is the set of spectra that

420: we used to measure D/H towards \qfive\ ($z_{em} = 2.64$, V=16.9;

421: Kirkman \etal\ 2003).  For our D/H work, we were mostly interested

422: the flux calibration in a 40~\AA\ region centered on the damped \lya\

423: line near 4285~\AA, and on the Lyman limit near 3210~\AA .  We began

424: the development of the methods using a similar set of spectra of

425: \qfour\ that we had used to make an earlier D/H measurement

426: \citep{omeara01}.

427: 

428: We used 5 spectra from the Kast spectrograph on the Lick 3-m

429: telescope, and one from the ESI echelle spectrograph on the Keck-II

430: telescope.  We used both the Kast and ESI spectra separately to make

431: independent flux calibrations of 8 integrations from HIRES.  Further

432: details of the observations, including the dates, the resolution, the

433: mean S/N, and plots of the spectra are in \citet{kirkman03}.  All

434: of the spectra that we used were shifted into the heliocentric frame,

435: and placed on a logarithmic wavelength scale with a constant velocity

436: increment per pixel, although with different increments for different

437: spectra.

438: 

439: \subsection{Spectra from Kast}

440: 

441: The Kast double spectrograph uses a

442: beam splitter to record blue and red spectra simultaneously in two

443: cameras.  For \qfive\ we have five KAST integrations, one from 1997,

444: and two each from 1999 and 2001. All integrations were obtained using

445: the d46 dichroic that splits the spectrum near 4600~\AA, the 830

446: line/mm grism blazed at 3460~\AA\ for the blue side, and the 1200

447: line/mm grating blazed at 5000~\AA\ for the red side.  We reduced all

448: exposures with the IRAF package {\tt longslit}.

449: 

450: \subsection{Spectra from ESI}

451: 

452: ESI covers from 3900 -- 11,000~\AA\ in ten

453: overlapping orders \citep{epps98,bigelow98,sheinis00}.

454: %(Epps \& Miller 1998; Bigelow \& Nelson 1998; Sheinis \etal\ 2000).

455: We have one exposure of \qfive\ using a 1'' slit, taken in the

456: echellette mode on January 11, 2000.  From the same night, we also

457: have an exposure of the flux standard star Feige 110.

458: 

459: \subsection{Spectra from HIRES}

460: 

461: Our HIRES spectra of \qfive\ all used similar instrumental setups.

462: The angle of the HIRES echelle was the same for all exposures, and

463: placed the center of each order near the center of the CCD. The

464: cross-disperser angle was also similar for all exposures, except for

465: one exposure that extended to much larger wavelengths.  The image

466: rotator (Appendix \ref{rotator}) was used in vertical mode, to

467: minimize slit losses from atmospheric dispersion.  We used the C5

468: decker, which provides an entrance aperture to the spectrograph with

469: dimensions $1.15^{''} \times 7.5^{''}$. In each case we placed the

470: target near the middle of the slit. The spectra were all recorded on

471: the engineering grade Tektronix CCD with 2048~$\times$~2048 pixels

472: that has been used in HIRES since 1994.

473: % but is to be replaced in 2003.

474: The HIRES pixel size is 2.1~\kms .

475: 

476: The CCD is large enough to record beyond the free spectral range for

477: all orders at wavelengths $< 5200$~\AA, and we placed the spectra on

478: the CCD such that we did record this flux for all such orders.  All

479: but one integration covered from near 3200\AA\ out to 4700\AA\ in

480: approximately 36 orders.  These integrations were 7200 -- 9000 seconds

481: long.  The S/N in each integration is near 3 per 2.1~\kms\ pixel near

482: the Lyman limit at $\sim$ 3200~\AA , and rises to near 35 at the peak of

483: the \lya\ emission line at $\sim$ 4400~\AA .

484: 

485: 

486: The HIRES spectra we use are the normal output from the MAKEE

487: software, which are the raw counts spectrum divided by spectra

488: extracted from flat field integrations.  In addition, the CCD defects

489: were marked with negative error values.  These spectra differ from the

490: raw counts that we discussed in the previous section in that the flat

491: field division has removed most of the variation across the orders due

492: to the blaze and vignetting. Although this flat field division may

493: introduce additional undesirable changes in the relative flux, we

494: proceed with these spectra because it is imperative that the CCD

495: defects have been removed.

496: 

497: \subsubsection{HIRES Spectral Resolution}

498: 

499: We measured the instrument resolution of HIRES by fitting Gaussian

500: functions to narrow, apparently un-blended lines in a single

501: Thorium-Argon arc integration taken before one of the QSO

502: integrations.  We fit hundreds of arc lines in all parts of the

503: spectrum, and found a dispersion of $\sigma = 3.4 \pm 0.1$~\kms, which

504: corresponds to a FWHM spectral resolution of $8.0 \pm 0.2$~\kms

505: ($b_{ins} = \sqrt{2}\sigma = 4.81 \pm 0.14$~\kms).  We did not detect

506: any variation in the resolution with wavelength.  However, we did

507: detect that the arc lines are not Gaussian in shape, with more

508: extended wings, such that the best fitting $\sigma$ increases when we

509: extend the fitting range around an individual line.  We also expect

510: that the spectra will have slightly different FWHM from the arc

511: spectra, because the illumination of the slit is different.

512: The wavelength shifts that we describe in the next section suggest that the

513: resolution will depend in part on the guiding and seeing.

514: 

515: \subsubsection{HIRES Wavelength Shifts}

516: \label{hireswave}

517: 

518: We measured wavelength shifts between the HIRES integrations and we

519: shifted the spectra onto the same scale to correct these shifts.  We

520: measured the cross-correlations between each of the 7 integrations

521: with the eighth that we used as the reference. An example of the

522: shifts is shown in

523: Figure \ref{X20a}. Comparisons of other pairs of integrations often

524: show a much larger dispersion in the measured shifts.  

525: In all cases, the shifts measured in each order are consistent with a

526: single shift for each integration.  The shifts had a standard

527: deviation of 0.7 \kms, which is 30\% of one HIRES CCD pixel.  Each

528: shift was measured to an accuracy of 0.13~\kms , which we determined

529: from the scatter in the shifts that we measured separately for each

530: order.

531: 

532: These shifts may arise from differences in the placement of the QSO

533: light in the HIRES slit, which projects to approximately 4 HIRES

534: pixels.  The 0.7 \kms\ rms shift is approximately 9\% of the FWHM

535: resolution, which itself is similar to the slit width.  The shifts do

536: not correlate with hour angle or the correction that was applied for 

537: the Earth's orbital motion ($<30$~\kms ) and spin ($<0.4$~\kms ).  The

538: shifts are

539: also larger than we expect from wavelength scale errors.  However, we

540: did find much larger wavelength scale errors when we did not 

541: ensure that MAKEE used enough arc lines to determine the dispersion

542: solution for each order.

543: 

544: \section{Overview of the Method}

545: 

546: There are three main steps in our procedure to apply relative flux

547: calibration to HIRES spectra.

548: 

549: \begin{itemize}

550: \item Step 1: Flux calibrate a high quality reference spectrum of

551:       the target.  

552: \item Step 2: Flux calibrate the HIRES echelle orders with the

553:       reference spectrum.  This imposes the long scale ($> 10$ \AA)

554:       spectral shape of the reference spectrum upon each HIRES echelle

555:       order.  The flux information on smaller scales (e.g. absorption

556:       line profiles) still comes from HIRES.

557: \item Step 3: Combine the HIRES orders. We first sum the integrations

558:       and then join the orders to give one continuous spectrum.

559: \end{itemize}

560: 

561: These procedures do not replace standard CCD spectrum extraction

562: procedures. Rather, they should be thought of as a ``software patch",

563: applied to correct errors that remain after the spectra have been

564: extracted, and perhaps calibrated, in the usual way.  Reasonably well

565: calibrated HIRES spectra are required as inputs to our method, because

566: the flux information on scales $< 10$ \AA\ will still come directly

567: from the HIRES spectra.  The procedure

568: is not unique, and we expect that other sequences might be appropriate

569: for different spectra.

570: 

571: We now discuss in further detail each of the steps outlined above.

572: 

573: \section{Step 1: Flux Calibrating the Reference Spectra of the Target}

574: 

575: Since we can not transfer information about the instrument response

576: between exposures, we must ``self-calibrate'' each exposure we take

577: with HIRES.  The first step of our method is thus to obtain a well

578: calibrated spectrum of the target.  The reference spectrum must

579: come from a well calibrated and stable spectrograph.  In our work on

580: Q1243+3047, we obtained reference spectra from both Lick+KAST and

581: Keck+ESI, and compared them to gauge the accuracy of the final flux

582: calibration.

