Paper detail

Spectro-photometric distances to stars: a general-purpose Bayesian approach

We developed a code that estimates distances to stars using measured spectroscopic and photometric quantities. We employ a Bayesian approach to build the probability distribution function over stellar evolutionary models given these data, delivering estimates of model parameters for each star individually. The code was first tested on simulations, successfully recovering input distances to mock stars with <1% bias.The method-intrinsic random distance uncertainties for typical spectroscopic survey measurements amount to around 10% for dwarf stars and 20\% for giants, and are most sensitive to the quality of $\log g$ measurements. The code was validated by comparing our distance estimates to parallax measurements from the Hipparcos mission for nearby stars (< 300 pc), to asteroseismic distances of CoRoT red giant stars, and to known distances of well-studied open and globular clusters. The external comparisons confirm that our distances are subject to very small systematic biases with respect to the fundamental Hipparcos scale (+0.4 % for dwarfs, and +1.6% for giants). The typical random distance scatter is 18% for dwarfs, and 26% for giants. For the CoRoT-APOGEE sample, the typical random distance scatter is ~15%, both for the nearby and farther data. Our distances are systematically larger than the CoRoT ones by about +9%, which can mostly be attributed to the different choice of priors. The comparison to known distances of star clusters from SEGUE and APOGEE has led to significant systematic differences for many cluster stars, but with opposite signs, and with substantial scatter. Finally, we tested our distances against those previously determined for a high-quality sample of giant stars from the RAVE survey, again finding a small systematic trend of +5% and an rms scatter of 30%.

preprint2015arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access19 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.

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.