--- abstract: 'We present radial velocities and chemical abundance ratios of \[Fe/H\], \[O/Fe\], \[Si/Fe\], and \[Ca/Fe\] for 264 red giant branch (RGB) stars in three Galactic bulge off–axis fields located near (l,b)=(–5.5,–7), (–4,–9), and ($+$8.5,$+$9). The results are based on equivalent width and spectrum synthesis analyses of moderate resolution (R$\approx$18,000), high signal–to–noise ratio (S/N$\sim$75–300 pixel$^{\rm -1}$) spectra obtained with the Hydra spectrographs on the Blanco 4m and WIYN 3.5m telescopes. The targets were selected from the blue side of the giant branch to avoid cool stars that would be strongly affected by CN and TiO; however, a comparison of the color–metallicity distribution in literature samples suggests our selection of bluer targets should not present a significant bias against metal–rich stars. We find a full range in metallicity that spans \[Fe/H\]$\approx$–1.5 to $+$0.5, and that, in accordance with the previously observed minor–axis vertical metallicity gradient, the median \[Fe/H\] also declines with increasing Galactic latitude in off–axis fields. The off–axis vertical \[Fe/H\] gradient in the southern bulge is estimated to be $\sim$0.4 dex kpc$^{\rm -1}$; however, comparison with the minor–axis data suggests a strong radial gradient does not exist. The ($+$8.5,$+$9) field exhibits a higher than expected metallicity, with a median \[Fe/H\]=–0.23, that might be related to a stronger presence of the X–shaped bulge structure along that line–of–sight. This could also be the cause of an anomalous increase in the median radial velocity for intermediate metallicity stars in the ($+$8.5,$+$9) field. However, the overall radial velocity and dispersion for each field are in good agreement with recent surveys and bulge models. All fields exhibit an identical, strong decrease in velocity dispersion with increasing metallicity that is consistent with observations in similar minor–axis outer bulge fields. Additionally, the \[O/Fe\], \[Si/Fe\], and \[Ca/Fe\] versus \[Fe/H\] trends are identical among our three fields, and are in good agreement with past bulge studies. We find that stars with \[Fe/H\]$\la$–0.5 are $\alpha$–enhanced, and that the \[$\alpha$/Fe\] ratios decline at higher metallicity. At \[Fe/H\]$\la$0, the $\alpha$–element trends are indistinguishable from the halo and thick disk, and the variations in the behavior of individual $\alpha$–elements are consistent with production in massive stars and a rapid bulge formation timescale.' author: - 'Christian I. Johnson, R. Michael Rich, Chiaki Kobayashi, Andrea Kunder, Catherine A. Pilachowski, Andreas Koch, and Roberto de Propris' title: 'METALLICITY DISTRIBUTION FUNCTIONS, RADIAL VELOCITIES, AND ALPHA ELEMENT ABUNDANCES IN THREE OFF–AXIS BULGE FIELDS' --- INTRODUCTION ============ Although the minor–axis of the Galactic bulge has been the subject of extensive high resolution spectroscopic study (e.g., Zoccali et al. 2008), there has been relatively little chemical characterization of stars in off–axis bulge fields. Iron and $\alpha$–element abundances are reported by Gonzalez et al. (2011) in a field near the globular cluster NGC 6553 (l,b)=($+$5.25,–3), but that is the only off–axis field for which significant (N$\ga$100 stars) chemical abundance data are presently available[^1]. Overall, the radial variation in \[Fe/H\][^2] and \[$\alpha$/Fe\] along the bulge major–axis and off–axis is poorly constrained. It is also clear that the bulge is spatially complex, and a deep understanding will require a full three–dimensional sampling of the structure. McWilliam & Zoccali (2010) found red clump giants to be spatially distributed in an X–shaped structure that spans the inner $\sim$8$\degr$, and was confirmed in a density analysis by Saito et al. (2011). The metal–rich subset of the bulge appears to be predominant in the X–shaped structure (Ness et al. 2012; Uttenthaler et al. 2012; but see also de Propris et al. 2011). Connected with these issues is the question of whether there is kinematic substructure in the bulge, and whether the population is comprised of multiple components. Some evidence suggests the bulge may host two dominant populations (Babusiaux et al. 2010; Bensby et al. 2011; Hill et al. 2011; Uttenthaler et al. 2012). At the most basic level, such a bimodality might be expressed in the bar and the "classical" bulge. Soto et al. (2007) argued that the metal–rich bulge stars exhibit a vertex deviation expected for stars orbiting in the bar, while the metal–poor (\[Fe/H\]$<$–0.5) stars could plausibly be on non–barred orbits. Hill et al. (2011) argues strongly for bimodality, connecting two putative peaks in the \[Fe/H\] distribution with differing \[Mg/Fe\] ratios. Bensby et al. (2011) also find evidence for bimodality in their sample of 26 microlensed bulge dwarfs and subgiants, although they have recently increased their sample to 58 stars (Bensby et al. 2013) and now favor a multi–component model that may also incorporate the bimodal structures found in previous studies. Similarly, Ness et al. (2013), using \[Fe/H\] values derived from moderate resolution spectra of a large sample ($\sim$28,000) of bulge giant and clump stars, deconvolve the metallicity distributions into 5 separate Gaussians that are asserted to vary systematically with Galactic latitude and longitude, and to reflect different populations. The BRAVA survey of $\sim$10,000 bulge M giants (e.g., Rich et al. 2007a; Kunder et al. 2012) does not find any hint of kinematic substructure or a significant classical bulge. Shen et al. (2010) argue that very strong limits are placed on any classical bulge fraction ($\la$8–15$\%$ of the disk mass) from the BRAVA survey. It has been shown theoretically possible for a rapidly rotating bar to spin up a classical bulge (e.g., Shen et al. 2010; Saha et al. 2012), but such an effect would likely be unveiled by the metal–poor stars exhibiting rapid rotation and bar–like kinematics, which is not observed. The question of correlations between \[Fe/H\], velocity, and/or velocity dispersion are among the most actively debated aspects of the substructure argument. Babusiaux et al. (2010) find a striking trend for the more metal–rich stars to have the highest velocity dispersion in Baade's Window (b=–4$\degr$); the trend reverses itself by b=–12$\degr$. Exploring intermediate minor–axis fields near b=–8$\degr$ and –10$\degr$, Johnson et al. (2011) and Uttenthaler et al. (2012) find the common trend (e.g. Rich 1990) of velocity dispersion decreasing with increasing metallicity. A further motivation to explore off–axis bulge fields addresses similarities and differences between such fields and the Galactic thick disk. In a bulge formation scenario in