Comparing Gaia, NED and SIMBAD source classifications in nearby galaxies
J. Hales, P. Barmby

TL;DR
This study compares Gaia DR3 source classifications with NED and SIMBAD for nearby galaxy sources, revealing high accuracy for stars but lower accuracy for quasars and galaxies, highlighting classification challenges.
Contribution
It provides a detailed comparison of Gaia classifications with existing catalogs, quantifying accuracy and identifying common misclassifications in nearby galaxy regions.
Findings
Gaia classification accuracy is ~80% when compared to NED/SIMBAD.
High agreement for stars (~90%), lower for quasars and galaxies.
Misclassifications often involve galaxies as stars and stars as quasars.
Abstract
Gaia Data Release 3 (DR3) provides the first classifications for the sources in Gaia's all-sky database. Most Gaia sources are stars in the Milky Way, but DR3 also contains many sources that belong to nearby galaxies, as well as background galaxies and quasars. In this work, we compare the Gaia classifications from the Discrete Source Classifier (CU8-DSC) module to the more detailed and heterogeneous classifications in NED and/or SIMBAD for sources with sky positions within twice the Holmberg radius of nearby galaxies. Matching these catalogues gives approximately 3.2e5 unique Gaia matches for 4e5 sources over 1040 galaxies (excluding some large Local Group galaxies) in the Local Volume Galaxy catalogue. Matched sources contain a lower fraction of Gaia-classified stars and higher fractions of galaxies and quasars (~95, 2 and 2 per cent, respectively) than DR3 overall. Considering NED…
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.
