Roman coronagraph simulations of exozodi observations in the presence of wavefront errors
Le résumé fourni par la source
The Coronagraph Instrument on board of the Nancy Grace Roman Space Telescope will demonstrate key technologies that will prepare the ground for the Habitable Worlds Observatory. The current predictions for the Roman Coronagraph's detection limit range from 1e-8 to a few 1e-9, which would allow for groundbreaking science, such as potentially imaging Jupiter-like planets. However, the performance of the instrument depends on many factors. Simulating images with varying optical error sources can help us connect instrument and observatory performance to science yield. Here we present corosims, a tool to simulate observations of astrophysical scenes with the Coronagraph with evolving errors. This tool wraps around the Coronagraph PROPER diffraction model and detector simulator. We use it to investigate the potential degeneracy between jitter-induced speckles and both hot and warm exozodi disk structures. First, we simulate observations of exozodi around Tau Ceti, with varying jitter. We predict that with nominal post-correction pointing jitter performance (~0.3 mas RMS), the Roman Coronagraph should be sensitive to 12x zodis worth of dust, assuming a face-on (worst case scenario) inclination. We further predict that its sensitivity degrades to 35x zodis if jitter on-target is 3x worse than the nominal value. This estimate assumes the best-modeled wavefront control and stability values from the project, including additional model uncertainty factors. We find that, while jitter hinders warm exozodi detection, jitter residuals are unlikely to result in a false positive. However, if a faint hot exozodi falls at small separation, it may not be distinguishable from jitter-induced speckle residuals of comparable brightness. Finally, we discuss the degeneracies induced between flux and separation retrieved near the inner working angle due the sharp edge of the Roman Coronagraph's focal plane mask.
Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.