4.6 Article

The Gaia-ESO Survey: The analysis of the hot-star spectra

Journal

ASTRONOMY & ASTROPHYSICS
Volume 661, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

EDP SCIENCES S A
DOI: 10.1051/0004-6361/202142349

Keywords

surveys; catalogs; stars: fundamental parameters; stars: abundances; stars: early-type; techniques: spectroscopic

Funding

  1. ESO Telescopes at the La Silla Paranal Observatory [188.B-3002, 193.B-0936, 197.B-1074]
  2. European Union FP7 programme through ERC grant [320360]
  3. Leverhulme Trust [RPG-2012-541]
  4. INAF
  5. Ministero dell' Istruzione, dell' Universite' e della Ricerca (MIUR)
  6. ESF (European Science Foundation) through the GREAT Research Network Programme
  7. Spanish Ministerio de Ciencia e Innovacion [PGC2018-091, 3741-B-C22, CEX-2019-000920-S]
  8. Spanish Government Ministerio de Economia y Competitivad (MINECO/FEDER) [PGC2018-093741-B-C21, PGC2018-093741-B-C22]
  9. Belgian Federal Science Policy Office [BR/143/A2/BRASS]
  10. Belgian F.R.S.-FNRS
  11. Federation Wallonie-Brussels
  12. Spanish Government Ministerio de Ciencia [AYA2016-75 931-C2-2-P, PGC2018-095 049-B-C22]
  13. CAPES
  14. Canarian Agency for Economy, Knowledge, and Employment [ProID2020010016]
  15. European Regional Development Fund (ERDF/EU) [ProID2020010016]
  16. Spanish MINECO/FEDER [AYA2017-84089, MDM-2017-0737]
  17. European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme [824064]
  18. State Agency for Research of the Spanish MCIU through the 'Center of Excellence Severo Ochoa' award [SEV-2017-0709]
  19. MCIU grant [PGC2018-095049-B-C21]
  20. Swedish Research Council [2018-04857]
  21. Swedish National Space Agency (SNSA)
  22. National Science Centre [2014/15/B/ST9/03981]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study presents the procedures and techniques used to analyze the spectra of the hottest stars observed in the Gaia-ESO Survey. The analysis results in stellar parameters and abundances for over 5500 stars, providing valuable data for future studies on stellar evolution and open star clusters.
Context. The Gaia-ESO Survey (GES) is a large public spectroscopic survey that has collected, over a period of six years, spectra of similar to 10(5) stars. This survey provides not only the reduced spectra, but also the stellar parameters and abundances resulting from the analysis of the spectra. Aims. The GES dataflow is organised in 19 working groups. Working group 13 (WG13) is responsible for the spectral analysis of the hottest stars (O, B, and A type, with a formal cutoff of T-eff > 7000 K) that were observed as part of GES. We present the procedures and techniques that have been applied to the reduced spectra in order to determine the stellar parameters and abundances of these stars. Methods. The procedure used was similar to that of other working groups in GES. A number of groups (called Nodes) each independently analyse the spectra via state-of-the-art techniques and codes. Specific for the analysis in WG13 was the large temperature range covered (T-eff approximate to 7000-50 000 K), requiring the use of different analysis codes. Most Nodes could therefore only handle part of the data. Quality checks were applied to the results of these Nodes by comparing them to benchmark stars, and by comparing them to one another. For each star the Node values were then homogenised into a single result: the recommended parameters and abundances. Results. Eight Nodes each analysed part of the data. In total 17 693 spectra of 6462 stars were analysed, most of them in 37 open star clusters. The homogenisation led to stellar parameters for 5584 stars. Abundances were determined for a more limited number of stars. The elements studied are He, C, N, O, Ne, Mg, Al, Si, and Sc. Abundances for at least one of these elements were determined for 292 stars. Conclusions. The hot-star data analysed here, as well as the GES data in general, will be of considerable use in future studies of stellar evolution and open clusters.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available