Exoplanets: Gaia and the importance of spectroscopic follow-up

Exoplanets: Gaia and the importance of spectroscopic follow-up Lisa Benamati Tese de Doutoramento apresentada à Faculdade de Ciências da Universidade do Porto, Departemento de Fisica e Astronomia, Área Científica 2015 Exoplanets: Gaia and the importance of spectroscopic follow-up Lisa Benamati PhD FCUP ANO 3.º CICLO D D D Exoplanets: Gaia and the importance of spectroscopic follow-up Lisa Benamati Doutoramento em Astronomia Departamento de Fisica e Astronomia 2015 Orientador Nuno M.C. Santos, Professor Associado Convidado, Faculdade de Ciencias Coorientador Alessandro Sozzetti, Categoria, Faculdade Exoplanets: Gaia and the importance of spectroscopic follow-up Lisa Benamati Centro de Astrof´ ısica da Universidade do Porto Departamento de F´ ısica e Astronomia, Faculdade de Ciˆ encias, Universidade do Porto Tese de Doutouramento Orientadores: N. C. Santos, A. Sozzetti 2015 Ai miei genitori ”Grazie per esserci e sostenermi sempre.” Abstract In this thesis I present the story of my PhD project. Starting with a short introduction and then presenting the work done using astrometry and spectroscopy and finishing with a description of the work done related to evolved stars. With the launch of Gaia on December 2013, a new era for astrometry and also for the astrophysics started. In the context of exoplanet research, Gaia will allow us to a) significantly refine our understanding of the statistical properties of extrasolar planets (and binary systems, too), b) achieve crucial tests of theoretical models of gas giant planet formation and migration, c) provide important contributions to the understanding of direct detections of giant extrasolar planets, and much more. These measurements in combination with spectroscopy and the present day and future extrasolar planet search programs will give a crucial contribution to several aspects of planetary systems astrophysics (formation theories, dynamical evolution, etc.). In my PhD, I explored the importance of spectroscopic follow-up as complement to Gaia data. In Chapter 2 I describe our software code to analyze synthetic one-dimensional data of Gaia and combine it with RV data. We used Hipparcos data to test the programs. Having no new solution using the Hipparcos data for the exoplanet-hosts (HD134113 and HD219828) we tried to use it for binary systems. In Chapter 3 I present the work done with the binary systems (CD−436810, G135−46, G27−44, G63−5, G237−84, HD16784, HD7424 and HD192718) using statistical methods to find a range of solutions for the mass of the companion and its orbital period because of lack of accuracy of the astrometric data. We did not obtain well constrained results, but two systems showed that the candidate companions at 1σof confidence level are brown dwarfs. For one system, then, we found two different solutions based on analysis of two different reductions of the Hipparcos data. We concluded that the old Hipparcos reduction seems to be more compatible with our results. The results of this work have been published in Benamati et al. (2013). The last chapter of this thesis describes the derivation of stellar parameters and abundances of 12 elements for a sample of giant stars which have been searched for planets. These parameters and abundances allow us to study the statistical properties and chemical evolution of evolved stars and in the future, also, the connection with the giant planets. The results of these works will be published in Alves et al. (2015) and Adibekyan et al. (2015). I VIII CONTENTS LIST OF FIGURES 1.1 The development of astrometric accuracies. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 1.2 Gaia observation principle (de Bruijne 2012). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 1.3 Number of the known extrasolar planets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 1.4 The mass-orbital period distribution in logarithmic scale . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 1.5 Histogram of the planet frequency. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 2.1 The relative orbit of a binary. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 2.2 The radial velocity curves for two stars in a binary system. . . . . . . . . . . . 27 2.3 Orientation of Double Stars. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 2.4 The RV curve of HD162020b. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 2.5 The astrometric orbital motion of HD162020b. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 2.6 The path of the star HD162020. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 2.7 RV curve of Alpha Centauri A and B . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 2.8 Resulted astrometric orbit of Alpha Centauri A and B . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 2.9 Resulted simulated motion of Alpha Centauri. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36 2.10 Residuals considering the planetary perturbation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 2.11 Residuals without the planetary perturbation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38 2.12 Resulted RV curve of HD43848 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39 2.13 Periodogram of HD43848. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41 2.14 Periodogram of HD134113 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43 2.15 Periodogram of HD219828 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44 3.1 Distribution of mass ratios. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47 3.2 RV measurements for the metal-poor binaries. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49 3.3 Limits on the orbital period and the mass of the companion to HD16784. . . . . 55 3.4 Limits on the orbital period and the mass of the companion to G27-44. . . . . . 56 3.5 Limits on the orbital period and the mass of the companion to G63-5. . . . . . 56 3.6 Limits on the orbital period and the mass of the companion to G237-84 and ∆µ. 57 3.7 Limits on the orbital period and the mass of the companion to HD7424. . . . . 58 IX XLIST OF FIGURES 3.8 Limits on the orbital period and the mass of the companion to HD192718. . . . 58 3.9 Limits on the mass and the orbital period for G135−46 ............. 59 3.10 The results for CD-436810. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61 3.11 Old and new Hipparcos reduction for CD-436810. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62 4.1 Results of Pasquini et al. [2007] and Mortier et al. [2013b]. . . . . . . . . . . . 67 4.2 Fluxinthespectralline............................... 68 4.3 HR diagram for our stellar sample. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70 4.4 Comparison between the atmospheric parameters derived using the three linelists. 72 4.5 Boxplot of the errors for derived parameters. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73 4.6 Comparison between the results found using the three line-lists. . . . . . . . . 75 4.7 Comparison of the results of this work for the TS13 line-list with literature data. 76 4.8 Comparison between our results with those from da Silva et al. [2006], . . . . 78 4.9 Interdependence of the stellar atmospheric parameters of the sample stars. . . . 80 4.10 The comparison between the EW calculated with IRAF and ARES. . . . . . . . 82 4.11 [CrI/CrII], [ScI/ScII], and [TiI/TiII] as a function of atmospheric parameters . . 84 4.12 [X/Fe] vs. Teffplots. ............................... 86 4.13 [X/Fe] vs. log gplots................................ 88 4.14 [X/Fe] vs. microturbulence plots. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89 4.15 [X/Fe] vs. [Fe/H]plots............................... 90 4.16 Toomre diagram for the entire sample. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93 4.17 [α/Fe] vs. [Fe/H].................................. 93 4.18 High-αand low-αseparation histograms. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 94 4.19 [Fe/H] vs. log gand The metallicity distribution. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 96 LIST OF TABLES 1.1 Comparison between Gaia and Hipparcos. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 1.2 Number of giant planets revealed by Gaia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 3.1 The sample of metal-poor spectroscopic binaries. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48 3.2 List of the sample with available radial-velocity RMS and mean RV from the CfA DS +TRES.................................. 50 3.3 Elements of the fitted orbit for the binaries G135-46 and CD-436810 . . . . . . 50 3.4 Summary of the results for the binary system CD-436810. . . . . . . . . . . . 60 3.5 List of the binaries with the results. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64 4.1 The coefficients of the linear fits. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79 4.2 Table of abundances, rms, total error and number of measured lines . . . . . . . 84 4.3 Slope, correlation coefficient, and significance of the [X/Fe] ... . . . . . . . . . 87 B.1 RVmeasurements................................. 105 C.1 List of the re jt. .................................. 114 C.2 Stellarparameters. ................................ 121 C.3 Stellar parameters of 74 stars common with our sample. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 126 C.4 Thelinelist .................................... 127 C.5 The table of the [X/H]abundances......................... 131 C.6 The table of the Galactic space velocity components. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 136 XI 12 LIST OF TABLES CHAPTER 1 Introduction Astronomy is one of the oldest sciences in the world. Human beings have long looked up at the sky and pondered its mysteries. Even today, many people are fascinated by the question if we are alone in this Universe and, thanks to the technology development, today we are trying to answer to this question, being able to detect planets around other stars and low-mass planet, too, like the Earth. The study of exoplanets seeks also to understand how planetary systems form and evolve, and to understand the diversity of planetary system architectures. Therefore we need to understand the behaviour of all types of stars, in addition to detect and to know the orbital properties of the planets and to interpret the statistical properties of the planetary sample. Knowing well the properties of the samples of stars we can delineate conclusions about the planet population as a function of metallicities, masses, etc. and compare the results of different surveys. For a complete description of the star a number of important parameters must be defined, such as mass, luminosity, radius, age, chemical composition, angular momentum, magnetic field, mass-loss rate and circumstellar environment. The derivations of several of these parameters requires potent observational techniques such as high resolution spectroscopy. The main goals of this thesis is twofold: the first one is to understand how the use of high precision spectroscopy can be useful to better characterize planetary systems combining the radial velocities with the upcoming of the new data from Gaia; the second one is to understand how the stellar parameters and namely abundances control planet formation by studying the properties of giant stars. Concerning the first of these goals, we exercised our combined analysis tools using existing Hipparcos data and radial velocities for a sample of low-metallicity objects observed with the HARPS spectrograph at La Silla (Pepe et al. 2002) and with the HIRES Spectrograph on the Keck 1 telescope at Mauna Kea in Hawaii (Vogt et al. 1994), in preparation for Gaia. For the second goal, we study giant stars screened for planets in RV surveys in the context of the CORALIE (Udry et al. 2000a) extrasolar planet search program analyzing the stellar parameters (effective temperature, microturbulence, surface gravity and iron abundance) and also other element abundances. We need to know these parameters and abundances with very high accuracy to understand better the theoretical models. The study and precise characterization of high-mass 13 14 CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION HIPPARCOS GAIA Limiting magnitude(V) ∼12 mag 20 mag Completeness (V) 7.3−9.0 mag 20 mag Number of objects 120000 1000 million Accuracy (all five parameters) 1−2 mas ∼9−26 µas Table 1.1: A comparison between the scientific capabilities of Gaia with those of Hipparcos. planets help us to understand better the statistical properties of extrasolar planets, the theory of gas giant planet formation and the formation and dynamical evolution of multiple-planet systems. 1.1 Gaia The first step in the acquisition of astrometric data from space was represented by the Hipparcos project. The accuracies of the positions, annual proper motions and parallaxes were in the range of 1-2 milliarcsec. The next-generation space astrometry mission Gaia, launched in December 2013, will improve on all of five astrometric parameters (α,δ,µα,µδ,π) by two orders of magnitude (see Fig. 1.1). In Table 1.1 a comparative summary of the performances of Gaia and Hipparcos is shown. Figure 1.1: The development of astrometric accuracies over the past two thousand years, illustrating the advance made by the Hipparcos mission and the potential accuracies achievable by Gaia. From (http://sci.esa.int/gaia/ 33840-progress-in-astrometric-accuracy/ Gaia will perform an all-sky survey in the V magnitude range between V=3 mag and V=20 mag. Its main method to acquire data will be high precision astrometry, backed with photometry and spectroscopy. It will observe about 1 billion stars, a few million galaxies, half a million quasars, and a few hundred thousands asteroids (Lindegren 2009). Gaia is in orbit around the 1.1. GAIA 15 L2 point (second Lagrange point) of the Sun-Earth system, at about 1.5 million kilometers from Earth in the anti-Sun direction. The position was chosen for its advantages: the point offers uninterrupted observations and the entire celestial sphere will be observed and analyzed during five years. The speed of the spacecraft around its axis is constant (60 arcsec s−1) and, therefore, during a period of six hours all objects located along the great circle perpendicular to the spin axis will be scanned. Each celestial object will be observed on average 70 times due to Gaia’s scanning law pattern: a basic angle between the two fields of view of 106.5 degrees, the spin motion of six-hour period and a 63 day-precession period (de Bruijne 2012) of the spacecraft rotation axis placed at an angle of 45 degrees with respect to the Sun direction (see Fig. 1.2). Figure 1.2: Gaia observation principle (de Bruijne 2012). The spacecraft is composed of three functional modules: the payload module, the mechanical service module and the electrical service module. The payload has a single integrated instrument that includes three major functions (astrometry, photometry and spectrometry). The ultimate spacecraft contains the three functions into a single instrument by using common telescopes and a shared focal plane (http://sci.esa.int/gaia/40129-payload-module/): •ASTRO: the Astrometric instrument which measures the five astrometric parameters giving the star position (2 angles, αand δ), the proper motion (derivatives of position) and the parallax (distance); •the Photometric instrument which covers the band 320-1000 nm; •the Radial Velocity Spectrometer (RVS) which gives the radial velocity data in the narrow band 847-874 nm. From a technical viewpoint, the general values of Gaia are: 16 CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION ∆d (pc) Nstar ∆a (AU) NdNm 0−100 ∼61000 1.3−5.3 >1600 >640 100−150 ∼114000 1.8−3.9 >1600 >750 150−200 ∼295000 2.5−3.3 >1500 >750 Table 1.2: Number of giant planets that could be revealed by Gaia (Nd) and fraction of detected planets having accurate orbital elements determined (Nm) as a function of increasing distance from the Sun (∆d). A uniform frequency distribution of 1.3% planets per 1 AU bin is assumed.(Lattanzi et al. 2002) •it is a continuously scanning, self-calibrating instrument that measures simultaneously the angular separations of several hundred star images with a field of view of about 1◦ diameter. •it has a high angular resolution in the scanning direction; •a wide-angle measuring capability; •only after a few years of scanning we can have a complete separation of the astrometric parameters reporting the motions and distances of single stars. 1.2 Exoplanets: Gaia’s data combined with radial velocity. One of the major scientific results in astronomy of the past decade was the discovery of extrasolar planets orbiting solar-type stars. The search of extrasolar planets has developed rapidly and with spectacular success after the first discovery by Mayor and Queloz [1995] of a planet orbiting the solar type star 51 Peg, followed soon by the detection of planets around 47 Uma (Butler and Marcy 1996) and 70 Vir (Marcy and Butler 1996). Today, more than 1700 planets have been found orbiting stars using five different exoplanet detection techniques (radial velocity, astrometry, transit, microlensing, imaging). Fig. 1.3 shows the temporal development of the detections. Thanks to this high and increasing number, it was possible to investigate the statistical properties of the derived orbital features and stellar-host characteristics, and to search for constraints for the different planet formation and evolution scenarios (e.g. Mayor et al. 2014). The fraction of F, G and K stars with giant planets is fairly well studied, out to orbital periods of several years that can be probed with current data, with good agreement between different surveys: this population at orbital distances of 1-5 AU, minimum mass >50 MEand orbital period <10 years is characterized by an occurence rate of about 15%. It shows a peak at 1-2 MJ with a ’brown dwarf desert’ above 10-20 Mj, a wide distribution of orbital eccentricities and a high metallicity of the host stars (e.g. Udry and Santos 2007, Cumming et al. 2008, Mayor et al. 2014). Nowadays, thanks to the high resolution, high-precision spectrographs (like HARPS, Pepe et al. 2002) and projects under development (like ESPRESSO, Pepe et al. 2010), we can push down 1.2. EXOPLANETS: GAIA’S DATA COMBINED WITH RADIAL VELOCITY. 17 Figure 1.3: Number of the detected extrasolar planets as a function of the year of the discovery. From ”The Extrasolar Planet Encyclopaedia” (http://exoplanet.eu/ the limits in RV and improve our knowledge of the close-in low-mass planet population with precise radial velocity measurements until 10cms−1. Thanks to HARPS and the Keck-HIRES, for example, it was discovered a large number of Neptunes and super-Earths. They show, around FGK stars, a occurence rate of 0.33 ±0.05 planets per stars with a minimum mass between 3 and 30 MEand period <50 days. In particular, at least 70 % of the systems with Neptune or super-Earth are multi-planet systems (e.g. Lovis et al. 2009, Howard et al. 2010, Mayor et al. 2011). Moreover, over the last few years, it has been increased the number of exoplanets found also by the transit method; for example, from the Kepler mission thousands more transiting planet candidates have been observed (e.g. Batalha et al. 2013). This is an exciting time in exoplanet statistics! In the upcoming years, we will learn much more because the sample will increase further and new regions of the mass-orbital period plane will be investigated. A wider range of stellar properties will be explored also thanks to the future astrometry space mission (Gaia) which should detect a significant number of planets. Gaia can potentially discover several thousands (possibly 10 −20x104, see Table 1.2) of gas giant planets at orbital radii 0.5 AU and 4-5 AU around solar-type stars out to d∼500pc, and 1000-1500 planets around M dwarfs out to ∼100pc (Perryman et al. 2014, Sozzetti 2015). The main potentiality of Gaia will be its ability to measure astrometrically actual masses and orbital parameters for possibly thousands of giant planets, and to determine the degree of coplanarity in possibly hundreds of multiple-planet systems (Casertano et al. 2008). Gaia will observe millions of main sequence stars and brown dwarf companions within a few AU from their host stars, but Sozzetti [2014] have demostrated that Gaia will detect also thousands of ultra-cool 24 CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION Second, between ∼0.5 and 0.9 AU there is an overabundance of exoplanets (Jones et al. 2014). Moreover, D¨ ollinger et al. [2009] observed that around more massive stars more massive planets are found (Mp&3MJ) compared with those discovered in solar-type stars confirming the core accretion model. However, the reason of this observational trend is still in debate (Jones et al. 2014). Therefore, we need to improve the observations and the study of planets around giant stars to have more statistics, in order to confirm the observed trends and to explain the properties of these systems. 