583: 

584: \subsection{Flux Calibration of Kast Spectra}

585: 

586: To calibrate the flux in our Kast spectra of \qfive , we took flux

587: information from a model spectrum of G191~B2B for the 1997 spectrum,

588: and a STIS spectrum of BD~28~4211 for the 1999 and 2001 exposures.  We

589: discuss the reasons behind our choice of these standard stars in

590: Appendix A.  We measured and matched the resolution of the observed

591: and reference spectra of the standard stars before we used them to

592: calculate the Kast response function.  The dip in the response at the

593: end of blue CCD and the beginning of red the CCD is due to the

594: changing efficiency of the beam splitter.  In Figure \ref{X9}, we

595: illustrate the flux calibration process.

596: 

597: The spectrum shows atmospheric ozone absorption lines

598: \citep{schachter91} as the wiggles of the raw CCD counts (panel b)

599: below 3400~\AA .  Their strength depends on the temperature of the

600: ozone layer and the effective airmass of the integration, and we have

601: not made appropriate adjustments.  We left the wiggles un-smoothed in

602: the response (Figure \ref{X9}, panel d) to help partially remove their

603: effect from the quasar spectrum.

604: 

605: In Figure \ref{X23}, we show the accuracy of the flux calibration of a

606: Kast spectrum of another star.  The flux residuals between our

607: calibrated KAST spectrum and a STIS spectrum of the same star are less

608: than 3\%.

609: 

610: \subsection{Flux Calibration of ESI Spectrum}

611: 

612: We flux calibrate ESI spectra in the same way we do those from Kast.

613: In Figure \ref{X10}, we show the steps in the flux calibration of an

614: ESI spectrum. The ESI orders overlap in wavelength, and in Figure

615: \ref{X6}, we see that the orders do not always have the same flux.

616: These differences increase in size as we approach the end of an order.

617: We have not investigated the origin of these flux differences. We cut

618: off most of the regions where the differences exceeds 2\% (which is

619: the noise level in our spectrum) without leaving any gaps in the

620: wavelength coverage.  We do not know the size of the remaining error,

621: especially in regions where there was no wavelength overlap, because

622: we do not have redundant observations of bright stars.  Nonetheless,

623: the ESI spectra could have better relative flux calibration than HIRES

624: spectra, for several reasons. ESI has fewer orders, each of which

625: covers more wavelength range and a much larger portion of each order

626: is sampled by adjacent orders.  ESI has a fixed instrumental

627: configuration and our ESI spectra have much higher S/N than our

628: individual HIRES integrations, which may change the proportion of the

629: flux that is extracted.

630: 

631: \subsection{Errors in the Reference Spectra}

632: 

633: The errors in the relative flux calibration of the reference spectrum are a

634: fundamental limitation on how well we can apply relative flux

635: calibration to the HIRES spectrum. One way to explore these errors is

636: to compare different reference spectra.  

637: We will see that the differences increase with wavelength range and they

638: are the main source of error in our calibration of our HIRES spectra of 

639: \qfive .

640: 

641: We found that the 5 Kast spectra show two types of shape.  The two

642: from 1999 are similar, as are the two from 2001.  

643: %Figure \ref{k01ab} shows the ratio of the two from 2001. 

644: We call the sum of the two flux

645: calibrated spectra from 1999 K99, and the two from 2001 K01.  KSUM 

646: is our name for the sum of all five spectra.  The 1997 spectrum is

647: similar to K01, but has much lower S/N.

648: 

649: These two groups, K99 and K01, differ in shape on the largest scales

650: across the whole \lyaf , but they do have very similar shapes across a

651: few hundred Angstroms after we normalize them to each other at

652: those wavelengths.  These differences are best seen when we smooth 

653: them slightly by

654: differing amounts to reduce differences in the spectral resolution.

655: The K01 spectra have up to 10\% systematically higher flux at

656: wavelengths $<3400$~\AA\ than do the K99 spectra.  The K01 spectra had

657: a few percent lower flux from 4000 -- 4300~\AA\ and higher flux across

658: the \lya\ emission line.  We do not know the origin of these

659: differences.  Possible origins include variation in atmospheric

660: extinction \citep{burki95} or a variation in the QSO.

661: 

662: We find that the ESI spectra differed from the various Kast spectra by

663: typically 2\% or less per Kast pixel, from 4100 -- 4400~\AA .

664: The differences correlate over a few Kast pixels in the \lyaf ,

665: with no large scale trends, except that to the red side of the \lya\ emission

666: line the ratio of the Kast to ESI flux increases by

667: approximately 5\% from 4300 -- 4400~\AA\ for all five Kast spectra.

668: 

669: \section{Step 2: Flux Calibrating HIRES Echelle Orders with a Reference Spectrum}

670: 

671: We calibrated the relative flux in a HIRES spectrum using a calibrated

672: reference spectrum from either Kast or ESI.  We divided a smoothed

673: version of the HIRES spectrum by the reference spectrum to find the

674: ``Conversion Ratio" spectrum.  We found that the smoothed HIRES

675: spectrum and the reference had to have the same wavelength scale and

676: resolution, because the \lyaf\ absorption lines cause the flux to vary

677: rapidly in wavelength.  We calibrated the individual orders of each

678: HIRES integration using a smooth function fitted to the conversion

679: ratio spectra, one for each order of each integration.

680: 

681: In Figure \ref{X17},

682: % figure9=X17

683: we illustrate the calibration of the relative flux in the HIRES orders

684: that we describe in the following five sub-sections.

685: 

686: \subsection{Wavelength Matching}

687: Because the wavelengths from HIRES are more accurate,

688: we shifted the Kast spectra onto the HIRES wavelength scale.

689: We measured the shifts by cross-correlation of

690: complete HIRES orders, and we confirmed the values by cross-correlating

691: individual strong lines in the \lyaf .

692: 

693: Some of the wavelength shifts may arise because the QSO was not

694: exactly centered in the slit. This is a reasonable explanation for the

695: typical shift which was 42~\kms , or 0.4 Kast pixels, only 

696: 17\% of the projected width of a 2 arcsecond wide slit.

697: These shifts should vary monotonically

698: along a spectrum, and some Kast spectra show this.  However, Figure

699: \ref{X11} shows that other spectra have more complex wavelength

700: shifts.  In such cases we measured the mean shift for each HIRES

701: order, and we fit a low order polynomial to these mean values, similar

702: to that used to fit the arc line wavelengths, to give a smoothly

703: changing wavelength scale without gaps or discontinuities.

704: 

705: We also placed the ESI spectra on the HIRES wavelength scale.  

706: This wavelength scale assignment was obtained by first smoothing 

707: the HIRES spectra to the approximate spectral

708: resolution of ESI, and then finding the velocity

709: shift by cross-correlation of the ESI with the HIRES integration.  

710: %\NB{orders 85,

711: %84, 83 and 80.  makee orders 28, 29, 30 and 33.} 

712: We shifted the complete ESI spectrum by +5.61 \kms , which is

713: 7.5\% of the projected 1 arcsec slit width.  As with

714: the Kast spectra, this shift is larger than we would expect from the

715: wavelength fits to the arc calibration lines and may arise

716: because the QSO was not exactly centered in the slit.

717: 

718: %\NB{Hires order shifts were above}

719: 

720: \subsection{Resolution Matching}

721: 

722: We smooth the HIRES spectrum to match the resolution of the Kast

723: spectrum.  This procedure is sensitive to wavelength shifts between

724: the two spectra, and hence it was done after the wavelength scales

725: were matched.  In contrast, the wavelength scale matching is

726: insensitive to the spectral resolution.  We smoothed the HIRES

727: spectrum, and sampled it in the wavelength bins of the Kast spectrum.

728: We smoothed with a Gaussian function of known FWHM, truncated at

729: $2\sigma$, and normalized to unit area.  We smoothed by different FWHM

730: to find the amount of smoothing that left the smallest residuals

731: between the smoothed HIRES and Kast spectra.  These residuals appeared

732: flat across strong absorption lines, which suggests that a Gaussian is

733: an adequate approximation to the line spread function of the Kast

734: spectrum.  As with the wavelength matching, the \lyaf\ provides

735: additional signal for resolution matching.

