Asteroseismology and Gaia

Testing scaling relations using 2200 Kepler stars with TGAS parallaxes

Daniel Huber, Joel Zinn, Mathias Bojsen-Hansen, Marc Pinsonneault, Christian Sahlholdt, Aldo Serenelli, Victor Silva Aguirre, Keivan Stassun, Dennis Stello, Jamie Tayar, Fabienne Bastien, Timothy R. Bedding, Lars A. Buchhave, William J. Chaplin, Guy R. Davies, Rafael A. García, David W. Latham, Savita Mathur, Benoit Mosser, Sanjib Sharma

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

48 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

We present a comparison of parallaxes and radii from asteroseismology and Gaia DR1 (TGAS) for 2200 Kepler stars spanning from the main sequence to the red-giant branch. We show that previously identified offsets between TGAS parallaxes and distances derived from asteroseismology and eclipsing binaries have likely been overestimated for parallaxes ≲5-10 mas (≈90%-98% of the TGAS sample). The observed differences in our sample can furthermore be partially compensated by adopting a hotter Teff scale (such as the infrared flux method) instead of spectroscopic temperatures for dwarfs and subgiants. Residual systematic differences are at the ≈2% level in parallax across three orders of magnitude. We use TGAS parallaxes to empirically demonstrate that asteroseismic radii are accurate to ≈5% or better for stars between ≈0.8-8 R. We find no significant offset for main-sequence (≲1.5 R) and low-luminosity RGB stars (≈3-8 R), but seismic radii appear to be systematically underestimated by ≈5% for subgiants (≲1.5-3 R). We find no systematic errors as a function of metallicity between [Fe H] ≈ -0.8 to +0.4 dex, and show tentative evidence that corrections to the scaling relation for the large frequency separation (Δν) improve the agreement with TGAS for RGB stars. Finally, we demonstrate that beyond ≈3 kpc asteroseismology will provide more precise distances than end-of-mission Gaia data, highlighting the synergy and complementary nature of Gaia and asteroseismology for studying galactic stellar populations.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Article number102
JournalAstrophysical Journal
Volume844
Issue number2
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 1 2017

Fingerprint

asteroseismology
scaling
stars
radii
temperature
parallax
systematic errors
metallicity
luminosity
comparison
method

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Astronomy and Astrophysics
  • Space and Planetary Science

