4.7 Article

The Gaia-ESO Survey: the selection function of the Milky Way field stars

Journal

MONTHLY NOTICES OF THE ROYAL ASTRONOMICAL SOCIETY
Volume 460, Issue 1, Pages 1131-1146

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/mnras/stw1011

Keywords

techniques: spectroscopic; surveys; stars: general; Galaxy: evolution

Funding

  1. Knut and Alice Wallenberg Foundation
  2. NCN/Poland [2014/15/B/ST9/03981]
  3. Swedish National Space Board
  4. ESO Telescopes at the La Silla Paranal Observatory [188.B-3002]
  5. UK Science and Technology Facilities Council
  6. European Union [320360]
  7. Leverhulme Trust [RPG-2012-541]
  8. INAF
  9. Ministero dell' Istruzione, dell' Universita' e della Ricerca (MIUR)
  10. ESF (European Science Foundation) through the GREAT Research Network Programme
  11. Alfred P. Sloan Foundation
  12. National Science Foundation
  13. US Department of Energy Office of Science

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The Gaia-ESO Survey was designed to target all major Galactic components (i.e. bulge, thin and thick discs, halo and clusters), with the goal of constraining the chemical and dynamical evolution of the Milky Way. This paper presents the methodology and considerations that drive the selection of the targeted, allocated and successfully observed Milky Way field stars. The detailed understanding of the survey construction, specifically the influence of target selection criteria on observed Milky Way field stars is required in order to analyse and interpret the survey data correctly. We present the target selection process for the Milky Way field stars observed with Very Large Telescope/Fibre Large Array Multi Element Spectrograph and provide the weights that characterize the survey target selection. The weights can be used to account for the selection effects in the Gaia-ESO Survey data for scientific studies. We provide a couple of simple examples to highlight the necessity of including such information in studies of the stellar populations in the Milky Way.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available