1.5 The outline of this work We have to answer still many outstanding questions discussed in the previous sections. Therefore we need to study the stars in very high detail. Thanks to Gaia, we will know precisely the positions, distances, space motion and changes in brightness of a thousand million stars in our Galaxy. It is expected to discover hundreds of thousands of new celestial objects, such as extrasolar planets and failed stars called brown dwarfs. The high-precision global astrometric measurements by Gaia will provide deep insights on the science of extrasolar planets. Therefore, combining these measurements with high precision radial velocities we expect to change the current landscape of exoplanets science. In the planet context, Gaia, with RVs follow-up, will help us to detect and to have a full characterization of planetary systems, and therefore to improve and deepen our knowledge on the planet formation and evolution. In Chapter 2 we discuss the two methods (RV and astrometry) and the developed tool to carry out simultaneous radial velocity and astrometric orbital fits which allow us to derive precise orbital parameters (period, time of the periastron, eccentricity, semimajor axis, inclination and ω). In Chapter 3 we present the study on 8 binary systems in a metal poor sample of solar type stars. Using statistical methods to effectively combine Hipparcos astrometry and radial velocities we find a possible range of solutions for the mass of the companion and its orbital period. Chapter 4 shows the analysis of giant stars, from the study of precise stellar parameters to the abundances for 12 elements (Na, Mg, Al, Si, Ca, Ti, Cr, Ni, Co, Sc, Mn and V). Finally, in Chapter 5 we summarise the results obtained in this PhD project and mention some of the work to be carried out in the future. CHAPTER 2 Putting together RV and astrometry in view of Gaia In this chapter we will present our first approach to the two methods (RV and astrometry described in the section 2.1) analyzing stars already studied by different authors. From the basic way (HD162020 and Alpha Centauri A & B) to conclude with the analysis of HD43848. For this last star we’ll also analyze its Hipparcos data because the data are unidimensional like Gaia and, therefore, the procedure to analyze them are similar. We’ll combine them with the RV analysis. At the end, we’ll try to use the same method to study other two stars (HD134113 and HD219828) but without success because of lack of accuracy of Hipparcos data. 2.1 The two methods Several different detection techniques can discover exoplanets. In this PhD thesis project we deal with two of these methods: radial velocity and astrometry. In this section we describe them. 2.1.1 Radial velocity The radial velocity method to detect exoplanets is based on the detection of variations in the velocity of the central star, due to the changing direction of the gravitational pull from an exoplanet as it orbits the star. The method consists in interpreting the measurements of radial velocities of these systems (binary stars or star plus exoplanets) to derive the parameters of the orbits. Hilditch [2001] describes how to obtain the orbital parameters from measured radial velocity and below we show how to derive them. Figure 2.1 shows the binary orbit in space relative to the line of sight of the observer (O) and the tangent plane of the sky. The polar coordinates of the star (celestial body) with respect to O are (r, ν +ω) , which can be determined into two components in the orbital plane: rcos(ν+ω) along the line of nodes, and rsin(ν+ω) at a right angle to the line of nodes. Therefore, projecting this second quantity into the line of sight, it is obtained z=rsin(ν+ω)sini(2.1) 25 26 CHAPTER 2. PUTTING TOGETHER RV AND ASTROMETRY IN VIEW OF GAIA Figure 2.1: The relative orbit of a binary located in three dimensions and defined by the angles Ω, i, and ω. The orbital plane intersects a reference plane. The intersection is called line of nodes, as it connects the center of mass with the ascending and descending nodes.(from Wikipedia) Consequently, we have the observed radial velocity due to the orbital motion: Vrad =˙z=sini[sin(ν+ω)˙r+rcos(ν+ω)˙ν] (2.2) ˙rand ˙νcan be determined using the polar equation for an ellipse, r=a(1 −e2)/(1 +ecos ν) to give ˙r=esin(νr˙ν) 1+ecosνand the Kepler0s second law, r2˙ν=2πa2(1 −e2)1/2/P. So, the final result is: Vrad =2πasini P(1 −e2)1/2[cos(ν+ω)+ecosω] (2.3) This equation can be written in another form: Vrad =K(cos(ν+ω)+ecosω)+γ(2.4) where K=2πasini P(1−e2)1/2is the semiamplitude of the velocity curve, and γis the systemic velocity, or the radial velocity of the centre of mass of the binary system. If the quantities γ,K,e, and ω are constant, the radial velocity Vrad has a maximum, A, or a minimum, B, when (ν+ω)=0 or π, respectively. Therefore, we have A=γ+Ke cos(ω+K),B=γ+Ke cos(ω−K) and as a result K=(A−B)/2. In Fig. 2.2 we can see a cosine curve which is given by the equation (2.4), when e=0. Increasing e, the velocity curve becomes increasingly skew-symmetric (Hilditch 2001). When we can see the velocity curves of the both components (double−lined spectroscopic binary), we can derive from the semiamplitude K1or K2the projected semimajor axis a1sin ior a2siniusing this equation (Hilditch 2001): 2.1. THE TWO METHODS 27 Figure 2.2: The radial−velocity curves for the two stars in a binary system with a circular orbit. The semiamplitudes are K1=100kms−1and K2=200kms−1, giving a mass ratio q=m2/m1= 0.5. The systemic velocity is γ=0kms−1. (Hilditch 2001) a1,2sini=(1 −e2)1/2 2πK1,2P(2.5) To derive the minimum masses m1,2sin3iwe can use this relationship (Hilditch 2001): m1,2sin3i=1 2πG(1 −e2)3/2(K1+K2)2K2,1P(2.6) It is important to note that this equation provides the true masses only for orbits with i =90 degrees (planes in our line of sight), otherwise, for inclined orbits, we can derive only the lower limit for the mass of each component (Hilditch 2001). 2.1.2 Astrometry. Astrometry consists of precisely measuring a star’s position in the sky and observing how that position changes over time. We should consider the relative motion of star 2 about star 1 at the origin O (Figure 2.3). The three coordinates that describe the motion can be described in relationship with the radius vector r, which is seen at time t to be at an angular position νrelative to the position of periastron, like (Hilditch 2001): x=r[cosΩcos(ν+ω)−sinΩsin(ν+ω)cosi] y=r[sinΩcos(ν+ω)+cosΩsin(ν+ω)cosi](2.7) 28 CHAPTER 2. PUTTING TOGETHER RV AND ASTROMETRY IN VIEW OF GAIA The component zis described in the Eq. (2.1). ω,Ω,iare, respectively, the longitude of periastron, the longitude of the ascending node and the inclination of the orbit. In Fig.2.3 we can observe the binary motion in function of the projected separation ρbetween the two components, 1 and 2, and the position angle θ. Figure 2.3: Orientation of Double Stars: Representation of Position Angle and Separation. The separation and position angle (ρ,θ) at time t are in relation with the projected quantities (x, y) using the equations ∆δ=x=ρcosθand ∆αcosδ=y=ρsinθ(Hilditch 2001). Introducing the Thiele-Innes constants, A, B, F, G, defined as: A=a[cosΩcosω−sinΩsinωcosi] B=a[sinΩcosω+cosΩsinωcosi] F=a[−cosΩsinω−sinΩcosωcosi] G=a[−sinΩsinω+cosΩcosωcosi] (2.8) and defining the elliptical rectangular coordinates, xp=cosE −eand yp=(1 −e2)1/2sin E, so that r2=a2(1 −ecosE)2=a2(x2 p+y2 p) and rcosν=axp,rsin ν=ayp, we have: ∆δ=ρcosθ=Axp+Fyp ∆αcosδ=ρsinθ=Bxp+Gyp (2.9) The quantity Erepresents the eccentric anomaly and is the solution of the Kepler’s equation: E=2tπ P+esin E 2.1. THE TWO METHODS 29 . Hence, the orbital period Pand the time of periastron passage T0is provided by observations of (ρ,θ) over a complete orbit, or at least over a substantial fraction of an orbit. To note that the quantities P,T0and e(eccentricity) represent the dynamical elements, while the Thiele-Innes constants contain the geometrical elements (Ω(deg), ω(deg), i(deg), and a(semimajor axis of the ellipse in mas)). We can describe the position of the central star in right ascension and declination (X(t) and Y(t) in µas) as a function of the time parameterizing the combination of proper motion, parallax and a Keplerian orbit, as follows: X(t)=cx+µαt+πPα+Axp+Fyp Y(t)=cy+µδt+πPδ+Bxp+Gyp (2.10) where: cx,cy=RA and Dec orthonormal components, µα, µδ =proper motions (mas/years), π= parallax (mas) and Pα,Pδ=parallax factors (van de Kamp 1960). The formulae for the parallax factors in right ascension and declination are: Pα=(cosεcosαsin−sinαcos) Pδ=((sinεcosδ−cosεsinαsinδ)sin−cos αsin δcos )(2.11) Where ε=23◦270is the obliquity of the ecliptic, and the Sun0s true longitude and αand δare the right ascension and declination of the star. Hipparcos astrometry: briefly description We start here to explain (more accurate explanation will be done in the section 2.4.2) the method to study the Hipparcos data because it’s quite similar to the method applied for Gaia data. The Hipparcos catalogue contains the intermediate astrometric data (IAD) or abscissa residuals, which are the data from which the astrometric solutions were obtained. Therefore, in this case the basic astrometric measurements for a single stars are described by the one dimensional position measurements called ’abscissa data’, collected over intervals set by the spin period of the satellite (10.6 hours) and referred to a reference great circle. Two independent data reduction consortia, NDAC and FAST, reduced indpendently the Hipparcos data, and each best final results are provided, but the final catalogue is formed by the merged results from the two consortia. In the IAD we can find some corrections (e.g. aberration, and satellite-attitude corrections). The abscissa residuals along a reference great circle are expressed in terms of the position in right ascension and declination in the equinox 2000.0 at the epoch 1991.25 (α0, δ0), the parallax (π), the proper motions in right ascension and declination(µα, µδ). For the Hipparcos catalogue α∗ 0=α0cosδand µ∗ α=µαcosδare used instead of α0and µα(Pourbaix and Jorissen 2000). In order to look for evidence of orbital motion in the abscissa residuals, the aim is to build an objective function to minimize including the abscissa residuals . The objective function (χ2) is expressed using this equation (Pourbaix and Jorissen 2000): χ2=(∆ν− M X k=1 ∂ν ∂pk ∆pk)tV−1(∆ν− M X k=1 ∂ν ∂pk ∆pk) (2.12) 30 CHAPTER 2. PUTTING TOGETHER RV AND ASTROMETRY IN VIEW OF GAIA where the superscript tmeans transposed, ∆νare the abscissa residuals, and ∂ν ∂pkis the partial derivative of the abscissa residuals with respect to the kth fitted parameters, ∆pkrepresents the relative correction, M is the number of parameters in the solution (5 astrometric parameters and the 4 Thiele-Innes constants in our case), and V−1is the inverse of the covariance matrix of the observations given by (Pourbaix and Jorissen 2000): V= V1··· 0 . . ..... . . 0··· Vn  (2.13) Vjis: Vj= σ2 FjρσFjσNj ρσFjσNjσ2 Nj(2.14) where ρ,σNjand σFjare given in the IAD file and are, respectively, the correlation coefficient between FAST and NDAC abscissae, the standard error of the NDAC abscissa (mas) and the standard error of the FAST abscissa (mas). If we consider both the two consortia (FAST and NDAC), the residuals obtained are correlated and Vjis the 2×2 variance-covariance matrix for measurement j. Otherwise, if we examine only one consortium Vjreduces to a diagonal matrix (with the estimated uncertainty σjof the measurement) (Pourbaix and Jorissen 2000). In detail we will explain better all the procedure when we will describe our study of the test case HD43848 (Sect. 2.4). Combined radial velocity +astrometry solution One way to combine radial velocity with astrometry solutions is to fit the Hipparcos IAD keeping four orbital elements fixed (P,e,T0,ω) to their spectroscopically determined values. In this way we can solve the inclination angle i and position angle of the ascending node Ω, putting an additional constraint on the astrometric semi-major axis as follows (Pourbaix and Jorissen 2000, Sozzetti and Desidera 2010): asini=9.19x10−8PK p1−e2π∗mas (2.15) where Pis the period in days, the semiamplitude of the radial velocity curve Kis in ms−1and the orbital parallax π∗is in mas. Hence, the resulting fitting procedure has a total of 7 adjustable parameters: the five astrometric parameters plus iand Ω. 2.2 HD162020 We started from the study of the two methods one by one. Our first step was to plot the expected RV and astrometric curve of a planet, HD162020b, taken the data from ”The Extrasolar Planet Enciclopedia” (http://exoplanet.eu/) for the RV method and from ”SIMBAD” (http://simbad.u-strasbg.fr/simbad/) for the astrometry. Our goal was to acquaint ourselves with the two methods and with the programming language (python is the chosen programming language). For RV, we used the Keplerian function, Eq. (2.4), because it denotes the 2.2. HD162020 31 radial-velocity variations caused by a planet in a generic Keplerian orbit around the star. Our sets of parameters were: P,e,γ,ω,Kand T0. We made a small computer program to draw the shape of the keplerian function of HD162020b. We needed to calculate the true anomaly (ν). It is a function of t,e,Pand T0and we computed it using the following algorithm: 1. for a given moment t, we calculated the mean anomaly, M: M=2π(t−T0)/P(2.16) 2. from the derived value of M, we computed the eccentric anomaly Eby solving the Kepler’s equation M=E−esin(E). This equation is transcendental and we used a method called Lagrange Expansion to solve iteratively the eccentric anomaly Eusing the following procedure for 20 iterations: E0=M+esin M+e2 2sin2M M0=E0−esinE0 E1=E0+M−M0 1−ecosE0 M1=E1−esin E1 (2.17) 3. At the end, we calculated the true anomaly ν, considering the orbital eccentricity eand the derived value for E tan ν 2=r1+e 1−etan E 2(2.18) The resulting plot is shown in Fig.2.4, where: P=8.428 ±0.000056 days T0=51990.667 ±0.005 JD240000 e=0.277 ±0002 γ=−27.328 ±0.002 km/s K=1.813 ±0.004 km/s ω=28.40 ±0.23 deg For the astrometric program, we used the orbital parameters aforementioned and assumed: a∗=0.06 mas 32 CHAPTER 2. PUTTING TOGETHER RV AND ASTROMETRY IN VIEW OF GAIA 0510 15 20 time(days) 29.0 28.5 28.0 27.5 27.0 26.5 26.0 25.5 25.0 RV(km/s) HD162020b Figure 2.4: The RV curve of HD162020b. i=45 degrees Ω = 180 degrees We thus calculated the Keplerian orbit (using the Thiele−Innes elements: A, B, G, F), described in Eq. (2.9) and then plotted the curves in Fig 2.5. 0.00 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.10 40 30 20 10 0 10 20 yp(mas) HD162020b 0.00 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.10 time(years) 30 20 10 0 10 20 30 xp(mas) 30 20 10 0 10 20 30 xp(mas) 40 30 20 10 0 10 20 yp(mas) HD162020b Figure 2.5: The astrometric orbital motion of HD162020b. After that, the combination of proper motion, parallax and the keplerian orbit has been parameterized as defined in Eq. (2.10). We used the values taken from ”SIMBAD” (http: 2.3. ALPHA CENTAURI A AND B 33 //simbad.u-strasbg.fr/simbad/) for α,δ, the proper motion and the parallax, and calculated the parallax factors like in Eq. (2.11). The distance (d) of the star was 31.26 pc and so, we calculated the parallax with the formula π=1/d. The plot of the path of the star is shown in Fig. 2.6. Figure 2.6: The path of the star HD162020. 2.3 Alpha Centauri A and B Our second step was to fit the RV and astrometric data of alpha Centauri A and B, a binary star. Again, we started from the radial velocity. We took the data from several articles: Lunt [1918], Wesselink [1953], Murdoch et al. [1993], Endl et al. [2001] and Pourbaix et al. [2002]. Our procedure to make the program is as follows: 1. we created a model for the RV (using the procedure of our first program); 2. we read the datapoints and plotted; 3. we calculated the χ2for each dataset as: χ2=X i (yi−Mi σi )2 where yiare the observations data and σiare the errors. 40 CHAPTER 2. PUTTING TOGETHER RV AND ASTROMETRY IN VIEW OF GAIA 2.4.2 Astrometry analyses For the astrometry, we retrieved the data from the official website of Hipparcos. As first step when we need to solve any data fitting problem, we set up an objective function in order to compare different solutions. To do that, it is usually necessary that the lowest value of this function corresponds to the best solution. The IAD gives us the abscissa residuals along a reference great circle for the Hipparcos 5-parameter solution (α0,δ0,π,µα,µδ). The purpose is to further reduce the abscissa residual ∆νbelow the values obtained from the Hipparcos 5-parameter model. So, we created the objective function for the Hipparcos Intermediate Astrometric Data which is the χ2expressed by (Pourbaix and Jorissen 2000): χ2=(∆ν− M X k=1 ∂ν ∂pk ∆pk)tV−1(∆ν− M X k=1 ∂ν ∂pk ∆pk) (2.19) where ∆νare the abscissa residuals provided by the IAD file and corresponding to the Hipparcos 5 parameter-solution and ∂ν ∂pkis the partial derivate of the abscissa residual varies when a correction ∆pkis applied to the value of the k-th parameter with respect to the Hipparcos solution. Mis the number of parameters retained in the solution, and V−1is the inverse of the covariance matrix of the observations. We use only one consortium of the observation j, so we created Vj as a diagonal matrix with the estimated uncertainty σjof the measurement. ∆ν, together with ∂ν ∂pk(k=1 to 5, with p1=α0,p2=δ0,p3=π,p4=µα,p5=µδ) and the original astrometric parameters as well as ρ,σFjand σNjare provided in the IAD file. To estimate χ2(Eq. 2.19) for an orbital model, it is required to have partial derivates of νwith respect to the orbital parameters. They are expressed as a function of the partial derivates of νwith respect to α0and δ0as follows: ∂ν ∂o=∂ν ∂α0 ∂ξ ∂o+∂ν ∂δ0 ∂η ∂o(2.20) where ois any orbital parameter and ξ=α0+µα(t−t0)+Pαπ+y, η =δ0+µδ(t−t0)+Pδπ+x. In the above expression, Pαand Pδare the parallax factors, while ξand ηrepresent the Cartesian coordinates of the observed component on the plane tangent to the sky at the position (α0,δ0). They combine the displacements due to the proper motion, the orbital motion and the parallax. The apparent orbit around the center of mass of the system is described by the variables xand y. They are expressed using the Thiele-Innes constants of the photocentric orbit as x=AX +FY and y=BX +GY with X=cos E−eand Y=√1−e2sin Ewhere Eis the eccentric anomaly and (X,Y) are the coordinates in the true orbit. We used the Thiele-Innes representation of a photocentric orbit to carry out a linear least squares fit over a large grid of periods, while keeping fixed eand T0to their spectroscopic values. The fitted model is fully linear in 9 parameters (Eq. 2.19 with M=9), i.e.the five astrometric ones and the four Thiele-Innes constants A, B, F and G (Sozzetti and Desidera 2010). Therefore, in that case the derivatives for the Thiele-Innes parameters are ∂ν ∂α ∂x ∂AA,∂ν ∂α ∂x ∂FF, ∂ν ∂δ ∂y ∂BB,∂ν ∂δ ∂y ∂GGwith ∂ν ∂α and ∂ν ∂δ given in the IAD file; ∂x ∂Aand ∂y ∂Brepresent X, ∂x ∂Fand ∂y ∂Grepresent Y. 2.4. HD43848: A TEST CASE 41 In this way we calculated the variation of χ2as a function of a trial period (a periodogram). The outcome is shown in Fig. 2.13. Figure 2.13: Periodogram of HD43848: a long-period trend in the data emerges in agreement with the RV analyses and the paper of Sozzetti and Desidera [2010] A long-period trend in the data emerges from the plot in agreement with the RV analyses and the work by Sozzetti and Desidera [2010]. Hipparcos only covered a fraction of the period (the duration of the mission was 3 years) but the periodogram has 3 local minima (circled) after 1000 days that confirm the presence of a long period companion. Then, we derived the upper mass limit from the astrometry of the planet for HD43848, while the radial velocity analysis gives the lower limit. Fixing e,T0and Pto their specroscopic values, we derived, first, the inclination from only the Thiele-Innes analysis using the Eq. (2.21) and after the semi-major axis from Eq. (2.22) (Pourbaix and Arenou 2001): i=2(arctan s(G−A)2+(B+F)2 (A+G)2+(B−F)2) (2.21) a2=1 cosi(A∗G−F∗B) (2.22) Then we could calculate the upper limit in mass for the planet using the following equation: 42 CHAPTER 2. PUTTING TOGETHER RV AND ASTROMETRY IN VIEW OF GAIA Mp=a(arcsec)∗(M 2 3 s∗d(pc)∗√1−e2) P2 3 (2.23) The result is 310.069MJand it’s not far from the error bars of the paper by Sozzetti and Desidera [2010]. They discovered that it is a late M dwarf with a companion of mass Mc= 120+167 −43 MJ. With the milliarcsec astrometry we cannot reach the sensitivity of radial velocity measurements for inclined orbits and for secondaries of order 1 −10MJ. The astrometric signature due to the primary’s reflex motion doesn’t depend on the inclination, on the contrary smaller orbital inclinations lead to smaller radial velocities. For this reason the astrometry constraints the upper limit of the secondary’s mass. But the astrometric sensitivity of Hipparcos can only determine orbits for brown dwarf companions of nearby stars, if they exist. Therefore, Gaia opens exciting perspectives to study and to know the true mass of brown dwarfs and high-mass planets, which can give us the possibility to study the formation mechanisms of objects with similar mass and their chemical composition. 2.4.3 Unresolved cases We tried to analyze other 2 stars, HD134113 and HD219828 to derive the upper mass limit similarly to what we found for the previous star. For HD134113, we took the spectroscopic parameters from Santos et al. [2011]. They found an orbital period of 201.674 ±0.008 days and a minimum mass of Mpsini =48MJ. Therefore, as a first step with the astrometric data from Hipparcos, we fitted the model to search for the period (Fig. 2.14). We could observe a deep around 0.4 years that fits well with RV orbital period. After that, we calculated the upper mass, but the resulted value was 604.69 MJ. This bad result is due to the small dataset and the high distance of the star, limiting the conclusions that can be drawn due to the lack of Hipparcos accuracy. For the star HD219828 the outcome was even less constraining. We knew the spectroscopic prameters from the paper of Melo et al. [2007]. But, unfortunately, Hipparcos, in this case, observed nothing (the periodogram is shown in Fig. 2.15) always due to the high distance of the star (Parallax =13.83 mas). Therefore, we computed the astrometric signature (α) using the Eq. (2.24) that for this star is 8.3 microarcsec. With the target mission accuracy of 20 µas, Gaia will be able to easily measure the mass of objects such as those around HD 134113 and HD 219828. α=Mp Ms∗ap(AU) d(pc)(2.24) 2.4.4 Summary and future work In this chapter, we presented the study of the two methods (radial velocity and astrometry) for different stars. We described the procedure and the results; we developed a programming code which seems to perform well. With the same code for Hipparcos data we tried to analyze two new stars but without success. In the future, we need to implement a new task to allow also 2.4. HD43848: A TEST CASE 43 Figure 2.14: Periodogram of HD134113 the measurement of the inclination (i), to be able to calculate the true mass of planets and to perform a method to calculate also the errors for the RV method. With the arrival of Gaia data, we could use the same software code to calculate the true mass of thousands of brown dwarfs and high-mass planets and therefore to improve our knowledge about extrasolar planets. 