Paper detail

Fundamental stellar parameters and age-metallicity relation of Kepler red giants in comparison with theoretical evolutionary tracks

Spectroscopic parameters (effective temperature, metallicity, etc) were determined for a large sample of ~100 red giants in the Kepler field, for which mass, radius, and evolutionary status had already been asteroseismologically established. These two kinds of spectroscopic and seismic information suffice to define the position on the "luminosity versus effective temperature" diagram and to assign an appropriate theoretical evolutionary track to each star. Making use of this advantage, we examined whether the stellar location on this diagram really matches the assigned track, which would make an interesting consistency check between theory and observation. It turned out that satisfactory agreement was confirmed in most cases (~90%, though appreciable discrepancies were seen for some stars such as higher-mass red-clump giants), suggesting that recent stellar evolution calculations are practically reliable. Since the relevant stellar age could also be obtained by this comparison, we derived the age-metallicity relation for these Kepler giants and found the following characteristics: (1) The resulting distribution is quite similar to what was previously concluded for FGK dwarfs. (2) The dispersion of metallicity progressively increases as the age becomes older. (3) Nevertheless, the maximum metallicity at any stellar age remains almost flat, which means the existence of super/near-solar metallicity stars in a considerably wide age range from ~(2--3)x 10^8~yr to ~10^10~yr.

preprint2016arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access6 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.