Paper detail

Magnetic Doppler imaging considering atmospheric structure modifications due to local abundances: a luxury or a necessity?

Magnetic Doppler imaging is currently the most powerful method of interpreting high-resolution spectropolarimetric observations of stars. This technique has revealed the presence of unexpected small-scale magnetic fields on the surfaces of Ap stars. These studies were recently criticisied by Stift et al. (2012), who claimed that magnetic inversions are not robust and are undermined by neglecting a feedback on the Stokes line profiles from the local atmospheric structure in the regions of enhanced metal abundance. We show that Stift et al. misinterpreted published magnetic Doppler imaging results and neglected some of the most fundamental principles behind magnetic mapping. We demonstrate that the variation of atmospheric structure across the surface of a star with chemical spots affects the local continuum intensity but is negligible for the normalised local Stokes profiles. For the disk-integrated spectra of an Ap star with extreme abundance variations, we find that the assumption of a mean model atmosphere leads to moderate errors in Stokes I but is negligible for polarisation spectra. Employing a new magnetic inversion code, which incorporates the horizontal variation of atmospheric structure, we reconstructed new maps of magnetic field and Fe abundance for the Ap star alpha^2 CVn. The resulting distribution of chemical spots changes insignificantly compared to the previous modelling based on a single model atmosphere, while the magnetic field geometry does not change at all. This shows that the assertions by Stift et al. are exaggerated as a consequence of unreasonable assumptions and extrapolations, as well as methodological flaws and inconsistencies of their analysis. Our discussion proves that published magnetic inversions based on a mean stellar atmosphere are robust and reliable, and that the presence of small-scale magnetic field structures on the surfaces of Ap stars is real.

preprint2012arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access3 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.