Paper detail

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.

preprint2020arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access4 authors3 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.