44 CHAPTER 2. PUTTING TOGETHER RV AND ASTROMETRY IN VIEW OF GAIA Figure 2.15: Periodogram of HD219828 CHAPTER 3 Binary systems in a metal-poor sample. This chapter describes the work done for the analysis of 8 metal-poor binary systems (SB1 −Benamati et al. 2013). The theories of planet formation and evolution are still under discussion and the study to find some strong correlation of giant planet frequency with stellar metallicity [Fe/H] is still open. It seems easier to find a planet around a metal-rich star than around metal-poor object. In this context, Sozzetti et al. [2009] and Santos et al. [2011] were motivated to design the RV surveys focus on the search for planets orbiting metal-deficient stars. In these sample unsuitable targets for a planet search were found for different reasons. Some of these stars, in particular, are binary stars (SB1). Our work focused on these metal-poor binary stars. The differences between binary frequencies for metal-poor and metal-rich stars has a long story. Some studies have showed that metal-poor stars are deficient in binaries, others that they have the same frequency of binaries as metal-rich stars. Abt [2008, 2009] showed that the metal-poor binaries have few short periods and many long ones, while for the metal-rich binaries the opposite is true. The reasons of this different period distribution can due to the equipment used or to the formation process. First, the low-resolution spectrographs help us to detect many of the short period binaries but not many of the long-period binaries and therefore we can conclude that the metal-poor stars are deficient in binaries. On the contrary, with the use of higher resolution we can detect many more binaries and so conclude that there is no differences in binary frequency between metal-poor and metal-rich stars. Second reason, if binaries are formed in three-body interactions in clusters and, as n-body simulations show, the longer they remain in dense cluster environments, the harder (shorter periods) they become. On the other hand, Latham et al. [2002] found that the period distribution are the same for the halo and disk suggesting that metallicity have little influence over the fragmentation process that leads to short-period binaries. Furthermore, Latham et al. [2002] discovered that all the binaries with periods shorter than 10 days have nearly circular orbits, while the binaries with periods longer than 20 days exhibit a wide range of eccentricities and a median value of about 0.37. Finally, if we compare these results with the parent stars in systems harboring planets, it seems 45 46 CHAPTER 3. BINARY SYSTEMS IN A METAL-POOR SAMPLE. that the stellar companions and planetary companions form and/or evolve by two different processes, because the frequency and orbital characteristics of stellar companions does not depend on metallicity. The results are in disagreement and need more investigation. Another study focused on the mass ratio distribution for the binaries. The conclusions regarding the mass ratio distribution of solar-type binaries are discrepant due to the difficulties to detect low-mass companions. The studies proposed a distribution flat or bimodal or monotonically increasing toward low-qsystems (Trimble 1990). In Duquennoy and Mayor [1991] the distribution shows a peak around q≈0.3, instead Raghavan et al. [2010] demonstrated that the distribution is flat down to q≈0.1 with the exception of a marginally significant peak at q&0.95. Duchˆ ene and Kraus [2013] found a difference in the ratio between short−and long−period binaries: the first one are characterized by a strong peak at q≈1 and a slowly declining f(q) function toward low-mass ratios, while the long-period binaries have a single peak around q≈0.3. Even for extreme mass ratio systems (q.0.1) the discussion and the interest are still open, in the context of the search for planetary-mass companions and of the difficulty for binary formation models to produce them (Bate 2012). In Fig. 3.1 deficit of low−qsystems, especially among (very) lowmass objects is shown. The extremely low frequency of BD (Brown dwarf) companions among solar-type SBs (e.g. Grether and Lineweaver 2006) is inconsistent with extrapolations of both the binary mass function and the planetary mass function (e.g. Reffert and Quirrenbach 2011, Sahlmann et al. 2011). It is called BD ”desert” but it is not completely arid: the BD companions are rare but not absent (Janson et al. 2012b). Therefore, we need further and more analysis. Finally, the way this trend depends on [Fe/H] has never been explored in detail because of the relatively small numbers of known binars among metal-poor stars. In this context, using different statistical methods we try to find in binary systems a range of solutions for the period and the mass of the companion based on the available radial velocities and the combination of Hipparcos and Tycho astrometry. 3.1 Sample and data The stars in this sample originally belongs to the Doppler surveys described in Santos et al. [2011] and Sozzetti et al. [2009]. Once they discovered that these objects were SB1 spectroscopic binaries, they were removed. The list of the entire sample analyzed is presented in Table 3.1 and the detailed set of properties can be found in the mentioned papers. For the most part of the stars (except CD−436810 and G135−46) was not found accetable orbital solution with the available RV data. The RV measurements were obtained with the HARPS Spectrograph at La Silla (Mayor et al. 2003) from Santos et al. [2011] and with the HIRES Spectrograph on the Keck 1 telescope at Mauna Kea in Hawaii (Vogt et al. 1994) from Sozzetti et al. [2009]. The HARPS data for CD−436810 and HD16784 were obtained with a 2−3ms−1precision, during approximately three and one year respectively. A complete and more detail description of the data and observing strategy is given in Santos et al. [2011]. For the other stars, the RV data were collected using HIRES (see Sozzetti et al. 2009 for details) over a timespan of about three years (2003-2006). The precision of this data is tipically 5−10ms−1. Further lower-precision RV timeseries for all binaries (except CD−436810 and HD16784) were gathered with the CfA Digital Speedometers (Latham 1992) and with TRES Echelle Spectrograph at the 1.5 meter Tillinghast 3.1. SAMPLE AND DATA 47 Figure 3.1: (Left:) Distribution of mass ratios as a function of mass for nearby field objects with M?⩽1.5M. The black dotted and dashed curves indicate constant companion masses at the substellar and planetary regime limits (0.075 and 0.013 M), respectively. Data for solar-type stars (green diamonds), low-mass stars (orange triangles) and very low-mass (VLM) objects (red plus signs) are taken from Raghavan et al. [2010], the RECONS survey and Janson et al. [2012a], and the VLM binary database, respectively. Brown dwarf conpanions to low-mass stars identified outside of large-scale surveys are shown as open orange triangles. The few systems with Mprim ⩽0.5Mfrom Raghavan et al. [2010] correspond to lower mass subsystems in hierarchical multiple systems. (Right:) Similar plot for star-forming regions and young associations. Shown as gray diamonds in this plot are companions to Class II/III objects in Taurus, Upper Scorpius, and Chamaeleon I using the large surveys from Kraus et al. [2008, 2011], Kraus and Hillenbrand [2012] and Lafreni` ere et al. [2008]. In addition, red open diamonds represent objects discovered via small-scale surveys or pointed observations with a particular emphasis on VLM primaries and/or companions (the figure is taken from Duchˆ ene and Kraus [2013]). telescope on Mt. Hopkins in Arizona. Typical velocities precision for TRES is on the order of 100 ms−1, while for CfA DS is ∼0.5 km s−1(see Table 3.2), but have a long duration between ∼10 years and more than 27 years. Using data from different spectrograph, we accounted for differences in the RV zero-points between datasets. The full set of RV time-series is presented in the various panels of Fig. 3.2. The relative HIRES measurements for each stars were shifted by the mean of the RV data from CfA and TRES (Table 3.2) in order to bring them close to the common CfA DS +TRES system and small residual velocity offsets between the three systems were determined as free parameters in the best-fit orbital solutions presented in Table 3.3. All HIRES, HARPS, CfA DS and TRES data are available in Appendix A of this thesis. 48 CHAPTER 3. BINARY SYSTEMS IN A METAL-POOR SAMPLE. Table 3.1: The sample of metal-poor spectroscopic binaries included in this study. Star Comment [Fe/H] (dex) M1(M) source of RVs source of [Fe/H] source of M1 CD-436810 SB1 −0.44 0.91 HARPS Spectrograph Adibekyan et al. [2012b] Sousa et al. [2011] HD16784 SB1 −0.65 0.83 HARPS Spectrograph Sousa et al. [2011] Sousa et al. [2011] G27-44 SB1 −0.78 0.85 HIRES Spectrograph Sozzetti et al. [2009] Sozzetti et al. [2009] G63-5 SB1 −0.62 0.83 HIRES Spectrograph Sozzetti et al. [2009] Sozzetti et al. [2009] G135-46 SB1 −0.62 0.84 HIRES Spectrograph Sozzetti et al. [2009] Sozzetti et al. [2009] G237-84 SB1 −0.66 0.79 HIRES Spectrograph Sozzetti et al. [2009] Sozzetti et al. [2009] HD7424 SB1 −0.76 0.82 HIRES Spectrograph Sozzetti et al. [2009] Sozzetti et al. [2009] HD192718 SB1 −0.63 0.88 HIRES Spectrograph Sozzetti et al. [2009] Sozzetti et al. [2009] 3.1. SAMPLE AND DATA 49 Figure 3.2: RV measurements for the metal-poor binaries: red points indicate HARPS measurements, blue points HIRES data, magenta points the CfA DS measurements and green points the TRES velocities. 56 CHAPTER 3. BINARY SYSTEMS IN A METAL-POOR SAMPLE. Figure 3.4: Limits on the orbital period and the mass of the companion to G27-44. Figure 3.5: Limits on the orbital period and the mass of the companion to G63-5. M, respectively (Fig. 3.5) and a minimum mass of 0.002 M. We cannot observe any definite result for the period. We obtained an upper limit for the minimum mass of 0.025 Mfor a period of ∼8 years (the span of the TRES RV data; RMS =0.36 km s−1). Also for this case, we did not use the ∆µand ˙µmethod (Table 3.5: no significant ∆µand not available ˙µ) and no trend from the periodogram in the Hipparcos data appears. 3.3.4 G237-84 In this case, we have a significant value for ∆µin addition to the slope (23.58 ±1.72 ms−1yr−1) of the RV data (Nmes=38). From the slope analysis we found at 68 % the mass <0.10 Mand at 95 % <0.35 Mand the minimum mass of the companion found in the histogram is 0.004 M. The period is found to be >6 years (2300 days) but from the histogram we cannot take any firm conclusions (Fig. 3.6). From the study of the maximum minimum mass (RMS =0.73 km s−1) we obtained a value < 0.07 M. Moreover, we tried to find some further constraints for the mass of the companion depending on its orbital period using the significant value for ∆µthat corresponds to the rightascension component of the proper motion (the larger one; Table 3.5). But, unfortunately, this study did not allow us to add other information. No ˙µis available and no trend in the Hipparcos 3.3. RESULTS 57 Figure 3.6: Limits on the orbital period and the mass of the companion of G237-84 and the study of ∆µ(the black line represents the measured value of ∆µ). data, doing the periodogram, is found for this star. 3.3.5 HD7424 For this star we used also the ∆µand the slope (-417.02 ±4.66 ms−1yr−1in 500 days) methods. Unfortunately from the ∆µanalysis we could not find any further and strong constraints for the mass. We observed interesting limits from the slope analysis: tha mass results to be > 0.008 Mand at 1 σ < 0.43 M. For the period we found a value between 1 and 40 years, with a maximum of 19-years at a 68 % (1-σ) confidence level (Fig. 3.7). Compared with the cases discussed above, for this star we found stronger constraints and no allowed values above 40 years exist due to the companion upper mass constraint used in our simulations. The maximum value for the minimum mass of the companion is 0.07 Mcalculated from the analysis of the dispersion of the CfA DS data (RMS =0.51 km s−1). Moreover, no trend from the periodogram in the Hipparcos data was observed and no ˙µis available. 3.3.6 HD192718 For this star, we could apply only the method of Torres [1999] with the slope (-144.65 ±1.40 m s−1yr−1) of the RV measurements (Nmes=20). The period is longer than 5 years because the data cover 2200 days. From the analysis, we could observe that the mass seems to be >0.02 58 CHAPTER 3. BINARY SYSTEMS IN A METAL-POOR SAMPLE. Figure 3.7: Limits on the orbital period and the mass of the companion to HD7424. Figure 3.8: Limits on the orbital period and the mass of the companion to HD192718. M, while at 1 and 2 σconfidence levels it is <0.55 and 0.75 M, respectively. For the period we obtained a value <53 years at 1 σand <83 years at 2 σ(Fig. 3.8). We used also the CfA DS data (RMS =0.92 km s−1) finding 0.08 Mas the upper limit for the minimum mass of the companion. No ˙µis available, the ∆µdoes not present any significant value and no trend in the Hipparcos data emerges. Considering the TRES data we observed that the orbital period is expected to be longer than 13.5 years (5000 days) and the results from the keplerian fit are compatible with the analysis, with an orbital period around 46.5 years (∼17000 days). 3.3.7 G135-46 For this star we could almost complete one cycle in the RV curve thanks to the CfA DS and TRES data. First, we applied the Torres’ method using only the slope of the Keck data (Nmes= 9 in 900 days) but unfortunately we could not found any strong constraints for the mass of the companion and for the orbital period of the system. In Fig. 3.9 we can only deduce that the mass of the companion is <0.54 Mat 68 % and <0.73 at 95 %; for the period we found that it is shorter than 70 years, while at 1 and at 2 σlevels its value is 39 years and 63 years, respectively. However, with the new data we could fit the RV curve and derive the orbital properties of the binary system and the minimum mass of the companion. The results are shown in Table 3.3 and 3.3. RESULTS 59 Figure 3.9: Upper panels: Limits on the mass and the orbital period of the companion to G135−46. Lower panels: RV data with overplotted the best-fit Keplerian orbit (left). Histogram of the mass fixing the period at the orbital fit value (right). the minimum mass results to be 0.2 M. With this value, we decided to use again the Torres’ method but imposing the period of 27 years resulting from the keplerian fit and the actual mass results to be >0.2 M. With this extra constraint, we obtained at 1 and 2 σlimits a mass of <0.30 Mand <0.63 M, respectively (Fig. 3.9). For this star, it is not observed a significant value for ∆µand no ˙µis also available. Moreover no trend appears in the Hipparcos data, doing the periodogram. 3.3.8 CD-436810 This binary is interesting because it has two contrasting results between the old and the new reduction of the Hipparcos Intermediate Astrometric Data (IAD). Moreover, the solution found with 7 (old reduction) and 5 (new reduction) parameters provides different parallax values: 6.83 mas for the old and 9.27 mas for the new reduction. This star has also RV data (even if not complete: Nmes =9 with a timespan of 3 years and half) and significant values of ∆µand ˙µ. We followed the method described in Sozzetti and Desidera [2010] to make the periodogram analysis and the data from the old reduction highlighted the presence of a significant long-term trend (Fig. 3.10). This star is the only one for which a periodogram analysis provided validating evidence in the Hipparcos data of the presence of a wide-separation companion. In addition, 60 CHAPTER 3. BINARY SYSTEMS IN A METAL-POOR SAMPLE. Table 3.4: Summary of the results for the binary system CD-436810 based on the old and new Hipparcos reduction Star Mass Minimum Mass Period Minimum Period (M) (M) (years) (years) 1σ2σ1σ2σ CD-436810 old 0.63 0.78 0.29 4.8 6 2.9 CD-436810 new 0.67 0.77 0.32 4.8 5.8 3.2 we applied the F-test and we found that the addition of four parameters to the model of the Hipparcos IAD improved significatly the fit: P(F) =0.0005. With the RV data, we derived the parameters of the keplerian fit and they are shown in Table 3.3. The obtained orbital period is ∼1702 days (∼4.6 years), while the derived minimum mass for the companion is ∼0.28 M. The solution is not optimal because the full orbit is not covered, and, therefore, it is used as a consistency check in support of the attempt at constraining the mass and orbital period of the companion to this particular star. Having the possibilities, we added more constraints using the other methods already mentioned above and making use of the available astrometric data. For the old Hipparcos reduction, the observed ∆µshows that the mass of the companion is above 0.3 M. With the value of ˙µwe also find that the orbital period is ∼4 - 8 years (∼1500 - 3000 days) (Fig. 3.10), since higher values would imply companion masses above 0.8 M. Doing the same procedure, but with the new Hipparcos reduction, we found a possible lower mass. In Fig. 3.10 we compared the two reduction for the ∆µand we could note the difference in the solution. We calculated the mass of the companion and the period using the method of the slope (-4885.42 ±46.15 m s−1yr−1) and we found also different results depending on whether we use the old or new reduction parallax results. For the old reduction, the period results between 2.9 years and below 6.3 years with the 1 σthreshold at 4.8 years (Fig. 3.11) and the derived secondary mass is between >0.29 Mand <0.80 Mwith the 68 % confidence limit being < 0.63 M(Fig. 3.11). For the new reduction, the possible values for the period slightly increase to between 3.2 years and 6.3 years with P<4.8 years at 1 σconfidence level (Fig. 3.11) and the companion mass also changes to values between 0.32 Mand 0.80 M, with M2<0.67 M at 68 % confidence (Fig. 3.11). In Table 3.4 the summary of the results for this star is given. 3.4 Summary In this chapter, we presented a multi-technique analysis of 8 metal-poor SB1 binary systems taken from the rejected targets of the sample of Santos et al. [2011] and Sozzetti et al. [2009]. For these stars, no previously determined orbital solutions and companion mass were estimated. We found a range of solutions for the secondary masses and for the orbital period of the systems. Because of the lack of complete radial velocity and accuracy of astrometry data we used different statistical methods. With the RV measurements, we started to try to find an orbital solution, then we used the statistical method described by Torres [1999] utilizing the d(RV)/dt with Monte Carlo simulations. With the astrometric data, we used the method of ∆µ(differ- 3.4. SUMMARY 61 Figure 3.10: Upper left: The Keplerian orbital fit to the CD-436810 RV data. Upper right and bottom: The periodogram analysis of the Hipparcos old reduction data and the study of ∆µand ˙µ for the case of CD−436810. The results for the old Hipparcos reduction are in blue (with 1 σof confidence level), while in red the results for the new reduction of Hipparcos data are reported. The black lines represent the measured values of ∆µand ˙µ. 62 CHAPTER 3. BINARY SYSTEMS IN A METAL-POOR SAMPLE. Figure 3.11: Upper panels: Limits on the mass and the orbital period of the companion to CD436810 using the old Hipparcos reduction. Lower panels:Limits on the mass and the orbital period of the companion to CD-436810 based on the new Hipparcos reduction. 3.5. CONCLUSIONS AND FUTURE WORK 63 ences between the measured proper motion of Hipparcos and Tycho-2) and ˙µ(the acceleration of proper motion) described by Makarov and Kaplan [2005] because our sample is composed of spectroscopic binaries with invisible or unresolved companions that create problems in the data reduction of a large and accurate astrometric catalog. For the examined systems we can conclude that for 3 of them the most likely values for the companion mass are below 0.2 M. Two of these systems (G27-44 and G63-5) show possible masses at 1 σof confidence level of ≈0.07 solar masses, putting them as candidate brown dwarf companions. Within the other 5 binaries we have 4 systems (HD192718, G135-46, HD16784 and CD-436810) where it is more likely that the mass of the companion is higher. These stars are thus likely orbited by M dwarf companions. A particular case is CD-436810, a binary system with a short orbital period (≥ 6 years) and a mass above 0.28 M, for which we find a very interesting result using the two different reductions of the Hipparcos data. The results found using the information in the slope of the RV data seem to be more compatible with the ∆µand the presence of the acceleration solution (˙µ) using the old Hipparcos reduction. The parallax found with the new reduction is 25 % higher. Therefore, the perturbation due to the companion should be more evident. Rather than a case of spurious acceleration (e.g., Tokovinin et al. 2012, 2013) this may point to a problem with the new Hipparcos data reduction for this specific star. 3.5 Conclusions and future work Our analysis is based on a small number of stars and the range found for the companion masses and orbital periods is unfortunately not well constrained. Therefore, it was difficult to compare the observed results with the mass distribution of the previous studies, like, for example, Duquennoy and Mayor [1991]. At the same time, it is interesting to note that among the 8 targets, two seems to have very low mass companions. However, even if this fits into the mass distribution of Duquennoy and Mayor [1991],it is not possible affirm absolutely the mass and the period but only a possible range of solutions. The future with Gaia will help us to put much better constraints and to find the exact mass and orbital parameters for the systems studied here. For example, it will be possible to solve the binary system CD-436810 because this system has a period (∼6.5 years) likely not significantly exceeding the Gaia mission duration (5 years). Moreover, the fraction of astrometric binaries will also dramatically increase when the Gaia catalogue will be published with about billion of stars. In addition, we will be able to apply the same methods described in this chapter to study extrasolar planets detected both astrometrically using the µas-level precision of Gaia data and with Doppler measurements. 