which the bar has thickened from a preexisting massive disk, it would not be surprising to find chemical similarities between bulge and thick disk stars; these might even be expected to predominate off–axis. Here, there is also some uncertainty. While early analyses (Zoccali et al. 2006; Fulbright et al. 2007; Lecureur et al. 2007) found that bulge stars were likely $\alpha$–enhanced, particularly in their \[O/Fe\] and \[Mg/Fe\] ratios, compared to the thick disk, more recent differential studies (e.g., Mel<span>é</span>ndez et al. 2008; Ryde et al. 2010; Alves–Brito et al. 2010; Gonzalez et al. 2011) have instead concluded that the thick disk and metal–poor bulge likely share identical \[$\alpha$/Fe\] distributions (but see also Bensby et al. 2013). However, it is not yet clear if these abundance similarities extend to super–solar metallicities and/or light odd–Z and heavy neutron–capture elements (e.g., Fulbright et al. 2007; Lecureur et al. 2007; Alves–Brito et al. 2010; McWilliam et al. 2010; Johnson et al. 2012). Exploring the bulge in new fields, and near the bulge/halo boundary, offers significant opportunities to search for bulge substructure and to explore whether the bulge population is complex and multimodal over its whole volume. Although future samples will reach thousands of stars, our sample of 264 red giant branch (RGB) stars observed in multiobject mode at moderate (R$\sim$18,000) resolution will yield new constraints on the structure and substructure of the bulge. These data will also provide new tests of whether the bulge resembles the thick disk, and the presence of kinematic or composition substructure. OBSERVATIONS AND DATA REDUCTION =============================== The observations for this project were obtained between 2011 August 19–20 with the WIYN 3.5m telescope at Kitt Peak National Observatory and 2011 September 8–12 with the Blanco 4m telescope at Cerro Tololo Inter–American Observatory. WIYN was used to observe the northern bulge field centered near (l,b)=($+$8.5,$+$9) and the Blanco was used to observe the two southern bulge fields centered near (l,b)=(–5.5,–7) and (–4,–9). All spectra were acquired using the Hydra multifiber positioners and bench spectrographs. For WIYN–Hydra, we used the red fibers, 316 line mm$^{\rm -1}$ Echelle grating, red camera, and X18 filter to achieve a resolving power of R($\lambda$/$\Delta$$\lambda$)$\approx$18,000. We also employed only one spectrograph setup with wavelength coverage ranging from about 6050–6350 Å. For Blanco–Hydra, we used the large 300$\micron$ (2$\arcsec$) fibers, 400 mm Bench Schmidt camera, 316 line mm$^{\rm -1}$ Echelle grating, and the E6257 and E6757 filters to achieve R$\approx$18,000 in the first setup (6125–6345 Å) and R$\approx$15,000 in the second setup (6550–6840 Å). A summary of the observation dates, instrument setups, and exposure times for each field is provided in Table 1. The data reduction for both WIYN–Hydra and Blanco–Hydra data were carried out using standard IRAF tasks.[^3] Overscan removal and bias subtraction were accomplished using the *ccdproc* routine. The remaining data reduction tasks, which include fiber identification and tracing, scattered light removal, flat–field correction, ThAr wavelength calibration, cosmic–ray removal, sky subtraction, and object spectrum extraction, were carried out using the *dohydra* task. For the spectrograph setups that included the $\sim$6275–6330 Å telluric absorption feature, we observed several rapidly rotating B stars at various airmasses in order to remove telluric contamination in the object spectra. The final telluric correction was applied with the *telluric* IRAF task. All spectra were then combined via co–addition and continuum normalized by fitting a low order polynomial through the continuum points identified in Fulbright et al. (2006; their Table 5). The signal–to–noise ratio (S/N) of the combined spectra ranged from 75 to more than 300. Target Selection ---------------- Since many of the previous bulge spectroscopic analyses have focused primarily on minor–axis fields (see $\S$1), we targeted fields that were located away from the minor–axis (i.e., l$\neq$0). The observed fields were also selected to have relatively low interstellar extinction (E(B–V)$\la$0.35), in order to minimize the integration time needed to reach S/N$\ga$75. For the Blanco, 5 hours of integration with our Hydra setups yields S/N$\ga$75 for stars with V$\la$14.5. Given the higher airmass and shorter time frame with which we were able to observe the bulge with WIYN, we selected brighter targets (V$\la$13.5–14). However, the significant throughput increase provided by the recent upgrade to the WIYN bench spectrograph (Bershady et al. 2008; Knezek et al. 2010) proved to make the selection of brighter stars an unnecessary constraint. Unfortunately, constraining bulge membership for individual stars is often a difficult task using currently available data. Although high–quality optical photometry is not available for large regions of the bulge, the 2MASS database (Skrutskie et al. 2006) provides accurate coordinates and infrared photometry for the bright giants we were targeting. From the raw 2MASS catalog, we created an initial target list by only selecting stars which had: (1) 4000$<$T$_{\rm eff}$$<$4800 K, (2) V$<$14.5, and (3) log(g)$<$2.5. The temperatures were determined using the J–K color–temperature relation provided by Alonso et al. (1999; 2001). All stars were individually dereddened using the E(B–V) values derived from the Schlegel et al. (1998) dust maps. Optical V magnitudes were estimated by taking the T$_{\rm eff}$ values calculated from J–K and then inverting the Alonso et al. (1999) V–K color–temperature relation to solve for V. The range of possible log(g) values for each star were determined by examining the temperature–gravity–color relations in Ku<span>č</span>inskas et al. (2005; 2006) to ensure log(g)$<$2.5.