Cited by 1,983Stellar, planetary, and galactic studiesAstronomy and Astrophysical ResearchAstronomical Observations and Instrumentation

Gaia Data Release 2: The astrometric solution

Open access
Lindegren, L., Hernández, J., Bombrun, A., Klioner, S., Bastian, U., Ramos-Lerate, M., de Torres, A., Steidelmüller, H. +82 more·2018·Astronomy & Astrophysics

Abstract

Context. Gaia Data Release 2 ( Gaia DR2) contains results for 1693 million sources in the magnitude range 3 to 21 based on observations collected by the European Space Agency Gaia satellite during the first 22 months of its operational phase. Aims. We describe the input data, models, and processing used for the astrometric content of Gaia DR2, and the validation of these resultsperformed within the astrometry task. Methods. Some 320 billion centroid positions from the pre-processed astrometric CCD observations were used to estimate the five astrometric parameters (positions, parallaxes, and proper motions) for 1332 million sources, and approximate positions at the reference epoch J2015.5 for an additional 361 million mostly faint sources. These data were calculated in two steps. First, the satellite attitude and the astrometric calibration parameters of the CCDs were obtained in an astrometric global iterative solution for 16 million selected sources, using about 1% of the input data. This primary solution was tied to the extragalactic International Celestial Reference System (ICRS) by means of quasars. The resulting attitude and calibration were then used to calculate the astrometric parameters of all the sources. Special validation solutions were used to characterise the random and systematic errors in parallax and proper motion. Results. For the sources with five-parameter astrometric solutions, the median uncertainty in parallax and position at the reference epoch J2015.5 is about 0.04 mas for bright ( G < 14 mag) sources, 0.1 mas at G = 17 mag, and 0.7 masat G = 20 mag. In the proper motion components the corresponding uncertainties are 0.05, 0.2, and 1.2 mas yr −1 , respectively.The optical reference frame defined by Gaia DR2 is aligned with ICRS and is non-rotating with respect to the quasars to within 0.15 mas yr −1 . From the quasars and validation solutions we estimate that systematics in the parallaxes depending on position, magnitude, and colour are generally below 0.1 mas, but the parallaxes are on the whole too small by about 0.03 mas. Significant spatial correlations of up to 0.04 mas in parallax and 0.07 mas yr −1 in proper motion are seen on small (< 1 deg) and intermediate (20 deg) angular scales. Important statistics and information for the users of the Gaia DR2 astrometry are given in the appendices.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1051/0004-6361/201832727

Cites

25 of 25 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The retrograde mean-motion signal is weak but robust to measurement uncertainties, statistical and systematic, because within 1 kpc the parallax is 1 mas, relative errors are small for bright Gaia RVS stars, and systematic parallax bias is negligible in this range.

    “The signal is therefore weak but robust to measurement uncertainties (statistical and systematic) because within 1 kpc from the Sun, the parallax is 1 mas, the relative errors are small ( 20%) for the bright stars in the Gaia radial-velocity spectrometer (RVS) sample (Gaia Collab. et al. 2018d), and the systematic parallax bias”

    From Streams, Substructures, and the Early History of the Milky Way (2020) · cites this paper as Lindegren et al. 2018

    Split into 2 atoms — 1 confirmed, 1 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Recent results from Gaia Data Release 2 demonstrate that early predictions of the Gaia mission performance were robust.

    “Recent results from Gaia Data Release 2 ( DR2 ) demonstrate that these early predictions of the mission performance were robust ( Gaia Collaboration et al. 2018; Lindegren et al. 2018 ) .”

    From LSST: From Science Drivers to Reference Design and Anticipated Data Products (2019) · cites this paper as Lindegren et al. 2018

  • Astrometric calibration will be based on Gaia mission results, which will provide numerous high-accuracy astrometric standards in every LSST field.

    “Astrometric calibration will be based on the results from the Gaia mission ( Lindegren et al. 2018 ) , which will provide numerous high-accuracy astrometric standards in every LSST fi eld.”

    From LSST: From Science Drivers to Reference Design and Anticipated Data Products (2019) · cites this paper as Lindegren et al. 2018

  • SDSS-POSS proper-motion measurements have an accuracy of ~5 mas yr-1 per coordinate at r = 20, and Gaia DR2 has delivered a median uncertainty in parallax of 0.7 mas and in proper motion of 1.2 mas yr-1 at its faint end (r ~ 20).

    “For comparison with Table 3, the SDSS-POSS propermotion measurements have an accuracy of ∼ 5 mas yr -1 per coordinate at r = 20 ( Munn et al. 2004 ) , and Gaia DR 2 has delivered a median uncertainty in parallax of 0.7 mas and in proper motion of 1.2 mas yr -1 at its faint end, approximately corresponding to r = 20 ( Gaia Collaboration et al. 2018; Lindegren et al. 2018 ) .”

