Paper detail

Stellar dating using chemical clocks and Bayesian inference

Dating stars is a major challenge with a deep impact on many astrophysical fields. One of the most promising techniques for this is using chemical abundances. Recent space- and ground-based facilities have improved the quantity of stars with accurate observations. This has opened the door for using Bayesian inference tools to maximise the information we can extract from them. Our aim is to present accurate and reliable stellar age estimates of FGK stars using chemical abundances and stellar parameters. We used one of the most flexible Bayesian inference techniques (hierarchical Bayesian models) to exceed current possibilities in the use of chemical abundances for stellar dating. Our model is a data-driven model. We used a training set that has been presented in the literature with ages estimated with isochrones and accurate stellar abundances and general characteristics. The core of the model is a prescription of certain abundance ratios as linear combinations of stellar properties including age. We gathered four different testing sets to assess the accuracy, precision, and limits of our model. We also trained a model using chemical abundances alone. We found that our age estimates and those coming from asteroseismology, other accurate sources, and also with ten Gaia benchmark stars agree well. The mean absolute difference of our estimates compared with those used as reference is 0.9 Ga, with a mean difference of 0.01 Ga. When using open clusters, we reached a very good agreement for Hyades, NGC 2632, Ruprecht 147, and IC4651. We also found outliers that are a reflection of chemical peculiarities and/or stars at the limit of the validity ranges of the training set. The model that only uses chemical abundances shows slightly worse mean absolute difference (1.18 Ga) and mean difference (-0.12 Ga).

preprint2022arXivOpen 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.