[^4] The culled preliminary target list of $\sim$1000–3000 stars was then input into the Hydra fiber positioning software to produce an optimal configuration file for each field. In addition to $\sim$10–20 sky fibers for each configuration, we were able to place fibers on 91 stars for the (–5.5,–7) field, 105 stars for the (–4,–9) field, and 68 stars for the ($+$8.5,$+$9) field. In Figure \[f1\] we show 2MASS color–magnitude diagrams (CMDs) for all three fields, and also identify the observed target stars. While $\sim$90$\%$ of the targets in the two southern bulge fields and all of the stars in the northern bulge field lie well on the bulge RGB, $\sim$10$\%$ of the stars in the two southern bulge fields lie in a region that is likely a mix of bulge RGB and foreground red clump stars (the approximate separation is illustrated by the dashed blue lines in Figure \[f1\]). It is possible that some of these targets are actually foreground red clump stars, but we find only a small fraction of the bluest stars to have large proper motions and estimate the contamination ratio to be $\la$10$\%$ of the total sample (see $\S$4.1.1). For the majority of target stars that lie on the RGB, it is clear from Figure \[f1\] that the observations are biased toward the bluer side of the RGB. This is a result of our choice to not select stars with T$_{\rm eff}$$<$4000 K, in order to avoid strong CN and TiO molecular features in the spectra that would prevent reliable abundance determinations via equivalent width measurements. However, we show in $\S$4.1.1 that we do not expect the selection of bluer stars to produce a strong metallicity bias. DATA ANALYSIS ============= Model Stellar Atmospheres ------------------------- As mentioned above, we used the dereddened (J–K$_{\rm S}$)$_{\rm o}$ color[^5] for each star to derive T$_{\rm eff}$ via the Alonso et al. (1999) color–temperature relation. In order to account for interstellar extinction, we assumed the relation E(J–K$_{\rm S}$)/E(B–V)=0.505 (Fiorucci & Munari 2003) and used the recommended E(B–V) value from Schlegel et al. (1998).[^6] The average E(B–V) values were 0.240 ($\sigma$=0.036), 0.136 ($\sigma$=0.008), and 0.385 ($\sigma$=0.024) for the (–5.5,–7), (–4,–9), and ($+$8.5,$+$9) fields, respectively. We did not attempt to refine T$_{\rm eff}$ using excitation equilibrium; however, a star–by–star examination of the log $\epsilon$(Fe I) abundance versus excitation potential plot indicated that significant ($\ga$100 K) T$_{\rm eff}$ adjustments were likely not necessary. This was true even for the most metal–rich stars (\[Fe/H\]$>$$+$0.2), which fall just outside the calibration range of the Alonso et al. (1999) J–K color–temperature relation. In a more quantitative sense, the average, median, and standard deviations of the slopes for the log $\epsilon$(Fe I) versus excitation potential plots were: –0.006, –0.011, and 0.043 for the (–5.5,–7) field, $+$0.002, –0.004, and 0.032 for the (–4,–9) field, and –0.019, –0.023, and 0.037 for the ($+$8.5,$+$9) field. For comparison, altering T$_{\rm eff}$$\pm$100 K in a "typical" bulge giant with \[Fe/H\]=–0.3 is expected to produce a change in the magnitude of the slope by $\sim$0.04 at T$_{\rm eff}$=4200 K and $\sim$0.02 at T$_{\rm eff}$=4800 K. Surface gravities were derived by interpolating within the 11 Gyr isochrones provided by the Dartmouth Stellar Evolution Database (Dotter et al. 2007).[^7] We initially assumed a level of $\alpha$–enhancement that followed the \[$\alpha$/Fe\] versus \[Fe/H\] trends of Gonzalez et al. (2011) and Johnson et al. (2011). However, after measuring \[$\alpha$/Fe\] for each star we reinterpolated using a grid with the appropriate level of $\alpha$–enhancement. As can be seen in Figure \[f2\], our assumed log(g) values are typically in good agreement with other log(g) estimates of bulge RGB stars in the literature. Note that the literature values shown in Figure \[f2\] represent a variety of techniques for deriving log(g), including ionization equilibrium, isochrone fitting, and photometric estimates. For each star the model atmosphere metallicity was set at \[M/H\]=–0.3 and then adjusted to equal the average derived \[Fe/H\] ratio. Similarly, the microturbulence (vt) was set at 2 km s$^{\rm -1}$ and then adjusted so that the plot of Fe I abundance versus line strength produced a zero slope. For all stars the model atmosphere was calculated by interpolating within the $\alpha$–rich AODFNEW ATLAS9 grid (Castelli et al. 1997).[^8] While not all of the stars in our sample are $\alpha$–rich, Fulbright et al. (2007) found that the impact of using the solar scaled versus $\alpha$–rich ATLAS9 models on derived abundances was relatively small for bulge giants ($\la$0.1 dex in most cases). Specifically, the average effect on \[Fe/H\], \[O/Fe\], \[Si/Fe\], and \[Ca/Fe\] was found to be (in the sense AODFNEW–ODFNEW): $+$0.06 ($\sigma$=0.03), –0.05 ($\sigma$=0.07), $+$0.02 ($\sigma$=0.03), and –0.02 ($\sigma$=0.03), respectively. We performed the same test on our data set and found that the average AODFNEW–ODFNEW abundance change for \[Fe/H\], \[O/Fe\], \[Si/Fe\], and \[Ca/Fe\] was similar at: $+$0.05 ($\sigma$=0.07), $+$0.06 ($\sigma$=0.06), $+$0.10 ($\sigma$=0.03), and –0.10 ($\sigma$=0.03), respectively. The final model atmosphere parameters, photometry, and E(B–V) values are provided in Table 2. Equivalent Width Abundance Determinations ----------------------------------------- The Fe I abundances were determined by measuring equivalent widths (EWs), using software developed for Johnson et al. (2008). The final \[Fe/H\] abundances, listed in Tables 2 and 3, were derived using the 2010 version of the LTE line analysis code MOOG (Sneden 1973). Single, isolated lines were fit with a Gaussian profile and moderately blended lines were deblended with up to five Gaussian profiles. We selected 61 Fe I lines located in the wavelength regions specified in $\S$2 that were relatively isolated in the spectra of both Arcturus (Hinkle et al. 2000)[^9] and $\mu$ Leo (Moultaka et al. 2004).[^10] On average, the \[Fe/H\] abundances for the (–5.5,–7), (–4,–9), and ($+$8.5,$+$9) fields are based on 21 Fe I lines. The number of lines used for each star is less than the 61 potential lines due to variations in wavelength coverage (Blanco–Hydra versus WIYN–Hydra), temperature, metallicity, and S/N. The average line–to–line dispersion of 0.16 dex ($\sigma$=0.03) was found to not vary significantly as a function of temperature or metallicity, and is reasonable given the relatively high metallicity and cool temperatures of our target stars coupled with the moderate spectral resolution. The Fe I abundances were determined on a line–by–line basis relative to Arcturus. The oscillator strength (log gf) values listed in Table 4 were derived by measuring the EW of each line in the high resolution, high S/N Arcturus atlas and forcing the derived abundance for each line to be \[Fe/H\]=–0.50, assuming the Arcturus model atmosphere parameters given in Fulbright et al. (2006; T$_{\rm eff}$=4290 K, log(g)=1.60, \[Fe/H\]=–0.50, and vt=1.67 km s$^{\rm -1}$). The wavelength and excitation potential values given in Table 4 are from the NIST Atomic Spectra Database (Ralchenko et al. 2011)[^11], Vienna Atomic Line Database (VALD; Kupka et al. 2000)[^12], or Thevenin (1990). Sample spectra of both the 6250 and 6700 Å setups for stars with similar T$_{\rm eff}$ but different \[Fe/H\] are shown in Figure \[f3\]. This figure also illustrates data quality as well as the change in line