in this paper we revisit an old and all - important problem of turbulent modeling .
the problem , first formulated in terms of images borrowed from kinetic theory by prandtl ( 1925 ) , was later developed by kolmogorov ( 1942 ) , launder and spaulding ( 1974 ) and many of their followers .
the success of these semi - empirical approaches can hardly be overestimated : with development of powerful computers turbulent modeling became an important part of scientific and engineering design process . still , these models , involving low -order time - derivatives and low powers of dimensionless rate of strain , are less effective in describing strongly sheared and rapidly distorted flows where the dimensionless rate of strain is not too small . to improve performance , various non - linear models , pioneered by speziale ( 1987 ) , accounting for the next order in powers of the rate of strain , have been proposed . since the second - order trancation of a lacking - small -parameter expansion is problematic , these models had a mixed success .
( the role of the large - eddy simulations ( les ) in description of complex flows will be discussed in conclusions . )
the attempts to systematically derive turbulence transport models from the navier - stokes equations ( ns ) , based on renormalized wyld s perturbation expansions ( rng ( yakhot/ smith et al ( 1992 ) , rubinstein and barton ( 1990 ) ) , double expansion ( yakhot et al ( 1992 ) ) , dia ( yoshizawa ( 1987 ) ) , were relatively successful and the resulting equations found their place in engineering .
it became clear soon that resummation of the series was impractical and the approach was restricted to the low- orders .
it has been shown recently by h. chen et al ( 2004 ) that the turbulence models , derived by application of the chapman - enskog expansion ( ce ) to a _ model _ kinetic ( boltzmann - bgk ) equation written for hydrodynamic modes , are similar to those previously obtained from the wyld ( 1961 ) expansion , applied directly to the navier - stokes equations .
the main result of chen et al ( 2004 ) can be stated as follows : the perturbation theory , leading from kinetic equation to the navier - stokes ( ns ) equations , generates the well - known turbulence models if , instead of the relaxation time @xmath4 of kinetic theory , one writes @xmath5 and represents the temperature @xmath6 as @xmath7 . here
@xmath8 and @xmath9 are the mean turbulent kinetic energy and dissipation rates , respectively .
thus , the formal superficial similarity between the two perturbation expansions has been established .
this result means that , in principle , the models of an arbitrary non - linearity and complexity , which we even can not explicitly write down , are contained in a simple kinetic equation .    in this work
, we would like to reformulate the procedure developed in chen ( 2004 ) by taking into account both microscopic and hydrodynamic modes .
the coarse - grained kinetic equation for hydrodynamic modes is then obtained by integrating out the fast microscopic variables . to achieve this goal
, we had to substantially redefine the expansion procedure and , as a result , obtain a qualitatively new class of turbulence models .
kinetic theory for a low - density gas is based on the boltzmann equation    @xmath10    for a single particle distribution function @xmath11 , where collision integral    @xmath12    if the system hamiltonin is known , this equation can be derived directly from the liuville theorem . here
the element of the phase -space volume @xmath13 and @xmath14 is the relative velocity of colliding particles . if the intermolecular distance is @xmath15 where @xmath16 is the length - scale of intermolecular interaction , the strait particle trajectories between collisions are assumed in deriving expression ( 1.2 ) .
the probability density functions in ( 1.2 ) are @xmath17 and @xmath18 . since in accord with the theory of elastic collisions ,
the velocities @xmath19 are expressed in terms of @xmath20 , the integration in ( 1.2 ) is carried out over the phase space @xmath21 only . the relaxation -time approximation ( rta ) :
@xmath22    where @xmath23 is the distribution function in thermodynamic equilibrium and @xmath24 is a properly chosen relaxation time , is an often used anztaz , mentioned in landau and lifshitz ( 1981 ) as a `` rough estimate of the ( boltzmann ) collision integral '' ( 1.2 ) .
still , recent implementations of this approximation in the so called `` lattice boltzmann '' numerical codes , led to a remarkable success in simulating a wide variety of extremely complex fluid flows .
as of today , the approach has been tested on basically all examples of classic laminar flows ( benzi ( 1992 ) , chen ( 1998 ) , succi ( 2001 ) ) .
the robustness , speed and simplicity of the method , made it an attractive tool for both theoretical investigations and engineering design .
even more spectacular , and somewhat unexpected , is success enjoyed by the lattice boltzmann method in simulating complex turbulent flows ( h. chen ( 2003 ) ) . in this application ,
the relaxation time @xmath24 is expressed in terms of hydrodynamic observables : @xmath25 , where turbulent kinetic energy is @xmath26 and the mean dissipation rate is @xmath27 . in this case ,
in the first order of the chapman - enskog ( ce ) expansion one obtains the well - known @xmath3 model with the non - linear @xmath3 model appearing in the next order ( chen et al ( 2004 ) ) .
in addition to speed and simplicity , the most attractive feature of this type of turbulence modeling is that it _ does not require theory of pressure - velocity correlations _ which , in complex flows , is an extremely difficult , still unsolved , problem .
typically , derivation of hydrodynamic navier - stokes equations from kinetic theory is based on a few assumptions . 1 .
if spatial gradients of mean velocity , density and temperature are equal to zero , the gas is assumed in thermodynamic equilibrium ; 2 .
expansion in powers of dimensionless rate of strain @xmath28 where @xmath29 leads to transport equations describing various physical phenomena .
the equations , derived this way can be used to fully describe large reynolds number turbulent flows requiring at least @xmath30 number of degrees of freedom . in the flows of practical importance
this number is huge and therefore , the value of a coarse graining procedure leading to turbulence models can hardly be overestimated .
it has been shown ( yakhot et al ( 1992 ) ) that the systematic derivation of turbulence models directly from the navier - stokes equations , can be formulated in terms of wyld s ( 1961 ) diagramamtic expansion in _ two _ dimensionless parameters : the reynolds number @xmath31 and , familiar from kinetic theory , dimensionless rate of strain @xmath32 .
the first expansion is responsible for description of isotropic and homogeneous turbulence with the non - zero energy flux across the scales and the second  -   for the non - zero _ spatial _ fluxes and flow structures . due to proliferation of tensorial indices in the high - order contributions ,
the resummation of the expansion is an extremely difficult task and it has been conjectured by polyakov ( 2001 ) in the middle of seventies that it may result in a kinetic equation containing all terms of wyld s series .
if this is true , a turbulence model of an arbitrary non - linearity and complexity may be contained in a relatively simple kinetic equation . _
the most important and interesting feature of this system is that , unlike equilibrium , the @xmath33 state of isotropic and homogeneous turbulence is not flux- free but involves a large @xmath34 energy flux across the scales .
thus , to derive turbulence models , it is desirable to develop a kinetic approach not based on the equilibrium , flux - free , zero - order state . _    in this paper we , building upon a remarkable work of h. chen et al ( 2004 ) , consider both turbulent ( hydrodynamic ) and thermal ( microscopic ) velocity fluctuations as governed by the boltzmann -bgk kinetic equation . since microscopic and hydrodynamic fluctuations occupy their respective fractions of the phase - space , this equation is formally defined on a somewhat enlarged phase - space .
the coarse - graining , eliminates the small - scale fast microscopic fluctuations and restores the six - dimensional space , leading to the kinetic equation for the _ large - scale ( turbulent ) velocity component only_. in this case , the zero - order , zero - mean - spatial - gradient state is not an equilibrium but that of isotropic and homogeneous turbulence characterized by a finite energy flux across the scales .
the chapman - enskog expansion applied to this state leads to a novel set of turbulence models of arbitrary nonlinearity .
this paper is organized as follows . in the next section
we , for the sake of clarity and continuity , describe traditional derivation of hydrodynamic approximations from kinetic equation and briefly outline the way turbulence models appear from the ns equations . in section 3 , which is most important for the present development ,
we introduce the non - equilibrium kinetic equation and the zero - order pdf for isotropic and homogeneous turbulence , both defined on an enlarged phase - space . in section 4
, the finite energy flux is defined as a dynamic constraint and it is shown that the introduced in section 3 non - equilibrium pdf is indeed a solution to non - equilibrium equation which conserves the total kinetic energy of a system . finally , in section 5 , the coarse - grained kinetic equation for hydrodynamic modes is derived .
it is shown in sections 6 and 7 , that the ce expansion , leads to transport equations for both turbulent velocity field and kinetic energy . in section 8 , choosing a proper relaxation time , we show that our kinetic equation contains the well known k - e , reynolds stress and non - linear models .
in addition , this simple equation contains turbulent models of an arbitrary non - linearity and complexity .
some new effects , originating from interaction of spatial fluxes with the energy flux ( cascade ) are identified .
summary and conclusions are presented in section 9 .      in equilibrium , with all temporal and spatial gradients equal to zero , the left side of kinetic equation ( 1.1),(1.2 ) is equal to zero and the remaining equation @xmath35 has a solution :    @xmath36    where the energy @xmath37 is conserved in the process of collision , i.e. @xmath38 and the temperature @xmath39 . for a gas moving with the constant velocity @xmath40 ,
the solution is :    @xmath41    this solution is clear if we introduce internal energy @xmath42 and write    @xmath43    in a frame of reference moving with velocity @xmath40 , we have    @xmath44    in deriving transport approximation , one expands the probability density powers the large - scale field ( ll ) @xmath45 .
the constant component @xmath46 can be removed by the galileo transformation and only derivatives of the large scale field @xmath40 are relevant .
in this section we , for the sake of clarity and continuity , briefly describe the main steps leading from the boltzmann equation to hydrodynamic approximations .
classic derivation of transport approximations starts with the boltzmann equation ( 1.1 ) , ( 1.2 ) or ( 1.3 ) and equilibrium pdf    @xmath47    in this section we denote velocity of the frame of reference @xmath48 which is a physical ( not phase - space variable ) . in what follows
we restore the notation @xmath49 used above .
this should not lead to any difficulty .
the equilibrium pdf is obtained from equation @xmath50 , which is valid locally , so that the hydrodynamic field @xmath51 can be a slow varying function of time and space coordinates .
in addition , the conservation laws and the symmetries of collision integral give :    @xmath52    introducing the fluid density @xmath53 and integrating ( 1.1)-(1.2 ) over @xmath54 leads to the continuity equation :    @xmath55    multiplying ( 1.1)-(1.2 ) by @xmath54 with subsequent integration over the phase space yields :    @xmath56    where the stress tensor is : @xmath57 .
in thermodymanic equilibrium , the stress - tensor is evaluated readily with the distribution function @xmath23 from ( 2.1 ) giving @xmath58 , so that combining this with the ideal gas equation , gives :    @xmath59    in what follows @xmath60 . defining @xmath61
, we obtain :    @xmath62    on the equilibrium pdf @xmath23 , @xmath63 and the third - order in fluctuations contribution to ( 2.6 ) is equal to zero
.      the nature of the large - scale hydrodynamic field @xmath64 in ( 2.4 ) has not been specified .
the problem of turbulence modeling is formulated as follows : let the velocity field @xmath65 where @xmath66 and @xmath67 .
our goal is to derive the equation for the large - scale slow field @xmath40 .
the above decomposition gives :    @xmath68    or    @xmath69    where    @xmath70    now we need a theory or at least set of rules to express both stress @xmath71 and the reynolds stress @xmath72 in terms of the large - scale field @xmath40 and its derivatives .
this program has been systematically developed in yakhot et al ( 1992 ) , smith et al ( 1992 ) .
the method consists of a few steps : 1 . in the first order , the stress tensor @xmath73
this leads to the navier - stokes equations ( ns ) .
2 .   add a statistically isotropic and homogeneous stirring force to the right side of the ns .
this force generates an @xmath34 energy flux @xmath74 across scales . in the case of a free turbulence with the total kinetic energy @xmath8 ,
prepared as an initial condition , the energy balance reads @xmath75 .
3 .   use wyld s ( 1961 ) expansion to eliminate small - scale velocity fluctuations .
it has been shown ( yakhot et al ( 1992 ) ) that development of turbulent models involves a double expansion in powers of two dimensionless parameters : the reynolds number @xmath76 and rate of strain @xmath77 where @xmath78 is the relaxation time of turbulent fluctuation .
the expansion in re leads to the fixed point @xmath79 , corresponding to the zero- spatial -gradient state of isotropic and homogeneous turbulence which serves a a ground state for the additional expansion in powers @xmath80 .
the first expansion accounts for the non - zero energy flux of isotropic and homogeneous turbulence while the second  -   gives rise to the not zero mean velocity field and various fluxes . in the first order of the @xmath80-expansion one derives a variant of @xmath3 model , in the second -the reynolds stress model and non - linear models etc .
it is important that the second order @xmath81 terms of the non - linear turbulent models , are well known from kinetic theory as next - order in the chapman - enskog expansion corrections to the navier - stokes equations ( landau - lifshitz ( 1981 ) ) .
this fact establishes similarities between wyld s expansion of the ns equations and the ce expansion of kinetic theory . while , one can formally write each term of the @xmath80-expansion , resummation of an infinite series is totally out of reach .
in turbulent flows , the velocity field is characterized by three correlation lengths ( landau and lifshitz ( 1959 ) , frisch ( 1996 ) ) : 1 .
microscopic mean -free path @xmath82 , where @xmath83 is the speed of sound and @xmath24 is the microscopic relaxation time ; 2 .
hydrodynamic inertial interval @xmath84 , where both large - scale forcing and viscous effects can be neglected and 3 .
nonuniversal , geometry - dependent , energy - production range @xmath85 .
we denote three velocity fields corresponding to these intervals as @xmath86 , respectively .