64 CHAPTER 3. BINARY SYSTEMS IN A METAL-POOR SAMPLE. Table 3.5: List of the binaries with the values of proper motion, ∆µ, and ˙µbased on Hipparcos and Tycho-2 data, and the RV slopes based on available Doppler information. NAME π(mas) µHipp (mas yr−1)µHipp new (mas yr−1)µTycho-2 (mas yr−1)∆µ(mas yr−1)˙µ(mas yr−2)slope (m s−1yr−1) CD-436810 9.27 α-27.20 ±1.07 -25.22 ±0.94 -18.3 ±1.6 8.9 ±1.9 11.29 ±2.16 -4885.42 ±46.15 δ-235.12 ±1.17 -234.14 ±0.89 -238.0 ±1.2 2.88 ±1.7 HD7424 8.64 α198.43 ±2.06 197.59 ±1.87 201.3 ±1.6 2.87 ±2.61 -417.02 ±4.66 δ-108.32 ±1.82 -110.10 ±1.49 -114.8 ±1.5 6.48 ±2.36 G237-84 29.07 α-294.31 ±0.63 -294.40 ±0.57 -300.1 ±1.1 5.79 ±1.27 23.58 ±1.72 δ244.42 ±0.66 244.96 ±0.51 246.5 ±1.1 2.08 ±1.28 G63-5 16.36 α-520.57 ±1.13 -520.03 ±1.03 -521.5 ±1.1 0.93 ±1.58 12.37 ±1.07 δ267.23 ±0.81 267.36 ±0.68 269.4 ±1.1 2.17 ±1.36 G135-46 12.96 α-334.28 ±1.16 -333.73 ±1.14 -334.0 ±0.9 0.28 ±1.47 198.65 ±2.14 δ-73.27 ±1.02 -73.97 ±1.10 -71.1 ±0.9 2.17 ±1.36 HD192718 17.28 α313.17 ±1.20 314.39 ±0.90 311.9 ±1.5 1.27 ±1.92 -144.65 ±1.40 δ-129.31 ±0.78 -129.51 ±0.61 -133.1 ±1.5 3.79 ±1.69 G27-44 23.66 α150.64 ±1.11 151.6 ±0.69 150.60 ±1.0 0.04 ±1.49 -11.20 ±0.78 δ331.61 ±0.75 331.35 ±0.55 332.4 ±1.1 0.79 ±1.33 HD16784 15.67 α569.90 ±0.95 569.56 ±0.98 570.0 ±1.2 0.1 ±1.5 10525.488 ±6169.67 δ75.41 ±0.90 75.63 ±0.86 75.1 ±1.2 0.31 ±1.5 CHAPTER 4 The giant stars sample. This chapter describes the work done for the derivation of the stellar parameters and the determination of the chemical abundances of 12 elements (Na, Mg, Al, Si, Ca, Ti, Cr, Ni, Co, Sc, Mn and V) for a sample of giant stars that are part of the CORALIE program to search for planets around giants (Alves et al. 2015, in press; and Adibekyan et al. 2015 accepted). The properties of giant planets around (low-mass) M dwarfs and solar-type stars are quite well studied: for FGK stars, it seems easier to find a planet around metal-rich star than around a metal-poor object (Santos et al. 2004), but not excluding completely the presence of planets around metal-poor stars. Moreover, it is known that the frequency of giant planets around (lowmass) M dwarfs is considerably smaller than the one found for FGK dwarfs (Endl et al. 2003, 2006). Because of the huge difficulties to obtain precise radial-velocities for massive main sequence stars, the stellar metallicity-giant planet correlation for evolved stars is still not well studied. By now, more than 50 giant planets have been found around giant stars, revealing contrasting properties compared to the giant planets discovered around dwarf stars. Pasquini et al. [2007] proposed that the metallicity-giant planet correlation may not be present for giants hosting exoplanets (Fig. 4, left panel). Although this conclusion is not unanimous (see Hekker and Mel´ endez 2007), the question is now being debated (Ghezzi et al. 2010a, Maldonado et al. 2013, Mortier et al. 2013a). It should also be noted that even though evolved planet hosts are on average more metal-poor than planet-hosting dwarfs1, there seems to be no metallicity enhancement for red giants with planets regarding to red giants without planets detected (Mortier et al. 2013b, and references therein). If confirmed, however, the results of Pasquini et al. [2007] would cast doubts in the planetmetallicity relation observed for dwarf stars, or at least in the way this relation has been interpreted. These authors suggest that such a difference between main sequence and evolved stars is due to pollution, which is more effective for stars in the main sequence than for evolved giant 1However, it should be considered the possibility that giant stellar samples that are searched for planets may are biased. Hence, the comparison of dwarf stars with giant stars should be done cautiously. This issue will be discussed later on throughout the thesis. 65 72 CHAPTER 4. THE GIANT STARS SAMPLE. Figure 4.4: Distribution of the atmospheric parameters derived using the HM07 (left panels), SO08 (middle panels), and TS13 (right panels) line-lists. In each plot, the Gaussian fits to the distribution, together with the values of the mean (dotted line) and the standard deviation σare also shown. 4.2. STELLAR SAMPLE AND OBSERVATIONS 73 Figure 4.5: Boxplot showing the median (solid horizontal red lines), lower and upper quartiles (box), range of datapoints within 1.5×(75% - 25%) range (whiskers), and outliers (individual blue crosses) of the errors for derived parameters presented in Fig. 4.4. 74 CHAPTER 4. THE GIANT STARS SAMPLE. microturbulence, and metallicity, respectively, while between the results of TS13 and SO08 the average differences (defined as TS13 - SO08 results) are -35 K, -0.071 dex, -0.033 kms−1, and -0.015 dex, respectively. Microturbulence of TS13 compares very well with SO08 line-list, but the results found with HM07 line-list are slightly higher than the other values, but still within the error bar. 4.2.2 Results Comparison with previous works The large majority of the giant stars studied in this paper do not have any previous metallicity estimate derived from high-resolution spectroscopy. In order to compare our results with previous ones, we used several works (Foy 1981; Gratton and Ortolani 1986; McWilliam 1990; Luck 1991; Jones et al. 1992; di Benedetto 1998; Randich et al. 1999; Thor´ en et al. 2004; da Silva et al. 2006; Hekker and Mel´ endez 2007; Liu et al. 2007; Mel´ endez et al. 2008; Soubiran et al. 2010; Jones et al. 2011a,b) to compile a list of literature data for a set of 74 stars in our sample. The literature values of the atmospheric parameters for these common sample are listed in Table C.3. Note that only 67 of these stars have all four parameters already calculated in previous works (Table C.3), hence we are providing here new precise spectroscopic atmospheric parameters for 190 stars. Indeed, five stars HD 96566, HD 94890, HD 24160, HD 116243, HD 134505 in this sample have only values of effective temperature taken from di Benedetto [1998]. Fig. 4.7 shows the comparison between our results obtained for the TS13 linelist, with those presented in these earlier works. As we can see in the panels of this figure, our results present a good agreement with those listed in the literature. The atmospheric parameters taken from the literature for the 74 stars presented in Table C.3 can also be found in the PASTEL catalog (Soubiran et al. 2010) but not the microturbulence velocity. Compared to the PASTEL catalog (Soubiran et al. 2010) we found an average difference (defined as TS13 - literature data) of 108 K, -0.02 dex, and 0.03 dex for effective temperature, surface gravity, and metallicity, respectively. The common sample presented in Table C.3 is composed by values taken from 13 different works. In order to test our results against samples homogeneously characterized, we checked our results, separately, against those from Jones et al. [2011b], Liu et al. [2007], McWilliam [1990], and da Silva et al. [2006] due to the significant number of stars in common with these works. Fig. 4.8 shows the comparison of our stellar parameters with those from these works. We found an average difference of 20 K, -0.17 dex, -0.032 kms−1, and -0.072 dex, respectively, for effective temperature, surface gravity, microturbulence, and metallicity when we compare our results with those from da Silva et al. [2006], and -26 K, 0.085 dex, 0.048 kms−1, and -0.0088 dex compared to Jones et al. [2011b]. We have 20 stars in common with McWilliam [1990] whom analysed 671 GK giant spectra, and derived effective temperatures with empirical and semi-empirical methods, involving an IR flux calibration. For this set of stars, the average difference on effective temperature is 119 K, with a standard deviation of 81.1 K, and it is less than 0.12 dex in metallicity, with a standard deviation of 0.07 dex. Besides the effective temperature and the metallicity from McWilliam [1990] are marginally higher than the one derived in our work, the two other parameters compare quite well, with an average difference of -0.21 dex and -0.65 kms−1for surface gravity and microtur- 4.2. STELLAR SAMPLE AND OBSERVATIONS 75 Figure 4.6: Comparison between the results found using the TS13, SO08, and HM07 line-lists. (a) Effective temperature, (b) metallicity, (c) surface gravity, and (d) microturbulence velocity derived using the HM07 (left plot) and SO08 (right plot) line-lists compared to those derived using the TS13 line-list. In each panel, the lower plot compares the differences from perfect agreement. The differences refer to the abscissa minus the ordinate of the corresponding upper plot. The dotted line shows the one-to-one relation, and the solid line is the linear fit, for which the values of the R-squared (R2), the slope calculated by the regression α, and the residual standard deviation σare given. The average error is also plotted. HD 74006 is not shown in the plots because it does not present the results using the HM07 line-list. 76 CHAPTER 4. THE GIANT STARS SAMPLE. Figure 4.7: Comparison of the results of this work obtained for the TS13 line-list with available literature data for (a) effective temperature, (b) metallicity, (c) surface gravity, and (d) microturbulence. The dotted line shows the one-to-one relation, and the solid line is the linear fit, for which the values of the R-squared (R2), the slope calculated by the regression α, and the residual standard deviation σare given. Each symbol indicates a reference given in Table C.3, as enumeration reported in the legend, i. e., (1): da Silva et al. [2006]; (2): di Benedetto [1998]; (3): Foy [1981]; (4): Gratton and Ortolani [1986]; (5): Hekker and Mel´ endez [2007]; (6): Jones et al. [2011b]; (7): Jones et al. [1992]; (8): Liu et al. [2007]; (9): Luck [1991]; (10): McWilliam [1990]; (11): Mel´ endez et al. [2008]; (12): Randich et al. [1999]; (13): Thor´ en et al. [2004]. 4.2. STELLAR SAMPLE AND OBSERVATIONS 77 bulence, respectively. The comparison of our atmospheric parameters with those from Liu et al. [2007], with whom we have 14 stars in common, is also presented in Fig. 4.8. The average differences are 108 K, 0.017 dex, 0.016 dex, and 0.089 kms−1, for effective temperature, metallicity, surface gravity, and microturbulence, respectively. One of the major advantage of our work is to present a homogeneous measurement of spectroscopic parameters for a set of giant stars that have been already surveyed for exoplanets research, thus presenting a solid sample of comparison for future researches. 4.2.3 Concluding remarks We have derived the stellar atmospheric parameters (the effective temperature, the surface gravity, the microturbulence, and the metallicity) for a sample of 257 field giant stars that are being surveyed for planets using precise radial-velocity measurements. Those parameters were derived by using three different line-lists of Fe I and Fe II (SO08, TS13, and HM07). All parameters derived in this work are listed in Table C.2, and we adopt as final the parameters derived with the TS13 line-list. We compared the results found by using the different linelists and we found small dispersion for most of the stars. HM07 results to show a much higher dispersion as expected because the linelist is small. The results from TS13 and SO08 are compatible in terms metallicity, but in Te f f they show an offset specially for the cooler stars. Even in this case this behaviour is expected because the SO08 linelist for cool stars presents unsatisfactory (too high) results in Te f f compared with other methods (Mortier et al. 2013a, Tsantaki et al. 2013). In the present catalog (Table C.2) we are providing new precise spectroscopic measurements of atmospheric parameters for 190 stars for which the given four parameters had not yet been found or published in previous works. Additionally, we also provide new measurements for 67 stars with previous published results of all parameters, but with the major advantage that they are now calculated homogeneously, providing a more suitable analysis. The comparison of our results with those presented in the literature shows that our derivations are solid, and it will be very useful to future studies of frequency of planets as a function of the different stellar parameters. Since the first discovery of a substellar companion orbiting a giant star (HD 137759 Frink et al. 2002), more than 100 evolved stars are known to host planets according to the available data at the Extrasolar Planets Encyclopaedia6, but it is still missing a homogeneous sample that allows to perform studies on the properties of giant stars hosting planets. Note that one star in our sample is already known to have an orbiting planet (HD 11977 - Setiawan et al. 2005). The parameters for this star are Te f f =5018 ±27 K, logg=2.85 ±0.07 cm s−2,ξ=1.44 ±0.03 km s−1, [Fe/H] =-0.17±0.03 dex (TS13 line-list), showing that its iron content is a bit less than that of the Sun. Low iron abundance has been also found in other giants hosting planets suggesting that planet-hosting giant stars are on average metal-poor compared to planet-hosting dwarfs. However, as pointed out by Mortier et al. [2013a], it may be due to a bias in samples of evolved stars used to detect planets. In the present catalog, the red giant branch star HD 135760 is the most metal-rich ([Fe/H] = +0.27 ±0.05 dex), which is in agreement with previous result presented by Jones et al. [2011b], while HD 7082 is the most metal-poor ([Fe/H] =-0.74 ± 6http://exoplanet.eu 78 CHAPTER 4. THE GIANT STARS SAMPLE. Figure 4.8: Comparison between our results with those from da Silva et al. [2006], Jones et al. [2011b]; Liu et al. [2007], and McWilliam [1990]. The dotted line shows the one-to-one relation, and the solid line is the linear fit, for which the values of the R-squared (R2), the slope calculated by the regression α, and the residual standard deviation σare given. Each symbol indicates a reference reported in Table C.3, as enumeration given in the legend. 4.3. ABUNDANCES 79 Table 4.1: The coefficients of the linear fits (y=a×X+b) of the relations between the stellar parameters, along with the correlation coefficient and the significances. The number of stars is 251. Elem a b R2z-score ξt−Te f f 0.120±0.065 0.825±0.326 0.013 1.7 logg−Te f f 0.847±0.089 -1.356±0.441 0.266 7.9 [Fe/H]−Te f f 0.280±0.069 -1.472±0.343 0.061 3.9 [Fe/H]−logg0.234±0.041 -0.751±0.116 0.116 5.4 ξt−logg-0.440±0.029 2.673±0.083 0.476 10.8 ξt−[Fe/H] -0.154±0.057 1.407±0.010 0.027 2.6 0.02 dex), amongst with three other stars that have [Fe/H] <-0.5 dex. Most stars of our sample have already a large number of measurements of precise radial velocities with the CORALIE spectrograph spread over the last years. Once a significant sample of planets will be found in the present sample, we will be able to study the planet frequency as a function of metallicity and stellar mass. Until then, we can use our accurate and uniform stellar parameters as control sample to others studies that compare stars hosting planets with stars without detected planets. The importance of this work is to present homogeneous measurements of spectroscopic parameters for a huge set of evolved stars, selected in a planet search program. This study will be a solid sample of comparison for future researches. 4.3 Abundances The next step, after the measurements of precise stellar parameters, was to determine the elemental abundances for 12 elements (Na, Mg, Al, Si, Ca, Ti, Cr, Ni, Co, Sc, Mn and V). We decided to adopt the stellar parameters derived from the linelist of Tsantaki et al. [2013], because it is designed specifically to analyze cool stars. The stars in the sample have effective temperatures 4700 .Teff.5600 K, surface gravities 2.2 .logg.3.7 dex, microturbulences 1.ξt.3.2 km s−1and they lie in the metallicity range of -0.75 .[Fe/H] .0.30 dex. The interdependence of the fundamental parameters are presented in Fig. 4.9. The figure reveals several interesting correlations between the parameters, for istance one can see that the metallicity correlates with the surface gravity and also stars with higher Te f f (above 5100 K) show higher metallicity. Microturbulent velocity strongly correlates with logg. The significance of the observed correlations is estimated following the method described in Figueira et al. [2013] and Adibekyan et al. [2013] and the parameters of the linear relations are presented in Table 4.1. We note that five stars classified as outliers in the ξt-logg, were excluded from the estimation of the significance of the correlations (see next Section for details). 80 CHAPTER 4. THE GIANT STARS SAMPLE. Figure 4.9: Interdependence of the stellar atmospheric parameters of the sample stars. The blue solid lines depict the linear fits of the data. 4.3. ABUNDANCES 81 4.3.1 The microturbulence relationship Sometimes, when the number of iron lines is not large enough, a correct determination of microturbulence becomes very difficult because of the small EW/λ range of the FeI lines (e.g., Mortier et al. 2013a). In these cases, one uses empiric relations between microturbulence and other stellar parameters. Several studies have shown that for FGK dwarf stars, microturbulent velocity depends on log g and Te f f (e.g., Nissen 1981; Allende Prieto et al. 2004; Adibekyan et al. 2012a; Tsantaki et al. 2013; Ram´ ırez et al. 2013). Takeda et al. [2008] has already suggested that the microturbulence correlates with the surface gravity, however the authors did not provide any analytic form of the relation. To find out the parameters the ξtcorrelates with, we first applied a linear fit for three pairs of data-sets: ξt-[Fe/H], ξt-logg,ξt-Te f f . Then we evaluated the significance of the correlation as it was done in Figueira et al. [2013]. As expected the strongest correlation is observed with logg(5.7σ), ≈4σin case of Te f f , and ≈1.8σfor [Fe/H]. However, the fits can be affected by the presence of several outliers as can be seen in Fig. 4.9. To remove the outliers we used the ξt-loggrelation (since it shows the strongest correlation), by applying a 2σ-clipping (two times of residual standard deviation). Then, after cleaning the data from outliers we again fitted the data and evaluated the significance of the relations. We found that microturbulence significantly correlates with the surface gravity (at about 11σlevel), and with the metallicity but with less degree of significance. Therefore, the five ouliers were responsible for the ”strong” relation observed between ξtand Te f f . After this test, we decided to present the relation of microturbulence only with loggand [Fe/H], which has the following functional form: ξt=2.72(±0.08) −0.457(±0.031) ×logg +0.072(±0.044) ×[Fe/H] (4.4) We note, that this empirical relation is valid only for the range of stellar parameters that the stars in our sample span. 4.3.2 Linelist and test case: Arcturus star To build a linelist for the 12 elements we tested the linelist and atomic data taken from Adibekyan et al. [2012b]. Since the spectra of cool evolved stars are more line crowed (which cause strong blending) compared to their unevolved hotter counterparts, we aimed to carefully select a subset of unblended lines from Adibekyan et al. [2012b]. For this purpose we used the spectrum of the K-giant Arcturus star taken from the archive of the NARVAL spectrograph at the 2m Bernard Lyot Telescope in Toulouse, France. This star has a very good quality spectrum, with both high resolution and high signal to noise to be an excellent reference star for giants. We measured the equivalent widths (EWs) of the selected lines both manually, using a Gaussian fitting procedure within the IRAF splot task, and automatically, using the ARES code (Sousa et al. 2007). We calculated the mean relative difference ((EWARES −EWIRAF)/EWIRAF ) and standard deviation of the relative difference of the EW measurements and applied a 2σ-clipping procedure second time after the outliers were excluded. Finaly, 118 lines out of 164 were left with maximum relative difference in EW of about 15 %. These lines were once again checked by eye within IRAF to make sure that they are not blended and hence the correspondence between the EW measurements is not by chance (Fig. 4.10). The new linelist can be found in Table C.4. 88 CHAPTER 4. THE GIANT STARS SAMPLE. log g Figure 4.13: [X/Fe] vs. loggplots. Each element is identified in the upper right corner of the respective plot. The black dots represent the stars of the sample and the gray small dots represent stars from Adibekyan et al. [2012b]. 4.3. ABUNDANCES 89 Figure 4.14: [X/Fe] vs. microturbulence plots. Each element is identified in the upper right corner of the respective plot. The black dots represent the stars of the sample and the gray small dots represent stars from Adibekyan et al. [2012b]. 90 CHAPTER 4. THE GIANT STARS SAMPLE. [Fe/H] Figure 4.15: [X/Fe] vs. [Fe/H] plots. The black dots represent the stars of the sample and the gray small dots represent stars from Adibekyan et al. [2012b] with Teff=T±500 K. The red circle and blue square show the average [X/Fe] value of our and Adibekyan sample, respectively, with [Fe/H] =0.0±0.1 dex. Each element is identified in the upper right corner of the respective plot. 4.3. ABUNDANCES 91 (compared to the abundances of dwarfs) were already observed by several authors (e.g., Friel et al. 2003, 2005; Tautvaiˇ sien˙ e et al. 2005; Jacobson et al. 2007; Villanova et al. 2009; Santrich et al. 2013). In most of these studies, the trends were explained as a stellar evolutionary effect, due to the deep mixing produced by the hydrogen burning cycle, after stars have left the main sequence. For a complete picture, one should perform through analysis taking into account the non-LTE effects which are stronger for giants stars and also the systematic errors which might arise due to particular spectroscopic analysis method used. For example, it is well known that sodium lines suffer from non-LTE effects which lead to an overestimation of the Na abundances (e.g., Alexeeva et al. 2014). In our analysis we used two sodium lines (at 6154.23 Å and 6160.75 Å) which were studied for non-LTE effects in Alexeeva et al. [2014]. The average EWs of these lines were ∼70 mÅ for 6154.23 Å, and ∼80 mÅ for the 6160.75 Å line. According to Alexeeva et al. [2014], the non-LTE correction for our stars should be from -0.1 to -0.15 dex, which is close to the difference in [Na/Fe] between giants and dwarfs observed in this study. 