Comparisons between different techniques for measuring mass segregation
Richard J. Parker (1), Simon P. Goodwin (2) ((1) Liverpool John, Moores University UK, (2) University of Sheffield, UK)

TL;DR
This paper compares four methods for measuring mass segregation in star-forming regions, highlighting their differences, limitations, and applicability through tests on synthetic data.
Contribution
It provides a systematic evaluation of four techniques, clarifying what each measures and their effectiveness in different spatial structures.
Findings
All methods work well in smooth, centrally concentrated regions.
The $\Omega_{ m GSR}$ method fails in substructured regions.
Only $\Lambda_{ m MSR}$ measures classical mass segregation reliably.
Abstract
We examine the performance of four different methods which are used to measure mass segregation in star-forming regions: the radial variation of the mass function ; the minimum spanning tree-based method; the local surface density method; and the technique, which isolates groups of stars and determines whether the most massive star in each group is more centrally concentrated than the average star. All four methods have been proposed in the literature as techniques for quantifying mass segregation, yet they routinely produce contradictory results as they do not all measure the same thing. We apply each method to synthetic star-forming regions to determine when and why they have shortcomings. When a star-forming region is smooth and centrally concentrated, all four methods correctly identify mass segregation…
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
