Paper detail

Unresolved versus resolved: testing the validity of young simple stellar population models with VLT/MUSE observations of NGC 3603

CONTEXT. Stellar populations are the building blocks of galaxies including the Milky Way. The majority, if not all extragalactic studies are entangled with the use of stellar population models given the unresolved nature of their observation. Extragalactic systems contain multiple stellar populations with complex star formation histories. However, their study is mainly based upon the principles of simple stellar populations (SSP). Hence, it is critical to examine the validity of SSP models. AIMS. This work aims to empirically test the validity of SSP models. This is done by comparing SSP models against observations of spatially resolved young stellar population in the determination of its physical properties, i.e. age and metallicity. METHODS. Integral field spectroscopy of a young stellar cluster in the Milky Way, NGC 3603, is used to study the properties of the cluster both as a resolved and unresolved stellar population. The unresolved stellar population is analysed using the H$α$ equivalent width as an age indicator, and the ratio of strong emission lines to infer metallicity. In addition, spectral energy distribution (SED) fitting using STARLIGHT, is used to infer these properties from the integrated spectrum. Independently, the resolved stellar population is analysed using the color-magnitude diagram (CMD) for age and metallicity determination. As the SSP model represents the unresolved stellar population, the derived age and metallicity are put to test whether they agree with those derived from resolved stars. RESULTS. The age and metallicity estimate of NGC 3603 derived from integrated spectroscopy are confirmed to be within the range of those derived from the CMD of the resolved stellar population, including other estimates found in the literature. The result from this pilot study supports the reliability of SSP models for studying unresolved young stellar populations.

preprint2016arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access5 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.