All Figures

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=.6\textwidth,angle=90]{MS2703f01.ps}\v... ...e*{3mm} \includegraphics[width=.6\textwidth,angle=90]{MS2703f02.ps} \end{figure}$ Figure 1: Example of visual distinction between a bona-fide point source (top) and a spurious point-source (bottom) from its pixel history. The bold solid line corresponds to the strongest source pixel profile in both figures. In the top figure, other profiles correspond to the neighboring pixels receiving flux (solid lines), or not (dotted lines). In the bottom figure, the profiles corresponding to the 8 neighboring pixels are shown as dotted lines. Vertical lines indicate start of slew to new target. Slew periods when ISO did not acquire the target yet are marked by a box. Detected glitches are marked by a star.
Open with DEXTER

In the text

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=8.8cm,clip]{MS2703f03.eps} \end{figure}$ Figure 2: Distribution of $(\Delta x_{ij}, \Delta y_{ij})$ for the 12 954 USNO matches within 18 $^{\prime \prime }$ of the 7197 ISOCAM sources. The range is expressed in ISOCAM pixels (6 $^{\prime \prime }$ width).
Open with DEXTER

In the text

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=8.8cm,clip]{MS2703f04.eps} \end{figure}$ Figure 3: Central part of the probability map ${\cal M}$ (normalized): $30~\times~ 20$ 1 $^{\prime \prime }$ bins in the $(\Delta x,\Delta y)$ plane.
Open with DEXTER

In the text

$\begin{figure} \par\mbox{\includegraphics[width=7cm,clip]{MS2703f05.ps} \includegraphics[width=7cm,clip]{MS2703f06.ps} } \end{figure}$ Figure 4: $0\sigma$ (left) and $2\sigma$ (right) probability pattern ${\cal P}$ ( $36\times 36$ 1 $^{\prime \prime }$ bins).
Open with DEXTER

In the text

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=8cm,clip]{MS2703f07.ps} \end{figure}$ Figure 5: Illustration of how completeness and reliability are correlated for a given method of cross matching, in the case where the spatial separation between counterparts is due to purely random errors.
Open with DEXTER

In the text

$\begin{figure} { \includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth,clip]{MS2703f08.eps}\hsp... ...m} \includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth,clip]{MS2703f11.eps} } \end{figure}$ Figure 6: Left: number of associations as a function of distance $\rho$ to the nearest peak of Fig. 3 (0.5 $^{\prime \prime }$ bin size). The dotted line corresponds to random associations. Right: derived probability $p(\rho )$ of an association being proper. Top row: USNO; bottom row: 2MASS.
Open with DEXTER

In the text

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{MS2703f12.eps}\hspace*{3mm} \includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{MS2703f13.eps} \end{figure}$ Figure 7: Differential histogram (log scale) for the number of USNO (left) and 2MASS (right) matches as a function of distance to the nearest neighbor (bin width is 1 $^{\prime \prime }$ ). The contribution of objects without matches is indicated by the dashed line.
Open with DEXTER

In the text

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{MS2703f14.eps}\hspace*{3mm} \includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{MS2703f15.eps} \end{figure}$ Figure 8: Completeness versus reliability for nearest-neighbor (line) and probability pattern (stars) methods, for USNO (left) and 2MASS (right). The adopted thresholds are indicated for the different methods.
Open with DEXTER

In the text

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=8.8cm,clip]{MS2703f03.eps} \end{figure}$	Figure 2: Distribution of $(\Delta x_{ij}, \Delta y_{ij})$ for the 12 954 USNO matches within 18 $^{\prime \prime }$ of the 7197 ISOCAM sources. The range is expressed in ISOCAM pixels (6 $^{\prime \prime }$ width).
Open with DEXTER

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=8.8cm,clip]{MS2703f04.eps} \end{figure}$	Figure 3: Central part of the probability map ${\cal M}$ (normalized): $30~\times~ 20$ 1 $^{\prime \prime }$ bins in the $(\Delta x,\Delta y)$ plane.
Open with DEXTER

$\begin{figure} \par\mbox{\includegraphics[width=7cm,clip]{MS2703f05.ps} \includegraphics[width=7cm,clip]{MS2703f06.ps} } \end{figure}$	Figure 4: $0\sigma$ (left) and $2\sigma$ (right) probability pattern ${\cal P}$ ( $36\times 36$ 1 $^{\prime \prime }$ bins).
Open with DEXTER

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=8cm,clip]{MS2703f07.ps} \end{figure}$	Figure 5: Illustration of how completeness and reliability are correlated for a given method of cross matching, in the case where the spatial separation between counterparts is due to purely random errors.
Open with DEXTER

$\begin{figure} { \includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth,clip]{MS2703f08.eps}\hsp... ...m} \includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth,clip]{MS2703f11.eps} } \end{figure}$	Figure 6: Left: number of associations as a function of distance $\rho$ to the nearest peak of Fig. 3 (0.5 $^{\prime \prime }$ bin size). The dotted line corresponds to random associations. Right: derived probability $p(\rho )$ of an association being proper. Top row: USNO; bottom row: 2MASS.
Open with DEXTER

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{MS2703f12.eps}\hspace*{3mm} \includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{MS2703f13.eps} \end{figure}$	Figure 7: Differential histogram (log scale) for the number of USNO (left) and 2MASS (right) matches as a function of distance to the nearest neighbor (bin width is 1 $^{\prime \prime }$ ). The contribution of objects without matches is indicated by the dashed line.
Open with DEXTER

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{MS2703f14.eps}\hspace*{3mm} \includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{MS2703f15.eps} \end{figure}$	Figure 8: Completeness versus reliability for nearest-neighbor (line) and probability pattern (stars) methods, for USNO (left) and 2MASS (right). The adopted thresholds are indicated for the different methods.
Open with DEXTER