1: %\documentclass[twoside,10pt,twocolumn]{report}
2:
3: %\usepackage{upthesis} %ficheiro de estilo da tese em português
4: %%\usepackage[portuges]{babel} %hifenação
5: %\usepackage{isolatin1} %reconhecer acentos iso
6: %\usepackage{epsf} %incluir figuras encapsulated postscript
7:
8: %\usepackage{graphicx} %incluir figs >>> adicionado por mim
9: %\usepackage{latexsym}
10:
11: %\usepackage{natbib} %-----------------bib A&A style
12: %\bibpunct{(}{)}{;}{a}{}{,} %-----------------bib A&A style
13: %\documentclass{aa}
14: \documentclass[rnote,oldversion]{aa} %-------------my version
15:
16:
17:
18:
19: \usepackage{graphicx}
20: \usepackage{txfonts}
21:
22: \begin{document}
23:
24: \title{Seismic evolution of low/intermediate mass PMS stars}
25:
26:
27: \subtitle{}
28:
29: \author{F. J. G. Pinheiro
30: \inst{1}
31: }
32:
33: \offprints{F. J. G. Pinheiro (fjgp@astro.up.pt)}
34:
35: \institute{Centro de Astrof\'{\i}sica da Universidade do Porto
36: , Rua da Estrelas , 4150-762 Porto, Portugal}
37: \date{ }
38:
39: % \abstract{}{}{}{}{}
40: % 5 {} token are mandatory
41: \abstract{
42: This article presents a study of the evolution of the internal
43: structure and seismic properties expected for low/intermediate
44: mass \hbox{Pre-Main} Sequence (PMS) stars.
45: Seismic and non-seismic properties of PMS stars were analysed.
46: This was done using
47: 0.8 to 4.4M$_\odot$ stellar models at stages ranging from the
48: end of the Hayashi track up to the Zero-Age Main-Sequence (ZAMS).
49: This research concludes that, for intermediate-mass stars
50: (M$>$1.3M$_\odot$), diagrams comparing the effective temperature
51: ($T_{eff}$) against the small separation can provide an alternative to
52: Christensen-Dalsgaard (C-D) diagrams.
53: The impact of the metal abundance of intermediate mass stars
54: (2.5-4.4M$_\odot$) has over their seismic properties is also
55: evaluated.
56: }%{ }{ }{ }{ }
57: \keywords{stars: evolution, stars: interiors, stars: oscillations,
58: stars: pre-main sequence
59: }
60: \maketitle
61:
62: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
63:
64:
65: \section{Introduction}
66:
67: The study of the Sun's seismic characteristics allows
68: a better understanding of its internal structure
69: (e.g. Antia \cite{antia05}).
70: Yet, for other stars it is only possible to observe
71: pulsations associated with low degree spherical harmonics,
72: constraining the results that one can obtain (Bedding \&
73: Kjeldsen \cite{bedding03}).
74: Still, asteroseismic techniques can be used to infer the
75: internal structure of solar-type stars (e.g. Monteiro et
76: al., \cite{monteiro02})
77:
78: The seismic study of Pre-Main Sequence (PMS) stars (e.g.
79: Breger \cite{breger72}, Marconi \& Palla \cite{marconi98},
80: Ripepi \& Marconi \cite{ripepi04}) has been mainly focused
81: on objects located inside the PMS Instability Strip (IS).
82: However, in terms of the location and size of the outer
83: convective regions, low mass PMS stars, located near the
84: Zero Age Main Sequence (ZAMS), resemble solar-type stars.
85: Therefore they may be expected to oscillate.
86:
87: Not much work has been done regarding the study of PMS
88: solar-type pulsations (Samadi et al. \cite{samadi05},
89: Pinheiro et al. \cite{pinheiro06}).
90: This research goes beyond the study of the seismic properties
91: of young stars initiated by Pinheiro et al. (\cite{pinheiro06})
92: by extending Monteiro et al.'s (\cite{monteiro02}) analysis
93: to PMS stars.
