Paper detail

Evidence for a systematic offset of $-$0.25 mas in the Gaia DR1 parallaxes

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, $Δπ\approx -0.22(\pm0.05) -0.003(\pm0.001)\timesβ$ mas ($β$ in degrees). Finally, there is a possible dependence of the parallax offset on distance, with the offset becoming negligible for $π\lesssim 1$ mas; we discuss whether this could be caused by a systematic error in the eclipsing binary distance scale, and reject this interpretation as unlikely.

preprint2016arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access2 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.

Institutions

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.