Paper detail

Stellar population synthesis based modelling of the Milky Way using asteroseismology of 13000 Kepler red giants

With current space-based missions it is now possible to obtain age-sensitive asteroseismic information for tens of thousands of red giants. This provides a promising opportunity to study the Galactic structure and evolution. We use asteroseismic data of red giants, observed by Kepler, to test the current theoretical framework of modelling the Galaxy based on population synthesis modeling and the use of asteroseismic scaling relations for giants. We use the open source code Galaxia to model the Milky Way and find the distribution of the masses predicted by Galaxia to be systematically offset with respect to the seismically-inferred observed masses. The Galactic model overestimates the number of low mass stars, and these stars are predominantly old and of low metallicity. Using corrections to the $Δν$ scaling relation suggested by stellar models (available for download) significantly reduces the disagreement between predicted and observed masses. For a few cases where non-seismic mass estimates are available, the corrections to $Δν$ also improve the agreement between seismic and non-seismic mass estimates. The disagreement between predictions of the Galactic model and the observations is most pronounced for stars with ${\rm [Fe/H]}<-0.5$ and ${\rm [Fe/H]}>0$ or for $T_{\rm eff}>4700$ K. Altering the star formation rate in order to suppress stars older than 10 Gyr improves the agreement for mass but leads to inconsistent color distributions. We also tested the predictions of the TRILEGAL Galactic model. However, unlike {\sl Galaxia}, it had difficulties in reproducing the photometric properties of the Kepler Input Catalog because it overestimates the number of blue stars. We conclude that either the scaling relations and/or the Galactic models need to be revised to reconcile predictions of theory with asteroseismic observations.

preprint2016arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access5 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.

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.