tests:collision:gc3
Differences
This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.
Both sides previous revisionPrevious revisionNext revision | Previous revision | ||
tests:collision:gc3 [2015/09/01 10:39] – v.henault-brunet | tests:collision:gc3 [2022/10/24 12:26] (current) – external edit 127.0.0.1 | ||
---|---|---|---|
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
===== GC III ===== | ===== GC III ===== | ||
+ | |||
+ | Active participants: | ||
==== Goals/ | ==== Goals/ | ||
- | ===A. Method comparison (now Challenge #4):=== | + | ===A. Method comparison (a.k.a. |
- | [[: | + | |
- | We will start with $N$-body snapshots of the M4 models by Heggie (2014): http:// | + | For this Challenge, initiated in GC III in Barcelona, we decided to compare fitting methods |
+ | - Jeans modelling (Laura) | ||
+ | - Single mass DF modelling (Alice) | ||
+ | - Multimass DF modelling (Miklos, Mark) | ||
+ | |||
+ | Results can go [[: | ||
===B. Understanding Gaia errors:=== | ===B. Understanding Gaia errors:=== | ||
Line 12: | Line 20: | ||
===C. Potential escapers: | ===C. Potential escapers: | ||
- | a) quantify biases from ignoring them | + | a) [[: |
b) towards self-consistent mixture models with potential escapers | b) towards self-consistent mixture models with potential escapers | ||
Line 18: | Line 26: | ||
===D. Rotation: | ===D. Rotation: | ||
- | include prescription for rotation in multi-mass DF models. | + | include |
tests/collision/gc3.1441103971.txt.gz · Last modified: 2022/10/24 12:26 (external edit)