736: 

737: The Kast spectral resolution varies from spectrum to spectrum, and it

738: can vary with wavelength in a spectrum, depending on where we chose to

739: focus.  We took the Kast resolution to be the FWHM of the smoothing

740: applied to the HIRES, after subtracting the initial HIRES 8~\kms\ FWHM

741: in quadrature.  For example, in the 1999 spectra of \qfive , the FWHM

742: of the Kast spectrum is near 300~\kms\ near 3300~\AA\ and from 3800 --

743: 4300~\AA\ but it improves to 220~\kms\ near 3500~\AA , where the

744: measurement error is approximately 10 -- 30~\kms , depending on the

745: region of the \lyaf .  We smoothed the HIRES spectrum by a single mean

746: FWHM even when the resolution varied along the Kast spectrum.  Using

747: similar methods we found that the ESI spectrum had a FWHM of 63.2

748: $\pm$ 3.0 \kms .

749: 

750: \subsection{Calculating the Conversion Ratio}

751: 

752: We divide the smoothed HIRES spectrum by the Kast spectrum, to obtain

753: the ``conversion ratio" (CR) spectrum.  The \lyaf\ hinders our

754: calculation of the CR, because we are very sensitive to slight

755: remaining errors in the wavelengths and the resolution.  

756: When we calculate the CR, we weight the flux in the individual spectra

757: by their errors, and we assign an error to each pixel in the CR.

758: %\NS{NS wants to add equation here because complex}

759: It is common to see increased error in the CR near strong

760: absorption lines (e.g. near 4285~\AA\ in panel (e) of Figure \ref{X17}), but 

761: this error does not have a systematic shape when

762: the wavelengths and resolution are well matched.

763: 

764: 

765: \subsection{Smoothing the Conversion Ratio}

766: 

767: We fit the CR spectra to obtain a smoothly changing function. The

768: original CR spectra vary from pixel to pixel because of photon

769: noise in the reference and HIRES spectra, especially in strong

770: absorption lines.  These variations can be much larger than the

771: expected change in the flux calibration and hence we can improve the

772: flux calibration by interpolating. We explored various ways of

773: smoothing and fitting, some in one dimension, along each order

774: separately, and others in two dimensions, both along and between

775: adjacent orders. The best choice will increase the S/N in the CR as

776: much as possible without changing the structure.

777: 

778: We found that a 4th order Chebyshev polynomial fit to the CR spectrum

779: for each HIRES order was a good choice. We choose this order by trial

780: and error. It leaves enough freedom to fit the shapes of the CR and

781: give a reduced $\chi ^2 \simeq 1$. Other fits would be appropriate in

782: spectra with different amount of structure and S/N.  In Figure

783: \ref{X21b}, we show the CR spectra for many HIRES orders.  We see

784: that the CR spectra for adjacent orders are very similar in shape, but

785: change systematically as we move across many orders. We also found

786: that the changes in shape from order-to-order are larger than

787: those between integrations for a given order, except for the effects of

788: photon noise in the CR.

789: 

790: We calculate the CR twice, in an iterative fashion, to improve the accuracy

791: near the ends of the HIRES orders. The first time, we stop the calculation 

792: before the order ends, where the filter, which we use to smooth the HIRES

793: spectrum to the resolution of the reference spectrum,

794: just touches the last pixel in the order. We can not, at that time, calculate 

795: the CR for the remaining pixels because we do not know the flux from beyond the

796: end of the order.

797: This flux is needed when we smooth the HIRES spectrum to match the reference 

798: spectrum. 

799: We do, however, allow the fit to the CR to extrapolate to the end of the order,

800: and we use that extrapolation to make the first estimate of the flux 

801: calibration. When we calculate the CR the second time, we 

802: know the HIRES flux from beyond the end of the order, because we have already

803: calibrated the whole HIRES spectrum.

804: 

805: An example of the type of error that can occur in the CR at order ends

806: is shown in Figure \ref{X21f}. In middle panel on the left, the

807: CR is erroneously low in the first two pixels at the start of order 98.

808: Here we calculated the CR once only, and we ignored the flux from beyond the

809: end of the order, where there happens to be a \lyb\ absorption line.

810: This absorption line lowers the flux in the reference spectrum, but not in

811: the HIRES spectrum for that order.

812: 

813: The error in the relative flux calibration of a HIRES integration

814: depends in part on the S/N in that HIRES integration. The conversion

815: ratios in Figure \ref{X21f} are for a second integration of \qfive\ that

816: can be compared to the integration shown in Figure \ref{X21b}.  The

817: two integrations were calibrated using the same Kast spectrum, and

818: hence the differences are caused by noise in the HIRES integration,

819: especially at the shortest wavelengths.

820: 

821: We experimented with other ways of smoothing the CR to reduce the

822: effects of photon noise. The 4th order polynomials smooth in

823: wavelength along an order, but they do not use any information from

824: adjacent orders.  We made a 2-dimensional map of the CR in the

825: coordinate frame of the HIRES CCD detector, and we smoothed this map

826: in both dimensions, both using a Gaussian filter and independently by

827: fitting a 2D surface using Chebyshev polynomials.  The Gaussian filter

828: did not work well because the largest width that did not change the

829: shape of the CR surface had a $4 \sigma $ width of only 3 orders, not

830: enough to reduce the noise significantly.  In Figure \ref{twodfit}, we

831: show a surface fit that was an improvement over the 1D polynomial

832: fits, but we did not use this in \citet{kirkman03}.

833: 

834: The error in the CR depends on the S/N in each CR pixel, and on the

835: fitting or smoothing that we use. The error will correlate on the

836: smoothing scale. When we apply a 4th order polynomial to each

837: order of 40~\AA, (the correlation length is approximately 10~\AA) and

838: this can be seen when we compare Figures \ref{X21b} \& \ref{X21f}.

839: There are also strong correlations in the CR near the ends of orders,

840: and near strong absorption where the errors are largest.

841: 

842: The contribution to the error in the CR from the S/N in the reference

843: or HIRES spectra can be estimated from the number of pixels in the

844: correlation length.  There are approximately 34

845: pixels in a Kast spectrum per HIRES order, and hence 

846: 8.5 per correlation length. An individual

847: Kast spectrum of \qfive\ has S/N 60 per pixel near 4250~\AA\ and 20

848: near 3250~\AA.  The CR will then have errors of at least 0.6\%

849: near 4250~\AA\ and 1.7\% near 3250~\AA.

850: 

851: \subsection{Applying the Conversion Ratio}

852: 

853: We divide the original HIRES integration, with full spectral

854: resolution and pixels, by the 1D fits to the CR to obtain the desired

855: flux calibrated HIRES spectrum.  Since we have not merged the orders,

856: the wavelength overlaps remain.  The resulting HIRES integration now

857: has relative flux calibration on each order.

858: 

859: 

860: \section{Step 3: Combine the HIRES Orders}

861: 

862: The final step is to combine the fluxed HIRES orders into a single

863: spectrum.  We add the HIRES integrations that have very similar

864: wavelength coverage, order by order, and then merge the orders. We choose

865: this sequence because it facilitates checks of the relative flux

866: calibration.  We compare the flux in each order in multiple

867: integrations before we sum the integrations. After they are summed,

868: the enhanced S/N makes it easier to see errors in the flux

869: calibration in the wavelength overlap between orders.

870: 

871: First, we place all orders from all HIRES integrations on a single

872: wavelength scale, so that pixels from orders that overlap in

873: wavelength sample exactly the same wavelengths.  We choose a scale

874: with a constant velocity increment of 2.1 \kms\ per pixel, equivalent

875: to constant log wavelength increment.  This choice has two advantages

876: over constant wavelength: in velocity units, the spectral resolution

877: of the echelle does not vary significantly with wavelength, and we use

878: velocity units to describe the widths of absorption line systems.

879: 

880: We simultaneously correct errors in the wavelength scales, using

881: information from the cross-correlation of different integrations as

882: discussed in (\S \ref{hireswave}). We do this correction

883: at the same time because we want to re-bin the HIRES spectra only once.

884: 

885: We calculate the mean flux in each pixel, from all integrations, after

886: rejecting large deviations that we identify by evaluating the $\chi

887: ^2$ statistic for each pixel.  We ignore the flux in a pixel from an

888: individual integration if it is $> m\sigma _i$ away from the weighted

889: mean for all integrations, where $\sigma _i $ are the errors on the

890: fluxes in the individual integrations.  The value of $m$ was

891: determined iteratively to remove most pixels with conspicuously

892: deviant flux values. For \qfive , we use $m=2$.  The algorithm

893: iterates, and re-derives the $\chi ^2$ after rejecting the flux value

894: from one integration. If all integrations are $> m \sigma$ away from

895: the weighted mean, we examine the errors.  If the errors in some of

896: the integrations have data, shown by non-zero errors returned by

897: MAKEE, we use the flux from the integration with the smallest error as

898: the mean.  If, however, there is no data in a particular pixel, for

899: example because of a known CCD defect, then we use the weighted mean

900: of the two pixels on either side, again using only those integrations

901: that are within $m \sigma$ of the weighted mean for that wavelength.

