Paper detail

Testing Mass Loss in Large Magellanic Cloud Cepheids using Infrared and Optical Observations II. Predictions and Tests of the OGLE-III Fundamental-Mode Cepheids

In this article, we test the hypothesis that Cepheids have infrared excesses due to mass loss. We fit a model using the mass-loss rate and the stellar radius as free parameters to optical observations from the OGLE-III survey and infrared observations from the 2MASS and SAGE data sets. The sample of Cepheids have predicted minimum mass-loss rates ranging from zero to $10^{-8}M_\odot$ $yr^{-1}$, where the rates depend on the chosen dust properties. We use the predicted radii to compute the Period-Radius relation for LMC Cepheids, and to estimate the uncertainty caused by the presence of infrared excess for determining angular diameters with the infrared surface brightness technique. Finally, we calculate the linear and non-linear Period-Luminosity (P-L) relations for the LMC Cepheids at VIJHK + IRAC wavelengths and we find that the P-L relations are consistent with being non-linear at infrared wavelengths, contrary to previous results.

preprint2010arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access4 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.