Paper detail

An empirical metallicity tracer in CEMP and C-normal stars

Deriving the metallicity, [Fe/H], in low-resolution spectra of carbon-enhanced metal-poor (CEMP) stars is a tedious task that, owing to the large number of line blends, often leads to uncertainties on [Fe/H] exceeding 0.25dex. The CEMP stars increase in number with decreasing [Fe/H] and some of these are known to be bona fide second generation halo stars. Hence, knowing their [Fe/H] is important for tracing the formation and chemical evolution of the Galaxy. Here, we aim to improve the [Fe/H] measurements in low-resolution spectra by avoiding issues related to blends. We improve our chemical tagging in such spectra at low metallicities. We developed an empirical way of deriving [Fe/H] in CEMP (and C-normal) stars that relates the equivalent width (EW) of strong lines, which remain detectable in lower-resolution, metal-poor spectra. The best [Fe/H] tracers are found to be Cr I and Ni I, which both show strong transitions in spectral regions that are free of molecular bands (between ~5200-6800A, a region accessible to most surveys). We derive different relations for dwarfs and giants. The relations are valid in the ranges ~-3<[Fe/H]<-0.5 and 10<EW<800mA (Cr) or [Fe/H]>-3.2 and EW>5mA (Ni), depending on the element and line as well as the stellar evolutionary stage. The empirical relations are valid for both CEMP and C-normal stars and have been proven to be accurate tracers in a sample of ~400 stars (mainly giants). The metallicities are accurate to within ~0.2 depending on the sample and resolution, and the empirical relations are robust to within 0.05-0.1dex. Our relations will improve the metallicity determination in future surveys, which will encounter a large number of CEMP stars, and will greatly speed up the process of determining [Fe/H] as the EWs only need to be measured in two or three lines in relatively clean regions compared to dealing with numerous blended Fe lines. Abrigded.

preprint2020arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access5 authors3 topics

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.