94: By taking into account the evolution of the seismic properties
95: of young stars we evaluate the possibility of testing PMS
96: evolutionary models through the use of solar-type pulsations.
97:
98:
99: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
100: \section{Solar-type pulsations}%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
101:
102: The Sun, amongst other solar-type stars, displays a type of
103: oscillation in which pressure acts as a restoring force.
104: These \hbox{p-mode} pulsations, known as solar-type oscillations,
105: are stochastically driven by the outer convective layers.
106: The power spectrum of solar-type pulsators presents two
107: ty\hbox{pical} frequency separations, known as the large
108: ($\Delta\nu_{n,l}$) and small ($\delta\nu_{n,l}$) separation.
109: The first one corresponds to the difference between
110: frequencies associated with oscillations of the same degree ($l$)
111: and consecutive overtone ($n$), while the latter corresponds
112: to the difference between frequencies $\nu_{n-1,l+2}$
113: and $\nu_{n,l}$.
114: Tassoul (\cite{tassoul80}) showed that in the asymptotic
115: regime ($n\gg l$) these two separations can be written as:
116:
117:
118: \begin{equation}
119: \label{eq:eq1}
120: \Delta\nu_{n,l} = \nu_{n+1,l} - \nu_{n,l} \propto \Delta\nu =
121: \bigg( 2 \int_{0}^{R} \frac{dr}{C_s} \bigg)^{-1} =
122: \bigg( 2 \int_{0}^{R} \frac{dr}{\sqrt{\Gamma_1 p/\rho}} \bigg)^{-1}
123: \end{equation}
124:
125: \begin{equation}
126: \label{eq:eq2}
127: \delta\nu_{n,l} = \nu_{n-1,l+2} - \nu_{n,l} \propto
128: \frac{\Delta\nu}{\nu_{n,l}} \times r_{i} ~ ~ ~ \mathrm{and}
129: ~ ~ ~ r_{i} = \int_{0}^{R} \frac{\partial C_s}{\partial r} \frac{dr}{r} ~ ~,
130: \end{equation}
131:
132: \noindent where $\Gamma_1$, p and $\rho$ are the
133: adiabatic exponent, pressure and density inside the star.
134: Therefore $\Delta\nu$ is a measurement of
135: the inverse of the time that acoustic waves, with a
136: velo\hbox{city} $Cs$, take to travel from the centre to
137: the stellar surface.
138: According to Kjeldsen \& Bedding (\cite{kjeldsen95}), for a
139: fully ionised star composed of an ideal gas with an ``average''
140: temperature $<$T$>\propto$M$^2$/R$^4$, one gets:
141:
142: \begin{equation}
143: \label{eq:eq3}
144: \Delta\nu \propto \sqrt{\mathrm{M/R}^3} \propto \sqrt{<\rho>}
145: = \sqrt{ \frac{1}{4/3 ~ \pi R^{3}} ~
146: {\textstyle \int }_{0}^{R} 4\pi ~ \rho(r) ~ r^{2} dr } ~ ,
147: \end{equation}
148:
149: \noindent i.e. $\Delta\nu$ depends on a global stellar
150: parameter ($<$$\rho$$>$).
151: The sound speed gradient integral $r_{i}$ (defined on Eq.
152: \ref{eq:eq2}) is related to the \hbox{astero}seismic ratio
153: $r_{n,l}$$=$$\delta\nu_{n,l}/\Delta\nu_{n,l+1}$
154: (Roxburgh \& Vorontsov \cite{roxburgh03}).
155: Equation 2 hints that $r_i$ and $\delta\nu_{n,l}$ are sensitive
156: to the sound speed gradient ($\partial C_s/\partial r$) near the
157: stellar centre. Thus $\delta\nu_{n,l}$ is sensitive
158: to the stellar structure and evolutionary status.
159: Diagrams which compare these two frequency separations can be
160: used to study solar-type stars
161: (Christensen-Dalsgaard \cite{dalsgaard84}).
