pith. sign in

arxiv: 1907.00807 · v1 · pith:FMPQAX55new · submitted 2019-07-01 · 🌌 astro-ph.SR

The CARMENES search for exoplanets around M dwarfs -- Photospheric parameters of target stars from high-resolution spectroscopy. II. Simultaneous multiwavelength range modeling of activity insensitive lines

V. M. Passegger , A. Schweitzer , D. Shulyak , E. Nagel , P. H. Hauschildt , A. Reiners , P. J. Amado , J. A. Caballero
show 20 more authors
M. Cort\'es-Contreras A. J. Dom\'inguez-Fern\'andez A. Quirrenbach I. Ribas M. Azzaro G. Anglada-Escud\'e F. F. Bauer V. J. S. B\'ejar S. Dreizler E. W. Guenther T. Henning S. V. Jeffers A. Kaminski M. K\"urster M. Lafarga E. L. Mart\'in D. Montes J. C. Morales J. H. M. M. Schmitt M. Zechmeister
This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-25 11:27 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.SR
keywords M dwarfsphotospheric parametersPHOENIX modelsCARMENESstellar activityexoplanet hostshigh-resolution spectroscopy
0
0 comments X

The pith

Parameters from visible spectra of M dwarfs agree better with literature than near-infrared spectra alone.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper determines effective temperature, surface gravity, and metallicity for 282 M dwarfs by fitting PHOENIX models to CARMENES spectra. It compares results from visible wavelengths, near-infrared, and both combined. The visible and combined fits match literature values more closely than near-infrared fits by themselves. Selecting lines insensitive to magnetic activity is key to avoiding biases from stellar activity. Accurate parameters help in characterizing planets around these stars.

Core claim

Fundamental parameters derived from visible spectra and visible plus near-infrared spectra combined are in better agreement with literature values than those derived from near-infrared spectra alone, when fitting to magnetically insensitive lines.

What carries the argument

χ² minimization fitting of updated PHOENIX stellar atmosphere models to selected activity-insensitive spectral lines across visible and near-infrared ranges.

If this is right

  • Improved stellar parameters lead to better constraints on the properties of any orbiting exoplanets.
  • Multiwavelength modeling reduces systematic errors in metallicity and temperature estimates for cool stars.
  • Future observations can prioritize visible spectroscopy for more reliable results on M dwarfs.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The discrepancy in near-infrared fits may point to incomplete modeling of molecular features or activity effects in that range.
  • Simultaneous multiwavelength data could become standard for reducing uncertainties in stellar characterization.

Load-bearing premise

Magnetically insensitive lines can be selected reliably so that stellar activity does not influence the fitted line profiles.

