BZPEERReading, trust and collaboration for research
Menu

Discover

GraphFollow connections around a paper, topic or saved view.

Workspaces

HomePick up where your research flow left off.InboxHandle requests, replies and notifications from one place.CollectionsCurate reading lists, evidence sets and shareable dossiers.ResearchSee your private provenance graph, trail and imports.CollaborationMove from discovery into focused discussion rooms.PublishDraft, preview and publish full-text research articles.

Network

ExpertsFind specialists worth following or asking for help.CommunitiesJoin research circles organized around shared work.PartnersSee external organizations active around the same topics.

Opportunities

ListingsBrowse roles, calls and collaborations with clearer fit signals.

Account

Log inReturn to your reading and collaboration workspace.Create accountStart saving work, following people and joining teams.
Log inCreate account

Researcher profile

Andrew Everall

Andrew Everall contributes to research discovery and scholarly infrastructure.

ResearcherAffiliation not importedOpen to collaborate
astro-ph.GAastro-ph.SRastro-ph.IM

Trust snapshot

Quick read

Trust 21 - EmergingVerification L1Unclaimed author
7works
0followers
3topics
4close collaborators

Actions

Decide how to stay connected

Follow researcher0

Identity and collaboration

How to connect with this researcher

Claiming links this public author record to a researcher profile and unlocks direct collaboration workflows.

Log in to claim

Direct collaboration

Open a focused conversation when the fit is right

Claim this author entity first to unlock direct invitations.

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent work, topics, institutions and collaborators without jumping out to a separate graph page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

7 published item(s)

preprint2021arXiv

A selection function toolbox for subsets of astronomical catalogues

Large catalogues are ubiquitous throughout astronomy, but most scientific analyses are carried out on smaller samples selected from these catalogues by chosen cuts on catalogued quantities. The selection function of that scientific sample - the probability that a star in the catalogue will satisfy these cuts and so make it into the sample - is thus unique to each scientific analysis. We have created a general framework that can flexibly estimate the selection function of a sample drawn from a catalogue in terms of position, magnitude and colour. Our method is unique in using the binomial likelihood and accounting for correlations in the selection function across position, magnitude and colour using Gaussian processes and spherical harmonics. We have created a new open-source Python package selectionfunctiontoolbox that implements this framework and used it to make three different estimates of the APOGEE DR16 red giant sample selection function, as a subset of 2MASS, with each estimate using an increasing amount of technical knowledge of the APOGEE targeting. In a companion paper we applied our methodology to derive estimates of the astrometric and spectroscopic selection functions of Gaia EDR3. Our framework will make it trivial for astrophysicists to estimate the selection function that they should be using with the custom sample of stars that they have chosen to answer their scientific question.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2021arXiv

The Photo-Astrometric Vertical Tracer Density of the Milky Way II: Results from Gaia

We use Gaia photometry and astrometry to estimate the vertical spatial structure of the Milky Way at the Solar radius, formally accounting for sample incompleteness (the selection function) and parallax measurement uncertainty. Our results show impressive precision demonstrating the power of the Gaia data. However, systematic errors dominate the parameter value uncertainties. We thoroughly test and quantify the impacts of all systematic uncertainties. The vertical tracer density is modelled as a sum of two exponential profiles for the thin and thick discs, together with a spherically symmetric power-law for the stellar halo. We constrain the thin disc scale height as ${h_\mathrm{Tn}=260 \pm 3\, (\mathrm{stat}) \pm 26\,\mathrm{pc}\, (\mathrm{sys})}$ and thick disc ${h_\mathrm{Tk}=693 \pm 7 \,(\mathrm{stat}) \pm 121\,\mathrm{pc}\, (\mathrm{sys})}$. For the halo, we obtain a power law profile with $n_\mathrm{H}=3.543\pm0.023 \,(\mathrm{stat}) \pm0.259\, (\mathrm{sys})$. We infer a local stellar mass density for non-compact object stars of ${ρ_\mathrm{local}^* = 3.66\pm0.03\,(\mathrm{stat})\pm0.52 \times10^{-2}\,\mathrm{M}_\odot/\mathrm{pc}^3\,(\mathrm{sys})}$ and surface density of ${Σ_\mathrm{local}^* = 23.17\pm0.08\,(\mathrm{stat})\pm2.43\,\mathrm{M}_\odot/\mathrm{pc}^2\,(\mathrm{sys})}$. We find asymmetries above and below the disc with longer disc scale heights in the north but a flatter halo in the south at the $\lesssim 10$ per cent level.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

Completeness of the Gaia-verse I: when and where were Gaia's eyes on the sky during DR2?