strength, continuum availability, and molecular contamination as a function of \[Fe/H\]. Spectrum Synthesis Abundance Determinations ------------------------------------------- For the elements other than Fe, we determined abundances via spectrum synthesis rather than EW measurement. Given the large number of stars analyzed here, we employed the computationally parallel version of the MOOG *synth* driver developed for Johnson et al. (2012). Similar to the Fe abundance measurements, \[O/Fe\], \[Si/Fe\], and \[Ca/Fe\] ratios were determined relative to Arcturus. We adopted the Arcturus abundances derived in Fulbright et al. (2007): \[O/Fe\]=$+$0.48, \[Si/Fe\]=$+$0.35, and \[Ca/Fe\]=$+$0.21. These adopted values are within $\sim$0.1 dex of those derived recently by Ram<span>í</span>rez & Allende Prieto (2011). The lines used here are listed in Table 3. For the 6300 Å \[O I\] line we synthesized the region spanning 6295–6305 Å, including the 6300.34 Å Ni I line that is blended with the 6300.30 \[O I\] feature. We assumed \[Ni/Fe\]=0 for all syntheses. The initial line list was compiled from VALD for atomic lines and the Kurucz database[^13] for CN molecular lines. The final log gf values for all significant atomic and molecular lines in the 6295–6305 Å region were adjusted to minimize the difference between our synthetic spectrum and the Arcturus atlas. In order to fit the CN features, we adopted the Arcturus carbon and nitrogen abundances from Peterson et al. (1993; \[C/Fe\]=$+$0.0 and \[N/Fe\]=$+$0.3). In general this provided a satisfactory fit to the CN lines using the original Kurucz line list and only a few minor adjustments were required. For the Sc I line that is blended with the \[O I\] feature in our Hydra spectra but not the Arcturus atlas, we set the log gf value assuming \[Sc/Fe\]=$+$0.2 (Peterson et al. 1993). However, as can be seen in the sample syntheses provided in Figure \[f4\], there is enough separation between the \[O I\] and Sc features in the Hydra spectra to reasonably account for the Sc contribution. Since the \[O I\] line is both modestly affected by CN blending (see bottom panels of Figure \[f4\]) and also by the C$+$N abundance (via the molecular equilibrium calculation), we identified a small window in the 6250 Å spectra that could be used to roughly estimate the CN abundance. While there are other similar windows that may be used, especially in the 6700 Å spectra, we selected the 6331–6339 Å window (shown in Figure \[f5\]) because it provided a several Angstrom wide region comprised of mostly CN lines and was observed with both the WIYN and Blanco bench spectrographs. For each star we initially set \[C/Fe\]=–0.30 and \[N/Fe\]=$+$0.50, values typical for bulge RGB stars (e.g., Mel<span>é</span>ndez et al. 2008; Ryde et al. 2010), and then adjusted \[N/Fe\] until a satisfactory fit was found. The derived \[C/Fe\] and \[N/Fe\] abundances were then used in the \[O I\] synthesis. This processes was iterated at least once for each star to account for the correlated variations in line strength between CN and O. The Si and Ca abundances are based on synthesis fits to lines in the 6140–6170 Å window. In order to properly account for CN contamination, Si and Ca were measured after obtaining CNO abundances. For the few stars where \[O I\] could not be measured, we have adopted the general \[O/Fe\] versus \[Fe/H\] trend found in our data (see $\S$4.3). Sample Si and Ca synthesis fits for a cool, metal–rich giant are shown in Figure \[f6\]. While most of the lines are not strongly affected by CN, the 6155 Å Si I line is sensitive to the CN abundance in our most metal–rich giants. As can be seen in Figure \[f6\], changing the CN abundance by $\pm$0.3 dex can result in a Si abundance uncertainty $\ga$0.2 dex. A comparison between the 6155 Å Si abundance and the 6145 Å Si abundance, which is only weakly affected by CN, suggests that at least on average there is reasonable agreement with $\langle$\[Si/Fe\]$_{\rm 6155}$–\[Si/Fe\]$_{\rm 6145}$$\rangle$=–0.03 ($\sigma$=0.17). The four Ca lines used here exhibit a similar degree of agreement with an average line–to–line dispersion of 0.08 dex ($\sigma$=0.05). Abundance Uncertainty Estimates ------------------------------- Tables 5a–5d summarize the abundance uncertainty estimates for log $\epsilon$(Fe), log $\epsilon$(O), log $\epsilon$(Si), and log $\epsilon$(Ca) due to changes in T$_{\rm eff}$$+$100 K, log(g)$+$0.30, \[M/H\]$+$0.30, and vt$+$0.30 km s$^{\rm -1}$. The $\sigma$/$\surd$(N) values for each element are also given as an estimate of the measurement uncertainty. For elements in Tables 5b–5d where only one line was available for measurement (e.g., \[O I\]), a value of $\sigma$/$\surd$(N)=0.05 has been assigned. This represents the average value for cases where multiple lines could be measured, and is a reasonable uncertainty estimate for visually fitting synthetic spectra. The total error column in Tables 5a–5d reflects the T$_{\rm eff}$, log(g), \[M/H\], vt, and measurement uncertainties added in quadrature, and are reflected in the error bars of all subsequent figures. The abundance sensitivities to each model atmosphere parameter were calculated by varying each parameter independently. The procedure involved first using the best–fit model atmosphere parameters and abundances given in Tables 2–3 to calculate theoretical EWs for each line. These theoretical EWs were held fixed and then a new model atmosphere was created with the T$_{\rm eff}$, log(g), \[M/H\], or vt value varied by the amount given in Tables 5a–5d. However, it should be noted that the sensitivity of each line to changes in model atmosphere parameters are not necessarily the same. Therefore, the values given in Tables 5a–5d represent the average difference between the newly derived abundances from each line and the original abundance given in Table 2. The uncertainty ranges of $\Delta$T$_{\rm eff}$=$+$100 K, $\Delta$log(g)=$+$0.30, $\Delta$\[M/H\]=$+$0.30, and $\Delta$vt=$+$0.30 km s$^{\rm -1}$ are likely to be conservative upper limits for each parameter. The T$_{\rm eff}$ variations, based on the uncertainty in E(B–V), are typically small ($<$50 K) for almost all stars in our sample. In particular, the average differences between the T$_{\rm eff}$ derived assuming the recommended E(B–V) and the maximum/minimum E(B–V) values are: $+$38 K ($\sigma$=27 K)/–24 K ($\sigma$=15 K) for the (–5.5,–7) field, $+$14 K ($\sigma$=7 K)/–10 K ($\sigma$=6 K) for the (–4,–9) field, and $+$21 K ($\sigma$=12 K)/–22 K ($\sigma$=10 K) for the ($+$8.5,$+$9) field. These values are significantly smaller than the 125 K 1$\sigma$ value of the Alonso et al. (1999) J–K$_{\rm S}$ color–temperature calibration. When we compare the