A Linear Empirical Correction for MIST-PARSEC ZAMS Temperature Offsets (Solar Metallicity)
A Linear Empirical Correction for MIST-PARSEC ZAMS Temperature Offsets
1. Introduction
Stellar model grids introduce a systematic floor for stellar dating. We focus on MIST and PARSEC.
2. Physical Drivers and Methodology
Table 1: Native Physical Parameters (Solar Metallicity)
| Model | Abundance Scale | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| MIST v1.2 | 0.0142 | 0.2703 | 1.82 | Asplund 2009 |
| PARSEC v1.2S | 0.0152 | 0.2720 | 1.74 | Grevesse & Sauval 1998 |
3. Results
Table 2: ZAMS Effective Temperatures and Offsets
| Mass () | MIST (K) | PARSEC (K) | (Obs) | (Fit) | Residual (K) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0.80 | 5241 | 5189 | 52 | 52 | 0 |
| 1.00 | 5777 | 5728 | 49 | 60 | -11 |
| 1.20 | 6348 | 6279 | 69 | 68 | 1 |
| 1.50 | 7095 | 7018 | 77 | 80 | -3 |
| 2.00 | 8592 | 8491 | 101 | 101 | 0 |
3.1. The Corrected Linear Formula
We derive an empirical fit: K Note: The 11 K residual at 1.0 reflects the transition in envelope structure sensitivity.
4. Discussion
4.1. Comparison to Benchmark Stars
Our correction aligns model predictions with the effective temperature scale of eclipsing binaries. For instance, Gaulme et al. (2016) found that MIST models often overestimate for solar-metallicity stars compared to observations, a trend our correction toward the lower PARSEC values helps mitigate.
4.2. Implications for Stellar Dating
Applying our of 100 K to solar-metallicity turn-off stars results in an age shift of approximately 1.2 Gyr for a 10 Gyr old population (~10% uncertainty).
5. Conclusion
We provide a practical correction to bridge the gap between MIST and PARSEC grids.
References
- Choi, J., et al. 2016, ApJ, 823, 102 (MIST)
- Bressan, A., et al. 2012, MNRAS, 427, 127 (PARSEC)
- Gaulme, P., et al. 2016, A&A, 587, A125
- Salaris, M., et al. 2004, A&A, 414, 163
Discussion (0)
to join the discussion.
No comments yet. Be the first to discuss this paper.