Customize Consent Preferences

We use cookies to help you navigate efficiently and perform certain functions. You will find detailed information about all cookies under each consent category below.

The cookies that are categorized as "Necessary" are stored on your browser as they are essential for enabling the basic functionalities of the site. ... 

Always Active

Necessary cookies are required to enable the basic features of this site, such as providing secure log-in or adjusting your consent preferences. These cookies do not store any personally identifiable data.

No cookies to display.

Functional cookies help perform certain functionalities like sharing the content of the website on social media platforms, collecting feedback, and other third-party features.

No cookies to display.

Analytical cookies are used to understand how visitors interact with the website. These cookies help provide information on metrics such as the number of visitors, bounce rate, traffic source, etc.

Performance cookies are used to understand and analyze the key performance indexes of the website which helps in delivering a better user experience for the visitors.

No cookies to display.

Advertisement cookies are used to provide visitors with customized advertisements based on the pages you visited previously and to analyze the effectiveness of the ad campaigns.

No cookies to display.

Papers of interest on the arXiv today – Sept 26th 2016

Posted on Sep 26, 2016 in astro-ph, Bayes, Research

Two interesting papers on the methodology side today: A ML source detection method that detects ultra-faint streaks below the pixel level noise (arXiv:1609.07158). They call it “ML” but in reality it uses MCMC to look at the Bayesian posterior (which is arguably a good thing!) and even Bayesian model comparison (in the BIC variety) to determine how many parameters the streak model should have.

This paper applies a Bayesian method to extract 2M distances to stars in the Gaia DR1 catalogue (arXiv:1609.07369). The money plot is Fig 4, where the performance of the (less accurate) distances from Gaia is compared to that from a bunch of Cepheids. I wonder whether the relatively poor performance of their model for distances > 2 kpc might not be a function of their chosen prior being actually optimised for the end-of-mission Gaia data, rather than for DR1 data used here. 

 

Leave a Reply