sort results by

Use logical operators AND, OR, NOT and round brackets to construct complex queries. Whitespace-separated words are treated as ANDed.

Show articles per page in mode

Davidson, Michael

Normalized to: Davidson, M.

21 article(s) in total. 758 co-authors, from 1 to 13 common article(s). Median position in authors list is 10,0.

[1]  oai:arXiv.org:1609.07325  [pdf] - 2099691
GaiaNIR: Combining optical and Near-Infra-Red (NIR) capabilities with Time-Delay-Integration (TDI) sensors for a future Gaia-like mission
Comments: 27 Pages
Submitted: 2016-09-23, last modified: 2020-05-22
ESA recently called for new "Science Ideas" to be investigated in terms of feasibility and technological developments -- for technologies not yet sufficiently mature. These ideas may in the future become candidates for M or L class missions within the ESA Science Program. With the launch of Gaia in December 2013, Europe entered a new era of space astrometry following in the footsteps of the very successful Hipparcos mission from the early 1990s. Gaia is the successor to Hipparcos, both of which operated in optical wavelengths, and Gaia is two orders of magnitude more accurate in the five astrometric parameters and is surveying four orders of magnitude more stars in a vast volume of the Milky Way. The combination of the Hipparcos/Tycho-2 catalogues with the first early Gaia data release will give improved proper motions over a long ~25 year baseline. The final Gaia solution will also establish a new optical reference frame by means of quasars, by linking the optical counterparts of radio (VLBI) sources defining the orientation of the reference frame, and by using the zero proper motion of quasars to determine a non-rotating frame. A weakness of Gaia is that it only operates at optical wavelengths. However, much of the Galactic centre and the spiral arm regions, important for certain studies, are obscured by interstellar extinction and this makes it difficult for Gaia to deeply probe. Traditionally, this problem is overcome by switching to the infra-red but this was not possible with Gaia's CCDs. Additionally, to scan the entire sky and make global absolute parallax measurements the spacecraft must have a constant rotation and this requires that the CCDs operate in TDI mode, increasing their complexity.
[2]  oai:arXiv.org:1804.09378  [pdf] - 1732652
Gaia Data Release 2: Observational Hertzsprung-Russell diagrams
Gaia Collaboration; Babusiaux, C.; van Leeuwen, F.; Barstow, M. A.; Jordi, C.; Vallenari, A.; Bossini, D.; Bressan, A.; Cantat-Gaudin, T.; van Leeuwen, M.; Brown, A. G. A.; Prusti, T.; de Bruijne, J. H. J.; Bailer-Jones, C. A. L.; Biermann, M.; Evans, D. W.; Eyer, L.; Jansen, F.; Klioner, S. A.; Lammers, U.; Lindegren, L.; Luri, X.; Mignard, F.; Panem, C.; Pourbaix, D.; Randich, S.; Sartoretti, P.; Siddiqui, H. I.; Soubiran, C.; Walton, N. A.; Arenou, F.; Bastian, U.; Cropper, M.; Drimmel, R.; Katz, D.; Lattanzi, M. G.; Bakker, J.; Cacciari, C.; Castañeda, J.; Chaoul, L.; Cheek, N.; DeAngeli, F.; Fabricius, C.; Guerra, R.; Holl, B.; Masana, E.; Messineo, R.; Mowlavi, N.; Nienartowicz, K.; Panuzzo, P.; Portell, J.; Riello, M.; Seabroke, G. M.; Tanga, P.; Thévenin, F.; Gracia-Abril, G.; Comoretto, G.; Garcia-Reinaldos, M.; Teyssier, D.; Altmann, M.; Andrae, R.; Audard, M.; Bellas-Velidis, I.; Benson, K.; Berthier, J.; Blomme, R.; Burgess, P.; Busso, G.; Carry, B.; Cellino, A.; Clementini, G.; Clotet, M.; Creevey, O.; Davidson, M.; DeRidder, J.; Delchambre, L.; Dell'Oro, A.; Ducourant, C.; Fernández-Hernández, J.; Fouesneau, M.; Frémat, Y.; Galluccio, L.; García-Torres, M.; González-Núñez, J.; González-Vidal, J. J.; Gosset, E.; Guy, L. P.; Halbwachs, J. -L.; Hambly, N. C.; Harrison, D. L.; Hernández, J.; Hestroffer, D.; Hodgkin, S. T.; Hutton, A.; Jasniewicz, G.; Jean-Antoine-Piccolo, A.; Jordan, S.; Korn, A. J.; Krone-Martins, A.; Lanzafame, A. C.; Lebzelter, T.; Löffler, W.; Manteiga, M.; Marrese, P. M.; Martín-Fleitas, J. M.; Moitinho, A.; Mora, A.; Muinonen, K.; Osinde, J.; Pancino, E.; Pauwels, T.; Petit, J. -M.; Recio-Blanco, A.; Richards, P. J.; Rimoldini, L.; Robin, A. C.; Sarro, L. M.; Siopis, C.; Smith, M.; Sozzetti, A.; Süveges, M.; Torra, J.; vanReeven, W.; Abbas, U.; Aramburu, A. Abreu; Accart, S.; Aerts, C.; Altavilla, G.; Álvarez, M. A.; Alvarez, R.; Alves, J.; Anderson, R. I.; Andrei, A. H.; Varela, E. Anglada; Antiche, E.; Antoja, T.; Arcay, B.; Astraatmadja, T. L.; Bach, N.; Baker, S. G.; Balaguer-Núñez, L.; Balm, P.; Barache, C.; Barata, C.; Barbato, D.; Barblan, F.; Barklem, P. S.; Barrado, D.; Barros, M.; Muñoz, S. Bartholomé; Bassilana, J. -L.; Becciani, U.; Bellazzini, M.; Berihuete, A.; Bertone, S.; Bianchi, L.; Bienaymé, O.; Blanco-Cuaresma, S.; Boch, T.; Boeche, C.; Bombrun, A.; Borrachero, R.; Bouquillon, S.; Bourda, G.; Bragaglia, A.; Bramante, L.; Breddels, M. A.; Brouillet, N.; Brüsemeister, T.; Brugaletta, E.; Bucciarelli, B.; Burlacu, A.; Busonero, D.; Butkevich, A. G.; Buzzi, R.; Caffau, E.; Cancelliere, R.; Cannizzaro, G.; Carballo, R.; Carlucci, T.; Carrasco, J. M.; Casamiquela, L.; Castellani, M.; Castro-Ginard, A.; Charlot, P.; Chemin, L.; Chiavassa, A.; Cocozza, G.; Costigan, G.; Cowell, S.; Crifo, F.; Crosta, M.; Crowley, C.; Cuypers, J.; Dafonte, C.; Damerdji, Y.; Dapergolas, A.; David, P.; David, M.; deLaverny, P.; DeLuise, F.; DeMarch, R.; deMartino, D.; deSouza, R.; deTorres, A.; Debosscher, J.; delPozo, E.; Delbo, M.; Delgado, A.; Delgado, H. E.; Diakite, S.; Diener, C.; Distefano, E.; Dolding, C.; Drazinos, P.; Durán, J.; Edvardsson, B.; Enke, H.; Eriksson, K.; Esquej, P.; Bontemps, G. Eynard; Fabre, C.; Fabrizio, M.; Faigler, S.; Falcão, A. J.; Casas, M. Farràs; Federici, L.; Fedorets, G.; Fernique, P.; Figueras, F.; Filippi, F.; Findeisen, K.; Fonti, A.; Fraile, E.; Fraser, M.; Frézouls, B.; Gai, M.; Galleti, S.; Garabato, D.; García-Sedano, F.; Garofalo, A.; Garralda, N.; Gavel, A.; Gavras, P.; Gerssen, J.; Geyer, R.; Giacobbe, P.; Gilmore, G.; Girona, S.; Giuffrida, G.; Glass, F.; Gomes, M.; Granvik, M.; Gueguen, A.; Guerrier, A.; Guiraud, J.; Gutiérrez-Sánchez, R.; Haigron, R.; Hatzidimitriou, D.; Hauser, M.; Haywood, M.; Heiter, U.; Helmi, A.; Heu, J.; Hilger, T.; Hobbs, D.; Hofmann, W.; Holland, G.; Huckle, H. E.; Hypki, A.; Icardi, V.; Janßen, K.; JevardatdeFombelle, G.; Jonker, P. G.; Juhász, Á. L.; Julbe, F.; Karampelas, A.; Kewley, A.; Klar, J.; Kochoska, A.; Kohley, R.; Kolenberg, K.; Kontizas, M.; Kontizas, E.; Koposov, S. E.; Kordopatis, G.; Kostrzewa-Rutkowska, Z.; Koubsky, P.; Lambert, S.; Lanza, A. F.; Lasne, Y.; Lavigne, J. -B.; LeFustec, Y.; LePoncin-Lafitte, C.; Lebreton, Y.; Leccia, S.; Leclerc, N.; Lecoeur-Taibi, I.; Lenhardt, H.; Leroux, F.; Liao, S.; Licata, E.; Lindstrøm, H. E. P.; Lister, T. A.; Livanou, E.; Lobel, A.; López, M.; Managau, S.; Mann, R. G.; Mantelet, G.; Marchal, O.; Marchant, J. M.; Marconi, M.; Marinoni, S.; Marschalkó, G.; Marshall, D. J.; Martino, M.; Marton, G.; Mary, N.; Massari, D.; Matijevič, G.; Mazeh, T.; McMillan, P. J.; Messina, S.; Michalik, D.; Millar, N. R.; Molina, D.; Molinaro, R.; Molnár, L.; Montegriffo, P.; Mor, R.; Morbidelli, R.; Morel, T.; Morris, D.; Mulone, A. F.; Muraveva, T.; Musella, I.; Nelemans, G.; Nicastro, L.; Noval, L.; O'Mullane, W.; Ordénovic, C.; Ordóñez-Blanco, D.; Osborne, P.; Pagani, C.; Pagano, I.; Pailler, F.; Palacin, H.; Palaversa, L.; Panahi, A.; Pawlak, M.; Piersimoni, A. M.; Pineau, F. -X.; Plachy, E.; Plum, G.; Poggio, E.; Poujoulet, E.; Prša, A.; Pulone, L.; Racero, E.; Ragaini, S.; Rambaux, N.; Ramos-Lerate, M.; Regibo, S.; Reylé, C.; Riclet, F.; Ripepi, V.; Riva, A.; Rivard, A.; Rixon, G.; Roegiers, T.; Roelens, M.; Romero-Gómez, M.; Rowell, N.; Royer, F.; Ruiz-Dern, L.; Sadowski, G.; Sellés, T. Sagristà; Sahlmann, J.; Salgado, J.; Salguero, E.; Sanna, N.; Santana-Ros, T.; Sarasso, M.; Savietto, H.; Schultheis, M.; Sciacca, E.; Segol, M.; Segovia, J. C.; Ségransan, D.; Shih, I-C.; Siltala, L.; Silva, A. F.; Smart, R. L.; Smith, K. W.; Solano, E.; Solitro, F.; Sordo, R.; SoriaNieto, S.; Souchay, J.; Spagna, A.; Spoto, F.; Stampa, U.; Steele, I. A.; Steidelmüller, H.; Stephenson, C. A.; Stoev, H.; Suess, F. F.; Surdej, J.; Szabados, L.; Szegedi-Elek, E.; Tapiador, D.; Taris, F.; Tauran, G.; Taylor, M. B.; Teixeira, R.; Terrett, D.; Teyssandier, P.; Thuillot, W.; Titarenko, A.; TorraClotet, F.; Turon, C.; Ulla, A.; Utrilla, E.; Uzzi, S.; Vaillant, M.; Valentini, G.; Valette, V.; vanElteren, A.; Van