T$_{\rm eff}$ values derived using the Alonso et al. (1999) calibration to those derived using the Gonz<span>á</span>lez Hern<span>á</span>ndez & Bonifacio (2009) calibration, we find our adopted Alonso et al. (1999) temperatures to be cooler by 63 K ($\sigma$=8 K) in the (–5.5,–7) field, 68 K ($\sigma$=7 K) in the (–4,–9) field, and 46 K ($\sigma$=13 K) in the ($+$8.5,$+$9) field. Therefore, we believe that an estimated uncertainty of 100 K is a reasonable assumption for our data. Since we did not calculate log(g) directly from photometry or ionization equilibrium, it is difficult to assess the true log(g) uncertainty. However, examination of Figure \[f2\] suggests that the difference between our derived log(g) values and those in the literature is typically within $\pm$0.30. For comparison, the Bescancon model[^14] (Robin et al. 2003) predicts that most bulge stars along our observed lines–of–sight should vary in distance by approximately $\pm$2 kpc, though the full range may extend several kpc on either side of the Galactic center. This would lead to a maximum photometric log(g) uncertainty of $\sim$0.20–0.25. Note that oxygen, especially when normalized to Fe I, is the element most affected by log(g) uncertainties. Similarly, since surface gravity is proportional to log(M/M$_{\sun}$) for stars with the same T$_{\rm eff}$ but different mass, it is likely that our abundance ratios will not be significantly altered by the possible inclusion of lower mass AGB stars in our sample. As stated previously, the average line–to–line dispersion for Fe I is 0.16 dex, with a small dispersion of 0.03 dex. Similarly, we found that the use of $\alpha$–enhanced versus solar–scaled models affected abundance ratios at $\la$0.1 dex level. Therefore, it seems likely that the use of a model atmosphere \[M/H\] uncertainty of 0.3 dex should represent a conservative upper limit on the effects continuous opacity and electron number density have on derived abundances. From Tables 5a–5d, we find that \[M/H\] uncertainties have the largest effect ($\sim$0.1 dex in magnitude) on O and Fe while Si and Ca abundances are less sensitive. The magnitude of the \[M/H\] uncertainty effect also tends to increase with increasing metallicity. Our adopted microturbulence uncertainty of 0.3 km s$^{\rm -1}$ may also be a conservative estimate. For an individual star, the typical vt uncertainty based on removing any trends in Fe I abundance versus line strength is $\sim$0.1–0.15 km s$^{\rm -1}$. When comparing stars of similar metallicity (in 0.5 dex bins), the 1$\sigma$ variation in derived vt values for stars of comparable temperature ranges from 0.17 km s$^{\rm -1}$ in the most metal–poor stars to 0.22 km s$^{\rm -1}$ in the most metal–rich stars. The effect of vt uncertainty on abundance is clear in Tables 5a–5d, which are sorted by metallicity in each field. Microturbulence becomes an increasingly important factor with increasing metallicity and thus line strength. Similarly, elements that were derived from stronger lines (e.g., Fe and Ca) are most sensitive to vt uncertainty. Radial Velocity Determinations ------------------------------ Radial velocities for all stars were measured using the *fxcor* task in IRAF. For templates, we calculated synthetic spectra over the full wavelength range covered for each star. The synthetic spectra were produced using the model atmosphere parameters given in Table 2, and were smoothed and binned to match the dispersion of the object spectra. The average measurement error returned by *fxcor* was similar for all fields: 0.71 km s$^{\rm -1}$ ($\sigma$=0.48 km s$^{\rm -1}$), 0.88 km s$^{\rm -1}$ ($\sigma$=0.53 km s$^{\rm -1}$), and 0.62 km s$^{\rm -1}$ ($\sigma$=0.38 km s$^{\rm -1}$) for the (–5.5,–7), (–4,–9), and ($+$8.5,$+$9) fields, respectively. The IRAF task *rvcorrect* was used the determine the heliocentric correction for all stars. The derived heliocentric radial velocities are provided in Table 2. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION ====================== Metallicity Distribution Functions ---------------------------------- In Figure \[f7\] we show the derived metallicity distribution functions for all three off–axis fields. These metallicity distributions are in reasonable agreement with those derived for similar outer bulge ($\mid$b$\mid$$>$4$\degr$) minor–axis fields (Zoccali et al. 2008; Johnson et al. 2011; Ness et al. 2013; Uttenthaler et al. 2012). For the (–5.5,–7), (–4,–9), and ($+$8.5,$+$9) fields, we find a full range in \[Fe/H\] that spans –1.50 to $+$0.66 dex ($\sigma$=0.47 dex), –1.40 to $+$0.26 dex ($\sigma$=0.42 dex), and –1.26 to $+$0.59 dex ($\sigma$=0.44 dex), respectively. As is the case with previous high resolution spectroscopic studies, we do not find any stars with \[Fe/H\]$\la$–1.5 that may be present in the bulge from the earliest epoch of star formation. This is in agreement with the ARGOS sample by Ness et al. (2013) that only found 0.71$\%$ (100/14147) of stars within 3.5 kpc of the Galactic center to have \[Fe/H\]$<$–1.5. The observed vertical metallicity gradient present along the bulge minor–axis, at least for $\mid$b$\mid$$>$4$\degr$ (Zoccali et al. 2008), appears to also be present in off–axis fields. This result is illustrated in Figure \[f8\], where we show the metallicity distribution functions for four minor–axis and four off–axis fields at similar Galactic latitudes. In a similar fashion to the minor–axis trend, the median \[Fe/H\] ratios for the ($+$5,–3) field given in Gonzalez et al. (2011) and our (–5.5,–7) and (–4,–9) fields are \[Fe/H\]=–0.08, –0.29, and –0.44, respectively. The decline in the median \[Fe/H\] ratio with increasing Galactic latitude appears to be driven by the same phenomenon in both the minor–axis and off–axis fields. In particular, both sets of observations show a decrease in the relative fraction of metal–rich (\[Fe/H\]$\ga$0) stars, an increase in the relative fraction of the metal–poor (\[Fe/H\]$\la$–1) stars, and no significant change in the relative fraction of intermediate metallicity stars as a function of increasing Galactic latitude. This result is at least qualitatively in agreement with the scenario proposed by Babusiaux et al. (2010), in which the metallicity gradient is a reflection of the change in the bulge/bar population mixture at different Galactic latitudes (but see also Ness et al. 2013). The data presented above indicate that the vertical metallicity gradient along l$\sim$$\pm$5$\degr$ is approximately 0.4 dex kpc$^{\rm -1}$, which is similar to the minor–axis gradients found by Zoccali et al. (2008; 0.6 dex kpc$^{\rm -1}$) and Ness et al. (2013; 0.45 dex kpc$^{\rm -1}$)[^15]. Given the uncertainty in bulge membership and possible biases