Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

The CARMENES search for exoplanets around M dwarfs: Different roads to radii and masses of the target stars

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 1904.03231 v1 pith:XWM2N777 submitted 2019-04-05 astro-ph.SR astro-ph.EP

The CARMENES search for exoplanets around M dwarfs: Different roads to radii and masses of the target stars

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

We determine the radii and masses of 293 nearby, bright M dwarfs of the CARMENES survey. This is the first time that such a large and homogeneous high-resolution (R>80 000) spectroscopic survey has been used to derive these fundamental stellar parameters. We derived the radii using Stefan-Boltzmann's law. We obtained the required effective temperatures $T_{\rm eff}$ from a spectral analysis and we obtained the required luminosities L from integrated broadband photometry together with the Gaia DR2 parallaxes. The mass was then determined using a mass-radius relation that we derived from eclipsing binaries known in the literature. We compared this method with three other methods: (1) We calculated the mass from the radius and the surface gravity log g, which was obtained from the same spectral analysis as $T_{\rm eff}$. (2) We used a widely used infrared mass-magnitude relation. (3) We used a Bayesian approach to infer stellar parameters from the comparison of the absolute magnitudes and colors of our targets with evolutionary models. Between spectral types M0V and M7V our radii cover the range $0.1\,R_{\normalsize\odot}<R<0.6\,R_{\normalsize\odot}$ with an error of 2-3% and our masses cover $0.09\,{\mathcal M}_{\normalsize\odot}<{\mathcal M}<0.6\,{\mathcal M}_{\normalsize\odot}$ with an error of 3-5%. We find good agreement between the masses determined with these different methods for most of our targets. Only the masses of very young objects show discrepancies. This can be well explained with the assumptions that we used for our methods.

discussion (0)

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

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

  1. The Pan-Pacific Planet Search -- IX. A menagerie of companions orbiting evolved stars

    astro-ph.EP 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 4.0

    Resolves six speculative companions into one giant planet, one eccentric brown dwarf, two low-mass stars, and two stars with no detectable companions.