1: %\documentclass[preprint]{aastex}
2: \documentclass[12pt,preprint]{aastex}
3: \usepackage{emulateapj5}
4: %\usepackage{apjfonts}
5: %\documentclass[12pt,preprint]{aastex}
6: \newcommand{\ms}{\mbox{m\,s$^{-1}$}\,}
7: \newcommand{\cms}{\mbox{cm\,s$^{-1}$}\,}
8: \newcommand{\mss}{\mbox{m${^2}$\,s$^{-2}$}\,}
9: \newcommand{\bhyi}{\mbox{$\beta$~Hyi}}
10: \newcommand{\muher}{\mbox{$\mu$~Her}}
11: \newcommand{\eboo}{\mbox{$\eta$~Boo}}
12: %\newcommand{\note}[1]{{\bf [#1]}}
13: %\newcommand{\note}[1]{{\bf [#1]}}
14: %\newcommand{\Dnu}[1]{\Delta \nu_{#1}}
15: \newcommand{\Dnu}{\Delta \nu}
16: \newcommand{\half}{{\textstyle\frac{1}{2}}}
17: \newcommand{\muHz}{\mbox{$\mu$Hz}}
18: \let\epsilon\varepsilon
19: %\slugcomment{Submitted to ApJ Letters}
20: \shorttitle{Oscillations in $\mu$ Her}
21: \shortauthors{Bonanno et al.}
22: \begin{document}
23:
24: \title{Detection of solar-like oscillations in the G5 subgiant \muher}
25:
26: \author{
27: Alfio Bonanno,\altaffilmark{1}
28: Serena Benatti,\altaffilmark{2}
29: Riccardo Claudi,\altaffilmark{2}
30: Silvano Desidera,\altaffilmark{2}
31: Raffaele Gratton,\altaffilmark{2}
32: Silvio Leccia,\altaffilmark{3}
33: Lucio Patern\`o \altaffilmark{4,1}
34: }
35:
36: \altaffiltext{1}{
37: INAF, Osservatorio Astrofisico di Catania, Via S. Sofia 78, I-95123 Catania,
38: Italy; abo@oact.inaf.it
39: }
40: \altaffiltext{2}{
41: INAF, Osservatorio Astronomico di Padova, Vicolo Osservatorio 5, I-35122 Padova, Italy
42: }
43: \altaffiltext{3}{
44: INAF, Osservatorio Astronomico di Capodimonte, Salita Moiariello 16, I-80131 Napoli,
45: Italy }
46: \altaffiltext{4}{
47: Dipartimento di Fisica ed Astronomia, Universit\`a di Catania,
48: Via S. Sofia 78, I-95123 Catania, Italy}
49: \begin{abstract}
50: A clear detection of excess of power, providing a substantial evidence
51: for solar-like oscillations in the G5 subgiant \muher{}, is presented.
52: This star was observed over seven nights with the SARG echelle spectrograph
53: operating with the 3.6-m Italian TNG Telescope, using an iodine absorption
54: cell as a velocity reference. A clear excess of power
55: centered at 1.2\,mHz, with peak amplitudes of about 0.9\,\ms in the amplitude spectrum
56: is present. Fitting the asymptotic relation to the power spectrum,
57: a mode identification for the $\ell=0,1,2,3$ modes in the frequency range
58: $900-1600\; \muHz$ is derived. The most likely value for the large separation turns
59: out to be 56.5 \muHz, consistent with theoretical expectations.
60: The mean amplitude per mode ($l=0,1$) at peak power results
61: to be $0.63 \;\rm m\,s^{-1}$, almost three times larger than the solar one.
62: \end{abstract}
63:
64: \keywords{stars: individual (\muher) --- stars: oscillations---
65: techniques: radial velocities}
66:
67: \section{Introduction}
68: The search for solar-like oscillations in stars has experienced a tremendous growth
69: in recent years (See \citealt{B+K2006b}, for a summary). Most of the results came
70: from high-precision Doppler measurements using spectrograph such as
71: CORALIE, HARPS, UCLES, UVES.
72: In particular, recent measurements obtained with the SARG spectrograph have led
73: to the determination of frequencies, mode amplitudes, lifetime and granulation
74: noise on Procyon A \citep{cla05,sil07}, a star for which the nature of oscillation
75: spectrum is still debated \citep{natureHD,nature2004}.