4.3.7 Kinematics and stellar populations The structure of the Milky Way (MW) has several stellar subsystems. The main three stellar populations of the MW are the thin disk, thick disk and the halo. These populations have different kinematic and chemical properties. It is becoming increasingly clear that a separation of the Galactic stellar components based only on stellar abundances is superior to kinematic separation (e.g., Navarro et al. 2011; Lee et al. 2011; Adibekyan et al. 2011; Liu and van de Ven 2012; Recio-Blanco et al. 2014), because chemistry is a relatively more stable property of a star than its spatial positions and kinematics. However, as mentioned above, some changes in abundances of some elements are expected when the stars are evolving and leaving the main sequence. In this analysis, to separate the thin and thick disk stellar components, we used the position of the stars in the [α/Fe]-[Fe/H] plane (here αrefers to the average abundance of Mg, Si, and Ti), but separately also a kinematics approach is applied. The space velocity components for 183 stars out of 256 were derived with respect to the local standard of rest (LSR), adopting the standard solar motion (U,V,W)= (11.1, 12.24, 7.25) km s−1of Sch¨ onrich et al. [2010]. For the remaining 73 stars we did not calculate the velocities because of the deficit of astrometric literature data. The main source of the parallaxes and proper motions were the updated version of the Hipparcos catalog (van Leeuwen 2007). The radial velocities were taken from the SIMBAD Astronomical Database9. Combining the measurement errors in the parallaxes, proper motions, and radial velocities, the resulting average errors in the U, V, and W velocities are of about 2-3 km s−1. To assess the likelihood of the stars being a member of different Galactic populations, we followed the prescriptions given by Reddy et al. [2006]. The probabilities that the stars belong to different stellar populations were calculated, having adopted both the Bensby et al. [2003] and Robin et al. [2003] population fractions. In these methods each of the three populations follows a Gaussian distribution of random velocities in each component. We considered that a probability in excess of 70 % suffices to assign a star to a concrete population. Stars with a probability less than 70 % were included in a transition population. The Galactic space velocity components and the probabilities to assign 9http://simbad.u-strasbg.fr/simbad/ 92 CHAPTER 4. THE GIANT STARS SAMPLE. the stellar population to which each star belongs to are shown in the Table C.6. According to the Bensby et al. [2003] criteria, among the 183 stars, we have 176 (96%) stars from the thin disk, 5 from the thick disk (3 %), and 2 stars are considered to be transition stars (1 %) that do not belong to any group. Adopting the criteria from Robin et al. [2003] gives 177 (97%) thin disk stars, 5 stars with kinematics suggesting a thick/thin disk transition, and one star with a classification of thick-disk/halo transition object. The distribution of the stars in the Tommre diagram is shown in Fig. 4.16. As mentioned above, in addition to the difference in their kinematics, the thin and thick disk stars are also different in their αcontent at a given metallicity. This dichotomy in the chemical evolution allows one to separate different stellar populations. The [α/Fe] versus [Fe/H] plot for the sample stars along with the dwarf stars from Adibekyan et al. [2012b] with Teff = T±500 K is depicted in Fig. 4.1710. As one can see from the figure the two samples show similar trends, with giant stars having on average higher [α/Fe] values at a fixed (low) [Fe/H]. Our chemical separation of the Galactic disks suggests that 23 stars (9%) in the sample show enhanced αabundances. In Adibekyan et al. [2011] and Adibekyan et al. [2013] the high-αstars were separated into two groups with a gap in both [α/Fe] and metallicity. It is interesting to see that the gap in [Fe/H] for high-αstars can be also seen in our sample at the same metallicity (≈-0.2 /-0.3 dex) and close to their [α/Fe] value (∼0.2 dex). Following the same logic and definitions as in Adibekyan et al. [2013], the 10 stars with enhanced [α/Fe] and [Fe/H] below -0.3 dex can be classified as thick disk stars, and the remaining 13 stars as high-αmetal-rich stars (HAMR). With this definition we see that 4% of the stars belong to the Galactic thick disk, as the kinematic separation was suggesting. We note that the current sample is small and we will avoid to give a definitive conclusion about the existence of the mentioned ”gap” and the distinction of the two α-enhanced metal-poor and metal-rich populations. However, the fact that the two different homogeneously analyzed samples (the current one and the one from Adibekyan et al. [2011]) show quite similar features probably is more than just a hint about the existence of the HAMR stars as a distinct stellar family. However, we want to note that no similar gap was found in Bensby et al. [2014] where the authors suggested that the HAMR stars represent the metal-rich tail of the thick disk. As mentioned in Bensby et al. [2014], a large sample with well-controlled selection function (e.g., Gaia-ESO survey - Gilmore et al. 2012) would help us to understand the real nature of the HAMR stars. Separation of the Galactic disks by α-enhancement The separation of Galactic stellar populations by the chemical properties of the stars was done following the method presented in Adibekyan et al. [2011].We first divided the sample into three [Fe/H] bins: [Fe/H] <-0.3 dex, [Fe/H] >0.0 dex, and stars in between. For the lowest and highest [Fe/H] bins we easily identified the minima in the [α/Fe] histograms. For the stars with intermediate [Fe/H], just plotting the [α/Fe] histogram will not reveal the minima, because the stars at these metallicities show a decrease of [α/Fe] with [Fe/H] (see Fig. 4.18). Thus, we first detrended the [α/Fe] by applying a linear fit and then subtracted it. Then in the [α/Fe] histogram we identified the minima and by adding them to the previously applied linear fit we obtained the 10The chemical dissection of the disks is presented in the next section. 4.3. ABUNDANCES 93 Figure 4.16: Toomre diagram for the entire sample. The left and right panels show the separation of the stellar groups according to the Bensby et al. [2003, B03] and Robin et al. [2003, R03] prescription, respectively. The symbols are explained in the figure. Figure 4.17: [α/Fe] vs. [Fe/H] for the current sample (black dots) and for the stars from Adibekyan et al. [2012b] with Teff=T±500 K(gray small dots). The separation between the thickand thin-disk stars for the two samples are presented in black and gray dashed lines. 94 CHAPTER 4. THE GIANT STARS SAMPLE. Figure 4.18: High-αand low-αseparation histograms for the stars with [Fe/H] <-0.3 dex (Lefttop), -0.3 ≤[Fe/H] ≤0.0 dex (left-middle), and [Fe/H] >0.0 dex (left-bottom). [α/Fe] vs. [Fe/H] for the whole sample (right). The dashed lines are separate stars of the thin and thick disks. line which separates the highand low-αstars at -0.3 ≤[Fe/H] ≤0.0 dex. The separation lines for each [Fe/H] bin presented in Fig. 4.18. 4.4 Metallicity distribution As mentioned above, several authors tried to understand the reason why the apparent giantplanet-metallicity correlation does not exist for evolved stars. As recently suggested by Mortier et al. [2013b], a possible reason might be a selection bias due to B-V colour cut-off. In Fig. 4.19, we plotted the relation between stellar metallicity and surface gravity for our targets. For comparison, the dwarf stars sample from Adibekyan et al. [2012b] is also presented. From the figure one can easily see that the giant stars sample lacks high metallicity and low-gravity stars, and also low-metallicity and high-gravity stars. This is again probably because of the selection criteria used to define the sample. To avoid the issues related to the selection effects, an unbiased giant sample with no colour cut-offand homogeneously derived parameters is needed to systematically search for planetary companions. However, it is still possible to overcome the effect of the B-V colour cut-offif one considers, for example, only stars in the ”cut rectangle” shown in Fig. 4.19 (red rectangle), where the stars are equally distributed. However, these ”cut rectangles” will consist of stars with narrower ranges of metallicities (from -0.25 to 0.15 dex in the example of Fig. 4.19), which is also an issue since the giant-planet-metallicity correlation is more pronounced at high metallicities (at least for dwarf stars). In the right panel of Fig. 4.19, we show the metallicity distribution of giant and dwarf stars where narrower [Fe/H] distribution of giants is apparent. The figure also shows that the two distributions are peaked at almost solar metallicity. Several studies have already observed this tendency of evolved stars lacking 4.5. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS 95 the metal-rich and very metal-poor tails (e.g., Taylor Croxall 2005; Takeda et al. 2008; Luck Heiter 2007; Ghezzi et al. 2010). The stars in this sample have stellar masses between 1.5 and 4.0 M(Alves et al. 2015), and hence should be on average younger than the dwarfs from Adibekyan et al. [2012b]. The younger age together with the age-metallicity dispersion relation (e.g., da Silva et al. 2006; Haywood 2008; Casagrande et al. 2011; Maldonado et al. 2013) might explain the narrower [Fe/H] distribution of the giants. Young stars are mostly local since they do not have time to migrate within the Galaxy (Wang Zhao 2013; Minchev et al. 2013). Radial migration in the disk makes the metallicity distribution wider, but does not change the mean abundance (Wang Zhao 2013), as we see in Fig. 4.19. This is because mostly massive stars contribute to the chemical enrichment of the interstellar medium and they contribute mainly around their birth places because of their very short lifetime. The lack of very metal-rich giants can be understood along the same migration process, while most of the old stars which migrate would come from the inner, metal-rich disk (Wang Zhao 2013; Minchev et al. 2013). In addition to the aforementioned astrophysical explanation, we would like to note again the selection effects which may arise in evolved star samples due to B-V colour cut-off. This selection bias may also make the metallicity distribution narrower. 4.5 Summary and conclusions We have carried out a uniform abundance analysis for 12 refractory elements for a sample of 257 field G-, K-type evolved stars that are being surveyed for planets using precise radialvelocity measurements with the CORALIE spectrograph. The abundances were derived using a carefully selected line-list. We found that for all the elements Galactic chemical evolution trends are similar for giant and dwarf stars, while for some species [X/Fe] values are shifted towards higher values at a fixed metallicity. Our analyis confirms the overabundance of Na (also Al and Si to a less degree) in giant stars compared to the field FGK dwarf stars from Adibekyan et al. [2012b]. This overabundance probably has a stellar evolutionary character, even though the possible departures from non-LTE may produce an enhancement of a similar degree (Alexeeva et al. 2014). To separate Galactic stellar populations, we applied both a purely kinematical approach and a chemical method. Our chemical separation suggests that 91% of the stars, being α-poor, belong to the thin disk and the remaining 9% of the stars show enhanced α-element abundances at a fixed [Fe/H]. This sample (while being not very large) also suggests a ”gap” in [Fe/H] for high-αstars as observed in Adibekyan et al. [2011]. Following the definition of the last authors, 4% of the stars were classified as thick-disk members (being metal-poor) and 5% as HAMR stars. The metallicity distribution of the giant stars is shown to be narrower than that of their non-evolved dwarf counterparts (see also Taylor and Croxall 2005; Takeda et al. 2008), but peaked at almost solar metallicity as in case of the dwarfs. The lack of very metal-rich and metal-poor stars can be explained by the fact that most of the stars are originated in the solar vicinity. Evolved stellar samples mostly consist of massive stars, which have shorter lifetime than the dwarfs, and therefore do not have enough time to migrate from further inner/outer disks (Wang and Zhao 2013; Minchev et al. 2013). Our present sample, as most of the giant star samples searched for planets, is affected by B-V colour cut-offwhich excludes low-loggstars with high-[Fe/H] and high-loggstars with low metallicity. As discussed in Mortier et al. [2013b], 96 CHAPTER 4. THE GIANT STARS SAMPLE. Figure 4.19: Left panel:[Fe/H] vs. log gfor the current sample (black dots) and for the stars from Adibekyan et al. [2012b] (gray dots). The two black dashed lines were drawn by eye and show the biases in the samples due to the B – V cut-off.Right panel: [Fe/H] distribution of the two aforementioned samples. The distribution of the giants stars (gray line) was multiplied by 2 for better visual comparison. 4.5. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS 97 this selection bias might be the reason of the absence of the correlation between occurrence of giant planets and stellar metallicity. We suggest to use stars in a ”cut-rectangle” in the logg- [Fe/H] diagram to overcome the aforementioned issue, if an unbiased sample is not available on hand. Although the current sample still contains only one star known to orbit a planetary companion (Setiawan et al. 2005),most of the stars have been already periodically observed over the last years. Before a significant number of planets will be detected, this sample can be used as a homogeneous comparison sample to study planet occurrence around giant stars. However, when exploring chemical peculiarities of planet-hosting giant stars, one should bear in mind the chemical properties of these evolved stars discussed in this thesis (e.g., enhancement in Na, Al, etc.). We need to improve our knowledge on the planet-giant stars connection. With the arrival of Gaia data we will be able to constrain better surface gravity (an important parameter for the derivation of elemental abundances) and will kinematically characterize the stars with higher precision. The determination of very precise parallaxes from Gaia for all stars in the sample can improve further its characterization. Gaia was launched on December 2013 and the duration of the mission is 5 years. In this period Gaia will conduct an astronomical census of one billion stars giving the possibility to build up a picture of the way the Galaxy was born and subsequently evolved, together with the planet formation and evolution. 104APPENDIX A. PUBLICATIONS, MEETINGS, CONFERENCES AND COMMUNICATIONS •WP5 progress meeting (skyconference): ”Gaia and the search for other planets: combining astrometry and RV”. (Talk) •”EWASS 2014” in Geneve, Switzerland, 30 June - 4 July 2014. (Talk) •”GREAT-ITN Full meeting” in Geneve, Switzerland, 3 July 2014. (Talk) •”The Milky Way Unravelled by Gaia” in Barcelona, Spain, 1-5 December 2014. (Talk) PUBBLICATIONS: •L. Benamati, A. Sozzetti, N. C. Santos, and D. W. Latham, November 2013, A Combined Astrometric and Spectroscopic Study of Metal-Poor Binaries, PASP, Vol. 125, No. 933, pp. 1315-1328 DOI: 10.1086/674147 •N. C. Santos, A. Mortier, J. P. S. Faria, X. Dumusque, V. Zh. Adibekyan, E. Delgado Mena, P. Figueira, L. Benamati et al. 2014, The HARPS search for southern extra-solar planets. XXXV. The interesting case of HD41248: stellar activity, no planets?, Astronomy and Astrophysics DOI: 10.1051/0004-6361/201423808 •S. Alves, L. Benamati, N. C. Santos, V. Zh. Adibekyan, S.G. Sousa et al., Determination of the spectroscopic stellar parameters for 257 field giant stars, 2015, MNRAS to appear •V. Zh. Adibekyan, L. Benamati, N. C. Santos, S. Alves et al., Chemical abundances and kinematics of 256 G-, K-type field giants. Setting a base for further analysis of giantplanets properties orbiting evolved stars., 2015, submitted. •L. Benamati, V. Zh. Adibekyan, N. C. Santos, A. Sozzetti, Exoplanets: Gaia and the importance of ground based spectroscopy follow-up, 2015, EAS Publications Series to appear, arXiv:1502.00806 APPENDIX B HIRES, HARPS, CfA DS and TRES data for the binary stars Table B.1: HARPS, CfA and TRES radial velocity measurements. BJD - 2400000 Radial Velocity (km s−1)σ(km s−1) CD−436810 (HARPS) 53016.845925 166.40259 0.00314 53052.734014 166.61746 0.00304 53056.775907 166.63784 0.00240 53064.792500 166.68113 0.00273 53490.601963 165.23422 0.00248 53491.671209 165.22884 0.00253 53492.558667 165.22192 0.00165 53573.459353 164.42581 0.00357 54173.743325 156.14358 0.00221 HD16784 (HARPS) 52944.692538 30.56387 0.00297 53206.921719 36.76851 0.00092 53216.891256 38.99693 0.00093 G27-44 (HIRES) 50668.01562 0.0315 0.0073 Continued on next page 105 106APPENDIX B. HIRES, HARPS, CFA DS AND TRES DATA FOR THE BINARY STARS Table B.1 – continued from previous page BJD - 2400000 Radial Velocity (km s−1)σ(km s−1) 50670.01562 0.0322 0.0089 51008.06641 0.0414 0.0037 51038.98438 0.0229 0.0075 51545.72266 0.0266 0.0145 53162.06250 0.0 0.0064 53569.00781 -0.0801 0.0084 53952.08984 -0.0747 0.0107 G27-44 (CfA DS) 45934.6884 -34.23 0.31 45958.5819 -33.92 0.44 46282.7861 -33.71 0.29 46339.7367 -33.26 0.25 46659.6928 -33.57 0.54 47007.8692 -33.45 0.49 47375.8000 -34.13 0.58 47694.9712 -33.61 0.26 48082.8128 -33.75 0.49 48143.6573 -33.60 0.51 48435.8309 -32.90 0.68 48900.6157 -34.20 0.42 49908.8241 -34.18 0.45 50739.6310 -34.29 0.36 50742.6880 -33.43 0.22 50755.6097 -33.86 0.28 G63-5 (HIRES) 50864.03514 -0.0529 0.0142 50866.00624 -0.0480 0.0118 51007.80053 -0.0284 0.0090 51548.09345 -0.0096 0.0077 53161.89205 0.0389 0.0067 53191.82188 0.0376 0.0042 53568.77818 0.0625 0.0128 G63-5 (CfA DS) Continued on next page 107 Table B.1 – continued from previous page BJD - 2400000 Radial Velocity (km s−1)σ(km s−1) 45037.9649 5.88 0.17 45717.8215 5.64 0.24 45860.6643 5.08 0.18 46509.8467 5.92 0.27 46843.8410 5.84 0.19 47201.9465 5.82 0.31 47549.9644 5.92 0.20 47963.8947 5.04 0.37 48371.6681 5.91 0.51 G237-84 (HIRES) 51291.99768 -0.0776 0.0106 51293.96887 -0.0890 0.0146 51547.17281 -0.0534 0.0110 52679.05301 0.0261 0.0126 52680.04800 0.0224 0.0119 52811.76697 0.0167 0.0107 53161.78931 0.0386 0.0104 53191.73366 0.0426 0.0089 53568.74194 0.0735 0.0128 G237-84 (CfA DS) 45772.7879 9.78 0.18 45833.8371 8.09 0.61 45886.6972 7.08 0.21 46107.9933 9.11 0.17 46577.6817 9.13 0.29 46953.6721 10.48 0.31 46986.6346 9.44 0.25 47134.9914 10.13 0.37 47159.0571 8.99 0.23 47556.0699 8.81 0.22 47575.0687 8.68 0.21 47602.7910 8.64 0.17 47604.8590 8.81 0.22 47629.8029 9.04 0.23 48288.9797 9.24 0.23 Continued on next page 108APPENDIX B. HIRES, HARPS, CFA DS AND TRES DATA FOR THE BINARY STARS Table B.1 – continued from previous page BJD - 2400000 Radial Velocity (km s−1)σ(km s−1) 48605.0531 9.09 0.22 49056.9222 9.05 0.38 54574.7592 9.88 0.43 54608.7376 9.74 0.40 54844.9614 10.67 0.25 54901.8969 9.88 0.50 54929.7681 10.11 0.40 55198.9976 9.51 0.30 55284.8971 9.82 0.20 G237-84 (TRES) 55311.8115 9.69 0.10 55340.6311 9.72 0.10 55584.0480 9.74 0.10 55666.8658 9.79 0.10 55668.7458 9.76 0.10 HD7424 (HIRES) 53192.10039 0.2411 0.0064 53209.12624 0.2252 0.0037 53210.11312 0.2249 0.0076 53569.11138 -0.1807 0.0085 53570.10677 -0.1781 0.0060 53684.76920 -0.3324 0.0078 HD7424 (CfA DS) 45722.6160 83.94 0.44 45960.7864 85.79 0.97 46673.7901 84.93 0.78 47018.8042 84.78 0.77 47431.9151 85.65 0.38 47780.7328 84.57 0.68 48856.8328 84.80 0.53 50711.8584 84.65 0.38 50742.7854 85.04 0.27 50744.7392 84.83 0.22 Continued on next page 109 Table B.1 – continued from previous page BJD - 2400000 Radial Velocity (km s−1)σ(km s−1) HD7424 (TRES) 55242.5827 84.56 0.10 HD192718 (HIRES) 51398.90265 0.5880 0.0080 51400.91461 0.5845 0.0119 52811.92588 0.0351 0.0110 52854.93152 0.0224 0.0086 52920.82402 -0.0128 0.0098 53162.04705 -0.1017 0.0085 53191.93307 -0.1096 0.0134 53208.94383 -0.1114 0.0095 53568.96500 -0.2887 0.0132 53569.97918 -0.2952 0.0103 53684.69217 -0.3106 0.0086 HD192718 (CfA DS) 48220.4871 -111.18 0.69 48405.8449 -110.87 0.67 48415.8438 -110.87 0.73 48433.7621 -110.96 0.84 51395.7013 -110.68 0.72 53192.9203 -112.11 0.34 HD192718 (TRES) 56087.9710 -112.73 0.10 56134.8973 -112.71 0.10 56260.5529 -112.81 0.10 G135-46 (HIRES) 52678.12921 -0.2133 0.0066 52679.09727 -0.2103 0.0078 Continued on next page 110APPENDIX B. HIRES, HARPS, CFA DS AND TRES DATA FOR THE BINARY STARS Table B.1 – continued from previous page BJD - 2400000 Radial Velocity (km s−1)σ(km s−1) 52680.08853 -0.2124 0.0063 52811.80232 -0.1416 0.0041 53161.81140 0.0724 0.0060 53191.82815 0.0921 0.0049 53206.74503 0.0866 0.0063 53568.79557 0.2629 0.0063 53569.77774 0.2636 0.0055 G135-46 (CfA DS) 46928.8399 -48.63 0.66 47174.9539 -49.67 0.64 47187.9622 -48.32 0.91 47225.0309 -49.35 0.60 47634.8100 -48.14 0.47 48374.7499 -49.87 0.60 49115.8432 -48.81 0.52 49470.8184 -48.88 0.46 49478.7951 -47.86 0.46 50093.9574 -47.86 0.46 53190.6938 -46.05 0.27 53216.6161 -46.05 0.68 53251.5128 -45.66 0.47 53343.9478 -45.91 0.59 53399.9381 -45.55 0.52 53434.8018 -46.58 0.39 53480.7413 -44.96 0.42 53513.8344 -45.91 0.39 53812.9219 -45.49 0.54 53871.8073 -45.73 0.24 54134.0428 -45.05 0.34 54160.0345 -44.93 0.36 54193.8909 -46.15 0.32 54219.8339 -45.52 0.31 54485.0612 -45.06 0.46 54548.9753 -45.40 0.43 54575.8548 -45.85 0.42 54575.9277 -45.65 0.48 54605.7664 -45.78 0.40 54632.7114 -45.37 0.40 Continued on next page 111 Table B.1 – continued from previous page BJD - 2400000 Radial Velocity (km s−1)σ(km s−1) 54843.0356 -45.08 0.38 54929.8908 -46.01 0.61 54930.9282 -45.00 0.62 54961.8243 -45.76 0.36 55251.9779 -44.62 0.60 55284.9205 -45.36 0.30 55731.7849 -45.42 0.20 G135-46 (TRES) 55200.0496 -45.19 0.10 55308.9105 -45.09 0.10 55344.7601 -45.29 0.10 55577.0259 -45.36 0.10 55665.8452 -45.40 0.10 55692.7503 -45.35 0.10 55960.0303 -45.84 0.10 55990.9158 -45.88 0.10 56024.8898 -45.91 0.10 56047.8309 -45.96 0.10 56089.6405 -45.95 0.10 56140.6684 -46.08 0.10 56288.0453 -46.21 0.10 56309.0569 -46.42 0.10 56348.0213 -46.35 0.10 56377.8662 -46.51 0.10 112APPENDIX B. HIRES, HARPS, CFA DS AND TRES DATA FOR THE BINARY STARS APPENDIX C Table for giant stars analysis 113 120 APPENDIX C. TABLE FOR GIANT STARS ANALYSIS Table C.1 – continued from previous page Star re jt HD48758 0.993 HD64121 0.993 HD69123 0.993 HD69879 0.993 HD74772 0.993 HD81169 0.993 HD88323 0.993 HD12431 0.994 HD16815 0.994 HD62034 0.994 HD13940 0.995 HD87816 0.995 HD60666 0.996 HD61642 0.996 HD62412 0.996 HD62943 0.996 HD63295 0.996 HD63744 0.996 121 Table C.2: Stellar parameters determined from the iron lines by using HM07, SO08, and TS13 line-lists. The adopted parameters in our work is the one derived with the