902: If none of the above criterion are met, we use the average of the

903: fluxes in all integrations.

904: 

905: Finally, we verify that adjacent orders show similar flux levels where

906: they overlap, and we used a weighted mean to combine the orders in

907: these regions, producing a single flux calibrated spectrum.  In Figure

908: \ref{f344thord}, we show order overlap for spectra of star Feige

909: 34. This spectrum can be compared to the spectra in Figures 

910: \ref{X16} that show

911: the flux calibration using usual methods. The ratio of the flux in

912: adjacent orders shows most variation near 3250~\AA\ : 0.92 -- 1.08\%,

913: and decreases to 0.98 -- 1.02 near 4300~\AA , where the signal to

914: noise ratio is highest in the Kast spectrum that we used as a reference.

915: The calibration of Feige 34 used the method and algorithm that we

916: developed and applied to our spectra of \qfive , with a few

917: exceptions.  The star does not have \lyaf\ lines, and hence we matched

918: the wavelength scale of the Kast and HIRES spectra using a single

919: shift for the whole Kast spectrum. We fitted the CR with one 4th order

920: polynomial per order.  A 6th order fit would work better near

921: 4300~\AA\ where the signal to noise ratio is high.

922: 

923: We consistently found, from many spectra, that the remaining difference 

924: between between the orders was 

925: largest at the end of an order, where the CR is less well known. Hence,

926: we tapered the flux from each order using a weighting function that

927: declined linearly from one, where the overlap begins, to zero, where the order

928: ends.

929: 

930: \section{Comparison of Spectra of \qfive\ Calibrated with Different 

931: Reference Spectra}

932: 

933: We made several different calibrations of the HIRES spectra of \qfive\ using

934: different low resolution spectra to convey the flux information.  We

935: label these HIRES spectra by the spectra that we used for

936: the flux calibration: hence, HK99 is the HIRES spectrum of \qfive\

937: calibrated using the Kast K99 spectrum of \qfive, HKSUM was calibrated

938: using the mean of all five Kast spectra and HESI was calibrated using the

939: ESI spectrum of \qfive .

940: 

941: We also made a spectrum, HH, which we calibrated using a HIRES spectrum

942: of a standard star. This HH calibration is not typical of the accuracy that 

943: we usually obtain, but rather it is the best that we could obtain with our

944: spectra. We made many calibrations using different HIRES integrations of 

945: standard stars, and we show the calibration that had the smoothest order 

946: joins. This HH calibration contrasts with the calibrations of the stars that

947: we showed in Fig. \ref{X16} that did not work as well.

948: 

949: In Figure \ref{X15}, we show the ratios of HIRES spectra calibrated in

950: these different ways.  The top panel shows HK99 spectra divided by

951: HESI.  There is a 7\% difference across the wavelength region shown.

952: The HK01 differs from HESI by 5\% at most, while the HKSUM

953: calibration differs from HESI by 4\%. The calibrations HH and HESI

954: differ the least -- only 3\% -- but show the largest jumps at order

955: joins, e.g. near 4325~\AA .  

956: The four gray bands of Figure \ref{X15} show the wavelength 

957: overlaps between the HIRES

958: orders. We show three complete orders and two partial ones.

959: 

960: We show the wavelength region centered on the

961: strong \lya\ lines that we have use to measure the H~I column density

962: that contributes to a D/H measurement. This \lya\ line has damping

963: wings that absorb approximately 1\% of the flux near 4233 and

964: 4340~\AA\ and hence accurate flux calibration of this region helps us

965: measure the column density, although most information comes from

966: 20~\AA\ on either side of the line center.

967: 

968: The differences between the calibrations have three origins.

969: The largest differences, which are on the largest scales, 

970: come from the differences between the K99, K01 and ESI spectra. 

971: Other differences, especially near the order joins, are related to the 

972: fitting of the CR, and are sensitive to the signal to noise ratio in the Kast 

973: and ESI spectra. A third type of difference occurs from pixel to pixel,

974: and comes from the rejection of deviant pixels from among the 8 HIRES 

975: integrations. The CR fits are smooth curves,

976: and the ratios would also be smooth were it not for differences in the

977: pixels which are rejected when we took the sum of the 8 integrations.

978: The numerous small 1 -- 2\% deviations arise when a pixel is not used

979: from one integration or another. The size of these deviations is

980: given by the signal to noise ratio of the individual integrations. 

981: The noise increases

982: in the strong absorption lines where we are dividing two HIRES

983: spectra, each of which has low signal to noise noise. 

984: Trends that are seen in more than one panel may come from differences

985: of the ESI spectrum from the others.  

986: 

987: We do not know which of the spectra is the more accurate.  

988: All of the spectra used in Figure \ref{X15} were calibrated with CR spectra 

989: that were fit order by order. We found that the 2-dimensional fits to the CR,

990: like that shown in Figure \ref{twodfit}, slightly reduced the deviations 

991: near the order joins.

992: 

993: 

994: \section{Discussion of the Accuracy of the Flux Calibration}

995: 

996: Many factors contribute to the errors in the relative flux calibration,

997: including:

998: \begin{itemize}

999: \item Errors in the flux reported for the standard star.

1000: \item Errors in our spectra of the standard star and reference. Common

1001: error sources include

1002: extinction and absorption in the Earth's atmosphere, slit losses that depend 

1003: on wavelength, a dichroic in the 

1004: spectrograph, variation of the target, variation with wavelength of

1005: the proportion of the flux extracted, and the S/N of the spectra.

1006: \item Errors calculating the response function that we use to calibrate the

1007: reference spectrum. 

1008: Errors occur matching the resolution and wavelength scales of our spectrum of 

1009: the standard to the published flux information.

1010: Such errors are especially conspicuous near absorption lines in the standard.

1011: \item Errors in the preparation of the HIRES spectrum, including

1012: the bias subtraction, flat field division and extraction.

1013: \item Errors applying the flux calibration to HIRES spectrum, including

1014: wavelength shifts, resolution differences, the signal to noise ratio of the HIRES 

1015: spectrum and fitting the CR.

1016: \end{itemize}

1017: We have found that many of these factors can produce 1 -- 10\% errors in flux

1018: calibration, but it is difficult to assign typical values for these errors.

1019: 

1020: The size of the error in the relative flux calibration depends on the

1021: wavelength and the wavelength range.  We do not include errors from the CR

1022: in the usual error array because the CR errors are 

1023: correlated over many pixels.

1024: In this paper we have concentrated on scales of a few orders, or 

1025: approximately 120~\AA\ that are most relevant to our work on D/H. We

1026: have paid much less attention to the relative flux calibration on larger scales

1027: that are dominated by a different set of factors, such as the extinction

1028: at the time of observation.  We expect errors due to extinction to

1029: monotonically increase with scale in our reference spectrum.

1030: 

1031: An indication of the accuracy we have attained in relative flux

1032: calibration is given in Figure \ref{f344thord}. We compare three 

1033: spectra of the flux standard star Feige 34: a HIRES spectrum that we

1034: flux calibrated using a Kast spectrum as the reference, the Kast

1035: reference spectrum, and STIS a spectrum.

1036: The Kast and STIS spectra are those shown in Figure \ref{X23}.

1037: The STIS spectrum was not used in the calibration, except to provide the

1038: normalization of the Kast spectrum across the range 3200 -- 4450~\AA .

1039: We used a one-dimensional 4th order polynomial to fit the CR.

1040: In the wavelength region shown, the HIRES spectrum differs from 

1041: its reference by at most 2.5\%, except near the absorption line,

1042: and typically $<1$\%. 

1043: At wavelengths 3400 -- 3800~\AA , where the signal to noise ratio is lower, the

1044: differences are twice as large.  

1045: The differences correlate on scales $> 5$~\AA .

1046: The flux in different HIRES orders joins smoothly, with no unusual structure.

1047: The remaining differences of the HIRES and STIS spectra come from the

1048: deviation of the Kast spectrum from the STIS, shown in Figure \ref{f344thord}.

1049: This comparison demonstrates that the method can give errors of

1050: $<1$\% in the relative flux over approximately 200~\AA .  

1051: For Feige 34 the accuracy of the flux calibration was limited by the 

1052: accuracy of the reference, and not by the method itself.

1053: \section{SUMMARY}

1054: 

1055: 

1056: We found that the distribution of the signal recorded in HIRES

1057: integrations differs from integration to integration. We 

1058: do not have a complete explanation for this behavior, although

1059: varying vignetting and inadequate extraction may be involved.

1060: We found that these differences persist

1061: even when the instrument is apparently unchanged. These changes mean

1062: that the usual methods of flux calibration are inadequate.

