Paper detail

The POINT-AGAPE Survey: Comparing Automated Searches of Microlensing Events toward M31

Searching for microlensing in M31 using automated superpixel surveys raises a number of difficulties which are not present in more conventional techniques. Here we focus on the problem that the list of microlensing candidates is sensitive to the selection criteria or "cuts" imposed and some subjectivity is involved in this. Weakening the cuts will generate a longer list of microlensing candidates but with a greater fraction of spurious ones; strengthening the cuts will produce a shorter list but may exclude some genuine events. We illustrate this by comparing three analyses of the same data-set obtained from a 3-year observing run on the INT in La Palma. The results of two of these analyses have been already reported: Belokurov et al. (2005) obtained between 3 and 22 candidates, depending on the strength of their cuts, while Calchi Novati et al. (2005) obtained 6 candidates. The third analysis is presented here for the first time and reports 10 microlensing candidates, 7 of which are new. Only two of the candidates are common to all three analyses. In order to understand why these analyses produce different candidate lists, a comparison is made of the cuts used by the three groups...

preprint2009arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access7 authors1 topic

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.