Paper detail

Distance determination for RAVE stars using stellar models III: The nature of the RAVE survey and Milky Way chemistry

We apply the method of Burnett & Binney (2010) for the determination of stellar distances and parameters to the internal catalogue of the Radial Velocity Experiment (Steinmetz et al. 2006). Subsamples of stars that either have Hipparcos parallaxes or belong to well-studied clusters, inspire confidence in the formal errors. Distances to dwarfs cooler than ~6000 K appear to be unbiased, but those to hotter dwarfs tend to be too small by ~10% of the formal errors. Distances to giants tend to be too large by about the same amount. The median distance error in the whole sample of 216,000 stars is 28% and the error distribution is similar for both giants and dwarfs. Roughly half the stars in the RAVE survey are giants. The giant fraction is largest at low latitudes and in directions towards the Galactic Centre. Near the plane the metallicity distribution is remarkably narrow and centred on [M/H]-0.04 dex; with increasing |z| it broadens out and its median moves to [M/H] ~ -0.5. Mean age as a function of distance from the Galactic centre and distance |z| from the Galactic plane shows the anticipated increase in mean age with |z|.

preprint2011arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access22 authors2 topics

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

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

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.