Paper detail

Asteroseismic surface gravity for evolved stars

Context: Asteroseismic surface gravity values can be of importance in determining spectroscopic stellar parameters. The independent log(g) value from asteroseismology can be used as a fixed value in the spectroscopic analysis to reduce uncertainties due to the fact that log(g) and effective temperature can not be determined independently from spectra. Since 2012, a combined analysis of seismically and spectroscopically derived stellar properties is ongoing for a large survey with SDSS/APOGEE and Kepler. Therefore, knowledge of any potential biases and uncertainties in asteroseismic log(g) values is now becoming important. Aims: The seismic parameter needed to derive log(g) is the frequency of maximum oscillation power (nu_max). Here, we investigate the influence of nu_max derived with different methods on the derived log(g) values. The large frequency separation between modes of the same degree and consecutive radial orders (Dnu) is often used as an additional constraint for the determination of log(g). Additionally, we checked the influence of small corrections applied to Dnu on the derived values of log(g). Methods We use methods extensively described in the literature to determine nu_max and Dnu together with seismic scaling relations and grid-based modeling to derive log(g). Results: We find that different approaches to derive oscillation parameters give results for log(g) with small, but different, biases for red-clump and red-giant-branch stars. These biases are well within the quoted uncertainties of ~0.01 dex (cgs). Corrections suggested in the literature to the Dnu scaling relation have no significant effect on log(g). However somewhat unexpectedly, method specific solar reference values induce biases of the order of the uncertainties, which is not the case when canonical solar reference values are used.

preprint2013arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

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 graph slice

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.