paper

Consistencies and inconsistencies in redshift-independent distances

arXiv:2503.13658 · doi:10.1093/mnras/staf1005

Abstract

Redshift-independent distances underpin much of astrophysics, and there exists a plethora of methods to estimate them. However, the extent to which the distances they imply are consistent, while crucial for the integrity of the distance ladder, has been little explored. We construct a statistical framework to assess both internal (between measurements with the same method) and external (between-method) consistency by comparing differences between distances to their quoted statistical uncertainties in the NASA/IPAC Extragalactic Database of Distances (NED-D). 66 of the 76 indicators in NED-D are amenable to a consistency test by having at least two measurements to the same galaxy or at least one measurement to a galaxy also measured by another method. We find that only 12 of these methods produce self-consistent distances across literature determinations, of which 7 are also consistent with distances to the same galaxies measured by all other methods. The most consistent 6 methods (M-stars luminosity, Novae, Masers, Globular Cluster Fundamental Plane, O- and B-type Supergiants and BL Lac Luminosity) also give similar average distances to the mean of all indicators, while the 7th (Proper Motion) underestimates distances relative to the mean by 17.1%. We also investigate consistency of Cepheid distances in the SH0ES 2022 catalogue, finding no evidence for unaccounted-for systematics. Our NED-D results imply that considerable work remains to obtain reliable distances by a multitude of methods, a crucial endeavour for constructing a multiply cross-checked and fully robust distance ladder. We make our code publicly available.

arXiv comment18 pages, 5 figures; matches MNRAS accepted version

References in corpus (50)

Cited by in corpus (2)