Pith. sign in

REVIEW

Modeling the Asteroseismic Surface Term across the HR Diagram

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 1506.06678 v1 pith:BET4ZRYA submitted 2015-06-22 astro-ph.SR

Modeling the Asteroseismic Surface Term across the HR Diagram

classification astro-ph.SR
keywords surfacetermacrossdiagramstarsasteroseismicgiantsmodel
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved
0 comments
read the original abstract

Asteroseismology is a powerful tool that can precisely characterize the mass, radius, and other properties of field stars. However, our inability to properly model the near-surface layers of stars creates a frequency-dependent frequency difference between the observed and the modeled frequencies, usually referred to as the "surface term". This surface term can add significant errors to the derived stellar properties unless removed properly. In this paper we simulate surface terms across a significant portion of the HR diagram, exploring four different masses ($M=0.8, 1.0, 1.2$, and $1.5$ M$_\odot$) at five metallicities ($[\rm{Fe/H}]=0.5, 0.0, -0.5 ,-1.0, and -1.5$) from main sequence to red giants for stars with $T_{\rm{eff}}<6500 K$ and explore how well the most common ways of fitting and removing the surface term actually perform. We find that the two-term model proposed by Ball & Gizon (2014) works much better than other models across a large portion of the HR diagram, including the red giants, leading us to recommend its use for future asteroseismic analyses.

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.