Comparing the WFC3 IR Grism Stare and Spatial-Scan Observations for Exoplanet Characterization

TL;DR

This study compares WFC3 IR grism stare and spatial scan observations for exoplanet characterization, finding stare mode more stable and precise, while spatial scan mode suffers from variability and non-Gaussian noise.

Contribution

It provides a detailed analysis of measurement stability differences between stare and spatial scan modes, highlighting the advantages of stare mode for exoplanet studies.

Findings

Stare mode achieves ~1.3 times photon-limited precision.

Spatial scan mode exhibits higher excess noise and non-Gaussian measurements.

Detector variability affects spatial scan measurement quality.

Abstract

We report on a detailed study of the measurement stability for WFC3 IR grism stare and spatial scan observations. The excess measurement noise for both modes is established by comparing the observed and theoretical measurement uncertainties. We find that the stare-mode observations produce differential measurements that are consistent and achieve $\sim\,1.3$ times photon-limited measurement precision. In contrast, the spatial-scan mode observations produce measurements which are inconsistent, non-Gaussian, and have higher excess noise corresponding to $\sim\,2$ times the photon-limited precision. The inferior quality of the spatial scan observations is due to spatial-temporal variability in the detector performance which we measure and map. The non-Gaussian nature of spatial scan measurements makes the use of $\chi^2$ and the determination of formal confidence intervals problematic and thus renders the comparison of spatial scan data with theoretical models or other measurements difficult. With better measurement stability and no evidence for non-Gaussianity, stare mode observations offer a significant advantage for characterizing transiting exoplanet systems.