Paper detail

Probing 3D and NLTE models using APOGEE observations of globular cluster stars

Hydrodynamical (or 3D) and non-local thermodynamic equilibrium (NLTE) effects are known to affect abundance analyses. However, there are very few observational abundance testsof 3D and NLTE models. We developed a new way of testing the abundance predictions of 3D and NLTE models, taking advantage of large spectroscopic survey data. We use a line-by-line analysis of the Apache Point Observatory Galactic Evolution Experiment (APOGEE) spectra (H band) with the Brussels Automatic Code for Characterizing High accUracy Spectra (BACCHUS). We compute line-by-line abundances of Mg, Si, Ca, and Fe for a large number of globular cluster K giants in the APOGEE survey. We compare this line-by-line analysis against NLTE and 3D predictions. While the 1D-NLTE models provide corrections in the right direction, there are quantitative discrepancies between different models. We observe a better agreement with the data for the models including reliable collisional cross-sections. The agreement between data and models is not always satisfactory when the 3D spectra are computed in LTE. However, we note that for a fair comparison, 3D corrections should be computed with self-consistently derived stellar parameters, and not on 1D models with identical stellar parameters. Finally, we focus on 3D and NLTE effects on Fe lines in the H band, where we observe a systematic difference in abundance relative to the value from the optical. Our results suggest that the metallicities obtained from the H band are more accurate in metal-poor giants. More atomic data and extended self-consistent 3D-NLTE computations need to be made. The method we have developed for testing 3D and NLTE models could be extended to other lines and elements, and is particularly suited for large spectroscopic surveys.

preprint2021arXivOpen 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.

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 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.