76:
77: In this paper we report the detection of excess of power, providing evidence for
78: oscillations, in the G5 subgiant \muher{} (HR~6623, $V=3.417\pm0.014$, G5~IV), a
79: slightly evolved solar-type star with mass $1.1\,M_\sun$,
80: effective temperature $T_{\rm e}=5596 \pm 80 \; \rm K$, and $\rm log \; g = 3.93\pm 0.10$
81: \citep{fu98}.
82:
83: \section{Observations and data reduction}
84: The observations were carried out over seven nights (2006 June 13--19)
85: with the high resolution cross dispersed echelle spectrograph SARG (\citealt{gratton01})
86: mounted on the Italian 3.6m telescope TNG at La Palma observing
87: station. Our spectra were obtained at $R=144,000$ in the wavelength range between 462 and
88: $792\,\rm nm$, where the calibration iodine absorbing cell covers only the blue part of the spectrum
89: (from 462 up to $620\,\rm nm$). Exposure times were typically 60\,s, with a dead-time of 55\,s between
90: exposures due to the readout time. The signal-to-noise ratio for most
91: spectra was in the range from 200 to 400, depending on the seeing and
92: extinction. In total, 1106 spectra were collected, with the following
93: distribution over the seven nights: 27, 106, 183, 186, 180, 226, 198. The first two
94: nights were affected by poor weather and technical problems.
95:
96: The extraction of radial velocities from the echelle spectra was based on the
97: method described by \citet{endl}.
98: The observed spectrum was fitted with a reconstructed one, by
99: using a convolution between the oversampled stellar template,
100: the very high resolution iodine cell spectrum and the measured spectrograph instrumental profile.
101: Essential to this process are the template spectra of \muher{} taken
102: with the iodine cell removed from the beam, and of the
103: iodine cell itself superimposed on a rapidly rotating B-type star, which
104: was the same for all the measurements.
105:
106: The resulting velocity measurements of \muher{} are shown in the lower
107: panel of Fig.~\ref{fig1}. They have been corrected to the solar
108: system barycenter and no other correction, such as
109: decorrelation or high-pass filtering has been applied.
110: The rms scatter of these measurements is 2.53\,\ms
111: and the uncertainties for the velocity measurements were estimated from residuals
112: in the radial velocity extraction procedure and are shown in the upper panel of
113: Figure.~\ref{fig1} where it can be noticed that
114: most lie in the range 1--2\,\ms, except for the second
115: night where technical problems due to the guiding system occurred.
116: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
117: \section{Time series analysis}\label{sec1}
118: The amplitude spectrum of the velocity time series was calculated as a
119: weighted least-squares fit of sinusoids \citep{FJK95,AKN98,BKB2004,KBB2005}, with a weight
120: being assigned to each point according to its uncertainty estimate obtained from
121: the radial velocity measurement.
122: We have then optimized the weight following the approach discussed in
123: \citealt{BBK2004}. This consists in (i)~cleaning all power at low
124: frequencies (below 250\,\muHz) from the time series, as well as all power from oscillations
125: (800--1800\,\muHz); and (ii)~searching these residuals for points that
126: deviated from zero by more than it would be expected from their uncertainties.
127: We found that 20 data points needed to be significantly down-weighted.
128:
129: Fig.~2 shows a pronounced excess of power in the power spectrum (PS)
130: around 1.2\,mHz which is the clear signature of
131: $p$-modes oscillations for a G5 subgiant star. This feature is apparent in the power spectra of
132: individual nights, and its frequency and amplitude are in agreement with
133: theoretical expectations, as we shall discuss.
134: Moreover, it is clearly disentangled from the low frequency increase
135: due to slow instrumental drifts ($1/f$ behavior in the amplitude spectrum) and
136: the high frequency white noise. In particular, we
137: find that the mean noise level in the amplitude spectrum in the range 3--5\,mHz is $\sigma = 0.1$\,\ms
138: which correspond to a mean noise level in the PS of 0.013\,\mss.
139: Since this is based on 1106 measurements, we can deduce
140: %(see \citealt{K+B95,be01})
141: that the velocity accuracy on the corresponding timescales is 1.82\,\ms.
142: %
143: % sigma_amp = sqrt(3.14) RMS(single) / sqrt(number of measurements)
144: % Noise = 0.102
145: %
146: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
147: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
148: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
149: \subsection{Large frequency spacing and oscillation frequencies}
150: The mode frequencies for low-degree, high radial order $p$-mode oscillations
151: in Sun-like stars are reasonably well
152: approximated by the asymptotic relation (\citealt{tassoul}):
153: \begin{equation}
154: \nu(n,l) = \Dnu{} (n + \half l + \epsilon) - l(l+1) \delta\nu_{02}/6
155: \label{uno}
156: \end{equation}
157: where $n$ and $l$ are integers which define the radial order and angular
158: degree of the mode, respectively; $\Dnu{}$ (the so-called large frequency separation)
159: reflects the average stellar density, $\delta\nu_{02}$ is sensitive to the sound speed
160: gradient near the core, and $\epsilon$ is a quantity of the order unity
161: %sensitive to the surface stratitifaction layers.