Cite this

Huber, D., Zinn, J., Bojsen-Hansen, M., Pinsonneault, M., Sahlholdt, C., Serenelli, A., ... Sharma, S. (2017). Asteroseismology and Gaia: Testing scaling relations using 2200 Kepler stars with TGAS parallaxes. Astrophysical Journal, 844(2), [102]. https://doi.org/10.3847/1538-4357/aa75ca
Huber, Daniel ; Zinn, Joel ; Bojsen-Hansen, Mathias ; Pinsonneault, Marc ; Sahlholdt, Christian ; Serenelli, Aldo ; Aguirre, Victor Silva ; Stassun, Keivan ; Stello, Dennis ; Tayar, Jamie ; Bastien, Fabienne ; Bedding, Timothy R. ; Buchhave, Lars A. ; Chaplin, William J. ; Davies, Guy R. ; García, Rafael A. ; Latham, David W. ; Mathur, Savita ; Mosser, Benoit ; Sharma, Sanjib. / Asteroseismology and Gaia : Testing scaling relations using 2200 Kepler stars with TGAS parallaxes. In: Astrophysical Journal. 2017 ; Vol. 844, No. 2.
@article{7abad9bd6b0d4e7794e9531871b5bad7,
title = "Asteroseismology and Gaia: Testing scaling relations using 2200 Kepler stars with TGAS parallaxes",
abstract = "We present a comparison of parallaxes and radii from asteroseismology and Gaia DR1 (TGAS) for 2200 Kepler stars spanning from the main sequence to the red-giant branch. We show that previously identified offsets between TGAS parallaxes and distances derived from asteroseismology and eclipsing binaries have likely been overestimated for parallaxes ≲5-10 mas (≈90{\%}-98{\%} of the TGAS sample). The observed differences in our sample can furthermore be partially compensated by adopting a hotter Teff scale (such as the infrared flux method) instead of spectroscopic temperatures for dwarfs and subgiants. Residual systematic differences are at the ≈2{\%} level in parallax across three orders of magnitude. We use TGAS parallaxes to empirically demonstrate that asteroseismic radii are accurate to ≈5{\%} or better for stars between ≈0.8-8 R⊙. We find no significant offset for main-sequence (≲1.5 R⊙) and low-luminosity RGB stars (≈3-8 R⊙), but seismic radii appear to be systematically underestimated by ≈5{\%} for subgiants (≲1.5-3 R⊙). We find no systematic errors as a function of metallicity between [Fe H] ≈ -0.8 to +0.4 dex, and show tentative evidence that corrections to the scaling relation for the large frequency separation (Δν) improve the agreement with TGAS for RGB stars. Finally, we demonstrate that beyond ≈3 kpc asteroseismology will provide more precise distances than end-of-mission Gaia data, highlighting the synergy and complementary nature of Gaia and asteroseismology for studying galactic stellar populations.",
author = "Daniel Huber and Joel Zinn and Mathias Bojsen-Hansen and Marc Pinsonneault and Christian Sahlholdt and Aldo Serenelli and Aguirre, {Victor Silva} and Keivan Stassun and Dennis Stello and Jamie Tayar and Fabienne Bastien and Bedding, {Timothy R.} and Buchhave, {Lars A.} and Chaplin, {William J.} and Davies, {Guy R.} and Garc{\'i}a, {Rafael A.} and Latham, {David W.} and Savita Mathur and Benoit Mosser and Sanjib Sharma",
year = "2017",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.3847/1538-4357/aa75ca",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "844",
journal = "Astrophysical Journal",
issn = "0004-637X",
publisher = "IOP Publishing Ltd.",
number = "2",

}

Huber, D, Zinn, J, Bojsen-Hansen, M, Pinsonneault, M, Sahlholdt, C, Serenelli, A, Aguirre, VS, Stassun, K, Stello, D, Tayar, J, Bastien, F, Bedding, TR, Buchhave, LA, Chaplin, WJ, Davies, GR, García, RA, Latham, DW, Mathur, S, Mosser, B & Sharma, S 2017, 'Asteroseismology and Gaia: Testing scaling relations using 2200 Kepler stars with TGAS parallaxes', Astrophysical Journal, vol. 844, no. 2, 102. https://doi.org/10.3847/1538-4357/aa75ca

Asteroseismology and Gaia : Testing scaling relations using 2200 Kepler stars with TGAS parallaxes. / Huber, Daniel; Zinn, Joel; Bojsen-Hansen, Mathias; Pinsonneault, Marc; Sahlholdt, Christian; Serenelli, Aldo; Aguirre, Victor Silva; Stassun, Keivan; Stello, Dennis; Tayar, Jamie; Bastien, Fabienne; Bedding, Timothy R.; Buchhave, Lars A.; Chaplin, William J.; Davies, Guy R.; García, Rafael A.; Latham, David W.; Mathur, Savita; Mosser, Benoit; Sharma, Sanjib.

In: Astrophysical Journal, Vol. 844, No. 2, 102, 01.01.2017.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Asteroseismology and Gaia

T2 - Testing scaling relations using 2200 Kepler stars with TGAS parallaxes

AU - Huber, Daniel

AU - Zinn, Joel

AU - Bojsen-Hansen, Mathias

AU - Pinsonneault, Marc

AU - Sahlholdt, Christian

AU - Serenelli, Aldo

AU - Aguirre, Victor Silva

AU - Stassun, Keivan

AU - Stello, Dennis

AU - Tayar, Jamie

AU - Bastien, Fabienne

AU - Bedding, Timothy R.

