2017
DOI: 10.1051/0004-6361/201731099
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Effects of the selection function on metallicity trends in spectroscopic surveys of the Milky Way

Abstract: Context. Large spectroscopic Galactic surveys imply a selection function in the way they performed their target selection. Aims. We investigate here the effect of the selection function on the metallicity distribution function (MDF) and on the vertical metallicity gradient by studying similar lines of sight using four different spectroscopic surveys (APOGEE, LAMOST, RAVE, and Gaia-ESO), which have different targeting strategies and therefore different selection functions. Methods. We use common fields between … Show more

Help me understand this report
View preprint versions

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

6
23
1

Year Published

2017
2017
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

3
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 28 publications
(30 citation statements)
references
References 106 publications
6
23
1
Order By: Relevance
“…The gradients we measure for all of the selected stars range from −0.24 dex kpc −1 at the inner disc to −0.17 dex kpc −1 at the outer disc. The vertical gradients that are derived for the range 5.3 ≤ R ≤ 9.2 kpc are similar to the gradients previously found in the literature, on the order of −0.2 dex kpc −1 to −0.27 dex kpc −1 (see Nandakumar et al 2017, for a comparison between the different surveys), compatible with a mixture of two populations of different scale-heights, namely, h z,thin ∼ 300 pc and h z,thick ∼ 1000 pc (e.g. Gilmore & Reid 1983).…”
Section: Metallicity Gradients For the Prograde Starssupporting
confidence: 87%
“…The gradients we measure for all of the selected stars range from −0.24 dex kpc −1 at the inner disc to −0.17 dex kpc −1 at the outer disc. The vertical gradients that are derived for the range 5.3 ≤ R ≤ 9.2 kpc are similar to the gradients previously found in the literature, on the order of −0.2 dex kpc −1 to −0.27 dex kpc −1 (see Nandakumar et al 2017, for a comparison between the different surveys), compatible with a mixture of two populations of different scale-heights, namely, h z,thin ∼ 300 pc and h z,thick ∼ 1000 pc (e.g. Gilmore & Reid 1983).…”
Section: Metallicity Gradients For the Prograde Starssupporting
confidence: 87%
“…We verified that slightly different (by ±0.2 dex from [Fe/H] = 0.0) assumptions to separate MR and MP stars do not significantly affect the results. In this respect, Nandakumar et al (2017) already demonstrated that the effect of the selection function plays a minor role in MDF studies.…”
Section: Metallicity Gradientsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In order to make a more faithful comparison of the model to the data, we need to take the selection function into consideration; we do this by imposing the APOGEE distance distribution function (DDF), along different lines of sight, on the model. Nandakumar et al (2017) showed that, for a given distance bin, different populations (e.g. giant or dwarf stars, etc.)…”
Section: Comparing With Apogee Dr13 Datamentioning
confidence: 99%