English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

The study of planet occurrence as a function of stellar mass is important fora better understanding of planet formation. Estimating stellar mass, especiallyin the red giant regime, is difficult. In particular, stellar masses of asample of evolved planet-hosting stars based on spectroscopy and grid-basedmodelling have been put to question over the past decade with claims they wereoverestimated. Although efforts have been made in the past to reconcile thisdispute using asteroseismology, results were inconclusive. In an attempt toresolve this controversy, we study four more evolved planet-hosting stars inthis paper using asteroseismology, and we revisit previous results to make aninformed study of the whole ensemble in a self-consistent way. For the four newstars, we measure their masses by locating their characteristic oscillationfrequency, $\mathrm{\nu}_{\mathrm{max}}$, from their radial velocity timeseries observed by SONG. For two stars, we are also able to measure the largefrequency separation, $\mathrm{\Delta\nu}$, helped by extended SONG single-siteand dual-site observations and new TESS observations. We establish therobustness of the $\mathrm{\nu}_{\mathrm{max}}$-only-based results bydetermining the stellar mass from $\mathrm{\Delta\nu}$, and from both$\mathrm{\Delta\nu}$ and $\mathrm{\nu}_{\mathrm{max}}$. We then compare theseismic masses of the full ensemble of 16 stars with the spectroscopic massesfrom three different literature sources. We find an offset between the seismicand spectroscopic mass scales that is mass-dependent, suggesting that thepreviously claimed overestimation of spectroscopic masses only affects starsmore massive than about 1.6 M$_\mathrm{\odot}$.

Asteroseismic masses of four evolved planet-hosting stars using SONG and TESS: resolving the retired A-star mass controversy