( see fig.1 ) .
locally , at the scales @xmath87 , the system is in thermodynamic equilibrium so that the @xmath88-field obeys maxwell ( gibbs ) statistics .
hydrodynamic approximations follow elimination ( small - scale averaging ) of modes from the interval @xmath89 , where @xmath24 is the relaxation time characterizing dynamics of small perturbations from thermodynamic equilibrium . after that
, the turbulence models are derived by averaging the navier - stokes equations in the interval @xmath90 .
we do not doubt the ability of the navier - stokes equations fully describe turbulent flow of arbitrarily large reynolds number . in this case , since the number of excited modes is at least @xmath91 , the computational cost of these direct simulations ( dns ) is very high .
our concern here is with derivation of the coarse - grained equations ( turbulence models ) for partial representation of turbulence in the interval @xmath92 , which is hard to obtain from hydrodynamics . in other words ,
_ in this work we are interested in the mode - elimination from the interval @xmath93 applied directly to the boltzmann equation . if successful , this way we will obtain the coarse - grained kinetic equation , containing , as a hydrodynamic approximation , all possible turbulence models , which are very hard to derive from the navier - stokes equation . _ in particular , we are interested in equations of motion for the coarse - grained or filtered velocity field which includes only a small fraction of hydrodynamic modes corresponding to the top of inertial range , i.e. @xmath92 . whatever the filtering procedure , the coarse - grained fields are obtained from the full fields by averaging over flow volumes of linear dimension @xmath94 , where @xmath95 is the filtering scale or over the modes @xmath96 with @xmath97 in a fourier space . also , one can define a coarse - grained field as :    @xmath98    where the integration is carried out over the volume @xmath99 centered about the point @xmath100 or    @xmath101 where @xmath102 is a filter function .
we see that the coarse - grained velocity field is a multipoint construction and evaluation of high - order moments is not a simple task .
moreover , spatial velocity derivatives are defined on a cut - off as :    @xmath103    and , if @xmath104 , their moments , called structure functions , obey multifractal statistics .
the inertial range multifractality ( anomalous scaling ) means that the moments of different orders are independent of each other . as a result ,
the full statistical description of velocity field involves a large , infinite in the limit @xmath105 , number of independent parameters .
this makes an accurate coarse - graining with the filter ( mesh ) size @xmath106 basically impossible .
the situation changes dramatically in the limit @xmath107 .
it is a well - established , though not well - understood , fact that at the scales @xmath108 , both the turbulent velocity fields @xmath2 and @xmath109 obey close- to- gaussian statistics .
moreover , it was demonstrated by schumacher et al ( 2007 ) that in the low - reynolds number turbulence , the velocity derivatives , too , are gaussian random variables .
if this is so , the entire large - scale field can be accurately described in terms of the second - order moment only .
our goal is to derive a coarse - grained equation for the modes @xmath110 fluctuating on the scales @xmath111 . in the standard turbulence modeling , this is operationally achieved by introducing a large `` effective viscosity '' @xmath112 , where @xmath113 , into the navier - stokes equations . due to a particular choice of viscosity @xmath114
, the small - scale modes ( @xmath115 ) are _ overdamped _ and the resulting hydrodynamic equations describe large - scale properties ( @xmath92 ) of the flow only .
the defined this way equation is called `` transport model '' as as opposed to the les models based on an inertial range cut -off @xmath116 . since the dominant contribution to turbulent kinetic energy
is contained in the large -scale fluctuations , we write the zero - order nonequillibrium probability density function in the laboratory reference frame :    @xmath117    in this expression , both @xmath54 and @xmath64- fields are phase - space variables independent of time and space .
thus , we have temporarily enlarged the phase space from six to nine dimensions .
the flow described by the probability density function ( 3.1 ) can be perceived as an ensemble of laminar flows each in thermodynamic equilibrium with the _ fluctuating equilibrium maxwell - gibbs probability density .
_ it is clear that : @xmath118 and @xmath119 and @xmath120 . in the laminar limit
@xmath121    @xmath122    and integrating over @xmath64 , we recover the expression ( 2.1 ) .
the pdf ( 3.1 ) , resembling that of a mixture of gases with different temperatures @xmath6 and @xmath123 , describes an essentially non - equilibrium state .
_ it will be shown below that ( 3.1 ) is a solution to a `` nonequilibrium '' kinetic equation and this temperature difference is related to the energy flux from hydrodynamic modes to the microscopic ones . _    from the above definitions : @xmath124    in what follows , we assume the probability density    @xmath125    so that locally @xmath126 and @xmath127    the pdf of hydrodynamic velocity field @xmath128 is obtained from ( 3.3 ) by integrating out the microscopic variable @xmath54 , i.e.    @xmath129    _ our goal is to derive a kinetic equation for @xmath128 describing turbulent fluctuations only . to achieve this goal ,
we first increase the original six - dimensional phase space of the previous section ( @xmath130 ) to the nine - dimensional one ( @xmath131 ) and , eliminating thermodynamic fluctuations , project the nine - dimensional problem to the six - dimensional one @xmath132 .
the advantage of this procedure from the turbulence modeling viewpoint is that while original problem involved @xmath133 number of particles , the coarse - grained one  -   only @xmath134 , where the integral scale @xmath135 is the large scale correlation length of turbulence . _
since the fast @xmath136 -field varies on the time scale @xmath137 , where @xmath83 stands for the speed of sound , @xmath138 , we can consider these components statistically ortogonal and introduce the continuity equation in the enlarged 9d - phase- space . in this case
the botzmann equation ( landau / lifshitz ( 1981 ) ) :    @xmath139    where @xmath140 is not yet specified ` non - equilibrium collision integral ' with @xmath141 obtained from equation :    @xmath142    with @xmath143 ( @xmath144 .
_ thus , in the theory developed below , we abandon the equilibrium pdf ( 2.1 ) for the the zero - spatial - gradient state of a gas in favor of the nonequilibrium expression ( 3.1 ) .
_ the detailed discussion of this point will be given below .
here we just mention that due to the non - zero energy flux across the scales , the kinetic energy of the zero - spatial - gradient ( @xmath33 ) turbulent flow decays leading to increase of the gas temperature @xmath6 .
if a turbulent flow is supported by a large - scale energy input per second @xmath145 , by nonlinearity , this energy is transfered to the smallest scales where it is dissipated .
it is usually assumed that the nature of the dissipation mechanism is unimportant . on the inertial- range scales , where both energy pumping and dissipation are negligibly small , the dynamics are characterized by the mean energy flux @xmath146 , where @xmath9 is the mean dissipation rate . in case of isotropic and homogeneous turbulence , prepared at initial instant of time with kinetic energy @xmath147 , the energy @xmath148 decays to zero . since in this case , all spatial gradients are equal to zero , no _
mean spatial fluxes _ are involved in the relaxation process .
_ unlike equilibrium gas , this strongly non - equilibrium system is characterized by a non - zero constant energy flux _ across the scales _ _ .
it has been shown in a series of extraordinary works by zakharov et al ( 1975 ) , ( 1992 ) , ( 1984 ) that , in case of turbulence , the euler equations , with velocity field written in terms of clebsch variables , can be represented as a kinetic equation for waves ( particles ) with the collision integral @xmath149 describing the non - linear interactions .
it has been shown that , in addition to equilibrium solutions , the equation @xmath150 for the occupation numbers @xmath151 , playing the role of the pdf in the @xmath152-space , has solutions corresponding to the non - zero constant fluxes in the wave - number space .
the direction of these fluxes is exclusively determined by physics of the problem and peculiarities of non - linear interactions .
for example , the mean field approximation developed in yakhot ( 1992 ) , led to the kolomogorov energy spectrum as one of zakharov s constant - flux solutions .
thus , unlike thermodynamic equilibrium , the kinetic equation for a zero -mean - gradient turbulent flow must satisfy the flux ( energy balance ) constraints :    @xmath153    valid in the statistically steady state or    @xmath154    -  in case of decaying turbulence .
the relations ( 4.2 ) and ( 4.3 ) , reflecting the energy balance in a flow , are independent upon the nature of the dissipation mechanism .
we split collision integral @xmath140 into two components : @xmath155 responsible for the non - zero energy flux of isotropic and homogeneous turbulence and @xmath156  -   for the spatial fluxes of a general turbulent flow .
since , as was pointed out above , the mean energy flux is a large - scale property , no differential operator can enter the expression .
thus we have : @xmath157 and    @xmath158\frac{{\cal e}}{{\cal k}}f({\bf c , v})\ ] ]      now we will show that the zero - order pdf ( 3.1 ) is a solution to kinetic equation describing isotropic and homogeneous turbulence .
since in this case , all spatial derivatives are equal to zero , the kinetic equation is :    @xmath159    and @xmath160 , @xmath161 and @xmath162 . substituting ( 3.1 ) into ( 3.5)-(3.6 ) gives :    @xmath163    this equation , valid for all values of independent parameters @xmath164 and @xmath165 , can be correct only if :    @xmath166    @xmath167    _ thus , we conclude that the zero - order pdf ( 3.1 ) is indeed a solution to the kinetic equation ( 3.5 ) , ( 3.6 ) for isotropic and homogeneous turbulence , subject to the energy constraints ( 4.1),(4.2 ) .
one can also see that according to ( 4.6 ) , ( 4.7 ) : @xmath168 , which reflects conservation of the total kinetic energy in decaying isotropic and homogeneous turbulence . _
introducing conditional probability density @xmath169 we can write :    @xmath170    so that    @xmath171    @xmath172    and @xmath173    below we develop an approach resembling the one proposed for the probability densities of the passive scalar in a random velocity field in sinai , yakhot ( 1989 ) . integrating the nine - dimensional boltzmann equation ( 3.5 ) , ( 4.3 ) over the relatively fast- field @xmath54 gives :    @xmath174    where    @xmath175    and the collision integral    @xmath176    is formally written with the yet unspecified relaxation time @xmath78 .
the coarse -grained zero - order pdf is :    @xmath177      the expression for conditional expectation value @xmath178 is a subject to four dynamic constraints .    1
.   it must be invariant under galileo transformation and not violate the galileo invariance of equation ( 5.5 ) .
this is the reason for the @xmath179 term in the right side of ( 5.3 ) .    2 .
integrating ( 5.5 ) over @xmath64 must lead to the continuity equation .
this gives :    @xmath180    3 .
multiplying ( 5.5 ) by @xmath64 and comparing the result with ( 2.6 ) yields :    @xmath181    4 .   in the zeroth order of expansion in powers of dimensionless spatial gradients ( chapman - enskog expansion ) , the equation ( 5.5 ) must generate ( 2.5 ) with the pressure term containing information about the integrated out microscopic variables . in a simplest case of ideal gas , @xmath182 .
a relation satisfying the above constraints is :    @xmath183    where    @xmath184    thus , the course - grained kinetic equation , correctly describing isotropic and homogeneous turbulence ( zero spatial gradients ) and satisfying the dynamic constraints presented above , is :    @xmath185    the equation ( 5.11 ) is the main result of this paper .      integrating ( 5.11 ) over @xmath64 gives continuity equation ( 2.3 ) .
in addition , multiplying it by @xmath64 and integrating leads to :    @xmath186+\frac{\overline{(v_{i}-v_{i})(v_{j}-v_{j})}}{{\cal k}}\frac{\partial p'}{\partial x_{i } } + \frac { \overline{\rho({\bf v - v})({\bf v - v})^{2}}}{{\cal k}}\frac{{\cal e}}{d{\cal k}}=0\ ] ]    or    @xmath187+\frac{\overline{(v_{i}-v_{i})(v_{j}-v_{j})}}{\rho{\cal k}}\frac{\partial p'}{\partial x_{i}}+ \frac{\overline{\rho({\bf v - v})({\bf v - v})^{2}}}{\rho { \cal k}}\frac{{\cal e}}{d{\cal k}}=0\ ] ]    in the zeroth order , averaged with with the pdf ( 5.7 ) , the equation ( 5.14 ) gives the euler equation :    @xmath188    where @xmath189 .
