RECORD
Determination of stellar radii from asteroseismic Data
Solar and Stellar Astrophysics · Submitted 2 Sep 2009
abstract compiled · 2026-09-23 · no language-model review
The authors' main claim Blind tests with data simulated to match those expected from the asteroseismic Survey Phase of Kepler show that it will be possible to infer stellar radii successfully using our method.
The compiled record
The paper's own sentences, arranged. Each label is drawn from a closed vocabulary; the number beside it is the probability the classifier gave that label. Numbers in the tables are the authors', checked by code. No sentence in this record was written by a model.
Open the compiled record
The abstract, sentence by sentence
The NASA Kepler mission is designed to find planets through transits. Accurate and precise radii of the detected planets depend on knowing the radius of the host star accurately, which is difficult unless the temperature and luminosity of the star are known precisely. Kepler, however, has an asteroseismology programme that will provide seismic variables that can characterise stellar radii easily, accurately, and extremely precisely. In this paper we describe the Yale-Birmingham (YB) method to determine stellar radii using a combination of seismic and conventional variables, and analyse the effect of these variables on the result. We find that for main-sequence stars, a knowledge of the parallax is not important to get accurate radii using the YB method: we can get results to an accuracy and precision of better than a few percent if we know the effective temperature and the seismic parameters for these stars. Metallicity does not make much difference either. However, good estimates of the effective temperature and metallicity, along with those of the seismic parameters, are essential to determine radii of sub giants properly. On the other hand, for red giants we find that determining radii properly is not possible without a good estimate of the parallax. We find that the so called "surface term" in the seismic data has minimal effect on the inferred radii. Uncertainties in the convective mixing length can matter under some circumstances and can cause a systematic shift in the inferred radii. Blind tests with data simulated to match those expected from the asteroseismic Survey Phase of Kepler show that it will be possible to infer stellar radii successfully using our method.
background contribution method result interpretation main claim
| # | sentence | role | the authors' own work | states the main conclusion | strength |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| s0 | The NASA Kepler mission is designed to find planets through transits. | background 1.00 | 0.04 | 0.01 | asserted 1.00 |
| s1 | Accurate and precise radii of the detected planets depend on knowing the radius of the host star accurately, which is difficult unless the temperature and luminosity of the star are known precisely. | background 0.79 | 0.05 | 0.02 | asserted 0.99 |
| s2 | Kepler, however, has an asteroseismology programme that will provide seismic variables that can characterise stellar radii easily, accurately, and extremely precisely. | background 0.83 | 0.10 | 0.09 | asserted 0.72 |
| s3 | In this paper we describe the Yale-Birmingham (YB) method to determine stellar radii using a combination of seismic and conventional variables, and analyse the effect of these variables on the result. | contribution 0.94 | 0.85 | 0.06 | asserted 0.95 |
| s4 | We find that for main-sequence stars, a knowledge of the parallax is not important to get accurate radii using the YB method: we can get results to an accuracy and precision of better than a few percent if we know the effective temperature and the seismic parameters for these stars. | result 1.00 | 0.96 | 0.41 | asserted 0.99 |
| s5 | Metallicity does not make much difference either. | result 1.00 | 0.86 | 0.05 | asserted 0.96 |
| s6 | However, good estimates of the effective temperature and metallicity, along with those of the seismic parameters, are essential to determine radii of sub giants properly. | result 0.97 | 0.84 | 0.09 | asserted 1.00 |
| s7 | On the other hand, for red giants we find that determining radii properly is not possible without a good estimate of the parallax. | result 0.98 | 0.95 | 0.11 | asserted 1.00 |
| s8 | We find that the so called "surface term" in the seismic data has minimal effect on the inferred radii. | result 1.00 | 0.94 | 0.05 | asserted 1.00 |
| s9 | Uncertainties in the convective mixing length can matter under some circumstances and can cause a systematic shift in the inferred radii. | result 0.86 | 0.80 | 0.04 | hedged possibility 0.93 |
| s10 | Blind tests with data simulated to match those expected from the asteroseismic Survey Phase of Kepler show that it will be possible to infer stellar radii successfully using our method. | result 0.83 | 0.92 | 0.18 | hedged possibility 0.72 |
What was examined, and what was not
- arXiv listing abstract v1
- full text
- figures and tables
- references and citing sentences
- relations to other papers
- P abstract
- S sections
- T body sentences
- C citations
- R cross-paper relations
The paper
Original abstract
The NASA Kepler mission is designed to find planets through transits. Accurate and precise radii of the detected planets depend on knowing the radius of the host star accurately, which is difficult unless the temperature and luminosity of the star are known precisely. Kepler, however, has an asteroseismology programme that will provide seismic variables that can characterise stellar radii easily, accurately, and extremely precisely. In this paper we describe the Yale-Birmingham (YB) method to determine stellar radii using a combination of seismic and conventional variables, and analyse the effect of these variables on the result. We find that for main-sequence stars, a knowledge of the parallax is not important to get accurate radii using the YB method: we can get results to an accuracy and precision of better than a few percent if we know the effective temperature and the seismic parameters for these stars. Metallicity does not make much difference either. However, good estimates of the effective temperature and metallicity, along with those of the seismic parameters, are essential to determine radii of sub giants properly. On the other hand, for red giants we find that determining radii properly is not possible without a good estimate of the parallax. We find that the so called "surface term" in the seismic data has minimal effect on the inferred radii. Uncertainties in the convective mixing length can matter under some circumstances and can cause a systematic shift in the inferred radii. Blind tests with data simulated to match those expected from the asteroseismic Survey Phase of Kepler show that it will be possible to infer stellar radii successfully using our method.
Human review
References
Discussion
Know something about this paper? Leave a comment, or highlight any passage above to comment on it.