Impact of measurement errors on the inferred stellar asteroseismic ages

Abstract

Aims. We aim to perform a theoretical investigation on the direct impact of measurement errors in the observational constraints on the recovered age for stars in main sequence (MS) and red giant branch (RGB) phases. We assumed that a mix of classical (effective temperature Teff and metallicity [Fe/H]) and asteroseismic (Δν and νmax) constraints were available for the objects. Methods. Artificial stars were sampled from a reference isochrone and subjected to random Gaussian perturbation in their observational constraints to simulate observational errors. The ages of these synthetic objects were then recovered by means of a Monte Carlo Markov chains approach over a grid of pre-computed stellar models. To account for observational uncertainties the grid covers different values of initial helium abundance and mixing-length parameter, that act as nuisance parameters in the age estimation. Results. The obtained differences between the recovered and true ages were modelled against the errors in the observables. This procedure was performed by means of linear models and projection pursuit regression models. The first class of statistical models provides an easily generalizable result, whose robustness is checked with the second method. From linear models we find that no age error source dominates in all the evolutionary phases. Assuming typical observational uncertainties, for MS the most important error source in the reconstructed age is the effective temperature of the star. An offset of 75 K accounts for an underestimation of the stellar age from 0.4 to 0.6 Gyr for initial and terminal MS. An error of 2.5% in νmax resulted the second most important source of uncertainty accounting for about −0.3 Gyr. The 0.1 dex error in [Fe/H] resulted particularly important only at the end of the MS, producing an age error of −0.4 Gyr. For the RGB phase the dominant source of uncertainty is νmax, causing an underestimation of about 0.6 Gyr; the offset in the effective temperature and Δν caused respectively an underestimation and overestimation of 0.3 Gyr. We find that the inference from the linear model is a good proxy for that from projection pursuit regression models. Therefore, inference from linear models can be safely used thanks to its broader generalizability. Finally, we explored the impact on age estimates of adding the luminosity to the previously discussed observational constraints. To this purpose, we assumed – for computational reasons – a 2.5% error in luminosity, much lower than the average error in the Gaia DR2 catalogue. However, even in this optimistic case, the addition of the luminosity does not increase precision of age estimates. Moreover, the luminosity resulted as a major contributor to the variability in the estimated ages, accounting for an error of about −0.3 Gyr in the explored evolutionary phases.

Testing abundance-age relations beyond solar analogues withKeplerLEGACY stars

“…Our non-seismic parameters (especially T eff , [Fe/H], and [α/Fe]) complement the superb Kepler oscillation data obtained for these bright stars and will aid further seismic modelling. These are important observational constraints that are necessary to exploiting the full potential of asteroseismology (see e.g., Chaplin et al 2014;Serenelli et al 2017;Creevey et al 2012;Valle et al 2018). We classified two of our targets with an age exceeding 8 Gyr as thick-disc members mostly based on chemodynamical arguments.…”

Testing abundance-age relations beyond solar analogues with Kepler LEGACY stars

“…These are important observational constraints that are necessary to exploit the full potential of asteroseismology (see, e.g. Chaplin et al 2014;Serenelli et al 2017;Valle et al 2018). We classify two of our targets with an age exceeding 8 Gyrs as thick-disc members mostly based on chemodynamical arguments.…”

Fundamental effective temperature measurements for eclipsing binary stars – I. Development of the method and application to AI Phoenicis

“…Jofré et al (2019) found that most FGK type stars (excluding the Sun) have calculated effective temperatures accurate to 200 − 300 K, with none more accurate than 50 K. Errors in T eff are now the dominant source of uncertainty in calibrating stellar models (Valle et al 2016). Furthermore, Valle et al (2018) found that introducing a systematic T eff error of ±150 K has a significant effect on the uncertainty of reconstructed asteroseismic ages. Most effective temperature measurements use…”