1063: 

1064: The methods we have described for applying relative flux calibration

1065: to a HIRES spectrum use three spectra: the HIRES spectrum of the target that

1066: we wish to calibrate, and Kast spectra of both the target and a flux standard

1067: star. We use the latter to get the Kast response and calibrate the

1068: Kast spectrum of the target that we name the reference spectrum.  We use 

1069: reference spectrum to impose flux calibration on the HIRES target spectrum.

1070: 

1071: This has method has three advantages. First, we

1072: can calibrate HIRES when normal calibrations using standard stars

1073: observed with HIRES alone are inadequate.  Second, we can correct many

1074: types of error in the HIRES spectrum, including those from varying

1075: vignetting and inadequate extraction.  Finally, we can obtain all the

1076: calibration spectra at a different time and on a different telescope.

1077: 

1078: The error in relative flux calibration, and the solution that we

1079: describe, could apply to any spectrum with inadequate relative flux

1080: calibration, whether from an unstable spectrograph or from inadequate

1081: extraction. Vignetting could vary in any spectrograph that was unstable.

1082: Instability could involve an optical misalignment, as with HIRES.

1083: Variable vignetting would be harder to recognize in a

1084: first order spectrum because we expect the largest changes near the

1085: largest field angles, but there is only one spectrum to show this

1086: change, and

1087: flux calibration is often harder near the ends of a single spectrum, for other

1088: reasons.

1089: 

1090: 

1091: \section{Acknowledgments}

1092: 

1093: This work was funded in part by grant NAG5-9224 and by NSF grant

1094: AST-9900842 and AST-0098731.  The spectra were obtained from the Lick

1095: and the W.M. Keck observatories. The W.M. Keck observatory is managed by a

1096: partnership among the University of California, Caltech and NASA.  We

1097: are grateful to Steve Vogt, the PI for the Keck HIRES instrument that

1098: enabled our work on D/H, for many invaluable discussions, along with

1099: Tom Barlow, who developed the MAKEE extraction software package.  We also

1100: thank Wako Aoki and Kunio Noguchi for discussions of the HDS echelle 

1101: spectrograph, and the W.M. Keck Observatory staff and the Lick Observatory 

1102: staff.

1103: 

1104: \appendix

1105: 

1106: \section{Appendix A: Choice of Standard Star}

1107: \label{appa}

1108: 

1109: We used the calibrations of the flux in stars based on

1110: STIS spectra \citep*{bohlin01}.

1111: In Figure \ref{X4} we see that the STIS spectra do not show the

1112: wiggles at 3200-3850~\AA\ that are present in the \citet*{oke90}

1113: spectrum of G191 B2B. This and other Oke spectra are

1114: widely used by default in the reduction packages IRAF and MIDAS.

1115: The differences between the \citet*{oke90}

1116: and STIS spectra can reach several 

1117: percent, larger than our random photon noise. Based on the lack of 

1118: features in the spectrum and the STIS data quality,

1119: we preferred the following stars for UV flux calibration near 3200~\AA :

1120: G191 B2B, BD+28 4211, Feige~110, and Feige~34. 

1121: For G191 B2B we have the additional choice of using a model spectrum 

1122: given by \citet{bohlin01}. This model spectrum fits

1123: their STIS spectra to within 0.7~\% in the continuum \citep*{bohlin00}, and

1124: it simplifies flux calibration because it has full resolution.

1125: 

1126: We used the entire STIS spectrum for flux calibration,

1127: including the broad Balmer absorption lines.  

1128: The \citet*{oke90}

1129: paper provides AB magnitudes at discrete continuum 

1130: points in 5-50~\AA\ intervals. These points skip the Balmer absorption lines,

1131: but we can not do this, because we then have insufficient information to

1132: calibrate several echelle orders, each of which is only 30-60~\AA\ long.

1133: 

1134: Our use of the flux calibration information near the Balmer lines can help us

1135: avoid significant errors.

1136: In Figure \ref{X5} we show a spectrum from ESI echellette order 15 that has its 

1137: sensitivity peak around 4350~\AA\ that coincides with Balmer $\gamma $ line, 

1138: 4341.68~\AA .  \qfive\ \citep{kirkman03} happens to have its \lya\ 

1139: emission at 4330~\AA . In an early flux calibration of this order, poor 

1140: interpolation across this Balmer line had led

1141: us to make an 8\% calibration error that was three times the random error.

1142: 

1143: 

1144: \section{Appendix B: HIRES Image Rotator}

1145: \label{rotator}

1146: 

1147: The vignetting in HIRES depends on whether or not the image rotator is

1148: used, and on the mode in which the rotator is used.

1149: 

1150: HIRES is fixed to the Nasmyth platform of the Keck-I telescope with its

1151: slit approximately parallel to the horizon.

1152: When we look at the image of the sky on the HIRES slit, we see that the

1153: vertical direction in this

1154: image rotates at a rate given by the elevation (EL) of the telescope.

1155: This is because telescope is rotating in EL 

1156: while HIRES is fixed.

1157: If the telescope is pointing at the horizon, and looking at an 

1158: arrow in the sky that is pointing towards the zenith, the image of 

1159: this arrow on the slit plane is also pointing towards the vertical, 

1160: which is perpendicular to the length of the slit.

1161: As the telescope moves to higher EL, the arrow rotates until it is 

1162: aligned along the slit when the telescope is pointing to the zenith.

1163: 

1164: The HIRES image rotator allows us to rotate the image of the sky on the

1165: slit plane in any way we like.

1166: We installed an image rotator in HIRES in late 1996. This is a large

1167: quartz prism that sits in front of the HIRES slit. The light from the

1168: Keck-I telescope tertiary mirror 

1169: undergoes three total internal reflections in the prism before 

1170: coming to a focus on the slit plane. 

1171: The prism can rotate continuously in either direction

1172: about the axis of the beam that converges on the center of the slit.

1173: The prism is aligned so that the image of a star on the center of the

1174: slit moves by under 0.5 arc seconds when the prism is moved in or

1175: out of the beam, and when the prism is rotated. The prism can be 

1176: spun rapidly to demonstrate this alignment. The prism does not

1177: vignette any of the beam that lands within 60 arc seconds of 

1178: the center of the slit.

1179: 

1180: The image rotator has two main modes of operation: Position Angle and

1181: Vertical Angle. The position angle mode is used when we wish to keep two

1182: stars in the slit, where as the vertical angle mode is used to keep the

1183: vertical direction in the sky parallel with the slit, as a surrogate for

1184: an atmospheric dispersion compensator. 

1185: When the image rotator was used in Vertical mode, the position angle along 

1186: the slit is the parallactic angle, and this varies as we track a target.

1187: The parallactic angle is measured at the target, from the North Celestial 

1188: Pole to the Zenith, in the direction from North via East. 

1189: The parallactic angle is fixed for a given elevation and azimuth 

1190: in the sky, but it changes when we track a target across the sky.

1191: 

1192: HIRES spectra are hard to flux calibrate in part because the 

1193: vignetting can change by 10\% from spectrum to spectrum.

1194: The vignetting changes because there is a known misalignment 

1195: between the beam coming from tertiary mirror and the HIRES optical axis.

1196: When HIRES was installed, the center of the Keck telescope pupil 

1197: was measured

1198: to be approximately 9~mm away from the collimator center, which

1199: corresponds to a beam misalignment of 7.4 arcminute. 

1200: If a star is held at one position on the HIRES slit, the axis of 

1201: the beam entering HIRES will rotate around the HIRES optical 

1202: axis at a rate given by any change in the position angle of the 

1203: sky image on the slit. If the position angle moves through 360 

1204: degrees, the axis of the beam entering HIRES

1205: follows the surface of a cone with an apex angle of 

1206: approximately 14.8 arcminutes.

1207: Steve Vogt used ray tracing to find that this rotation causes 

1208: the vignetting to vary by approximately 10\%, depending on the angle.

1209: %The vignetting occurs at the focal plane in the Schmidt camera, 

1210: %with some from the cross-disperser at certain wavelengths and 

1211: %field angles.

1212: The vignetting occurs due to a dewar which forms a central obstruction

1213: in the beam near the camera's prime focus.