Hemelryck, E.; Vaschetto, M.; Vecchiato, A.; Veljanoski, J.; Viala, Y.; Vicente, D.; Vogt, S.; vonEssen, C.; Voss, H.; Votruba, V.; Voutsinas, S.; Walmsley, G.; Weiler, M.; Wertz, O.; Wevers, T.; Wyrzykowski, Ł.; Yoldas, A.; Žerjal, M.; Ziaeepour, H.; Zorec, J.; Zschocke, S.; Zucker, S.; Zurbach, C.; Zwitter, T.
Comments: Published in the A&A Gaia Data Release 2 special issue. Tables 2 and A.4 corrected. Tables available at http://cdsarc.u-strasbg.fr/viz-bin/qcat?J/A+A/616/A10
Submitted: 2018-04-25, last modified: 2018-08-13
We highlight the power of the Gaia DR2 in studying many fine structures of the Hertzsprung-Russell diagram (HRD). Gaia allows us to present many different HRDs, depending in particular on stellar population selections. We do not aim here for completeness in terms of types of stars or stellar evolutionary aspects. Instead, we have chosen several illustrative examples. We describe some of the selections that can be made in Gaia DR2 to highlight the main structures of the Gaia HRDs. We select both field and cluster (open and globular) stars, compare the observations with previous classifications and with stellar evolutionary tracks, and we present variations of the Gaia HRD with age, metallicity, and kinematics. Late stages of stellar evolution such as hot subdwarfs, post-AGB stars, planetary nebulae, and white dwarfs are also analysed, as well as low-mass brown dwarf objects. The Gaia HRDs are unprecedented in both precision and coverage of the various Milky Way stellar populations and stellar evolutionary phases. Many fine structures of the HRDs are presented. The clear split of the white dwarf sequence into hydrogen and helium white dwarfs is presented for the first time in an HRD. The relation between kinematics and the HRD is nicely illustrated. Two different populations in a classical kinematic selection of the halo are unambiguously identified in the HRD. Membership and mean parameters for a selected list of open clusters are provided. They allow drawing very detailed cluster sequences, highlighting fine structures, and providing extremely precise empirical isochrones that will lead to more insight in stellar physics. Gaia DR2 demonstrates the potential of combining precise astrometry and photometry for large samples for studies in stellar evolution and stellar population and opens an entire new area for HRD-based studies.
[3]  oai:arXiv.org:1804.09366  [pdf] - 1732648
Gaia Data Release 2: The astrometric solution
Comments: 25 pages, 29 figures. Special A&A issue on Gaia Data Release 2
Submitted: 2018-04-25
Gaia Data Release 2 (Gaia DR2) contains results for 1693 million sources in the magnitude range 3 to 21 based on observations collected by the European Space Agency Gaia satellite during the first 22 months of its operational phase. We describe the input data, models, and processing used for the astrometric content of Gaia DR2, and the validation of these results performed within the astrometry task. Some 320 billion centroid positions from the pre-processed astrometric CCD observations were used to estimate the five astrometric parameters (positions, parallaxes, and proper motions) for 1332 million sources, and approximate positions at the reference epoch J2015.5 for an additional 361 million mostly faint sources. Special validation solutions were used to characterise the random and systematic errors in parallax and proper motion. For the sources with five-parameter astrometric solutions, the median uncertainty in parallax and position at the reference epoch J2015.5 is about 0.04 mas for bright (G<14 mag) sources, 0.1 mas at G=17 mag, and 0.7 mas at G=20 mag. In the proper motion components the corresponding uncertainties are 0.05, 0.2, and 1.2 mas/yr, respectively. The optical reference frame defined by Gaia DR2 is aligned with ICRS and is non-rotating with respect to the quasars to within 0.15 mas/yr. From the quasars and validation solutions we estimate that systematics in the parallaxes depending on position, magnitude, and colour are generally below 0.1 mas, but the parallaxes are on the whole too small by about 0.03 mas. Significant spatial correlations of up to 0.04 mas in parallax and 0.07 mas/yr in proper motion are seen on small (<1 deg) and intermediate (20 deg) angular scales. Important statistics and information for the users of the Gaia DR2 astrometry are given in the appendices.
[4]  oai:arXiv.org:1804.09367  [pdf] - 1736357
Gaia Data Release 2: processing of the photometric data
Comments:
Submitted: 2018-04-25
The second Gaia data release is based on 22 months of mission data with an average of 0.9 billion individual CCD observations per day. A data volume of this size and granularity requires a robust and reliable but still flexible system to achieve the demanding accuracy and precision constraints that Gaia is capable of delivering. The internal Gaia photometric system was initialised using an iterative process that is solely based on Gaia data. A set of calibrations was derived for the entire Gaia DR2 baseline and then used to produce the final mean source photometry. The photometric catalogue contains 2.5 billion sources comprised of three different grades depending on the availability of colour information and the procedure used to calibrate them: 1.5 billion gold, 144 million silver, and 0.9 billion bronze. These figures reflect the results of the photometric processing; the content of the data release will be different due to the validation and data quality filters applied during the catalogue preparation. The photometric processing pipeline, PhotPipe, implements all the processing and calibration workflows in terms of Map/Reduce jobs based on the Hadoop platform. This is the first example of a processing system for a large astrophysical survey project to make use of these technologies. The improvements in the generation of the integrated G-band fluxes, in the attitude modelling, in the cross-matching, and and in the identification of spurious detections led to a much cleaner input stream for the photometric processing. This, combined with the improvements in the definition of the internal photometric system and calibration flow, produced high-quality photometry. Hadoop proved to be an excellent platform choice for the implementation of PhotPipe in terms of overall performance, scalability, downtime, and manpower required for operations and maintenance.
