2020
DOI: 10.3847/1538-3881/abafba
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Mean Estimate Distances for Galaxies with Multiple Estimates in NED-D

Abstract: Numerous research topics rely on an improved cosmic distance scale (e.g., cosmology, gravitational waves) and the NASA/IPAC Extragalactic Database of Distances (NED-D) supports those efforts by tabulating multiple redshift-independent distances for 12,000 galaxies (e.g., Large Magellanic Cloud (LMC) zero-point). Six methods for securing a mean estimate distance (MED) from the data are presented (e.g., indicator and Decision Tree). All six MEDs yield surprisingly consistent distances for the cases examined, inc… Show more

Help me understand this report
View preprint versions

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
8
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5
2
2

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 14 publications
(9 citation statements)
references
References 18 publications
1
8
0
Order By: Relevance
“…For a historical comparison, our determination agrees to within 1σ with the value of µ 0 = 24.33 ± 0.12 mag to Baade's field I (3 kpc from the center of M31) from Freedman & Madore (1990). Our distance also agrees with all six mean estimate distances (MED) (Steer 2020) and the MED for Cepheid distances only of 790 ± 78 kpc from the NASA/IPAC Extragalactic Database (NED) (I. Steer, 2020, private communication) as well as the the recommended value of µ 0 = 24.45 ± 0.10 mag from de Grijs & Bono (2014).…”
Section: Comparison With Other Studiessupporting
confidence: 84%
“…For a historical comparison, our determination agrees to within 1σ with the value of µ 0 = 24.33 ± 0.12 mag to Baade's field I (3 kpc from the center of M31) from Freedman & Madore (1990). Our distance also agrees with all six mean estimate distances (MED) (Steer 2020) and the MED for Cepheid distances only of 790 ± 78 kpc from the NASA/IPAC Extragalactic Database (NED) (I. Steer, 2020, private communication) as well as the the recommended value of µ 0 = 24.45 ± 0.10 mag from de Grijs & Bono (2014).…”
Section: Comparison With Other Studiessupporting
confidence: 84%
“…It can be estimated with a wide range of approaches and accuracies from limited knowledge of many types of astronomical sources, nearly all of which have been utilized in this endeavor over the past century. There have been > 1000 estimates published since 1980, with 1/3 of those in the last five years and 20% in the last two years -a recent quadrupling of the effort indicating the accelerating interest in H 0 (Steer 2020). However, past discrepancies internal to the body of local measurements reveal that systematic errors can dominate determinations of H 0 , and that there is no reason to believe all efforts will regress to the mean or that a more accurate result can be derived from their median (Chen & Ratra 2011).…”
Section: The Sh0es Programmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A simple mean of all these estimates could not be adopted as the values are not continuous but at extremes. Steer (2020) has defined a robust method to get enhanced mean estimate distances (MED) using the weighted mean for the distances from various primary and secondary sources. From the various means, we have estimated MED 7, which is a combination of the unweighted (MED 2), error-weighted (MED 3), and dateweighted (MED 4) means with weights of 1:2:4, respectively.…”
Section: Reddening Distance and Metallicitymentioning
confidence: 99%