162: These are known as Christensen-Dalsgaard (C-D) diagrams.
163:
164:
165: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
166: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
167: \section{Evolution of the seismic properties}
168:
169: Stellar models are required to analyse the evolution of
170: the internal structure and seismic properties of PMS stars.
171: PMS \hbox{models} produced in preparation for the COROT mission
172: (available at \textit{http://www.astro.up.pt/corot/models})
173: were used in this study.
174: These models were produced using the CESAM stellar
175: evolutionary code (Morel \cite{morel97}),
176: applying the same procedures and assuming the same
177: physical ingredients used
178: in the modelling of EK Cep (Marques et al. \cite{marques04}).
179: These Z=0.02 models have masses between 0.8 and 3.2M$_\odot$.
180: For each mass, 13 models were available.
181: These are equally spaced in time, \hbox{ranging} from
182: the end of the Hayashi track up to the ZAMS.
183: Figure \ref{fig:1}.a shows each model's position in
184: the HR diagram.
185:
186: The model's seismic parameters ($\Delta\nu$ \& $r_{i}$) were
187: estimated using the integrals shown in Eqs. 1 and 2.
188: The \hbox{C-D} diagram displayed in Fig. \ref{fig:1}.b
189: was produced following Roxburgh \& Vorontsov's approach
190: (\cite{roxburgh03}), i.e. $r_{i}$ was used instead
191: of $\delta\nu_{n,l}$.
192: The overlap of different models on the C-D diagram implies
193: that this diagram is only useful to analyse stars with less
194: than 1.3M$_\odot$.
195:
196:
197: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
198: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
199: \subsection{Sound speed gradient integral vs. effective temperature}
200:
201: By comparing, for each model, the effective temperature
202: (T$\mathrm{_{eff}}$)
203: against its $r_i$ integral (Fig. \ref{fig:figr3}.a) one
204: breaks the small and large separation degeneracy displayed
205: by some of the models (Fig. \ref{fig:figr2}.b).
206: This means that unlike C-D diagrams, T$_{eff}$ vs. $r_i$
207: diagrams can be used to study objects more massive than
208: 1.3M$_\odot$.
209: Yet Monte Carlo simulations point out that, for low mass stars
210: (M$<$$1.3$M$_\odot$), $T_{eff}$ vs. $r_i$ diagrams can
211: only achieve the precision of C-D diagrams if $T_{eff}$ is
212: accurately known.
213: For instance, a 3.5$\%$ accuracy in the mass determination
214: is achieved either by knowing $r_i$ and $\Delta\nu$ with a
215: 5$\%$ precision or by knowing $r_i$ (with that accuracy)
216: and T$_{eff}$ with a 50K uncertainty.
217:
218: Figure \ref{fig:figr2} shows that the $r_i$ integral
219: evolves in a similar way as the average sound speed
220: gradient computed between 0.25 and 0.33 stellar radii
221: $\left( <\partial{C_s}/\partial{r}>_{R/4-R/3} =
222: %\int_{R/4}^{R/3} C_{s} dr / \int_{R/4}^{R/3} dr \right).
223: \frac{1}{R/3-R/4} \int_{R/4}^{R/3}
224: \frac{\partial C_{s}}{\partial r} dr \right)$.
225: This hints at $r_i$'s dependence on the inner sound
226: speed gradient.
227:
228:
229: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
230: %=================================================================
231: \subsection{The large separation and the mean stellar density} %%%%%%%%%
232:
233: From Eq. 3 we get that $\Delta\nu$$\propto$$<$$\rho$$>^{1/2}$.
