Paper detail

The iron and oxygen content of LMC Classical Cepheids and its implications for the Extragalactic Distance Scale and Hubble constant

Classical Cepheids are primary distance indicators and a crucial stepping stone to determining the present-day Hubble constant Ho to the precision and accuracy required to constrain apparent deviations from the LCDM Concordance Cosmological Model. We have measured the iron and oxygen abundances of of 89 Cepheids in the LMC, one of the anchors of the local Distance Scale, quadrupling the prior sample and including 68 of the 70 Cepheids used to constrain Ho by the SH0ES program. The goal is to constrain the extent to which the Cepheid luminosity is influenced by their chemical composition, an important contributor to the uncertainty on the determination of the Ho itself and a critical factor in the internal consistency of the distance ladder. We have derived stellar parameters and abundances from a self-consistent spectroscopic analysis based on Equivalent Width of absorption lines. The [Fe/H] distribution of LMC Cepheids is a single Gaussian with a mean of -0.4079+-0.003 dex (0.1 dex systematic uncertainty) and sigma 0.076+-0.003 dex. The latter is fully compatible with the measurement error and supports the low dispersion of 0.069 mag seen in the NIR HST LMC period-luminosity relation. The uniformity of the abundance has the important consequence that the LMC Cepheids alone cannot provide any meaningful constraint on the dependence of the Cepheid Period-Luminosity relation on chemical composition at any wavelength. This revises a prior claim based on a small sample of 22 LMC Cepheids that there was little dependence (or uncertainty) between composition and NIR luminosity, a conclusion which would produce a conflict between anchors of the distance ladder with different mean abundance. The chemical homogeneity of the LMC Cepheid population makes it an ideal environment to calibrate the metallicity dependence between the more metal poor SMC and metal rich Milky Way and NGC4258.

preprint2021arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access9 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.

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.