Cited by 251Stellar, planetary, and galactic studiesAstronomy and Astrophysical ResearchGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena

An Improved Proper-Motion Catalog Combining USNO-B and the Sloan Digital Sky Survey

Open access
Munn, Jeffrey A., Monet, David G., Levine, Stephen E., Canzian, Blaise, Pier, Jeffrey R., Harris, Hugh C., Lupton, Robert H., Ivezić, Željko +4 more·2004·The Astronomical Journal

Abstract

An improved proper-motion catalog is presented, combining the USNO-B and Sloan Digital Sky Survey (SDSS) catalogs in the area of sky covered by SDSS Data Release 1 (DR1; 2099 deg 2 ). USNO-B positions are recalibrated using SDSS galaxies, and proper motions are recomputed including both the USNO-B and SDSS positions. Statistical errors in the USNO-B proper motions are decreased by roughly 20%–30%, systematic errors are greatly reduced, and the proper motions are placed on an absolute reference frame. Requiring a match to an SDSS object removes the large number of false high proper motion objects in USNO-B. The resultant catalog is 90% complete to g < 19.7, with statistical errors in the component proper motions of roughly 3–3.5 mas yr -1 , substantially smaller systematic errors, and a contamination rate of less than 0.5%. A number of studies are currently underway using proper motions from this catalog. The catalog is available via ftp.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1086/383292

Cites

30 of 30 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • SDSS-POSS proper-motion measurements have an accuracy of ~5 mas yr-1 per coordinate at r = 20, and Gaia DR2 has delivered a median uncertainty in parallax of 0.7 mas and in proper motion of 1.2 mas yr-1 at its faint end (r ~ 20).

    “For comparison with Table 3, the SDSS-POSS propermotion measurements have an accuracy of ∼ 5 mas yr -1 per coordinate at r = 20 ( Munn et al. 2004 ) , and Gaia DR 2 has delivered a median uncertainty in parallax of 0.7 mas and in proper motion of 1.2 mas yr -1 at its faint end, approximately corresponding to r = 20 ( Gaia Collaboration et al. 2018; Lindegren et al. 2018 ) .”

    From LSST: From Science Drivers to Reference Design and Anticipated Data Products (2019) · cites this paper as Munn et al. 2004

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 4

  1. Downes, R. A., et al. 2004, AJ, in press Fukugita, M., Ichikawa, T., Gunn, J. E., Doi, M., Shimasaku, K., & Schneider, D. P. 1996, AJ, 111, 1748
  2. Kleinman, S., et al. 2004, ApJ, in press
  3. Lupton, R., Gunn, J. E., Ivezic ´, Z ˇ., Knapp, G. R., Kent, S., & Yasuda, N. 2001, in ASP Conf. Ser. 238, Astronomical Data Analysis Software and Systems X, ed. F. R. Harnden, Jr., F. A. Primini, & H. E. Payne (San Francisco: ASP), 269
  4. Zacharias, N., et al. 2000, AJ, 120, 2131 Note added in proof.-A similar paper by A. Gould and J. Kollmeier, deriving proper motions by combining SDSS, USNO- A2.0, and USNO-B1.0, appeared on astro-ph on the day this paper was submitted to the Astronomical Journal and is now in press in the Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series. It differs significantly in the techniques used for deriving recalibrated proper motions. The reader is referred to that paper for a different approach to the problem (A. Gould & J. Kollmeier, ApJS, preprint [doi: 10.1086=382529]).

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Munn, J. A., Monet, D. G., Levine, S. E., Canzian, B., Pier, J. R., Harris, H. C., Lupton, R. H., Ivezić, Ž., Hindsley, R. B., Hennessy, G. S., Schneider, D. P., & Brinkmann, J.
Affiliations
  • United States Naval Observatory (US)
  • Princeton University (US)
  • United States Naval Research Laboratory (US)
  • Pennsylvania State University (US)
Venue
The Astronomical Journal
Published
2004-05
Volume
127
Issue
5
Pages
3034-3042
ISSN
  • 0004-6256 (ISSN-L)
  • 1538-3881
OpenAlex
W2038016818
Cited by
251
References
29
Citations by year
2025: 2 · 2024: 1 · 2022: 2 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 9 · 2016: 22 · 2015: 18 · 2014: 14 · 2013: 24 · 2012: 30
FWCI
6.25
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
The Astronomical Journal (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Astronomy and Astrophysics › Stellar, planetary, and galactic studies
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Instrumentation › Astronomy and Astrophysical Research
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Astronomy and Astrophysics › Galaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena
Keywords
Sloan Digital Sky Survey, absolute reference frame, systematic errors, statistical errors, catalog completeness

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