Paper detail

Characterizing the AB Doradus Moving Group Via High Resolution Spectroscopy and Kinematic Traceback

We present a detailed analysis of 10 proposed F and G members of the nearby, young moving group AB Doradus (ABD). Our sample was obtained using the 2.7m telescope at the McDonald Observatory with the coude echelle spectrograph, achieving R $\sim$ 60,000 and S/N $\sim$ 200. We derive spectroscopic T$_{eff}$, log(g), [Fe/H], and microturbulance (v$_{t}$) using a bootstrap method of the TGVIT software resulting in typical errors of 33K in T$_{eff}$, 0.08 dex in log(g), 0.03 dex in [Fe/H], and 0.13 km s$^{-1}$ in v$_{t}$. Characterization of the ABD sample is performed in three ways: (1) Chemical homogeneity, (2) Kinematic Traceback, and (3) Isochrone fitting. We find the average metal abundance is [M/H] = -0.03 $\pm$ 0.06 with a traceback age of 125 Myrs. Our stars were fit to 3 different evolutionary models (Siess et al. 2000, Baraffe et al. 1998, and YREC) and we found the best match to our ABD sample is the YREC [M/H] = -0.1 model. In our sample of 10 stars, we identify 1 star which is a probable non-member, 3 enigmatic stars, and 6 stars with confirmed membership. We also present a list of chemically coherent stars from this study and the Barenfeld et al. (2013) study.

preprint2014arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access2 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.