[5]  oai:arXiv.org:1804.09830  [pdf] - 1732659
Gaia Data Release 2. Calibration and mitigation of electronic offset effects in the data
Comments: 20 pages, 30 figures, accepted for publication in Astronomy and Astrophysics
Submitted: 2018-04-25
The European Space Agency Gaia satellite was launched into orbit around L2 in December 2013. This ambitious mission has strict requirements on residual systematic errors resulting from instrumental corrections in order to meet a design goal of sub-10 microarcsecond astrometry. During the design and build phase of the science instruments, various critical calibrations were studied in detail to ensure that this goal could be met in orbit. In particular, it was determined that the video-chain offsets on the analogue side of the analogue-to-digital conversion electronics exhibited instabilities that could not be mitigated fully by modifications to the flight hardware. We provide a detailed description of the behaviour of the electronic offset levels on microsecond timescales, identifying various systematic effects that are known collectively as offset non-uniformities. The effects manifest themselves as transient perturbations on the gross zero-point electronic offset level that is routinely monitored as part of the overall calibration process. Using in-orbit special calibration sequences along with simple parametric models, we show how the effects can be calibrated, and how these calibrations are applied to the science data. While the calibration part of the process is relatively straightforward, the application of the calibrations during science data processing requires a detailed on-ground reconstruction of the readout timing of each charge-coupled device (CCD) sample on each device in order to predict correctly the highly time-dependent nature of the corrections. We demonstrate the effectiveness of our offset non-uniformity models in mitigating the effects in Gaia data. We demonstrate for all CCDs and operating instrument and modes on board Gaia that the video-chain noise-limited performance is recovered in the vast majority of science samples.
[6]  oai:arXiv.org:1705.00688  [pdf] - 1583007
Gaia Data Release 1. Testing the parallaxes with local Cepheids and RR Lyrae stars
Gaia Collaboration; Clementini, G.; Eyer, L.; Ripepi, V.; Marconi, M.; Muraveva, T.; Garofalo, A.; Sarro, L. M.; Palmer, M.; Luri, X.; Molinaro, R.; Rimoldini, L.; Szabados, L.; Musella, I.; Anderson, R. I.; Prusti, T.; de Bruijne, J. H. J.; Brown, A. G. A.; Vallenari, A.; Babusiaux, C.; Bailer-Jones, C. A. L.; Bastian, U.; Biermann, M.; Evans, D. W.; Jansen, F.; Jordi, C.; Klioner, S. A.; Lammers, U.; Lindegren, L.; Mignard, F.; Panem, C.; Pourbaix, D.; Randich, S.; Sartoretti, P.; Siddiqui, H. I.; Soubiran, C.; Valette, V.; van Leeuwen, F.; Walton, N. A.; Aerts, C.; Arenou, F.; Cropper, M.; Drimmel, R.; Høg, E.; Katz, D.; Lattanzi, M. G.; O'Mullane, W.; Grebel, E. K.; Holland, A. D.; Huc, C.; Passot, X.; Perryman, M.; Bramante, L.; Cacciari, C.; Castañeda, J.; Chaoul, L.; Cheek, N.; De Angeli, F.; Fabricius, C.; Guerra, R.; Hernández, J.; Jean-Azntoine-Piccolo, A.; Masana, E.; Messineo, R.; Mowlavi, N.; Nienartowicz, K.; Ordóñez-Blanco, D.; Panuzzo, P.; Portell, J.; Richards, P. J.; Riello, M.; Seabroke, G. M.; Tanga, P.; Thévenin, F.; Torra, J.; Els, S. G.; Gracia-Abril, G.; Comoretto, G.; Garcia-Reinaldos, M.; Lock, T.; Mercier, E.; Altmann, M.; Andrae, R.; Astraatmadja, T. L.; Bellas-Velidis, I.; Benson, K.; Berthier, J.; Blomme, R.; Busso, G.; Carry, B.; Cellino, A.; Cowell, S.; Creevey, O.; Cuypers, J.; Davidson, M.; De Ridder, J.; de Torres, A.; Delchambre, L.; Dell'Oro, A.; Ducourant, C.; Frémat, Y.; García-Torres, M.; Gosset, E.; Halbwachs, J. -L.; Hambly, N. C.; Harrison, D. L.; Hauser, M.; Hestroffer, D.; Hodgkin, S. T.; Huckle, H. E.; Hutton, A.; Jasniewicz, G.; Jordan, S.; Kontizas, M.; Korn, A. J.; Lanzafame, A. C.; Manteiga, M.; Moitinho, A.; Muinonen, K.; Osinde, J.; Pancino, E.; Pauwels, T.; Petit, J. -M.; Recio-Blanco, A.; Robin, A. C.; Siopis, C.; Smith, M.; Smith, K. W.; Sozzetti, A.; Thuillot, W.; van Reeven, W.; Viala, Y.; Abbas, U.; Aramburu, A. Abreu; Accart, S.; Aguado, J. J.; Allan, P. M.; Allasia, W.; Altavilla, G.; Álvarez, M. A.; Alves, J.; Andrei, A. H.; Varela, E. Anglada; Antiche, E.; Antoja, T.; Antón, S.; Arcay, B.; Bach, N.; Baker, S. G.; Balaguer-Núñez, L.; Barache, C.; Barata, C.; Barbier, A.; Barblan, F.; Navascués, D. Barrado y; Barros, M.; Barstow, M. A.; Becciani, U.; Bellazzini, M.; García, A. Bello; Belokurov, V.; Bendjoya, P.; Berihuete, A.; Bianchi, L.; Bienaymé, O.; Billebaud, F.; Blagorodnova, N.; Blanco-Cuaresma, S.; Boch, T.; Bombrun, A.; Borrachero, R.; Bouquillon, S.; Bourda, G.; Bouy, H.; Bragaglia, A.; Breddels, M. A.; Brouillet, N.; Brüsemeister, T.; Bucciarelli, B.; Burgess, P.; Burgon, R.; Burlacu, A.; Busonero, D.; Buzzi, R.; Caffau, E.; Cambras, J.; Campbell, H.; Cancelliere, R.; Cantat-Gaudin, T.; Carlucci, T.; Carrasco, J. M.; Castellani, M.; Charlot, P.; Charnas, J.; Chiavassa, A.; Clotet, M.; Cocozza, G.; Collins, R. S.; Costigan, G.; Crifo, F.; Cross, N. J. G.; Crosta, M.; Crowley, C.; Dafonte, C.; Damerdji, Y.; Dapergolas, A.; David, P.; David, M.; De Cat, P.; de Felice, F.; de Laverny, P.; De Luise, F.; De March, R.; de Souza, R.; Debosscher, J.; del Pozo, E.; Delbo, M.; Delgado, A.; Delgado, H. E.; Di Matteo, P.; Diakite, S.; Distefano, E.; Dolding, C.; Anjos, S. Dos; Drazinos, P.; Durán, J.; Dzigan, Y.; Edvardsson, B.; Enke, H.; Evans, N. W.; Bontemps, G. Eynard; Fabre, C.; Fabrizio, M.; Faigler, S.; Falcão, A. J.; Casas, M. Farràs; Federici, L.; Fedorets, G.; Fernández-Hernánde, J.; Fernique, P.; Fienga, A.; Figueras, F.; Filippi, F.; Findeisen, K.; Fonti, A.; Fouesneau, M.; Fraile, E.; Fraser, M.; Fuchs, J.; Gai, M.; Galleti, S.; Galluccio, L.; Garabato, D.; García-Sedano, F.; Garralda, N.; Gavras, P.; Gerssen, J.; Geyer, R.; Gilmore, G.; Girona, S.; Giuffrida, G.; Gomes, M.; González-Marcos, A.; González-Núñez, J.; González-Vidal, J. J.; Granvik, M.; Guerrier, A.; Guillout, P.; Guiraud, J.; Gúrpide, A.; Gutiérrez-Sánchez, R.; Guy, L. P.; Haigron, R.; Hatzidimitriou, D.; Haywood, M.; Heiter, U.; Helmi, A.; Hobbs, D.; Hofmann, W.; Holl, B.; Holland, G.; Hunt, J. A. S.; Hypki, A.; Icardi, V.; Irwin, M.; de