Hostname: page-component-5db6c4db9b-s6gjx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2023-03-25T14:27:19.267Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "useRatesEcommerce": false } hasContentIssue true

Astrometric accuracy of snapshot fast radio burst localisations with ASKAP

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 September 2021

Cherie K. Day*
Affiliation:
Centre for Astrophysics and Supercomputing, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn VIC 3122, Australia Australia Telescope National Facility, CSIRO, Space and Astronomy, PO Box 76, Epping NSW 1710 Australia
Adam T. Deller
Affiliation:
Centre for Astrophysics and Supercomputing, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn VIC 3122, Australia
Clancy W. James
Affiliation:
International Centre for Radio Astronomy Research, Curtin Institute of Radio Astronomy, Curtin University, Perth, WA 6845, Australia.
Emil Lenc
Affiliation:
Australia Telescope National Facility, CSIRO, Space and Astronomy, PO Box 76, Epping NSW 1710 Australia
Shivani Bhandari
Affiliation:
Australia Telescope National Facility, CSIRO, Space and Astronomy, PO Box 76, Epping NSW 1710 Australia
R. M. Shannon
Affiliation:
Centre for Astrophysics and Supercomputing, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn VIC 3122, Australia
Keith W. Bannister
Affiliation:
Australia Telescope National Facility, CSIRO, Space and Astronomy, PO Box 76, Epping NSW 1710 Australia
*
Corresponding author: Cherie K. Day, email: cday@swin.edu.au

Abstract

The recent increase in well-localised fast radio bursts (FRBs) has facilitated in-depth studies of global FRB host properties, the source circumburst medium, and the potential impacts of these environments on the burst properties. The Australian Square Kilometre Array Pathfinder (ASKAP) has localised 11 FRBs with sub-arcsecond to arcsecond precision, leading to sub-galaxy localisation regions in some cases and those covering much of the host galaxy in others. The method used to astrometrically register the FRB image frame for ASKAP, in order to align it with images taken at other wavelengths, is currently limited by the brightness of continuum sources detected in the short-duration (‘snapshot’) voltage data captured by the Commensal Real-Time ASKAP Fast Transients (CRAFT) software correlator, which are used to correct for any frame offsets due to imperfect calibration solutions and estimate the accuracy of any required correction. In this paper, we use dedicated observations of bright, compact radio sources in the low- and mid-frequency bands observable by ASKAP to investigate the typical astrometric accuracy of the positions obtained using this so-called ‘snapshot’ technique. Having captured these data with both the CRAFT software and ASKAP hardware correlators, we also compare the offset distributions obtained from both data products to estimate a typical offset between the image frames resulting from the differing processing paths, laying the groundwork for future use of the longer duration, higher signal-to-noise ratio (S/N) data recorded by the hardware correlator. We find typical offsets between the two frames of ${\sim}0.6$ and ${\sim}0.3$ arcsec in the low- and mid-band data, respectively, for both RA and Dec. We also find reasonable agreement between our offset distributions and those of the published FRBs. We detect only a weak dependence in positional offset on the relative separation in time and elevation between target and calibrator scans, with the trends being more pronounced in the low-band data and in Dec. Conversely, the offsets show a clear dependence on frequency in the low band, which we compare to the frequency-dependent Dec. offsets found in FRB 200430. In addition, we present a refined methodology for estimating the overall astrometric accuracy of CRAFT FRBs.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2021. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of the Astronomical Society of Australia

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Astropy Collaboration, et al. 2018, AJ, 156, 123 Google Scholar
Bannister, K. W., et al. 2019, Science, 365, 565 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Becker, R. H., White, R. L., & Helfand, D. J. 1995, ApJ, 450, 559 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bhandari, S., et al. 2020a, ApJ, 895, L37 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bhandari, S., et al. 2020b, ApJ, 901, L20 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bhandari, S., et al. 2021, arXiv e-prints, p.arXiv:2108.01282 Google Scholar
Briggs, D. S. 1995, PhD dissertation, New Mexico Inst. of Mining & TechnologyGoogle Scholar
Chatterjee, S., et al. 2017, Nature, 541, 58 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Day, C. K. et al., 2020, MNRAS, 497, 3335 Google Scholar
Day, C. K., Bhandari, S., Deller, A. T., Shannon, R. M., & ASKAP-CRAFT Survey Science Project 2021, ATel, 14592, 1 Google Scholar
Deller, A. T., et al. 2011, PASP, 123, 275 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fonseca, E., et al. 2020, ApJ, 891, L6 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gordon, D. 2018, in AGU Fall Meeting Abstracts, G42A–01Google Scholar
Greisen, E. W. 2003, in Information Handling in Astronomy- Historical Vistas, ed. Heck, A., Astrophysics and Space Science Library, Vol. 285, 109, doi: 10.1007/0-306-48080-8_7 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heintz, K. E., et al. 2020, ApJ, 903, 152 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hotan, A. W., et al. 2021, PASA, 38, e009 Google Scholar
Law, C. J., et al. 2020, ApJ, 899, 161 Google Scholar
Macquart, J.-P., et al. 2010, PASA, 27, 272 Google Scholar
Macquart, J. P., et al. 2020, Nature, 581, 391 Google Scholar
Mannings, A. G., et al. 2020, ApJ, in press, p. arXiv:2012.11617Google Scholar
Marcote, B., et al. 2020, Nature, 577, 190 Google Scholar
McConnell, D., et al. 2020, PASA, 37, e048 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McMullin, J. P., Waters, B., Schiebel, D., Young, W., & Golap, K. 2007, in Astronomical Data Analysis Software and Systems XVI, ed. Shaw, R. A., Hill, F., & Bell, D. J., Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series, Vol. 376, 127 Google Scholar
Mevius, M., et al. 2016, Radio Sci., 51, 927 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Michilli, D., et al. 2018, Nature, 553, 182 Google Scholar
Planck Collaboration et al. 2020, A&A, 641, A6 Google Scholar
Prochaska, J. X., et al. 2019, Science, 366, 231 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ravi, V., et al. 2019, Nature, 572, 352 Google Scholar
Sault, R. J., Teuben, P. J., & Wright, M. C. H. 1995, in Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series, Vol. 77, Astronomical Data Analysis Software and Systems IV, ed. Shaw, R. A., Payne, H. E., & Hayes, J. J. E., 433 (arXiv:astro-ph/0612759)Google Scholar
Taylor, G., Carilli, C., Perley, R., & Astronomical Society of the Pacific, National Radio Astronomy Observatory (U.S.). 1999, Synthesis Imaging in Radio Astronomy II: A Collection of Lectures from the Sixth NRAO/NMIMT Synthesis Imaging Summer School Held at Socorro, New Mexico, USA, 17–23 June, 1998. Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series, Astronomical Society of the Pacific, https://books.google.com.au/books?id=e23vAAAAMAAJ Google Scholar
Tendulkar, S. P., et al. 2021, ApJ, 908, L12 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Walters, A., Weltman, A., Gaensler, B. M., Ma, Y.-Z., & Witzemann, A. 2018, ApJ, 856, 65 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wright, E. L. 2006, PASP, 118, 1711 CrossRefGoogle Scholar