    From LSST: From Science Drivers to Reference Design and Anticipated Data Products (2019) · cites this paper as Lindegren et al. 2018

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 28

  1. Arenou, F., Luri, X., Babusiaux, C. et al. 2018, A&A, 616, A17 (Gaia 2 SI) · DOI
  2. Butkevich, A. G., Klioner, S. A., Lindegren, L., Hobbs, D., & van Leeuwen F. 2017, A&A, 603, A45 · DOI
  3. Evans, D. W., Riello, M., De Angeli, F., et al. 2018, A&A, 616, A4 (Gaia 2 SI) · DOI
  4. Fabricius, C., Bastian, U., Portell, J., et al. 2016, A&A, 595, A3 · DOI
  5. Freedman, W. L., Madore, B. F., Gibson, B. K., et al. 2001, ApJ, 553, 47 · DOI
  6. Gaia Collaboration (Brown, A. G. A., et al.) 2016a, A&A, 595, A2 · DOI
  7. Gaia Collaboration (Prusti, T., et al.) 2016b, A&A, 595, A1 · DOI
  8. Gaia Collaboration (Brown, A. G. A., et al.) 2018a, A&A, 616, A1 (Gaia 2 SI) · DOI
  9. Gaia Collaboration (Mignard, F., et al.) 2018b, A&A, 616, A14 (Gaia 2 SI) · DOI
  10. Gaia Collaboration (Helmi, A., et al.) 2018c, A&A, 616, A12 (Gaia 2 SI) · DOI
  11. Gaia Collaboration (Babusiaux, S., et al.) 2018d, A&A, 616, A10 (Gaia 2 SI) · DOI
  12. Hambly, N. C., Copper, M., Boudreault, S., et al. 2018, A&A, 616, A15 (Gaia 2 SI) · DOI
  13. Klioner, S. A. 2003, AJ, 125, 1580 · DOI
  14. Klioner, S. A. 2004, Phys. Rev. D, 69, 124001 · DOI
  15. Lindegren, L., Lammers, U., Hobbs, D., et al. 2012, A&A, 538, A78 · DOI
  16. Lindegren, L., Lammers, U., Bastian, U., et al. 2016, A&A, 595, A4 · DOI
  17. Michalik, D., Lindegren, L., Hobbs, D., & Butkevich, A. G. 2015, A&A, 583, A68 · DOI
  18. Mora, A., Biermann, M., Bombrun, A., et al. 2016, in Proc. SPIE, Space Tele- scopes and Instrumentation 2016: Optical, Infrared, and Millimeter Wave, 9904, 99042D · DOI
  19. Riello, M., De Angeli, F., Evans, D. W., et al. 2018, A&A, 616, A3 (Gaia 2 SI) · DOI
  20. Rodgers, A. W. & Eggen, O. J. 1974, PASP, 86, 742 · DOI
  21. Sartoretti, P., Katz, D., Cropper, M., et al. 2018, A&A, 616, A6 (Gaia 2 SI) · DOI
  22. Secrest, N. J., Dudik, R. P., Dorland, B. N., et al. 2015, ApJS, 221, 12 · DOI
  23. Secrest, N. J., Dudik, R. P., Dorland, B. N., et al. 2016, VizieR Online Data Catalog: II/221 · DOI
  24. Soffel, M., Klioner, S. A., Petit, G., et al. 2003, AJ, 126, 2687 · DOI
  25. Taylor, M. B. 2005, in Astronomical Data Analysis Software and Systems XIV, eds. P. Shopbell, M. Britton, & R. Ebert, ASP Conf. Ser., 347, 29 · DOI
  26. van Leeuwen, F., Evans, D. W., De Angeli, F., et al. 2017, A&A, 599, A32 · DOI
  27. Wenger, M., Ochsenbein, F., Egret, D., et al. 2000, A&AS, 143, 9 1 Lund Observatory, Department of Astronomy and Theoretical Physics, Lund University, Box 43, 22100 Lund, Sweden · DOI
  28. Institute for Astronomy, School of Physics and Astronomy, Univer- sity of Edinburgh, Royal Observatory, Blackford Hill, Edinburgh EH9 3HJ, UK 10 Gaia Project Office for DPAC/ESA, Camino Bajo del Castillo s/n, 28691 Villanueva de la Cañada, Spain 11 Aurora Technology for ESA/ESAC, Camino Bajo del Castillo s/n, 28691 Villanueva de la Cañada, Spain 12 Institute of Astronomy, University of Cambridge, Madingley Road, Cambridge CB3 0HA, UK 13

