2007
DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2006.11153.x
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The microlensing optical depth towards the Large Magellanic Cloud: is there a puzzle?

Abstract: Using neural networks, Belokurov, Evans & Le Du showed that seven out of the 29 microlensing candidates towards the Large Magellanic Cloud (LMC) of the MACHO collaboration are consistent with blended microlensing and added Gaussian noise. We then estimated the microlensing optical depth to the LMC to be 0.3 × 10−7≲τ≲ 0.5 × 10−7, lower than the value τ= 1.2+0.4−0.3× 10−7 claimed by the MACHO collaboration. There have been independent claims of a low optical depth to the LMC by the EROS collaboration, who have m… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

2
8
0

Year Published

2007
2007
2015
2015

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 20 publications
(10 citation statements)
references
References 27 publications
2
8
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Rather than trying to identify a list of definite ML candidates, it is therefore more appropriate to associate a probability with each of the candidates generated by any particular selection of cuts. This point has also been made by Evans & Belokurov (2007).…”
Section: Comparison With Candidates Selected By Other Surveyssupporting
confidence: 53%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…Rather than trying to identify a list of definite ML candidates, it is therefore more appropriate to associate a probability with each of the candidates generated by any particular selection of cuts. This point has also been made by Evans & Belokurov (2007).…”
Section: Comparison With Candidates Selected By Other Surveyssupporting
confidence: 53%
“…There is therefore a trade‐off between minimizing the number of false negatives (genuine ML events which are rejected) and false positives (spurious ML events which are accepted). This has also been stressed by Evans & Belokurov (2007) in the context of ML searches towards the Magellanic Clouds. They conclude that efficiency calculations can correct for the effects of false negatives but not for the effects of false positives, so the best strategy in an ML experiment is to eschew a decision boundary altogether.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 72%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Besides the X-ray observations, data on RS Oph were also collected in the radio (O'Brien et al 2006;Kantharia et al 2007;Eyres et al 2009), IR (Monnier et al 2006;Das et al 2006;Evans et al 2007aEvans et al , 2007bChesneau et al 2007;Lane et al 2007;Banerjee et al 2009;Rushton et al 2010;Brandi et al 2009), and optical bands (Hachisu et al 2006;Worters et al 2007;Bode et al 2007;Munari et al 2007;Brandi et al 2009). Hachisu et al (2007) discussed the temporal evolution of the RS Oph SSS X-ray light curve, but did not include any detailed consideration of the spectral characteristics or their evolution; nor did they include the effects of interstellar and (changing) circumstellar absorption on their conclusions.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This point has been made by Calchi Novati & Mancini (2011) in discussing the OGLE results when they "stress the potential difficulty within the evaluation of the detection efficiency to correctly take into account the risk of excluding bona fide microlensing candidates". The question of whether the detected events really are microlensing events by compact halo objects has been the subject of extensive debate Griest & Thomas 2005;Bennett 2005;Evans & Belokurov 2007), although the outcome of this exchange seems to support, with minor modifications, the original claims of Alcock et al (2000). Rather than simply removing suspect microlensing candidates, Bennett (2005) employs a likelihood anaysis to assign microlensing probabilities to the candidates.…”
Section: Detection Efficiencymentioning
confidence: 99%