it follows from ( 5.7 ) and ( 5.11 ) that in the case of strongly nonequilibrium flow as an unperturbed state , the equation of state @xmath190 in ( 5.11 ) is decoupled from the `` temperature '' @xmath123 entering the problem as a parameter in the zero -order pdf ( 5.7 ) . indeed , the coarse grained equation ( 5.11 ) gives for @xmath191 :    @xmath192    in the zeroth order ( @xmath33 ) , all gradients equal to zero , the equation ( 5.15 ) reads :    @xmath154    we also define a vector    @xmath193
to find the solution to the kinetic equation ( 5.11 ) we following chen et al ( 2004 ) write :    @xmath194    and    @xmath195    and @xmath196 .
the mean of any flow property is then    @xmath197    where    @xmath198    the zero - order pdf @xmath199 is given by expression ( 5.7 ) .
the first and second -order corrections are calculated readily with @xmath200 .
the result is :    @xmath201\equiv [ \frac{\partial } { \partial t}+{\bf v}\cdot \nabla +   \frac{{\bf v - v}}{{\cal k}}\cdot(\nabla p')+\frac{({\bf v - v})^{2}-d{\cal k}}{{\cal k}}\frac{{\cal e}}{d{\cal k}}]f^{(0)}=-\frac{f^{(1)}}{\tau_{t}}\ ] ]    and    @xmath202f^{(1)}-\frac{\partial f^{(0)}}{\partial t_{1}}=-\frac{f^{(2)}}{\tau_{t}}\end{aligned}\ ] ]    this gives :      and        using the pdf given by ( 6.8 ) , we can write :    @xmath205    and the normal stress ( pressure ) @xmath206 .
setting @xmath207 gives ;    @xmath208    and :    @xmath209    or introducing turbulence kinetic energy @xmath210 :    @xmath211    where @xmath189 .
two remarks are in order .
firsrt , an additional dimensionless expansion parameter , @xmath212 , which is not present in the ordinary chapman - enskog expansion , appears in the present nonequilibrium theory . in strong turbulence , where molecular relaxation can be neglected , the characteristic time is @xmath213 and @xmath214 , is nothing but the renormalized reynolds number @xmath215 , corresponding to the fixed point of isotropic and homogeneous turbulence .
second , the derived pressure @xmath216 leads to renormalization of the sound speed by the turbulent velocity fluctuations , derived in staroselsky et al ( 1990 ) and predicted earlier by candrasekhar ( 1995 ) in the context of gravitational collapse of interstellar gas .      combining the above results we , writing for the sake of simplicity of notation @xmath217 , have :    @xmath218    in what follows the last term in ( 6.15 ) , responsible for the so called dilatation effects in compressible flows , will be neglected . multiplying this equation by @xmath219 we summarize the above results : _ in the first order of the chapman -enskog expansion ,
the coarse grained kinetic equation ( 5.11 ) gives _ :    @xmath220    and    @xmath221
according to ( 6.6 )    @xmath222    where the operator @xmath223 is defined in ( 6.5 ) .
the symbol @xmath224 stands for the time - derivative in first - order contributions to the hydrodynamic equations .
for example :    @xmath225    @xmath226    and    @xmath227    it is clear that @xmath228 is a time derivative of all @xmath229 contributions to expansion and , according to ( 7.1 ) , @xmath230 .
thus ,      now , assuming @xmath232 , @xmath39 and @xmath233 , we rewrite ( 6.8 ) as    @xmath234    where    @xmath235\ ] ]    and    @xmath236    thus :    @xmath237^{2 } + \hspace{1 in } \nonumber \\    2{\cal k}\tau_{t}[-2[(v - v)_{\alpha}(v - v)_{\beta})-    ( v - v)_{\beta}\nabla_{\alpha}p-     ( v - v)_{\alpha}\nabla_{\beta } p]s_{\alpha,\beta})+   \frac{1}{\tau_{t}}(v - v)_{\alpha}(v - v)_{\beta}({\cal d}\tau_{t}s_{\alpha\beta }   )   ] \}\nonumber \\   -f^{(0)}\frac{\tau_{t}g}{2{\cal k}^{2 } } ( { \bf v - v)\cdot \nabla}{\cal k}\hspace{3in}\end{aligned}\ ] ]    where @xmath238 . collecting all contributions up
to @xmath239 simple calculation with @xmath240 gives :    @xmath241    so that for @xmath242 :    @xmath243    and finally :    @xmath244 + o(\nabla { \cal k})\ ] ]    the remaining @xmath245 contributions can be easily calculated . for example :    @xmath246    we see that    @xmath247    the usually neglected @xmath248 contributions to the turbulent models , may not be too small in the high - gradient regions of the flow .
introducing effective viscosity    @xmath249    with    @xmath250    gives :    @xmath251 + o(\nabla { \cal k})\ ] ]    we can summarize the results of this section : in the second order of expansion if @xmath207 and @xmath252 , the turbulence model reads :    @xmath253    and    @xmath254    in the high reynolds number regions of the flow , @xmath255 and    @xmath256    the expressions ( 8.4 ) and ( 8.3 ) have a few features not present in familiar turbulence models .
first , consider a simplest possible example of the fully developed statistically steady flow in an infinite channel . in this case
, @xmath257 , @xmath258 and the equation ( 8.3 ) reads :    @xmath259    the last contribution to the right side of equation ( 8.6 ) describing interaction of the energy flux in the wave - number space and momentum flux in the physical space , is not small in the proximity to the walls
. this effect does not appear in familiar turbulence models .
the equations ( 8.1 ) - ( 8.5 ) are quite involved and , as in the theories based on renormalized wyld s expansions of the navier - stokes equations , accounting for the higher - order contributions to the hydrodynamic approximation is impossible .
_ however , the main difference between the approach developed in this paper and the theories based on the renormalized perturbation expansions of the navier - stokes equations is that here the problem of resummaion of an infinite series does arise : the equations ( 8.1)-(8.5 ) and all high - order models , we even can not write down , are contained in a simple kinetic equation ( 5.11 ) . _
the boltzmann - equation ( 1.1)-(1.2 ) contains the navier - stokes equations capable of accurate description of turbulent flows . as was demonstrated in the nineties (
yakhot et al 1992 ) , rubinstein ( 1990 ) , ) the coarse -graining or small - scale elimination , applied to the ns equations , leads to the low - order turbulent models .
we believe that , in principle , _ the coarse - grained boltzmann equation ( 1.1)-(1.2 ) _ contains coarse - grained hydrodynamic approximations and _ all _ possible turbulence models ( both les and transport ) of an arbitrary nonlinearity and complexity . at the present time
, this coarse - graining procedure does not exist .
one can attempt to develop the wyld diagrammatic expansion applied directly on the non - linear equation ( 1.1)-(1.2 ) , eliminate fast modes and , as a result , derive turbulence models .
this well - defined program is extremely complex and we were unable to achieve much progress .    instead
, the theory proposed in this paper is based on a simple qualitative relaxation time approximation ( 1.1),(1.3 ) combined with the ` turbulent relaxation time ' @xmath213 which is an exact consequence of the energy balance ( 4.6 ) .
since kinetic energy is the large - scale property of turbulence , this relaxation time is the largest time - scale in a flow leading to the largest ` turbulent viscosity ' @xmath260 .
this way , the fast modes are overdamped and the resulting equations correspond to transport turbulent modeling describing velocity fluctuations on the scales @xmath92 .
transport modeling vs les . _
the choice of the often - used maxwell - gibbs distribution function ( 2.1 ) is an important step in derivation of the navier - stokes equations from kinetic theory .
given these equations , one defines a spatial cut- off @xmath95 and , averaging over the small - scale ( @xmath261 ) fluctuations , derives the coarse - grained ns equations , called turbulent models ( yakhot ( 1992 ) , smith et al ( 1992 ) , rubistein et al ( 1990 ) , yoshizawa ( 1987 ) ) . by construction ,
the resulting equations for the `` resolved scales '' involve spatial derivatives evaluated on the mesh ( cut -off ) , i.e. all gradients in these equations are :      as was shown above , the high - order modeling involves high powers of velocity gradients ( velocity differences ) , which , due to intermittency ( @xmath104 ) , can not be expressed in terms of small deviations from the gaussian pdf .
therefore , to describe a flow , including the inertial range ( @xmath263 ) dynamics , the model must satisfy an infinite number of non - trivial dynamic constraints involving , among other terms , pressure - velocity correlations ( yakhot and sreenivasan ( 2006 ) ) .
with increase of the difference @xmath264 , more and more constraints become relevant and , at the scales @xmath115 , the quality of all existing les models rapidly deteriorate : with increase of the moment order , the difference between full ( dns ) and model ( les ) simulations of high - order moments grows .    as @xmath107 ,
the probability density of velocity difference is extremely close to gaussian , the moments @xmath265 , @xmath266 and the problem of anomalous scaling does not appear .
( see fig . ) .
this huge simplification was the main and only reason for our choice of the non - equilibrium probability density ( 3.1 ) leading to the gaussian pdf ( 5.7 ) of the coarse - grained hydrodynamic field .
thus , the procedure developed here is valid for transport modeling only . to work out a similar approach to the les ( @xmath104 )
, one has to use the expressions for the multifractal pdfs of velocity difference , which is not a simple task .
+ _ 2 . the models . _ at the large scales @xmath92 , the zero - order ( @xmath33 ) flow can be described in terms of only _ two parameters _ : kinetic energy @xmath8 and mean dissipation rate @xmath9 , so that @xmath5 . despite superficial similarity of relaxation times ,
the coarse - grained kinetic equation , derived in this paper , is very different from the well -known @xmath267 model , widely used in engineering : + 1 .
no explicitly written momentum equation is involved in our model .
no separate equation for kinetic energy @xmath8 is needed : all information is contained in the kinetic equation ; + 3 .
the simple equation ( 5.11 ) contains @xmath267 , reynolds stress and all non - linear models etc .
thus , for example , it can describe the secondary vortices in a square duct flow , which no @xmath267 model is capable of doing .
no modeling of pressure - velocity correlations is needed : it is hidden in ( 5.11 ) .
this fact can be of extreme importance for computing complex flows .
the rapid distortion and memory effects are accounted for in ( 5.11 ) .
_ sound speed renormalization . _
the kinetic equation ( 5.11 ) contains an equation of state @xmath268 , which is a remnant of the integrated out microscopic , close - to- equilibrium , modes .
the equilibrium speed of sound is defined as usulal : @xmath269 . as follows from ( 6.12 ) , the speed of sound obtained from hydrodynamic approximation , derived in the lowest order of the non - equilibrium ce expansion , proposed in this work , is renormalized : @xmath270 .
this effect , appearing in the higher order of the renormalization group procedure applied to the ns equation , was derived and numerically tested in staroselsky et al ( 1990 ) and , even earlier , was suggested by chandrasekhar ( 1955 ) who was interested in the role of turbulence in dynamics of the interstellar gas collapse .
this feature may prove important for simulations of turbulent flows .    during last two hundred years
, the navier - stokes equations enjoyed remarkable success in describing low- knudsen and low- weisenberg number fluid flows .
this success was habitually attributed to the large scale- separation between hydrodynamic and microscopic modes : @xmath271 .
there is one caveat in this argument , though .
one must bear in mind that the ns equations are _ closed _ by imposing proper equations of state relating pressure to density and temperature .
invariably , the equilibrium equations of state or equilibrium thermodynamic relations are chosen for this purpose .
the problem is that the ce procedure , leading to the ns equations , is an expansion around the zero - spatial- gradient equilibrium state of fluid and both the pressure gradient and the gradient of turbulent kinetic energy are large -scale properties defined on the same hydrodynamic scales .
thus , in this state of fluid , the only relevant dimensionless parameter is mach number @xmath272 .
therefore , to describe the stresses , in addition to thermodynamic considerations based on an estimate @xmath273 , one has to add the turbulent contribution @xmath274 , which appears naturally in the procedure developed above .
thus , strictly speaking , the pressure term in the ns equation , which is the functional of the solution , must be determined self - consistently .    given the relaxation time @xmath5 and effective viscosity @xmath275 , the kinetic equation ( 5.11 ) generates various fields such as @xmath40 and @xmath8 .
however , to evaluate the relaxation time , the magnitude of the local dissipation rate is needed .
this can be done selfconsistently , if , in accord with kolmogorv theory , we assume          where @xmath278 denotes position ( coordinate ) of a lattice site and the averaging is carried out selfconsistently on a non - equilibrium pdf , which is a solution to the kinetic equation ( 5.11 ) .
another possibility is to use the dissipation rate directly from the energy balance ( 8.5 ) .
