Oscillating red giants in eclipsing binary systems: Empirical reference value for asteroseismic scaling relation
Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, ISSN: 1365-2966, Vol: 478, Issue: 4, Page: 4669-4696
2018
- 44Citations
- 15Captures
Metric Options: CountsSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Article Description
The internal structures and properties of oscillating red-giant stars can be accurately inferred through their global oscillation modes (asteroseismology). Based on 1460 d of Kepler observations we perform a thorough asteroseismic study to probe the stellar parameters and evolutionary stages of three red giants in eclipsing binary systems. We present the first detailed analysis of individual oscillation modes of the red-giant components of KIC 8410637, KIC 5640750, and KIC 9540226. We obtain estimates of their asteroseismic masses, radii, mean densities, and logarithmic surface gravities by using the asteroseismic scaling relations as well as grid-based modelling. As these red giants are in double-lined eclipsing binaries, it is possible to derive their independent dynamical masses and radii from the orbital solution and compare it with the seismically inferred values. For KIC 5640750 we compute the first spectroscopic orbit based on both components of this system. We use high-resolution spectroscopic data and light curves of the three systems to determine up-to-date values of the dynamical stellar parameters. With our comprehensive set of stellar parameters we explore consistencies between binary analysis and asteroseismic methods, and test the reliability of the well-known scaling relations. For the three red giants under study, we find agreement between dynamical and asteroseismic stellar parameters in cases where the asteroseismic methods account for metallicity, temperature, and mass dependence as well as surface effects. We are able to attain agreement from the scaling laws in all three systems if we use Δ = 130.8 ± 0.9 μHz instead of the usual solar reference value.
Bibliographic Details
http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85050824841&origin=inward; http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/mnras/sty1113; https://academic.oup.com/mnras/article/478/4/4669/4990665; http://academic.oup.com/mnras/article-pdf/478/4/4669/25100626/sty1113.pdf; https://dx.doi.org/10.1093/mnras/sty1113
Oxford University Press (OUP)
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know