Paper detail

The radius discrepancy in low mass stars: single vs. binaries

A long-standing issue in the theory of low mass stars is the discrepancy between predicted and observed radii and effective temperatures. In spite of the increasing availability of very precise radius determinations from eclipsing binaries and interferometric measurements of radii of single stars, there is no unanimous consensus on the extent (or even the existence) of the discrepancy and on its connection with other stellar properties (e.g. metallicity, magnetic activity). We investigate the radius discrepancy phenomenon using the best data currently available (accuracy about 5%). We have constructed a grid of stellar models covering the entire range of low mass stars (0.1-1.25 M_sun) and various choices of the metallicity and of the mixing length parameter α. We used an improved version of the Yale Rotational stellar Evolution Code (YREC), implementing surface boundary conditions based on the most up-to-date PHOENIX atmosphere models. Our models are in good agreement with others in the literature and improve and extend the low mass end of the Yale-Yonsei isochrones. Our calculations include rotation-related quantities, such as moments of inertia and convective turnover time scales, useful in studies of magnetic activity and rotational evolution of solar-like stars. Consistently with previous works, we find that both binaries and single stars have radii inflated by about 3% with respect to the theoretical models; among binaries, the components of short orbital period systems are found to be the most deviant. We conclude that both binaries and single stars are comparably affected by the radius discrepancy phenomenon.

preprint2013arXivOpen 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.