+ the proportionality constants in ( 8 .
2 ) are reasonably close to those quoted in speziale ( 1987 ) , rubinstein et al ( 1990 ) and yoshizawa ( 1987 ) .
it should be pointed out that the value of calculations based the low - order trancations is not clear .
indeed , recasting the results of sections 7 and 8 in terms of dimensionless rate of strain @xmath279 , we find that @xmath280 and the next order gives : @xmath281 .
taking into account that in the flows of engineering importance the parameter @xmath80 is not small , often reaching values @xmath282 , the perturbation expansion does not converge and no trancation is , in general , possible .
_ we would like to reiterate that the entire series is contained in a relatively simple kinetic equation ( 5.11)_.    the low - order hydrodynamic approximations and turbulence models , contained in ( 5.11 ) , are similar to the well - known ones , which have been widely tested in both scientific and engineering environments ( see chen ( 2004 ) , for example ) .
the future simulations of strongly nonlinear , rapidly distorted or oscillating flows , will provide a decisive test of the limits of validity and accuracy of calculations based on the kinetic equation derived in this paper .
benzi r. , succi s. , & vergassola m. , 1992 , _ the lattice boltzmann equation : theory and applications _
, phys . rep .
* 222 * , 145 .
bhatnagar p.l , gross e & m. krook , 1954 _ a model for collisions in gases i. small amplitude processes in charged and neutral one - component systems_. phys .
94 * , 511525 .
chandrasekhar s. 1951 , _
london a * 210 * , 26 .
chen h. , kandasamy s. , orszag s.a . , shock r. , succi s. , & yakhot v. 2003 , _ extended boltzmann kinetic equation for turbulent flows_. science * 301 * , 633636 .
chen h , orszag s.a .
, staroselsky i. , & succi s. 2004 , _ expanded analogy between boltzmann kinetic theory of fluids and turbulence _ , j. fluid mechanics , * 519 * 301 - 313 .
, & doolen g. 1998 _ lattice boltzmann method for fluid flows _ , ann . rev .
fluid mech . * 30 * , 329 .
frisch , u. 1996 _ turbulence _ cambridge university press .
kolmogorov , a.n .
1942 , _ the equation of turbulent motion in an incompressible viscous fluid _ , izv .
nauk sssr , ser .
fiz * vi * , 56 - 58 . landau l.d . &
lifshitz e.m .
_ physical kinetics _ , butterworth - heinenann , oxford ( 1981 ) .
launder , b. & spaulding , d. 1974 , _ the numerical computations of turbulent flows _ , comput . meth .
appl . mech
* 3 * , 269 - 289 .
polyakov a.m. 2001 , private communication .
prandl , l. 1925 _ bericht ber untersuchungen zur ausgebildeten turbulenz_. z. angew . math . mech . * 5 * , 136 - 139 .
rubinstein , r.b . & barton , j.m .
1990 nonlinear reynolds stress models and the renormalization group , phys .
fluids a*2 * , 1472 - 1476 .
sinai , ya .
g. & yakhot , v. 1989 _ limiting probability distributions of a passive scalar in a random velocity field _ ,
* 63 * 1962 - 1965 .
schumacher , j. , sreenivasan , k.r . &
yakhot , v. 2007 _ asymptotic exponents from low re flows _ new journ phys . *
9 * , 1 - 19 .
speziale , c. 1987 _ on the nonlinear @xmath283 and @xmath267 models of turbulence _ .
mech . * 78 * , 459 - 467 .
staroselsky , i , yakhot , v. , kida , s. & orszag , s 1988 _ long - time , large - scale properties of randomly stirred compressible fluid _
, phys.rev.lett . ,
* 65 * , 171 - 174 .
succi , s. _ the lattice boltzmann equation for fluid dynamics and beyond _ oxford university press .
wyld , _ formulation of the theory of turbulence in incompressible fluid .
_ , annals of physics * 14 * , 143 - 165 ( 1961 ) .
yakhot , v. , orszag .
s. , thangam , s. , gatski , t. & speziale , c. 1992 _ development of turbulence models for shear flows by a double expansion technique_. phys .
fluids a*4 * , 1510 - 1520 .
yakhot , v. & smith l.m . , 1992 _ the renormalization group , the @xmath284-expansion and derivation of turbulence models _ , j. sci .
* 7 * , 35 - 61 .
yakhot , v. & sreenivasan , k.r .
anomalous scaling of structure function and dynamic constraints on turbulence simulation .
. phys . * 121 * , 823 - 841 .
yoshizawa , a. 1987 _ statistical modeling of transport - equation for the kinetic energy dissipation rate .
fluids * 30 * , 628 - 631 .
yakhot , v. & zakharov , v.e . , 1993 _ hidden conservation laws in hydrodynamics ; energy and dissipation rate spectra in strong turbulence .
_ physica d * 64 * , 380 - 394 .
zakharov , v.e .
, 1984 _ kolmogorov spectra in weak turbulence _ in basic plasma physica , galeev a.a .
& sudan r.m . , editors , ( north holland , amsterdam ) zakharov , v.e .
, falkovich , g. & lvov , v.s . , 1992 _ kolmogorov spectra in weak turbulence .
_ springer , heidelberg zakharov v.e . &
lvov , v.s . , 1975 _ statistical description of nonlinear wave fields . _
, radiophysics and electronics , springer , heidelberg .


the galaxy luminosity function ( @xmath10 ) remains at the core of both galaxy evolution and cosmology . by integrating @xmath10 over space and time
, various observable distributions can be obtained .
in particular , differential number counts of galaxies as a function of apparent magnitude , @xmath0 , is obtained by integrating @xmath10 over all redshifts and morphological types .
the reliability of the predicted @xmath0 values depends directly on the cosmological model and on how well the evolution of galaxies is modelled from their formation to the present .
the study of number counts can therefore be used to test world models or to search for evolution during the look - back time .
the function @xmath0 provides one of the most fundamental observables and has been studied by several authors ( for reviews see ellis 1997 ; koo & kron 1992 ; sandage 1988 ) .
recently , a major effort has been made to reach very faint magnitudes using the _ hubble space telescope _
( _ hst _ ) .
although the _ hst _ can not compete with ground - based observations in terms of collecting area , it does provide an unprecedent view of the optical sky at small angular scales and faint flux levels .
a number of authors have studied faint galaxy counts based on the hubble deep field ( hdf ) @xcite and using different photometry packages @xcite . in this paper
, we use the notation @xmath7 , @xmath8 , and @xmath9 to denote magnitudes in the _ hst _ passbands on the @xmath2 system @xcite .
@xcite has compared the hdf catalogues available in the literature .
they generally show good agreement , although the effects of different isophotal thresholds and different splitting algorithms are apparent .
however , @xcite showed that , at @xmath11 , the different galaxy counts agree to within @xmath12 in all the catalogues , whereas at @xmath13 there is a factor of 1.7 difference among them .
this emphasizes the fact that galaxy counting is not a precise science .    in this paper
, the hdf will be used to test the validity of previous number count studies and to produce a new determination of the faint end of @xmath0 for magnitudes fainter than @xmath1 .
surface - brightness fluctuation ( sbf ) measurements are used .
this allows us to explore @xmath0 beyond the limiting magnitude of the hdf and to overcome most of the limitations arising from incompleteness , providing new , stronger constraints on the faint end of @xmath0 .
this work is based on data from the hdf north .
observations were made in 1995 december 1830 , and both raw and reduced data have been put into public domain as a community service @xcite .
version 2 f450w , f606w and f814w images , released into public domain on 1996 february 29 , have been used here .    the final version 2 images were combined using the drizzle algorithm .
drizzling causes the noise in one pixel to be correlated with the noise in the adjacent one @xcite .
the sbf technique is based on the spectral analysis of an image . because the power spectrum of the image is modified by the drizzling process , drizzled images were not considered in this study .
`` weighted and cosmic - ray cleaned '' images have been used instead .
these are flat - fielded , cosmic - ray - rejected and sky - subtracted stacked images at each dither position .
only dark exposures have been selected .
each of the the three wide - field and the planetary camera wfpc2 chips were analyzed separately .
the labels of all images considered , the corresponding filter and the total exposure times are listed in table [ t - data ] .
the sbf concept was introduced by @xcite , who noted that , in the surface photometry of a galaxy far enough away to remain unresolved , a pixel - to - pixel fluctuation is observed because of the poisson statistics of the spatial distribution of stars , globular clusters , background galaxies , etc .
this technique was introduced with the aim of measuring distances . comparing sbfs produced by the stellar population of a galaxy with those of nearby galaxies for which externally calibrated distances are available , accurate estimates of distances
can be obtained up to @xmath1440 mpc @xcite .
other authors have used sbf studies to determine the age and metallicity of unresolved stellar populations of nearby galaxies @xcite ; however , the sbf signal can provide information about other kinds of undetected and unresolved objects in an image .
this is the case , for example , of globular cluster populations @xcite . in this paper ,
sbfs have been used to characterize the faint end of @xmath0 using undetected galaxies in the hdf - n images .
next in this section , the theoretical background of sbfs and the hdf - n signal measurement are described in detail .
the sbf technique involves spectral analysis of the pixel - to - pixel fluctuation signal .
this provides the total point spread function psf - convolved variance ( @xmath15 ) produced by all point objects whose spatial flux distribution is convolved with the psf , and the total non - psf - convolved variance ( @xmath16 ) .
a convolution in the real space transforms into a product in fourier space . for this reason
, the power spectrum of an image , @xmath17 , has the form :    @xmath18    where @xmath19 is the power spectrum of the psf convolved with some window function .
the @xmath19 can be approximated by the power spectrum of the psf alone , @xmath20 , with a negligible error @xcite .
so eq .  [ pow1 ] transforms into    @xmath21    once the power spectrum of an image has been computed , the variances @xmath15 and @xmath16 can be obtained fitting eq .
[ pow2 ] to data .    in hdf images
, @xmath15 is mainly produced by faint galaxies , and , as we will see later , by cosmic rays .
so @xmath15 must be equal to the sum of the variances produced by faint galaxies ( @xmath22 ) and by cosmic rays ( @xmath23 ) : @xmath24 on the other hand , @xmath16 is the sum of read - out noise ( @xmath25 ) , photon shot noise ( @xmath26 ) , and dark current ( @xmath27 ) variances :    @xmath28    the pixel - to - pixel variance produced by a class of objects can be evaluated as the second moment of the differential number counts of that object population @xcite . in the present study ,
the target population is composed by faint undetected galaxies .
the brightest individuals , which are detected , must be masked out before the sbf analysis .
if all sources brighter than a limiting flux ( @xmath29 ) are masked , then the variance produced by the remaining non - masked population is : @xmath30    we can put this equation in terms of magnitudes via the relationship @xmath31 @xmath32 being the flux ( @xmath33 s@xmath34 pix@xmath34 ) , and @xmath35 the magnitude of an object yielding one unit of flux per unit time ; that is , the photometric zero point listed in table [ t - zero ] .
if @xmath0 is known , then the theoretical variance produced by faint galaxies can be estimated . assuming the following pure power - law form for @xmath0 : @xmath36 where @xmath37 is a normalizing constant and @xmath38 is the slope of the magnitude distribution , the variance produced by the non - masked galaxy population is then @xmath39 where @xmath40 is the limiting magnitude ; i.e. the magnitude corresponding to the limiting flux , @xmath29 .
we will refer to this variance as the @xmath0-estimated @xmath41 from here on .
as we have shown , in order to compute it , an initial @xmath0 , obtained from a given photometric catalogue , must be assumed .
a number of authors have studied @xmath0 in the hdf - n .
the main discrepancies between previous number count studies occur between @xcite and @xcite .
these coincide for `` bright '' magnitudes , but large differences arise for fainter galaxies , the @xcite number counts being larger than those of @xcite .
as pointed out by @xcite , there are two reasons for this discrepancy .
first , as we go fainter the @xcite magnitudes become systematically brighter than those of @xcite .
@xcite claimed that the effect of this on the counts is actually quite small , generally @xmath42 .
second , @xcite find objects that @xcite do not detect at all .
this appears to account for the majority of the differences between the data sets .
@xcite argued that virtually all of these objects are merged in the reductions of @xcite but not in their data .    in figure [ glf ] ,
differential number counts results from @xcite ( filled circles ) and @xcite ( open circles ) are plotted for the f450w , f606w , and f814w filters , respectively .
these data have been obtained from tables 9 and 10 in @xcite , and from tables 8 , 10 and 12 in @xcite , all expressed in the total magnitude scale .
following eq .