What would settle it

A direct comparison showing that near-infrared derived parameters match literature values as closely as visible ones would challenge the central finding.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 1907.00807 by A. J. Dom\'inguez-Fern\'andez, A. Kaminski, A. Quirrenbach, A. Reiners, A. Schweitzer, D. Montes, D. Shulyak, E. L. Mart\'in, E. Nagel, E. W. Guenther, F. F. Bauer, G. Anglada-Escud\'e, I. Ribas, J. A. Caballero, J. C. Morales, J. H. M. M. Schmitt, M. Azzaro, M. Cort\'es-Contreras, M. K\"urster, M. Lafarga, M. Zechmeister, P. H. Hauschildt, P. J. Amado, S. Dreizler, S. V. Jeffers, T. Henning, V. J. S. B\'ejar, V. M. Passegger.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Surface gravity log g as a function of effective temperature Teff. The left panel compares the Lyon group’s BCAH98 (Baraffe et al. 1998), BHAC15 (Baraffe et al. 2015) models, and PARSEC models for [M/H] = 0 and fixed age of 5 Gyr. The right panel shows the PARSEC models for [M/H] = 0 and variable age from 0.01 to 10 Gyr. The gray vertical lines indicate the temperature range of our PHOENIX-SESAM grid from … view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Comparison of PHOENIX-ACES (blue) and PHOENIX-SESAM (red) models for a selection of lines. The parameters of the models are Teff=3500 K, log g=5.0 dex, and [Fe/H]=0.0 dex. The models are broadened corresponding to the spectral resolution in the VIS (R ≈ 94 600) and NIR (R ≈ 80 500) channel. For each wavelength region the residual between the two models are shown. 2014), which limits using these lines in sp… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: CARMENES template spectrum of GJ 133 = J03213+799 (black) with best-fit model (blue and red). The fitting regions are marked in red. All lines are identified together with their Landé factors when available. Article number, page 10 of 30 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Comparison of stellar parameters derived from VIS and NIR ranges. The assumed stellar age is color-coded. The black line indicates the 1:1 relation, the gray lines represent the 1σ deviations for VIS of 51 K, 0.04 log g, and 0.16 [Fe/H]. Error bars for VIS and NIR are plotted in the lower right corner of each plot. Article number, page 11 of 30 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Comparison between results from VIS and literature values for Teff (top panel), log g (middle panel), and [Fe/H] (bottom panel). The 1:1 relation is indicated by the black line. The uncertainties of this work (black) are shown in the lower right corner of each panel together with the uncertainties of Rajpurohit et al. (2018) (purple). Article number, page 12 of 30 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Comparison between results from NIR and literature values for Teff (top panel), log g (middle panel), and [Fe/H] (bottom panel). The 1:1 relation is indicated by the black line. The uncertainties of this work (black) are shown in the lower right corner of each panel together with the uncertainties of Rajpurohit et al. (2018) (purple). Article number, page 13 of 30 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Comparison between results from VIS+NIR and literature values for Teff (top panel), log g (middle panel), and [Fe/H] (bottom panel). The 1:1 relation is indicated by the black line. The uncertainties of this work (black) are shown in the lower right corner of each panel together with the uncertainties of Rajpurohit et al. (2018) (purple). Article number, page 14 of 30 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p01… view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Comparison of [Fe/H] (top panel), log g (middle panel), and Teff (bottom panel) between values of this work in VIS+NIR and literature. The age is color-coded; active star are plotted as asterisks. Outliers are identified with numbers; the green lines connect their different literature values. The black line indicates the 1:1 relation, the gray lines the 1σ deviation. Article number, page 15 of 30 [PITH_FU… view at source ↗
read the original abstract

We present precise photospheric parameters of 282 M dwarfs determined from fitting the most recent version of PHOENIX models to high-resolution CARMENES spectra in the visible (0.52 - 0.96 $\mu$m) and near-infrared wavelength range (0.96 - 1.71 $\mu$m). With its aim to search for habitable planets around M dwarfs, several planets of different masses have been detected. The characterization of the target sample is important for the ability to derive and constrain the physical properties of any planetary systems that are detected. As a continuation of previous work in this context, we derived the fundamental stellar parameters effective temperature, surface gravity, and metallicity of the CARMENES M-dwarf targets from PHOENIX model fits using a $\chi^2$ method. We calculated updated PHOENIX stellar atmosphere models that include a new equation of state to especially account for spectral features of low-temperature stellar atmospheres as well as new atomic and molecular line lists. We show the importance of selecting magnetically insensitive lines for fitting to avoid effects of stellar activity in the line profiles. For the first time, we directly compare stellar parameters derived from multiwavelength range spectra, simultaneously observed for the same star. In comparison with literature values we show that fundamental parameters derived from visible spectra and visible and near-infrared spectra combined are in better agreement than those derived from the same spectra in the near-infrared alone.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

1 major / 1 minor

Summary. The paper derives effective temperature, surface gravity, and metallicity for 282 M dwarfs by χ²-fitting the latest PHOENIX models (with updated EOS and line lists) to simultaneous CARMENES high-resolution spectra. It stresses the selection of magnetically insensitive lines to mitigate stellar activity effects on line profiles and performs the first direct comparison of parameters obtained from the visible range (0.52–0.96 μm), near-infrared range (0.96–1.71 μm), and their combination, reporting that VIS and VIS+NIR results agree better with literature values than NIR-only results.

Significance. If the empirical comparison holds, the work supplies a large homogeneous parameter catalog useful for CARMENES exoplanet host characterization. The simultaneous multi-range observations and explicit use of activity-insensitive lines constitute a clear methodological advance over single-band analyses; the updated PHOENIX models are also a positive contribution.

major comments (1)
  1. [Methods / line selection] The central claim rests on the assertion that magnetically insensitive lines can be selected so that activity does not bias the χ² fits. The manuscript states the importance of this selection but does not specify the quantitative criteria, line list, or validation tests used; without these details the robustness of the VIS vs. NIR agreement comparison cannot be assessed.
minor comments (1)
  1. The abstract gives wavelength ranges but does not report the number of lines retained after selection or the typical χ² values per degree of freedom for the three fitting regimes.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

1 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their constructive review and positive assessment of the work's significance. We address the single major comment below and will revise the manuscript to incorporate the requested details.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Methods / line selection] The central claim rests on the assertion that magnetically insensitive lines can be selected so that activity does not bias the χ² fits. The manuscript states the importance of this selection but does not specify the quantitative criteria, line list, or validation tests used; without these details the robustness of the VIS vs. NIR agreement comparison cannot be assessed.