234: By relying on the definition of
235: $\Delta\nu$ and $<$$\rho$$>^{1/2}$(Eqs. 1 \& 2) we can
236: write the $\Delta\nu$$/$$<$$\rho$$>^{1/2}$ ratio as:
237:
238: \begin{displaymath}
239: \Delta\nu/<\rho>^{1/2} =
240: \frac{1}{\frac{2}{C_{S}(0)} \int_{0}^{R} \frac{C_{S}(0)}{C_{S}(r)} dr }
241: \times
242: \left( \frac{4/3 ~ ~ \pi R^3}{\rho(0)\int_{0}^{R} 4\pi
243: \frac{\rho(r)}{\rho(0)} r^2 dr } \right)^{0.5}
244: %
245: \stackrel{ x = \frac{r}{R} }{=}
246: \end{displaymath}
247: \begin{displaymath}
248: ~ ~ \stackrel{ x = \frac{r}{R} }{=}
249: \left(\frac{ C_{S}(0)}{2R \sqrt{3 \rho(0) } }\right) \times
250: \left(\int_{0}^{1}\frac{C_{S}(0)}{C_{S}(x)} dx \right)^{-1}\times
251: \left(\int_{0}^{1} \frac{\rho(x)}{\rho(0)} x^{2} dx \right)^{-0.5}=
252: \end{displaymath}
253:
254: \begin{equation}
255: \label{eq:eq4}
256: ~ ~ ~ \, = K_{0} \times {I_{C}}^{-1} \times {I_{\rho}}^{-0.5} ~ ,
257: \end{equation}
258:
259:
260: \noindent where $K_{0}$ is an estimate of
261: $\Delta\nu$/$<\rho>^{1/2}$ obtained using the central
262: density ($\rho(0)$) and sound speed ($C_{S}(0)$).
263: The normalised sound speed ($I_{C}$) and density
264: ($I_{\rho}$) integrals are independent of the model's
265: radius, density and sound speed.
266:
267: Figure \ref{fig:figr3} hints
268: that changes in the density and sound speed profiles
269: are partially responsible for the observed variations in the
270: $\Delta\nu$/$<$$\rho$$>^{1/2}$ ratio.
271: Such profile changes are due to modifications in the
272: relationship between pressure and density resul\hbox{ting}
273: from changes in the location/size of convective/ionisation
274: regions that occur during the contraction towards the ZAMS.
275:
276: This figure also shows that $\Delta\nu$/$<$$\rho$$>^{1/2}$,
277: $K_{0}$, $I_{C}$ and $I_{\rho}$ are, to some extent,
278: correlated with the model's effective temperature.
279: Indeed, the dispersion of the model's
280: $\Delta\nu$/$<$$\rho$$>^{1/2}$ ratio in Fig. \ref{fig:figr3}.a
281: is, at any given temperature, around 2 to 5\%
282: Thus knowing a star's effective temperature allows one
283: to predict its $\Delta\nu$/$<$$\rho$$>^{1/2}$ ratio.
284:
285: %%;..........................................................FIGURE1
286: \begin{figure}[htb]
287: \begin{center}
288: \includegraphics[angle=90,width=12.6cm,height=10.cm]{RNfig1.eps}
289: \caption{
290: {\bf{a)}} PMS evolutionary tracks for 0.8 to 3.2M$_\odot$ stars.
291: The diamonds correspond to the models described in Sect. 3.
292: {\bf{b)}} C-D diagram produced using the same models.
293: The arrow indicates the direction in which evolution takes place. }
294: \label{fig:1}
295: \end{center}
296: \end{figure}
297: %;..........................................................
298:
299: %%;..........................................................FIGURE2
300: \begin{figure}[hbt]
301: \begin{center}
302: \includegraphics[angle=90,width=12.cm,height=9.35cm]{RNfig2.eps}
303: \caption{
304: {\bf{a)}} Evolution of the sound speed gradient integral
305: and {\bf{b)}} the \hbox{average} sound speed gradient
306: $<\partial{C_s}/\partial{r}>_{R/4-R/3}$
307: for the models displayed at Fig. 1 (diamonds).
308: }
309: \label{fig:figr2}
310: \end{center}
311: \end{figure}
312: %;..........................................................
