Paper detail

Observational calibration of the projection factor of Cepheids. II. Application to nine Cepheids with HST/FGS parallax measurements

The distance to pulsating stars is classically estimated using the parallax-of-pulsation (PoP) method, which combines spectroscopic radial velocity measurements and angular diameter estimates to derive the distance of the star. An important application of this method is the determination of Cepheid distances, in view of the calibration of their distance scale. However, the conversion of radial to pulsational velocities in the PoP method relies on a poorly calibrated parameter, the projection factor (p-factor). We aim to measure empirically the value of the p-factors of a homogeneous sample of nine Galactic Cepheids for which trigonometric parallaxes were measured with the Hubble Space Telescope Fine Guidance Sensor. We use the SPIPS algorithm, a robust implementation of the PoP method that combines photometry, interferometry, and radial velocity measurements in a global modeling of the pulsation. We obtained new interferometric angular diameters using the PIONIER instrument at the Very Large Telescope Interferometer, completed by data from the literature. Using the known distance as an input, we derive the value of the p-factor and study its dependence with the pulsation period. We find the following p-factors: 1.20 $\pm$ 0.12 for RT Aur, 1.48 $\pm$ 0.18 for T Vul, 1.14 $\pm$ 0.10 for FF Aql, 1.31 $\pm$ 0.19 for Y Sgr, 1.39 $\pm$ 0.09 for X Sgr, 1.35 $\pm$ 0.13 for W Sgr, 1.36 $\pm$ 0.08 for $β$ Dor, 1.41 $\pm$ 0.10 for $ζ$ Gem, and 1.23 $\pm$ 0.12 for $\ell$ Car. These values are consistently close to p = 1.324 $\pm$ 0.024. We observe some dispersion around this average value, but the observed distribution is statistically consistent with a constant value of the p-factor as a function of the pulsation period. The error budget of our determination of the p-factor values is presently dominated by the uncertainty on the parallax, a limitation that will soon be waived by Gaia.

preprint2016arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access7 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.