    Authors: We agree that additional explicit documentation is needed. In the revised manuscript we will add a dedicated subsection (in Section 3) that (i) states the quantitative criteria used to identify magnetically insensitive lines (primarily the lack of detectable Zeeman broadening in the PHOENIX synthetic spectra and cross-references to published magnetic-sensitivity indices), (ii) provides the resulting line list (or a machine-readable table of the selected features), and (iii) reports validation tests, including fits performed with and without the activity-sensitive lines and comparisons against independent activity indicators. These additions will directly support the robustness of the VIS–NIR comparison. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity detected

full rationale

The derivation consists of direct χ² fitting of updated external PHOENIX atmosphere models (with new EOS and line lists) to observed CARMENES spectra across VIS, NIR, and combined ranges, followed by empirical comparison of the resulting Teff, log g, and [Fe/H] values against independent literature compilations. No equations reduce outputs to inputs by construction, no fitted parameters are relabeled as predictions, and no load-bearing self-citations or uniqueness theorems imported from prior author work are invoked to force the central agreement claim. The method is self-contained against external benchmarks.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

3 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on the fidelity of the updated PHOENIX models for low-temperature atmospheres and the assumption that activity-insensitive lines can be isolated; three fitted parameters are determined per star but no additional free parameters are introduced beyond the standard atmospheric parameters.

free parameters (3)
  • effective temperature
    Fitted via χ² minimization to match observed spectra in the stated wavelength ranges
  • surface gravity
    Fitted via χ² minimization to match observed spectra in the stated wavelength ranges
  • metallicity
    Fitted via χ² minimization to match observed spectra in the stated wavelength ranges
axioms (2)
  • domain assumption Updated PHOENIX models with new equation of state and atomic/molecular line lists accurately represent M-dwarf photospheres at low temperatures
    Invoked as the basis for all model fits described in the abstract
  • domain assumption Magnetically insensitive lines exist and can be selected to eliminate activity effects from the line profiles
    Stated as a prerequisite for reliable fitting to avoid stellar activity bias

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5987 in / 1454 out tokens · 37920 ms · 2026-05-25T11:27:43.883452+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

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

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

68 extracted references · 68 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    H., Alexander, D

    Allard, F., Hauschildt, P. H., Alexander, D. R., Tamanai, A., & Schweitzer, A. 2001, ApJ, 556, 357

    work page 2001

  2. [2]

    2011, in Astronomical Society of the Pa- cific Conference Series, V ol

    Allard, F., Homeier, D., & Freytag, B. 2011, in Astronomical Society of the Pa- cific Conference Series, V ol. 448, 16th Cambridge Workshop on Cool Stars, Stellar Systems, and the Sun, ed. C. Johns-Krull, M. K. Browning, & A. A. West, 91

    work page 2011

  3. [3]

    2012, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London Series A, 370, 2765

    Allard, F., Homeier, D., & Freytag, B. 2012, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London Series A, 370, 2765

    work page 2012

  4. [4]

    2013, Memorie della Societa Astro- nomica Italiana Supplementi, 24, 128

    Allard, F., Homeier, D., Freytag, B., et al. 2013, Memorie della Societa Astro- nomica Italiana Supplementi, 24, 128

    work page 2013

  5. [5]

    J., & Scott, P

    Asplund, M., Grevesse, N., Sauval, A. J., & Scott, P. 2009, ARA&A, 47, 481 Baraffe, I., Chabrier, G., Allard, F., & Hauschildt, P. H. 1998, A&A, 337, 403 Baraffe, I., Homeier, D., Allard, F., & Chabrier, G. 2015, A&A, 577, A42

    work page 2009

  6. [6]