[ bglf ] , @xmath0 has been fitted to the data of @xcite and @xcite , and the fitted functions ( solid lines ) are also plotted .
as @xcite found a change in the @xmath0 slope at a magnitude of around 26 , @xmath0 has been fitted to their data in the two magnitude intervals [ 23 , 26 ] and [ 26 , 29 ] .
the fitted @xmath0 functions have been used in eq .
[ sigma_bg ] to compute the @xmath0-estimated @xmath41 .
results are listed in table [ t - sigma ] .
these @xmath0-estimated @xmath41 values will be later on compared with those directly derived from the sbf measurements ( which we will call the sbf - measured @xmath41 ) .
this comparison will allow us to evaluate the validity of the differential number counts of both @xcite and @xcite and , as a result , a final @xmath0 will be proposed .    before describing the details of the sbf measurements in hdf images , note that the sbf technique is valid only if faint galaxies have a stellar appearance .
in @xcite the radius  magnitude relation for galaxies in the @xcite hdf catalogue has been analyzed . for magnitudes fainter than @xmath43 ,
all the galaxies have a radius smaller that @xmath44 , close to the fwhm of the wf chips .
so very faint galaxies , in the magnitude range where sbf will be measured , can be assumed to have a stellar appearance .      here
, the practical procedure for obtaining the sbf signal in hdf - n images is described in detail .
first of all , it should be noted that cosmic rays are difficult to discriminate from stars in _ hst _ frames . in order to estimate and eliminate the cosmic - ray contribution to the sbf signal , @xmath15 , a procedure
based on the random nature of cosmic - ray events has been used for each filter and chip .
the sbf signal has be measured not only on the final combined images , but on all the individual images listed in table [ t - data ] as well .    before computing the power spectrum of an image ,
objects brighter than @xmath40 must be masked out . in this study ,
the window functions have been created using the @xcite photometric catalogue , which is the only one available to us . as isophotal magnitudes were considered while creating the window functions , in order to convert them to the total magnitude scale an isophotal - to - total magnitude correction of 0.2 mag @xcite was applied .
the sbf analysis have been be performed considering two different values of @xmath40 : 27.8 and 28.8 .
all objects brighter than @xmath40 have been masked out using a window function whose pixel values are zero in a circle centered on the location of the bright objects and unity in the rest of the image . the window function has been created using a patch radius large enough to completely mask bright galaxies , including their external haloes and therefore merged galaxies where these exist .
the procedure creating the mask has been the following : first , the brightest galaxies have been masked one by one manually . in order to avoid residual light beyond the masked regions ,
very generous patch sizes have been adopted .
the shape of the used patchs for these very bright galaxies depends on the shape of the particular masked galaxy .
once bright galaxies have been masked , the rest of galaxies brighter than the chosen @xmath40 have been masked using circular patches .
the radius of these patches has been chosen to be the same for all galaxies , and its size is again very generous : the adopted patch radius is 15 pixels .    in order to test
if all the residual light beyond the masked regions has been eliminated , the sbf analysis has been repeated for one image varying the radius of the patches .
we have considered patch radii of 20 , 25 and 30 pixels .
note that if a radius larger than 30 pixels would be used , the image would be completely masked due to the superposition of adjacent patches .
the considered image has been the f450w average image of wf2 with @xmath45 .
the sbf results are listed in table [ patches ] .
it can be seen that the sbf results are independent of the patch radius . as a conclusion
, it can be seen that the adopted patch radius avoid residual light beyond the masked regions , as required .
if the differences between the @xcite and @xcite data sets relies on the objects that are merged in the former and not in the latter , as argued by @xcite , then the created window function is virtually the same as one would obtain using the @xcite photometric catalogue , and also masks objects that are in this catalogue and not in that of @xcite .
next , multiplying the window function by the image , the residual masked image is obtained .
it is this image which is used to compute the power spectrum .
as has been said , two sets of masked images have been computed , one for each @xmath46 value .
the power spectrum of the masked image is two - dimensional .
it is radially averaged in order to obtain the one - dimensional power spectrum .
fitting the power spectrum of the images with eq .
[ pow2 ] , the quantities @xmath15 and @xmath16 can be obtained for each image . as we could not construct a psf from hdf images , since there were not enough stars in any of the four chips , the used psfs were the high - s / n psfs extracted by p. b. stetson from a large set of uncrowded and unsaturated wfpc2 images .
spatial variations of the psf along the ccd mosaic could introduce a significant uncertainty in @xmath15 . to limit this effect ,
we have used a psf template for each one of the four chips of the wfpc2 .
minor psf variations inside each particular chip have not been considered . for each chip , both psf and
the computed power spectrum represent mean values across the complete field of the chip , so any spatial variation of the psf across the chip would affect the sbf fitting procedure , introducing an uncertainty in the @xmath15 measurement .
this uncertainty is small , and in any case , it is included in the obtained @xmath15 uncertainty .    in fig .
[ @xmath7.average.29 ] we show an example of the sbf fitting procedure in an hdf image .
the observed discrepancy at low wave numbers between the obtained power spectrum and the fit is due to large scale fluctuations in the background brightness of the images .
this wave number region , where the discrepancy occurs , is not taken into account when fitting eq .
the power - spectrum fitting procedure is the following : eq .
[ pow2 ] is used to fit the power spectrum for wave numbers in the range [ @xmath47 , @xmath48 , @xmath49 being the highest wave number of the computed power spectrum , and @xmath47 a number which we vary from 0 to @xmath49 . as a result ,
two functions , @xmath50 and @xmath51 , are obtained .
the function @xmath50 is also shown in fig .
[ @xmath7.average.29 ] ( small boxes ) .
it can be seen that this function exhibits a `` plateau '' region . the final adopted result and its uncertainty for @xmath15
are obtained computing the average and standard deviation of @xmath50 in the plateau interval . for the @xmath16 measurement ,
the procedure is exactly the same as for @xmath15 .
@xmath15 and @xmath16 results corresponding to @xmath45 and @xmath52 are listed in tables [ t - results28 ] and [ t - results29 ] , respectively .
results are listed for all images , corresponding to all chips and all filters .
in this section , results from tables [ t - results28 ] and [ t - results29 ] will first be carefully analyzed , and will be used to test the probable effect of flat - fielding errors on the measured @xmath15 .
then , the obtained @xmath15 values in different images will be used to estimate the contribution of cosmic rays and to deduce the desired sbf - measured @xmath41 .
finally , in order to check the sbf results , two consistency tests will be performed .
the possibility of flat - fielding errors affecting the measured @xmath15 must considered .
if flat - fielding would contribute to @xmath15 , then its effect should be larger in images with high sky background . in this context ,
considering same filter and chip images , if flat - fielding is contributing to @xmath15 , a relation between @xmath15 and the sky level should appear .    to test if the flat - fielding errors have an influence on the measured @xmath15 , filter f606w has been considered because it provides a larger number of images covering a wider range of sky levels .
sky levels are provided in the weighted , cosmic - ray cleaned image headers . as an example , fig .
[ flatfielding ] shows the measured @xmath15 as a function of these sky levels for the wf2 f606w images with @xmath45 .
it can be seen that no relation is apparent , so flat - fielding errors are insignificant in the @xmath15 measurements .
the _ hst _ provides images of exceptional resolution . as a consequence , discriminating stars from cosmic rays
is a difficult task .
this also has implications for sbf measurements .
if a cosmic - ray event alters only one pixel , then it is handled as white noise , and consequently , it contributes to the @xmath16 signal .
but if two or more pixels are affected , then a cosmic ray can be confused with a point source and it will therefore contribute to the @xmath15 signal . in the wfpc2 , the majority of cosmic ray events affect 23 pixels , so if undetected cosmic rays exist in an image , the sbf results will be affected by an increase of both @xmath16 and @xmath15 .
but there is noise also due to detected cosmic rays .
the pixels containing cosmic rays have been masked during the data reduction of the images , and therefore , the noise in these pixels is higher than it is in pixels where none of the input images were masked .    as we will see later , the contribution of cosmic rays to @xmath15 is not negligible , and is necessary to control this effect in order to obtain the sbf - measured @xmath41 .
it is for this reason that a strategy aimed at estimating and eliminating the contribution of cosmic rays from @xmath15 must be developed .
such a strategy is described next .    in an individual weighted and cosmic - ray cleaned image , @xmath15 has two contributions , faint galaxies and cosmic rays : @xmath53    if such individual images averaged , the contributions from galaxies and cosmic rays will be different , because of their different natures .
measured in the averaged image , @xmath15 becomes @xmath54 where @xmath55 is the number of individual images used for the average .    in tables
[ t - results28 ] and [ t - results29 ] , results for @xmath15 are listed for all the individual weighted and cosmic - ray cleaned images and for the averaged images as well .
if the influence of cosmic rays were negligible , @xmath15 would be the same in all the individual images and in the averaged one .
it can be seen that this is not the case , from which we may conclude that the contribution of cosmic rays to @xmath15 is non - negligible .
equations [ cr1 ] and [ cr2 ] can now be used to obtain @xmath41 and @xmath56 . for @xmath15 , the mean of the values of the individual images for each chip and filter have been used .
results are listed in table [ t - results - bg ] for the two considered values of @xmath46 .
the final sbf - measured @xmath41 values for each filter can now be obtained from the averages of the single - chip results .
they are given in the last row of each @xmath46 set in table [ t - results - bg ] and will be compared in  [ discussion ] with the @xmath0-estimated @xmath41 values .
in this section , a couple of consistency tests have been performed in order to check the reliability of our sbf - measured @xmath41 results .
together with the psf - convolved variance , @xmath15 , sbfs provide the value of @xmath16 , the non - psf - convolved variance .
this can be compared with its expected value , directly obtained from the read - out noise , the dark current , and the sky brightness analysis of each image .    for hdf version 2 ,
each of the weighted and cosmic - ray cleaned images is the result of combining several exposures with the same dither position .
the different exposures are combined with weights proportional to the inverse variance ( @xmath57 ) at the mean background level . the variance @xmath16 , in electrons , is computed from the following noise model @xcite :    @xmath58    where @xmath59 is the exposure time , @xmath60 is the sky background rate , @xmath61 is the dark current , and @xmath62 is the read - out noise .
the inverse variances , @xmath57 , of each exposure are provided in the header of the resulting weighted and cosmic - ray cleaned image . from this information , the value of @xmath16 corresponding to the latter can be computed . as an example , these values are listed in table [ t - p1 ] ( column 2 ) for the wf2 images and @xmath7 . the @xmath16 values obtained directly from the sbf analysis of the images , using @xmath63 , are listed in column 3 . both computed and observed values of @xmath16
are equivalent in all cases .
only a slight excess in the observed @xmath16 is noticeable .
this excess is produced by cosmic rays , which also contribute to the measured @xmath15 values , as we have shown .
this test shows that , with this technique , the white noise ( @xmath16 ) is determined with high precision , thereby reinforcing the correctness of @xmath15 measurements .
[ interval ]    this second consistency test is based on the comparison of the parameter @xmath64 $ ] computed in two different ways .
we call @xmath64 $ ] to the variance produced by galaxies with magnitudes within a given interval :    @xmath65(m_{a},m_{b } ) \equiv \int_{f_{b}}^{f_{a } } n(f ) f^2 df,\ ] ]    where @xmath66 is the magnitude corresponding to a flux @xmath67 , and @xmath68 to @xmath69 .
defined in this way , @xmath64 $ ] is the difference between the variances computed with two values of @xmath40 , namely @xmath70 and @xmath71 :    @xmath72(m_{a},m_{b})=\sigma_{\rm bg}^2(m_{\rm c}=m_{a})-\sigma_{\rm bg}^2(m_{\rm c}=m_{b } ) \nonumber\\\end{aligned}\ ] ]    the @xmath0-estimated and sbf - measured @xmath64 $ ] can be now compared .
to do this , the magnitude interval [ 27.8 , 28.8 ] has been considered .    as the @xcite photometric catalogue has been used to create the window functions ,
only objects found by them in the magnitude interval [ 27.8 , 28.8 ] contribute to the sbf - measured @xmath64 $ ] .
in particular , some of the objects within the interval [ 27.8 , 28.8 ] in the @xcite catalogue will remain masked , namely those which , following @xcite , are merged in the @xcite catalogue .
this implies that the sbf - measured @xmath64 $ ] is not expected to coincide with the @xmath0-estimated @xmath64 $ ] computed using the @xcite data . on the other hand , the @xmath0-estimated @xmath64 $ ] computed using the @xcite data should , for rigor , be similar to the sbf - measured @xmath64 $ ] only if all the objects of the @xcite catalogue in the interval [ 27.8 , 28.8 ] are unmerged
however , if merged galaxies exist in other intervals @xcite , there is no reason why they should not be present here also .
the effect of mergers on @xmath64 $ ] can be tested considering that a fraction of @xcite objects in the interval [ 27.8 , 28.8 ] are the result of a merger between two fainter galaxies with integrated fluxes @xmath73 and @xmath74 .