TS13 line-list. HM07 line-list S08 line-list T13 line-list HD Te f f log gξ[Fe/H] Te f f log gξ[Fe/H] Te f f log gξ[Fe/H] number (K) (cm s−2) (km s−1) (dex) (K) (cm s−2) (km s−1) (dex) (K) (cm s−2) (km s−1) (dex) 496 4881 ±225 2.78 ±0.45 1.21 ±0.20 0.05 ±0.18 4900 ±39 2.79 ±0.07 1.52 ±0.04 -0.03 ±0.03 4854 ±40 2.75 ±0.10 1.46 ±0.04 -0.03 ±0.03 636 4784 ±202 2.86 ±0.41 1.26 ±0.20 0.24 ±0.31 4903 ±46 2.87 ±0.09 1.50 ±0.04 0.13 ±0.03 4840 ±43 2.75 ±0.11 1.46 ±0.04 0.10 ±0.03 770 4800 ±208 2.66 ±0.42 1.25 ±0.20 -0.03 ±0.32 4841 ±35 2.59 ±0.07 1.52 ±0.03 -0.13 ±0.03 4771 ±45 2.47 ±0.10 1.50 ±0.04 -0.16 ±0.03 1737 4797 ±203 2.36 ±0.42 1.25 ±0.20 0.13 ±0.51 4998 ±47 2.75 ±0.08 1.57 ±0.05 0.13 ±0.04 4932 ±50 2.57 ±0.12 1.54 ±0.05 0.10 ±0.04 3488 4869 ±63 2.87 ±0.11 1.56 ±0.09 -0.08 ±0.06 4935 ±30 2.83 ±0.06 1.50 ±0.03 -0.08 ±0.03 4880 ±34 2.72 ±0.08 1.44 ±0.04 -0.10 ±0.03 4737 5146 ±61 3.09 ±0.09 1.14 ±0.09 0.05 ±0.06 5217 ±26 3.20 ±0.07 1.35 ±0.03 0.01 ±0.02 5199 ±30 3.03 ±0.10 1.34 ±0.03 0.00 ±0.03 5457 4682 ±90 2.85 ±0.18 1.36 ±0.10 -0.02 ±0.07 4727 ±44 2.78 ±0.09 1.36 ±0.04 -0.05 ±0.03 4706 ±46 2.78 ±0.10 1.36 ±0.05 -0.05 ±0.03 6080 5034 ±70 3.43 ±0.11 1.18 ±0.10 -0.08 ±0.06 5118 ±25 3.46 ±0.04 1.12 ±0.03 -0.07 ±0.02 5084 ±24 3.38 ±0.05 1.14 ±0.03 -0.09 ±0.02 6192 4995 ±102 2.87 ±0.16 1.51 ±0.14 -0.04 ±0.10 5124 ±32 3.05 ±0.07 1.45 ±0.03 0.04 ±0.03 5122 ±26 2.99 ±0.11 1.42 ±0.03 0.05 ±0.02 6245 5115 ±62 3.21 ±0.09 1.25 ±0.09 0.04 ±0.06 5179 ±23 3.16 ±0.05 1.33 ±0.03 0.02 ±0.02 5163 ±26 3.12 ±0.07 1.28 ±0.03 0.02 ±0.03 6793†5178 ±74 3.15 ±0.13 1.41 ±0.13 -0.02 ±0.08 5367 ±33 3.49 ±0.10 1.70 ±0.04 0.03 ±0.03 5330 ±42 3.27 ±0.11 1.55 ±0.04 0.03 ±0.04 7082 4979 ±93 2.75 ±0.09 1.75 ±0.44 -0.76 ±0.11 5047 ±18 2.70 ±0.04 1.70 ±0.03 -0.75 ±0.02 5048 ±21 2.69 ±0.09 1.67 ±0.04 -0.74 ±0.02 8651 4739 ±203 2.61 ±0.41 1.28 ±0.20 -0.11 ±0.06 4798 ±37 2.64 ±0.07 1.58 ±0.03 -0.19 ±0.03 4763 ±42 2.66 ±0.11 1.56 ±0.04 -0.20 ±0.03 9163 4865 ±59 3.20 ±0.11 1.13 ±0.08 -0.12 ±0.04 4930 ±27 3.18 ±0.05 1.16 ±0.03 -0.14 ±0.02 4898 ±29 3.12 ±0.07 1.14 ±0.03 -0.15 ±0.02 9362 4824 ±66 2.59 ±0.11 1.46 ±0.11 -0.30 ±0.07 4895 ±26 2.64 ±0.04 1.50 ±0.03 -0.28 ±0.02 4885 ±32 2.60 ±0.07 1.49 ±0.03 -0.29 ±0.03 9525 4764 ±214 3.08 ±0.43 1.27 ±0.20 0.12 ±0.50 4808 ±48 2.88 ±0.09 1.42 ±0.05 0.00 ±0.03 4725 ±70 2.71 ±0.16 1.33 ±0.07 -0.02 ±0.04 10142 4727 ±67 2.57 ±0.13 1.51 ±0.08 -0.14 ±0.05 4815 ±45 2.61 ±0.09 1.53 ±0.05 -0.11 ±0.04 4755 ±34 2.47 ±0.09 1.50 ±0.04 -0.15 ±0.03 11977 4968 ±98 2.88 ±0.16 1.62 ±0.17 -0.19 ±0.10 5054 ±21 2.90 ±0.04 1.46 ±0.02 -0.15 ±0.02 5018 ±27 2.85 ±0.07 1.44 ±0.03 -0.17 ±0.03 12055†5118 ±204 2.84 ±0.41 1.09 ±0.20 -0.04 ±0.63 5265 ±30 3.11 ±0.07 1.54 ±0.03 -0.02 ±0.03 5255 ±27 3.04 ±0.15 1.45 ±0.03 -0.02 ±0.02 12296 4751 ±57 2.76 ±0.12 1.49 ±0.07 0.01 ±0.05 4811 ±32 2.65 ±0.06 1.53 ±0.03 -0.04 ±0.02 4787 ±33 2.60 ±0.09 1.51 ±0.03 -0.05 ±0.03 12431 4997 ±71 2.90 ±0.14 1.35 ±0.10 0.04 ±0.07 5049 ±30 2.93 ±0.06 1.43 ±0.03 0.00 ±0.02 5010 ±36 2.83 ±0.09 1.43 ±0.04 -0.03 ±0.03 12438 4956 ±77 2.58 ±0.09 1.70 ±0.24 -0.62 ±0.08 5050 ±14 2.69 ±0.04 1.64 ±0.02 -0.57 ±0.01 5056 ±20 2.70 ±0.04 1.66 ±0.03 -0.57 ±0.02 13263 5098 ±67 3.06 ±0.10 1.39 ±0.12 -0.06 ±0.07 5181 ±21 3.09 ±0.04 1.36 ±0.02 -0.04 ±0.02 5173 ±25 3.08 ±0.07 1.38 ±0.03 -0.05 ±0.02 13940 4996 ±65 3.02 ±0.11 1.35 ±0.10 0.02 ±0.06 5050 ±25 2.99 ±0.04 1.43 ±0.03 0.00 ±0.02 5017 ±32 2.90 ±0.07 1.43 ±0.03 -0.02 ±0.03 14247 4840 ±55 3.12 ±0.10 1.28 ±0.07 -0.13 ±0.05 4895 ±28 3.05 ±0.05 1.24 ±0.03 -0.15 ±0.02 4857 ±33 2.97 ±0.06 1.22 ±0.03 -0.17 ±0.03 14703 4966 ±204 2.91 ±0.42 1.17 ±0.20 0.15 ±0.43 5100 ±25 3.13 ±0.06 1.37 ±0.03 0.12 ±0.02 5058 ±33 3.10 ±0.10 1.38 ±0.04 0.09 ±0.03 14832 4826 ±70 2.70 ±0.13 1.50 ±0.09 -0.23 ±0.07 4890 ±26 2.66 ±0.05 1.50 ±0.03 -0.23 ±0.02 4862 ±28 2.59 ±0.06 1.48 ±0.03 -0.25 ±0.02 15414 4756 ±60 3.21 ±0.12 1.08 ±0.07 -0.02 ±0.04 4843 ±34 3.23 ±0.07 1.14 ±0.04 -0.06 ±0.02 4803 ±39 3.21 ±0.10 1.07 ±0.05 -0.06 ±0.03 16815 4739 ±57 2.74 ±0.11 1.33 ±0.08 -0.32 ±0.05 4794 ±24 2.69 ±0.06 1.35 ±0.03 -0.34 ±0.02 4777 ±27 2.65 ±0.10 1.33 ±0.03 -0.34 ±0.02 16975 5065 ±201 2.88 ±0.43 1.12 ±0.20 0.15 ±0.851 5162 ±24 3.02 ±0.04 1.41 ±0.02 0.07 ±0.02 5159 ±25 3.05 ±0.08 1.43 ±0.03 0.07 ±0.02 17324 4868 ±68 3.15 ±0.11 1.25 ±0.10 -0.15 ±0.05 4916 ±27 3.11 ±0.05 1.18 ±0.03 -0.16 ±0.02 4902 ±30 3.05 ±0.07 1.19 ±0.03 -0.17 ±0.02 17374 4881 ±64 2.85 ±0.11 1.37 ±0.09 -0.02 ±0.06 4923 ±25 2.77 ±0.04 1.47 ±0.03 -0.08 ±0.02 4899 ±28 2.75 ±0.06 1.45 ±0.03 -0.09 ±0.02 17504 4910 ±57 3.20 ±0.09 1.19 ±0.09 -0.25 ±0.05 4962 ±21 3.18 ±0.03 1.16 ±0.02 -0.26 ±0.02 4961 ±24 3.18 ±0.05 1.16 ±0.03 -0.26 ±0.02 17652 4820 ±63 2.66 ±0.10 1.51 ±0.10 -0.30 ±0.06 4868 ±23 2.62 ±0.05 1.51 ±0.02 -0.32 ±0.02 4872 ±27 2.59 ±0.06 1.51 ±0.03 -0.32 ±0.03 17715 4842 ±56 2.67 ±0.10 1.43 ±0.07 -0.06 ±0.05 4961 ±33 2.83 ±0.06 1.50 ±0.03 -0.01 ±0.03 4920 ±31 2.69 ±0.08 1.46 ±0.03 -0.03 ±0.03 18023 4686 ±208 2.72 ±0.42 1.31 ±0.20 -0.30 ±0.15 4770 ±28 2.73 ±0.07 1.29 ±0.03 -0.28 ±0.02 4740 ±28 2.61 ±0.12 1.28 ±0.03 -0.31 ±0.02 18121 4761 ±63 2.62 ±0.12 1.34 ±0.08 -0.10 ±0.06 4837 ±37 2.65 ±0.07 1.43 ±0.04 -0.14 ±0.03 4792 ±43 2.54 ±0.09 1.42 ±0.04 -0.17 ±0.03 18292 4818 ±206 2.69 ±0.41 1.24 ±0.20 0.13 ±0.40 5004 ±34 2.94 ±0.08 1.47 ±0.04 0.13 ±0.03 4930 ±43 2.85 ±0.10 1.45 ±0.04 0.09 ±0.03 18448 4724 ±72 2.59 ±0.13 1.50 ±0.10 -0.31 ±0.07 4791 ±30 2.62 ±0.08 1.60 ±0.03 -0.33 ±0.03 4756 ±32 2.60 ±0.09 1.54 ±0.04 -0.34 ±0.03 18650 4745 ±206 2.62 ±0.41 1.28 ±0.20 0.15 ±0.57 4912 ±43 2.86 ±0.08 1.47 ±0.04 0.12 ±0.03 4823 ±35 2.65 ±0.09 1.47 ±0.04 0.06 ±0.03 19940 4804 ±218 2.95 ±0.44 1.25 ±0.20 -0.02 ±0.56 4905 ±38 2.97 ±0.06 1.32 ±0.04 -0.05 ±0.03 4854 ±41 2.90 ±0.09 1.28 ±0.04 -0.06 ±0.03 21011 4885 ±80 2.85 ±0.13 1.39 ±0.10 -0.04 ±0.07 4972 ±30 2.89 ±0.05 1.47 ±0.03 -0.06 ±0.03 4934 ±33 2.82 ±0.07 1.46 ±0.04 -0.09 ±0.03 21430 4919 ±72 2.61 ±0.10 1.42 ±0.14 -0.36 ±0.07 4983 ±18 2.67 ±0.04 1.48 ±0.02 -0.36 ±0.02 4987 ±21 2.66 ±0.06 1.49 ±0.03 -0.35 ±0.02 22366 4678 ±65 2.68 ±0.12 1.40 ±0.08 -0.36 ±0.05 4740 ±22 2.67 ±0.04 1.35 ±0.02 -0.37 ±0.02 4734 ±27 2.68 ±0.06 1.36 ±0.03 -0.37 ±0.02 22382 4809 ±215 2.72 ±0.43 1.25 ±0.20 0.10 ±0.53 4920 ±35 2.90 ±0.07 1.49 ±0.03 0.07 ±0.03 4851 ±38 2.72 ±0.09 1.51 ±0.04 0.01 ±0.03 22532 4996 ±73 3.22 ±0.12 1.16 ±0.12 -0.20 ±0.07 5061 ±18 3.22 ±0.04 1.19 ±0.02 -0.22 ±0.02 5047 ±19 3.20 ±0.06 1.19 ±0.02 -0.22 ±0.02 22676 5045 ±309 3.01 ±0.62 1.13 ±0.20 0.12 ±0.22 5147 ±32 3.11 ±0.08 1.47 ±0.04 0.06 ±0.03 5109 ±36 3.01 ±0.09 1.40 ±0.04 0.06 ±0.03 23549 4885 ±204 2.88 ±0.41 1.21 ±0.20 0.27 ±0.20 5038 ±33 2.99 ±0.07 1.51 ±0.03 0.18 ±0.03 4992 ±39 2.96 ±0.10 1.48 ±0.04 0.16 ±0.03 23670 4877 ±215 2.71 ±0.45 1.21 ±0.20 -0.06 ±0.24 4883 ±27 2.68 ±0.05 1.48 ±0.03 -0.16 ±0.02 4884 ±30 2.68 ±0.07 1.48 ±0.03 -0.16 ±0.03 23719 4945 ±206 2.63 ±0.44 1.18 ±0.20 0.17 ±0.14 5103 ±34 2.95 ±0.05 1.52 ±0.03 0.13 ±0.03 5061 ±31 2.87 ±0.08 1.50 ±0.03 0.12 ±0.03 23931 4811 ±207 2.75 ±0.42 1.25 ±0.20 0.01 ±0.32 4853 ±35 2.73 ±0.07 1.48 ±0.04 -0.08 ±0.03 4785 ±33 2.63 ±0.09 1.47 ±0.03 -0.11 ±0.03 23940 4795 ±60 2.57 ±0.10 1.49 ±0.11 -0.38 ±0.06 4917 ±24 2.59 ±0.13 1.56 ±0.03 -0.33 ±0.02 4939 ±26 2.52 ±0.30 1.57 ±0.03 -0.34 ±0.03 24160 5047 ±61 2.78 ±0.10 1.37 ±0.10 0.08 ±0.07 5153 ±25 2.94 ±0.06 1.52 ±0.03 0.08 ±0.02 5136 ±26 2.85 ±0.08 1.53 ±0.03 0.08 ±0.02 122 APPENDIX C. TABLE FOR GIANT STARS ANALYSIS Table C.2: continued. HM07 line-list SO08 line-list TS13 line-list HD Te f f loggξ[Fe/H] Te f f log gξ[Fe/H] Te f f log gξ[Fe/H] number (K) (cm s−2) (km s−1) (dex) (K) (cm s−2) (km s−1) (dex) (K) (cm s−2) (km s−1) (dex) 28093 4885 ±63 2.52 ±0.10 1.46 ±0.10 -0.19 ±0.07 5011 ±28 2.69 ±0.07 1.61 ±0.03 -0.15 ±0.03 4994 ±28 2.60 ±0.15 1.58 ±0.03 -0.15 ±0.03 28732 4889 ±217 2.83 ±0.44 1.21 ±0.20 0.10 ±0.33 4999 ±35 2.98 ±0.06 1.46 ±0.03 0.08 ±0.03 4928 ±33 2.86 ±0.08 1.44 ±0.03 0.05 ±0.03 29085 4842 ±57 3.05 ±0.10 1.27 ±0.08 -0.18 ±0.04 4910 ±26 3.07 ±0.05 1.25 ±0.03 -0.18 ±0.02 4879 ±29 3.00 ±0.06 1.22 ±0.03 -0.19 ±0.02 29291 5080 ±207 2.70 ±0.44 1.11 ±0.20 0.19 ±0.55 5070 ±31 2.75 ±0.05 1.64 ±0.03 0.02 ±0.03 5074 ±30 2.77 ±0.07 1.61 ±0.03 0.04 ±0.03 29399 4831 ±219 3.39 ±0.44 1.24 ±0.20 0.12 ±0.33 4914 ±45 3.36 ±0.09 1.27 ±0.05 0.09 ±0.03 4828 ±53 3.27 ±0.16 1.12 ±0.07 0.11 ±0.03 29751 5054 ±80 2.91 ±0.13 1.46 ±0.14 -0.10 ±0.08 5109 ±21 2.87 ±0.04 1.54 ±0.02 -0.12 ±0.02 5052 ±21 2.75 ±0.08 1.53 ±0.02 -0.16 ±0.02 29930 4656 ±65 2.43 ±0.13 1.51 ±0.07 -0.04 ±0.05 4823 ±50 2.62 ±0.10 1.52 ±0.05 0.03 ±0.03 4748 ±58 2.47 ±0.13 1.53 ±0.06 -0.02 ±0.04 30185 4901 ±204 2.85 ±0.41 1.20 ±0.20 -0.04 ±0.69 4960 ±29 2.85 ±0.05 1.42 ±0.03 -0.09 ±0.02 4905 ±33 2.77 ±0.09 1.40 ±0.03 -0.13 ±0.03 30790 4739 ±63 2.60 ±0.12 1.46 ±0.08 -0.01 ±0.06 4925 ±48 2.86 ±0.09 1.49 ±0.05 0.07 ±0.04 4817 ±49 2.59 ±0.12 1.48 ±0.05 0.00 ±0.04 32436 4697 ±230 2.56 ±0.46 1.30 ±0.20 0.15 ±0.34 4871 ±39 2.82 ±0.07 1.58 ±0.04 0.10 ±0.03 4773 ±57 2.61 ±0.13 1.56 ±0.05 0.04 ±0.04 32453 5176 ±118 3.18 ±0.14 1.38 ±0.23 -0.02 ±0.13 5186 ±22 3.06 ±0.04 1.45 ±0.02 -0.06 ±0.02 5171 ±27 2.99 ±0.06 1.43 ±0.03 -0.06 ±0.03 33285 4902 ±87 2.31 ±0.15 1.87 ±0.14 -0.09 ±0.09 5133 ±39 2.68 ±0.07 2.09 ±0.05 0.01 ±0.04 5088 ±44 2.54 ±0.11 1.92 ±0.05 0.00 ±0.04 34172 5111 ±211 3.04 ±0.42 1.09 ±0.20 0.13 ±0.93 5156 ±30 3.06 ±0.05 1.44 ±0.03 0.05 ±0.03 5140 ±35 3.02 ±0.10 1.38 ±0.04 0.06 ±0.03 34266 4929 ±218 2.61 ±0.44 1.19 ±0.20 0.10 ±0.33 4975 ±31 2.66 ±0.06 1.63 ±0.03 0.01 ±0.03 4978 ±34 2.70 ±0.08 1.64 ±0.04 0.01 ±0.03 34642 4857 ±401 3.34 ±0.80 1.22 ±0.20 -0.01 ±0.85 4895 ±29 3.20 ±0.05 1.17 ±0.04 -0.06 ±0.02 4865 ±30 3.16 ±0.06 1.13 ±0.04 -0.06 ±0.02 36189 4913 ±74 2.35 ±0.12 1.80 ±0.14 -0.12 ±0.09 5068 ±32 2.43 ±0.12 1.92 ±0.04 -0.05 ±0.03 5053 ±39 2.50 ±0.10 1.83 ±0.05 -0.05 ±0.04 37811 5067 ±67 2.87 ±0.10 1.52 ±0.11 -0.01 ±0.07 5178 ±22 2.94 ±0.05 1.55 ±0.02 0.02 ±0.02 5136 ±28 2.88 ±0.07 1.52 ±0.03 -0.01 ±0.03 39640 4904 ±56 2.81 ±0.09 1.44 ±0.08 -0.08 ±0.06 4992 ±33 2.84 ±0.06 1.48 ±0.04 -0.08 ±0.03 4932 ±36 2.70 ±0.08 1.43 ±0.04 -0.11 ±0.03 39720 4727 ±53 2.57 ±0.10 1.59 ±0.07 -0.19 ±0.05 4790 ±34 2.51 ±0.07 1.56 ±0.03 -0.19 ±0.03 4770 ±39 2.45 ±0.09 1.53 ±0.04 -0.19 ±0.03 40409 4789 ±201 3.31 ±0.40 1.26 ±0.20 0.10 ±0.96 4838 ±44 3.14 ±0.09 1.20 ±0.04 0.08 ±0.03 4806 ±48 3.14 ±0.11 1.17 ±0.06 0.08 ±0.03 41451 4849 ±201 2.77 ±0.40 1.23 ±0.20 0.28 ±0.99 4966 ±42 2.85 ±0.09 1.54 ±0.05 0.16 ±0.04 4893 ±58 2.78 ±0.15 1.45 ±0.06 0.17 ±0.04 44880 4946 ±205 3.05 ±0.41 1.18 ±0.20 -0.21 ±0.69 5050 ±21 3.20 ±0.04 1.22 ±0.02 -0.19 ±0.02 5036 ±22 3.14 ±0.04 1.23 ±0.03 -0.21 ±0.02 44956 5102 ±204 3.07 ±0.43 1.10 ±0.20 -0.02 ±0.69 5219 ±23 3.27 ±0.05 1.39 ±0.03 -0.03 ±0.02 5163 ±21 3.13 ±0.09 1.33 ±0.02 -0.05 ±0.02 45145 4831 ±57 2.82 ±0.11 1.50 ±0.07 0.00 ±0.05 4935 ±30 2.78 ±0.10 1.54 ±0.03 -0.01 ±0.03 4891 ±35 2.58 ±0.21 1.49 ±0.03 -0.04 ±0.03 45158 5009 ±201 3.08 ±0.40 1.15 ±0.20 0.18 ±0.91 5091 ±27 3.05 ±0.06 1.36 ±0.03 0.10 ±0.02 5062 ±39 2.99 ±0.08 1.35 ±0.04 0.07 ±0.03 45553 5103 ±74 3.14 ±0.12 1.27 ±0.11 0.06 ±0.07 5184 ±28 3.13 ±0.05 1.37 ±0.03 0.05 ±0.03 5168 ±33 3.07 ±0.10 1.34 ±0.04 0.05 ±0.03 46116 4854 ±57 2.65 ±0.09 1.57 ±0.10 -0.33 ±0.06 4917 ±25 2.70 ±0.04 1.51 ±0.03 -0.30 ±0.02 4903 ±26 2.63 ±0.07 1.51 ±0.03 -0.32 ±0.02 46262 4693 ±212 2.96 ±0.42 1.31 ±0.20 -0.32 ±0.06 4746 ±27 2.89 ±0.06 1.26 ±0.03 -0.34 ±0.02 4716 ±29 2.90 ±0.07 1.21 ±0.03 -0.34 ±0.02 46727 4901 ±60 2.84 ±0.10 1.45 ±0.09 -0.05 ±0.06 4942 ±31 2.75 ±0.05 1.47 ±0.04 -0.09 ±0.03 4922 ±41 2.73 ±0.08 1.46 ±0.05 -0.10 ±0.03 47001 4681 ±72 2.46 ±0.13 1.53 ±0.10 -0.25 ±0.07 4724 ±29 2.39 ±0.08 1.61 ±0.03 -0.32 ±0.02 4703 ±31 2.24 ±0.12 1.57 ±0.03 -0.33 ±0.03 47910 4814 ±70 2.75 ±0.13 1.32 ±0.08 -0.02 ±0.06 4922 ±31 2.82 ±0.06 1.45 ±0.03 -0.05 ±0.03 4844 ±33 2.65 ±0.08 1.40 ±0.03 -0.09 ±0.03 47973 5062 ±210 2.68 ±0.46 1.12 ±0.20 0.25 ±0.67 5071 ±46 2.67 ±0.10 1.75 ±0.06 0.06 ±0.04 5048 ±59 2.73 ±0.11 1.68 ±0.07 0.06 ±0.05 48758 4785 ±64 2.86 ±0.11 1.30 ±0.13 -0.59 ±0.06 4871 ±18 2.93 ±0.03 1.27 ±0.02 -0.57 ±0.02 4864 ±22 2.95 ±0.04 1.28 ±0.03 -0.57 ±0.02 49947 4910 ±221 2.63 ±0.44 1.20 ±0.20 -0.18 ±0.36 5002 ±23 2.87 ±0.05 1.47 ±0.03 -0.19 ±0.02 4984 ±28 2.80 ±0.06 1.49 ±0.04 -0.20 ±0.02 51211 4860 ±71 2.79 ±0.13 1.41 ±0.10 -0.12 ±0.07 4927 ±26 2.73 ±0.05 1.50 ±0.03 -0.16 ±0.02 4899 ±27 2.70 ±0.08 1.47 ±0.03 -0.16 ±0.02 55151 4792 ±62 2.77 ±0.14 1.52 ±0.08 -0.02 ±0.05 4873 ±30 2.83 ±0.08 1.51 ±0.03 0.01 ±0.03 4814 ±36 2.79 ±0.15 1.46 ±0.04 -0.01 ±0.02 55865 4817 ±60 2.82 ±0.12 1.51 ±0.08 0.00 ±0.05 4926 ±38 2.83 ±0.07 1.50 ±0.04 0.03 ±0.03 4866 ±34 2.70 ±0.10 1.47 ±0.04 -0.01 ±0.03 55964 4901 ±63 3.08 ±0.11 1.26 ±0.09 -0.10 ±0.05 4972 ±24 3.10 ±0.04 1.30 ±0.03 -0.11 ±0.02 4941 ±27 3.00 ±0.07 1.26 ±0.03 -0.12 ±0.02 56478 4827 ±56 2.73 ±0.11 1.50 ±0.08 -0.10 ±0.05 4932 ±31 2.77 ±0.06 1.57 ±0.03 -0.12 ±0.03 4897 ±34 2.68 ±0.08 1.56 ±0.04 -0.15 ±0.03 58540 4750 ±291 3.23 ±0.58 1.28 ±0.20 -0.02 ±0.39 4782 ±35 3.06 ±0.07 1.18 ±0.04 -0.06 ±0.02 4732 ±42 2.96 ±0.10 1.12 ±0.04 -0.07 ±0.03 59219 4784 ±104 2.32 ±0.21 1.96 ±0.16 -0.09 ±0.10 5099 ±67 3.00 ±0.13 2.27 ±0.10 0.06 ±0.06 5081 ±63 2.92 ±0.20 2.14 ±0.08 0.06 ±0.05 59894 4920 ±72 2.81 ±0.12 1.36 ±0.10 -0.12 ±0.07 5012 ±25 2.92 ±0.04 1.46 ±0.03 -0.12 ±0.02 4996 ±25 2.87 ±0.06 1.45 ±0.03 -0.13 ±0.02 60060 4887 ±351 2.86 ±0.70 1.21 ±0.20 0.07 ±0.24 4900 ±35 2.79 ±0.06 1.50 ±0.03 -0.07 ±0.03 4882 ±37 2.72 ±0.08 1.46 ±0.04 -0.08 ±0.03 60574 4938 ±72 2.62 ±0.10 1.50 ±0.15 -0.42 ±0.08 5046 ±18 2.82 ±0.04 1.64 ±0.02 -0.41 ±0.02 5036 ±24 2.78 ±0.05 1.61 ±0.03 -0.40 ±0.02 60666 4752 ±71 2.59 ±0.13 1.35 ±0.08 -0.07 ±0.06 4886 ±40 2.76 ±0.07 1.47 ±0.04 -0.05 ±0.03 4784 ±38 2.63 ±0.11 1.45 ±0.04 -0.10 ±0.03 61642 4817 ±59 2.69 ±0.11 1.31 ±0.07 -0.07 ±0.05 4925 ±35 2.79 ±0.07 1.41 ±0.04 -0.07 ±0.03 4868 ±41 2.65 ±0.10 1.38 ±0.04 -0.11 ±0.03 61904 5046 ±201 2.93 ±0.40 1.13 ±0.20 0.19 ±0.82 5148 ±26 3.07 ±0.06 1.43 ±0.03 0.11 ±0.02 5102 ±28 2.92 ±0.10 1.41 ±0.03 0.08 ±0.03 62034 4850 ±296 2.81 ±0.59 1.23 ±0.20 0.07 ±0.32 4870 ±33 2.73 ±0.06 1.48 ±0.03 -0.05 ±0.03 4836 ±32 2.68 ±0.07 1.47 ±0.03 -0.07 ±0.02 62412 4900 ±204 2.74 ±0.41 1.20 ±0.20 0.12 ±0.43 5030 ±36 2.90 ±0.07 1.48 ±0.04 0.06 ±0.03 4966 ±40 2.76 ±0.09 1.45 ±0.04 0.03 ±0.03 62943 5042 ±201 3.02 ±0.41 1.13 ±0.20 0.08 ±0.82 5141 ±23 3.11 ±0.04 1.36 ±0.02 0.03 ±0.02 5114 ±21 3.02 ±0.10 1.35 ±0.02 0.01 ±0.02 63295 4721 ±57 2.43 ±0.10 1.41 ±0.07 -0.18 ±0.05 4896 ±39 2.73 ±0.06 1.48 ±0.04 -0.10 ±0.03 4837 ±44 2.57 ±0.09 1.44 ±0.05 -0.13 ±0.03 63744 4760 ±67 2.78 ±0.14 1.54 ±0.09 -0.04 ±0.05 4903 ±57 2.86 ±0.10 1.54 ±0.06 0.00 ±0.04 4815 ±51 2.66 ±0.12 1.41 ±0.06 -0.02 ±0.04 63948 4902 ±60 3.03 ±0.10 1.26 ±0.09 -0.08 ±0.06 5005 ±26 3.10 ±0.05 1.32 ±0.03 -0.08 ±0.02 4960 ±26 3.02 ±0.06 1.30 ±0.03 -0.10 ±0.02 123 Table C.2: continued. HM07 line-list SO08 line-list TS13 line-list HD Te f f loggξ[Fe/H] Te f f log gξ[Fe/H] Te f f log gξ[Fe/H] number (K) (cm s−2) (km s−1) (dex) (K) (cm s−2) (km s−1) (dex) (K) (cm s−2) (km s−1) (dex) 64121 5018 ±70 3.28 ±0.12 1.19 ±0.12 -0.24 ±0.07 5077 ±20 3.30 ±0.04 1.18 ±0.02 -0.25 ±0.02 5072 ±17 3.32 ±0.05 1.18 ±0.02 -0.25 ±0.01 65638 4950 ±49 2.93 ±0.08 1.50 ±0.08 0.02 ±0.05 5015 ±30 2.89 ±0.05 1.44 ±0.03 0.05 ±0.03 4972 ±30 2.81 ±0.07 1.45 ±0.03 0.02 ±0.03 67762 4938 ±204 3.44 ±0.41 1.18 ±0.20 -0.01 ±0.49 5010 ±28 3.42 ±0.06 1.10 ±0.03 -0.01 ±0.02 4972 ±30 3.36 ±0.06 1.09 ±0.04 -0.04 ±0.02 67977 5057 ±68 2.92 ±0.08 1.37 ±0.13 -0.18 ±0.07 5165 ±19 3.09 ±0.04 1.40 ±0.02 -0.13 ±0.02 5142 ±22 3.07 ±0.06 1.41 ±0.03 -0.15 ±0.02 67990 4905 ±63 2.90 ±0.12 1.44 ±0.08 -0.02 ±0.06 5012 ±30 2.92 ±0.06 1.46 ±0.03 0.00 ±0.03 4925 ±33 2.73 ±0.09 1.40 ±0.03 -0.05 ±0.03 69123 4844 ±56 3.13 ±0.11 1.33 ±0.07 0.07 ±0.04 4885 ±34 3.01 ±0.07 1.35 ±0.04 0.02 ±0.03 4850 ±40 2.81 ±0.18 1.32 ±0.04 -0.01 ±0.03 69674 4789 ±67 2.43 ±0.11 1.55 ±0.09 -0.20 ±0.06 4888 ±27 2.53 ±0.05 1.59 ±0.03 -0.17 ±0.03 4871 ±38 2.59 ±0.08 1.62 ±0.04 -0.19 ±0.03 69879 4768 ±53 2.64 ±0.10 1.41 ±0.07 -0.01 ±0.04 4867 ±36 2.71 ±0.08 1.47 ±0.03 -0.01 ±0.03 4811 ±35 2.63 ±0.10 1.49 ±0.04 -0.06 ±0.03 70982 5037 ±72 2.86 ±0.12 1.43 ±0.10 0.00 ±0.07 5132 ±27 2.89 ±0.05 1.50 ±0.03 0.02 ±0.03 5132 ±30 2.78 ±0.13 1.45 ±0.03 0.02 ±0.03 73468 5000 ±251 2.77 ±0.50 1.15 ±0.20 -0.06 ±0.10 5036 ±21 2.89 ±0.04 1.48 ±0.02 -0.13 ±0.02 5012 ±22 2.85 ±0.07 1.46 ±0.03 -0.14 ±0.02 73887 4824 ±54 2.73 ±0.10 1.37 ±0.07 0.04 ±0.05 4927 ±38 2.80 ±0.07 1.51 ±0.04 0.01 ±0.03 4828 ±43 2.60 ±0.09 1.48 ±0.04 -0.05 ±0.04 73898 4958 ±75 2.66 ±0.10 1.60 ±0.16 -0.48 ±0.08 5034 ±16 2.70 ±0.04 1.53 ±0.02 -0.44 ±0.02 5055 ±21 2.72 ±0.06 1.54 ±0.03 -0.43 ±0.02 74006 5766 ±149 3.92 ±0.15 4.28 ±0.42 -0.02 ±0.12 5590 ±168 3.73 ±0.27 3.17 ±0.49 -0.06 ±0.13 74772†5131 ±128 2.67 ±0.15 1.22 ±0.27 -0.09 ±0.12 5290 ±24 2.93 ±0.07 1.62 ±0.03 -0.07 ±0.02 5291 ±32 2.89 ±0.11 1.54 ±0.04 -0.04 ±0.03 75168†5243 ±80 2.99 ±0.12 1.45 ±0.16 -0.05 ±0.09 5450 ±27 3.23 ±0.07 1.56 ±0.03 0.06 ±0.03 5444 ±35 3.19 ±0.14 1.52 ±0.04 0.05 ±0.03 75451 4819 ±74 3.08 ±0.14 1.18 ±0.09 0.00 ±0.05 4916 ±31 3.12 ±0.06 1.24 ±0.04 -0.03 ±0.03 4875 ±31 3.04 ±0.07 1.21 ±0.03 -0.04 ±0.02 77580 4850 ±457 2.74 ±0.92 1.23 ±0.20 0.19 ±0.06 5042 ±43 3.01 ±0.09 1.52 ±0.04 0.16 ±0.04 4991 ±50 2.95 ±0.10 1.46 ±0.05 0.16 ±0.04 78883 4840 ±58 2.67 ±0.09 1.65 ±0.14 -0.52 ±0.06 4994 ±29 2.89 ±0.07 1.69 ±0.04 -0.42 ±0.03 4984 ±27 2.82 ±0.12 1.59 ±0.04 -0.42 ±0.03 79091 4708 ±59 2.94 ±0.13 1.27 ±0.07 -0.17 ±0.04 4765 ±26 2.86 ±0.06 1.26 ±0.03 -0.21 ±0.02 4726 ±33 2.80 ±0.08 1.23 ±0.04 -0.22 ±0.02 79846 4983 ±137 2.67 ±0.30 2.55 ±0.40 -0.13 ±0.15 5300 ±60 2.88 ±0.15 2.43 ±0.08 0.13 ±0.06 5117 ±75 2.77 ±0.21 2.32 ±0.11 0.00 ±0.07 80171 4933 ±202 2.94 ±0.41 1.18 ±0.20 0.22 ±0.60 5034 ±33 3.02 ±0.08 1.48 ±0.04 0.11 ±0.03 5006 ±47 2.97 ±0.11 1.41 ±0.05 0.12 ±0.04 80934 4921 ±201 3.04 ±0.40 1.19 ±0.20 0.22 ±0.60 5042 ±33 3.08 ±0.07 1.42 ±0.04 0.15 ±0.03 5002 ±46 3.03 ±0.12 1.41 ±0.05 0.13 ±0.04 81101 4898 ±79 2.65 ±0.11 1.52 ±0.15 -0.38 ±0.08 4979 ±19 2.75 ±0.03 1.53 ±0.02 -0.35 ±0.02 4977 ±24 2.72 ±0.05 1.51 ±0.03 -0.36 ±0.02 81136†5141 ±74 2.90 ±0.10 1.60 ±0.13 0.07 ±0.08 5222 ±26 2.81 ±0.07 1.68 ±0.03 0.07 ±0.02 5206 ±30 2.78 ±0.11 1.60 ±0.03 0.08 ±0.03 81169 5072 ±217 2.95 ±0.43 1.11 ±0.20 -0.01 ±0.15 5131 ±22 3.06 ±0.04 1.38 ±0.02 -0.05 ±0.02 5126 ±22 3.04 ±0.06 1.36 ±0.03 -0.05 ±0.02 83380 4793 ±202 2.74 ±0.41 1.26 ±0.20 0.10 ±0.28 4920 ±36 2.88 ±0.07 1.47 ±0.04 0.06 ±0.03 4840 ±47 2.72 ±0.10 1.47 ±0.05 0.00 ±0.04 83465 4712 ±84 2.58 ±0.17 1.49 ±0.10 -0.10 ±0.07 4839 ±31 2.67 ±0.06 1.56 ±0.03 -0.08 ±0.03 4837 ±43 2.72 ±0.10 1.52 ±0.04 -0.06 ±0.03 84698 4846 ±59 2.71 ±0.12 1.37 ±0.08 0.01 ±0.05 4947 ±32 2.81 ±0.06 1.50 ±0.03 0.01 ±0.03 4870 ±36 2.70 ±0.08 1.46 ±0.04 -0.03 ±0.03 85154 4948 ±204 2.97 ±0.41 1.18 ±0.20 0.09 ±0.57 5085 ±31 3.13 ±0.06 1.32 ±0.03 0.09 ±0.03 5041 ±39 3.06 ±0.08 1.34 ±0.04 0.07 ±0.03 85250 5034 ±60 3.17 ±0.10 1.35 ±0.09 0.10 ±0.06 5119 ±27 3.16 ±0.05 1.35 ±0.03 0.09 ±0.02 5084 ±28 3.07 ±0.07 1.33 ±0.03 0.08 ±0.02 85396 5018 ±64 3.20 ±0.10 1.20 ±0.10 -0.15 ±0.06 5084 ±18 3.22 ±0.03 1.20 ±0.02 -0.15 ±0.01 5082 ±19 3.20 ±0.06 1.21 ±0.02 -0.15 ±0.02 85612 5028 ±80 3.35 ±0.14 1.14 ±0.12 -0.04 ±0.07 5108 ±22 3.38 ±0.04 1.18 ±0.03 -0.05 ±0.02 5068 ±22 3.26 ±0.09 1.20 ±0.03 -0.08 ±0.02 87540 4936 ±223 2.93 ±0.52 1.18 ±0.20 0.11 ±0.18 4959 ±26 2.85 ±0.06 1.45 ±0.03 -0.02 ±0.02 4914 ±30 2.71 ±0.09 1.43 ±0.03 -0.05 ±0.03 87627 4713 ±48 2.60 ±0.09 1.57 ±0.06 -0.16 ±0.04 4778 ±31 2.56 ±0.06 1.55 ±0.03 -0.16 ±0.03 4741 ±39 2.50 ±0.09 1.48 ±0.04 -0.17 ±0.03 87816 4904 ±202 2.79 ±0.42 1.20 ±0.20 0.18 ±0.45 4996 ±50 2.88 ±0.09 1.40 ±0.05 0.13 ±0.03 4987 ±55 2.89 ±0.11 1.37 ±0.07 0.14 ±0.04 87896†5260 ±73 3.65 ±0.15 1.52 ±0.14 0.09 ±0.07 5324 ±37 3.46 ±0.09 1.51 ±0.04 0.13 ±0.03 5283 ±46 3.41 ±0.10 1.45 ±0.05 0.10 ±0.04 88323 4953 ±70 2.76 ±0.11 1.45 ±0.09 0.08 ±0.07 5074 ±35 2.80 ±0.07 1.59 ±0.04 0.09 ±0.03 5048 ±43 2.72 ±0.12 1.52 ±0.04 0.10 ±0.04 88836 5047 ±233 2.88 ±0.47 1.13 ±0.20 0.06 ±0.40 5058 ±22 2.95 ±0.05 1.42 ±0.02 -0.04 ±0.02 5037 ±26 2.87 ±0.08 1.40 ±0.03 -0.05 ±0.02 89015 4783 ±209 2.71 ±0.42 1.26 ±0.20 0.09 ±0.06 4837 ±36 2.71 ±0.07 1.56 ±0.04 -0.02 ±0.03 4796 ±38 2.64 ±0.09 1.48 ±0.04 -0.01 ±0.03 90074 5128 ±59 3.17 ±0.09 1.22 ±0.10 0.00 ±0.06 5197 ±19 3.17 ±0.05 1.30 ±0.02 -0.03 ±0.02 5164 ±23 3.06 ±0.07 1.29 ±0.03 -0.05 ±0.02 90317 4890 ±202 3.41 ±0.40 1.21 ±0.20 0.04 ±0.31 4888 ±24 3.15 ±0.06 1.14 ±0.03 -0.02 ±0.02 4868 ±30 3.16 ±0.07 1.08 ±0.03 0.00 ±0.02 90980 4788 ±201 2.71 ±0.40 1.26 ±0.20 0.17 ±0.74 4967 ±35 2.98 ±0.07 1.45 ±0.04 0.15 ±0.03 4915 ±46 2.99 ±0.11 1.49 ±0.05 0.11 ±0.04 91437 5092 ±63 3.03 ±0.09 1.33 ±0.09 0.04 ±0.06 5178 ±29 3.09 ±0.04 1.40 ±0.03 0.04 ±0.03 5142 ±27 2.99 ±0.08 1.38 ±0.03 0.02 ±0.03 93410 4691 ±69 2.82 ±0.14 1.30 ±0.08 -0.20 ±0.05 4774 ±33 2.80 ±0.06 1.32 ±0.03 -0.20 ±0.02 4730 ±35 2.80 ±0.10 1.30 ±0.03 -0.22 ±0.02 93773 5018 ±54 3.03 ±0.10 1.47 ±0.09 -0.02 ±0.05 5055 ±27 2.93 ±0.06 1.42 ±0.03 -0.05 ±0.02 5018 ±29 2.79 ±0.08 1.42 ±0.03 -0.07 ±0.02 94510 4948 ±65 3.15 ±0.11 1.28 ±0.09 -0.12 ±0.06 5015 ±24 3.14 ±0.05 1.24 ±0.03 -0.12 ±0.02 5002 ±24 3.08 ±0.07 1.24 ±0.03 -0.13 ±0.02 94890 4787 ±202 2.60 ±0.41 1.26 ±0.20 0.06 ±0.31 4911 ±34 2.76 ±0.06 1.53 ±0.03 -0.03 ±0.03 4892 ±42 2.76 ±0.09 1.52 ±0.04 -0.03 ±0.03 96566 4910 ±120 2.56 ±0.18 1.67 ±0.18 0.05 ±0.12 4914 ±48 2.45 ±0.10 1.80 ±0.05 0.00 ±0.04 4968 ±49 2.59 ±0.17 1.75 ±0.05 0.05 ±0.05 97344 5009 ±63 2.96 ±0.10 1.48 ±0.11 -0.05 ±0.06 5130 ±28 3.09 ±0.06 1.44 ±0.03 0.00 ±0.03 5074 ±32 3.04 ±0.12 1.40 ±0.04 -0.03 ±0.03 98732 4732 ±203 3.08 ±0.41 1.29 ±0.20 -0.31 ±0.29 4815 ±28 3.07 ±0.05 1.14 ±0.03 -0.29 ±0.02 4790 ±25 3.06 ±0.05 1.09 ±0.03 -0.29 ±0.02 100708 4717 ±82 2.94 ±0.15 1.15 ±0.09 -0.01 ±0.06 4828 ±38 3.01 ±0.07 1.33 ±0.04 -0.07 ±0.03 4798 ±36 2.82 ±0.16 1.26 ±0.04 -0.08 ±0.026 101162 4889 ±65 2.91 ±0.11 1.46 ±0.08 0.08 ±0.05 4925 ±32 2.81 ±0.06 1.47 ±0.04 0.05 ±0.03 4936 ±31 2.79 ±0.17 1.48 ±0.04 0.06 ±0.03 103462 4950 ±92 2.53 ±0.11 1.41 ±0.43 -0.53 ±0.10 5068 ±15 2.75 ±0.04 1.56 ±0.02 -0.47 ±0.01 5100 ±21 2.79 ±0.06 1.57 ±0.03 -0.45 ±0.02 124 APPENDIX C. TABLE FOR GIANT STARS ANALYSIS Table C.2: continued. HM07 line-list SO08 line-list TS13 line-list HD Te f f loggξ[Fe/H] Te f f log gξ[Fe/H] Te f f log gξ[Fe/H] number (K) (cm s−2) (km s−1) (dex) (K) (cm s−2) (km s−1) (dex) (K) (cm s−2) (km s−1) (dex) 104704 4716 ±86 3.04 ±0.17 1.23 ±0.10 -0.09 ±0.06 4775 ±30 2.93 ±0.06 1.24 ±0.03 -0.15 ±0.02 4736 ±40 2.85 ±0.09 1.20 ±0.04 -0.16 ±0.03 106572 4722 ±110 2.38 ±0.18 1.50 ±0.32 -0.49 ±0.09 4825 ±26 2.53 ±0.05 1.61 ±0.03 -0.44 ±0.02 4806 ±27 2.52 ±0.07 1.62 ±0.03 -0.46 ±0.02 110829 4883 ±202 3.41 ±0.40 1.21 ±0.20 0.23 ±0.63 4844 ±43 