    C., Ribas, I., et al

    Baroch, D., Morales, J. C., Ribas, I., et al. 2018, A&A, 619, A32

    work page 2018

  7. [7]

    F., Zechmeister, M., & Reiners, A

    Bauer, F. F., Zechmeister, M., & Reiners, A. 2015, A&A, 581, A117

    work page 2015

  8. [8]

    Berdyugina, S. V . & Solanki, S. K. 2002, A&A, 385, 701

    work page 2002

  9. [9]

    L., Aganze, C., Burgasser, A

    Birky, J. L., Aganze, C., Burgasser, A. J., et al. 2017, in American Astronomical Society Meeting Abstracts, V ol. 229, American Astronomical Society Meet- ing Abstracts #229, 240.18

    work page 2017

  10. [10]

    S., von Braun, K., van Belle, G., et al

    Boyajian, T. S., von Braun, K., van Belle, G., et al. 2012, ApJ, 757, 112

    work page 2012

  11. [11]

    2012, MNRAS, 427, 127

    Bressan, A., Marigo, P., Girardi, L., et al. 2012, MNRAS, 427, 127

    work page 2012

  12. [12]

    A., Guàrdia, J., López del Fresno, M., et al

    Caballero, J. A., Guàrdia, J., López del Fresno, M., et al. 2016b, in Proc. SPIE, V ol. 9910, Observatory Operations: Strategies, Processes, and Systems VI, 99100E Caffau, E., Ludwig, H.-G., Ste ffen, M., Freytag, B., & Bonifacio, P. 2011, Sol. Phys., 268, 255

    work page 2011

  13. [13]

    2015, MNRAS, 452, 1068

    Chen, Y ., Bressan, A., Girardi, L., et al. 2015, MNRAS, 452, 1068

    work page 2015

  14. [14]

    2014, MNRAS, 444, 2525

    Chen, Y ., Girardi, L., Bressan, A., et al. 2014, MNRAS, 444, 2525

    work page 2014

  15. [15]

    H., & Witte, S

    Claret, A., Hauschildt, P. H., & Witte, S. 2012, A&A, 546, A14 Cortés-Contreras, M. 2016, PhD thesis, Universidad Complutense de Madrid, Spain

    work page 2012

  16. [16]

    2000, A&A, 364, 217 Gaia Collaboration, Brown, A

    Delfosse, X., Forveille, T., Ségransan, D., et al. 2000, A&A, 364, 217 Gaia Collaboration, Brown, A. G. A., Vallenari, A., et al. 2018, A&A, 616, A1 Gaia Collaboration, Prusti, T., de Bruijne, J. H. J., et al. 2016, A&A, 595, A1

    work page 2000

  17. [17]

    & Mann, A

    Gaidos, E. & Mann, A. W. 2014, ApJ, 791, 54

    work page 2014

  18. [18]

    E., Rothman, L

    Gordon, I. E., Rothman, L. S., Hill, C., et al. 2017, J. Quant. Spec. Ra- diat. Transf., 203, 3

    work page 2017

  19. [19]

    D., Bayliss, D., Brahm, R., et al

    Hartman, J. D., Bayliss, D., Brahm, R., et al. 2015, AJ, 149, 166

    work page 2015

  20. [20]

    Hauschildt, P. H. 1992, J. Quant. Spec. Radiat. Transf., 47, 433

    work page 1992

  21. [21]

    Hauschildt, P. H. 1993, J. Quant. Spec. Radiat. Transf., 50, 301

    work page 1993

  22. [22]

    H., Allard, F., & Baron, E

    Hauschildt, P. H., Allard, F., & Baron, E. 1999, ApJ, 512, 377

    work page 1999

  23. [23]

    Hauschildt, P. H. & Baron, E. 1999, Journal of Computational and Applied Math- ematics, 109, 41

    work page 1999

  24. [24]

    H., Baron, E., & Allard, F

    Hauschildt, P. H., Baron, E., & Allard, F. 1997, ApJ, 483, 390

    work page 1997

  25. [25]

    2013, A&A, 553, A6

    Husser, T.-O., Wende-von Berg, S., Dreizler, S., et al. 2013, A&A, 553, A6

    work page 2013

  26. [26]

    A., et al

    Kaminski, A., Trifonov, T., Caballero, J. A., et al. 2018, A&A, 618, A115

    work page 2018

  27. [27]