we have considered three simple situations : i ) @xmath75 ; ii ) @xmath76 ; and iii ) @xmath77 .
it should be noted that since sbfs are a measure of the second moment of the brightness function , the more similar @xmath73 and @xmath74 are , the larger is the effect introduced in @xmath64 $ ] .
so case i ) is the most pessimistic and , although it is unrealistic , will give the maximum expected effect on @xmath64 $ ] for a given fraction of mergers .
in figure [ mergers ] we show the results of @xmath0-estimated @xmath64 $ ] for the three cases and the f606w filter , considering different values of the percentage of merged objects .
it can be seen that , even in the very pessimistic case where @xmath78 of the @xcite objects are mergers of two identical galaxies , their influence on @xmath64 $ ] is less than @xmath12 .
for example , in a perhaps more realistic situation in which about 2025% of the objects are mergers of two galaxies with different magnitudes , the effect on @xmath64 $ ] would smaller than @xmath1410% ( see figure [ mergers ] ) . in conclusion ,
the effect of mergers on @xmath64 $ ] computed using the @xcite number counts is small and can be expected to remain below about 15% for any reasonable scenario .
we can hence proceed with our test on @xmath64 $ ] for the [ 27.8 , 28.8 ] interval using the @xcite data .
the results for sbf - measured and @xmath0-estimated @xmath64 $ ] are given in table [ t - interval ] .
the value of @xmath0-estimated @xmath64 $ ] has been computed using @xcite and @xcite data .
the results are given in columns 2 and 3 , while column 4 lists the @xmath0-measured @xmath64 $ ] values .
it can be seen that they are not compatible with the values obtained from the @xcite data , as expected .    on the other hand , the @xmath0-estimated @xmath64 $ ] obtained from the @xcite number counts and the sbf - measured @xmath64 $ ] are very close . in order to compare them with more detail , let analyze figure [ mergers ] again .
the @xmath0-measured @xmath64 $ ] value for the f606w filter and its error interval have also been plotted in the figure ( shadowed region ) .
it can be seen now that they fully coincide if a number of mergers about 2030% is assumed .
this situation is realistic and compatible with @xcite s claims .    summarizing ,
the test has been successful and shows that the sbf measurements are well - calibrated .
in this section , sbf - measured @xmath41 results ( listed in table [ t - results - bg ] ) and the @xmath0-estimated @xmath41 values obtained from both the @xcite and @xcite data ( listed in table [ t - sigma ] ) will be compared . in the following ,
two possibilities will be considered and their consequences discussed : i ) that the @xcite data represent the right differential number counts , and ii ) that the @xcite number counts are correct .
the obtained sbf measurements will be used to test the validity of these possibilities and , as a result , a final @xmath0 will be proposed .      here
we assume that the @xcite number counts are correct .
comparing the @xmath0-estimated @xmath41 obtained using @xcite data and sbf - measured @xmath41 , it can be seen that the former are much larger .
there are only two possible sources to account for this discrepancy : first , a faint unresolved stellar population , belonging to the milky way halo , could be responsible of the excess in the sbf signal ; and second , the faint end of @xmath0 is different from the fitted one used here to evaluate the @xmath0-estimated @xmath41 . in the first case
, sbf results may be used to characterize such a halo population . in the second case
, sbf results may be used to deduce a new faint end of @xmath0 able to account for the sbf - measured @xmath41 .
we shall analyze both possibilities in detail and discuss the feasibility of each one and its compatibility with the observations ; finally , we shall deduce its implications for @xmath0 .      here , we will consider a milky way halo population of faint stars be responsible of the observed excess in the sbf signal . we will firstly deduce the halo population necessary to cause this sbf signal excess . in order to check the feasibility of this hypothesis , the obtained halo population will then be compared with observations in the hdf .
lets consider a simple population of objects with absolute magnitude @xmath79 following the standard spatial distribution used by @xcite : @xmath80 where @xmath81 is the number of objects per pc@xmath82 at a distance from the milky way center between @xmath62 and @xmath83 ; @xmath84 is the core radius , and @xmath85 is the object density in the milky way center . for simplicity
we take @xmath86 .    to derive the sbf signal from the former population
, we must first express the equations in terms of distance from the sun ( @xmath87 ) .
this can be done using : @xmath88 where @xmath89 is the galactocentric radius , i.e. , the distance from the sun to the milky way center , and @xmath90 are galactic coordinates .
the spatial distribution of objects expressed in spherical coordinates is then : @xmath91    integrating for the hdf - n and considering its coordinates @xmath92 and @xmath93 , the former expression is reduced to : @xmath94    now , @xmath95 can be written in terms of magnitudes by means of the distance modulus to obtain : @xmath96    the number of resolved objects with @xmath97 that should appear in the hdf - n , ( @xmath98 ) can be now deduced from eq .
[ eq2 ] , as well as the variance that the faint part of the population ( @xmath99 ) would produce ( @xmath100 ) : @xmath101    @xmath102    in order to compare these predictions with the hdf data , the @xmath8 filter results have been used
. a value must be assumed for the core radius , @xmath84 .
realistic values are around @xmath103 pc @xcite , but @xmath104 pc and @xmath105 pc have been also used to check a wide interval of possibilities . making @xmath100
equal to the @xmath106 excess observed in the filter @xmath8 for @xmath52 ( that is , @xmath107 @xmath108 ^ 2 $ ] , see tables [ t - sigma ] and [ t - results - bg ] ) and introducing the value in eq .
[ eq4 ] , the central density @xmath85 can be obtained and used in eqs  [ eq1 ] and [ eq2 ] to derive @xmath109 and @xmath110 .
results are plotted in fig .
[ mod_halo ] , where @xmath109 and @xmath98 are shown as functions of @xmath111 , the absolute magnitude of the halo population objects .
this figure implies the existence of a large number of halo objects that should be present in the hdf images .
note that @xmath98 is greater than @xmath14250 in all cases .
this result is not compatible with the hdf - n observations , where no obvious stars are present , except for a few 20th magnitude ones , @xcite .    in conclusion ,
the observed excess in sbf - measured @xmath106 can not be produced by objects belonging to the milky way halo .
otherwise a large number of resolved objects from this halo population would show up in the hdf - n images , which is not the case .
if the observed @xmath112 excess can not be produced by milky way halo objects , the only possibility is that it is caused by faint galaxies .
the large excess obtained in the sbf - measured @xmath112 with respect to the @xmath0-estimated @xmath112 would imply an increase in the slope of @xmath0 at some magnitude fainter than @xmath52 .
this slope can be computed by fitting the @xmath0-estimated @xmath112 to our sbf - measured @xmath112 and taking the slope as a free parameter . if it is assumed that the slope change occurs at @xmath113 for all filters , the resulting slopes for the fainter range are @xmath114 , @xmath115 , and @xmath116 for @xmath7 , @xmath8 , and @xmath9 , respectively .
these slopes would be valid up to @xmath117 , @xmath118 , and @xmath119 at least since the contribution of fainter magnitudes to @xmath112 becomes smaller than the uncertainties in the sbf - measured @xmath112 results .
if the slope change were to occur at a magnitude fainter than 28.8 , it would result in a steeper @xmath0 . in any case ,
such big changes in the slope of @xmath0 seem unrealistic . in our opinion , this possibility should be rejected . as a consequence
, it must be concluded that the @xcite data are incomplete .
assuming that the @xcite differential number counts are correct , the sbf - measured @xmath41 results listed in table [ t - results - bg ] and the @xmath0-estimated @xmath41 values obtained using the @xcite data , listed in table [ t - sigma ] , can be compared .
it can be seen that the sbf - measured and @xmath0-estimated @xmath41 coincide within the error bars for the f814w filter , and is very similar for the f450w filter . only in the filter
f606w some differences arise .
this implies that extrapolation of the @xcite @xmath0 function to magnitudes fainter than 28.8 accounts almost entirely for the measured sbf signal , thus indicating a high level of precision in the @xcite data .
however , as sbf - measured and @xmath0-estimated @xmath41 present slight differences in the f450w and f606w filters , the most likely @xmath0 function that completely fits our sbf measurements can be determined .
this will be done in the next subsection .      in this section ,
the most likely @xmath0 function will be obtained for magnitudes fainter than 28.8 .
we consider that the most likely @xmath0 function is that which fits our sbf measurements .
an @xmath0 function is completely determined by giving the slope ( @xmath38 ) and the number of galaxies in a given area and magnitude interval ( @xmath120 ) .
in particular we consider @xmath121 , computed for the magnitude interval [ 28.75 , 29.25 ] and the area of the hdf - n .
note that there are infinite sets of ( @xmath38 , @xmath121 ) that can produce the same sbf signal . in figure [ sbf ] ,
the ( @xmath38 , @xmath121 ) pairs that can account for our measured sbf signal have been plotted ( solid lines ) for the f450w , f606w , and f814w filters . with short - dashed lines
we represent the ( @xmath38 , @xmath121 ) pairs that would produce the sbf measurements @xmath122 . in this figure ,
the ( @xmath38 , @xmath121 ) sets corresponding to the extrapolation of @xmath0 obtained from @xcite ( solid circle ) and @xcite data ( open circle ) have also been plotted .
it can be seen in figure [ sbf ] that the @xcite ( @xmath38 , @xmath121 ) reproduce our sbf results for the f814w filter , as previously shown . for f450w
, the @xcite ( @xmath38 , @xmath121 ) is very close to our sbf measurements . in all cases
( except for f606w ) , the @xcite ( @xmath38 , @xmath121 ) results are far from our sbf results , as previously argued .    the most likely @xmath0 function can be obtained from figure [ sbf ] .
we assume that , for each filter , the best @xmath0 estimate for magnitudes fainter than 28.8 is given by the nearest point of the solid lines to the @xcite point .
in this case , results for the slopes are @xmath4 , @xmath5 , and @xmath6 for @xmath7 , @xmath8 , and @xmath9 , respectively .
the results are listed in table [ t - glf ] and plotted in figure [ glf2 ] ( solid lines ) .
the slopes obtained are valid down to magnitude @xmath3 at least .
the contribution to the sbf signal by objects of fainter magnitudes is less than the uncertainty in the sbf measurements .
this value represents an extension of more than two magnitudes beyond the limits of the previous photometric studies by @xcite and @xcite .
it should also be mentioned that , within the uncertainties and except for the objects that could be merged into brighter ones in @xcite , it is free from incompleteness .
in this paper , the faint end of the differential galaxy number counts , @xmath0 , has been studied by means of sbf measurements .
once the contribution from cosmic rays has been evaluated and eliminated from the sbf signal , the background psf - convolved variance originating from faint objects has been carefully analyzed .
our conclusions can be summarized as follows :    * comparing the sbf - measured @xmath41 with the @xmath0-estimated @xmath41 predicted by the extrapolation of @xcite number counts a clear excess has been found in the measured signal .
the possibility that the excess might be produced by milky way halo stars is ruled out because it would be totally incompatible with the resolved stellar population present in the hdf . on the other hand , if this excess is caused by a faint galaxy population modifying the faint end of @xmath0 , then the required slopes for magnitudes fainter than 28.8 are @xmath114 , @xmath115 , and @xmath116 for @xmath7 , @xmath8 , and @xmath9 , respectively .
such big changes in the @xmath0 slope seem unrealistic . in our opinion , this possibility should be rejected . in conclusion ,
the @xcite number counts are not compatible with our sbf measurements , probably owing to the incompleteness in their data .
* comparing the sbf - measured @xmath41 with the @xmath0-estimated @xmath41 , predicted by the extrapolation of @xcite number counts , we find that they coincide within the error bars for the f814w and f450w filters and are similar for f606w .
this implies that the extrapolation of the @xcite @xmath0 function to magnitudes fainter than 28.8 nearly accounts for the measured sbf signal , indicating a high level of precision in the @xcite results . *
the most likely @xmath0 function has been obtained fitting our sbf results .
results for the @xmath0 slope for magnitudes fainter than @xmath1 are @xmath4 , @xmath5 , and @xmath6 for @xmath7 , @xmath8 , and @xmath9 , respectively .
the obtained slopes are valid down to magnitude @xmath3 at least .
this value represents an extension of more than two magnitudes beyond the limits of the previous photometric studies by @xcite and @xcite .
this work is based on observations with the nasa / esa _ hubble space telescope _
, obtained in the space telescope science institute , which is operated by the association of universities for research in astronomy , inc .
