2.11 Choosing between COS and STIS
With the installation of COS and the repair of the Space Telescope Imaging Spectrograph (STIS) HST has two spectrographs with significant overlap in spectral range and resolving power. Each has unique capabilities, and the decision of which to use will be driven by the science goals of the program and the nature of the target to be observed.
In the far-UV (from about 1100 to 1800 Å), the throughput of the COS FUV channel exceeds that of the STIS FUV MAMA by factors of 10 to 30, and the combination of the spectroscopic resolving power (~17,000) and wavelength coverage (300 to 370 Å per setting) of the medium-resolution COS FUV modes, as well as the extremely low detector dark rate of the XDL detector, results in a discovery space (throughput times wavelength coverage) for observations of faint FUV point sources that is at least 10 times greater for most targets than that of STIS modes with comparable resolution, and as much as 70 times greater for faint, background-limited point sources.
Because of its MgF2 windows, the STIS FUV MAMA is insensitive to wavelengths below about 1150 Å. The COS FUV XDL detector is windowless and provides useful throughput to at least 900 Å. See Section 5.1.2 for details.
In the near-UV (~1700 to 3200 Å), COS and STIS have complementary capabilities. To accommodate the NUV detector format the COS NUV spectrum is split into three non-contiguous stripes, each of which covers a relatively small range in wavelength. Obtaining a full NUV spectrum of an object requires several set-ups and exposures (six or more for the medium-resolution gratings and three for G230L grating). When broad NUV wavelength coverage is needed obtaining a single STIS spectrum will often be more efficient than taking separate COS spectra. Users should note that for the shorter NUV wavelengths COS modes often have a substantial throughput advantage over the comparable STIS modes, while at the longer NUV wavelengths it can be STIS that has the advantage. They should also consider that the STIS NUV modes have produced a large set of existing observations, while the COS NUV modes have so far seen limited use. As a result, the calibration of the STIS NUV modes is likely to be superior to that of comparable COS modes for the foreseeable future.
After installation into HST in 2009, the dark rate of the COS NUV detector had initially been substantially lower than that of STIS NUV detector. However, the dark rates for the two detectors have converged over the years. Observers are advised to perform detailed calculations using both the COS and STIS ETCs and to consider carefully the relative instrument overheads to determine which combination of instruments and modes is best for their science.
For observations of extended sources, the spatial resolution offered by STIS must be weighed against the superior sensitivity of COS. One of the primary design goals of STIS was to provide spatially resolved spectra in the UV, optical, and near-IR. The STIS long slits, when used with the first-order gratings, allow spatially resolved observations that exploit the intrinsically high resolution of HST over the full width of the detectors (approximately 0.05 arcsec per 2-pixel spatial resolution element over a length of 25 arcsec with the NUV and FUV MAMAs, and approximately 0.1 arcsec per 2-pixel spatial-resolution element over a length of 52 arcsec with the CCD).
COS was optimized for point-source observations. While COS has relatively large entrance apertures (2.5 arcsec diameter), flux from regions more than 0.4 arcsec from the aperture center is significantly vignetted. These large apertures also mean that objects extended in the dispersion direction will yield spectra with lower spectral resolution. In addition, the optical design of the FUV channel limits the achievable spatial resolution; measured values of the FWHM in the spatial dimension vary between about 0.25 and 1.5 arcsec, depending on grating and wavelength (Section 5.1.9). The COS NUV channel uses a different optical design and has a spatial resolution comparable to that of the STIS first-order NUV modes (~0.05 arcsec), with somewhat better sampling. However, for sources extending more than 1 arcsec in the spatial direction, the various NUV spectral segments will begin to overlap.
The line-spread functions (LSFs) of both instruments exhibit non-Gaussian wings due to mid-frequency zonal (polishing) errors in the Optical Telescope Assembly (OTA). Using STIS, one can minimize their effects through the use of narrow apertures. Narrow apertures are not available on COS. The broad wings of the LSF, especially in the short wavelengths of the FUV band, can limit the ability of COS to resolve faint, narrow features, and blend closely-spaced lines. Studies that require accurate knowledge of the line profile will require full consideration of the COS LSF (Section 3.3). The non-Gaussian wings of the COS LSF should have only modest impact on science programs targeting broad lines and continuum sources.
Both COS detectors and the STIS MAMA detectors are prohibited from observing objects that exceed specific brightness levels (see Chapter 10 in this handbook and Sections 13.8 and 14.8 of the STIS Instrument Handbook). Some brightness limits have been established for the health and safety of the instrument, while others are practical limits that are set to ensure good data quality. Because STIS is less sensitive than COS, the brightness limits for STIS tend to be significantly less stringent. In the NUV range, the STIS G230LB and G230MB gratings can also be used with the STIS CCD, which has no bright-object limitations. STIS also has a number of small and neutral-density apertures that can be used with the MAMA detectors to attenuate the light of a too-bright object. COS has only a single neutral-density filter that attenuates by a factor of about 200, but also degrades the spectral resolution by a factor of 3 to 5. In most cases some combination of STIS gratings and apertures will be a better choice for observing a UV-bright object than COS with its neutral-density filter. Users are advised to compare results from the COS and STIS ETCs when deciding on an appropriate strategy for their target.