Fombelle, G. Jevardat; Jofré, P.; Jonker, P. G.; Jorissen, A.; Julbe, F.; Karampelas, A.; Kochoska, A.; Kohley, R.; Kolenberg, K.; Kontizas, E.; Koposov, S. E.; Kordopatis, G.; Koubsky, P.; Krone-Martins, A.; Kudryashova, M.; Kull, I.; Bachchan, R. K.; Lacoste-Seris, F.; Lanza, A. F.; Lavigne, J. -B.; Poncin-Lafitte, C. Le; Lebreton, Y.; Lebzelter, T.; Leccia, S.; Leclerc, N.; Lecoeur-Taibi, I.; Lemaitre, V.; Lenhardt, H.; Leroux, F.; Liao, S.; Licata, E.; Lindstrøm, H. E. P.; Lister, T. A.; Livanou, E.; Lobel, A.; Löffler, W.; López, M.; Lorenz, D.; MacDonald, I.; Fernandes, T. Magalhães; Managau, S.; Mann, R. G.; Mantelet, G.; Marchal, O.; Marchant, J. M.; Marinoni, S.; Marrese, P. M.; Marschalkó, G.; Marshall, D. J.; Martín-Fleitas, J. M.; Martino, M.; Mary, N.; Matijevič, G.; Mazeh, T.; McMillan, P. J.; Messina, S.; Michalik, D.; Millar, N. R.; Miranda, B. M. H.; Molina, D.; Molinaro, M.; Molnár, L.; Moniez, M.; Montegriffo, P.; Mor, R.; Mora, A.; Morbidelli, R.; Morel, T.; Morgenthaler, S.; Morris, D.; Mulone, A. F.; Narbonne, J.; Nelemans, G.; Nicastro, L.; Noval, L.; Ordénovic, C.; Ordieres-Meré, J.; Osborne, P.; Pagani, C.; Pagano, I.; Pailler, F.; Palacin, H.; Palaversa, L.; Parsons, P.; Pecoraro, M.; Pedrosa, R.; Pentikäinen, H.; Pichon, B.; Piersimoni, A. M.; Pineau, F. -X.; Plachy, E.; Plum, G.; Poujoulet, E.; Prša, A.; Pulone, L.; Ragaini, S.; Rago, S.; Rambaux, N.; Ramos-Lerate, M.; Ranalli, P.; Rauw, G.; Read, A.; Regibo, S.; Reylé, C.; Ribeiro, R. A.; Riva, A.; Rixon, G.; Roelens, M.; Romero-Gómez, M.; Rowell, N.; Royer, F.; Ruiz-Dern, L.; Sadowski, G.; Sellés, T. Sagristà; Sahlmann, J.; Salgado, J.; Salguero, E.; Sarasso, M.; Savietto, H.; Schultheis, M.; Sciacca, E.; Segol, M.; Segovia, J. C.; Segransan, D.; Shih, I-C.; Smareglia, R.; Smart, R. L.; Solano, E.; Solitro, F.; Sordo, R.; Nieto, S. Soria; Souchay, J.; Spagna, A.; Spoto, F.; Stampa, U.; Steele, I. A.; Steidelmüller, H.; Stephenson, C. A.; Stoev, H.; Suess, F. F.; Süveges, M.; Surdej, J.; Szegedi-Elek, E.; Tapiador, D.; Taris, F.; Tauran, G.; Taylor, M. B.; Teixeira, R.; Terrett, D.; Tingley, B.; Trager, S. C.; Turon, C.; Ulla, A.; Utrilla, E.; Valentini, G.; van Elteren, A.; Van Hemelryck, E.; van Leeuwen, M.; Varadi, M.; Vecchiato, A.; Veljanoski, J.; Via, T.; Vicente, D.; Vogt, S.; Voss, H.; Votruba, V.; Voutsinas, S.; Walmsley, G.; Weiler, M.; Weingrill, K.; Wevers, T.; Wyrzykowski, Ł.; Yoldas, A.; Žerjal, M.; Zucker, S.; Zurbach, C.; Zwitter, T.; Alecu, A.; Allen, M.; Prieto, C. Allende; Amorim, A.; Anglada-Escudé, G.; Arsenijevic, V.; Azaz, S.; Balm, P.; Beck, M.; Bernstein, H. -H.; Bigot, L.; Bijaoui, A.; Blasco, C.; Bonfigli, M.; Bono, G.; Boudreault, S.; Bressan, A.; Brown, S.; Brunet, P. -M.; Bunclark, P.; Buonanno, R.; Butkevich, A. G.; Carret, C.; Carrion, C.; Chemin, L.; Chéreau, F.; Corcione, L.; Darmigny, E.; de Boer, K. S.; de Teodoro, P.; de Zeeuw, P. T.; Luche, C. Delle; Domingues, C. D.; Dubath, P.; Fodor, F.; Frézouls, B.; Fries, A.; Fustes, D.; Fyfe, D.; Gallardo, E.; Gallegos, J.; Gardiol, D.; Gebran, M.; Gomboc, A.; Gómez, A.; Grux, E.; Gueguen, A.; Heyrovsky, A.; Hoar, J.; Iannicola, G.; Parache, Y. Isasi; Janotto, A. -M.; Joliet, E.; Jonckheere, A.; Keil, R.; Kim, D. -W.; Klagyivik, P.; Klar, J.; Knude, J.; Kochukhov, O.; Kolka, I.; Kos, J.; Kutka, A.; Lainey, V.; LeBouquin, D.; Liu, C.; Loreggia, D.; Makarov, V. V.; Marseille, M. G.; Martayan, C.; Martinez-Rubi, O.; Massart, B.; Meynadier, F.; Mignot, S.; Munari, U.; Nguyen, A. -T.; Nordlander, T.; O'Flaherty, K. S.; Ocvirk, P.; Sanz, A. Olias; Ortiz, P.; Osorio, J.; Oszkiewicz, D.; Ouzounis, A.; Park, P.; Pasquato, E.; Peltzer, C.; Peralta, J.; Péturaud, F.; Pieniluoma, T.; Pigozzi, E.; Poels, J.; Prat, G.; Prod'homme, T.; Raison, F.; Rebordao, J. M.; Risquez, D.; Rocca-Volmerange, B.; Rosen, S.; Ruiz-Fuertes, M. I.; Russo, F.; Sembay, S.; Vizcaino, I. Serraller; Short, A.; Siebert, A.; Silva, H.; Sinachopoulos, D.; Slezak, E.; Soffel, M.; Sosnowska, D.; Straižys, V.; ter Linden, M.; Terrell, D.; Theil, S.; Tiede, C.; Troisi, L.; Tsalmantza, P.; Tur, D.; Vaccari, M.; Vachier, F.; Valles, P.; Van Hamme, W.; Veltz, L.; Virtanen, J.; Wallut, J. -M.; Wichmann, R.; Wilkinson, M. I.; Ziaeepour, H.; Zschocke, S.
Comments: 29 pages, 25 figures. Accepted for publication by A&A
Submitted: 2017-05-01
Parallaxes for 331 classical Cepheids, 31 Type II Cepheids and 364 RR Lyrae stars in common between Gaia and the Hipparcos and Tycho-2 catalogues are published in Gaia Data Release 1 (DR1) as part of the Tycho-Gaia Astrometric Solution (TGAS). In order to test these first parallax measurements of the primary standard candles of the cosmological distance ladder, that involve astrometry collected by Gaia during the initial 14 months of science operation, we compared them with literature estimates and derived new period-luminosity ($PL$), period-Wesenheit ($PW$) relations for classical and Type II Cepheids and infrared $PL$, $PL$-metallicity ($PLZ$) and optical luminosity-metallicity ($M_V$-[Fe/H]) relations for the RR Lyrae stars, with zero points based on TGAS. The new relations were computed using multi-band ($V,I,J,K_{\mathrm{s}},W_{1}$) photometry and spectroscopic metal abundances available in the literature, and applying three alternative approaches: (i) by linear least squares fitting the absolute magnitudes inferred from direct transformation of the TGAS parallaxes, (ii) by adopting astrometric-based luminosities, and (iii) using a Bayesian fitting approach. TGAS parallaxes bring a significant added value to the previous Hipparcos estimates. The relations presented in this paper represent first Gaia-calibrated relations and form a "work-in-progress" milestone report in the wait for Gaia-only parallaxes of which a first solution will become available with Gaia's Data Release 2 (DR2) in 2018.
