Subscribe to the gold package and get unlimited access to Shamra Academy
Register a new userEvidence for a systematic offset of $-$0.25 mas in the Gaia DR1 parallaxes
78
0
0.0
(
0
)
Ask ChatGPT about the research
No Arabic abstract
We test the parallaxes reported in the Gaia first data release using the sample of eclipsing binaries with accurate, empirical distances from Stassun & Torres (2016). We find an average offset of $-$0.25$pm$0.05 mas in the sense of the Gaia parallaxes being too small (i.e., the distances too long). The offset does not depend strongly on obvious parameters such as color or brightness. However, we find with high confidence that the offset may depend on ecliptic latitude: the mean offset is $-$0.38$pm$0.06 mas in the ecliptic north and $-$0.05$pm$0.09 mas in the ecliptic south. The ecliptic latitude dependence may also be represented by the linear relation, $Deltapi approx -0.22(pm0.05) -0.003(pm0.001)timesbeta$ mas ($beta$ in degrees). Finally, there is a possible dependence of the parallax offset on distance, with the offset becoming negligible for $pilesssim 1$ mas; we discuss whether this could be caused by a systematic error in the eclipsing binary distance scale, and reject this interpretation as unlikely.
rate research
Read More
We reprise the analysis of Stassun & Torres (2016), comparing the parallaxes of the eclipsing binaries reported in that paper to the parallaxes newly reported in the Gaia second data release (DR2). We find evidence for a systematic offset of $-82 pm 33$ micro-arcseconds, in the sense of the Gaia parallaxes being too small, for brightnesses $(G lesssim 12)$ and for distances (0.03--3 kpc) in the ranges spanned by the eclipsing binary sample. The offset does not appear to depend strongly on distance within this range, though there is marginal evidence that the offset increases (becomes slightly more negative) for distances $gtrsim 1$ kpc, up to the 3 kpc distances probed by the test sample. The offset reported here is consistent with the expectation that global systematics in the Gaia DR2 parallaxes are below 100 micro-arcseconds.
We infer distances and their asymmetric uncertainties for two million stars using the parallaxes published in the Gaia DR1 (GDR1) catalogue. We do this with two distance priors: A minimalist, isotropic prior assuming an exponentially decreasing space density with increasing distance, and an anisotropic prior derived from the observability of stars in a Milky Way model. We validate our results by comparing our distance estimates for 105 Cepheids which have more precise, independently estimated distances. For this sample we find that the Milky Way prior performs better (the RMS of the scaled residuals is 0.40) than the exponentially decreasing space density prior (RMS is 0.57), although for distances beyond 2 kpc the Milky Way prior performs worse, with a bias in the scaled residuals of -0.36 (vs. -0.07 for the exponentially decreasing space density prior). We do not attempt to include the photometric data in GDR1 due to the lack of reliable colour information. Our distance catalogue is available at http://www.mpia.de/homes/calj/tgas distances/main.html as well as at CDS. This should only be used to give individual distances. Combining data or testing models should be done with the original parallaxes, and attention paid to correlated and systematic uncertainties.
We present fits to the broadband photometric spectral energy distributions (SEDs) of 158 eclipsing binaries (EBs) in the Tycho-2 catalog. These EBs were selected because they have highly precise stellar radii, effective temperatures, and in many cases metallicities previously determined in the literature, and thus have bolometric luminosities that are typically good to $lesssim$ 10%. In most cases the available broadband photometry spans a wavelength range 0.4-10 $mu$m, and in many cases spans 0.15-22 $mu$m. The resulting SED fits, which have only extinction as a free parameter, provide a virtually model-independent measure of the bolometric flux at Earth. The SED fits are satisfactory for 156 of the EBs, for which we achieve typical precisions in the bolometric flux of $approx$ 3%. Combined with the accurately known bolometric luminosity, the result for each EB is a predicted parallax that is typically precise to $lesssim$ 5%. These predicted parallaxes---with typical uncertainties of 200 $mu$as---are 4-5 times more precise than those determined by Hipparcos for 99 of the EBs in our sample, with which we find excellent agreement. There is no evidence among this sample for significant systematics in the Hipparcos parallaxes of the sort that notoriously afflicted the Pleiades measurement. The EBs are distributed over the entire sky, span more than 10 mag in brightness, reach distances of more than 5 kpc, and in many cases our predicted parallaxes should also be more precise than those expected from the Gaia first data release. The EBs studied here can thus serve as empirical, independent benchmarks for these upcoming fundamental parallax measurements.
We describe the methodologies that, taking advantage of Gaia-DR1 and the Gaia-ESO Survey data, enable the comparison of observed open star cluster sequences with stellar evolutionary models. The final, long-term goal is the exploitation of open clusters as age calibrators. We perform a homogeneous analysis of eight open clusters using the Gaia-DR1 TGAS catalogue for bright members, and information from the Gaia-ESO Survey for fainter stars. Cluster membership probabilities for the Gaia-ESO Survey targets are derived based on several spectroscopic tracers. The Gaia-ESO Survey also provides the cluster chemical composition. We obtain cluster parallaxes using two methods. The first one relies on the astrometric selection of a sample of bona fide members, while the other one fits the parallax distribution of a larger sample of TGAS sources. Ages and reddening values are recovered through a Bayesian analysis using the 2MASS magnitudes and three sets of standard models. Lithium depletion boundary (LDB) ages are also determined using literature observations and the same models employed for the Bayesian analysis. For all but one cluster, parallaxes derived by us agree with those presented in Gaia Collaboration et al. (2017), while a discrepancy is found for NGC 2516; we provide evidence supporting our own determination. Inferred cluster ages are robust against models and are generally consistent with literature values. The systematic parallax errors inherent in the Gaia DR1 data presently limit the precision of our results. Nevertheless, we have been able to place these eight clusters onto the same age scale for the first time, with good agreement between isochronal and LDB ages where there is overlap. Our approach appears promising and demonstrates the potential of combining Gaia and ground-based spectroscopic datasets.
The Kepler mission has been fantastic for asteroseismology of solar-type stars, but the targets are typically quite distant. As a consequence, the reliability of asteroseismic modeling has been limited by the precision of additional constraints from high-resolution spectroscopy and parallax measurements. A precise luminosity is particularly useful to minimize potential biases due to the intrinsic correlation between stellar mass and initial helium abundance. We have applied the latest version of the Asteroseismic Modeling Portal (AMP) to the complete Kepler data sets for 30 stars with known rotation rates and chromospheric activity levels. We compare the stellar properties derived with and without the measured parallaxes from the first data release of Gaia. We find that in most cases the masses and ages inferred from asteroseismology shift within their uncertainties. For a few targets that show larger shifts, the updated stellar properties only strengthen previous conclusions about anomalous rotation in middle-aged stars.
Log in to be able to interact and post comments
comments
Fetching comments
Sign in to be able to follow your search criteria