The STIS high-dispersion echelle modes E140H and E230H have resolving powers of ~114,000 (or even R ~ 200,000 with the 0.1 × 0.03 aperture and specialized data reduction; see Section 12.6, "Improving the Sampling of the Line Spread Function," of the STIS Instrument Handbook), significantly higher than the best COS resolution. Also, STIS can obtain spectra in the optical and near-IR at wavelengths up to 10,200 Å, while the maximum wavelength observable by COS is about 3200 Å.
Both STIS and COS can perform observations in
TIME-TAG mode, whereby the time of each photon's arrival is recorded. STIS is capable of a much finer time resolution (125 μs vs. 32 ms for COS), although few programs require such a high sampling rate. Due to its lower sensitivity, STIS may be able to observe a target in
TIME-TAG mode that is too bright for
TIME-TAG observations with COS. On the other hand,
TIME-TAG data acquired with the COS FUV detector includes information on the pulse-height distribution, while
TIME-TAG data acquired with the STIS and COS MAMAs do not. Pulse-height information can be valuable in identifying and rejecting background counts in the spectra of faint sources.
COS Instrument Handbook
- Chapter 1: An Introduction to COS
Chapter 2: Special Considerations for Cycle 29
- • 2.1 COS FUV Detector Lifetime Positions
- • 2.2 Visit Length
- • 2.3 Central Wavelength Settings Added in Cycle 26
- • 2.4 The G285M Grating is Available but Unsupported
- • 2.5 COS Observations Below 1150 Angstroms: Resolution and Wavelength Calibration Issues
- • 2.6 Time-Dependent Sensitivity Changes
- • 2.7 Spectroscopic Use of the Bright Object Aperture
- • 2.8 Non-Optimal Observing Scenarios
- • 2.9 NUV Spectroscopic Acquisitions
- • 2.10 SNAP, TOO, and Unpredictable Source Programs with COS
- • 2.11 Choosing between COS and STIS
- Chapter 3: Description and Performance of the COS Optics
- Chapter 4: Description and Performance of the COS Detectors
Chapter 5: Spectroscopy with COS
- • 5.1 The Capabilities of COS
- • 5.2 TIME-TAG vs. ACCUM Mode
- • 5.3 Valid Exposure Times
- • 5.4 Estimating the BUFFER-TIME in TIME-TAG Mode
- • 5.5 Spanning the Gap with Multiple CENWAVE Settings
- • 5.6 FUV Single-Segment Observations
- • 5.7 Internal Wavelength Calibration Exposures
- • 5.8 Fixed-Pattern Noise
- • 5.9 COS Spectroscopy of Extended Sources
- • 5.10 Wavelength Settings and Ranges
- Chapter 6: Imaging with COS
- Chapter 7: Exposure-Time Calculator - ETC
Chapter 8: Target Acquisitions
- • 8.1 Introduction
- • 8.2 Target Acquisition Overview
- • 8.3 ACQ SEARCH Acquisition Mode
- • 8.4 ACQ IMAGE Acquisition Mode
- • 8.5 ACQ PEAKXD Acquisition Mode
- • 8.6 ACQ PEAKD Acquisition Mode
- • 8.7 Exposure Times
- • 8.8 Centering Accuracy and Data Quality
- • 8.9 Recommended Parameters for all COS TA Modes
- • 8.10 Special Cases
- Chapter 9: Scheduling Observations
- Chapter 10: Bright-Object Protection
- Chapter 11: Data Products and Data Reduction
Chapter 12: The COS Calibration Program
- • 12.1 Introduction
- • 12.2 Ground Testing and Calibration
- • 12.3 SMOV4 Testing and Calibration
- • 12.4 COS Monitoring Programs
- • 12.5 Cycle 17 Calibration Program
- • 12.6 Cycle 18 Calibration Program
- • 12.7 Cycle 19 Calibration Program
- • 12.8 Cycle 20 Calibration Program
- • 12.9 Cycle 21 Calibration Program
- • 12.10 Cycle 22 Calibration Program
- • 12.11 Cycle 23 Calibration Program
- • 12.12 Cycle 24 Calibration Program
- • 12.13 Cycle 25 Calibration Program
- • 12.14 Cycle 26 Calibration Program
- • 12.15 Cycle 27 Calibration Program
- • 12.16 Cycle 28 Calibration Program
Chapter 13: Spectroscopic Reference Material
- • 13.1 Introduction
- • 13.2 Using the Information in this Chapter
- 13.3 Gratings
- • 13.4 Spectrograph Design Parameters
- • 13.5 The Location of COS in the HST Focal Plane
- • 13.6 The COS User Coordinate System
- • Glossary