Paper detail

Bayesian approach to cyclic activity of CF Oct

Bayesian statistical methods of Gregory-Loredo and the Bretthorst generalization of the Lomb-Scargle periodogram have been applied for studying activity cycles of the early K-type subgiant star CF Oct. We have used a ~45 year long dataset derived from archival photographic observations, published photoelectric photometry, Hipparcos data series and All Sky Automated Survey archive. We have confirmed the already known rotational period for the star of 20.16 d and have shown evidences that it has exhibited changes from 19.90 d to 20.45 d. This is an indication for stellar surface differential rotation.The Bayesian magnitude and time--residual analysis reveals clearly at least one long-term cycle. The cycle lenght's posterior distributions appear to be multimodal with a pronounced peak at a period of 7.1 y with FWHM of 54 d for time-residuals and at a period of 9.8 y with FWHM of 184 d for magitude data. These results are consistent with the previously postulated cycle of 9+/-3 years.

preprint2011arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access3 authors1 topic

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.