of incomplete samples, it seems unlikely that the difference in magnitude ($\sim$0.2 dex) between the derived metallicity gradients found here and in Zoccali et al. (2008) is significant. Additionally, there does not seem to be a strong radial \[Fe/H\] gradient in the bulge. Interestingly, the northern bulge ($+$8.5,$+$9) field is slightly more metal–rich than the two southern fields, with a median \[Fe/H\]=–0.23. However, as can be seen in Figure \[f7\], where we plot the cumulative \[Fe/H\] distribution functions for all fields, it is clear that the the ($+$8.5,$+$9) and (–5.5,–7) fields share similar distributions. This is supported by the results of two–sided Kolmogorov–Smirnov (KS) tests (Press et al. 1992), which indicate that there is insufficient evidence to reject the null hypothesis that the ($+$8.5,$+$9) and (–5.5,–7) are drawn from the same parent population (p–value=0.881)[^16]. On the other hand, the (–5.5,–7)/(–4,–9) and (–4,–9)/($+$8.5,$+$9) field combinations are possibly drawn from different parent populations, with p–values of 0.031 and 0.045, respectively. It is not clear if this signifies an asymmetry in the bulge metallicity distribution between the northern and southern regions or is simply a result of the smaller sample size and slightly redder colors of the observed stars in the ($+$8.5,$+$9) field (see Figure \[f1\]). We also consider the possibility that the higher metallicity of the ($+$8.5,$+$9) field could be due to a predominance of the X–shaped bulge structure in that region. Ness et al. (2012) and Uttenthaler et al. (2012) suggest that the X–shaped bulge, traced by the double red clump, may be dominated by metal–rich (\[Fe/H\]$>$–0.5) stars. As can be seen in Saito et al. (2011; their Figure 3), one of the red clump components in the X–shaped structure appears prominently near our ($+$8.5,$+$9) sight line. A distant, lower density component is also noted near the (–5.5,–7) sight line, and the higher metallicity of both our (–5.5,–7) and ($+$8.5,$+$9) could partially reflect the predominance of the X–shaped structure in these fields. ### Sample Selection Bias and Foreground Contamination As mentioned in $\S$2.1, the targets in all three bulge fields were selected from the blue side of the RGB to avoid cool stars with spectra that may be dominated by molecular bands (especially TiO). The naive interpretation is that this will produce a strong bias in our derived metallicity distribution functions and significantly undersample the most metal-rich stars. However, the bias may not be as strong as expected because several factors combine to disperse the observed J–K$_{\rm S}$–\[Fe/H\] relation including: differential reddening, a complicated spatial geometry with a distance spread that could range from $\sim$4.5–11.5 kpc in our fields[^17], metallicity dependent \[$\alpha$/Fe\] variations, a possible age range of $\sim$2–13 Gyr for stars with \[Fe/H\]$\ga$–0.4 (e.g., see Figures 15–16 of Bensby et al. 2013; but see also Clarkson et al. 2008), and the mixing of RGB and AGB stars. In general, it is not a trivial matter to estimate the observational bias of the color–metallicity relation in the bulge, especially in the J–K$_{\rm S}$ and K$_{\rm S}$ dimensions, because of large uncertainties in several of the factors listed above. This is evident both in the metallicity distribution functions produced here (Figure \[f7\]), which are not dominated by metal–poor stars as one might expect, and in the J–K$_{\rm S}$–\[Fe/H\] relations of previous studies that span a broader color range. In Figure \[f9\] we show K$_{\rm S}$ versus J–K$_{\rm S}$ color–magnitude diagrams for the Zoccali et al. (2008) and Gonzalez et al. (2011) data sets and overplot the observed stars, with the most metal–poor (\[Fe/H\]$<$–0.7) and metal–rich (\[Fe/H\]$>$$+$0.2) subsets identified. While the differential reddening and distance distributions vary from field–to–field, a common feature among all fields is the significant mixing of metal–poor and metal–rich stars on the giant branch. The metal–rich population in particular appears to span the entire color range, although an unknown fraction of these stars may be disk and/or halo contaminators (see below). What is the effect on the derived metallicity distribution functions by preferentially sampling the blue side of the bulge giant branch? We can derive some estimate with the Zoccali et al. (2008) and Gonzalez et al. (2011) fields by comparing the metallicity distribution functions of the bluest third, which roughly matches our sample selection, to the full samples. The results are shown in Figure \[f10\] where we plot histograms, cumulative distribution functions, provide results for two–sided KS tests, compare the median \[Fe/H\] values, and compare the inter–quartile range (IQR) for each population. While it is clear from the cumulative distribution functions that (in most cases) the blue samples are moderately more metal–poor than the full samples, the effect is significantly smaller than anticipated. In fact, the two–sided KS tests for all fields indicate that we cannot strongly reject the null hypothesis that the blue and full samples were drawn from the same parent population. Furthermore, the general shapes of the full metallicity distribution functions are preserved in the blue samples, and the median \[Fe/H\] and IQR values do not vary significantly between the two subsets, especially in the b$>$–4$\degr$ fields that are most similar to our fields. In other words, the qualitative and quantitative results found especially by Zoccali et al. (2008), and particularly with regard to the \[Fe/H\] gradient, would not have been significantly altered by the selection of stars on the blue side of the giant branch[^18]. Finally, we can compare our (–5.5,–7) and (–4,–9) fields with the data presented in Ness et al. (2013; their Figure 8). For the similar latitude minor–axis fields of (0,–7.5; 690 stars) and (0,–10; 650 stars) in Ness et al. (2013), they find median \[Fe/H\] values of –0.34 and –0.46, respectively. This is in good agreement with the median \[Fe/H\] values of our (–5.5,–7) and (–4,–9) fields, which have \[Fe/H\]=–0.29 and -0.44, respectively. The $<$0.05 dex difference between our derived median \[Fe/H\] values and Ness et al. (2013) is in agreement with the estimated bias introduced by the selection of stars on the blue side of the giant branch (see the middle panels of Figure \[f10\]). We conclude that our selection of bluer stars likely does not introduce a strong metallicity bias, and that the derived metallicity distribution functions are representative of the underlying population in each field. However, the metal–rich stars in our sample will be more concentrated on the near