The Gaia space mission is crafting revolutionary astrometric, photometric and spectroscopic catalogues that will allow us to map our Galaxy, but only if we know the completeness of this Gaia-verse of catalogues: what stars does it contain and what stars is it missing? We argue that the completeness is driven by Gaia's spinning-and-precessing scanning law and will apply this principle to the Gaia-verse over this series. We take a first step by identifying the periods in time that did not contribute any measurements to Gaia DR2; these gaps create ribbons of incompleteness across the sky that will bias any study that ignores them, although some of these gaps may be filled in future data releases. Our first approach was to use the variable star photometry to identify the 94 gaps longer than 1% of a day. Our second approach was to predict the number of observations of every point on the sky, which in comparison to the reported number of detections revealed additional gaps in the astrometry and spectroscopy. Making these predictions required us to make the most precise, publicly-available determination of the Gaia scanning law. Using this scanning law, we further identified that most stars fainter than $G=22$ in DR2 have spurious magnitudes due to a miscalibration resulting from a thunderstorm over Madrid. Our list of gaps and precision scanning law will allow astronomers to know when Gaia's eye was truly on their binary star, exoplanet or microlensing event during the time period of the second data release.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

Completeness of the Gaia-verse II: what are the odds that a star is missing from Gaia DR2?

The second data release of the Gaia mission contained astrometry and photometry for an incredible 1,692,919,135 sources, but how many sources did Gaia miss and where do they lie on the sky? The answer to this question will be crucial for any astronomer attempting to map the Milky Way with Gaia DR2. We infer the completeness of Gaia DR2 by exploiting the fact that it only contains sources with at least five astrometric detections. The odds that a source achieves those five detections depends on both the number of observations and the probability that an observation of that source results in a detection. We predict the number of times that each source was observed by Gaia and assume that the probability of detection is either a function of magnitude or a distribution as a function of magnitude. We fit both these models to the 1.7 billion stars of Gaia DR2, and thus are able to robustly predict the completeness of Gaia across the sky as a function of magnitude. We extend our selection function to account for crowding in dense regions of the sky, and show that this is vitally important, particularly in the Galactic bulge and the Large and Small Magellanic Clouds. We find that the magnitude limit at which Gaia is still 99% complete varies over the sky from $G=18.9$ to $21.3$. We have created a new Python package selectionfunctions (https://github.com/gaiaverse/selectionfunctions) which provides easy access to our selection functions.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

Predictions of Gaia's prize microlensing events are flawed

Precision astrometry from the second Gaia data release has allowed astronomers to predict 5,787 microlensing events, with 528 of these having maximums within the extended Gaia mission (J2014.5 - J2026.5). Future analysis of the Gaia time-series astrometry of these events will, in some cases, lead to precise gravitational mass measurements of the lens. We find that 61% of events predicted during the extended Gaia mission with sources brighter than G = 18 are likely to be spurious, with the background source in these cases commonly being either a duplicate detection or a binary companion of the lens. We present quality cuts to identify these spurious events and a revised list of microlensing event candidates. Our findings imply that half of the predictable astrometric microlensing events during the Gaia mission have yet to be identified.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

seestar: Selection functions for spectroscopic surveys of the Milky Way

Selection functions are vital for understanding the observational biases of spectroscopic surveys. With the wide variety of multi-object spectrographs currently in operation and becoming available soon, we require easily generalisable methods for determining the selection functions of these surveys. Previous work, however, has largely been focused on generating individual, tailored selection functions for every data release of each survey. Moreover, no methods for combining these selection functions to be used for joint catalogues have been developed. We have developed a Poisson likelihood estimation method for calculating selection functions in a Bayesian framework, which can be generalised to any multi-object spectrograph. We include a robust treatment of overlapping fields within a survey as well as selection functions for combined samples with overlapping footprints. We also provide a method for transforming the selection function that depends on the sky positions, colour, and apparent magnitude of a star to one that depends on the galactic location, metallicity, mass, and age of a star. This `intrinsic' selection function is invaluable for chemodynamical models of the Milky Way. We demonstrate that our method is successful at recreating synthetic spectroscopic samples selected from a mock galaxy catalogue.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

Unresolved stellar companions with Gaia DR2 astrometry

For stars with unresolved companions, motions of the centre of light and that of mass decouple, causing a single-source astrometric model to perform poorly. We show that such stars can be easily detected with the reduced chi2 statistic, or RUWE, provided as part of Gaia DR2. We convert RUWE into the amplitude of the image centroid wobble, which, if scaled by the source distance, is proportional to the physical separation between companions (for periods up to several years). We test this idea on a sample of known spectroscopic binaries and demonstrate that the amplitude of the centroid perturbation scales with the binary period and the mass ratio as expected. We apply this technique to the Gaia DR2 data and show how the binary fraction evolves across the Hertzsprung--Russell diagram. The observed incidence of unresolved companions is high for massive young stars and drops steadily with stellar mass, reaching its lowest levels for white dwarfs. We highlight the elevated binary fraction for the nearby Blue Stragglers and Blue Horizontal Branch stars. We also illustrate how unresolved hierarchical triples inflate the relative velocity signal in wide binaries. Finally, we point out a hint of evidence for the existence of additional companions to the hosts of extrasolar hot jupiters.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access