[7]  oai:arXiv.org:1703.01131  [pdf] - 1567701
Gaia Data Release 1. Open cluster astrometry: performance, limitations, and future prospects
Gaia Collaboration; van Leeuwen, F.; Vallenari, A.; Jordi, C.; Lindegren, L.; Bastian, U.; Prusti, T.; de Bruijne, J. H. J.; Brown, A. G. A.; Babusiaux, C.; Bailer-Jones, C. A. L.; Biermann, M.; Evans, D. W.; Eyer, L.; Jansen, F.; Klioner, S. A.; Lammers, U.; Luri, X.; Mignard, F.; Panem, C.; Pourbaix, D.; Randich, S.; Sartoretti, P.; Siddiqui, H. I.; Soubiran, C.; Valette, V.; Walton, N. A.; Aerts, C.; Arenou, F.; Cropper, M.; Drimmel, R.; Høg, E.; Katz, D.; Lattanzi, M. G.; O'Mullane, W.; Grebel, E. K.; Holland, A. D.; Huc, C.; Passot, X.; Perryman, M.; Bramante, L.; Cacciari, C.; Castañeda, J.; Chaoul, L.; Cheek, N.; De Angeli, F.; Fabricius, C.; Guerra, R.; Hernández, J.; Jean-Antoine-Piccolo, A.; Masana, E.; Messineo, R.; Mowlavi, N.; Nienartowicz, K.; Ordóñez-Blanco, D.; Panuzzo, P.; Portell, J.; Richards, P. J.; Riello, M.; Seabroke, G. M.; Tanga, P.; Thévenin, F.; Torra, J.; Els, S. G.; Gracia-Abril, G.; Comoretto, G.; Garcia-Reinaldos, M.; Lock, T.; Mercier, E.; Altmann, M.; Andrae, R.; Astraatmadja, T. L.; Bellas-Velidis, I.; Benson, K.; Berthier, J.; Blomme, R.; Busso, G.; Carry, B.; Cellino, A.; Clementini, G.; Cowell, S.; Creevey, O.; Cuypers, J.; Davidson, M.; De Ridder, J.; de Torres, A.; Delchambre, L.; Dell'Oro, A.; Ducourant, C.; Frémat, Y.; García-Torres, M.; Gosset, E.; Halbwachs, J. -L.; Hambly, N. C.; Harrison, D. L.; Hauser, M.; Hestroffer, D.; Hodgkin, S. T.; Huckle, H. E.; Hutton, A.; Jasniewicz, G.; Jordan, S.; Kontizas, M.; Korn, A. J.; Lanzafame, A. C.; Manteiga, M.; Moitinho, A.; Muinonen, K.; Osinde, J.; Pancino, E.; Pauwels, T.; Petit, J. -M.; Recio-Blanco, A.; Robin, A. C.; Sarro, L. M.; Siopis, C.; Smith, M.; Smith, K. W.; Sozzetti, A.; Thuillot, W.; van Reeven, W.; Viala, Y.; Abbas, U.; Aramburu, A. Abreu; Accart, S.; Aguado, J. J.; Allan, P. M.; Allasia, W.; Altavilla, G.; Álvarez, M. A.; Alves, J.; Anderson, R. I.; Andrei, A. H.; Varela, E. Anglada; Antiche, E.; Antoja, T.; Antón, S.; Arcay, B.; Bach, N.; Baker, S. G.; Balaguer-Núñez, L.; Barache, C.; Barata, C.; Barbier, A.; Barblan, F.; Navascués, D. Barrado y; Barros, M.; Barstow, M. A.; Becciani, U.; Bellazzini, M.; García, A. Bello; Belokurov, V.; Bendjoya, P.; Berihuete, A.; Bianchi, L.; Bienaymé, O.; Billebaud, F.; Blagorodnova, N.; Blanco-Cuaresma, S.; Boch, T.; Bombrun, A.; Borrachero, R.; Bouquillon, S.; Bourda, G.; Bouy, H.; Bragaglia, A.; Breddels, M. A.; Brouillet, N.; Brüsemeister, T.; Bucciarelli, B.; Burgess, P.; Burgon, R.; Burlacu, A.; Busonero, D.; Buzzi, R.; Caffau, E.; Cambras, J.; Campbell, H.; Cancelliere, R.; Cantat-Gaudin, T.; Carlucci, T.; Carrasco, J. M.; Castellani, M.; Charlot, P.; Charnas, J.; Chiavassa, A.; Clotet, M.; Cocozza, G.; Collins, R. S.; Costigan, G.; Crifo, F.; Cross, N. J. G.; Crosta, M.; Crowley, C.; Dafonte, C.; Damerdji, Y.; Dapergolas, A.; David, P.; David, M.; De Cat, P.; de Felice, F.; de Laverny, P.; De Luise, F.; De March, R.; de Martino, D.; de Souza, R.; Debosscher, J.; del Pozo, E.; Delbo, M.; Delgado, A.; Delgado, H. E.; Di Matteo, P.; Diakite, S.; Distefano, E.; Dolding, C.; Anjos, S. Dos; Drazinos, P.; Durán, J.; Dzigan, Y.; Edvardsson, B.; Enke, H.; Evans, N. W.; Bontemps, G. Eynard; Fabre, C.; Fabrizio, M.; Faigler, S.; Falcão, A. J.; Casas, M. Farràs; Federici, L.; Fedorets, G.; Fernández-Hernández, J.; Fernique, P.; Fienga, A.; Figueras, F.; Filippi, F.; Findeisen, K.; Fonti, A.; Fouesneau, M.; Fraile, E.; Fraser, M.; Fuchs, J.; Gai, M.; Galleti, S.; Galluccio, L.; Garabato, D.; García-Sedano, F.; Garofalo, A.; Garralda, N.; Gavras, P.; Gerssen, J.; Geyer, R.; Gilmore, G.; Girona, S.; Giuffrida, G.; Gomes, M.; González-Marcos, A.; González-Núñez, J.; González-Vidal, J. J.; Granvik, M.; Guerrier, A.; Guillout, P.; Guiraud, J.; Gúrpide, A.; Gutiérrez-Sánchez, R.; Guy, L. P.; Haigron, R.; Hatzidimitriou, D.; Haywood, M.; Heiter, U.; Helmi, A.; Hobbs, D.; Hofmann, W.; Holl, B.; Holland, G.; Hunt, J. A. S.; Hypki, A.; Icardi, V.; Irwin, M.; de Fombelle, G. Jevardat; Jofré, P.; Jonker, P. G.; Jorissen, A.; Julbe, F.; Karampelas, A.; Kochoska, A.; Kohley, R.; Kolenberg, K.; Kontizas, E.; Koposov, S. E.; Kordopatis, G.; Koubsky, P.; Krone-Martins, A.; Kudryashova, M.; Kull, I.; Bachchan, R. K.; Lacoste-Seris, F.; Lanza, A. F.; Lavigne, J. -B.; Poncin-Lafitte, C. Le; Lebreton, Y.; Lebzelter, T.; Leccia, S.; Leclerc, N.; Lecoeur-Taibi, I.; Lemaitre, V.; Lenhardt, H.; Leroux, F.; Liao, S.; Licata, E.; Lindstrøm, H. E. P.; Lister, T. A.; Livanou, E.; Lobel, A.; Löffer, W.; López, M.; Lorenz, D.; MacDonald, I.; Fernandes, T. Magalhães; Managau, S.; Mann, R. G.; Mantelet, G.; Marchal, O.; Marchant, J. M.; Marconi, M.; Marinoni, S.; Marrese, P. M.; Marschalkó, G.; Marshall, D. J.; Martín-Fleitas, J. M.; Martino, M.; Mary, N.; Matijevič, G.; Mazeh, T.; McMillan, P. J.; Messina, S.; Michalik, D.; Millar, N. R.; Miranda, B. M. H.; Molina, D.; Molinaro, R.; Molinaro, M.; Molnár, L.; Moniez, M.; Montegrio, P.; Mor, R.; Mora, A.; Morbidelli, R.; Morel, T.; Morgenthaler, S.; Morris, D.; Mulone, A. F.; Muraveva, T.; Musella, I.; Narbonne, J.; Nelemans, G.; Nicastro, L.; Noval, L.; Ordénovic, C.; Ordieres-Meré, J.; Osborne, P.; Pagani, C.; Pagano, I.; Pailler, F.; Palacin, H.; Palaversa, L.; Parsons, P.; Pecoraro, M.; Pedrosa, R.; Pentikäinen, H.; Pichon, B.; Piersimoni, A. M.; Pineau, F. -X.; Plachy, E.; Plum, G.; Poujoulet, E.; Prša, A.; Pulone, L.; Ragaini, S.; Rago, S.; Rambaux, N.; Ramos-Lerate, M.; Ranalli, P.; Rauw, G.; Read, A.; Regibo, S.; Reylé, C.; Ribeiro, R. A.; Rimoldini, L.; Ripepi, V.; Riva, A.; Rixon, G.; Roelens, M.; Romero-Gómez, M.; Rowell, N.; Royer, F.; Ruiz-Dern, L.; Sadowski, G.; Sellés, T. Sagristà; Sahlmann, J.; Salgado, J.; Salguero, E.; Sarasso, M.; Savietto, H.; Schultheis, M.; Sciacca, E.; Segol, M.; Segovia, J. C.; Segransan, D.; Shih, I-C.; Smareglia, R.; Smart, R. L.; Solano, E.; Solitro, F.; Sordo, R.; Nieto, S. Soria; Souchay, J.; Spagna, A.; Spoto, F.; Stampa, U.; Steele, I. A.; Steidelmüller, H.; Stephenson, C. A.; Stoev, H.; Suess, F. F.; Süveges, M.; Surdej, J.; Szabados, L.; Szegedi-Elek, E.; Tapiador, D.; Taris, F.; Tauran, G.; Taylor, M. B.; Teixeira, R.; Terrett, D.; Tingley, B.; Trager, S. C.; Turon, C.; Ulla, A.; Utrilla, E.; Valentini, G.; van Elteren, A.; Van Hemelryck, E.; van Leeuwen, M.; Varadi, M.; Vecchiato, A.; Veljanoski, J.; Via, T.; Vicente, D.; Vogt, S.; Voss, H.; Votruba, V.; Voutsinas, S.; Walmsley, G.; Weiler, M.; Weingril, K.; Wevers, T.; Wyrzykowski, Ł.; Yoldas, A.; Žerjal, M.; Zucker, S.; Zurbach, C.; Zwitter, T.; Alecu, A.; Allen, M.; Prieto, C. Allende; Amorim, A.; Anglada-Escudé, G.; Arsenijevic, V.; Azaz, S.; Balm, P.; Beck, M.; Bernsteiny, H. -H.; Bigot, L.; Bijaoui, A.; Blasco, C.; Bonfigli, M.; Bono, G.; Boudreault, S.; Bressan, A.; Brown, S.; Brunet, P. -M.; Bunclarky, P.; Buonanno, R.; Butkevich, A. G.; Carret, C.; Carrion, C.; Chemin, L.; Chéreau, F.; Corcione, L.; Darmigny, E.; de Boer, K. S.; de Teodoro, P.; de Zeeuw, P. T.; Luche, C. Delle; Domingues, C. D.; Dubath, P.; Fodor, F.; Frézouls, B.; Fries, A.; Fustes, D.; Fyfe, D.; Gallardo, E.; Gallegos, J.; Gardio, D.; Gebran, M.; Gomboc, A.; Gómez, A.; Grux, E.; Gueguen, A.; Heyrovsky, A.; Hoar, J.; Iannicola, G.; Parache, Y. Isasi; Janotto, A. -M.; Joliet, E.; Jonckheere, A.; Keil, R.; Kim, D. -W.; Klagyivik, P.; Klar, J.; Knude, J.; Kochukhov, O.; Kolka, I.; Kos, J.; Kutka, A.; Lainey, V.; LeBouquin, D.; Liu, C.; Loreggia, D.; Makarov, V. V.; Marseille, M. G.; Martayan, C.; Martinez-Rubi, O.; Massart, B.; Meynadier, F.; Mignot, S.; Munari, U.; Nguyen, A. -T.; Nordlander, T.; O'Flaherty, K. S.; Ocvirk, P.; Sanz, A. Olias; Ortiz, P.; Osorio, J.; Oszkiewicz, D.; Ouzounis, A.; Palmer, M.; Park, P.; Pasquato, E.; Peltzer, C.; Peralta, J.; Péturaud, F.; Pieniluoma, T.; Pigozzi, E.; Poelsy, J.; Prat, G.; Prod'homme, T.; Raison, F.; Rebordao, J. M.; Risquez, D.; Rocca-Volmerange, B.; Rosen, S.; Ruiz-Fuertes, M. I.; Russo, F.; Sembay, S.; Vizcaino, I. Serraller; Short, A.; Siebert, A.; Silva, H.; Sinachopoulos, D.; Slezak, E.; Soffel, M.; Sosnowska, D.; Straižys, V.; ter Linden, M.; Terrell, D.; Theil, S.; Tiede, C.; Troisi, L.; Tsalmantza, P.; Tur, D.; Vaccari, M.; Vachier, F.; Valles, P.; Van Hamme, W.; Veltz, L.; Virtanen, J.; Wallut, J. -M.; Wichmann, R.; Wilkinson, M. I.; Ziaeepour, H.; Zschocke, S.