313:
314: %...........................................................FiGURE3
315: \begin{figure}[hbt]
316: \begin{center}
317: \includegraphics[angle=90,width=24.cm,height=18.7cm]{RNfig3.eps}
318: \caption{
319: {\bf{a)}} Normalization of the large separation ($\Delta\nu$) by
320: the square root of the mean stellar density $<$$\rho$$>^{1/2}$,
321: {\bf{b)}} $\Delta\nu$/$<$$\rho$$>^{1/2}$ ratio estimated using
322: the core density and sound speed,
323: {\bf{c)}} inverse of the profile integral $I_C$ and,
324: {\bf{d)}} inverse of the square root of the profile integral
325: $I_\rho$ for the models described in Sect. 3 (diamonds).
326: }
327: \label{fig:figr3}
328: \end{center}
329: \end{figure}
330: %...........................................................
331:
332: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
333: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
334: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
335: \section{The contribution of metallicity} %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
336:
337: Intermediate mass PMS stars are known for their
338: $\delta$-Scuti type pulsations.
339: Samadi et al. (\cite{samadi05}) predicted the
340: amplitudes of solar-type pulsations for
341: low mass PMS stars located to the right of the IS.
342: The size (in solar radius) of the outer convective
343: region of Samadi's PMS model \#9 is smaller than that
344: of the log(T$\mathrm{_{eff}}$)$\leq$3.85 models used
345: in Sect. 3.
346: Therefore, one may be tempted to extrapolate Samadi's
347: result for \hbox{log(T$\mathrm{_{eff}}$)$\leq$3.85 stars}.
348: On the other hand, intermediate mass stars located near
349: the ZAMS may not display solar-type pulsations since their
350: outer convective layers are smaller (about one order of
351: magnitude) than the one of Samadi's PMS model \#9.
352: The convective cores of A type stars ($\sim$2M$_\odot$)
353: can drive g modes (Browning et al. \cite{browning04}
354: \& Antonello et al. \cite{antonello06}).
355: However, currently it is unknown whether core convection
356: can drive solar-type pulsations like outer convection does.
357: Nonetheless, such conjectures require an extrapolation
358: of the study of solar-type pulsations to more
359: massive stars.
360:
361: In order to explore the metalicity effect on the
362: seismic properties of intermediate mass stars, we
363: selected Z=0.01 and Z=0.02 models produced by J.
364: Marques to study the PMS \hbox{$\delta$-Scuti} star
365: VV Ser (Ripepi et al. \cite{ripepi07}).
366: These models have masses ranging between 2.5 and
367: 4.4M$_\odot$ covering, for each mass, 30 evolutionary
368: stages equally spaced in time.
369: Figure \ref{fig:figr4} shows that the seismic properties
370: of Z=0.02 PMS stars evolve in a similar fashion to those of
371: Z=0.01 stars.
372: This happens because the internal structure of both
373: types of stars evolves in the same way.
374: However quantitatively there are some \hbox{diffe}rences.
375: Near the ZAMS, metal-poor stars are denser and have larger
376: sound speed gradients than their Z=0.02 counterparts.
377: Therefore their $r_i$ integral is larger.
378:
379:
380: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
381: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
382: \section{Asteroseismic test of PMS models}
383:
384:
385: The seismic properties of a given star can be used
386: to test stellar models that reproduce, within given
387: uncertainties, its position in the HR diagram.
388: Figure \ref{figr5} shows this.
389: In this \hbox{exercise} the target is a 2.8M$_\odot$,
390: Z=0.01 star with log(L/L$_{\odot}$)=1.51 and
391: log(T$_{eff}$)=3.77.
392: The models tested here are the same ones used in
393: Sect. 4.
394: In this case a 20\% uncertainty is assumed in the
395: target's log(L/L$_{\odot}$), a 1\% uncertainty in
396: log(T$_{eff}$) and a 5\% accuracy in its
397: seismic parameters $\Delta\nu$ and $r_i$.
398: Figure \ref{figr5} hints that, as expected from Eq. 3,
399: $\Delta\nu$ puts \hbox{cons}traints on the model's density.
