Paper detail

How reliable is Zeeman Doppler Imaging without simultaneous temperature reconstruction?

Aims: The goal of this study is to perform numerical tests of Zeeman Doppler Imaging (ZDI) to asses whether correct reconstruction of magnetic fields is at all possible without taking temperature into account for stars in which magnetic and temperature inhomogeneities are spatially correlated. Methods: We used a modern ZDI code employing a physically realistic treatment of the polarized radiative transfer in all four Stokes parameters. We generated artificial observations of isolated magnetic spots and of magnetic features coinciding with cool temperature spots and then reconstructed magnetic and temperature distributions from these data. Results: Using Stokes I and V for simultaneous magnetic and temperature mapping for the star with a homogeneous temperature distribution yields magnetic field strengths underestimated by typically 10-15% relative to their true values. When temperature is kept constant and Stokes I is not used for magnetic mapping, the underestimation is 30-60%. At the same time, the strength of magnetic field inside cool spots is underestimated by as much as 80-95% and the spot geometry is also poorly reconstructed when temperature variations are ignored. On the other hand, the inversion quality is greatly improved when temperature variations are accounted for in magnetic mapping. When using all four Stokes parameters the reconstructed field strength inside cool spots is underestimated by 30-40% but the spot geometry can be recovered very accurately compared to the experiments with circular polarization alone. Conclusions: Reliable magnetic field reconstruction for a star with high-contrast temperature spots is essentially impossible if temperature inhomogeneities are ignored. A physically realistic line profile modeling method, which simultaneously accounts for both types of inhomogeneities, is required for meaningful ZDI of cool active stars.

preprint2012arXivOpen 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.