Paper detail

Red giant masses and ages derived from carbon and nitrogen abundances

We show that the masses of red giant stars can be well predicted from their photospheric carbon and nitrogen abundances, in conjunction with their spectroscopic stellar labels log g, Teff, and [Fe/H]. This is qualitatively expected from mass-dependent post main sequence evolution. We here establish an empirical relation between these quantities by drawing on 1,475 red giants with asteroseismic mass estimates from Kepler that also have spectroscopic labels from APOGEE DR12. We assess the accuracy of our model, and find that it predicts stellar masses with fractional r.m.s. errors of about 14% (typically 0.2 Msun). From these masses, we derive ages with r.m.s errors of 40%. This empirical model allows us for the first time to make age determinations (in the range 1-13 Gyr) for vast numbers of giant stars across the Galaxy. We apply our model to 52,000 stars in APOGEE DR12, for which no direct mass and age information was previously available. We find that these estimates highlight the vertical age structure of the Milky Way disk, and that the relation of age with [alpha/M] and metallicity is broadly consistent with established expectations based on detailed studies of the solar neighbourhood.

preprint2015arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access10 authors2 topics

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.

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.