Comments: Accepted for publication by A&A. 21 pages main text plus 46 pages appendices. 34 figures main text, 38 figures appendices. 8 table in main text, 19 tables in appendices
Submitted: 2017-03-03
Context. The first Gaia Data Release contains the Tycho-Gaia Astrometric Solution (TGAS). This is a subset of about 2 million stars for which, besides the position and photometry, the proper motion and parallax are calculated using Hipparcos and Tycho-2 positions in 1991.25 as prior information. Aims. We investigate the scientific potential and limitations of the TGAS component by means of the astrometric data for open clusters. Methods. Mean cluster parallax and proper motion values are derived taking into account the error correlations within the astrometric solutions for individual stars, an estimate of the internal velocity dispersion in the cluster, and, where relevant, the effects of the depth of the cluster along the line of sight. Internal consistency of the TGAS data is assessed. Results. Values given for standard uncertainties are still inaccurate and may lead to unrealistic unit-weight standard deviations of least squares solutions for cluster parameters. Reconstructed mean cluster parallax and proper motion values are generally in very good agreement with earlier Hipparcos-based determination, although the Gaia mean parallax for the Pleiades is a significant exception. We have no current explanation for that discrepancy. Most clusters are observed to extend to nearly 15 pc from the cluster centre, and it will be up to future Gaia releases to establish whether those potential cluster-member stars are still dynamically bound to the clusters. Conclusions. The Gaia DR1 provides the means to examine open clusters far beyond their more easily visible cores, and can provide membership assessments based on proper motions and parallaxes. A combined HR diagram shows the same features as observed before using the Hipparcos data, with clearly increased luminosities for older A and F dwarfs.
[8]  oai:arXiv.org:1612.02952  [pdf] - 1538988
Gaia data release 1, the photometric data
Comments: 9 pages, 6 figures, 1 table, Accepted for publication by A&A as part of the Gaia 1st data release issue
Submitted: 2016-12-09
Context. This paper presents an overview of the photometric data that are part of the first Gaia data release. Aims. The principles of the processing and the main characteristics of the Gaia photometric data are presented. Methods. The calibration strategy is outlined briefly and the main properties of the resulting photometry are presented. Results. Relations with other broadband photometric systems are provided. The overall precision for the Gaia photometry is shown to be at the milli-magnitude level and has a clear potential to improve further in future releases.
[9]  oai:arXiv.org:1609.04303  [pdf] - 1523840
Gaia Data Release 1: Astrometry - one billion positions, two million proper motions and parallaxes
Comments: Accepted for publication in Astronomy & Astrophysics
Submitted: 2016-09-14
Gaia Data Release 1 (Gaia DR1) contains astrometric results for more than 1 billion stars brighter than magnitude 20.7 based on observations collected by the Gaia satellite during the first 14 months of its operational phase. We give a brief overview of the astrometric content of the data release and of the model assumptions, data processing, and validation of the results. For stars in common with the Hipparcos and Tycho-2 catalogues, complete astrometric single-star solutions are obtained by incorporating positional information from the earlier catalogues. For other stars only their positions are obtained by neglecting their proper motions and parallaxes. The results are validated by an analysis of the residuals, through special validation runs, and by comparison with external data. Results. For about two million of the brighter stars (down to magnitude ~11.5) we obtain positions, parallaxes, and proper motions to Hipparcos-type precision or better. For these stars, systematic errors depending e.g. on position and colour are at a level of 0.3 milliarcsecond (mas). For the remaining stars we obtain positions at epoch J2015.0 accurate to ~10 mas. Positions and proper motions are given in a reference frame that is aligned with the International Celestial Reference Frame (ICRF) to better than 0.1 mas at epoch J2015.0, and non-rotating with respect to ICRF to within 0.03 mas/yr. The Hipparcos reference frame is found to rotate with respect to the Gaia DR1 frame at a rate of 0.24 mas/yr. Based on less than a quarter of the nominal mission length and on very provisional and incomplete calibrations, the quality and completeness of the astrometric data in Gaia DR1 are far from what is expected for the final mission products. The results nevertheless represent a huge improvement in the available fundamental stellar data and practical definition of the optical reference frame.
[10]  oai:arXiv.org:1609.04240  [pdf] - 1480663
On-orbit performance of the Gaia CCDs at L2
Comments: Published in A&A Gaia special feature
Submitted: 2016-09-14
The European Space Agency's Gaia satellite was launched into orbit around L2 in December 2013 with a payload containing 106 large-format scientific CCDs. The primary goal of the mission is to repeatedly obtain high-precision astrometric and photometric measurements of one thousand million stars over the course of five years. The scientific value of the down-linked data, and the operation of the onboard autonomous detection chain, relies on the high performance of the detectors. As Gaia slowly rotates and scans the sky, the CCDs are continuously operated in a mode where the line clock rate and the satellite rotation spin-rate are in synchronisation. Nominal mission operations began in July 2014 and the first data release is being prepared for release at the end of Summer 2016. In this paper we present an overview of the focal plane, the detector system, and strategies for on-orbit performance monitoring of the system. This is followed by a presentation of the performance results based on analysis of data acquired during a two-year window beginning at payload switch-on. Results for parameters such as readout noise and electronic offset behaviour are presented and we pay particular attention to the effects of the L2 radiation environment on the devices. The radiation-induced degradation in the charge transfer efficiency (CTE) in the (parallel) scan direction is clearly diagnosed; however, an extrapolation shows that charge transfer inefficiency (CTI) effects at end of mission will be approximately an order of magnitude less than predicted pre-flight. It is shown that the CTI in the serial register (horizontal direction) is still dominated by the traps inherent to the manufacturing process and that the radiation-induced degradation so far is only a few per cent. Finally, we summarise some of the detector effects discovered on-orbit which are still being investigated.
