EDP Sciences logo
Subscriber Authentication Point
Search
Menu
Home All issues Volume 595 (November 2016) A&A, 595 (2016) C2 Full HTML
Free Access
Erratum
This article is an erratum for:
[https://doi.org/10.1051/0004-6361/201323317]

Issue
A&A
Volume 595, November 2016
Article Number C2
Number of page(s) 3
Section Stellar structure and evolution
DOI https://doi.org/10.1051/0004-6361/201323317e
Published online 09 November 2016

Erratum for: A&A 566, A20 (2014), DOI: 10.1051/0004-6361/201323317

In Appourchaux et al. (2014), the correct Eq. (1) should have been written with a minus sign in front of the second bracket as ln(Γ)=(αln(ν/νmax)+lnΓα)−(lnΔΓdip1+(2ln(ν/νdip)ln(Wdip/νmax))2),\begin{eqnarray} \ln(\Gamma)=(\alpha \ln(\nu/\nu_{\max})+\ln \Gamma_{\alpha})-\left(\frac{\ln \Delta \Gamma_{\rm dip}}{1+\left(\frac{2\ln(\nu/\nu_{\rm dip})}{\ln (W_{\rm dip}/\nu_{\rm max})}\right)^2}\right), \label{Eq_fit} \end{eqnarray}(1)where ν is the mode frequency, νmax is the frequency of maximum mode height, α is the power law index, Γα is the factor of the power law, ΔΓdip is the depth of the dip, Wdip is the width of the dip and νdip is the frequency of the dip. The fits in Appourchaux et al. (2014) were indeed performed with the minus sign.

Another error was also found in the original Table 3 of Appourchaux et al. (2014) pretending to give the parameters of Eq. (1). As a matter of fact, in that Table 3, the parameter Wdip as reported is related to the full width at half maximum (FWHM) calculated in frequency space, and in addition wrongly computed as it should have been about 1.5 times larger. Using Eq. (1) given above, we can deduce the proper relation between FWHMdip and Wdip as FWHMdip=νdip|Wdipνmax−νmaxWdip|·\begin{equation} {\it FWHM}_{\rm dip}=\nu_{\rm dip}\left| \sqrt{\frac{W_{\rm dip}}{\nu_{\rm max}}}-\sqrt{\frac{\nu_{\rm max}}{W_{\rm dip}}}\right|\cdot \end{equation}(2)

In Table 1, we give the parameters that were not affected by the mistake supplemented by the value of νdip which was not given in Appourchaux et al. (2014). In Table 2, we give the parameter Wdip that was not properly given in the Table 3 of Appourchaux et al. (2014), together with the corrected FWHMdip, a value which was not correct in Table 3 of Appourchaux et al. (2014) and was wrongly named. We also note that from the expression of Eq. (1), there are two solutions for Wdip since we have ln(Wdipa/νmax)=−ln(Wdipb/νmax)\begin{equation} \ln (W_{\rm dip}^{a}/\nu_{\rm max})=-\ln (W_{\rm dip}^{b}/\nu_{\rm max}) \end{equation}(3)where Wdipa\hbox{$W_{\rm dip}^{a}$} is the solution greater than νmax, while Wdipb\hbox{$W_{\rm dip}^{b}$} is the solution smaller than νmax. Here the solution chosen for Wdip is the former solution.

These corrections do not affect the conclusions reached for the dependence of these parameters upon the effective temperature and νmax.

thumbnail Fig. 6

Parameters of Eq. (1) as a function of the effective temperature for all 28 stars, for the power law dependence (left) and for the Lorentzian fit (right). The median value together with the credible intervals at 33% and 66% were derived from a Monte-Carlo simulation of the fit. The orange line shows the temperature dependence of the linewidth at the frequency of maximum mode height as derived by Appourchaux et al. (2012). The open diamond is the result of the fit for the solar data of the LOI. The open triangles are the results of the fit for the sub-giant stars of Benomar et al. (2013). The solid lines show a linear fit of the parameters with respect to the effective temperature. The Lorentzian parameters for stars for which the Lorentzian fit is not significant are not plotted.

thumbnail Fig. 7

Parameters of Eq. (1) as a function of the frequency of maximum mode height for all 28 stars, for the power law dependence (left) and for the Lorentzian fit (right). The median value together with the credible intervals of 33% and 66% were derived from a Monte-Carlo simulation of the fit. The open diamond is the result of the fit for the solar LOI data. The open triangles are the result of the fit for the sub-giant stars of Benomar et al. (2013). The error bars are derived from a Monte-Carlo simulation using credible intervals of 33% and 66%. The solid lines show a linear fit of the parameters with respect to the frequency. The Lorentzian parameters for stars for which the Lorentzian fit is not significant are not plotted.

Table 1

Linewidth parameters as per Eq. (1).

Table 2

Width of the linewidth (Wdip) as per Eq. (1) and of FWHMdip as per Eq. (2).

Acknowledgments

We are grateful to Mikkel N. Lund for having found a discrepancy leading to the main author to find the source of the mistake.

References

  1. Appourchaux, T., Benomar, O., Gruberbauer, M., et al. 2012, A&A, 537, A134 [NASA ADS] [CrossRef] [EDP Sciences] [Google Scholar]
  2. Appourchaux, T., Antia, H. M., Benomar, O., et al. 2014, A&A, 566, A20 [NASA ADS] [CrossRef] [EDP Sciences] [Google Scholar]
  3. Benomar, O., Bedding, T. R., Mosser, B., et al. 2013, ApJ, 767, 158 [NASA ADS] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]

© ESO, 2016

All Tables

Table 1

Linewidth parameters as per Eq. (1).

In the text
Table 2

Width of the linewidth (Wdip) as per Eq. (1) and of FWHMdip as per Eq. (2).

In the text

All Figures

thumbnail Fig. 6

Parameters of Eq. (1) as a function of the effective temperature for all 28 stars, for the power law dependence (left) and for the Lorentzian fit (right). The median value together with the credible intervals at 33% and 66% were derived from a Monte-Carlo simulation of the fit. The orange line shows the temperature dependence of the linewidth at the frequency of maximum mode height as derived by Appourchaux et al. (2012). The open diamond is the result of the fit for the solar data of the LOI. The open triangles are the results of the fit for the sub-giant stars of Benomar et al. (2013). The solid lines show a linear fit of the parameters with respect to the effective temperature. The Lorentzian parameters for stars for which the Lorentzian fit is not significant are not plotted.
In the text
thumbnail Fig. 7

Parameters of Eq. (1) as a function of the frequency of maximum mode height for all 28 stars, for the power law dependence (left) and for the Lorentzian fit (right). The median value together with the credible intervals of 33% and 66% were derived from a Monte-Carlo simulation of the fit. The open diamond is the result of the fit for the solar LOI data. The open triangles are the result of the fit for the sub-giant stars of Benomar et al. (2013). The error bars are derived from a Monte-Carlo simulation using credible intervals of 33% and 66%. The solid lines show a linear fit of the parameters with respect to the frequency. The Lorentzian parameters for stars for which the Lorentzian fit is not significant are not plotted.
In the text

Current usage metrics show cumulative count of Article Views (full-text article views including HTML views, PDF and ePub downloads, according to the available data) and Abstracts Views on Vision4Press platform.

Data correspond to usage on the plateform after 2015. The current usage metrics is available 48-96 hours after online publication and is updated daily on week days.

Initial download of the metrics may take a while.