    2014, in Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series, V ol

    Kausch, W., Noll, S., Smette, A., et al. 2014, in Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series, V ol. 485, Astronomical Data Analysis Software and Systems XXIII, ed. N. Manset & P. Forshay, 403 Landi Degl’Innocenti, E. & Landolfi, M., eds. 2004, Astrophysics and Space Science Library, V ol. 307, Polarization in Spectral Lines

    work page 2014

  28. [28]

    & Heiter, U

    Lindgren, S. & Heiter, U. 2017, A&A, 604, A97

    work page 2017

  29. [29]

    2018, A&A, 620, A171

    Luque, R., Nowak, G., Pallé, E., et al. 2018, A&A, 620, A171

    work page 2018

  30. [30]

    2015, A&A, 577, A132

    Maldonado, J., Affer, L., Micela, G., et al. 2015, A&A, 577, A132

    work page 2015

  31. [31]

    W., Brewer, J

    Mann, A. W., Brewer, J. M., Gaidos, E., Lépine, S., & Hilton, E. J. 2013, AJ, 145, 52

    work page 2013

  32. [32]

    W., Deacon, N

    Mann, A. W., Deacon, N. R., Gaidos, E., et al. 2014, AJ, 147, 160

    work page 2014

  33. [33]

    W., Dupuy, T., Kraus, A

    Mann, A. W., Dupuy, T., Kraus, A. L., et al. 2019, ApJ, 871, 63

    work page 2019

  34. [34]

    W., Feiden, G

    Mann, A. W., Feiden, G. A., Gaidos, E., Boyajian, T., & von Braun, K. 2015, ApJ, 804, 64 Martínez-Rodríguez, H. 2014, Master thesis, Universidad Complutense de

    work page 2015

  35. [35]

    2017, PhD thesis, Universität Hamburg, Germany

    Meyer, M. 2017, PhD thesis, Universität Hamburg, Germany

    work page 2017

  36. [36]

    J., & Gálvez, M

    Montes, D., López-Santiago, J., Fernández-Figueroa, M. J., & Gálvez, M. C. 2001, A&A, 379, 976

    work page 2001

  37. [37]

    Nagel, E., Czesla, S., Schmitt, J. H. M. M., et al. 2019, A&A, 622, A153

    work page 2019

  38. [38]

    R., Charbonneau, D., Irwin, J., et al

    Newton, E. R., Charbonneau, D., Irwin, J., et al. 2014, AJ, 147, 20

    work page 2014

  39. [39]

    2002, Physics of star formation in galaxies

    Palla, F., Zinnecker, H., Maeder, A., & Meynet, G., eds. 2002, Physics of star formation in galaxies

    work page 2002

  40. [40]

    Passegger, V . M. 2017, PhD thesis, Georg-August-Universität Göttingen, Ger- many

    work page 2017

  41. [41]

    M., Reiners, A., Jeffers, S

    Passegger, V . M., Reiners, A., Jeffers, S. V ., et al. 2018, A&A, 615, A6

    work page 2018

  42. [42]

    M., Wende-von Berg, S., & Reiners, A

    Passegger, V . M., Wende-von Berg, S., & Reiners, A. 2016, A&A, 587, A19

    work page 2016

  43. [43]

    Piskunov, N. E. & Valenti, J. A. 2002, A&A, 385, 1095

    work page 2002

  44. [44]

    J., Ribas, I., et al

    Quirrenbach, A., Amado, P. J., Ribas, I., et al. 2018, in Society of Photo- Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, V ol. 10702, So- ciety of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, 107020W

    work page 2018

  45. [45]

    S., Allard, F., Rajpurohit, S., et al

    Rajpurohit, A. S., Allard, F., Rajpurohit, S., et al. 2018, A&A, 620, A180

    work page 2018

  46. [46]

    2009, ApJ, 692, 538

    Reiners, A., Basri, G., & Browning, M. 2009, ApJ, 692, 538

    work page 2009

  47. [47]

    2018, Nature, 563, 365 Rodríguez Martínez, R., Ballard, S., Mayo, A., et al

    Ribas, I., Tuomi, M., Reiners, A., et al. 2018, Nature, 563, 365 Rodríguez Martínez, R., Ballard, S., Mayo, A., et al. 2018, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:1808.03652

    work page arXiv 2018

  48. [48]

