All Tables

Table 1: Individual measurements. Columns are: (1, 2) date and time of observation; (3, 4) projected baseline length and position angle (measured East of North); (5) squared visibility after calibration and error; (6, 9) HD number of calibrators used prior and after the given data point respectively, 0 means that there was no calibrator; (7, 8, 10, 11) quantities used for computing the correlation matrix as in Eq. (26) of Perrin (2003): $\sigma _{V^2}$ are errors on the estimated visibility of the calibrators.
Table 2: Calibrators with spectral type, K magnitude, limb-darkened disk (LD) angular diameter in K band (in milliarcsec) and baseline (Mérand et al. 2005; Bordé et al. 2002).
Table 3: Influence of the limb-darkening parameter $\alpha$ on the best-fit diameter and the associated reduced $\chi ^2$ using the whole data set, assuming a brightness distribution $I (\mu ) = \mu ^{\alpha }$ with $\mu = \cos \theta$ the cosine of the azimuth of a surface element of the star (Hestroffer 1997). The visibility deficit measured at short baselines (S1-S2) with respect to the best-fit model is given in the last column, showing a weak dependence on the limb-darkening model.
Table 4: Available constraints on the near- and mid-infrared excess around Vega. References: (1) Campins et al. (1985); (2) Blackwell et al. (1983); (3) Rieke et al. (1985); (4) Liu et al. (2004); (5) Cohen et al. (1992), with the absolute photometric error estimated by Aumann et al. (1984). The photometric data in references (1), (2) and (3) have been compared to the most recent Kurucz photospheric model of Vega (Bohlin & Gilliland 2004), which has a typical uncertainty of 2% in the infrared (this uncertainty has been added to the estimated errors on the measurements). Note that the interferometric data from FLUOR and BLINC only sample a specific part of the inner disk, while the photometric studies include Vega's entire environment.