( aura ) , under nasa contract nas5 - 26555 .
this research has been supported by the instituto de astrofsica de canarias ( grant p3/94 ) , the dgesic of the kingdom of spain ( grant pi97 - 1438-c02 - 01 ) , and the dgui of the autonomous government of the canary islands ( grant pi1999/008 ) .                                                      lcc f450w.d1.dark & f450w & 17200 + f450w.d2.dark & f450w & 7900 + f450w.d3.dark & f450w & 11500 + f450w.d4.dark & f450w & 12400 + f450w.d5.dark & f450w & 11800 + f450w.d6.dark & f450w & 12900 + f450w.d8.dark & f450w & 13100 + f450w.d9.dark & f450w & 10700 +   + f606w.d1.dark & f606w & 6700 + f606w.d2.dark & f606w & 4800 + f606w.d3.dark & f606w & 6450 + f606w.d4.dark & f606w & 10300 + f606w.d5.dark & f606w & 15600 + f606w.d6.dark & f606w & 17300 + f606w.d7.dark & f606w & 14600 + f606w.d8.dark & f606w & 10100 + f606w.d9.dark & f606w & 7100 + f606w.d10.dark & f606w & 8300 + f606w.d11.dark & f606w & 7800 +   + f814w.d1.dark & f814w & 10800 + f814w.d2.dark & f814w & 12200 + f814w.d3.dark & f814w & 14200 + f814w.d4.dark & f814w & 12000 + f814w.d5.dark & f814w & 13000 + f814w.d6.dark & f814w & 13100 + f814w.d8.dark & f814w & 5800 + f814w.d9.dark & f814w & 12900 +    lcc f450w & pc1 & 21.92 + f450w & wf2 & 21.93 + f450w & wf3 & 21.93 + f450w & wf4 & 21.90 + f606w & pc1 & 23.02 + f606w & wf2 & 23.02 + f606w & wf3 & 23.03 + f606w & wf4 & 23.00 + f814w & pc1 & 22.08 + f814w & wf2 & 22.09 + f814w & wf3 & 22.09 + f814w & wf4 & 22.07 +       +   + 27.8 & 2.82 @xmath123 & 2.74 @xmath124 & 5.50 @xmath123 + 28.8 & 6.45 @xmath125 & 6.43 @xmath123 & 1.32 @xmath123 +   +   +   + 27.8 & 7.20
@xmath123 & 5.76 @xmath124 & 1.05 @xmath124 + 28.8 & 2.23 @xmath123 & 1.62 @xmath124 & 3.04 @xmath123 +        f450w.d1.dark & 1.90 @xmath126 0.16 & 3.86 @xmath126 0.01 & 1.05 @xmath126 0.11 & 5.4 @xmath126 0.1 & 0.86 @xmath126 0.05 & 5.4 @xmath126 0.1 & 1.09 @xmath126 0.05 & 4.6 @xmath126 0.1 + f450w.d2.dark & 3.04 @xmath126 0.10 & 7.21 @xmath126 0.01 & 1.89 @xmath126 0.07 & 11.4 @xmath126 0.1 & 1.70 @xmath126 0.23 & 10.8@xmath126 0.1 & 1.13 @xmath126 0.17 & 10.0 @xmath126 0.1 + f450w.d3.dark & 1.48 @xmath126 0.06 & 5.25 @xmath126 0.01 & 1.06 @xmath126 0.10 & 8.0 @xmath126 0.1 & 1.01 @xmath126 0.07 & 7.8 @xmath126 0.1 & 1.33 @xmath126 0.10 & 6.9 @xmath126 0.1 + f450w.d4.dark & 1.39 @xmath126 0.09 & 4.45 @xmath126 0.01 & 1.34 @xmath126 0.06 & 6.9 @xmath126 0.1 & 1.25 @xmath126 0.09 & 6.7 @xmath126 0.1 & 1.42 @xmath126 0.13 & 6.2 @xmath126 0.1 + f450w.d5.dark & 1.73 @xmath126 0.09 & 5.18 @xmath126 0.01 & 1.21 @xmath126 0.05 & 7.5 @xmath126 0.1 & 1.36 @xmath126 0.04 & 7.2 @xmath126 0.1 & 1.89 @xmath126 0.07 & 6.3 @xmath126 0.1 + f450w.d6.dark & 1.47 @xmath126 0.06 & 4.31 @xmath126 0.01 & 1.04 @xmath126 0.12 & 6.9 @xmath126 0.1 & 1.22 @xmath126 0.03 & 6.7 @xmath126 0.1 & 1.00 @xmath126 0.08 & 6.1 @xmath126 0.1 + f450w.d8.dark & 1.24 @xmath126 0.05 & 4.32 @xmath126 0.01 & 0.77 @xmath126 0.08 & 6.9 @xmath126 0.1 & 1.40 @xmath126 0.05 & 6.7 @xmath126 0.1 & 0.76 @xmath126 0.11 & 6.1 @xmath126 0.1 + f450w.d9.dark & 2.10 @xmath126 0.08 & 5.95 @xmath126 0.01 & 1.13 @xmath126 0.11 & 8.9 @xmath126 0.1 & 0.98 @xmath126 0.21 & 8.5 @xmath126 0.1 & 1.70 @xmath126 0.06 & 7.7 @xmath126 0.1 + average image & 0.29 @xmath126 0.03 & 0.636 @xmath126 0.001 & 0.452@xmath126 0.006 & 0.901@xmath126 0.002 & 0.563 @xmath126 0.014 & 0.847@xmath126 0.004 & 0.441 @xmath126 0.006 & 0.762 @xmath126 0.002 +   + f606w.d1.dark & 4.50 @xmath126 0.24 & 17.6 @xmath126 0.1 & 7.7 @xmath126 0.3 & 36.8 @xmath126 0.1 & 6.8 @xmath126 0.9 & 37.4 @xmath126 0.2 & 2.5 @xmath126 0.2 & 35.2 @xmath126 0.1 + f606w.d2.dark & 6.1 @xmath126 0.5 & 27.2 @xmath126 0.1 & 8.2 @xmath126 0.2 & 54.9 @xmath126 0.4 & 5.5 @xmath126 0.6 & 56.5 @xmath126 0.1 & 1.4 @xmath126 0.9 & 52.5 @xmath126 0.3 + f606w.d3.dark & 4.7 @xmath126 0.6 & 22.2 @xmath126 0.1 & 5.5 @xmath126 0.5 & 42.7 @xmath126 0.2 & 6.2 @xmath126 1.7 & 42.1 @xmath126 0.3 & 8.8 @xmath126 0.6 & 42.6 @xmath126 0.3 + f606w.d4.dark & 2.92 @xmath126 0.21 & 13.3 @xmath126 0.1 & 4.2 @xmath126 0.4 & 26.1 @xmath126 0.1 & 6.2 @xmath126 0.5 & 25.7 @xmath126 0.1 & 5.2 @xmath126 0.4 & 23.9 @xmath126 0.1 + f606w.d5.dark & 4.71 @xmath126 0.18 & 9.3 @xmath126 0.1 & 6.1 @xmath126 0.2 & 17.6 @xmath126 0.1 & 6.8 @xmath126 0.6 & 19.1 @xmath126 0.2 & 4.5 @xmath126 0.6 & 16.8 @xmath126 0.2 + f606w.d6.dark & 2.48 @xmath126 0.09 & 7.5 @xmath126 0.1 & 6.5 @xmath126 0.3 & 16.2 @xmath126 0.1 & 6.0 @xmath126 0.2 & 17.4 @xmath126 0.1 & 5.2 @xmath126 0.4 & 14.8 @xmath126 0.1 + f606w.d7.dark & 3.52 @xmath126 0.16 & 9.0 @xmath126 0.1 & 6.3 @xmath126 0.3 & 18.2 @xmath126 0.1 & 7.1 @xmath126 0.4 & 18.6 @xmath126 0.1 & 4.3 @xmath126 0.2 & 16.7 @xmath126 0.1 + f606w.d8.dark & 3.6 @xmath126 0.4 & 12.6 @xmath126 0.1 & 7.4 @xmath126 0.5 & 25.2 @xmath126 0.1 & 6.7 @xmath126 0.6 & 25.7 @xmath126 0.1 & 5.6 @xmath126 0.4 & 24.2 @xmath126 0.2 + f606w.d9.dark & 5.17 @xmath126 0.24 & 20.3 @xmath126 0.1 & 6.6 @xmath126 0.4 & 37.6 @xmath126 0.1 & 7.8 @xmath126 0.3 & 38.4 @xmath126 0.2 & 6.5 @xmath126 0.4 & 33.7 @xmath126 0.2 + f606w.d10.dark & 4.50 @xmath126 0.13 & 15.1 @xmath126 0.1 & 7.3 @xmath126 0.4 & 30.2 @xmath126 0.1 & 7.6 @xmath126 0.6 & 31.3 @xmath126 0.2 & 4.7 @xmath126 0.7 & 28.2 @xmath126 0.2 + f606w.d11.dark & 5.37 @xmath126 0.16 & 15.5 @xmath126 0.1 & 5.5 @xmath126 0.8 & 31.3 @xmath126 0.2 & 7.4 @xmath126 0.8 & 32.3 @xmath126 0.2 & 4.4 @xmath126 0.7 & 28.9 @xmath126 0.2 + average image & 0.96 @xmath126 0.18 & 1.38 @xmath126 0.01 & 3.19 @xmath126 0.13 & 2.68 @xmath126 0.02 & 3.08 @xmath126 0.20 & 2.52 @xmath126 0.04 & 3.2 @xmath126 0.5 & 1.95 @xmath126 0.14 +   + f814w.d1.dark & 2.24 @xmath126 0.10 & 7.94 @xmath126 0.01 & 0.83 @xmath126 0.16 & 14.9 @xmath126 0.1 & 1.5 @xmath126 0.3 & 15.7 @xmath126 0.1 & 1.8 @xmath126 0.3 & 14.7 @xmath126 0.1 + f814w.d2.dark & 1.89 @xmath126 0.11 & 7.59 @xmath126 0.01 & 1.99 @xmath126 0.15 & 13.3 @xmath126 0.1 & 3.23 @xmath126 0.09 & 24.4 @xmath126 0.1 & 1.70 @xmath126 0.18 & 13.3 @xmath126 0.1 + f814w.d3.dark & 2.04 @xmath126 0.04 & 6.13 @xmath126 0.01 & 1.34 @xmath126 0.17 & 11.8 @xmath126 0.1 & 1.68 @xmath126 0.11 & 11.9 @xmath126 0.1 & 1.56 @xmath126 0.07 & 10.5 @xmath126 0.1 + f814w.d4.dark & 2.03 @xmath126 0.05 & 6.92 @xmath126 0.01 & 2.51 @xmath126 0.23 & 13.0 @xmath126 0.1 & 1.94 @xmath126 0.20 & 13.8 @xmath126 0.1 & 0.75 @xmath126 0.10 & 13.6 @xmath126 0.1 + f814w.d5.dark & 2.1 @xmath126 0.3 & 7.00 @xmath126 0.01 & 2.6 @xmath126 0.3 & 12.9 @xmath126 0.1 & 0.92 @xmath126 0.14 & 14.6 @xmath126 0.1 & 2.07 @xmath126 0.09 & 13.0 @xmath126 0.1 + f814w.d6.dark & 2.04 @xmath126 0.11 & 6.62 @xmath126 0.01 & 2.7 @xmath126 0.3 & 12.1 @xmath126 0.1 & 3.09 @xmath126 0.17 & 13.6 @xmath126 0.1 & 1.29 @xmath126 0.16 & 12.8 @xmath126 0.1 + f814w.d8.dark & 5.98 @xmath126 0.14 & 20.26 @xmath126 0.01 & 4.1 @xmath126 0.3 & 27.5 @xmath126 0.1 & 3.5 @xmath126 0.3 & 28.6 @xmath126 0.1 & 3.0 @xmath126 0.6 & 25.3 @xmath126 0.1 + f814w.d9.dark & 2.55 @xmath126 0.19 & 6.77 @xmath126 0.01 & 2.0 @xmath126 0.4 & 12.6 @xmath126 0.1 & 2.3 @xmath126 0.3 & 13.0 @xmath126 0.1 & 2.60 @xmath126 0.07 & 12.0 @xmath126 0.1 + 0 average image & 0.413 @xmath126 0.019 & 1.074 @xmath126 0.002 & 1.011 @xmath126 0.024 & 1.669 @xmath126 0.007 & 0.47 @xmath126 0.05 & 2.057 @xmath126 0.012 & 0.88 @xmath126 0.03 & 