1214: 

1215: \begin{thebibliography}{25}

1216: \expandafter\ifx\csname natexlab\endcsname\relax\def\natexlab#1{#1}\fi

1217: 

1218: \bibitem[{{Aoki}(2002)}]{aoki02}

1219: {Aoki}, W. 2002,

1220:   http://www.subarutelescope.org/Observing/Instruments/HDS/index.html

1221: 

1222: \bibitem[{{Barlow} \& {Sargent}(1997)}]{barlow97}

1223: {Barlow}, T.~A. \& {Sargent}, W.~L.~W. 1997, \aj, 113, 136

1224: 

1225: \bibitem[{{Bigelow} \& {Nelson}(1998)}]{bigelow98}

1226: {Bigelow}, B.~C. \& {Nelson}, J.~E. 1998, in Proc. SPIE Vol. 3355, p. 164-174,

1227:   Optical Astronomical Instrumentation, Sandro D'Odorico; Ed., Vol. 3355,

1228:   164--174

1229: 

1230: \bibitem[{{Bohlin}(2000)}]{bohlin00}

1231: {Bohlin}, R.~C. 2000, \aj, 120, 437

1232: 

1233: \bibitem[{{Bohlin} {et~al.}(2001){Bohlin}, {Dickinson}, \&

1234:   {Calzetti}}]{bohlin01}

1235: {Bohlin}, R.~C., {Dickinson}, M.~E., \& {Calzetti}, D. 2001, \aj, 122, 2118

1236: 

1237: \bibitem[{{Burki} {et~al.}(1995){Burki}, {Rufener}, {Burnet}, {Richard},

1238:   {Blecha}, \& {Bratschi}}]{burki95}

1239: {Burki}, G., {Rufener}, F., {Burnet}, M., {Richard}, C., {Blecha}, A., \&

1240:   {Bratschi}, P. 1995, \aaps, 112, 383

1241: 

1242: \bibitem[{{Burles} \& {Tytler}(1997)}]{burles97}

1243: {Burles}, S. \& {Tytler}, D. 1997, \aj, 114, 1330

1244: 

1245: \bibitem[{{Burles} \& {Tytler}(1998)}]{burles98b}

1246: ---. 1998, \apj, 507, 732

1247: 

1248: \bibitem[{{Clayton}(1996)}]{echelle_starlink}

1249: {Clayton}, M. 1996, http://starlink.rl.ac.uk/star/docs/sg9.htx/sg9.html

1250: 

1251: \bibitem[{{Dekker} {et~al.}(2000){Dekker}, {D'Odorico}, {Kaufer}, {Delabre}, \&

1252:   {Kotzlowski}}]{dekker00}

1253: {Dekker}, H., {D'Odorico}, S., {Kaufer}, A., {Delabre}, B., \& {Kotzlowski}, H.

1254:   2000, in Proc. SPIE Vol. 4008, p. 534-545, Optical and IR Telescope

1255:   Instrumentation and Detectors, Masanori Iye; Alan F. Moorwood; Eds., Vol.

1256:   4008, 534--545

1257: 

1258: \bibitem[{{Diego} {et~al.}(1990){Diego}, {Charalambous}, {Fish}, \&

1259:   {Walker}}]{diego90}

1260: {Diego}, F., {Charalambous}, A., {Fish}, A.~C., \& {Walker}, D.~D. 1990, in

1261:   Instrumentation in astronomy VII; Proceedings of the Meeting, Tucson, AZ,

1262:   Feb. 13-17, 1990 (A91-29601 11-35). Bellingham, WA, Society of Photo-Optical

1263:   Instrumentation Engineers, 1990, p. 562-576. Anglo-Australian

1264:   Observatory-supported research., Vol. 1235, 562--576

1265: 

1266: \bibitem[{{Epps} \& {Miller}(1998)}]{epps98}

1267: {Epps}, H.~W. \& {Miller}, J.~S. 1998, in Proc. SPIE Vol. 3355, p. 48-58,

1268:   Optical Astronomical Instrumentation, Sandro D'Odorico; Ed., Vol. 3355,

1269:   48--58

1270: 

1271: \bibitem[{{Kirkman} {et~al.}(2003){Kirkman}, {Tytler}, {Suzuki}, {O'Meara}, \&

1272:   {Lubin}}]{kirkman03}

1273: {Kirkman}, D., {Tytler}, D., {Suzuki}, N., {O'Meara}, J.~M., \& {Lubin}, D.

1274:   2003, \apjs submitted, astro-ph/0302006

1275: 

1276: \bibitem[{{Massey} {et~al.}(1992){Massey}, {Valdes}, \& {Barnes}}]{iraf_slit}

1277: {Massey}, P., {Valdes}, F., \& {Barnes}, J. 1992,

1278:   http://iraf.noao.edu/docs/spectra.html

1279: 

1280: \bibitem[{{McLean} {et~al.}(1998){McLean}, {Becklin}, {Bendiksen}, {Brims},

1281:   {Canfield}, {Figer}, {Graham}, {Hare}, {Lacayanga}, {Larkin}, {Larson},

1282:   {Levenson}, {Magnone}, {Teplitz}, \& {Wong}}]{mclean98}

1283: {McLean}, I.~S., {Becklin}, E.~E., {Bendiksen}, O., {Brims}, G., {Canfield},

1284:   J., {Figer}, D.~F., {Graham}, J.~R., {Hare}, J., {Lacayanga}, F., {Larkin},

1285:   J.~E., {Larson}, S.~B., {Levenson}, N., {Magnone}, N., {Teplitz}, H., \&

1286:   {Wong}, W. 1998, in Proc. SPIE Vol. 3354, p. 566-578, Infrared Astronomical

1287:   Instrumentation, Albert M. Fowler; Ed., Vol. 3354, 566--578

1288: 

1289: \bibitem[{{Noguchi} {et~al.}(1998){Noguchi}, {Ando}, {Izumiura}, {Kawanomoto},

1290:   {Tanaka}, \& {Aoki}}]{noguchi98}

1291: {Noguchi}, K., {Ando}, H., {Izumiura}, H., {Kawanomoto}, S., {Tanaka}, W., \&

1292:   {Aoki}, W. 1998, in Proc. SPIE Vol. 3355, p. 354-362, Optical Astronomical

1293:   Instrumentation, Sandro D'Odorico; Ed., Vol. 3355, 354--362

1294: 

1295: \bibitem[{{Oke}(1990)}]{oke90}

1296: {Oke}, J.~B. 1990, \aj, 99, 1621

1297: 

1298: \bibitem[{{O'Meara} {et~al.}(2001){O'Meara}, {Tytler}, {Kirkman}, {Suzuki},

1299:   {Prochaska}, {Lubin}, \& {Wolfe}}]{omeara01}

1300: {O'Meara}, J.~M., {Tytler}, D., {Kirkman}, D., {Suzuki}, N., {Prochaska},

1301:   J.~X., {Lubin}, D., \& {Wolfe}, A.~M. 2001, \apj, 552, 718

1302: 

1303: \bibitem[{{Schachter}(1991)}]{schachter91}

1304: {Schachter}, J. 1991, \pasp, 103, 457

1305: 

1306: \bibitem[{{Schroeder}(1987)}]{schroeder87}

1307: {Schroeder}, D.~J. 1987, {Astronomical Optics} (San Diego: Academic Press,

1308:   1987)

1309: 

1310: \bibitem[{{Sheinis} {et~al.}(2000){Sheinis}, {Miller}, {Bolte}, \&

1311:   {Sutin}}]{sheinis00}

1312: {Sheinis}, A.~I., {Miller}, J.~S., {Bolte}, M., \& {Sutin}, B.~M. 2000, in

1313:   Proc. SPIE Vol. 4008, p. 522-533, Optical and IR Telescope Instrumentation

1314:   and Detectors, Masanori Iye; Alan F. Moorwood; Eds., Vol. 4008, 522--533

1315: 

1316: \bibitem[{{Tull}(1998)}]{tull98}

1317: {Tull}, R.~G. 1998, in Proc. SPIE Vol. 3355, p. 387-398, Optical Astronomical

1318:   Instrumentation, Sandro D'Odorico; Ed., Vol. 3355, 387--398

1319: 

1320: \bibitem[{{Vogt}(1987)}]{vogt87}

1321: {Vogt}, S.~S. 1987, \pasp, 99, 1214

1322: 

1323: \bibitem[{{Vogt} {et~al.}(1994){Vogt}, {Allen}, {Bigelow}, {Bresee}, {Brown},

1324:   {Cantrall}, {Conrad}, {Couture}, {Delaney}, {Epps}, {Hilyard}, {Hilyard},

1325:   {Horn}, {Jern}, {Kanto}, {Keane}, {Kibrick}, {Lewis}, {Osborne},

1326:   {Pardeilhan}, {Pfister}, {Ricketts}, {Robinson}, {Stover}, {Tucker}, {Ward},

1327:   \& {Wei}}]{vogt94}

1328: {Vogt}, S.~S., {Allen}, S.~L., {Bigelow}, B.~C., {Bresee}, L., {Brown}, B.,

1329:   {Cantrall}, T., {Conrad}, A., {Couture}, M., {Delaney}, C., {Epps}, H.~W.,

1330:   {Hilyard}, D., {Hilyard}, D.~F., {Horn}, E., {Jern}, N., {Kanto}, D.,

1331:   {Keane}, M.~J., {Kibrick}, R.~I., {Lewis}, J.~W., {Osborne}, J.,

1332:   {Pardeilhan}, G.~H., {Pfister}, T., {Ricketts}, T., {Robinson}, L.~B.,

1333:   {Stover}, R.~J., {Tucker}, D., {Ward}, J., \& {Wei}, M.~Z. 1994, in Proc.

