| Abstract
| - Context. Stellar properties and, in particular stellar radii of exoplanet host stars, are essential for measuring the properties of exoplanets, therefore it is becoming increasingly important to be able to supply reliable stellar radii fast. Grid-modelling is an obvious choice for this, but that only offers a low degree of transparency to non-specialists. Aims. Here we present a new, easy, fast, and transparent method of obtaining stellar properties for stars exhibiting solar-like oscillations. The method, called Asteroseismology Made Easy (AME), can determine stellar masses, mean densities, radii, and surface gravities, as well as estimate ages. We present AME as a visual and powerful tool that could be useful, in particular, in light of the large number of exoplanets being found. Methods. AME consists of a set of figures from which the stellar parameters can be deduced. These figures are made from a grid of stellar evolutionary models that cover masses ranging from 0.7 M⊙ to 1.6 M⊙ in steps of 0.1 M⊙ and metallicities in the interval −0.3 dex ≤ [Fe/H] ≤ +0.3 dex in increments of 0.1 dex. The stellar evolutionary models are computed using the Modules for Experiments in Stellar Astrophysics (MESA) code with simple input physics. Results. We have compared the results from AME with results for three groups of stars: stars with radii determined from interferometry (and measured parallaxes), stars with radii determined from measurements of their parallaxes (and calculated angular diameters), and stars with results based on modelling their individual oscillation frequencies. We find that a comparison of the radii from interferometry to those from AME yields a weighted mean of the fractional differences of just 2%. This is also the level of deviation that we find when we compare the parallax-based radii to the radii determined from AME. Conclusions. The comparison between independently determined stellar parameters and those found using AME show that our method can provide reliable stellar masses, radii, and ages, with median uncertainties in the order of 4%, 2%, and 25%, respectively.
|