1.592@xmath126 0.011 +      f450w.d1.dark & 1.53 @xmath126 0.04 & 3.66 @xmath126 0.01 & 0.75 @xmath126 0.08 & 5.4 @xmath126 0.1 & 0.62 @xmath126 0.06 & 5.4 @xmath126 0.1 & 0.83 @xmath126 0.04 & 4.7 @xmath126 0.1 + f450w.d2.dark & 3.00 @xmath126 0.09 & 7.14 @xmath126 0.01 & 2.01 @xmath126 0.06 & 11.2 @xmath126 0.1 & 1.48 @xmath126 0.23 & 10.8 @xmath126 0.1 & 1.46 @xmath126 0.17 & 9.9 @xmath126 0.1 + f450w.d3.dark & 1.43 @xmath126 0.04 & 5.24 @xmath126 0.01 & 1.04 @xmath126 0.11 & 8.0 @xmath126 0.1 & 0.81 @xmath126 0.07 & 7.8 @xmath126 0.1 & 1.22 @xmath126 0.05 & 6.9 @xmath126 0.1 + f450w.d4.dark & 1.30 @xmath126 0.06 & 4.45 @xmath126 0.01 & 1.09 @xmath126 0.06 & 6.9 @xmath126 0.1 & 1.14 @xmath126 0.05 & 6.7 @xmath126 0.1 & 1.23 @xmath126 0.10 & 6.1 @xmath126 0.1 + f450w.d5.dark & 1.68 @xmath126 0.08 & 5.09 @xmath126 0.01 & 0.76 @xmath126 0.06 & 7.6 @xmath126 0.1 & 1.2 @xmath126 0.3 & 7.2 @xmath126 0.1 & 1.49 @xmath126 0.04 & 6.4 @xmath126 0.1 + f450w.d6.dark & 1.46 @xmath126 0.05 & 4.31 @xmath126 0.01 & 0.59 @xmath126 0.04 & 6.9 @xmath126 0.1 & 0.67 @xmath126 0.18 & 6.8 @xmath126 0.1 & 0.77 @xmath126 0.06 & 6.1 @xmath126 0.1 + f450w.d8.dark & 1.55 @xmath126 0.04 & 4.29 @xmath126 0.01 & 0.71 @xmath126 0.07 & 6.9 @xmath126 0.1 & 1.16 @xmath126 0.07 & 6.8 @xmath126 0.1 & 0.81 @xmath126 0.07 & 6.0 @xmath126 0.1 + f450w.d9.dark & 1.97 @xmath126 0.06 & 5.96 @xmath126 0.01 & 1.32 @xmath126 0.03 & 8.8 @xmath126 0.1 & 1.2 @xmath126 0.4 & 8.4 @xmath126 0.1 & 1.57 @xmath126 0.05 & 7.7 @xmath126 0.1 + average image & 0.265 @xmath126 0.009 & 0.626 @xmath126 0.001 & 0.317@xmath126 0.009 & 0.929 @xmath126 0.003 & 0.341@xmath126 0.015 & 0.896@xmath126 0.004 & 0.247 @xmath126 0.011 & 0.822 @xmath126 0.004 +   + f606w.d1.dark & 4.75 @xmath126 0.17 & 17.7 @xmath126 0.1 & 5.8 @xmath126 0.3 & 37.2 @xmath126 0.1 & 6.0 @xmath126 0.6 & 37.7 @xmath126 0.2 & 2.4 @xmath126 0.7 & 35.0 @xmath126 0.3 + f606w.d2.dark & 5.9 @xmath126 0.8 & 27.3 @xmath126 0.1 & 8.9 @xmath126 0.8 & 55.2 @xmath126 0.3 & 4.2 @xmath126 0.7 & 56.8 @xmath126 0.2 & 3.6 @xmath126 0.7 & 51.9 @xmath126 0.3 + f606w.d3.dark & 4.9 @xmath126 0.4 & 21.2 @xmath126 0.1 & 3.8 @xmath126 0.4 & 43.0 @xmath126 0.1 & 4.7 @xmath126 1.7 & 42.5 @xmath126 0.5 & 6.0 @xmath126 0.8 & 44.8 @xmath126 0.3 + f606w.d4.dark & 2.49 @xmath126 0.22 & 13.4 @xmath126 0.1 & 1.9 @xmath126 0.4 & 26.5 @xmath126 0.1 & 4.4 @xmath126 0.5 & 26.1 @xmath126 0.2 & 4.2 @xmath126 0.4 & 24.2 @xmath126 0.1 + f606w.d5.dark & 4.69 @xmath126 0.17 & 9.3 @xmath126 0.1 & 4.0 @xmath126 0.2 & 18.0 @xmath126 0.1 & 4.4 @xmath126 0.3 & 19.1 @xmath126 0.1 & 3.2 @xmath126 0.4 & 16.9 @xmath126 0.2 + f606w.d6.dark & 2.41 @xmath126 0.12 & 7.6 @xmath126 0.1 & 4.2 @xmath126 0.2 & 16.6 @xmath126 0.1 & 4.1 @xmath126 0.2 & 17.6 @xmath126 0.4 & 3.8 @xmath126 0.4 & 15.1 @xmath126 0.2 + f606w.d7.dark & 2.9 @xmath126 0.4 & 9.1 @xmath126 0.1 & 4.4 @xmath126 0.3 & 18.6 @xmath126 0.1 & 4.5 @xmath126 0.3 & 19.2 @xmath126 0.1 & 3.8 @xmath126 0.7 & 16.8 @xmath126 0.3 + f606w.d8.dark & 3.48 @xmath126 0.16 & 12.6 @xmath126 0.1 & 4.9 @xmath126 0.5 & 25.8 @xmath126 0.2 & 5.5 @xmath126 1.0 & 26.1 @xmath126 0.3 & 2.5 @xmath126 1.3 & 24.3 @xmath126 0.4 + f606w.d9.dark & 5.3 @xmath126 0.3 & 20.6 @xmath126 0.1 & 4.9 @xmath126 0.6 & 37.6 @xmath126 0.2 & 4.4 @xmath126 0.4 & 39.2 @xmath126 0.1 & 4.8 @xmath126 0.4 & 34.1 @xmath126 0.2 + f606w.d10.dark & 4.41 @xmath126 0.20 & 15.0 @xmath126 0.1 & 6.2 @xmath126 0.3 & 30.5 @xmath126 0.1 & 6.4 @xmath126 0.8 & 31.7 @xmath126 0.2 & 2.6 @xmath126 0.7 & 28.7 @xmath126 0.3 + f606w.d11.dark & 5.6 @xmath126 0.4 & 15.4 @xmath126 0.1 & 3.4 @xmath126 1.0 & 31.8 @xmath126 0.3 & 5.3 @xmath126 0.4 & 33.1 @xmath126 0.1 & 2.3 @xmath126 0.5 & 29.2 @xmath126 0.2 + average image & 0.557@xmath126 0.021 & 1.41 @xmath126 0.01 & 1.38 @xmath126 0.15 & 2.81 @xmath126 0.02 & 1.72 @xmath126 0.10 & 2.71 @xmath126 0.02 & 1.4 @xmath126 0.3 & 2.43 @xmath126 0.09 +   + f814w.d1.dark & 2.34 @xmath126 0.08 & 7.99 @xmath126 0.01 & 0.28 @xmath126 0.12 & 15.1 @xmath126 0.1 & 1.3 @xmath126 0.3 & 15.9 @xmath126 0.1 & 2.02 @xmath126 0.23 & 14.8 @xmath126 0.1 + f814w.d2.dark & 1.51 @xmath126 0.09 & 7.64 @xmath126 0.01 & 1.26 @xmath126 0.13 & 13.3 @xmath126 0.1 & 3.6 @xmath126 0.5 & 26.2 @xmath126 0.1 & 2.09 @xmath126 0.17 & 13.2 @xmath126 0.1 + f814w.d3.dark & 2.04 @xmath126 0.04 & 6.10 @xmath126 0.01 & 1.43 @xmath126 0.09 & 11.9 @xmath126 0.1 & 1.54 @xmath126 0.22 & 12.0 @xmath126 0.1 & 1.00 @xmath126 0.09 & 10.6 @xmath126 0.1 + f814w.d4.dark & 2.14 @xmath126 0.05 & 6.91 @xmath126 0.01 & 1.48 @xmath126 0.08 & 13.3 @xmath126 0.1 & 1.54 @xmath126 0.11 & 13.9 @xmath126 0.1 & 0.9 @xmath126 0.4 & 13.9 @xmath126 0.1 + f814w.d5.dark & 2.1 @xmath126 0.3 & 7.02 @xmath126 0.01 & 1.4 @xmath126 0.5 & 13.1 @xmath126 0.1 & 1.37 @xmath126 0.16 & 14.9 @xmath126 0.1 & 1.6 @xmath126 0.3 & 13.2 @xmath126 0.1 + f814w.d6.dark & 1.79 @xmath126 0.06 & 6.67 @xmath126 0.01 & 2.12 @xmath126 0.12 & 12.5 @xmath126 0.1 & 2.83 @xmath126 0.15 & 13.2 @xmath126 0.1 & 1.95 @xmath126 0.12 & 12.9 @xmath126 0.1 + f814w.d8.dark & 5.2 @xmath126 0.5 & 20.81 @xmath126 0.01 & 4.27 @xmath126 0.15 & 27.7 @xmath126 0.1 & 3.2 @xmath126 0.3 & 28.6 @xmath126 0.1 & 2.3 @xmath126 0.3 & 25.4 @xmath126 0.1 + f814w.d9.dark & 2.61 @xmath126 0.18 & 6.78 @xmath126 0.01 & 2.13 @xmath126 0.12 & 12.3 @xmath126 0.1 & 2.50 @xmath126 0.06 & 13.0 @xmath126 0.1 & 2.04 @xmath126 0.07 & 12.3 @xmath126 0.1 + average image & 0.397 @xmath126 0.022 & 1.084 @xmath126 0.002 & 0.54 @xmath126 0.03 & 1.787 @xmath126 0.007 & 0.484@xmath1260.022 & 2.140 @xmath1260.006 & 0.43 @xmath126 0.03 & 1.763@xmath126 0.010 +       + pc1 & 0.35 @xmath126 0.16 & 0.215 @xmath126 0.007 & 3.1 @xmath126 0.9 & 0.336 @xmath126 0.020 & 0.48 @xmath126 0.10 & 0.314 @xmath126 0.006 + wf2 & 0.347 @xmath126 0.008 & 0.105 @xmath126 0.005 & 2.26
@xmath126 0.13 & 0.331 @xmath126 0.018 & 0.83 @xmath126 0.03 & 0.176 @xmath126 0.012 + wf3 & 0.468 @xmath126 0.015 & 0.094 @xmath126 0.006 & 2.72 @xmath126 0.20 & 0.36 @xmath126 0.03 & 0.52 @xmath126 0.05 & 0.218 @xmath126 0.013 + wf4 & 0.320 @xmath126 0.008 & 0.121 @xmath126 0.005 & 3.0 @xmath126 0.5 & 0.16 @xmath126 0.05 & 0.74 @xmath126 0.04 & 0.139 @xmath126 0.021 + sbf - measured @xmath127 & 0.37 @xmath126 0.04 & & 2.8 @xmath126 0.3 & & 0.64 @xmath126 0.03 & +   + pc1 & 0.26 @xmath126 0.05 & 0.211 @xmath126 0.006 & 0.91 @xmath126 0.11 & 0.370 @xmath126 0.011 & 0.42 @xmath126 0.12 & 0.297 @xmath126 0.012 + wf2 & 0.214 @xmath126 0.010 & 0.102 @xmath126 0.004 & 1.04 @xmath126 0.15 & 0.342 @xmath126 0.021 & 0.36 @xmath126 0.03 & 0.179 @xmath126 0.011 + wf3 & 0.242 @xmath126 0.019 & 0.099 @xmath126 0.011 & 1.40 @xmath126 0.10 & 0.32 @xmath126 0.03 & 0.23 @xmath126 0.03 & 0.251 @xmath126 0.013 + wf4 & 0.115 @xmath126 0.012 & 0.132 @xmath126 0.004 & 1.2 @xmath126 0.3 & 0.22 @xmath126 0.04 & 0.24 @xmath126 0.03 & 0.187 @xmath126 0.013 + sbf - measured @xmath127 & 0.208 @xmath126 0.014 & & 1.13 @xmath126 0.09 & & 0.31 @xmath126 0.03 & +    lcc f450w.d1.dark & 5.2 & 5.48 @xmath126 0.02 + f450w.d2.dark & 11.5 & 11.25 @xmath126 0.01 + f450w.d3.dark & 7.8 & 8.02 @xmath126 0.03 + f450w.d4.dark & 6.9 & 6.96 @xmath126 0.02 + f450w.d5.dark & 7.3 & 7.62 @xmath126 0.02 + f450w.d6.dark & 6.7 & 6.99 @xmath126 0.01 + f450w.d8.dark & 6.6 & 6.91 @xmath126 0.02 + f450w.d9.dark & 8.3 & 8.81 @xmath126 0.01 +