Resolution-Corrected White Dwarf Gravitational Redshifts Validate SDSS-V Wavelength Calibration and Enable Accurate Mass-Radius Tests
Stefan M. Arseneau, J.J. Hermes, Nadia L. Zakamska, Kareem El-Badry, Nicole R. Crumpler, Vedant Chandra, Gautham Adamane Pallathadka, Carles Badenes, Boris T. Gaensicke, Nicola Gentile Fusillo

TL;DR
This paper identifies biases in low-resolution spectroscopic measurements of white dwarf gravitational redshifts, provides correction methods, and demonstrates improved agreement with theoretical models, thereby enhancing the accuracy of white dwarf mass-radius tests.
Contribution
It introduces resolution-dependent corrections for white dwarf gravitational redshift measurements, improving the accuracy of mass-radius relation tests from low-resolution spectroscopic data.
Findings
Biases of 5-15 km/s in low-resolution radial velocities identified
Resolution corrections improve agreement with theoretical mass-radius relations
Best practices established for white dwarf velocity measurements from large surveys
Abstract
Leveraging the large sample size of low-resolution spectroscopic surveys to constrain white dwarf stellar structure requires an accurate understanding of the shapes of hydrogen absorption lines, which are pressure broadened by the Stark effect. Using data from both the Sloan Digital Sky Survey and the Type Ia Supernova Progenitor Survey, we show that substantial biases (5-15 km/s) exist in radial velocity measurements made from observations at low spectral resolution relative to similar measurements from high-resolution spectra. Our results indicate that the physics of line formation in high-density plasmas, especially in the wings of the lines, are not fully accounted for in state-of-the-art white dwarf model atmospheres. We provide corrections to account for these resolution-induced redshifts in a way that is independent of an assumed mass-radius relation, and we demonstrate that…
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.