AU - Buchhave, Lars A.

AU - Chaplin, William J.

AU - Davies, Guy R.

AU - García, Rafael A.

AU - Latham, David W.

AU - Mathur, Savita

AU - Mosser, Benoit

AU - Sharma, Sanjib

PY - 2017/1/1

Y1 - 2017/1/1

N2 - We present a comparison of parallaxes and radii from asteroseismology and Gaia DR1 (TGAS) for 2200 Kepler stars spanning from the main sequence to the red-giant branch. We show that previously identified offsets between TGAS parallaxes and distances derived from asteroseismology and eclipsing binaries have likely been overestimated for parallaxes ≲5-10 mas (≈90%-98% of the TGAS sample). The observed differences in our sample can furthermore be partially compensated by adopting a hotter Teff scale (such as the infrared flux method) instead of spectroscopic temperatures for dwarfs and subgiants. Residual systematic differences are at the ≈2% level in parallax across three orders of magnitude. We use TGAS parallaxes to empirically demonstrate that asteroseismic radii are accurate to ≈5% or better for stars between ≈0.8-8 R⊙. We find no significant offset for main-sequence (≲1.5 R⊙) and low-luminosity RGB stars (≈3-8 R⊙), but seismic radii appear to be systematically underestimated by ≈5% for subgiants (≲1.5-3 R⊙). We find no systematic errors as a function of metallicity between [Fe H] ≈ -0.8 to +0.4 dex, and show tentative evidence that corrections to the scaling relation for the large frequency separation (Δν) improve the agreement with TGAS for RGB stars. Finally, we demonstrate that beyond ≈3 kpc asteroseismology will provide more precise distances than end-of-mission Gaia data, highlighting the synergy and complementary nature of Gaia and asteroseismology for studying galactic stellar populations.

AB - We present a comparison of parallaxes and radii from asteroseismology and Gaia DR1 (TGAS) for 2200 Kepler stars spanning from the main sequence to the red-giant branch. We show that previously identified offsets between TGAS parallaxes and distances derived from asteroseismology and eclipsing binaries have likely been overestimated for parallaxes ≲5-10 mas (≈90%-98% of the TGAS sample). The observed differences in our sample can furthermore be partially compensated by adopting a hotter Teff scale (such as the infrared flux method) instead of spectroscopic temperatures for dwarfs and subgiants. Residual systematic differences are at the ≈2% level in parallax across three orders of magnitude. We use TGAS parallaxes to empirically demonstrate that asteroseismic radii are accurate to ≈5% or better for stars between ≈0.8-8 R⊙. We find no significant offset for main-sequence (≲1.5 R⊙) and low-luminosity RGB stars (≈3-8 R⊙), but seismic radii appear to be systematically underestimated by ≈5% for subgiants (≲1.5-3 R⊙). We find no systematic errors as a function of metallicity between [Fe H] ≈ -0.8 to +0.4 dex, and show tentative evidence that corrections to the scaling relation for the large frequency separation (Δν) improve the agreement with TGAS for RGB stars. Finally, we demonstrate that beyond ≈3 kpc asteroseismology will provide more precise distances than end-of-mission Gaia data, highlighting the synergy and complementary nature of Gaia and asteroseismology for studying galactic stellar populations.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85027411977&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85027411977&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.3847/1538-4357/aa75ca

DO - 10.3847/1538-4357/aa75ca

M3 - Article

VL - 844

JO - Astrophysical Journal

JF - Astrophysical Journal

SN - 0004-637X

IS - 2

M1 - 102

ER -

Huber D, Zinn J, Bojsen-Hansen M, Pinsonneault M, Sahlholdt C, Serenelli A et al. Asteroseismology and Gaia: Testing scaling relations using 2200 Kepler stars with TGAS parallaxes. Astrophysical Journal. 2017 Jan 1;844(2). 102. https://doi.org/10.3847/1538-4357/aa75ca