Papers › Unresolved multiple stars and Galactic clusters' mass estimates

Unresolved multiple stars and Galactic clusters' mass estimates

5 Jan 2021arXiv:2101.01417links table onlyarchive 2025-07-28

Olga I. Borodina, Giovanni Carraro, Anton F. Seleznev, Vladimir M. Danilov

The archive published only this paper's code-link row. Authors, date and abstract are from arXiv's metadata (CC0), read from the Kaggle arXiv metadata snapshot of 2026-09-12 where its title matched the archive's; the title is the archive's.

If not properly accounted for, unresolved binary stars can induce a bias in the photometric determination of star cluster masses inferred from star counts and the luminosity function. A correction factor close to 1.15 (for a binary fraction of 0.35) was found in \citep{Boro19}, which needs to be applied to blind photometric mass estimates. This value for the correction factor was found to be smaller than literature values. In an attempt to lift this discrepancy, in this work the focus is on higher order multiple stars with the goal of investigating the effect of triple and quadruple systems adopting the same methodology and data-set as in the quoted work. Then the result is found that when triple and quadruple together with binary systems are properly accounted for, the actual cluster mass (computed as all stars were single) should be incremented by a factor of 1.18$-$1.27, depending on the cluster and when the binary fraction $\alpha$ is 0.35. Fitting formulae are provided to derive the increment factor for different binary star percentages.

PaperPDFCode

Code

Repository list and official/mentioned flags are the archive's, frozen 2025-07-28. Reachability, where shown, is from one Syntology probe window (2026-09-16 to 2026-09-18); repositories not probed show nothing. GitHub stars are not tracked.

Code Syntology ran Syntology

Not run by Syntology. Nothing on this page verifies that the listed code works.

Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28

No leaderboard rows for this paper in the archive.

Report a problem or propose a change · a person checks every report against the paper or source before anything changes; decisions are listed on /corrections