  We characterize the performance of the widely-used least-squares estimator in
astrometry in terms of a comparison with the Cramer-Rao lower variance bound.
In this inference context the performance of the least-squares estimator does
not offer a closed-form expression, but a new result is presented (Theorem 1)
where both the bias and the mean-square-error of the least-squares estimator
are bounded and approximated analytically, in the latter case in terms of a
nominal value and an interval around it. From the predicted nominal value we
analyze how efficient is the least-squares estimator in comparison with the
minimum variance Cramer-Rao bound. Based on our results, we show that, for the
high signal-to-noise ratio regime, the performance of the least-squares
estimator is significantly poorer than the Cramer-Rao bound, and we
characterize this gap analytically. On the positive side, we show that for the
challenging low signal-to-noise regime (attributed to either a weak
astronomical signal or a noise-dominated condition) the least-squares estimator
is near optimal, as its performance asymptotically approaches the Cramer-Rao
bound. However, we also demonstrate that, in general, there is no unbiased
estimator for the astrometric position that can precisely reach the Cramer-Rao
bound. We validate our theoretical analysis through simulated digital-detector
observations under typical observing conditions. We show that the nominal value
for the mean-square-error of the least-squares estimator (obtained from our
theorem) can be used as a benchmark indicator of the expected statistical
performance of the least-squares method under a wide range of conditions. Our
results are valid for an idealized linear (one-dimensional) array detector
where intra-pixel response changes are neglected, and where flat-fielding is
achieved with very high accuracy.
