fixed uk to MJy issue with extra SEDs plot

DIRBE/04_starmodel/main.tex

@@ -81,7 +81,7 @@
    \keywords{ISM: general - Zodiacal dust, Interplanetary medium - Cosmology: observations, diffuse radiation - Galaxy: general}
 
    \maketitle
-1
+
 \setcounter{tocdepth}{2}
 \tableofcontents
 
@@ -297,7 +297,7 @@ \subsection{Spectral Energy Densities}
   \label{fig:exgalSEDs}
 \end{figure}
 
-Figure \ref{fig:exgalSEDs} shows the spectra for the extra sources in the same format as fig. \ref{fig:starSEDs}, with the median SED highlighted in red. Overall, we see similar spectral behaviour between these two classes of sources, despite the different modelling approaches. This implies that they may be similar populations of sources (see sec. \ref{sec:extragalactic?}). Both classes of sources follow a roughly gaussian amplitude distribution at each frequency, showing no signs of a sharp cuttoff caused by our amplitude cut during the selection process. This is likely due to degeneracies between nearby sources in the model. Those with low amplitudes have had some of their emission sucked up by a nearby brighter source, possibly one within the same $0.11^{\mathrm{o}}$ pixel. About \emph{GET A NUMBER HERE}\% of sources end up with amplitudes consistent with 0, and are not shown in these plots and so in a subsequent analysis these sources could be trimmed from the model to save computational time and reduce its complexity.
+Figure \ref{fig:exgalSEDs} shows the spectra for the extra sources in the same format as fig. \ref{fig:starSEDs}, with the median SED highlighted in red. Overall, we see similar spectral behaviour between these two classes of sources, despite the different modelling approaches. This implies that they may be similar populations of sources (see sec. \ref{sec:extragalactic?}). The extra sources are on average brighter, due to the larger magnitude cuttoff when selecting these sources (dimmer ones were incorporated into the diffuse template). Both classes of sources follow a roughly gaussian amplitude distribution at each frequency, showing no signs of a sharp cuttoff caused by our amplitude cut during the selection process. This is likely due to degeneracies between nearby sources in the model. Those with low amplitudes have had some of their emission sucked up by a nearby brighter source, possibly one within the same $0.11^{\mathrm{o}}$ pixel. About 46\% of sources end up with amplitudes consistent with 0, and are not shown in these plots and so in a subsequent analysis these sources could be trimmed from the model to save computational time and reduce its complexity.
 
 
 \section{Comparison to other Analyses}
@@ -404,26 +404,26 @@ \subsection{Extragalactic Sources?}
      & ($^{\circ}$) & ($^{\circ}$) & (MJy) & & & arcsec &  \\
     
