A Gaia Data Release 3 View on the Tip of the Red Giant Branch Luminosity
AI-generated Key Points
⚠The license of the paper does not allow us to build upon its content and the key points are generated using the paper metadata rather than the full article.
- Siyang Li, Stefano Casertano, and Adam G. Riess explore how to refine the determination of the Hubble constant using the tip of the red giant branch (TRGB) as a standard candle.
- They use $Gaia$ Data Release 3 (DR3) to directly calibrate the luminosity of the TRGB in the Johnson-Cousins I band.
- The authors calibrate the TRGB luminosity using a two-dimensional maximum likelihood algorithm with field stars and $Gaia$ synthetic photometry and parallaxes.
- They find that for a high-contrast and low-contrast break characterized by either values of the contrast parameter $R$ or magnitude of break $\beta$, respectively, $M^{TRGB}_I = -4.02$ and $-3.92$ mag respectively, or a midpoint of $-3.970 \pm 0.042_{-0.024}$ (sys) $\pm 0.062$ (stat) mag.
- This measurement improves upon previous TRGB measurements as higher precision photometry based on $Gaia$ DR3 allows them to constrain two additional free parameters of the luminosity function.
- The authors investigate whether they can use $Gaia$ DR3 synthetic photometry to calibrate TRGB luminosity with $\omega$ Centauri but find evidence of blending within its inner region for cluster member photometry that precludes accurate calibration with $Gaia$ DR3 photometry.
- Instead, they provide an updated TRGB measurement of $m^{TRGB}_I = 9.82 \pm 0.04$ mag in $\omega$ Centauri using ground-based photometry from the most recent version of the database described in Stetson et al. (2019), which gives $M^{TRGB}_I = -3.97 \pm 0.04$ (stat) $\pm 0.10$ (sys) mag when tied to the $Gaia$ EDR3 parallax distance from consensus estimates provided by Vasiliev & Baumgardt (2021), Soltis et al. (2021), and Ma\'{i}z Apell\'{a}niz et al.(2022a).
Authors: Siyang Li, Stefano Casertano, Adam G. Riess
Abstract: The tip of the red giant branch (TRGB) is a standard candle that can be used to help refine the determination of the Hubble constant. $Gaia$ Data Release 3 (DR3) provides synthetic photometry constructed from low-resolution BP/RP spectra for Milky Way field stars that can be used to directly calibrate the luminosity of the TRGB in the Johnson-Cousins I band, where the TRGB is least sensitive to metallicity. We calibrate the TRGB luminosity using a two-dimensional maximum likelihood algorithm with field stars and $Gaia$ synthetic photometry and parallaxes. For a high-contrast and low-contrast break (characterized by the values of the contrast parameter $ R$ or the magnitude of the break $ \beta $), we find $M^{TRGB}_I$ =$-4.02$ and $-3.92$ mag respectively, or a midpoint of $-3.970$ $^{+0.042} _{-0.024}$ (sys) $\pm$ $0.062$ (stat) mag. This measurement improves upon the TRGB measurement from Li et al. (2022), as the higher precision photometry based on $ Gaia $ DR3 allows us to constrain two additional free parameters of the luminosity function. We also investigate the possibility of using $Gaia$ DR3 synthetic photometry to calibrate the TRGB luminosity with $\omega$ Centauri, but find evidence of blending within the inner region for cluster member photometry that precludes accurate calibration with $Gaia$ DR3 photometry. We instead provide an updated TRGB measurement of $m^{TRGB}_I$ = $ 9.82 \pm 0.04$ mag in $\omega$ Centauri using ground-based photometry from the most recent version of the database described in Stetson et al. (2019), which gives $M^{TRGB}_I$ = $-3.97$ $\pm$ $0.04$ (stat) $\pm$ 0.10 (sys) mag when tied to the $Gaia$ EDR3 parallax distance from the consensus of Vasiliev & Baumgardt (2021), Soltis et al. (2021), and Ma\'{i}z Apell\'{a}niz et al. (2022a).
Ask questions about this paper to our AI assistant
You can also chat with multiple papers at once here.
⚠The license of the paper does not allow us to build upon its content and the AI assistant only knows about the paper metadata rather than the full article.
Assess the quality of the AI-generated content by voting
Score: 0
Why do we need votes?
Votes are used to determine whether we need to re-run our summarizing tools. If the count reaches -10, our tools can be restarted.
The previous summary was created more than a year ago and can be re-run (if necessary) by clicking on the Run button below.
⚠The license of this specific paper does not allow us to build upon its content and the summarizing tools will be run using the paper metadata rather than the full article. However, it still does a good job, and you can also try our tools on papers with more open licenses.
Similar papers summarized with our AI tools
Navigate through even more similar papers through a
tree representationLook for similar papers (in beta version)
By clicking on the button above, our algorithm will scan all papers in our database to find the closest based on the contents of the full papers and not just on metadata. Please note that it only works for papers that we have generated summaries for and you can rerun it from time to time to get a more accurate result while our database grows.
Disclaimer: The AI-based summarization tool and virtual assistant provided on this website may not always provide accurate and complete summaries or responses. We encourage you to carefully review and evaluate the generated content to ensure its quality and relevance to your needs.