162: sensitive to the surface layers.
163: Note that $\delta\nu_{02}$ is the so-called small
164: frequency separation between adjacent modes with $l=0$ and $l=2$.
165:
166: On attempting to find the peaks in our power spectrum matching the asymptotic
167: relation, we were severely hampered by the single-site window function. As
168: is well known, daily gaps in a time series produce aliases in the power
169: spectrum at spacings $\pm11.57\,\muHz$ and multiples, which are difficult to disentangle
170: from the genuine peaks. Various methods for the search of regular series of peaks
171: have been discussed in the literature, such as
172: autocorrelation, comb response and histograms of frequencies.
173: We used the comb response function method
174: where a comb response function $CR(\Dnu{})$ is calculated for all sensible
175: values of $\Dnu{}$ (See \citealt{kjeldsen95} for details).
176: In particular we used the following function:
177: \begin{equation} \label{comb}
178: CR(\Dnu{})=\prod_{n=1}^{5}\Big [ PS\big (\nu_{\rm max}\pm \frac{2n-1}{2} \Dnu{} \big)
179: PS\big (\nu_{\rm max} \pm n \Dnu{} \big ) \Big ]^{\frac{1}{2^{n-1}}} \label{cr}
180: %PS(\nu_{\rm max}\pm\frac{n+1}{2}\Dnu{})
181: \end{equation}
182: so that a peak in the $CR$ at a particular value of $\Dnu{}$ indicates the
183: presence of a regular series of peaks in the PS, centered at $\nu_{\rm max}$
184: and having a spacing of $\Dnu{}/2$.
185: It differs from a correlation function as the product of individuals terms is
186: considered rather than the sum. Moreover it
187: generalizes the $CR$ defined in \citet{kjeldsen95} including
188: (and down-weighting) four outermost additional frequencies so that
189: it better detects the presence of a regular series of peaks as we checked in
190: simulated power spectra.
191: %(we also checked
192: %that the standard $CR$ in our set of data led to the same result).
193:
194:
195: %In order to determine the peaks needed to construct the $CR$ we
196: %first extracted the frequencies of the strongest peaks in the power spectrum
197: %in the range $800-1800 \, \mu\rm Hz$ by using an iterative algorithm, in
198: %which the highest peak was identified and the corresponding sinusoidal
199: %variation was subtracted from the time series.
200: To reduce the uncertainties due to the noise, only frequencies
201: with amplitude greater than $4\,\sigma$ in the amplitude spectrum,
202: in the frequency range $800-1800 \, \mu\rm Hz$,
203: have been used to compute the $CR$ \label{cr}.
204: We then determined the local maxima of the response function $CR(\Dnu{})$
205: in the range $40 \leq \Dnu{} \leq 80\; \rm \mu Hz$ and
206: the resulting cumulative comb response function,
207: obtained by summing the contributions of all the response functions,
208: had the most prominent peak at $57 \rm \mu Hz$ as shown in Fig.~3.
209:
210: The large separation $\Dnu{}$ scales approximately with the square root of
211: the mean density of the star (\citealt{cox}) and by extrapolating from the solar case
212: ($\Dnu{}=134.8 \; \muHz$; see \citealt{be07}) one obtains
213: %$\Dnu{} = (M/M_\sun)^{1/2}(L/L_\sun)^{-3/4} (T/T_\sun)^3 \Delta\nu_\sun = 55\,\pm 4\muHz $
214: $\Dnu{} = (M/M_\sun)^{1/2}(R/R_\sun)^{-3/2} \; \Delta\nu_\sun = 59 \,\pm 4\muHz $
215: where the error derives from the uncertainties on the radius quoted
216: in \citet{fu98}. Since we searched over the entire range
217: 40--80\,\muHz, the agreement between observation and theory is encouraging.
218:
219: We tried to extract the oscillation frequencies directly from the PS
220: by using the modified extraction method described in \citet{kjeldsen95}
221: and recently used in \cite{sil07}: for each frequency $\nu_{\rm max}$ extracted in the step before,
222: a frequency region of $2\,\rm\mu Hz$ width centered
223: on $\nu_{\rm max}\pm n \; 57\,\rm\mu Hz$, with $n=1,...$ was selected.
