Paper detail

Hipparcos Variable Star Detection and Classification Efficiency

A complete periodic star extraction and classification scheme is set up and tested with the Hipparcos catalogue. The efficiency of each step is derived by comparing the results with prior knowledge coming from the catalogue or from the literature. A combination of two variability criteria is applied in the first step to select 17 006 variability candidates from a complete sample of 115 152 stars. Our candidate sample turns out to include 10 406 known variables (i.e., 90% of the total of 11 597) and 6600 contaminating constant stars. A random forest classification is used in the second step to extract 1881 (82%) of the known periodic objects while removing entirely constant stars from the sample and limiting the contamination of non-periodic variables to 152 stars (7.5%). The confusion introduced by these 152 non-periodic variables is evaluated in the third step using the results of the Hipparcos periodic star classification presented in a previous study (Dubath et al. [1]).

preprint2011arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

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 graph slice

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.