[11]  oai:arXiv.org:1608.00045  [pdf] - 1460034
Gaia: focus, straylight and basic angle
Comments: 17 pages, 17 figures. To appear in SPIE proceedings 9904-78. Space Telescopes and Instrumentation 2016: Optical, Infrared, and Millimeter Wave. Version 2: additional details on commissioning investigations added
Submitted: 2016-07-29, last modified: 2016-08-21
The Gaia all-sky astrometric survey is challenged by several issues affecting the spacecraft stability. Amongst them, we find the focus evolution, straylight and basic angle variations Contrary to pre-launch expectations, the image quality is continuously evolving, during commissioning and the nominal mission. Payload decontaminations and wavefront sensor assisted refocuses have been carried out to recover optimum performance. Straylight and basic angle variations several orders of magnitude greater than foreseen were found and studied during commissioning by the Gaia scientists (payload experts). Building on their investigations, an ESA-Airbus DS working group was established during the early nominal mission and worked on a detailed root cause analysis. In parallel, Gaia scientists have also continued analysing the data, most notably comparing the BAM signal to global astrometric solutions, with remarkable agreement. In this contribution, a status review of these issues will be provided, with emphasis on the mitigation schemes and the lessons learned for future space missions where extreme stability is a key requirement.
[12]  oai:arXiv.org:1205.5570  [pdf] - 1123657
The XMM Cluster Survey: Evidence for energy injection at high redshift from evolution of the X-ray luminosity-temperature relation
Comments: Accepted for publication in MNRAS; 12 pages, 6 figures; added references to match published version
Submitted: 2012-05-24, last modified: 2012-07-04
We measure the evolution of the X-ray luminosity-temperature (L_X-T) relation since z~1.5 using a sample of 211 serendipitously detected galaxy clusters with spectroscopic redshifts drawn from the XMM Cluster Survey first data release (XCS-DR1). This is the first study spanning this redshift range using a single, large, homogeneous cluster sample. Using an orthogonal regression technique, we find no evidence for evolution in the slope or intrinsic scatter of the relation since z~1.5, finding both to be consistent with previous measurements at z~0.1. However, the normalisation is seen to evolve negatively with respect to the self-similar expectation: we find E(z)^{-1} L_X = 10^{44.67 +/- 0.09} (T/5)^{3.04 +/- 0.16} (1+z)^{-1.5 +/- 0.5}, which is within 2 sigma of the zero evolution case. We see milder, but still negative, evolution with respect to self-similar when using a bisector regression technique. We compare our results to numerical simulations, where we fit simulated cluster samples using the same methods used on the XCS data. Our data favour models in which the majority of the excess entropy required to explain the slope of the L_X-T relation is injected at high redshift. Simulations in which AGN feedback is implemented using prescriptions from current semi-analytic galaxy formation models predict positive evolution of the normalisation, and differ from our data at more than 5 sigma. This suggests that more efficient feedback at high redshift may be needed in these models.
[13]  oai:arXiv.org:1106.3056  [pdf] - 1077311
The XMM Cluster Survey: Optical analysis methodology and the first data release
Comments: MNRAS submitted, 30 pages, 20 figures, 3 electronic tables. The X-ray analysis methodology used to construct and analyse the XCS-DR1 cluster sample is presented in the companion paper, Lloyd-Davies et al. (2010). The XCS-DR1 catalogue, together with optical and X-ray (colour-composite and greyscale) images for each cluster, is publicly available from http://xcs-home.org/datareleases
Submitted: 2011-06-15, last modified: 2011-06-17
The XMM Cluster Survey (XCS) is a serendipitous search for galaxy clusters using all publicly available data in the XMM-Newton Science Archive. Its main aims are to measure cosmological parameters and trace the evolution of X-ray scaling relations. In this paper we present the first data release from the XMM Cluster Survey (XCS-DR1). This consists of 503 optically confirmed, serendipitously detected, X-ray clusters. Of these clusters, 255 are new to the literature and 356 are new X-ray discoveries. We present 464 clusters with a redshift estimate (0.06 < z < 1.46), including 261 clusters with spectroscopic redshifts. In addition, we have measured X-ray temperatures (Tx) for 402 clusters (0.4 < Tx < 14.7 keV). We highlight seven interesting subsamples of XCS-DR1 clusters: (i) 10 clusters at high redshift (z > 1.0, including a new spectroscopically-confirmed cluster at z = 1.01); (ii) 67 clusters with high Tx (> 5 keV); (iii) 131 clusters/groups with low Tx (< 2 keV); (iv) 27 clusters with measured Tx values in the SDSS `Stripe 82' co-add region; (v) 78 clusters with measured Tx values in the Dark Energy Survey region; (vi) 40 clusters detected with sufficient counts to permit mass measurements (under the assumption of hydrostatic equilibrium); (vii) 105 clusters that can be used for applications such as the derivation of cosmological parameters and the measurement of cluster scaling relations. The X-ray analysis methodology used to construct and analyse the XCS-DR1 cluster sample has been presented in a companion paper, Lloyd-Davies et al. (2010).
[14]  oai:arXiv.org:1010.0677  [pdf] - 1041050
The XMM Cluster Survey: X-ray analysis methodology
Comments: MNRAS accepted, 45 pages, 38 figures. Our companion paper describing our optical analysis methodology and presenting a first set of confirmed clusters has now been submitted to MNRAS
Submitted: 2010-10-04, last modified: 2011-06-15
The XMM Cluster Survey (XCS) is a serendipitous search for galaxy clusters using all publicly available data in the XMM-Newton Science Archive. Its main aims are to measure cosmological parameters and trace the evolution of X-ray scaling relations. In this paper we describe the data processing methodology applied to the 5,776 XMM observations used to construct the current XCS source catalogue. A total of 3,675 > 4-sigma cluster candidates with > 50 background-subtracted X-ray counts are extracted from a total non-overlapping area suitable for cluster searching of 410 deg^2. Of these, 993 candidates are detected with > 300 background-subtracted X-ray photon counts, and we demonstrate that robust temperature measurements can be obtained down to this count limit. We describe in detail the automated pipelines used to perform the spectral and surface brightness fitting for these candidates, as well as to estimate redshifts from the X-ray data alone. A total of 587 (122) X-ray temperatures to a typical accuracy of < 40 (< 10) per cent have been measured to date. We also present the methodology adopted for determining the selection function of the survey, and show that the extended source detection algorithm is robust to a range of cluster morphologies by inserting mock clusters derived from hydrodynamical simulations into real XMM images. These tests show that the simple isothermal beta-profiles is sufficient to capture the essential details of the cluster population detected in the archival XMM observations. The redshift follow-up of the XCS cluster sample is presented in a companion paper, together with a first data release of 503 optically-confirmed clusters.
[15]  oai:arXiv.org:1005.4681  [pdf] - 1032729
The XMM Cluster Survey: The build up of stellar mass in Brightest Cluster Galaxies at high redshift
Comments: Accepted for publication in ApJ, 9 pages (updated with additional references)
Submitted: 2010-05-25, last modified: 2010-06-03
We present deep J and Ks band photometry of 20 high redshift galaxy clusters between z=0.8-1.5, 19 of which are observed with the MOIRCS instrument on the Subaru Telescope. By using near-infrared light as a proxy for stellar mass we find the surprising result that the average stellar mass of Brightest Cluster Galaxies (BCGs) has remained constant at ~9e11MSol since z~1.5. We investigate the effect on this result of differing star formation histories generated by three well known and independent stellar population codes and find it to be robust for reasonable, physically motivated choices of age and metallicity. By performing Monte Carlo simulations we find that the result is unaffected by any correlation between BCG mass and cluster mass in either the observed or model clusters. The large stellar masses imply that the assemblage of these galaxies took place at the same time as the initial burst of star formation. This result leads us to conclude that dry merging has had little effect on the average stellar mass of BCGs over the last 9-10 Gyr in stark contrast to the predictions of semi-analytic models, based on the hierarchical merging of dark matter haloes, which predict a more protracted mass build up over a Hubble time. We discuss however that there is potential for reconciliation between observation and theory if there is a significant growth of material in the intracluster light over the same period.