side of the bulge/bar system than a selection of stars with a broader color distribution. In addition to the properties mentioned above that can blur the color–metallicity relation, contamination by disk and halo stars along the line–of–sight can also affect the derived metallicity distribution functions. While most studies agree that the halo contamination is small ($\la$2$\%$; e.g., Zoccali et al. 2008; Hill et al. 2011; Uttenthaler et al. 2012), a true estimate of the (primarily) foreground thin and thick disk contamination is difficult to ascertain. In an attempt to gauge the impact of foreground contamination, the coordinates of stars in our two southern bulge fields were cross–referenced with the Southern Proper Motion IV catalog (SPM4; Girard et al. 2011)[^19]. We were able to match 77/91 stars in the (–5.5,–7) field and 98/105 stars in the (–4,–9) field. Histograms of the proper motion results are shown in the top two panels of Figure \[f11\]. As can be seen in Figure \[f11\], both fields contain a dominant population with a total proper motion $\la$20 mas year$^{\rm -1}$ and a tail that extends out to $\sim$35 mas year$^{\rm -1}$ for the (–5.5,–7) field and $\sim$60 mas year$^{\rm -1}$ for the (–4,–9) field. This is in good agreement with that found by Uttenthaler et al. (2012; their Figure 3) at (0,–10). As a rough estimate of contamination, we can assign targets lying in the tails of the proper motion distributions as possible foreground stars. Using a discriminator of 22 mas year$^{\rm -1}$ for the (–5.5,–7) field and 21 mas year$^{\rm -1}$ for the (–4,–9) field suggests foreground contamination rates of 9$\%$ (7/77) and 11$\%$ (11/98), respectively. However, given that many of the "outliers" fall within a few mas year$^{\rm -1}$ of our cut–off and the proper motion errors are generally $\sim$3–8 mas year$^{\rm -1}$, it is possible that as many as 50$\%$ of the possible outliers are actually bulge members. Additionally, since Uttenthaler et al. (2012) find that the double red clump and dual peaked metallicity distribution function features are present in their sample of stars with proper motions $>$20 mas year$^{\rm -1}$, we follow their assessment and have not excluded any stars in our sample. We do note however that the middle and bottom panels of Figure \[f11\], which plot (J–K)$_{\rm o}$ and \[Fe/H\] versus total proper motion, give some indications that the more extreme proper motion outliers may clump together at colors and metallicities consistent with the foreground thin disk and metal–poor thick disk (or metal–rich halo). Radial Velocities ----------------- In Figure \[f12\] we plot histograms of the heliocentric radial velocity distributions for all fields analyzed here. The mean, median, and standard deviations are –26.6, –29.9, and 73.7 km s$^{\rm -1}$ for the (–5.5,–7) field, –40.7, –49.3, and 85.1 km s$^{\rm -1}$ for the (–4,–9) field, and –3.8, $+$15.2, and 81.6 km s$^{\rm -1}$ for the ($+$8.5,$+$9) field. Similarly, the mean/median galactocentric velocities (V$_{\rm GC}$) for these fields are: –40.8/–44.8 km s$^{\rm -1}$, –48.0/–57.8 km s$^{\rm -1}$, and $+$40.5/$+$60.2 km s$^{\rm -1}$. For the two southern bulge fields, the velocity distributions and dispersions are in good agreement with the BRAVA results (e.g., see Kunder et al. 2012; their Figure 11). This is confirmed in Figure \[f13\] where we plot the velocity distributions from this work and overlapping or nearby BRAVA fields. A two–sided KS test finds that the data are insufficient to strongly reject the null hypothesis that the (–5.5,–7)/(–6,–7) fields (p–value=0.063) and (–4,–9)/(–4,–8) fields (p–value=0.094) are drawn from the same parent populations. Additionally, the median galactocentric radial velocity and dispersion for our two southern bulge fields are in reasonable agreement with the Shen et al. (2010) bulge model, which find V$_{\rm GC}$=–52.2 ($\sigma$=78.9) km s$^{\rm -1}$ and V$_{\rm GC}$=–54.1 ($\sigma$=78.2) km s$^{\rm -1}$ at (l,b)=(–5.5,–7) and (–4,–9), respectively (Z. Li & J. Shen 2012; priv. comm.). While the BRAVA sample did not extend to our single northern bulge field, the mean galactocentric velocity and dispersion we derived for the ($+$8.5,$+$9) field (V$_{\rm GC}$=$+$40.5 km s$^{\rm -1}$, $\sigma$=81.6 km s$^{\rm -1}$) is in moderately good agreement with that found by Minitti (1996) for the nearby ($+$8,$+$7) field (V$_{\rm GC}$=$+$54.4 km s$^{\rm -1}$, $\sigma$=84.4 km s$^{\rm -1}$). Similarly, our derived median galactocentric velocity for this field (V$_{\rm GC}$=$+$60.2 km s$^{\rm -1}$) is in reasonably good agreement with the Shen et al. (2010) median galactocentric velocity model value of V$_{\rm GC}$=$+$71.6 km s$^{\rm -1}$ ($\sigma$=65.7 km s$^{\rm -1}$; Z. Li & J. Shen 2012; priv. comm.). As was mentioned in $\S$4.1, it is possible that the ($+$8.5,$+$9) sight line may be partially contaminated by one of the structures associated with the X–shaped bulge (e.g., see Saito et al. 2011; their Figure 3). This could result in additional substructure being present in our empirical velocity distribution function. However, visual inspection of Figure \[f12\] does not indicate strong evidence of any additional features. This is supported by the results of Shapiro–Wilk and Anderson–Darling normality tests, which return p–values of 0.288 and 0.114, and indicate insufficient evidence to reject the null hypothesis that the ($+$8.5,$+$9) velocity distribution is normal. In Figure \[f14\] we show the heliocentric radial velocity and dispersion distributions as a function of \[Fe/H\] for all fields. As can be clearly seen in Figure \[f14\], all three fields exhibit nearly identical trends of a decreasing velocity dispersion with increasing \[Fe/H\]. This observed trend is consistent with both the red clump and giant data analyzed in other outer bulge ($\mid$b$\mid$$\ga$6$\degr$) fields (e.g., Minitti 1996; Babusiaux et al. 2010; de Propris et al. 2011; Johnson et al. 2011; Uttenthaler et al. 2012), and contrasts with the minor–axis results found by Babusiaux et al. (2010; their Figure 6) at b=–4$\degr$ (opposite trend) and b=–6$\degr$ (no trend). While de Propris et al. (2011) also find a correlation between the mean radial velocity and \[Fe/H\] for red clump stars, Babusiaux et al. (2010) and Uttenthaler et al. (2012) do not find significant evidence of mean velocity variations as a function of metallicity. Visual inspection of Figure \[f14\] indicates that we also do not find significant variations in mean/median velocity as a function of \[Fe/H\] with two exceptions: (1) the metal–poor (\[Fe/H\]$<$–1) stars in all fields and (2) the intermediate metallicity (–0.5$\la$\[Fe/H\]$\la$0) stars in the ($+$8.5,$+$9) field. When the data