400: In the same manner we can see how $r_i$ puts
401: \hbox{cons}traints on the stellar evolutionary status.
402: Conversely, models that reproduce the seismic properties
403: of a given star can constrain its global stellar parameters
404: (e.g. Pinheiro et al. \cite{pinheiro03}).
405:
406: According to Baglin et al. (\cite{baglin01}), in a 150 day
407: run COROT can achieve a 0.1$\mu$Hz accuracy in individual
408: frequency determination.
409: On the other hand, $\Delta\nu_{n,l}$$\approx$40$\mu$Hz and
410: $\delta\nu_{n,l}$$\approx$6$\mu$Hz are typical
411: frequency separations of intermediate mass PMS stars
412: (Pinheiro et al. \cite{pinheiro06}).
413: This means that COROT can determine $\Delta\nu_{n,l}$ and
414: $\delta\nu_{n,l}$ with accuracies up to 0.5\% and
415: 4\%, respectively.
416: Table \ref{tab:1} shows that some of the models used above
417: have different seismic properties, despite occupying the
418: same position in the HR diagram.
419: Since these differences are larger that COROT's
420: accuracy, one could use COROT to test these models.
421:
422:
423: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
424: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
425: \section{Conclusions \& future developments}
426:
427: The seismic characteristics of the PMS models evaluated
428: here reflect their internal structure.
429: Therefore, as the models contract towards the ZAMS
430: their structure and seismic properties change.
431: In general terms, the evolution of $\Delta\nu$ and
432: $r_i$ shows no signi\hbox{ficant} dependence on the
433: model's mass and metallicity.
434: However these variations are correlated to some
435: extent with the model's effective temperature.
436: Indeed, in the range of metal abundances \hbox{analy}sed
437: here, the knowledge of star's effective temperature
438: (with a 100K uncertainty) allows us to infer its
439: $\Delta\nu/$$<$$\rho$$>^{1/2}$ ratio with a
440: precision between 2 and 5.5\%.
441:
442: Due to a degeneracy between the seismic properties
443: ($\delta\nu$ \& $r_i$) of some models, C-D diagrams
444: are only useful for testing PMS models with less
445: than 1.3M$_\odot$. This degeneracy is \hbox{broken by}
446: taking into account their temperature.
447: Consequently,~ $T_{eff}$ vs. $r_i$
448:
449: %...........................................................FiGURE4
450: \begin{figure}[hbt]
451: \begin{center}
452: \includegraphics[angle=90,width=12.cm,height=9.35cm]{RNfig4.eps}
453: \caption{
454: {\bf{a)}} Evolution of the $\Delta\nu$/$<\rho>^{1/2}$ ratio and
455: {\bf{b)}} $r_{i}$ integral for diferent stellar models.
456: The black diamonds correspond to 2.5M$_{\odot}$, 3.1M$_{\odot}$
457: and 4.0M$_{\odot}$ Z=0.01 models.
458: The grey diamonds correspond to 2.5-2.8M$_{\odot}$,
459: 3.1-3.4M$_{\odot}$ and 4.0-4.3M$_{\odot}$ Z=0.02 models.
460: }
461: \label{fig:figr4}
462: \end{center}
463: \end{figure}
464: %...........................................................
465:
466: %%;..........................................................FIGURE5
467: \begin{figure}[bht]
468: \begin{center}
469: \includegraphics[angle=90,width=12.cm,height=9.35cm]{RNfig5.eps}
470: \caption{
471: {\bf{a)}} Z=0.01 and, {\bf{b)}} Z=0.02 stellar models
472: that reproduce, with 5\% accuracy, the large separation
473: $\Delta\nu$ (black diamonds) and the $r_i$ integral (white
474: diamonds) of a 2.8M$_\odot$, Z=0.01 test star whose
475: position in the HR diagram is given by the black cross
476: (log(T$_{eff}$)=3.77 \& log(L/L$_{\odot}$)=1.51).