[16]  oai:arXiv.org:0802.4462  [pdf] - 1934218
The XMM Cluster Survey: Forecasting cosmological and cluster scaling-relation parameter constraints
Comments: 28 pages, 17 figures. Revised version, as accepted for publication in MNRAS. High-resolution figures available at http://xcs-home.org (under "Publications")
Submitted: 2008-02-29, last modified: 2009-04-26
We forecast the constraints on the values of sigma_8, Omega_m, and cluster scaling relation parameters which we expect to obtain from the XMM Cluster Survey (XCS). We assume a flat Lambda-CDM Universe and perform a Monte Carlo Markov Chain analysis of the evolution of the number density of galaxy clusters that takes into account a detailed simulated selection function. Comparing our current observed number of clusters shows good agreement with predictions. We determine the expected degradation of the constraints as a result of self-calibrating the luminosity-temperature relation (with scatter), including temperature measurement errors, and relying on photometric methods for the estimation of galaxy cluster redshifts. We examine the effects of systematic errors in scaling relation and measurement error assumptions. Using only (T,z) self-calibration, we expect to measure Omega_m to +-0.03 (and Omega_Lambda to the same accuracy assuming flatness), and sigma_8 to +-0.05, also constraining the normalization and slope of the luminosity-temperature relation to +-6 and +-13 per cent (at 1sigma) respectively in the process. Self-calibration fails to jointly constrain the scatter and redshift evolution of the luminosity-temperature relation significantly. Additional archival and/or follow-up data will improve on this. We do not expect measurement errors or imperfect knowledge of their distribution to degrade constraints significantly. Scaling-relation systematics can easily lead to cosmological constraints 2sigma or more away from the fiducial model. Our treatment is the first exact treatment to this level of detail, and introduces a new `smoothed ML' estimate of expected constraints.
[17]  oai:arXiv.org:0904.0006  [pdf] - 150995
Early assembly of the most massive galaxies
Comments: Published in Nature 2nd April 2009. This astro ph version includes main text and supplementary material combined
Submitted: 2009-03-31
The current consensus is that galaxies begin as small density fluctuations in the early Universe and grow by in situ star formation and hierarchical merging. Stars begin to form relatively quickly in sub-galactic sized building blocks called haloes which are subsequently assembled into galaxies. However, exactly when this assembly takes place is a matter of some debate. Here we report that the stellar masses of brightest cluster galaxies, which are the most luminous objects emitting stellar light, some 9 billion years ago are not significantly different from their stellar masses today. Brightest cluster galaxies are almost fully assembled 4-5 Gyrs after the Big Bang, having grown to more than 90% of their final stellar mass by this time. Our data conflict with the most recent galaxy formation models based on the largest simulations of dark matter halo development. These models predict protracted formation of brightest cluster galaxies over a Hubble time, with only 22% of the stellar mass assembled at the epoch probed by our sample. Our findings suggest a new picture in which brightest cluster galaxies experience an early period of rapid growth rather than prolonged hierarchical assembly.
[18]  oai:arXiv.org:0903.1731  [pdf] - 315692
The XMM Cluster Survey: Galaxy Morphologies and the Color-Magnitude Relation in XMMXCS J2215.9-1738 at z=1.46
Comments: Accepted for publication in The Astrophysical Journal
Submitted: 2009-03-10
We present a study of the morphological fractions and color-magnitude relation in the most distant X-ray selected galaxy cluster currently known, XMMXCS J2215.9-1738 at z=1.46, using a combination of optical imaging data obtained with the Hubble Space Telescope Advanced Camera for Surveys, and infrared data from the Multi-Object Infrared Camera and Spectrograph, mounted on the 8.2m Subaru telescope. We find that the morphological mix of the cluster galaxy population is similar to clusters at z~1: approximately ~62% of the galaxies identified as likely cluster members are ellipticals or S0s; and ~38% are spirals or irregulars. We measure the color-magnitude relations for the early type galaxies, finding that the slope in the z_850-J relation is consistent with that measured in the Coma cluster, some ~9 Gyr earlier, although the uncertainty is large. In contrast, the measured intrinsic scatter about the color-magnitude relation is more than three times the value measured in Coma, after conversion to rest frame U-V. From comparison with stellar population synthesis models, the intrinsic scatter measurements imply mean luminosity weighted ages for the early type galaxies in J2215.9-1738 of ~3 Gyr, corresponding to the major epoch of star formation coming to an end at z_f = 3-5. We find that the cluster exhibits evidence of the `downsizing' phenomenon: the fraction of faint cluster members on the red sequence expressed using the Dwarf-to-Giant Ratio (DGR) is 0.32+/-0.18. This is consistent with extrapolation of the redshift evolution of the DGR seen in cluster samples at z < 1. In contrast to observations of some other z > 1 clusters, we find a lack of very bright galaxies within the cluster.
[19]  oai:arXiv.org:0708.3258  [pdf] - 4241
The XMM Cluster Survey: The Dynamical State of XMMXCS J2215.9-1738 at z=1.457
Comments: 13 pages, 6 figures, accepted for publication in ApJ
Submitted: 2007-08-23
We present new spectroscopic observations of the most distant X-ray selected galaxy cluster currently known, XMMXCS J2215.9-1738 at z=1.457, obtained with the DEIMOS instrument at the W. M. Keck Observatory, and the FORS2 instrument on the ESO Very Large Telescope. Within the cluster virial radius, as estimated from the cluster X-ray properties, we increase the number of known spectroscopic cluster members to 17 objects, and calculate the line of sight velocity dispersion of the cluster to be 580+/-140 km/s. We find mild evidence that the velocity distribution of galaxies within the virial radius deviates from a single Gaussian. We show that the properties of J2215.9-1738 are inconsistent with self-similar evolution of local X-ray scaling relations, finding that the cluster is underluminous given its X-ray temperature, and that the intracluster medium contains ~2-3 times the kinetic energy per unit mass of the cluster galaxies. These results can perhaps be explained if the cluster is observed in the aftermath of an off-axis merger. Alternatively, heating of the intracluster medium through supernovae and/or Active Galactic Nuclei activity, as is required to explain the observed slope of the local X-ray luminosity-temperature relation, may be responsible.
[20]  oai:arXiv.org:astro-ph/0606075  [pdf] - 82515
The XMM Cluster Survey: A Massive Galaxy Cluster at z=1.45
Comments: Accepted for publication in the The Astrophysical Journal Letters. 5 pages, 5 figures
Submitted: 2006-06-04, last modified: 2006-06-05
We report the discovery of XMMXCS J2215.9-1738, a massive galaxy cluster at z =1.45, which was found in the XMM Cluster Survey. The cluster candidate was initially identified as an extended X-ray source in archival XMM data. Optical spectroscopy shows that 6 galaxies within a 60 arcsec diameter region lie at z = 1.45 +/- 0.01. Model fits to the X-ray spectra of the extended emission yield kT = 7.4 (+2.7,-1.8) keV (90 % confidence); if there is an undetected central X-ray point source then kT = 6.5 (+2.6,-1.8) keV. The bolometric X-ray luminosity is Lx = 4.4 (+0.8,-0.6) x 10^44 ergs/s over a 2 Mpc radial region. The measured Tx, which is the highest known for a cluster at z > 1, suggests that this cluster is relatively massive for such a high redshift. The redshift of XMMXCS J2215.9-1738 is the highest currently known for a spectroscopically-confirmed cluster of galaxies.
[21]  oai:arXiv.org:astro-ph/0405225  [pdf] - 64745
XMM Cluster Survey: X-ray source identification using the Sloan Digital Sky Survey
Comments: 13 pages, 11 figures
Submitted: 2004-05-12
[ABRIDGED] The XMM Cluster Survey (XCS) is predicted to detect thousands of clusters observed serendipitously in XMM-Newton pointings. We investigate automating optical follow-up of cluster candidates using the SDSS public archive, concentrating on 42 XMM observations that overlap the SDSS First Data Release. Restricting to the inner 11 arcminutes of the XMM field-of-view gives 637 unique X-ray sources across a 3.09 deg^2 region with SDSS coverage. The log N-log S relation indicates survey completeness to a flux limit of around 1x10^{-14} erg s^-1 cm^-2. We have cross-correlated XMM point sources with SDSS quasars, finding 103 unique matches from which we determine a matching radius of 3.8 arcseconds. Using this we make immediate identifications of roughly half of all XMM point sources as quasars (159) or stars (55). We have estimated the typical error on SDSS-determined photometric cluster redshifts to be 5% for relaxed systems, and 11% for disturbed systems, by comparing them to spectroscopic redshifts for eight previously-known clusters. The error for disturbed systems may be problematic for cluster surveys relying on photometric redshifts alone. We use the False Discovery Rate to select 41 XMM sources (25 point-like, 16 extended) statistically associated with SDSS galaxy overdensities. Of the extended sources, 5 are new cluster candidates and 11 are previously-known clusters (0.044<z<0.782). There are 83 extended X-ray sources not associated with SDSS galaxy overdensities, which are strong candidates for new high-redshift clusters. We highlight two previously-known z>1 clusters rediscovered by our wavelet-based detection software. These results show that the SDSS can provide useful automated follow-up to X-ray cluster surveys, but cannot provide all the optical follow-up necessary for X-ray cluster surveys.