3.01 ±0.09 1.30 ±0.04 0.10 ±0.03 4824 ±44 2.79 ±0.22 1.30 ±0.05 0.07 ±0.03 111295 4853 ±101 2.40 ±0.15 1.47 ±0.34 -0.41 ±0.09 5049 ±27 2.88 ±0.06 1.78 ±0.03 -0.32 ±0.03 5029 ±34 2.79 ±0.12 1.69 ±0.05 -0.33 ±0.03 113778 4736 ±118 2.62 ±0.22 1.49 ±0.16 -0.07 ±0.10 4842 ±32 2.72 ±0.07 1.52 ±0.03 -0.05 ±0.03 4821 ±38 2.60 ±0.10 1.49 ±0.04 -0.07 ±0.03 114474 4831 ±82 3.02 ±0.15 1.34 ±0.10 0.14 ±0.06 4842 ±41 2.83 ±0.07 1.47 ±0.04 0.03 ±0.03 4790 ±48 2.76 ±0.10 1.41 ±0.05 0.03 ±0.03 115310 5079 ±94 3.15 ±0.13 1.41 ±0.16 0.10 ±0.10 5097 ±28 2.97 ±0.05 1.43 ±0.03 0.04 ±0.03 5011 ±34 2.80 ±0.07 1.45 ±0.04 -0.03 ±0.03 116243†5058 ±101 2.69 ±0.12 1.91 ±0.33 -0.34 ±0.12 5325 ±22 3.02 ±0.05 1.63 ±0.03 -0.12 ±0.02 5305 ±32 2.97 ±0.10 1.62 ±0.04 -0.13 ±0.03 118338 5031 ±397 2.90 ±0.80 1.13 ±0.20 0.17 ±0.89 5178 ±25 3.13 ±0.05 1.47 ±0.03 0.10 ±0.02 5131 ±32 3.10 ±0.13 1.44 ±0.04 0.08 ±0.03 119250 4821 ±97 2.68 ±0.16 1.44 ±0.13 -0.14 ±0.09 4882 ±27 2.67 ±0.05 1.50 ±0.03 -0.15 ±0.02 4823 ±37 2.50 ±0.10 1.47 ±0.04 -0.18 ±0.03 120457 4916 ±203 2.95 ±0.41 1.19 ±0.20 0.23 ±0.74 5042 ±32 3.09 ±0.07 1.39 ±0.03 0.16 ±0.02 5017 ±42 3.08 ±0.08 1.33 ±0.05 0.17 ±0.03 121853 4934 ±67 2.76 ±0.10 1.50 ±0.14 -0.28 ±0.07 4985 ±23 2.77 ±0.04 1.57 ±0.03 -0.28 ±0.02 4968 ±24 2.68 ±0.06 1.50 ±0.03 -0.28 ±0.02 123151 4864 ±66 2.72 ±0.10 1.42 ±0.09 -0.18 ±0.06 4971 ±29 2.80 ±0.05 1.51 ±0.04 -0.19 ±0.02 4957 ±35 2.77 ±0.10 1.48 ±0.04 -0.19 ±0.03 123569 4981 ±202 2.94 ±0.40 1.16 ±0.20 0.11 ±0.71 5104 ±27 3.12 ±0.05 1.37 ±0.03 0.07 ±0.02 5089 ±31 3.13 ±0.08 1.38 ±0.03 0.07 ±0.03 125136 4781 ±163 2.96 ±0.30 1.42 ±0.21 -0.16 ±0.14 4949 ±33 3.15 ±0.06 1.18 ±0.04 -0.01 ±0.02 4937 ±37 2.97 ±0.20 1.22 ±0.04 -0.05 ±0.03 127195 4947 ±66 3.42 ±0.11 1.10 ±0.10 -0.05 ±0.05 5006 ±23 3.37 ±0.04 1.09 ±0.03 -0.07 ±0.02 4990 ±24 3.38 ±0.05 1.09 ±0.03 -0.08 ±0.02 129462 4915 ±165 3.00 ±0.25 2.04 ±0.31 -0.16 ±0.14 4985 ±27 2.84 ±0.04 1.52 ±0.03 -0.07 ±0.02 4953 ±26 2.75 ±0.06 1.48 ±0.03 -0.08 ±0.02 129893 4914 ±59 2.91 ±0.10 1.43 ±0.08 0.01 ±0.05 4974 ±31 2.88 ±0.05 1.44 ±0.03 -0.01 ±0.03 4917 ±35 2.80 ±0.08 1.40 ±0.04 -0.03 ±0.03 130650 4940 ±71 2.79 ±0.11 1.51 ±0.12 -0.07 ±0.07 5027 ±24 2.78 ±0.04 1.54 ±0.03 -0.06 ±0.02 5009 ±28 2.79 ±0.07 1.51 ±0.03 -0.06 ±0.02 131376 5052 ±234 3.01 ±0.47 1.12 ±0.20 0.14 ±0.59 5126 ±26 3.11 ±0.06 1.43 ±0.03 0.08 ±0.02 5096 ±34 3.06 ±0.08 1.42 ±0.03 0.07 ±0.03 132905 4876 ±66 2.54 ±0.09 1.46 ±0.12 -0.39 ±0.07 4954 ±22 2.69 ±0.05 1.53 ±0.02 -0.37 ±0.02 4989 ±22 2.61 ±0.18 1.55 ±0.03 -0.35 ±0.02 133921†5173 ±60 3.10 ±0.11 1.15 ±0.09 0.15 ±0.06 5283 ±31 3.10 ±0.09 1.24 ±0.03 0.18 ±0.03 5270 ±38 3.10 ±0.12 1.18 ±0.04 0.18 ±0.04 134505 5101 ±247 2.92 ±0.50 1.10 ±0.20 0.09 ±0.10 5156 ±24 3.07 ±0.04 1.44 ±0.03 0.02 ±0.02 5126 ±23 3.01 ±0.06 1.42 ±0.03 0.00 ±0.02 135760 4801 ±201 3.41 ±0.40 1.25 ±0.20 0.21 ±0.59 4891 ±71 3.32 ±0.14 1.24 ±0.07 0.19 ±0.04 4909 ±94 3.49 ±0.19 1.06 ±0.09 0.27 ±0.05 136014 4807 ±73 2.57 ±0.12 1.56 ±0.13 -0.49 ±0.07 4925 ±21 2.73 ±0.04 1.62 ±0.02 -0.43 ±0.02 4899 ±23 2.69 ±0.07 1.63 ±0.03 -0.46 ±0.02 136672 4763 ±266 2.59 ±0.53 1.27 ±0.20 -0.29 ±0.20 4842 ±31 2.68 ±0.06 1.53 ±0.03 -0.33 ±0.03 4829 ±27 2.68 ±0.09 1.48 ±0.03 -0.32 ±0.02 139521 4888 ±52 2.76 ±0.09 1.52 ±0.08 -0.14 ±0.05 4954 ±24 2.75 ±0.04 1.50 ±0.03 -0.13 ±0.02 4960 ±27 2.79 ±0.07 1.45 ±0.03 -0.11 ±0.02 139980 4885 ±212 2.67 ±0.44 1.21 ±0.20 -0.07 ±0.21 4944 ±28 2.87 ±0.06 1.47 ±0.03 -0.15 ±0.02 4936 ±25 2.83 ±0.08 1.45 ±0.03 -0.14 ±0.02 140329 4991 ±201 3.45 ±0.40 1.15 ±0.20 0.07 ±0.85 5043 ±30 3.40 ±0.07 1.15 ±0.04 0.02 ±0.02 4988 ±32 3.31 ±0.10 1.09 ±0.04 0.01 ±0.02 140861 5032 ±87 2.76 ±0.13 2.02 ±0.26 -0.39 ±0.10 5069 ±18 2.69 ±0.04 1.75 ±0.02 -0.36 ±0.02 5082 ±20 2.71 ±0.08 1.76 ±0.03 -0.36 ±0.02 141832 4972 ±202 3.45 ±0.40 1.16 ±0.20 0.19 ±0.94 5046 ±43 3.41 ±0.07 1.30 ±0.05 0.11 ±0.04 4936 ±50 3.43 ±0.25 1.11 ±0.06 0.13 ±0.03 143009 5029 ±224 2.63 ±0.45 1.14 ±0.20 0.18 ±0.60 5067 ±27 2.77 ±0.05 1.68 ±0.03 0.04 ±0.03 4994 ±36 2.69 ±0.12 1.63 ±0.04 0.00 ±0.03 143546†5152 ±222 3.05 ±0.45 1.07 ±0.20 0.15 ±0.75 5223 ±28 3.11 ±0.06 1.52 ±0.03 0.05 ±0.03 5212 ±39 3.07 ±0.12 1.44 ±0.04 0.06 ±0.04 145621 4754 ±53 2.76 ±0.12 1.54 ±0.07 -0.02 ±0.04 4854 ±44 2.75 ±0.08 1.56 ±0.04 -0.01 ±0.03 4739 ±42 2.85 ±0.27 1.48 ±0.04 -0.01 ±0.03 146686 4755 ±204 2.88 ±0.41 1.28 ±0.20 0.37 ±0.71 4914 ±71 2.95 ±0.12 1.44 ±0.07 0.27 ±0.04 4813 ±75 2.73 ±0.16 1.37 ±0.08 0.25 ±0.05 146690 4938 ±201 2.75 ±0.40 1.18 ±0.20 0.11 ±0.82 5050 ±28 2.91 ±0.05 1.46 ±0.03 0.04 ±0.02 5023 ±31 2.84 ±0.07 1.46 ±0.03 0.02 ±0.03 148890 5037 ±204 2.87 ±0.41 1.13 ±0.20 0.08 ±0.74 5069 ±26 2.91 ±0.05 1.45 ±0.03 -0.01 ±0.02 5039 ±31 2.81 ±0.08 1.47 ±0.03 -0.05 ±0.03 155276 4717 ±237 2.63 ±0.47 1.29 ±0.20 0.18 ±0.43 4943 ±53 2.96 ±0.10 1.51 ±0.05 0.17 ±0.04 4851 ±60 2.86 ±0.13 1.43 ±0.06 0.17 ±0.04 156854 4863 ±343 2.79 ±0.69 1.22 ±0.20 0.10 ±1.43 4981 ±32 2.90 ±0.06 1.53 ±0.04 0.00 ±0.03 4883 ±42 2.70 ±0.12 1.44 ±0.04 -0.05 ±0.03 157515 4885 ±57 3.27 ±0.10 1.17 ±0.08 -0.11 ±0.05 4911 ±26 3.19 ±0.06 1.16 ±0.03 -0.16 ±0.02 4892 ±25 3.17 ±0.07 1.12 ±0.03 -0.16 ±0.02 159558 4825 ±66 2.65 ±0.11 1.59 ±0.11 -0.30 ±0.06 4889 ±22 2.64 ±0.04 1.55 ±0.03 -0.29 ±0.02 4861 ±25 2.46 ±0.13 1.52 ±0.03 -0.31 ±0.02 160720 5125 ±92 3.11 ±0.13 1.50 ±0.15 0.03 ±0.09 5235 ±30 3.08 ±0.06 1.51 ±0.03 0.04 ±0.03 5177 ±29 2.94 ±0.10 1.46 ±0.03 0.00 ±0.03 160819 4877 ±205 3.24 ±0.41 1.21 ±0.20 0.03 ±0.09 4893 ±30 3.08 ±0.06 1.28 ±0.03 -0.08 ±0.02 4822 ±47 3.23 ±0.29 1.12 ±0.05 -0.03 ±0.03 161814 4853 ±204 2.70 ±0.41 1.23 ±0.20 0.15 ±0.23 4955 ±36 2.80 ±0.06 1.47 ±0.03 0.10 ±0.03 4911 ±42 2.71 ±0.10 1.46 ±0.04 0.08 ±0.03 163652 4944 ±75 2.68 ±0.11 1.61 ±0.18 -0.40 ±0.09 5011 ±16 2.73 ±0.03 1.53 ±0.02 -0.36 ±0.01 5014 ±19 2.73 ±0.04 1.54 ±0.02 -0.36 ±0.02 165135 4774 ±59 2.68 ±0.11 1.39 ±0.08 -0.24 ±0.05 4875 ±29 2.79 ±0.05 1.40 ±0.03 -0.19 ±0.02 4860 ±32 2.74 ±0.07 1.38 ±0.03 -0.20 ±0.03 165634 4950 ±62 2.58 ±0.09 1.55 ±0.10 -0.03 ±0.07 5061 ±25 2.73 ±0.06 1.62 ±0.03 -0.01 ±0.02 5062 ±26 2.58 ±0.10 1.63 ±0.03 -0.01 ±0.03 166063 5009 ±207 2.32 ±0.42 1.15 ±0.20 0.13 ±0.46 5035 ±34 2.37 ±0.08 1.98 ±0.04 -0.07 ±0.03 4996 ±42 2.32 ±0.12 1.85 ±0.05 -0.07 ±0.04 166599 5088 ±221 3.14 ±0.44 1.10 ±0.20 0.15 ±0.66 5076 ±28 3.01 ±0.05 1.39 ±0.03 0.01 ±0.02 5052 ±27 2.94 ±0.08 1.39 ±0.03 0.00 ±0.02 166949 5123 ±210 3.35 ±0.42 1.09 ±0.20 0.00 ±0.64 5166 ±21 3.27 ±0.05 1.27 ±0.02 -0.05 ±0.02 5130 ±22 3.26 ±0.12 1.22 ±0.03 -0.06 ±0.02 168838 4817 ±206 2.66 ±0.41 1.24 ±0.20 0.12 ±0.49 5028 ±36 2.99 ±0.07 1.52 ±0.04 0.12 ±0.03 4930 ±42 2.79 ±0.10 1.43 ±0.04 0.09 ±0.03 169767 4782 ±65 2.94 ±0.13 1.30 ±0.08 -0.13 ±0.05 4821 ±30 2.84 ±0.06 1.33 ±0.03 -0.19 ±0.02 4801 ±39 2.78 ±0.09 1.28 ±0.04 -0.19 ±0.03 169836 4870 ±205 2.70 ±0.48 1.22 ±0.20 0.05 ±0.29 4993 ±27 2.86 ±0.05 1.48 ±0.03 -0.01 ±0.02 4934 ±34 2.75 ±0.08 1.48 ±0.04 -0.05 ±0.03 125 Table C.2: continued. HM07 line-list SO08 line-list TS13 line-list HD Te f f loggξ[Fe/H] Te f f log gξ[Fe/H] Te f f log gξ[Fe/H] number (K) (cm s−2) (km s−1) (dex) (K) (cm s−2) (km s−1) (dex) (K) (cm s−2) (km s−1) (dex) 169916 4793 ±317 3.03 ±0.63 1.26 ±0.20 0.04 ±1.12 4801 ±32 2.81 ±0.07 1.35 ±0.03 -0.08 ±0.03 4778 ±37 2.59 ±0.18 1.35 ±0.04 -0.11 ±0.03 172211 4996 ±202 2.85 ±0.40 1.15 ±0.20 0.32 ±1.08 5115 ±34 2.99 ±0.06 1.53 ±0.03 0.17 ±0.03 5082 ±34 2.94 ±0.09 1.47 ±0.04 0.18 ±0.03 172875 4975 ±78 3.04 ±0.12 1.43 ±0.12 0.08 ±0.07 5070 ±33 3.04 ±0.06 1.46 ±0.04 0.11 ±0.03 5026 ±45 2.99 ±0.09 1.38 ±0.05 0.11 ±0.04 173378 4926 ±62 3.19 ±0.10 1.23 ±0.09 -0.21 ±0.05 5005 ±19 3.17 ±0.04 1.18 ±0.02 -0.20 ±0.02 4994 ±20 3.17 ±0.04 1.17 ±0.02 -0.20 ±0.02 173540†5511 ±123 3.76 ±0.15 2.89 ±1.46 -0.24 ±0.18 5547 ±31 3.32 ±0.07 1.74 ±0.04 -0.15 ±0.03 5591 ±46 3.48 ±0.12 1.86 ±0.08 -0.15 ±0.04 174295 4854 ±72 2.67 ±0.12 1.39 ±0.09 -0.19 ±0.07 4974 ±24 2.84 ±0.06 1.44 ±0.03 -0.17 ±0.02 4960 ±28 2.61 ±0.14 1.46 ±0.03 -0.20 ±0.03 175145†5374 ±163 3.69 ±0.23 1.20 ±0.32 0.16 ±0.17 5382 ±23 3.49 ±0.06 1.41 ±0.03 0.02 ±0.02 5348 ±28 3.44 ±0.12 1.33 ±0.04 0.01 ±0.03 175219 4800 ±63 2.56 ±0.10 1.49 ±0.09 -0.31 ±0.06 4896 ±25 2.71 ±0.05 1.50 ±0.03 -0.29 ±0.02 4888 ±30 2.64 ±0.06 1.52 ±0.04 -0.30 ±0.03 175401 5009 ±86 2.98 ±0.14 1.79 ±0.15 0.04 ±0.08 5102 ±37 2.97 ±0.06 1.57 ±0.04 0.16 ±0.03 5042 ±42 2.79 ±0.12 1.55 ±0.04 0.12 ±0.04 177222 4914 ±59 3.00 ±0.09 1.28 ±0.08 -0.03 ±0.06 4993 ±26 3.00 ±0.06 1.38 ±0.03 -0.06 ±0.02 4952 ±32 2.84 ±0.13 1.34 ±0.03 -0.08 ±0.03 177389 5049 ±67 3.52 ±0.10 1.09 ±0.10 -0.01 ±0.05 5102 ±24 3.50 ±0.04 1.08 ±0.03 -0.03 ±0.02 5061 ±26 3.49 ±0.09 1.05 ±0.03 -0.05 ±0.02 179433 5291 ±220 3.49 ±0.44 1.00 ±0.20 0.28 ±0.57 5168 ±22 3.15 ±0.04 1.38 ±0.02 -0.02 ±0.02 5145 ±31 3.16 ±0.08 1.39 ±0.04 -0.04 ±0.03 181517 4965 ±209 2.95 ±0.42 1.17 ±0.20 0.18 ±0.29 5050 ±33 2.99 ±0.06 1.47 ±0.03 0.08 ±0.03 4996 ±41 2.96 ±0.08 1.44 ±0.05 0.07 ±0.03 182893 4913 ±201 3.04 ±0.49 1.19 ±0.20 0.19 ±0.37 5043 ±30 3.13 ±0.06 1.38 ±0.03 0.14 ±0.02 4994 ±40 3.09 ±0.09 1.36 ±0.04 0.12 ±0.03 185075 4703 ±64 2.58 ±0.11 1.39 ±0.10 -0.49 ±0.06 4792 ±27 2.67 ±0.05 1.41 ±0.03 -0.47 ±0.02 4749 ±23 2.55 ±0.05 1.39 ±0.03 -0.51 ±0.02 189005†5086 ±72 2.67 ±0.09 1.63 ±0.15 -0.21 ±0.08 5222 ±20 2.90 ±0.04 1.69 ±0.02 -0.15 ±0.02 5203 ±25 2.88 ±0.07 1.67 ±0.03 -0.16 ±0.03 189080 4716 ±201 2.81 ±0.40 1.29 ±0.20 -0.09 ±0.31 4791 ±34 2.81 ±0.06 1.40 ±0.03 -0.13 ±0.02 4720 ±34 2.71 ±0.10 1.34 ±0.03 -0.15 ±0.02 189195 4864 ±60 2.75 ±0.10 1.44 ±0.09 -0.10 ±0.06 4936 ±24 2.78 ±0.05 1.47 ±0.03 -0.11 ±0.02 4887 ±29 2.68 ±0.07 1.47 ±0.03 -0.14 ±0.03 195569 4852 ±77 2.84 ±0.15 1.39 ±0.10 0.00 ±0.06 4948 ±31 2.84 ±0.06 1.46 ±0.03 -0.02 ±0.03 4909 ±33 2.83 ±0.08 1.44 ±0.03 -0.02 ±0.03 196171 4859 ±57 2.79 ±0.10 1.43 ±0.08 -0.06 ±0.05 4941 ±33 2.83 ±0.05 1.44 ±0.03 -0.05 ±0.03 4900 ±43 2.83 ±0.10 1.43 ±0.04 -0.07 ±0.03 198232 4877 ±63 2.39 ±0.25 1.43 ±0.09 -0.01 ±0.07 4948 ±35 2.65 ±0.07 1.59 ±0.04 -0.02 ±0.03 4898 ±43 2.37 ±0.18 1.51 ±0.04 -0.05 ±0.04 199951†5088 ±91 2.81 ±0.15 1.37 ±0.18 -0.09 ±0.10 5279 ±30 3.06 ±0.09 1.62 ±0.04 -0.01 ±0.03 5242 ±32 3.02 ±0.15 1.52 ±0.04 -0.02 ±0.03 201852 5025 ±243 3.02 ±0.48 1.14 ±0.20 0.11 ±0.13 5038 ±24 3.01 ±0.05 1.42 ±0.03 0.00 ±0.02 4999 ±34 3.05 ±0.10 1.41 ±0.04 -0.02 ±0.03 207229 4896 ±210 2.83 ±0.42 1.20 ±0.20 0.11 ±0.15 4947 ±34 2.83 ±0.06 1.52 ±0.04 0.00 ±0.03 4887 ±39 2.71 ±0.09 1.46 ±0.04 -0.02 ±0.03 207883 4822 ±61 2.61 ±0.10 1.47 ±0.09 -0.22 ±0.06 4934 ±25 2.74 ±0.05 1.53 ±0.03 -0.20 ±0.02 4911 ±28 2.75 ±0.06 1.49 ±0.03 -0.20 ±0.02 208285 4850 ±72 2.67 ±0.12 1.67 ±0.15 -0.50 ±0.07 4953 ±21 2.80 ±0.04 1.62 ±0.02 -0.43 ±0.02 4947 ±25 2.77 ±0.05 1.60 ±0.03 -0.44 ±0.02 208737 4888 ±75 2.56 ±0.13 1.60 ±0.10 -0.02 ±0.07 5025 ±32 2.71 ±0.06 1.62 ±0.03 0.05 ±0.03 4968 ±34 2.68 ±0.10 1.59 ±0.04 0.03 ±0.03 210056 4819 ±234 3.02 ±0.47 1.24 ±0.20 -0.06 ±0.28 4870 ±34 3.00 ±0.07 1.31 ±0.03 -0.10 ±0.02 4824 ±29 2.99 ±0.10 1.25 ±0.03 -0.10 ±0.02 210622 4953 ±201 3.35 ±0.40 1.17 ±0.20 0.06 ±0.85 5033 ±26 3.34 ±0.06 1.18 ±0.03 0.05 ±0.02 4999 ±31 3.19 ±0.14 1.18 ±0.04 0.03 ±0.02 212953 4812 ±77 2.62 ±0.11 1.52 ±0.13 -0.43 ±0.07 4896 ±23 2.68 ±0.05 1.56 ±0.03 -0.41 ±0.02 4893 ±24 2.63 ±0.08 1.55 ±0.03 -0.41 ±0.02 213009 4816 ±146 2.47 ±0.26 2.08 ±0.25 -0.22 ±0.14 5045 ±59 2.93 ±0.12 2.23 ±0.08 -0.12 ±0.06 5013 ±88 2.54 ±0.28 2.39 ±0.14 -0.23 ±0.09 214462 4762 ±53 2.86 ±0.11 1.28 ±0.06 -0.03 ±0.04 4831 ±36 2.88 ±0.08 1.35 ±0.03 -0.07 ±0.03 4770 ±44 2.76 ±0.10 1.30 ±0.04 -0.09 ±0.03 215104 4755 ±83 2.55 ±0.15 1.61 ±0.12 -0.20 ±0.08 4918 ±30 2.77 ±0.06 1.51 ±0.03 -0.11 ±0.02 4882 ±34 2.70 ±0.07 1.49 ±0.04 -0.13 ±0.03 215682 4715 ±55 2.64 ±0.10 1.50 ±0.07 -0.09 ±0.05 4795 ±38 2.66 ±0.07 1.51 ±0.04 -0.10 ±0.03 4728 ±43 2.51 ±0.10 1.50 ±0.04 -0.15 ±0.03 216210 5095 ±60 3.19 ±0.09 1.28 ±0.10 -0.01 ±0.06 5166 ±20 3.22 ±0.03 1.28 ±0.02 0.00 ±0.02 5135 ±26 3.14 ±0.07 1.30 ±0.03 -0.03 ±0.02 216742 4825 ±66 3.05 ±0.11 1.30 ±0.09 -0.11 ±0.05 4836 ±32 2.90 ±0.06 1.34 ±0.03 -0.18 ±0.02 4812 ±34 2.86 ±0.07 1.31 ±0.04 -0.18 ±0.02 216763 4902 ±65 2.80 ±0.11 1.50 ±0.09 -0.18 ±0.06 4984 ±23 2.86 ±0.05 1.46 ±0.03 -0.14 ±0.02 4980 ±32 2.87 ±0.08 1.47 ±0.03 -0.14 ±0.03 219507 4711 ±56 2.71 ±0.11 1.47 ±0.07 -0.09 ±0.04 4819 ±35 2.73 ±0.07 1.50 ±0.04 -0.10 ±0.03 4763 ±44 2.63 ±0.10 1.50 ±0.04 -0.14 ±0.03 219572 5055 ±58 3.02 ±0.10 1.49 ±0.10 -0.04 ±0.06 5112 ±23 2.97 ±0.06 1.44 ±0.03 -0.03 ±0.02 5087 ±28 2.91 ±0.08 1.44 ±0.03 -0.04 ±0.02 220790 4847 ±204 2.64 ±0.41 1.23 ±0.20 -0.17 ±0.29 4940 ±25 2.80 ±0.06 1.51 ±0.03 -0.19 ±0.02 4902 ±27 2.75 ±0.08 1.48 ±0.03 -0.21 ±0.02 221323 4839 ±205 2.81 ±0.41 1.23 ±0.20 0.15 ±0.06 4919 ±34 2.82 ±0.06 1.51 ±0.04 0.00 ±0.03 4842 ±44 2.63 ±0.09 1.47 ±0.04 -0.04 ±0.03 222433 4913 ±65 2.81 ±0.10 1.39 ±0.09 -0.09 ±0.06 4956 ±25 2.78 ±0.06 1.43 ±0.03 -0.12 ±0.02 4941 ±30 2.71 ±0.07 1.44 ±0.03 -0.14 ±0.03 223647 4930 ±74 2.71 ±0.11 1.51 ±0.14 -0.36 ±0.08 5034 ±19 2.82 ±0.04 1.54 ±0.02 -0.33 ±0.02 5017 ±25 2.77 ±0.07 1.51 ±0.03 -0.34 ±0.03 223700 4995 ±237 3.17 ±0.47 1.15 ±0.20 0.17 ±0.59 5024 ±30 3.08 ±0.06 1.33 ±0.03 0.10 ±0.02 5018 ±36 3.09 ±0.09 1.31 ±0.04 0.11 ±0.03 224362 4732 ±99 2.65 ±0.20 1.40 ±0.11 -0.02 ±0.08 4922 ±42 2.89 ±0.08 1.56 ±0.04 0.02 ±0.03 4782 ±42 2.52 ±0.13 1.51 ±0.04 -0.07 ±0.03 †For this star the parameters derived with the SO08 line-list may also be adopted as final. 126 APPENDIX C. TABLE FOR GIANT STARS ANALYSIS Table C.3: Stellar parameters taken from the literature of 74 stars in common with our sample. References are provided in the last column. HD Te f f σ(Te f f ) log gσ(log g) [Fe/H] σ([Fe/H]) ξ σ(ξ) Ref. number (K) (K) (cm s−2) (cm s−2) (dex) (dex) (km s−1) (km s−1) 496 4893 – 3.00 – 0.13 – 1.50 – (1) 770 4696 100 2.68 0.10 -0.12 0.10 1.40 0.2 (2) 1737 5020 – 2.73 – 0.16 0.12 1.44 – (3) 5457 4780 – 2.74 – -0.07 0.14 1.38 – (3) 8651 4708 100 2.67 0.10 -0.18 0.10 1.40 0.2 (2) 9362 4754 100 2.61 0.10 -0.28 0.10 1.30 0.2 (2) 10142 4688 100 2.65 0.10 -0.1 0.10 1.40 0.2 (2) 11977 4975 70 2.90 0.20 -0.14 0.05 1.60 – (4) 12296 4860 – 2.71 – -0.03 0.14 1.47 – (3) 12438 4975 70 2.50 0.20 -0.54 0.05 1.50 – (4) 16815 4732 100 2.60 0.10 -0.33 0.10 1.30 0.2 (2) 16975 5015 100 2.91 0.10 0.01 0.10 1.30 0.2 (2) 17652 4820 – 2.45 – -0.37 0.08 1.42 – (3) 23719 5070 – 2.85 – 0.11 0.11 1.43 – (3) 23940 4910 – 2.63 – -0.33 0.11 1.39 – (3) 24160 5010 – – – – – – – (5) 29085 4875 – 3.10 – -0.2 – 1.35 – (6) 29291 4960 – 2.92 – -0.09 – 2.20 – (7) 32436 4640 – 2.65 – 0.02 – 1.90 – (7) 34266 5030 – 2.58 – 0.10 0.10 1.43 – (3) 34642 4870 70 3.30 0.20 0.03 0.05 1.30 – (4) 36189 5081 70 2.80 0.20 0.05 0.05 1.90 – (4) 37811 5220 – 2.94 – 0.08 0.10 1.39 – (3) 40409 4755 – 3.30 – 0.13 – 1.80 – (8) 60666 4750 – 2.60 – -0.02 – 1.38 – (6) 67762 4980 – 3.26 – -0.06 0.07 1.07 – (3) 70982 5089 70 3.00 0.20 0.04 0.05 1.60 – (4) 73898 5030 – 3.03 – -0.49 – 2.00 – (7) 74772 5210 – 2.50 – -0.03 – 1.50 – (9) 81169 4975 – 2.41 – -0.09 – 2.10 – (10) 93773 4985 70 3.00 0.20 0.00 0.05 1.50 – (4) 94510 5100 – 3.00 – 0.10 – 1.10 – (9) 94890 4802 – – – – – – – (5) 96566 4901 – – – – – – – (5) 100708 4890 – 2.75 – -0.08 – 1.50 – (9) 104704 4810 – 2.81 – -0.15 0.08 1.20 – (3) 115310 5060 – 2.63 – 0.04 0.09 1.39 – (3) 116243 5181 – – – – – – – (5) 118338 5180 – 3.00 – 0.12 0.08 1.37 – (3) 119250 4860 – 2.53 – -0.18 0.10 1.43 – (3) 120457 4985 – 2.85 – 0.15 0.08 1.31 – (3) 121853 4925 – 2.55 – -0.32 0.09 1.44 – (3) 123151 4960 – 2.62 – -0.22 0.09 1.51 – (3) 129462 5000 – 2.72 – -0.03 0.10 1.41 – (3) 134505 4990 – – – – – – – (5) 135760 4850 – 3.06 – 0.20 0.13 1.19 – (3) 136014 4869 70 2.70 0.20 -0.39 0.05 1.50 – (4) 139521 4930 – 3.28 – -0.34 – 2.70 – (7) 140329 5010 – 3.14 – 0.01 0.09 1.09 – (3) 143546 4977 100 2.84 0.10 -0.05 0.10 1.30 0.2 (2) 146686 4699 100 2.80 0.10 0.23 0.10 1.30 0.2 (2) 157515 4980 – 3.15 – -0.17 0.08 1.15 – (3) 165135 4760 – 2.72 – -0.36 – 2.10 – (7) 165634 4980 – 2.65 – -0.05 – 1.73 – (6) 166599 5005 50 2.60 0.25 -0.03 0.09 – – (11) 168838 4950 – 2.73 – 0.09 0.09 1.44 – (3) 169767 4720 100 2.71 0.10 -0.2 0.10 1.20 0.2 (2) 169916 4689 100 2.66 0.10 -0.06 0.10 1.20 0.2 (2) 174295 4893 70 2.80 0.20 -0.17 0.05 1.50 – (4) 175219 4720 – 2.44 – -0.32 – – – (12) 177389 5131 70 3.70 0.20 0.09 0.05 1.10 – (4) 189005 5060 – 2.78 – -0.38 – 2.70 – (7) 189080 4720 – 2.51 – -0.17 0.10 1.29 – (3) 195569 4980 – 2.78 – 0.05 0.10 1.35 – (3) 196171 4788 100 2.69 0.10 -0.13 0.10 1.50 0.2 (2) 198232 4923 70 2.80 0.20 0.10 0.05 1.50 – (4) 199951 5310 – 3.00 – -0.01 – 1.60 – (9) 207229 4945 – 2.59 – 0.03 0.10 1.43 – (3) 208737 4995 – 2.41 – 0.05 0.10 1.55 – (3) 213009 4800 – 2.00 – -0.2 – 1.30 – (13) 215104 4737 100 2.62 0.10 -0.2 0.10 1.50 0.2 (2) 216763 4841 100 2.72 0.10 -0.21 0.10 1.40 0.2 (2) 220790 4850 – 2.67 – -0.27 0.13 1.37 – (3) 222433 4860 – 3.05 – -0.3 – 2.10 – (7) (1) Gratton and Ortolani [1986]; (2) Liu et al. [2007]; (3) Jones et al. [2011b]; (4) da Silva et al. [2006]; (5) di Benedetto [1998]; (6) Hekker and Mel´ endez [2007]; (7) McWilliam [1990]; (8) Thor´ en et al. [2004]; (9) Jones et al. [1992]; (10) Luck [1991]; (11) Randich et al. [1999]; (12) Mel´ endez et al. [2008]; (13) Foy [1981] 127 Table C.4: The new linelist. λ(Å) (eV) loggf Elements Z EWsun (mÅ) 6154.23 2.10 -1.622 NaI 11 36.6 6160.75 2.10 -1.363 NaI 11 54.3 5711.09 4.35 -1.777 MgI 12 105.6 6319.24 5.11 -2.300 MgI 12 25.2 6696.03 3.14 -1.571 AlI 13 36.2 6698.67 3.14 -1.886 AlI 13 21.1 5645.61 4.93 -2.068 SiI 14 35.8 5684.49 4.95 -1.642 SiI 14 61.2 5701.11 4.93 -2.034 SiI 14 37.7 5753.64 5.62 -1.333 SiI 14 45.7 5948.54 5.08 -1.208 SiI 14 85.4 6125.02 5.61 -1.555 SiI 14 31.7 6142.49 5.62 -1.520 SiI 14 33.1 6145.02 5.62 -1.425 SiI 14 38.8 6195.46 5.87 -1.666 SiI 14 17.1 6237.33 5.61 -1.116 SiI 14 61.1 6243.82 5.62 -1.331 SiI 14 44.8 6244.48 5.62 -1.310 SiI 14 46.2 6527.21 5.87 -1.227 SiI 14 38.9 6721.85 5.86 -1.156 SiI 14 44.0 6741.63 5.98 -1.625 SiI 14 15.5 5260.39 2.52 -1.836 CaI 20 0. 5261.71 2.52 -0.677 CaI 20 97.7 5349.47 2.71 -0.581 CaI 20 94.6 5512.98 2.93 -0.559 CaI 20 84.8 5867.56 2.93 -1.592 CaI 20 25.1 6156.02 2.52 -2.497 CaI 20 9.6 6161.29 2.52 -1.313 CaI 20 60.6 6166.44 2.52 -1.155 CaI 20 69.9 6169.04 2.52 -0.800 CaI 20 92.2 6455.60 2.52 -1.404 CaI 20 56.3 6471.67 2.53 -0.825 CaI 20 91.2 6499.65 2.52 -0.917 CaI 20 85.8 5671.82 1.45 0.533 ScI 21 14.6 5526.82 1.77 0.140 ScII 21 76.3 5657.88 1.51 -0.326 ScII 21 66.9 5667.14 1.50 -1.025 ScII 21 33.9 5684.19 1.51 -0.946 ScII 21 37.2 6245.62 1.51 -1.022 ScII 21 34.9 Continued on next page 128 APPENDIX C. TABLE FOR GIANT STARS ANALYSIS Table C.4 – continued from previous page WL Excit loggf elements num ewsun 6320.84 1.50 -1.863 ScII 21 8.1 4820.41 1.50 -0.429 TiI 22 43.1 4913.62 1.87 0.068 TiI 22 50.2 4997.10 0.00 -2.174 TiI 22 31.6 5016.17 0.85 -0.657 TiI 22 63.2 5039.96 0.02 -1.199 TiI 22 75.3 5071.49 1.46 -0.797 TiI 22 28.8 5145.47 1.46 -0.622 TiI 22 37.0 5503.90 2.58 -0.218 TiI 22 12.3 5648.57 2.49 -0.410 TiI 22 10.1 5662.16 2.32 -0.123 TiI 22 23.5 5739.48 2.25 -0.781 TiI 22 7.7 5965.84 1.88 -0.492 TiI 22 26.7 6064.63 1.05 -1.941 TiI 22 8.3 6091.18 2.27 -0.445 TiI 22 15.0 6126.22 1.07 -1.416 TiI 22 22.1 6258.11 1.44 -0.435 TiI 22 51.5 6599.12 0.90 -2.069 TiI 22 9.3 5211.54 2.59 -1.490 TiII 22 32.8 5418.77 1.58 -2.104 TiII 22 49.5 5670.85 1.08 -0.482 VI 23 18.8 6039.73 1.06 -0.747 VI 23 12.4 6081.45 1.05 -0.692 VI 23 14.1 6090.21 1.08 -0.150 VI 23 33.5 6119.53 1.06 -0.451 VI 23 21.6 6243.11 0.30 -1.067 VI 23 27.8 6251.83 0.29 -1.431 VI 23 15.0 4801.03 3.12 -0.251 CrI 24 49.6 4936.34 3.11 -0.343 CrI 24 5.6 5214.14 3.37 -0.784 CrI 24 16.4 5238.97 2.71 -1.427 CrI 24 15.9 5247.57 0.96 -1.618 CrI 24 82.0 5287.18 3.44 -0.954 CrI 24 10.4 5480.51 3.45 -0.997 CrI 24 9.5 4884.61 3.86 -2.069 CrII 24 23.4 5377.62 3.84 -0.068 MnI 25 40.8 4792.86 3.25 -0.080 CoI 27 32.7 4813.48 3.22 0.177 CoI 27 45.9 5301.05 1.71 -1.950 CoI 27 19.5 5359.20 4.15 0.040 CoI 27 9.6 Continued on next page 129 Table C.4 – continued from previous page WL Excit loggf elements num ewsun 5647.24 2.28 -1.594 CoI 27 14.0 4814.60 3.60 -1.670 NiI 28 16.7 4913.98 3.74 -0.661 NiI 28 55.7 4952.29 3.61 -1.261 NiI 28 32.3 4976.33 1.68 -3.002 NiI 28 37.7 5010.94 3.63 -0.901 NiI 28 48.8 5081.11 3.85 0.064 NiI 28 93.5 5094.41 3.83 -1.108 NiI 28 30.3 5435.86 1.99 -2.432 NiI 28 51.7 5462.50 3.85 -0.880 NiI 28 41.0 5587.87 1.93 -2.479 NiI 28 52.9 5589.36 3.90 -1.148 NiI 28 26.7 5625.32 4.09 -0.731 NiI 28 37.8 5628.35 4.09 -1.316 NiI 28 14.7 5641.88 4.11 -1.017 NiI 28 24.1 5643.08 4.16 -1.234 NiI 28 15.1 5694.99 4.09 -0.629 NiI 28 43.1 5748.36 1.68 -3.279 NiI 28 28.0 5847.00 1.68 -3.410 NiI 28 23.0 5996.73 4.24 -1.010 NiI 28 20.3 6086.29 4.27 -0.471 NiI 28 43.5 6108.12 1.68 -2.512 NiI 28 65.0 6111.08 4.09 -0.823 NiI 28 34.2 6119.76 4.27 -1.316 NiI 28 10.9 6128.98 1.68 -3.368 NiI 28 25.3 6130.14 4.27 -0.938 NiI 28 22.1 6175.37 4.09 -0.534 NiI 28 49.0 6176.82 4.09 -0.266 NiI 28 63.7 6186.72 4.11 -0.888 NiI 28 30.5 6204.61 4.09 -1.112 NiI 28 22.0 6223.99 4.11 -0.954 NiI 28 27.7 6322.17 4.15 -1.164 NiI 28 18.4 6327.60 1.68 -3.086 NiI 28 38.6 6360.81 4.17 -1.145 NiI 28 18.5 6378.26 4.15 -0.830 NiI 28 31.8 6598.60 4.24 -0.914 NiI 28 24.9 6635.13 4.42 -0.779 NiI 28 23.6 6767.78 1.83 -2.136 NiI 28 79.2 6772.32 3.66 -0.963 NiI 28 49.2 136 APPENDIX C. TABLE FOR GIANT STARS ANALYSIS Table C.6: The table of the Galactic space velocity components and the probabilities to assign the stellar population to which each star belongs.. star U V W B03 R03 Pthick Pthin Phalo group Pthick Pthin Phalo group HD163652 -74 31 15 0.15 0.85 0 thin 0.03 0.97 0 thin HD208285 -62 -20 53 0.72 0.28 0 thick 0.5 0.5 0 transition thick/thin HD189005 -40 15 18 0.03 0.97 0 thin 0.01 0.99 0 thin HD60574 39 55 11 0.25 0.75 0 thin 0.03 0.97 0 thin HD174295 -46 -4 -1 0.02 0.98 0 thin 0.01 0.99 0 thin HD169916 -29 -14 7 0.01 0.99 0 thin 0.01 0.99 0 thin HD179433 -32 7 -1 0.01 0.99 0 thin 0.01 0.99 0 thin HD155276 -23 4 -15 0.02 0.98 0 thin 0.01 0.99 0 thin HD169767 -35 -6 -22 0.03 0.97 0 thin 0.02 0.98 0 thin HD73898 39 31 -23 0.08 0.92 0 thin 0.02 0.98 0 thin HD146686 -27 0 21 0.02 0.98 0 thin 0.02 0.98 0 thin HD172875 -21 -2 -4 0.01 0.99 0 thin 0.01 0.99 0 thin HD182893 -27 -5 6 0.01 0.99 0 thin 0.01 0.99 0 thin HD143009 -24 1 11 0.01 0.99 0 thin 0.01 0.99 0 thin HD73468 -47 22 11 0.04 0.96 0 thin 0.01 0.99 0 thin HD166063 -20 -6 12 0.01 0.99 0 thin 0.01 0.99 0 thin HD140861 -47 -41 34 0.26 0.74 0 thin 0.13 0.87 0 thin HD129462 -38 -6 6 0.01 0.99 0 thin 0.01 0.99 0 thin HD139521 -9 19 -3 0.01 0.99 0 thin 0.01 0.99 0 thin HD175219 -8 -2 20 0.02 0.98 0 thin 0.01 0.99 0 thin HD129893 -15 9 -20 0.02 0.98 0 thin 0.01 0.99 0 thin HD175401 -22 2 5 0.01 0.99 0 thin 0.01 0.99 0 thin HD173540 -12 9 -4 0.01 0.99 0 thin 0.01 0.99 0 thin HD62412 29 23 