The DOI matches its Crossref record.
A Method for Optimal Image Subtraction
Open accessAbstract
We present a new method designed for optimal subtraction of two images with different seeing. Using image subtraction appears to be essential for full analysis of microlensing survey images; however, a perfect subtraction of two images is not easy, as it requires the derivation of an extremely accurate convolution kernel. Some empirical attempts to find the kernel have used a Fourier transform of bright stars, but solving the statistical problem of finding the best kernel solution has never really been tackled. We demonstrate that it is possible to derive an optimal kernel solution from a simple least-squares analysis using all the pixels of both images, and we also show that it is possible to fit the differential background variation at the same time. We show that point-spread function (PSF) variations can be easily handled by the method. To demonstrate the practical efficiency of the method, we analyzed some images from a Galactic Bulge field monitored by the OGLE II project. We find that the residuals in the subtracted images are very close to the photon noise expectations. We also present some light curves of variable stars and show that despite high crowding levels, we get an error distribution close to that expected from photon noise alone. We thus demonstrate that nearly optimal differential photometry can be achieved even in very crowded fields. We suggest that this algorithm might be particularly important for microlensing surveys, where the photometric accuracy and completeness levels could be very significantly improved by using this method.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Riess, A. G., Strolger, L., Tonry, J., Casertano, S., Ferguson, H. C., Mobasher, B., Challis, P., Filippenko, A. V., Jha, S., Li, W., et al. (2004) · The Astrophysical Journal · doi:10.1086/383612 · Cited by 4,315
“…Association of Universities for Research in Astronomy, Inc., under cooperative agreement with the National Science Foundation. and SN 2003XX, which resided less than 0B05 from the sharp nucleus of bright elliptical hosts and for which the technique of matching PSFs was used (Alard & Lupton 1998).”
Microlensing constraints on primordial black holes with Subaru/HSC Andromeda observations
Niikura, H., Takada, M., Yasuda, N., Lupton, R. H., Sumi, T., More, S., Kurita, T., Sugiyama, S., More, A., Oguri, M., et al. (2019) · Nature Astronomy · doi:10.1038/s41550-019-0723-1 · Cited by 570
Self-citationNo supernovae associated with two long-duration γ-ray bursts
Fynbo, J. P. U., Watson, D., Thöne, C. C., Sollerman, J., Bloom, J. S., Davis, T. M., Hjorth, J., Jakobsson, P., Jørgensen, U. G., Graham, J. F., et al. (2006) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature05375 · Cited by 438
Variable Stars in Galactic Globular Clusters
Clement, C. M., Muzzin, A., Dufton, Q., Ponnampalam, T., Wang, J., Burford, J., Richardson, A., Rosebery, T., Rowe, J., & Sawyer Hogg, H. (2001) · The Astronomical Journal · doi:10.1086/323719 · Cited by 435
Shapelets -- I. A method for image analysis
Refregier, A. (2003) · Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society · doi:10.1046/j.1365-8711.2003.05901.x · Cited by 339
Metadata
- Authors
- Alard, C., & Lupton, R. H.
- Venue
- The Astrophysical Journal
- Publisher
- American Astronomical Society
- Published
- 1998-08-10
- Volume
- 503
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 325-331
- ISSN
- 0004-637X (ISSN-L)
- 1538-4357
- OpenAlex
- W2029990369
- Cited by
- 1,387
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 80.67
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: A Method for Optimal Image Subtraction. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1086/305984
- The paper
- Alard, C., & Lupton, R. H. (1998). A Method for Optimal Image Subtraction. The Astrophysical Journal. https://doi.org/10.1086/305984
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.