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 Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Precise stellar masses and radii can be determined using asteroseismology,but their accuracy must be tested against independent estimates. Using radiiderived from Gaia DR2 parallaxes, we test the accuracy of asteroseismic radiifor a sample of 93 dwarfs based on both individual frequency fitting and theseismic scaling relations. Radii from frequency fitting are about 1 per centsmaller than Gaia radii on average; however, this difference may be explainedby a negative bias of 30 $\mu$as in the Gaia parallaxes. This indicates thatthe radii derived from frequency fitting are accurate to within 1 per cent. Thescaling relations are found to overestimate radii by more than 5 per cent,compared to the Gaia radii, at the highest temperatures. We demonstrate thatthis offset is reduced to 3 per cent after applying corrections based on modelfrequencies to the scaling relation for $\Delta\nu$, but only when the modelfrequencies are corrected for the surface effect. With corrections to$\Delta\nu$, the scaling relation gives radii accurate to about 2--3 per centfor dwarfs in the temperature range $5400$--$6700$ K. The remaining offset atthe highest temperatures may indicate the need for a correction to the scalingrelation for $\nu_{\mathrm{max}}$.

Asteroseismic radii of dwarfs: New accuracy constraints from Gaia DR2 parallaxes