      \hline
-     1 \rule{0pt}{2ex} & 351.97 & 15.03 & 5.5$\cdot 10^7$ & 2.4 & Gaia DR2 6045630776564826368 & 0.06 & * \\
-     2 & 199.84 & -8.94 & 4.1$\cdot 10^7$ & 1.35 & AllWISE	J055518.95+072220.3 & 0 & * \\
-	 3 & 351.95 & 15.09 & 4.1$\cdot 10^7$ & 1.73 & hstID S8EN231745 & 0.03 & * \\
-     4 & 272.65 & -39.30 & 3.5$\cdot 10^7$ & 3.16 & hstID S142070633 & 1.2 & -\\
-	 5 & 35.50 & 27.83 & 3.4$\cdot 10^7$ & 1.73 & smssj 171432.09+142210.3 & 0.1 & *\\ 
-	 6 & 199.81 & -8.99 & 3.1$\cdot 10^7$ & 3.61 & hstID N9I5116496 & 0.01 & *\\ 
-	 7 & 35.57 &  27.80 & 2.9$\cdot 10^7$ & 0.57 & hstID N3VM068511 & 0.01 & * \\
-	 8 & 199.79 & -8.96 & 2.8$\cdot 10^7$ & -1.38 & hstID N9I5116403 & 0.3 & * \\ 
-	 9 & 272.69 & -39.30 & 2.8$\cdot 10^7$ & 5.01 & AllWISE	J043704.88-620608.5  & 0 & -\\ 
-	 10 & 162.59 & 4.57 & 2.7$\cdot 10^7$ & 1.46 & hstID NCAJ155129 & 0.3 & *\\ 
-	 11 & 126.12 & -6.72 & 4.6$\cdot 10^4$ & 4.29 & HD 236669 & 0.4 & Spectroscopic Binary\\ 
-	 12 & 299.45 & 9.14 & 4.6$\cdot 10^4$ & 4.96 & HD 108499 & 0.1 & Spectroscopic Binary\\ 
-	 13 & 68.98 & 2.35 & 4.1$\cdot 10^1$ & 5.01 & IRAS 19534+3241 & 0.3 & Long-Period Variable\\
-	 14 & 302.55 &  10.44 & 1.9$\cdot 10^4$ & 5.01 & IRAS 12461-5209 & 1.3 & Long Period Variable Candidate\\
-	 15 & 56.88 & -4.15 & 2.6$\cdot 10^4$ & 4.40 & V* RW Sge  & 0.17 & Mira Variable \\
-	 16 & 83.035 & 49.70 & 4.3$\cdot 10^4$ & 4.63 & HD 234253 & 0.4 & Star\\
-	 17 & 5.02 & -1.36 & 4.6$\cdot 10^2$ & 4.33 & IRAS 17592-2517 & 0.3 & Mira Variable\\ 
-	 18 & 317.08 & -3.65 & 1.0$\cdot 10^5$ & 3.55 & IRAS 14569-6242 & 0.4 & Long period variable candidate \\
-	 19 & 187.05 & -4.28 & 1.0$\cdot 10^6$ & -2.06 & V* Y Tau & 0.3 & Carbon Star\\
-	 20 & 15.00 & 0.02 & 2.1$\cdot 10^5$ & 5.04 & 2MASS 18174772-1553381 & 0.38 & - \\
+     1 \rule{0pt}{2ex} & 351.97 & 15.03 & 972 & 2.4 & Gaia DR2 6045630776564826368 & 0.06 & * \\
+     2 & 199.84 & -8.94 & 725 & 1.35 & AllWISE	J055518.95+072220.3 & 0 & * \\
+	 3 & 351.95 & 15.09 & 725 & 1.73 & hstID S8EN231745 & 0.03 & * \\
+     4 & 272.65 & -39.30 & 619 & 3.16 & hstID S142070633 & 1.2 & -\\
+	 5 & 35.50 & 27.83 & 601 & 1.73 & smssj 171432.09+142210.3 & 0.1 & *\\ 
+	 6 & 199.81 & -8.99 & 548 & 3.61 & hstID N9I5116496 & 0.01 & *\\ 
+	 7 & 35.57 &  27.80 & 513 & 0.57 & hstID N3VM068511 & 0.01 & * \\
+	 8 & 199.79 & -8.96 & 495 & -1.38 & hstID N9I5116403 & 0.3 & * \\ 
+	 9 & 272.69 & -39.30 & 495 & 5.01 & AllWISE	J043704.88-620608.5  & 0 & -\\ 
+	 10 & 162.59 & 4.57 & 477 & 1.46 & hstID NCAJ155129 & 0.3 & *\\ 
+	 11 & 126.12 & -6.72 & 0.81 & 4.29 & HD 236669 & 0.4 & Spectroscopic Binary\\ 
+	 12 & 299.45 & 9.14 & 0.81 & 4.96 & HD 108499 & 0.1 & Spectroscopic Binary\\ 
+	 13 & 68.98 & 2.35 & 7.2$\cdot 10^{-4}$ & 5.01 & IRAS 19534+3241 & 0.3 & Long-Period Variable\\
+	 14 & 302.55 &  10.44 & 0.34 & 5.01 & IRAS 12461-5209 & 1.3 & Long Period Variable Candidate\\
+	 15 & 56.88 & -4.15 & 0.46 & 4.40 & V* RW Sge  & 0.17 & Mira Variable \\
+	 16 & 83.035 & 49.70 & 0.76 & 4.63 & HD 234253 & 0.4 & Star\\
+	 17 & 5.02 & -1.36 & 8.1$\cdot 10^{-3}$ & 4.33 & IRAS 17592-2517 & 0.3 & Mira Variable\\ 
+	 18 & 317.08 & -3.65 & 1.8 & 3.55 & IRAS 14569-6242 & 0.4 & Long period variable candidate \\
+	 19 & 187.05 & -4.28 & 17.7 & -2.06 & V* Y Tau & 0.3 & Carbon Star\\
+	 20 & 15.00 & 0.02 & 3.71 & 5.04 & 2MASS 18174772-1553381 & 0.38 & - \\
      \hline
     \end{tabular}
     \caption{Description of 20 extragalactic sources, the 10 brightest and 10 randomly selected ones. The bright sources are almost entirely found within the boundaries of other very bright sources in the optical (denoted with type *), so their brightnesses may be influenced by this confusion. Those with types listed as a dash have no catalogue information about their classifications.}