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Lindegren, L., Hernández, J., Bombrun, A., Klioner, S., Bastian, U., Ramos-Lerate, M., de Torres, A., Steidelmüller, H., Stephenson, C., Hobbs, D., Lammers, U., Biermann, M., Geyer, R., Hilger, T., Michalik, D., Stampa, U., McMillan, P. J., Castañeda, J., Clotet, M., Comoretto, G., Davidson, M., Fabricius, C., Gracia, G., Hambly, N. C., Hutton, A., Mora, A., Portell, J., van Leeuwen, F., Abbas, U., Abreu, A., Altmann, M., Andrei, A., Anglada, E., Balaguer-Núñez, L., Barache, C., Becciani, U., Bertone, S., Bianchi, L., Bouquillon, S., Bourda, G., Brüsemeister, T., Bucciarelli, B., Busonero, D., Buzzi, R., Cancelliere, R., Carlucci, T., Charlot, P., Cheek, N., Crosta, M., Crowley, C., de Bruijne, J., de Felice, F., Drimmel, R., Esquej, P., Fienga, A., Fraile, E., Gai, M., Garralda, N., González-Vidal, J. J., Guerra, R., Hauser, M., Hofmann, W., Holl, B., Jordan, S., Lattanzi, M. G., Lenhardt, H., Liao, S., Licata, E., Lister, T., Löffler, W., Marchant, J., Martin-Fleitas, J.-M., Messineo, R., Mignard, F., Morbidelli, R., Poggio, E., Riva, A., Rowell, N., Salguero, E., Sarasso, M., Sciacca, E., Siddiqui, H., Smart, R. L., Spagna, A., Steele, I., Taris, F., Torra, J., van Elteren, A., van Reeven, W., & Vecchiato, A.
Affiliations
  • Lund University (SE)
  • European Space Astronomy Centre (ES)
  • Technische Universität Dresden (DE)
  • Heidelberg University (DE)
  • Institut de Ciències del Cosmos (ES)
  • Royal Observatory (GB)
  • Osservatorio Astrofisico di Torino (IT)
  • Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (FR)
  • National Observatory (BR)
  • Osservatorio Astrofisico di Catania (IT)
  • University of Bern (CH)
  • Eurix (Italy) (IT)
  • University of Turin (IT)
  • University of Geneva (CH)
  • Chinese Academy of Sciences (CN)
  • Las Cumbres Observatory Global Telescope Network (US)
  • Liverpool John Moores University (GB)
Venue
Astronomy & Astrophysics
Publisher
EDP Sciences
Published
2018-08
Volume
616
Pages
A2
ISSN
  • 0004-6361 (ISSN-L)
  • 1432-0746
OpenAlex
W4289710306
Cited by
1,983
References
25
Citations by year
2026: 62 · 2025: 110 · 2024: 115 · 2023: 119 · 2022: 180 · 2021: 318 · 2020: 475 · 2019: 415 · 2018: 186 · 2016: 3
FWCI
187.93
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Astronomy and Astrophysics (publishedVersion)
  • RECERCAT (Consorci de Serveis Universitaris de Catalunya) (acceptedVersion)
  • Liverpool John Moores University (acceptedVersion)
  • Leiden Repository (Leiden University) (submittedVersion)
  • Dipòsit Digital de la Universitat de Barcelona (Universitat de Barcelona) (submittedVersion, public-domain)
  • Edinburgh Research Explorer (University of Edinburgh) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Funders
  • National Science Foundation
  • Israel Cancer Research Fund
  • UK Space Agency (ST/N000641/1, ST/N001117/1)
  • European Space Agency
  • Schweizerischer Nationalfonds zur Förderung der Wissenschaftlichen Forschung (55216, 55996)
  • National Natural Science Foundation of China (2016-1, 11703065, 11573054)
  • Centre National d’Etudes Spatiales
  • Ministerio de Educación, Cultura y Deporte (FPU16/03827, FPU16)
  • Nederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek (NWO-M-614.061.414)
  • Agenzia Spaziale Italiana (I/037/08/0, 2013/030/I.0, 2014-025-R.1.2015, 025-R.1.2015, I/008/10/0, 2014-025-R.0, 2014-049-R.0, I/058/10/0)
  • Istituto Nazionale di Astrofisica (I/008/10/0, 2016-17-I.0, 2014-025-R.1.2015, 2014-049-R.0/1/2, 2014-025-R.0, 2013/030/I.0)
  • Universitat de Barcelona
  • Barcelona Supercomputing Center (AECT-2017-1-0020, AECT-2016-3-0011, AECT-2016-1-0006, AECT-2016-2-0013, 1-0020)
  • Ministerio de Asuntos Económicos y Transformación Digital, Gobierno de España (ESP2016-80079-C2-1-R, MDM-2014-0369, AyA2014-55216, ESP2014-55996-C2-1-R)
  • Xunta de Galicia (2016‐2019)
  • Science and Technology Facilities Council (ST/L006561/1, ST/N000641/1, ST/L00061X/1, ST/L006553/1, ST/J001465/1, ST/H002391/1, ST/M000966/1, ST/R000484/1, ST/F007159/1, PP/E001149/1)
  • Institut de Ciències del Cosmos (MDM-2014-0369)
  • Zentrum für Informationsdienste und Hochleistungsrechnen, Technische Universität Dresden
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Astronomy and Astrophysics › Stellar, planetary, and galactic studies
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Instrumentation › Astronomy and Astrophysical Research
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Computational Mechanics › Astronomical Observations and Instrumentation
Keywords
Gaia DR2, astrometry, parallax, proper motions, astrometric calibration, spacecraft attitude determination, International Celestial Reference System, systematic errors, spatial correlation

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review