are partitioned into 0.5 dex \[Fe/H\] bins, the median radial velocities within each bin of the (–5.5,–7) and (–4,–9) fields vary by $<$20 km s$^{\rm -1}$ (ignoring the \[Fe/H\]$<$–1 stars). The same is also true in the ($+$8.5,$+$9) field where the stars with –1$<$\[Fe/H\]$<$–0.5 and \[Fe/H\]$>$0 have median radial velocities of –24.6 and –28.4 km s$^{\rm -1}$, respectively. However, the stars in this field with –0.5$<$\[Fe/H\]$<$0 exhibit a noticeable velocity increase to $+$28.8 km s$^{\rm -1}$. Although there is evidence that the X–shaped bulge structure traced by the double red clump may preferentially contain stars with \[Fe/H\]$>$–0.5 (Ness et al. 2012; Uttenthaler et al. 2012), it is not clear if the increase in median velocity near \[Fe/H\]$\sim$–0.5 for our RGB sample is due to contamination from the nearby X–shape structure or is simply a statistical fluctuation. For the metal–poor (\[Fe/H\]$<$–1) stars in the (–5.5,–7), (–4,–9), and ($+$8.5,$+$9) fields the median heliocentric velocities are: $+$49.6 ($\sigma$=119.2) km s$^{\rm -1}$, –70.8 ($\sigma$=117.4) km s$^{\rm -1}$, and –114 ($\sigma$=109.3) km s$^{\rm -1}$, respectively. This contrasts with the more homogeneous set of stars with \[Fe/H\]$>$–1, which have median velocities and dispersions of: –32.5 ($\sigma$=66.1) km s$^{\rm -1}$, –42.1 ($\sigma$=79.4) km s$^{\rm -1}$, and $+$17.4 ($\sigma$=76.1) km s$^{\rm -1}$. However, the relatively small number of stars in the most metal–poor bin of each field makes it difficult to assess the significance of the larger median velocities and dispersion of these stars. Therefore, we instead attempt to determine how many of the stars with \[Fe/H\]$<$–1 might be outliers by using the interquartile range (IQR) of the more metal–rich (\[Fe/H\]$>$–1) stars in each field. We define moderate outliers as stars with velocities of 1.5–3.0$\times$IQR above/below the median and extreme outliers as stars having velocities $>$3.0$\times$IQR above/below the median. While we did not find extreme outliers in any of the fields, $\sim$20–40$\%$ of the metal–poor stars are moderate outliers and may belong to the halo. The small percentage of stars with both low \[Fe/H\] and high velocities is consistent with the halo contamination estimate given in $\S$4.1.1. $\alpha$–Element Abundances --------------------------- While iron may be produced by both short lived Type II supernovae (SNe) and longer lived Type Ia SNe, the $\alpha$ elements are primarily produced only by massive stars. As a consequence, the \[$\alpha$/Fe\] ratio can be a useful diagnostic for determining the chemical enrichment history of a stellar population (e.g. Tinsley 1979; Matteucci & Brocato 1990). In particular, the magnitude of the \[$\alpha$/Fe\] ratios and the metallicity at which the \[$\alpha$/Fe\] ratio begins to decline (presumably due to the onset of Type Ia contributions) yield information about important quantities such as a population's initial mass function (IMF) and star formation rate (e.g., see review by McWilliam 1997 and references therein). Additionally, the star–to–star dispersion of the measured \[$\alpha$/Fe\] ratios in a given metallicity range can provide insight regarding the homogeneity of the gas from which the observed stars formed. In order to help address these issues in the bulge, we have measured the \[O/Fe\], \[Si/Fe\], and \[Ca/Fe\] ratios for stars in all three of our bulge fields. In Figures \[f15\]–\[f17\] we plot \[O/Fe\], \[Si/Fe\], and \[Ca/Fe\] as a function of \[Fe/H\], respectively. To first order, all of the \[X/Fe\] ratios follow the same general trend of being enhanced by $\ga$$+$0.3 dex at \[Fe/H\]$\la$–0.5 and then declining monotonically with increasing \[Fe/H\]. However, despite all of the $\alpha$–elements sharing the same \[Fe/H\] value at which a steeper decline in their \[X/Fe\] ratios occurs, it is clear from Figures \[f15\]–\[f17\] that each element exhibits a slightly different trend. In particular, we note: (1) the \[O/Fe\] ratios are $\sim$0.1–0.3 dex larger than either \[Si/Fe\] or \[Ca/Fe\] for a given \[Fe/H\], (2) the decline in \[Ca/Fe\] with increasing \[Fe/H\] is more shallow than for \[O/Fe\] and \[Si/Fe\], (3) the \[Si/Fe\] data appear to continuously decline at \[Fe/H\]$>$0 while the \[O/Fe\] and \[Ca/Fe\] distributions appear to flatten out, and (4) the difference between the median \[X/Fe\] ratios for stars with \[Fe/H\]$<$–0.5 and \[Fe/H\]$>$–0.5 is marginally larger for \[O/Fe\] than either \[Si/Fe\] or \[Ca/Fe\] (see also Table 6). This last point has been noted previously (e.g., McWilliam & Rich 2004; Zoccali et al. 2006; Fulbright et al. 2007; Alves–Brito et al. 2010; Ryde et al. 2010), and may be related to mass loss in Wolf–Rayet stars, rapidly rotating massive metal–poor stars, or metal–poor binary systems (e.g., McWilliam et al. 2008; Cescutti et al. 2009; but see also Ryde et al. 2010 and Alves–Brito et al. 2010). Unfortunately, we did not measure C, N, or Mg in our spectra and cannot comment further on the likelihood of our measured \[O/Fe\] abundances being affected by mass and/or metallicity–dependent reductions in the oxygen yield from massive stars. Interestingly, the individual abundance trends are nearly identical in all three of our fields, an observation that is highlighted in the bottom panels of Figures \[f15\]–\[f17\]. The similarities between the different fields is also evident by examining Table 6, which summarizes the median \[X/Fe\] ratios and star–to–star dispersions for the metal–poor (\[Fe/H\]$<$–0.5) and metal–rich (\[Fe/H\]$>$–0.5) groups in each field. The dispersion value, listed as $\sigma$ in Table 6, represents the scatter around a best–fit line through each subpopulation, and is likely a fair representation of the measurement error. On average, the scatter for \[O/Fe\], \[Si/Fe\], and \[Ca/Fe\] only increases by $+$0.06, $+$0.02, and $+$0.02 dex between the metal–poor and metal–rich populations. These data support previous observations (e.g., Gonzalez et al. 2011; Johnson et al. 2011; Rich et al. 2012; Uttenthaler et al. 2012) that the bulge was well–mixed across a large volume and that large–scale IMF and star formation history differences were either not present or were diluted by mixing. In order to examine further the small differences between the various $\alpha$–element trends, we compare our abundances with three bulge chemical enrichment models in Figure \[f18\]. The models in Figure \[f18\] include the primary bulge model from Kobayashi et al. (2011; solid red line), a model assuming a flat IMF (x=0.3; dashed green line), and a model assuming a flat IMF with both outflow (to reduce the Fe production) and a larger binary fraction than the solar
{'source': 'arXiv_out/1302'}