This list includes stars that have been observed, and the direct and indirect methods disagree.
This is the comparison that led us to ditch the indirect method. It seems to have two issues
- It does not take magnitude into account.
- Some stars with proper motion seem to be wrongly matched.
The purpose of this report is to check whether outliers can be caused by misidentification.
When looking at the report for a given outlier, consider that if the true match is a star with no
proper motion in Gaia, then there should be an AGASC star matched to this Gaia star. Is there one?
If you double-click on a report's figure, it will zoom out and show you all AGASC stars around.
Notable examples:
-
36444624 . The indirect method does not use magnitude as a criterion, and matches a star with the wrong magnitude. The correct match is actually closer if one considers proper motion.
-
52053176 . Maybe the indirect method did not consider proper motion?
-
170537688 . This one should be a blend of two stars. The direct method chooses one, and the indirect method the other. Still, the indirect method does not choose the closest one.
-
176951584 . The indirect method gives the star with the wrong magnitude even though the right one is closer.
Stars