Paper detail

Evolutionary and pulsation properties of Type II Cepheids

We discuss the observed pulsation properties of Type II Cepheids (TIICs) in the Galaxy and Magellanic Clouds. The period (P) distributions, luminosity amplitudes and population ratios of the three different sub-groups (BL Herculis[BLH, P<5 days], W Virginis [WV, 5<P<20 days], RV Tauri [RVT, P>20 days]) are quite similar in different stellar systems, suggesting a common evolutionary channel and a mild dependence on both metallicity and environment. We present a homogeneous theoretical framework based on Horizontal Branch (HB) evolutionary models, envisaging that TIICs are mainly old (t<10 Gyr), low-mass stars. The BLHs are predicted to be post early asymptotic giant branch (PEAGB) stars (double shell burning) on the verge of reaching their AGB track (first crossing of the instability strip), while WVs are a mix of PEAGB and post-AGB stars (hydrogen shell burning) moving from cool to hot (second crossing). Thus suggesting that they are a single group of variable stars. RVTs are predicted to be a mix of post-AGB stars along their second crossing (short-period tail) and thermally pulsing AGB stars (long-period tail) evolving towards their white dwarf cooling sequence. We also present several sets of synthetic HB models by assuming a bimodal mass distribution along the HB. Theory suggests, in agreement with observations, that TIIC pulsation properties marginally depend on metallicity. Predicted period distributions and population ratios for BLHs agree quite well with observations, while those for WVs and RVTs are almost a factor of two smaller and larger than observed, respectively. Moreover, the predicted period distributions for WVs peak at periods shorter than observed, while those for RVTs display a long period tail not supported by observations. We investigate several avenues to explain these differences, but more detailed calculations are required to address them.

preprint2020arXivOpen 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.

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.