Goodness of Fit (Testing)

Deheuvels, Paul

doi:10.1002/9780470057339.vnn084

Cited by 1 publication

(1 citation statement)

References 34 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Solar‐like oscillations have been detected on a number of main‐sequence stars using multisite ground‐based spectroscopy (Bedding & Kjeldsen 2007) and the recent high‐precision photometric observations of the French‐led COROT space telescope (Baglin et al 2007). This has led to the first detailed asteroseismic studies of solar‐like oscillations in main‐sequence stars (Appourchaux et al 2008; Benomar et al 2009; Deheuvels et al 2010; Mathur et al 2010a).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Global asteroseismic properties of solar-like oscillations observed by Kepler: a comparison of complementary analysis methods

Verner

Elsworth

Chaplin

et al. 2011

Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society

111

109

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We present the asteroseismic analysis of 1948 F‐, G‐ and K‐type main‐sequence and subgiant stars observed by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration Kepler mission. We detect and characterize solar‐like oscillations in 642 of these stars. This represents the largest cohort of main‐sequence and subgiant solar‐like oscillators observed to date. The photometric observations are analysed using the methods developed by nine independent research teams. The results are combined to validate the determined global asteroseismic parameters and calculate the relative precision by which the parameters can be obtained. We correlate the relative number of detected solar‐like oscillators with stellar parameters from the Kepler Input Catalogue and find a deficiency for stars with effective temperatures in the range 5300 ≲Teff≲ 5700 K and a drop‐off in detected oscillations in stars approaching the red edge of the classical instability strip. We compare the power‐law relationships between the frequency of peak power, νmax, the mean large frequency separation, Δν, and the maximum mode amplitude, Amax, and show that there are significant method‐dependent differences in the results obtained. This illustrates the need for multiple complementary analysis methods to be used to assess the robustness and reproducibility of results derived from global asteroseismic parameters.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%