    R., Muirhead, P

    Rojas-Ayala, B., Covey, K. R., Muirhead, P. S., & Lloyd, J. P. 2012, ApJ, 748, 93

    work page 2012

  49. [49]

    L., et al

    Ryabchikova, T., Piskunov, N., Kurucz, R. L., et al. 2015, Phys. Scr, 90, 054005

    work page 2015

  50. [50]

    2018, AJ, 155, 257 Schäfer, S., Guenther, E

    Sarkis, P., Henning, T., Kürster, M., et al. 2018, AJ, 155, 257 Schäfer, S., Guenther, E. W., Reiners, A., et al. 2018, in Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, V ol. 10702, Ground- based and Airborne Instrumentation for Astronomy VII, 1070276 Schöfer, P., Jeffers, S. V ., Reiners, A., et al. 2019, A&A, 623, A44

    work page 2018

  51. [51]

    M., Cifuentes, C., et al

    Schweitzer, A., Passegger, V . M., Cifuentes, C., et al. 2019, A&A, 625, A68

    work page 2019

  52. [52]

    2017, Nature Astronomy, 1, 0184

    Shulyak, D., Reiners, A., Engeln, A., et al. 2017, Nature Astronomy, 1, 0184

    work page 2017

  53. [53]

    2014, A&A, 563, A35

    Shulyak, D., Reiners, A., Seemann, U., Kochukhov, O., & Piskunov, N. 2014, A&A, 563, A35

    work page 2014

  54. [54]

    2015, A&A, 576, A77

    Smette, A., Sana, H., Noll, S., et al. 2015, A&A, 576, A77

    work page 2015

  55. [55]

    1973, ApJ, 184, 839

    Sneden, C. 1973, ApJ, 184, 839

    work page 1973

  56. [56]

    2012, MOOG: LTE line analysis and spectrum synthesis, Astrophysics Source Code Library

    Sneden, C., Bean, J., Ivans, I., Lucatello, S., & Sobeck, J. 2012, MOOG: LTE line analysis and spectrum synthesis, Astrophysics Source Code Library

    work page 2012

  57. [57]

    A., et al

    Souto, D., Cunha, K., García-Hernández, D. A., et al. 2017, ApJ, 835, 239

    work page 2017

  58. [58]

    T., Smith, V

    Souto, D., Unterborn, C. T., Smith, V . V ., et al. 2018, ApJ, 860, L15

    work page 2018

  59. [59]

    2014, MNRAS, 445, 4287

    Tang, J., Bressan, A., Rosenfield, P., et al. 2014, MNRAS, 445, 4287

    work page 2014

  60. [60]

    2018, A&A, 609, A117

    Trifonov, T., Kürster, M., Zechmeister, M., et al. 2018, A&A, 609, A117

    work page 2018

  61. [61]

    Valenti, J. A. & Piskunov, N. 2012, SME: Spectroscopy Made Easy, Astro- physics Source Code Library

    work page 2012

  62. [62]

    Veyette, M. J. & Muirhead, P. S. 2018, ApJ, 863, 166

    work page 2018

  63. [63]

    J., Muirhead, P

    Veyette, M. J., Muirhead, P. S., Mann, A. W., et al. 2017, ApJ, 851, 26 von Braun, K., Boyajian, T. S., van Belle, G. T., et al. 2014, MNRAS, 438, 2413

    work page 2017

  64. [64]

    Wright, J. T. & Eastman, J. D. 2014, PASP, 126, 838

    work page 2014

  65. [65]

    2014, A&A, 561, A59

    Zechmeister, M., Anglada-Escudé, G., & Reiners, A. 2014, A&A, 561, A59

    work page 2014

  66. [66]

    Zechmeister, M., Dreizler, S., Ribas, I., Reiners, A., & Caballero, J. A. 2019, A&A, in press

    work page 2019

  67. [67]

    2009, A&A, 505, 859

    Zechmeister, M., Kürster, M., & Endl, M. 2009, A&A, 505, 859

    work page 2009

  68. [68]

    J., et al

    Zechmeister, M., Reiners, A., Amado, P. J., et al. 2018, A&A, 609, A12 Article number, page 16 of 30 V . M. Passegger et al.: Simultaneous multiwavelength range modeling of activity insensitive lines Appendix A: Additional plots Figure A.1 presents the same comparison plots as in Fig. 4, in- cluding values for the combined wavelength ranges VIS +NIR. The ...

    work page 2018