0 0.02 0.98 0 thin 0.01 0.99 0 thin HD215682 -38 4 1 0.01 0.99 0 thin 0.01 0.99 0 thin HD141832 -24 -38 12 0.04 0.96 0 thin 0.02 0.98 0 thin HD123569 -30 -8 -6 0.01 0.99 0 thin 0.01 0.99 0 thin HD139980 -12 2 10 0.01 0.99 0 thin 0.01 0.99 0 thin HD11977 -25 18 11 0.02 0.98 0 thin 0.01 0.99 0 thin HD198232 0 -1 14 0.01 0.99 0 thin 0.01 0.99 0 thin HD67977 9 27 11 0.02 0.98 0 thin 0.01 0.99 0 thin HD55151 12 24 17 0.03 0.97 0 thin 0.01 0.99 0 thin HD74006 27 22 3 0.02 0.98 0 thin 0.01 0.99 0 thin HD69879 24 21 25 0.04 0.96 0 thin 0.02 0.98 0 thin HD216763 2 17 16 0.02 0.98 0 thin 0.01 0.99 0 thin HD33285 -2 24 7 0.02 0.98 0 thin 0.01 0.99 0 thin HD220790 -21 35 -6 0.04 0.96 0 thin 0.01 0.99 0 thin HD172211 -13 0 0 0.01 0.99 0 thin 0.01 0.99 0 thin HD17504 8 15 19 0.02 0.98 0 thin 0.01 0.99 0 thin HD111295 -45 -33 -24 0.08 0.92 0 thin 0.04 0.96 0 thin HD103462 13 43 30 0.2 0.8 0 thin 0.04 0.96 0 thin HD91437 10 19 -10 0.02 0.98 0 thin 0.01 0.99 0 thin HD134505 -10 0 6 0.01 0.99 0 thin 0.01 0.99 0 thin HD177389 -9 20 -13 0.02 0.98 0 thin 0.01 0.99 0 thin HD16815 -2 -7 29 0.03 0.97 0 thin 0.03 0.97 0 thin HD496 1 -30 23 0.04 0.96 0 thin 0.03 0.97 0 thin HD208737 -16 8 -2 0.01 0.99 0 thin 0.01 0.99 0 thin Continued on next page 137 Table C.6 – continued from previous page star U V W B03 R03 Pthick Pthin Phalo group Pthick Pthin Phalo group HD114474 -23 -5 1 0.01 0.99 0 thin 0.01 0.99 0 thin HD37811 33 15 -2 0.02 0.98 0 thin 0.01 0.99 0 thin HD6793 -15 -6 19 0.02 0.98 0 thin 0.01 0.99 0 thin HD81136 -4 20 18 0.02 0.98 0 thin 0.01 0.99 0 thin HD9362 -32 20 7 0.02 0.98 0 thin 0.01 0.99 0 thin HD14832 -36 8 20 0.03 0.97 0 thin 0.02 0.98 0 thin HD166599 2 0 20 0.02 0.98 0 thin 0.01 0.99 0 thin HD3488 -31 -13 11 0.02 0.98 0 thin 0.01 0.99 0 thin HD160720 2 15 -4 0.01 0.99 0 thin 0.01 0.99 0 thin HD60666 -21 37 5 0.04 0.96 0 thin 0.01 0.99 0 thin HD168838 5 16 6 0.01 0.99 0 thin 0.01 0.99 0 thin HD156854 7 19 6 0.01 0.99 0 thin 0.01 0.99 0 thin HD121853 18 22 -6 0.02 0.98 0 thin 0.01 0.99 0 thin HD341720 8 17 7 0.01 0.99 0 thin 0.01 0.99 0 thin HD165634 5 5 -11 0.01 0.99 0 thin 0.01 0.99 0 thin HD29291 20 22 -2 0.02 0.98 0 thin 0.01 0.99 0 thin HD207229 7 -3 18 0.01 0.99 0 thin 0.01 0.99 0 thin HD17715 23 14 9 0.02 0.98 0 thin 0.01 0.99 0 thin HD120457 11 14 1 0.01 0.99 0 thin 0.01 0.99 0 thin HD219572 -7 13 -3 0.01 0.99 0 thin 0.01 0.99 0 thin HD70982 19 19 -3 0.02 0.98 0 thin 0.01 0.99 0 thin HD23719 16 14 9 0.01 0.99 0 thin 0.01 0.99 0 thin HD83380 25 14 11 0.02 0.98 0 thin 0.01 0.99 0 thin HD21011 17 6 14 0.01 0.99 0 thin 0.01 0.99 0 thin HD96566 -10 6 4 0.01 0.99 0 thin 0.01 0.99 0 thin HD74772 2 15 5 0.01 0.99 0 thin 0.01 0.99 0 thin HD6245 9 16 7 0.01 0.99 0 thin 0.01 0.99 0 thin HD196171 7 22 3 0.02 0.98 0 thin 0.01 0.99 0 thin HD63744 19 20 -35 0.09 0.91 0 thin 0.04 0.96 0 thin HD100708 -50 -1 42 0.23 0.77 0 thin 0.13 0.87 0 thin HD169836 1 14 -19 0.02 0.98 0 thin 0.01 0.99 0 thin HD143546 17 23 1 0.02 0.98 0 thin 0.01 0.99 0 thin HD94890 46 11 -13 0.02 0.98 0 thin 0.01 0.99 0 thin HD146690 11 15 -5 0.01 0.99 0 thin 0.01 0.99 0 thin HD88836 -2 8 -9 0.01 0.99 0 thin 0.01 0.99 0 thin HD88323 -27 0 4 0.01 0.99 0 thin 0.01 0.99 0 thin HD201852 -1 14 -6 0.01 0.99 0 thin 0.01 0.99 0 thin HD28732 11 16 2 0.01 0.99 0 thin 0.01 0.99 0 thin HD39640 39 7 5 0.02 0.98 0 thin 0.01 0.99 0 thin HD113778 32 21 0 0.02 0.98 0 thin 0.01 0.99 0 thin HD24160 31 12 -4 0.01 0.99 0 thin 0.01 0.99 0 thin HD214462 38 13 18 0.03 0.97 0 thin 0.01 0.99 0 thin HD55865 -7 2 15 0.01 0.99 0 thin 0.01 0.99 0 thin HD23670 48 -19 21 0.04 0.96 0 thin 0.03 0.97 0 thin HD216210 18 8 5 0.01 0.99 0 thin 0.01 0.99 0 thin HD30185 -3 26 -12 0.02 0.98 0 thin 0.01 0.99 0 thin HD87816 -21 2 -5 0.01 0.99 0 thin 0.01 0.99 0 thin HD213009 4 8 -3 0.01 0.99 0 thin 0.01 0.99 0 thin HD5457 17 -1 13 0.01 0.99 0 thin 0.01 0.99 0 thin Continued on next page 138 APPENDIX C. TABLE FOR GIANT STARS ANALYSIS Table C.6 – continued from previous page star U V W B03 R03 Pthick Pthin Phalo group Pthick Pthin Phalo group HD47001 -25 21 -14 0.02 0.98 0 thin 0.01 0.99 0 thin HD118338 -8 -13 6 0.01 0.99 0 thin 0.01 0.99 0 thin HD32453 -7 16 3 0.01 0.99 0 thin 0.01 0.99 0 thin HD85250 -14 2 -5 0.01 0.99 0 thin 0.01 0.99 0 thin HD110829 32 17 -3 0.02 0.98 0 thin 0.01 0.99 0 thin HD59219 3 6 3 0.01 0.99 0 thin 0.01 0.99 0 thin HD221323 -3 -7 -4 0.01 0.99 0 thin 0.01 0.99 0 thin HD94510 21 7 17 0.02 0.98 0 thin 0.01 0.99 0 thin HD195569 14 0 -2 0.01 0.99 0 thin 0.01 0.99 0 thin HD79846 -30 0 3 0.01 0.99 0 thin 0.01 0.99 0 thin HD46116 -65 -10 4 0.03 0.97 0 thin 0.02 0.98 0 thin HD148890 15 10 -17 0.02 0.98 0 thin 0.01 0.99 0 thin HD85154 -3 0 -12 0.01 0.99 0 thin 0.01 0.99 0 thin HD36189 -10 9 -5 0.01 0.99 0 thin 0.01 0.99 0 thin HD22676 27 7 6 0.01 0.99 0 thin 0.01 0.99 0 thin HD81169 -20 3 -11 0.01 0.99 0 thin 0.01 0.99 0 thin HD85396 40 12 8 0.02 0.98 0 thin 0.01 0.99 0 thin HD212953 17 -56 -3 0.11 0.89 0 thin 0.04 0.96 0 thin HD9525 15 3 -2 0.01 0.99 0 thin 0.01 0.99 0 thin HD19940 18 19 -13 0.02 0.98 0 thin 0.01 0.99 0 thin HD136014 -5 -72 -31 0.76 0.24 0 thick 0.34 0.66 0 transition thick/thin HD4737 13 23 -8 0.02 0.98 0 thin 0.01 0.99 0 thin HD12055 -19 -14 5 0.01 0.99 0 thin 0.01 0.99 0 thin HD116243 26 8 -3 0.01 0.99 0 thin 0.01 0.99 0 thin HD115310 33 2 -3 0.01 0.99 0 thin 0.01 0.99 0 thin HD6192 6 11 -9 0.01 0.99 0 thin 0.01 0.99 0 thin HD34266 -5 3 8 0.01 0.99 0 thin 0.01 0.99 0 thin HD130650 43 11 21 0.03 0.97 0 thin 0.02 0.98 0 thin HD13940 27 5 -6 0.01 0.99 0 thin 0.01 0.99 0 thin HD18650 34 -18 -7 0.02 0.98 0 thin 0.01 0.99 0 thin HD44956 1 10 -17 0.02 0.98 0 thin 0.01 0.99 0 thin HD185075 4 14 -38 0.09 0.91 0 thin 0.05 0.95 0 thin HD222433 58 8 5 0.03 0.97 0 thin 0.01 0.99 0 thin HD636 26 2 6 0.01 0.99 0 thin 0.01 0.99 0 thin HD223647 36 5 9 0.02 0.98 0 thin 0.01 0.99 0 thin HD21430 -24 25 0 0.02 0.98 0 thin 0.01 0.99 0 thin HD49947 77 14 0 0.06 0.94 0 thin 0.02 0.98 0 thin HD17652 -36 19 0 0.02 0.98 0 thin 0.01 0.99 0 thin HD16975 -6 2 -4 0.01 0.99 0 thin 0.01 0.99 0 thin HD161814 21 -2 -2 0.01 0.99 0 thin 0.01 0.99 0 thin HD77580 -24 -1 5 0.01 0.99 0 thin 0.01 0.99 0 thin HD199951 25 15 -4 0.01 0.99 0 thin 0.01 0.99 0 thin HD73887 19 -4 -7 0.01 0.99 0 thin 0.01 0.99 0 thin HD1737 17 -25 -14 0.02 0.98 0 thin 0.02 0.98 0 thin HD29085 49 -13 -29 0.07 0.93 0 thin 0.04 0.96 0 thin HD34642 47 -32 -2 0.04 0.96 0 thin 0.02 0.98 0 thin HD165135 33 -13 0 0.01 0.99 0 thin 0.01 0.99 0 thin HD189195 26 14 -13 0.02 0.98 0 thin 0.01 0.99 0 thin HD210056 40 -11 16 0.02 0.98 0 thin 0.02 0.98 0 thin Continued on next page 139 Table C.6 – continued from previous page star U V W B03 R03 Pthick Pthin Phalo group Pthick Pthin Phalo group HD12438 72 2 -27 0.12 0.88 0 thin 0.05 0.95 0 thin HD219507 21 5 -15 0.01 0.99 0 thin 0.01 0.99 0 thin HD136672 62 37 -27 0.28 0.72 0 thin 0.05 0.95 0 thin HD40409 -59 -20 8 0.03 0.97 0 thin 0.02 0.98 0 thin HD106572 -119 -129 -109 0.4 0 0.6 transition thick/halo 0.49 0 0.51 transition thick/halo HD61642 26 -19 2 0.01 0.99 0 thin 0.01 0.99 0 thin HD60060 -22 -10 1 0.01 0.99 0 thin 0.01 0.99 0 thin HD89015 -2 -15 10 0.01 0.99 0 thin 0.01 0.99 0 thin HD14247 -63 -32 5 0.06 0.94 0 thin 0.03 0.97 0 thin HD12296 54 -13 -13 0.03 0.97 0 thin 0.02 0.98 0 thin HD69123 -10 -9 -2 0.01 0.99 0 thin 0.01 0.99 0 thin HD47973 -7 -11 2 0.01 0.99 0 thin 0.01 0.99 0 thin HD224362 35 -8 3 0.01 0.99 0 thin 0.01 0.99 0 thin HD32436 12 -35 9 0.03 0.97 0 thin 0.02 0.98 0 thin HD10142 52 -35 -12 0.06 0.94 0 thin 0.03 0.97 0 thin HD119250 9 -32 5 0.02 0.98 0 thin 0.01 0.99 0 thin HD46727 12 -16 -7 0.01 0.99 0 thin 0.01 0.99 0 thin HD13263 22 -13 -8 0.01 0.99 0 thin 0.01 0.99 0 thin HD215104 30 -20 -15 0.02 0.98 0 thin 0.02 0.98 0 thin HD79091 -32 -19 -7 0.02 0.98 0 thin 0.01 0.99 0 thin HD22382 -40 -33 3 0.03 0.97 0 thin 0.02 0.98 0 thin HD29399 23 4 -30 0.04 0.96 0 thin 0.03 0.97 0 thin HD39720 11 -25 2 0.01 0.99 0 thin 0.01 0.99 0 thin HD63948 -17 -13 -9 0.01 0.99 0 thin 0.01 0.99 0 thin HD101162 -11 -33 -13 0.03 0.97 0 thin 0.02 0.98 0 thin HD93410 -87 -32 -1 0.15 0.85 0 thin 0.05 0.95 0 thin HD83465 -70 -31 1 0.07 0.93 0 thin 0.03 0.97 0 thin HD123151 48 -7 21 0.03 0.97 0 thin 0.02 0.98 0 thin HD132905 68 10 -13 0.05 0.95 0 thin 0.02 0.98 0 thin HD28093 -93 -37 -15 0.32 0.68 0 transition thick/thin 0.09 0.91 0 thin HD63295 23 -34 -4 0.02 0.98 0 thin 0.02 0.98 0 thin HD81101 17 -37 -4 0.03 0.97 0 thin 0.02 0.98 0 thin HD23940 57 -73 -34 0.92 0.08 0 thick 0.53 0.46 0 transition thick/thin HD45145 -35 -22 -9 0.02 0.98 0 thin 0.01 0.99 0 thin HD189080 86 -7 5 0.08 0.92 0 thin 0.03 0.97 0 thin HD67762 -77 -47 -7 0.24 0.76 0 thin 0.07 0.93 0 thin HD8651 17 -21 -60 0.76 0.24 0 thick 0.65 0.34 0 transition thick/thin HD7082 70 -73 -34 0.95 0.05 0 thick 0.61 0.39 0.01 transition thick/thin 140 APPENDIX C. TABLE FOR GIANT STARS ANALYSIS BIBLIOGRAPHY H. A. Abt. The Difference Between Metal-Poor and Metal-Rich Binaries. AJ, 135:722–725, February 2008. doi: 10.1088/0004-6256/135/2/722. H. A. Abt. The Difference between Metal-poor and Metal-rich Binaries. In B. Soonthornthum, S. Komonjinda, K. S. Cheng, and K. C. Leung, editors, The Eighth Pacific Rim Conference on Stellar Astrophysics: A Tribute to Kam-Ching Leung, volume 404 of Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series, page 209, August 2009. V. Z. Adibekyan, N. C. Santos, S. G. Sousa, and G. Israelian. A new α-enhanced super-solar metallicity population. A&A, 535:L11, November 2011. doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201118240. V. Z. Adibekyan, E. Delgado Mena, S. G. Sousa, N. C. Santos, G. Israelian, J. I. Gonz´ alez Hern´ andez, M. Mayor, and A. A. Hakobyan. Exploring the α-enhancement of metal-poor planet-hosting stars. The Kepler and HARPS samples. A&A, 547:A36, November 2012a. doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201220167. V. Z. Adibekyan, S. G. Sousa, N. C. Santos, E. Delgado Mena, J. I. Gonz´ alez Hern´ andez, G. Israelian, M. Mayor, and G. Khachatryan. Chemical abundances of 1111 FGK stars from the HARPS GTO planet search program. Galactic stellar populations and planets. A&A, 545:A32, September 2012b. doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201219401. V. Z. Adibekyan, P. Figueira, N. C. Santos, A. A. Hakobyan, S. G. Sousa, G. Pace, E. Delgado Mena, A. C. Robin, G. Israelian, and J. I. Gonz´ alez Hern´ andez. Kinematics and chemical properties of the Galactic stellar populations. The HARPS FGK dwarfs sample. A&A, 554: A44, June 2013. doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201321520. S. Albrecht, J. N. Winn, J. A. Johnson, A. W. Howard, G. W. Marcy, R. P. Butler, P. Arriagada, J. D. Crane, S. A. Shectman, I. B. Thompson, T. Hirano, G. Bakos, and J. D. Hartman. Obliquities of Hot Jupiter Host Stars: Evidence for Tidal Interactions and Primordial Misalignments. ApJ, 757:18, September 2012. doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/757/1/18. 141 142 BIBLIOGRAPHY S. A. Alexeeva, Y. V. Pakhomov, and L. I. Mashonkina. Non-LTE sodium abundance in galactic thickand thin-disk red giants. Astronomy Letters, 40:406–424, July 2014. doi: 10.1134/ S1063773714070019. Y. Alibert, C. Mordasini, and W. Benz. Migration and giant planet formation. A&A, 417:L25– L28, April 2004. doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20040053. C. Allende Prieto, P. S. Barklem, D. L. Lambert, and K. Cunha. S4N: A spectroscopic survey of stars in the solar neighborhood. The Nearest 15 pc. A&A, 420:183–205, June 2004. doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20035801. N. M. Batalha, J. F. Rowe, S. T. Bryson, T. Barclay, C. J. Burke, D. A. Caldwell, J. L. Christiansen, F. Mullally, S. E. Thompson, T. M. Brown, A. K. Dupree, D. C. Fabrycky, E. B. Ford, J. J. Fortney, R. L. Gilliland, H. Isaacson, D. W. Latham, G. W. Marcy, S. N. Quinn, D. Ragozzine, A. Shporer, W. J. Borucki, D. R. Ciardi, T. N. Gautier, III, M. R. Haas, J. M. Jenkins, D. G. Koch, J. J. Lissauer, W. Rapin, G. S. Basri, A. P. Boss, L. A. Buchhave, J. A. Carter, D. Charbonneau, J. Christensen-Dalsgaard, B. D. Clarke, W. D. Cochran, B.-O. Demory, J.-M. Desert, E. Devore, L. R. Doyle, G. A. Esquerdo, M. Everett, F. Fressin, J. C. Geary, F. R. Girouard, A. Gould, J. R. Hall, M. J. Holman, A. W. Howard, S. B. Howell, K. A. Ibrahim, K. Kinemuchi, H. Kjeldsen, T. C. Klaus, J. Li, P. W. Lucas, S. Meibom, R. L. Morris, A. Prˇ sa, E. Quintana, D. T. Sanderfer, D. Sasselov, S. E. Seader, J. C. Smith, J. H. Steffen, M. Still, M. C. Stumpe, J. C. Tarter, P. Tenenbaum, G. Torres, J. D. Twicken, K. Uddin, J. Van Cleve, L. Walkowicz, and W. F. Welsh. Planetary Candidates Observed by Kepler. III. Analysis of the First 16 Months of Data. ApJS, 204:24, February 2013. doi: 10.1088/0067-0049/204/2/24. M. R. Bate. Stellar, brown dwarf and multiple star properties from a radiation hydrodynamical simulation of star cluster formation. MNRAS, 419:3115–3146, February 2012. doi: 10.1111/ j.1365-2966.2011.19955.x. L. Benamati, A. Sozzetti, N. C. Santos, and D. W. Latham. A Combined Astrometric and Spectroscopic Study of Metal-Poor Binaries. PASP, 125:1315–1328, November 2013. doi: 10.1086/674147. T. Bensby, S. Feltzing, and I. Lundstr¨ om. Elemental abundance trends in the Galactic thin and thick disks as traced by nearby F and G dwarf stars. A&A, 410:527–551, November 2003. doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20031213. T. Bensby, S. Feltzing, and M. S. Oey. Exploring the Milky Way stellar disk. A detailed elemental abundance study of 714 F and G dwarf stars in the solar neighbourhood. A&A, 562: A71, February 2014. doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201322631. M. Bergemann. Ionization balance of Ti in the photospheres of the Sun and four late-type stars. MNRAS, 413:2184–2198, May 2011. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2011.18295.x. M. Bergemann, R.-P. Kudritzki, M. W¨ url, B. Plez, B. Davies, and Z. Gazak. Red Supergiant Stars as Cosmic Abundance Probes. II. NLTE Effects in J-band Silicon Lines. ApJ, 764:115, February 2013. doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/764/2/115. BIBLIOGRAPHY 143 M. Bergemann, R.-P. Kudritzki, and B. Davies. Spectroscopic analysis of cool giants and supergiants. ArXiv e-prints, March 2014. A. P. Boss. Rapid Formation of Gas Giant Planets around M Dwarf Stars. ApJ, 643:501–508, May 2006. doi: 10.1086/501522. A. P. Boss. Giant planet formation by gravitational instability. Science, 276:1836–1839, 1997. doi: 10.1126/science.276.5320.1836. L. A. Buchhave, D. W. Latham, A. Johansen, M. Bizzarro, G. Torres, J. F. Rowe, N. M. Batalha, W. J. Borucki, E. Brugamyer, C. Caldwell, S. T. Bryson, D. R. Ciardi, W. D. Cochran, M. Endl, G. A. Esquerdo, E. B. Ford, J. C. Geary, R. L. Gilliland, T. Hansen, H. Isaacson, J. B. Laird, P. W. Lucas, G. W. Marcy, J. A. Morse, P. Robertson, A. Shporer, R. P. Stefanik, M. Still, and S. N. Quinn. An abundance of small exoplanets around stars with a wide range of metallicities. Nature, 486:375–377, June 2012. doi: 10.1038/nature11121. A. Burkert and S. Ida. The Separation/Period Gap in the Distribution of Extrasolar Planets around Stars with Masses M =1.2 Msolar.ApJ, 660:845–849, May 2007. doi: 10.1086/ 512538. R. P. Butler and G. W. Marcy. A Planet Orbiting 47 Ursae Majoris. ApJ, 464:L153, June 1996. doi: 10.1086/310102. A. G. W. Cameron. The formation of the sun and planets. Icarus, 1:13–69, 1962. doi: 10.1016/ 0019-1035(62)90005-2. S. Casertano, M. G. Lattanzi, A. Sozzetti, A. Spagna, S. Jancart, R. Morbidelli, R. Pannunzio, D. Pourbaix, and D. Queloz. Double-blind test program for astrometric planet detection with Gaia. A&A, 482:699–729, May 2008. doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20078997. W. D. Cochran, M. Endl, R. A. Wittenmyer, and J. L. Bean. A Planetary System around HD 155358: The Lowest Metallicity Planet Host Star. ApJ, 665:1407–1412, August 2007. doi: 10.1086/519555. R. Cosentino, C. Lovis, F. Pepe, A. Collier Cameron, D. W. Latham, E. Molinari, S. Udry, N. Bezawada, M. Black, A. Born, N. Buchschacher, D. Charbonneau, P. Figueira, M. Fleury, A. Galli, A. Gallie, X. Gao, A. Ghedina, C. Gonzalez, M. Gonzalez, J. Guerra, D. Henry, K. Horne, I. Hughes, D. Kelly, M. Lodi, D. Lunney, C. Maire, M. Mayor, G. Micela, M. P. Ordway, J. Peacock, D. Phillips, G. Piotto, D. Pollacco, D. Queloz, K. Rice, C. Riverol, L. Riverol, J. San Juan, D. Sasselov, D. Segransan, A. Sozzetti, D. Sosnowska, B. Stobie, A. Szentgyorgyi, A. Vick, and L. Weber. Harps-N: the new planet hunter at TNG. In Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, volume 8446 of Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, page 1, September 2012. doi: 10.1117/12.925738. A. Cumming, R. P. Butler, G. W. Marcy, S. S. Vogt, J. T. Wright, and D. A. Fischer. The Keck Planet Search: Detectability and the Minimum Mass and Orbital Period Distribution of Extrasolar Planets. PASP, 120:531–554, May 2008. doi: 10.1086/588487. 144 BIBLIOGRAPHY L. da Silva, L. Girardi, L. Pasquini, J. Setiawan, O. von der L¨ uhe, J. R. de Medeiros, A. Hatzes, M. P. D¨ ollinger, and A. Weiss. Basic physical parameters of a selected sample of evolved stars. A&A, 458:609–623, November 2006. doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20065105. G. D’Angelo, R. H. Durisen, and J. J. Lissauer. Giant Planet Formation. In S. Seager, editor, Exoplanets, edited by S. Seager. Tucson, AZ: University of Arizona Press, 2011, 526 pp. ISBN 978-0-8165-2945-2., p.319-346, pages 319–346. 2011. J. H. J. de Bruijne. Science performance of Gaia, ESA’s space-astrometry mission. Ap&SS, 341: 31–41, September 2012. doi: 10.1007/s10509-012-1019-4. E. Delgado Mena, G. Israelian, J. I. Gonz´ alez Hern´ andez, J. C. Bond, N. C. Santos, S. Udry, and M. Mayor. Chemical Clues on the Formation of Planetary Systems: C/O Versus Mg/Si for HARPS GTO Sample. ApJ, 725:2349–2358, December 2010. doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/725/ 2/2349. M. Desort, A.-M. Lagrange, F. Galland, S. Udry, and M. Mayor. Search for exoplanets with the radial-velocity technique: quantitative diagnostics of stellar activity. A&A, 473:983–993, October 2007. doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20078144. G. P. di Benedetto. Towards a fundamental calibration of stellar parameters of A, F, G, K dwarfs and giants. A&A, 339:858–871, November 1998. M. P. D¨ ollinger, A. P. Hatzes, L. Pasquini, E. W. Guenther, and M. Hartmann. Planetary companions around the K giant stars 11 Ursae Minoris and HD 32518. A&A, 505:1311–1317, October 2009. doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/200911702. G. Duchˆ ene and A. Kraus. Stellar Multiplicity. ARA&A, 51:269–310, August 2013. doi: 10. 1146/annurev-astro-081710-102602. X. Dumusque, N. C. Santos, S. Udry, C. Lovis, and X. Bonfils. Stellar noise and planet detection. I. Oscillations, granulation and sun-like spots. In A. Sozzetti, M. G. Lattanzi, and A. P. Boss, editors, IAU Symposium, volume 276 of IAU Symposium, pages 527–529, November 2011. doi: 10.1017/S1743921311021089. A. Duquennoy and M. Mayor. Multiplicity among solar-type stars in the solar neighbourhood. II - Distribution of the orbital elements in an unbiased sample. A&A, 248:485–524, August 1991. S. Ekstr¨ om, C. Georgy, P. Eggenberger, G. Meynet, N. Mowlavi, A. Wyttenbach, A. Granada, T. Decressin, R. Hirschi, U. Frischknecht, C. Charbonnel, and A. Maeder. Grids of stellar models with rotation. I. Models from 0.8 to 120 MŁat solar metallicity (Z =0.014). A&A, 537:A146, January 2012. doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201117751. M. Endl, M. K¨ urster, S. Els, A. P. Hatzes, and W. D. Cochran. The planet search program at the ESO Coud´ e Echelle spectrometer. II. The alpha Centauri system: Limits for planetary companions. A&A, 374:675–681, August 2001. doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20010723. BIBLIOGRAPHY 145 M. Endl, W. D. Cochran, R. G. Tull, and P. J. MacQueen. A Dedicated M Dwarf Planet Search Using The Hobby-Eberly Telescope. AJ, 126:3099–3107, December 2003. doi: 10.1086/ 379137. M. Endl, W. D. Cochran, M. K¨ urster, D. B. Paulson, R. A. Wittenmyer, P. J. MacQueen, and R. G. Tull. Exploring the Frequency of Close-in Jovian Planets around M Dwarfs. ApJ, 649: 436–443, September 2006. doi: 10.1086/506465. P. Figueira, M. Marmier, G. Bou´ e, C. Lovis, N. C. Santos, M. Montalto, S. Udry, F. Pepe, and M. Mayor. Comparing HARPS and Kepler surveys. The alignment of multiple-planet systems. A&A, 541:A139, May 2012. doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201219017. P. Figueira, N. C. Santos, F. Pepe, C. Lovis, and N. Nardetto. Line-profile variations in radialvelocity measurements. Two alternative indicators for planetary searches. A&A, 557:A93, September 2013. doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201220779. D. A. Fischer and J. Valenti. The Planet-Metallicity Correlation. ApJ, 622:1102–1117, April 2005. doi: 10.1086/428383. P. J. Flower. Transformations from Theoretical Hertzsprung-Russell Diagrams to ColorMagnitude Diagrams: Effective Temperatures, B-V Colors, and Bolometric Corrections. ApJ, 469:355, September 1996. doi: 10.1086/177785. R. Foy. Detailed analysis of cool giants with low microturbulent velocity. A&A, 93:315–319, January 1981. E. D. Friel, H. R. Jacobson, E. Barrett, L. Fullton, S. C. Balachandran, and C. A. Pilachowski. Abundances of Red Giants in the Old Open Cluster Collinder 261. AJ, 126:2372–2384, November 2003. doi: 10.1086/378600. E. D. Friel, H. R. Jacobson, and C. A. Pilachowski. Abundances of Red Giants in Old Open Clusters. II. Berkeley 17. AJ, 129:2725–2730, June 2005. doi: 10.1086/430146. S. Frink, D. S. Mitchell, A. Quirrenbach, D. A. Fischer, G. W. Marcy, and R. P. Butler. Discovery of a Substellar Companion to the K2 III Giant ιDraconis. ApJ, 576:478–484, September 2002. doi: 10.1086/341629. B. S. Gaudi, S. Seager, and G. Mallen-Ornelas. On the Period Distribution of Close-in Extrasolar Giant Planets. ApJ, 623:472–481, April 2005. doi: 10.1086/428478. L. Ghezzi, K. Cunha, S. C. Schuler, and V. V. Smith. Metallicities of Planet-hosting Stars: A Sample of Giants and Subgiants. ApJ, 725:721–733, December 2010a. doi: 10.1088/ 0004-637X/725/1/721. L. Ghezzi, K. Cunha, V. V. Smith, F. X. de Ara´ ujo, S. C. Schuler, and R. de la Reza. Stellar Parameters and Metallicities of Stars Hosting Jovian and Neptunian Mass Planets: A Possible Dependence of Planetary Mass on Metallicity. ApJ, 720:1290–1302, September 2010b. doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/720/2/1290.