477: The grey diamonds correspond to the models that
478: reproduce both seismic properties with a 5\% accuracy,
479: while the small squares represent models that do not
480: reproduce them.
481: The boxes represent a 1\%$\times$20\% uncertainty
482: region (in log(T$_{eff}$) and log(L/L$_\odot$))
483: around the black crosses.
484: The lines are 2.5 to 4.0M$_\odot$ PMS evolutionary tracks.}
485: \label{figr5}
486: \end{center}
487: \end{figure}
488: %;..........................................................
489:
490: %======================================================TABLE1
491: \begin{table}[htbp]
492: \tabcolsep=1.mm
493: \begin{center}
494: \caption{Models that occupy the same position in the
495: HR diagram and have different seismic characteristics.}
496: \begin{tabular}{ c c c c c c c } \hline \hline
497: M/M$_\odot$ & log(T$_{eff}$) & log(L/L$_\odot$) & Z & age(Myr) &
498: $\Delta\nu$($\mu$Hz) & $r_i$(s$^{-1}$) \\ \hline
499: 2.5 & 3.75 & 1.16 & 0.01 & 1.66 & 27.9 & -366.4 \\ \hline
500: 2.5 & 3.75 & 1.16 & 0.02 & 2.46 & 28.6 & -454.0 \\ \hline
501: \multicolumn{5}{r}{relative difference} & 2.3\% & 19.3\% \\ \hline
502: 2.6 & 3.86 & 1.68 & 0.01 & 2.25 & 24.1 & -762.4 \\ \hline
503: 2.7 & 3.86 & 1.68 & 0.02 & 2.74 & 24.4 & -799.1 \\ \hline
504: \multicolumn{5}{r}{relative difference} & 1.3\% & 4.6\% \\ \hline
505: 2.6 & 4.05 & 1.92 & 0.01 & 2.82 & 53.3 & -1919.7 \\ \hline
506: 3.1 & 4.05 & 1.92 & 0.02 & 2.58 & 59.2 & -1662.3 \\ \hline
507: \multicolumn{5}{r}{relative difference} & 9.5\% & 13.4\% \\ \hline
508: \end{tabular}
509: \label{tab:1}
510: \end{center}
511: \end{table}
512: %%%%%%%=====================================================
513:
514:
515: \noindent diagrams can be used to analyse stars more massive
516: than 1.3M$_\odot$.
517: \noindent On the other hand, the accuracy in individual
518: frequency determination that COROT can achieve is enough
519: to test several PMS evolutionary models.
520: This result supports the study of young solar-type pulsators.
521:
522: In the near future we will analyse the effect that
523: stellar parameters, such as the mixing and the overshooting,
524: have on the seismic properties of low/intermediate mass PMS
525: stars.
526: The seismic properties expected for each model will be
527: estimated u\hbox{sing} the ADIPLS pulsation code
528: (Christensen-Dalsgaard \cite{dalsgaard82}).
529:
530:
531: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
532: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% ACK.
533:
534: \begin{acknowledgements}
535: This work was supported by
536: Funda\c{c}\~{a}o para a Ci\^{e}ncia e a Tecnologia
537: and FEDER (through POCI2010) through
538: project \hbox{POCI/CTE-AST/57610/2004}.
539: I would also like to thank M. Monteiro, J. Fernandes
540: and the anonymous referee for their useful remarks and
541: J. Marques for providing his models.
542: \end{acknowledgements}
543:
544: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
545: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
546: \begin{thebibliography}{99}
547:
548: \bibitem[2005]{antia05} Antia, H.~M., 2005, JApA, 26, 161
549:
550: \bibitem[2006]{antonello06} Antonello, E.,
551: Mantegazza, L., Rainer, M., \& Miglio, A.\ 2006, A\&A, 445, L15
552:
553: \bibitem[2001]{baglin01} Baglin, A., Auvergne, M., Catala, C.,
554: Michel, E., COROT Team, 2001, ESA-SP 464, 395
555:
556: \bibitem[2003]{bedding03} Bedding, T.~R., Kjeldsen, H., 2003, PASA, 20, 203
557:
558: \bibitem[1972]{breger72} Breger, M., 1972, ApJ, 171, 539
559:
560: \bibitem[2004]{browning04} Browning, M.~K., Brun,
561: A.~S., \& Toomre, J.\ 2004, ApJ, 601, 512
562:
563: \bibitem[1982]{dalsgaard82} Christensen-Dalsgaard, J., 1982, MNRAS, 199, 735
564:
565: \bibitem[1983]{dalsgaard83} Christensen-Dalsgaard, J., Frandsen, S.,
566: 1983, SoPh, 82, 469
567:
568: \bibitem[1984]{dalsgaard84} Christensen-Dalsgaard, J., 1984,
569: Space Research in Stellar Activity and Variability, 11
570:
571: \bibitem[1977]{goldreich77} Goldreich, P.,Keeley, D.~A., 1977, ApJ,
572: 212, 243
573:
574: \bibitem[2002]{guenther02} Guenther, D.~B., 2002, ApJ, 569, 911
575:
576: \bibitem[1995]{kjeldsen95} Kjeldsen, H., Bedding, T.~R., 1995, A\&A, 293, 87
577:
578: \bibitem[1998]{marconi98} Marconi, M., Palla, F., 1998, ApJ, 507, L141
579:
580: \bibitem[2004]{marques04} Marques, J.~P., Fernandes, J.,
581: Monteiro, M.~J.~P.~F.~G., 2004, A\&A, 422, 239
582:
583: \bibitem[2006]{mazumdar06} Mazumdar, A., Basu,
584: S., Collier, B.~L., Demarque, P.\ 2006, MNRAS, 372, 949
585:
586: \bibitem[2002]{monteiro02} Monteiro, M.~J.~P.~F.~G.,
587: Christensen-Dalsgaard, J., Thompson, M.~J, 2002,
588: ESA SP-485: Stellar Structure and Habitable Planet Finding,
589: 291-298
590:
591: \bibitem[1997]{morel97} Morel, P., 1997, A\&AS, 124, 597
592:
593: \bibitem[2003]{pinheiro03} Pinheiro, F.~J.~G., Folha, D.~F.~M.,
594: Marconi, M., Ripepi, V., Palla, F., Monteiro, M.~J.~P.~F.~G.,
595: Bernabei, S., 2003, A\&A, 399, 271-274
596:
597: \bibitem[2006]{pinheiro06} Pinheiro, F.~J.~G., 2006,
598: 2005: Past Meets Present in Astronomy and Astrophysics, 23
599:
600: \bibitem[2004]{ripepi04} Ripepi, V., Marconi, M., 2004,
601: ESA SP-538: Stellar Structure and Habitable Planet Finding, 397
602:
603: \bibitem[2007]{ripepi07} Ripepi, V., Bernabei, S., Marconi, M.,
604: Ruoppo, A., Palla, F., Monteiro, M.~J.~P.~F.~G., Marques, J.~P.,
605: Ferrara, P., Marinoni, S., Terranegra, L., 2006, A\&A, 462, 1023
606:
607: \bibitem[2003]{roxburgh03} Roxburgh, I.~W., Vorontsov, S.~V.,
608: 2003, A\&A, 411, 215
609:
610: \bibitem[2001]{samadi01} Samadi, R., Goupil, M.-J., 2001, \aap, 370, 136
611:
612: \bibitem[2005]{samadi05} Samadi, R., Goupil, M.-J., Alecian, E., Baudin,
613: F., Georgobiani, D., Trampedach, R., Stein, R., Nordlund, {\AA},
614: 2005, JApA, 26, 171
615:
616: \bibitem[1980]{tassoul80} Tassoul, M., 1980, ApJS, 43, 469
617:
618: \end{thebibliography}
619:
620:
621:
622: \end{document}
623: