Paper detail

Fundamental stellar parameters of benchmark stars from CHARA interferometry. I. Metal-poor stars

Benchmark stars are crucial as validating standards for current as well as future large stellar surveys of the Milky Way. However, the number of suitable metal-poor benchmarks is currently limited. We aim to construct a new set of metal-poor benchmarks, based on reliable interferometric effective temperature ($T_\text{eff}$) determinations and a homogeneous analysis with a desired precision of $1\%$ in $T_\text{eff}$. We observed ten late-type metal-poor dwarf and giants: HD2665, HD6755, HD6833, HD103095, HD122563, HD127243, HD140283, HD175305, HD221170, and HD224930. Only three of the ten stars (HD103095, HD122563, and HD140283) have previously been used as benchmarks. For the observations, we used the high angular resolution optical interferometric instrument PAVO at the CHARA array. We modelled angular diameters using 3D limb darkening models and determined $T_\text{eff}$ directly from the Stefan-Boltzmann relation, with an iterative procedure to interpolate over tables of bolometric corrections. Surface gravities ($\log(g)$) were estimated from comparisons to Dartmouth stellar evolution model tracks. We collected spectroscopic observations from the ELODIE and FIES spectrographs and estimated metallicities ($\mathrm{[Fe/H]}$) from a 1D non-LTE abundance analysis of unblended lines of neutral and singly ionized iron. We inferred $T_\text{eff}$ to better than $1\%$ for five of the stars (HD103095, HD122563, HD127243, HD140283, and HD224930). The $T_\text{eff}$ of the other five stars are reliable to between $2-3\%$; the higher uncertainty on the $T_\text{eff}$ for those stars is mainly due to their having a larger uncertainty in the bolometric fluxes. We also determined $\log(g)$ and $\mathrm{[Fe/H]}$ with median uncertainties of $0.03\,\mathrm{dex}$ and $0.09\,\mathrm{dex}$, respectively. These ten stars can, therefore, be adopted as a new, reliable set of metal-poor benchmarks.

preprint2020arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access7 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.