1334:   SPIE Instrumentation in Astronomy VIII, David L. Crawford; Eric R. Craine;

1335:   Eds., Volume 2198, p. 362, Vol. 2198, 362+

1336: 

1337: \bibitem[{{Willmarth} \& {Barnes}(1994)}]{iraf_echelle}

1338: {Willmarth}, D. \& {Barnes}, J. 1994, http://iraf.noao.edu/docs/spectra.html

1339: 

1340: \end{thebibliography}

1341: 

1342: 

1343: %% Figures

1344: %--figure

1345: 

1346: \clearpage

1347: 

1348: % figure 1

1349: \begin{figure}

1350: \epsscale{0.9}

1351: \plottwo{x2v2.ps}{x3v2.ps}

1352: \caption{

1353: Two 300 second integrations of the star G191-B2B taken with near identical

1354: HIRES setups on consecutive nights: 19 (solid) and 20

1355: (light) September, 2000.  The right panel shows the ratio of the two.

1356: These spectra were taken with the C5 dekker (1.14 arcsec slit), and

1357: the image rotator was set to align the sky vertical along the slit.

1358: The September 19 integration had sidereal time ST = 05:16:48 hours,

1359: telescope elevation EL = 56.96 degrees, and image rotator physical

1360: angle, as measured looking at the prism, of IROT2ANG = 195.9357

1361: degrees. For September 20th we had ST = 05:02:24, EL = 57.03 degrees

1362: and IROT2ANG = 195.8646.  The September 20th spectrum was multiplied

1363: by 1.06 to give similar counts to the other near 4300~\AA\ to correct

1364: for differences in the atmospheric transparency, seeing and the loss

1365: of light at the slit.

1366: % K0900 DN-0140 solid and 0229 light

1367:  \label{X2}  }

1368: \end{figure}

1369: 

1370: \clearpage

1371: % figure 2

1372: \begin{figure}

1373: \includegraphics[angle=270,scale=0.45]{x22cv2.ps}

1374: \caption{

1375: The ratio of the two spectra shown in Fig. \ref{X2}, divided by

1376: average ratio from the ten orders with the largest wavelengths. We show this

1377: average in the top left panel, and other panels each show one HIRES order.

1378: We show the full amount of each order

1379: that fell on the CCD, which includes some wavelength overlap between

1380: adjacent orders. We have re-binned the original

1381: 2048 pixels into 205 pixels for presentation.

1382: \label{X22c}  }

1383: \end{figure}

1384: 

1385: \clearpage

1386: %% Demonstartion of the failure of the Standard Method

1387: % figure 3

1388: \begin{figure}

1389: \epsscale{0.9}

1390: \plottwo{x16av4.ps}{x16bv5.ps}

1391: \caption{

1392: HIRES spectra of stars that we flux calibrated in the usual manner.

1393: In both cases we see large flux calibration errors. In other cases we

1394: can obtain smaller errors.

1395: Left, 

1396: HIRES integration of star BD+33 2642.

1397: We determined the response function of HIRES by

1398: comparing a HIRES spectrum of G191-B2B, taken on the same night

1399: (September 19, 2000), to a model spectrum with known flux (Appendix

1400: \ref{appa}).  The continuous line shows a lower resolution HST FOS

1401: spectrum of BD+33~2642. We may adjust the HIRES spectrum vertically to

1402: account for slit losses.  The right panel is the same, but for a HIRES

1403: integration of BD+28~4211 obtained October 10, 1999, calibrated with a

1404: HIRES spectrum of G191-B2B, taken on the same night. The continuous line

1405: is a STIS spectrum of BD+28~4211.  \label{X16} }

1406: \end{figure}

1407: 

1408: \clearpage

1409: %% HIRES vs HIRES wavelength shift

1410: % figure 4

1411: % formaly called "hires-shift"

1412: \begin{figure}

1413: \includegraphics[angle=270,scale=0.45]{x20av1.ps}  

1414: \caption{

1415: The wavelength shifts measured between two consecutive HIRES integrations

1416: for \qfive , both taken on March 13, 2000.  The small points show

1417: shifts measured by cross-correlating blocks of approximately 20 pixels that 

1418: contain an absorption line.  The larger points show the

1419: mean shift per order, and the vertical bars show $\pm 1\sigma $ from

1420: the distribution of the measurements in that order. The dotted line

1421: shows the mean shift between the two integrations.

1422: \label{X20a}  }

1423: \end{figure}

1424: 

1425: \clearpage

1426: % figure 5

1427: \begin{figure}

1428: \epsscale{0.6}

1429: \plotone{x9v1.ps}

1430: \caption{

1431: Steps in the calibration of the flux in a Kast spectrum.

1432: Panel (a) shows the STIS spectrum of star BD+28 4211. Panel (b) shows the

1433: raw counts recorded in two simultaneous Kast integrations,

1434: one with the blue camera (left) and one with the red camera (right).  We do

1435: not show the wavelength overlap on

1436: either side of the central wavelength of the dichroic beam splitter (called

1437: d46), which we show with the vertical line near 4450~\AA .    

1438: We had moved the ``x-stage" that holds the CCD of the blue camera of Kast

1439: to sample wavelengths well beyond the peak of the \lya\ emission line.

1440: Panel (c) shows the response function (b)/(a), and panel (d) shows the raw

1441: counts in one 5400 second integration on \qfive .

1442: Panel (e) shows the flux calibrated spectrum, (d)/(c).

1443: \label{X9}  }

1444: \end{figure} 

1445: 

1446: \clearpage

1447: % figure 6

1448: %% we may not need to use the following

1449: \begin{figure}

1450: \includegraphics[angle=270,scale=0.45]{x23v1.ps}

1451: \caption{

1452: Top Panel: Two spectra of the star Feige~34, one from STIS (solid line,

1453: \citealt{bohlin01}), and

1454: the other a Kast spectrum that we have flux calibrated (dotted).

1455: We calibrated the Kast spectrum with Kast spectrum of the star BD+28~4211.

1456: We also normalized the Kast spectrum to have the same mean flux as the STIS 

1457: spectrum to adjust for slit losses.

1458: Bottom Panel: Ratio of the two spectra in the top panel.

1459: The dotted line is the error for the STIS spectrum (approximately 1\% random 

1460: and 3\% systematic), and the dashed line is the

1461: random error from the photon noise in the Kast spectrum.

1462: These errors are for 2~\AA\ pixels.

1463: \label{X23}  }

1464: \end{figure}

1465: 

1466: \clearpage

1467: % figure 7

1468: \begin{figure}

1469: \epsscale{0.6}

1470: \plotone{x10v2.ps}

1471: \caption{

1472: Steps in the flux calibration of an ESI integration of \qfive\ using

1473: an ESI spectrum of the star Feige~110 obtained on the same night.  We

1474: show only 3 of the 10 ESI orders. Panel (a) at the top shows the STIS

1475: flux calibrated spectrum of star Feige 110. Panel (b) shows the raw

1476: CCD counts from an ESI spectrum of this star. Panel (c) shows the

1477: smoothed ratio (b)/(a) that is the response function of ESI.  Panel

1478: (d) shows the raw counts from an integration of \qfive , and panel (e)

1479: shows the same spectrum after relative flux calibration.  \label{X10}

1480: }

1481: \end{figure}

1482: 

1483: \clearpage

1484: % figure 8

1485: \begin{figure}

1486: \includegraphics[angle=270,scale=0.45]{x6v0.ps}

1487: \caption{

1488: Demonstration of the errors in the flux calibration of an ESI spectrum of

1489: the star HZ44. The middle traces show the ESI orders after

1490: flux calibration using an ESI spectrum of star Feige~110.

1491: The lower smooth curves show the response function of these ESI orders.

1492: Here we use the usual flux calibration methods.

1493: The insert in the upper right is an enlargement of

1494: 4800 -- 5100~\AA\ that clearly shows that adjacent orders differ.

1495: \label{X6}  }

1496: \end{figure}

1497: 

1498: \clearpage

1499: % figure 9 

1500: \begin{figure}

1501: \epsscale{0.5}

1502: \plotone{x17v0.ps}

1503: \caption{

1504: Illustration of the steps taken to apply relative flux to HIRES spectra of

1505: \qfive\ using Kast spectra of the same QSO.

1506: Panel (a) shows a flux calibrated Kast spectrum.

1507: It has been shifted in wavelength to match the HIRES

1508: wavelengths.  Panel (b) shows the CCD counts recorded in the three

1509: HIRES orders that cover these wavelengths. This is a single HIRES

1510: integration, and the orders overlap in wavelength, although we do not

1511: show this here.  Panel (c) shows the extracted HIRES orders that have

1512: been ``flattened" by dividing by the flat field. This is the

1513: Flux-name.fits file that is the usual output from MAKEE.  Panel (d) is

1514: shows the spectra from panel (c) after smoothing by a Gaussian filter

1515: to match the spectral resolution of the Kast spectrum in panel (a).

1516: The HIRES spectrum has been re-binned onto the Kast pixels.  Panel (e)

1517: shows the ratio (d)/(a) that we call the conversion ratio.  It has

1518: values at the Kast pixels, and two values at the wavelengths that

1519: appear in two HIRES orders. The smooth curves are low order fits to

1520: the pixels that sample the conversion ratio.  Panel (f) is (c)/(e),

1521: the flux calibrated HIRES spectra. Notice that the jump in the HIRES

1522: flux at the order join near 4320~\AA\ in panels (b), (c) and (d) is

1523: detected by the conversion ratio in (e) and corrected in (f).  Panel

1524: (g) shows the sum of 8 HIRES integrations, each of which is corrected

1525: individually in the same manner. The order joins are not apparent.  We

1526: do not plot most pixels in the high resolution spectra, to reduce the

1527: file size.  \label{X17} }

1528: \end{figure}

1529: 

1530: \clearpage

1531: % figure 10

1532: \begin{figure}

1533: \includegraphics[angle=270,scale=0.45]{x11v0.ps}

1534: \caption{

1535: Shifts in the wavelength scale of a spectrum of \qfive\ from the

1536: Kast spectrograph measured relative to a HIRES spectrum of the same QSO.

1537: Each dot shows the shift measured by cross-correlating a region of spectrum

1538: that contains an absorption line. The bars show means of these dots,

1539: taken over the individual HIRES orders. 

1540: We obtain similar shifts when we cross-correlate over complete HIRES orders.

1541: The sampling pixel size is 107.1 \kms .

1542:  \label{X11}  }

1543: \end{figure}

1544: 

1545: \clearpage

1546: % figure 11

1547: \begin{figure}

1548: \includegraphics[angle=270,scale=0.45]{x21bv2.ps}

1549: \caption{

1550: Conversion ratio for the 8100 second HIRES integration of \qfive\ taken April

1551: 4, 1999. The relative flux calibration uses a Kast spectrum from 2001.

1552: The mean level of the CR in each order has been normalized for the plot.

1553: The pixels sizes are from the Kast spectrum, and the curves show 4th order

1554: Chebyshev polynomial fits to each order.

1555:  \label{X21b}  }

1556: \end{figure}

1557: 

1558: \clearpage

1559: % figure 12 

1560: \begin{figure}

1561: \includegraphics[angle=270,scale=0.45]{x21fv2.ps}

1562: \caption{

1563: As Fig. \ref{X21b}, but for a 7200 second HIRES integration taken 11 months 

1564: later on March 14, 2000. 

1565:  \label{X21f}  }

1566: \end{figure}

1567: 

1568: \clearpage

1569: % figure 13

1570: \begin{figure}

1571: \includegraphics[angle=270,scale=0.7]{3Dcrv2.ps}

1572: \caption{

1573: The conversion ratio for a HIRES integration of \qfive\

1574: fitted with a 2-dimensional Chebyshev polynomial. Each small plus sign shows 

1575: the CR value in a pixel of the reference spectrum from ESI.

1576: The CR values are shown elevated above a plane that approximates

1577: the HIRES CCD.

1578: The axis ``CCD pixel position" is the pixel along the

1579: direction of a HIRES order, with wavelength increasing to higher

1580: numbers.  The axis ``Echelle Order" is encoded such that 113 - the

1581: number given is the HIRES order. The orders are shown parallel to each

1582: other and with equal spacing.  The vertical hight of a plus sign shows the

1583: CR in that ESI pixel, and the other two coordinates show the location

1584: of the HIRES pixel with a similar wavelength.  The S/N in the ESI

1585: spectrum increases with wavelength, to the left.  The CR have been

1586: normalized to have a mean CR $=1 $ in the middle 20\% of each HIRES

1587: order.  Prior to this, the CR varied systematically by approximately a

1588: factor of two.  The thick curves show the Chebyshev polynomial along

1589: each order. These polynomials are constrained to 4th order in both the

1590: CCD pixel and echelle order directions.  \label{twodfit} }

1591: \end{figure}

1592: 

1593: 

1594: \clearpage

1595: % figure 14

1596: \begin{figure}

1597: \epsscale{0.8}

1598: \plotone{x25v3.ps}

1599: \caption{

1600: Spectra of star Feige 34 with relative flux calibration.

1601: The lower two spectra are from STIS (heavy line) and Kast (thin line),

1602: both from Fig. \ref{X23}.

1603: The upper two spectra, displaced vertically by the same amount for clarity, 

1604: are the same Kast reference

1605: spectrum and five and a half orders of a HIRES spectrum 

1606: (faint trace with many pixels, darker in even numbered orders).

1607: \label{f344thord} }

1608: \end{figure}

1609: 

1610: \clearpage

1611: % figure 15

1612: % formarly refered to "H-comp"

1613: \begin{figure}

1614: \epsscale{0.7}

1615: \plotone{x15v3.ps}

1616: \caption{

1617: Ratios of the flux in different summations of the 8 HIRES integrations of

1618: \qfive\ that we have calibrated using different spectra.

1619: HK99, HK01 and HKSUM were all calibrated with Kast spectra, while HESI

1620: and HH are HIRES spectra calibrated using ESI spectra and a HIRES

1621: spectrum of a flux standard.  Each of the top 4 panels shows the ratio

1622: of two HIRES spectra, each one of which looks similar to that shown in

1623: the bottom panel.  The vertical bands show the wavelengths where the

1624: orders overlap.  We do not plot most pixels, to reduce the file size.

1625: If we had plotted all pixels, the noise near the few strongest absorption

1626: lines would be much more conspicuous, and in each 10~\AA\ interval

1627: we would see 1 -- 20 fluctuations of 1 -- 2\%.

1628: We also do not plot pixels that have negative flux, because of the 

1629: random noise in the sky subtraction.  

1630: \label{X15} }

1631: \end{figure}

1632: 

1633: 

1634: %%%% END of Main TEXT FIGURES %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1635: 

1636: %%% APPENDIX FIGURES START %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1637: 

1638: %% Appendix A :Standard Star

1639: \clearpage

1640: % figure 16

1641: \begin{figure}

1642: \includegraphics[angle=270,scale=0.45]{x4v0.ps}

1643: \caption{

1644: Flux calibrated spectra of the star G191-B2B.

1645: The continuous, wobbly line is a STIS spectrum from \citet{bohlin00}.

1646: The dotted line and points are from Oke (1990).

1647:  \label{X4}  }

1648: \end{figure}

1649: 

1650: \clearpage

1651: % figure 17

1652: \begin{figure}

1653: \includegraphics[angle=270,scale=0.45]{x5v0.ps}

1654: \caption{

1655: Spectra of the flux standard star Feige 110.

1656: The lowest trace shows the signal recorded in one ESI order.

1657: The dotted line shows the flux reported by Oke (1990)

1658: and the points show the flux values that he recommended to minimize

1659: sensitivity to spectral resolution. The STIS spectrum from

1660: \citep*{bohlin01} is shown by the continuous

1661: trace comprising pixels that are easy to see on the plot. 

1662:  \label{X5}         }

1663: \end{figure}

1664: 

1665: % following not made - feb 6th, low priority

1666: %\clearpage

1667: % figure = k01abk99

1668: %\begin{figure}

1669: %\includegraphics[angle=270,scale=0.45]{k01abk99.ps}

1670: %\caption{

1671: %\NS{discuss how to make this with DT and DK}

1672: %A comparison of Kast spectra that have relative flux calibration.

1673: %The top panel shows the ratio of two integration from 2001, while the

1674: %bottom panel shows one integration from 1999 divided by one from 2001.

1675: % (label=k01abk99) \label{k01abk99}  }

1676: %\end{figure}

1677: 

1678: 

1679: 

1680: \end{document}

1681: