Table 7: Comparison between various determinations of the luminosity of the horizontal branch (from Cacciari & Clementini 2003).
Method M_V(RR)

at $\rm [Fe/H]=-1.5$

Statistical parallaxes 0.78 $\pm$ 0.12

Trigonometric parallaxes (RR Lyr) 0.58 $\pm$ 0.13

Trigonometric parallaxes (HB stars) 0.62 $\pm$ 0.11

Baade-Wesselink (RR Cet) 0.55 $\pm$ 0.12

HB stars: Evolutionary models - bright 0.43 $\pm$ 0.12

HB stars: Evolutionary models - faint 0.56 $\pm$ 0.12

Pulsation models (visual) 0.58 $\pm$ 0.12

Pulsation models ( $PL_{\rm K}Z$ ) 0.59 $\pm$ 0.10

Pulsation models (double-modes) 0.57 $\pm$ 0.06

Fourier parameters 0.61 $\pm$ 0.05

Main Sequence Fitting 0.56 $\pm$ 0.07

**Table 7:** Comparison between various determinations of the luminosity of the horizontal branch (from Cacciari & Clementini 2003).
Method	M_V(RR)
	at $\rm [Fe/H]=-1.5$
Statistical parallaxes	0.78 $\pm$ 0.12
Trigonometric parallaxes (RR Lyr)	0.58 $\pm$ 0.13
Trigonometric parallaxes (HB stars)	0.62 $\pm$ 0.11
Baade-Wesselink (RR Cet)	0.55 $\pm$ 0.12
HB stars: Evolutionary models - bright	0.43 $\pm$ 0.12
HB stars: Evolutionary models - faint	0.56 $\pm$ 0.12
Pulsation models (visual)	0.58 $\pm$ 0.12
Pulsation models ( $PL_{\rm K}Z$ )	0.59 $\pm$ 0.10
Pulsation models (double-modes)	0.57 $\pm$ 0.06
Fourier parameters	0.61 $\pm$ 0.05
Main Sequence Fitting	0.56 $\pm$ 0.07

Source LaTeX | All tables | In the text