224: When this region contained a peak with an amplitude greater or equal than
225: $3\,\sigma$ in the amplitude spectrum we identified this peak as the second
226: component to be cleaned, and recomputed the PS for each $n$.
227: The advantage of using this approach is that the extracted frequencies are determined
228: except for the same day-night alias shift for each group of frequencies
229: extracted during the procedure.
230: In order to identify the individual frequencies of the modes we then constructed echelle diagrams
231: corresponding to values of the large separation around $57\, \rm\mu Hz$, so that we could
232: easily identify the ridges of the $\ell =0$ and then those of $\ell =1,2,3$.
233:
234: It is important to see if there are additional frequencies, not following the comb-like structure, which where not found with the modified extraction. We thus analyzed the spectrum
235: of the residuals obtained with the modified extraction,
236: as shown in the upper panel of Fig.~4, and we found 5 additional frequencies with amplitude
237: $ \geq 3\,\sigma$ namely,
238: $\nu_1 =1133.6 \; \rm \mu Hz$;
239: $\nu_2 =1580.5 \; \rm \mu Hz$;
240: $\nu_3 =1387.1 \; \rm \mu Hz$;
241: $\nu_4 =1172.9 \; \rm \mu Hz$ and
242: $\nu_5 =1045.6 \; \rm \mu Hz$.
243: These frequencies can be of stellar origin but can also be spurious peaks due to the noise
244: or due to the non-linearity of the extraction procedure.
245: On the other hand it is possible to note that that $\nu_4$ can be
246: identified with an $l=3, n=18$ mode and $\nu_5-11.57=1034.03$ can be identified with a
247: $l=2, n=16$ mode.
248: The left panel of Table~1 shows the identified frequencies according with the modified
249: extraction. It should be noticed that although we define a peak to be significant
250: if its amplitude is greater or equal than $3\,\sigma$ in the amplitude spectrum, in Table~1
251: we have included one frequency with amplitude $2.9 \, \sigma$ as this frequency appears
252: also with the standard extraction method (see below) and with an higher signal to noise
253: ratio.
254:
255: The large and small frequency separation and the constant $\epsilon$
256: have thus been determined by means of a least square best fit with
257: the asymptotic relation (\ref{uno}) for all the identified modes by means of the modified extraction,
258: which provided us with: $\Dnu{} = 56.46 \pm 0.11 \; \mu \rm Hz$,
259: $\delta\nu_0 = 5.22 \pm 0.81 \; \mu \rm Hz$ and $\epsilon=1.46\pm 0.05$.
260: The expected position of the modes according to this solution is depicted
261: with dashed lines in the left panel of Figure~5 while
262: %for the modified extraction and
263: %$\Dnu{} = 56.78 \pm 0.13 \; \mu \rm Hz$,
264: %$\delta\nu_0 = 5.0 \pm 1.40 \; \mu \rm Hz$ and $\epsilon=1.34\pm 0.056$
265: %for the standard extraction.
266: Figure~6 shows a close-up of the power spectrum with the identified
267: frequencies according with the modified extraction.
268:
269: As deviations from Eq.~(1) could be expected for $\ell \not = 0 $
270: in the case of avoided crossings (\citealt{ASW77}), it is important to
271: check that the standard iterative sine-wave fitting leads to a consistent identification.
272: We thus extracted iteratively all the frequencies with amplitude greater than $3\, \sigma$
273: and tried to construct an echelle diagram by searching in the range $50-60 \; \mu \rm Hz$.
274: It turned out that only with $\Dnu \approx 57$ it was possible to clearly see the
275: ridge corresponding to $\ell=0$. It was then straightforward to identify the $\ell=1,2,3$ mode,
276: except for two frequencies, namely
277: $\nu_1 =1112.0 \; \rm \mu Hz$,
278: $\nu_2 =1596.6 \; \rm \mu Hz$
279: which could not be identified. The PS of the
280: residuals in shown in the lower panel of Fig.~4
281: while the resulting echelle diagram is depicted in the right panel of Fig.~5.
282:
283: A synoptic view of the extracted frequencies with the two methods is then presented in Table~1
284: where the frequencies extracted according with the modified extraction (left)
285: are compared with those obtained with the standard extraction (right).
286: It is reassuring to notice that 11 frequencies have the same identification in
287: both approaches. In particular the identification of the $\ell=0$
288: ridge appears to be quite robust, and indeed one can see in Fig.~5
289: that the echelle diagrams obtained
290: with the modified extraction (left) and the standard extraction (right)
291: are essentially the same; this result suggests that we have correctly detected the large separation
292: in this star.
293:
294: In Table~1 the error on frequencies is reported in parentheses.
295: In particular we have used the analytical estimates
296: %\begin{equation}
297: %\sigma(a)=\sqrt{\frac{2}{N}} \; \sigma(v)\simeq 0.1 \; {\rm m/s}, \;\;\;\;
298: %\sigma(\nu) = \sqrt{\frac{6}{N}}\; \frac{1}{\pi T} \; \frac{\sigma(v)}{a}
299: %\simeq \frac{0.1}{a_{m/s}} \; \mu \rm Hz
300: %\end{equation}
301:
302: \begin{eqnarray}
303: &&\sigma(a)=\sqrt{\frac{2}{N}} \; \sigma(v)\simeq 0.1 \; {\rm m/s}, \nonumber\\
304: &&\sigma(\nu) = \sqrt{\frac{6}{N}}\; \frac{1}{\pi T} \; \frac{\sigma(v)}{a}
305: \simeq \frac{0.1}{a_{m/s}} \; \mu \rm Hz
306: \end{eqnarray}
307:
308: \citep{mgn}
309: where $N=1106$ is the number of data points, $T=6.25$ is the total duration of the run in
310: days and $\sigma(v) = \langle \sigma_v \rangle$ is the mean error of the data.
311: %(mean error of the residual measurements).
312: Note that $\sigma(a)$ represents the noise of the amplitude spectrum after pre-withening
313: and $\sigma(a)/a$ is the inverse of the $S/N$ ratio. However
314: the errors given by these formulae represent a lower limit to the real
315: error \citep{mgn}. In particular the actual errors can be several times larger up to a factor
316: $\approx 10$ (note that the formal resolution is $1.8 \rm \; \mu Hz$).
317:
318: The large and small frequency separation and the constant $\epsilon$
319: have thus been determined by means of a least square best fit with
320: the asymptotic relation (\ref{uno}) for all the identified modes,
321: which provided us with: $\Dnu{} = 56.50 \pm 0.07 \; \mu \rm Hz$,
322: $\delta\nu_0 = 5.03 \pm 0.94 \; \mu \rm Hz$ and $\epsilon=1.44\pm 0.03$.
323: The expected position of the modes according to this solution is depicted
324: with dashed lines in Figure~4.
325: Figure~5 shows a close-up of the power spectrum with the identified
326: frequencies according with the modified extraction.
327: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
328: \subsection{Oscillation amplitudes}
329: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
330: The strongest peaks in the amplitude spectrum of \muher{} (square root of
331: power) reach about 0.9\,\ms. However, these are likely to have been
332: strengthened significantly by constructive interference with noise peaks.
333: As stressed by \citet{K+B95} the effects of the noise must
334: be taken into account when estimating the amplitude of the underlying
335: signal. In order to estimate the average amplitude of the modes we used the
336: result of \citet{K+B95} (see also \citealt{KBB2005} ), where the effect of the noise
337: is estimated. By considering the five strongest peaks
338: we found a mean amplitude of the $p$-mode peak power,
339: for the modes with $l=0,1$ in the frequency interval $0.8-1.6\,\rm mHz$,
340: of $(63.14\pm 3.0)\,\rm cm\,s^{-1}$. The observed amplitudes
341: are thus in good agreement with the theoretical amplitudes obtained
342: by \citet{K+B95} for which $v_{\rm osc}
343: = (L/L_\odot)/(M/M_\odot) \; (23.4\pm 1.4) \; \rm cm \;s^{-1} = (69.50\pm 4.1) \; \rm cm\;s^{-1}$
344: (see also the discussion by \citealt{Hou2006}).
345: We also note that the frequency of excess of power
346: (1.2\,mHz) is consistent with the value expected
347: from scaling the acoustic cutoff from the solar case.
348: %\citep[][KB95]{BGN91}.
349:
350: \section{Conclusion}
351: Our observations of \muher{} show an evident excess of power in the PS, clearly
352: disentangled from the low frequency increase, and with a position and amplitude that are
353: in agreement with expectations. Although hampered by the single-site
354: window, the comb analysis and the echelle diagram show clear evidence for regularity in the
355: peaks at the spacing expected from asymptotic theory.
356: Moreover, our results provide valuable confirmation
357: that oscillations in solar-like stars really do have the amplitudes that
358: scales as $L/M$ by extrapolating from the Sun.
359: We hope that in the near future a multi-site observing campaign
360: will allow us to explore further the oscillation spectrum of \muher.
361:
362: \acknowledgments
363: We would like to thank Tim Bedding and Antonio Frasca
364: for important suggestions and encouragements.
365: This work was supported financially by the INAF grant ``PRIN - 2006".
366:
367: \begin{thebibliography}{99}
368: \expandafter\ifx\csname natexlab\endcsname\relax\def\natexlab#1{#1}\fi
369: \expandafter\ifx\csname url\endcsname\relax
370: \def\url#1{{\tt #1}}\fi
371:
372: \bibitem[{Aizenman} et~al.(1977){Aizenman}, {Smeyers}, \& {Weigert}]{ASW77}
373: {Aizenman}, M., {Smeyers}, P., \& {Weigert}, A., 1977, A\&A, 58, 41
374:
375: \bibitem[Arentoft et~al.(1998)Arentoft, Kjeldsen, Nuspl, Bedding, Fronto,
376: Viskum, Frandsen, \& Belmonte]{AKN98}
377: Arentoft, T., Kjeldsen, H., Nuspl, J., Bedding, T.~R., Fronto, A., Viskum, M.,
378: Frandsen, S., \& Belmonte, J.~A., 1998, A\&A, 338, 909
379:
380: \bibitem[{Bedding et al.(2007)}]{be07}
381: {Bedding}, T.~R. {Kjeldsen}, H. {Arentoft}, et al.
382: astro-ph/0703747
383:
384: \bibitem[{Bedding et al.(1996)}]{B+K96}
385: Bedding, T. R., Kjeldsen, H., Reetz, J., \& Barbuy, B. 1996, MNRAS 280, 1155
386: %
387: \bibitem[{Bedding} \& {Kjeldsen}(2006)]{B+K2006b}
388: {Bedding}, T.~R., \& {Kjeldsen}, H., 2006, In Fletcher, K., editor, {\em Beyond
389: the Spherical Sun: a new era in helio-and asteroseismology, Proc. SOHO
390: 18/GONG 2006/HelAS I}, SP-624, 25 and
391: \newblock astro-ph/0609770
392:
393: \bibitem[Bedding et~al.(2001)]{be01}
394: {Bedding}, T.~R., {Butler}, R.~P., {Kjeldsen}, H.,
395: {Baldry}, I.~K., {O'Toole}, S.~J., {Tinney}, C.~G.,
396: {Marcy}, G.~W., {Kienzle}, F. and {Carrier}, F.,
397: 2001, ApJ, 105, L594L
398:
399: \bibitem[Butler et~al.(2004)Butler, Bedding, Kjeldsen, McCarthy, O'Toole,
400: Tinney, Marcy, \& Wright]{BBK2004}
401: Butler, R.~P., Bedding, T.~R., Kjeldsen, H., McCarthy, C., O'Toole, S.~J.,
402: Tinney, C.~G., Marcy, G.~W., \& Wright, J.~T., 2004, ApJ, 600, L75
403:
404: \bibitem[{Claudi et al.(2005)}]{cla05}
405: Claudi, R. U., Bonanno, A., Leccia, S., et al. 2005, A\&A 429, L17
406:
407: \bibitem[{Christensen-Dalsgaard \& Kjeldsen(2004)}]{natureHD}
408: Christensen-Dalsgaard, J. Kjeldsen, H., Nature, 2004, 430, 29
409:
410: \bibitem[{Cox, 1981}]{cox}
411: Cox, J.P., {\it Theory of Stellar Pulsations}, Princeton UP, 1981, New Jersey
412:
413: \bibitem[{Endl et al.(2000)}]{endl}
414: Endl et al. 2000, A\&A 362, 585
415:
416: \bibitem[Frandsen et~al.(1995)Frandsen, Jones, Kjeldsen, Viskum, Hjorth,
417: Andersen, \& Thomsen]{FJK95}
418: Frandsen, S., Jones, A., Kjeldsen, H., Viskum, M., Hjorth, J., Andersen, N.~H.,
419: \& Thomsen, B., 1995, A\&A, 301, 123
420:
421: \bibitem[Fuhrmann(1998)]{fu98}
422: Fuhrmann, K., 1998, A\&A 338, 161
423:
424: \bibitem[{Gratton et al.(2001)}]{gratton01}
425: Gratton, R., Bonanno, G., Bruno, P., et al. 2001, Exp. Astron., 12, 107
426:
427: \bibitem[{Leccia et al.(2007)}]{sil07}
428: Leccia, S., Kjeldsen, H., Bonanno, A. et al. 2007, A\&A 464, 1059
429:
430: \bibitem[Bedding et~al.(2004)]{BKB2004}
431: Bedding, T.~R., Kjeldsen, H., Butler, R.~P., McCarthy, C., Marcy, G.~W.,
432: O'Toole, S.~J., Tinney, C.~G., \& Wright, J.~T., 2004, ApJ, 614, 380
433:
434: \bibitem[Houdek (2006)]{Hou2006}
435: {Houdek}, G., 2006, In Fletcher, K., editor, {\em Beyond the Spherical Sun: a
436: new era in helio-and asteroseismology, Proc. SOHO 18/GONG 2006/HelAS I},
437: SP-624, ~28 and
438: \newblock astro-ph/0612024
439: %
440: \bibitem[{Kjeldsen et al.(1995)}]{kjeldsen95}
441: Kjeldsen, H., Bedding, T. R., Viskum, M., \& Frandsen, S. 1995, AJ 109, 1313
442:
443: \bibitem[{Kjeldsen \& Bedding(1995)}]{K+B95}
444: Kjeldsen, H., \& Bedding, T.~R., 1995, A\&A, 293, 87
445: %
446: \bibitem[Kjeldsen et~al.(2005)] {KBB2005}
447: Kjeldsen, H., et al. 2005, ApJ, 635, 1281
448:
449: \bibitem[Montgomery and O'Donoghue(1991)]{mgn}
450: Montgomery, M.H., D.O'Donoghue 1991, DSSN, 13, 28
451:
452: \bibitem[Tassoul(1980)]{tassoul}
453: Tassoul, M., 1980, ApJS, 43, 469
454:
455: \bibitem[Matthews et~al.(2004)]{nature2004}
456: {Matthews}, J.~M., {Kusching}, R., {Guenther}, D.~B.,
457: {Walker}, G.~A.~H., {Moffat}, A.~F.~J., {Rucinski}, S.~M.,
458: {Sasselov}, D.;{Weiss}, W.~W. , 2004,
459: Nature, 430, 51
460: \end{thebibliography}
461:
462: %\clearpage
463:
464: %
465: % total days = 6.25
466: %
467: % error = (sqrt(3)/T/Pi)*(N/S) = 0.1/Amp (m/sec) \muHz
468:
469: \begin{table*}
470: \begin{center}
471: \caption{\label{tab.freqs}Oscillation frequencies in \muher{}
472: for the modified extraction (left) and standard extraction (right)}
473: \begin{tabular}{rcl|lccl}
474: \tableline
475: \noalign{\smallskip}
476: %
477: %modified & & & standard & & \\
478: %
479: \tableline
480: (\muHz) & S/N & \sc Mode ID & (\muHz) & S/N & \sc Mode ID \\
481: \noalign{\smallskip}
482: \tableline
483: \noalign{\smallskip}
484: 985.5(0.2) & 5.3 & $l= 0$, $n=16$ & 985.6(0.2) & 4.9 & $l= 0$, $n=16$ \\
485: 1100.4(0.3) & 3.8 & $l= 0$, $n=18$ & & & \\
486: 1211.2(0.1) & 9.1 & $l= 0$, $n=20$ & 1211.2(0.1) & 9.1 & $l= 0$, $n=20$ \\
487: 1268.7(0.3) & 3.1 & $l= 0$, $n=21$ & & & \\
488: 1323.2(0.3) & 2.9 & $l= 0$, $n=22$ & 1323.4(0.3) & 3.5 & $l= 0$, $n=22$ \\
489: 1437.6(0.3) & 3.5 & $l= 0$, $n=24$ & 1437.8(0.2) =1426.1+11.6 & 5.3 & $l= 0$, $n=24$ \\
490: & & & 1608.2(0.3) =1596.6+11.6 & 3.3 & $l= 0$, $n=27$ \\
491: 1125.1(0.2) & 4.1 & $l= 1$, $n=18$ & 1124.8(0.1) =1136.4-11.6 & 6.9 & $l= 1$, $n=18$ \\
492: 1180.0(0.2) & 4.2 & $l= 1$, $n=19$ & 1180.0(0.2) =1192.4-11.6 & 5.0 & $l=1$, $n=19$ \\
493: 1238.9(0.3) & 3.8 & $l= 1$, $n=20$ & & & \\
494: 1296.4(0.3) & 3.0 & $l= 1$, $n=21$ & & & \\
495: 1351.9(0.2) & 4.4 & $l= 1$, $n=22$ & 1352.1(0.2) & 4.7 & $l= 1$, $n=22$ \\
496: 1034.0(0.2) & 3.2 & $l=2$, $n=16$ & 1034.3(0.3) =1045.9-11.6 & 3.3 & $l= 2$, $n=16$ \\
497: & & & 1205.6(0.3) & 3.2 & $l= 2$, $n=19$ \\
498: & & & 1375.4(0.3)=1387.0-11.6 & 3.4 & $l= 2$, $n=22$ \\
499: 947.6(0.2) & 4.0 & $l= 3$, $n=14$ & 947.5(0.3) & 3.9 & $l= 3$, $n=14$ \\
500: 1061.0(0.2) & 4.0 & $l= 3$, $n=16$ & 1061.2(0.3) & 3.9 & $l= 3$, $n=16$ \\
501: 1173.0(0.3) & 3.2 & $l=3$, $n=18$ & 1172.9(0.3) & 3.1 & $l= 3$, $n=18$ \\
502: & & & 1285.1(0.2) & 5.1 & $l= 3$, $n=20$ \\
503: & & & 1569.2(0.3) & 3.5 & $l= 3$, $n=25$ \\
504: \noalign{\smallskip}
505: \tableline
506: \end{tabular}
507: \end{center}
508: \end{table*}
509:
510: %
511: % total days = 6.25
512: %
513: % error = (sqrt(3)/T/Pi)*(N/S) = 0.1/Amp \muHz
514:
515: %\begin{table*}
516: %\begin{center}
517: %\caption{\label{tab.freqs}Oscillation frequencies in \muher{}
518: %with frequency errors and amplitudes errors.}
519: %\begin{tabular}{rcl}
520: %\tableline
521: %\noalign{\smallskip}
522: %\tableline
523: %(\muHz) & Amplitude $\ms$ \\
524: %\noalign{\smallskip}
525: %\tableline
526: %\noalign{\smallskip}
527: % 1211.16 $\pm$0.01 & 0.91 $\pm$0.1 & \\
528: % 1136.36 $\pm$0.01 & 0.69 $\pm$0.1 & \\
529: % 1425.80 $\pm$0.02 & 0.53 $\pm$0.1 & \\
530: % 1192.39 $\pm$0.02 & 0.50 $\pm$0.1 & \\
531: % 1351.28 $\pm$0.02 & 0.47 $\pm$0.1 & \\
532: % 985.61 $\pm$0.02 & 0.48 $\pm$0.1 & \\
533: % 947.58 $\pm$0.02 & 0.40 $\pm$0.09 & \\
534: % 1061.10 $\pm$0.02 & 0.40 $\pm$0.1 & \\
535: % 1323.45 $\pm$0.03 & 0.35 $\pm$0.1 & \\
536: % 1045.91 $\pm$0.03 & 0.32 $\pm$0.1 & \\
537: % 1172.92 $\pm$0.03 & 0.30 $\pm$0.1 & \\
538: %\noalign{\smallskip}
539: %\tableline
540: %\end{tabular}
541: %\end{center}
542: %\end{table*}
543:
544:
545: %\clearpage
546:
547: \begin{figure*}
548: \epsscale{.8}
549: %\plotone{figures/ucles-time-err.epsi}
550: \plotone{f1.eps}
551: \caption[]{\label{fig1}Velocity measurements of \muher{}
552: obtained with SARG (lower panel) and the corresponding uncertainties
553: (upper panel).}
554: \end{figure*}
555:
556: \begin{figure*}
557: \epsscale{1}
558: \plotone{f2.eps}
559: \caption[]{\label{fig2} Power spectrum of the SARG velocity
560: measurement of \muher{} with the spectral window (in the inset). }
561: \end{figure*}
562:
563: \begin{figure*}
564: \epsscale{.4}
565: \plotone{f3.eps}
566: \caption[]{\label{fig3} CR function of the power spectrum of the \muher{} data.
567: }
568: \end{figure*}
569:
570:
571: \begin{figure*}
572: \epsscale{.9}
573: \plotone{f6.eps}
574: \caption[]{\label{fig4}
575: The power spectrum of the residuals obtained with the modified extraction
576: (upper panel) and with the standard extraction (lower panel).
577: The dot-dashed and the dashed lines indicate $4\,\sigma$
578: and $3\,\sigma$ respectively.
579: }
580: \end{figure*}
581:
582: \begin{figure*}
583: \epsscale{.8}
584: \plotone{f4.eps}
585: \caption[]{\label{fig5} Echelle diagram for the extracted frequencies for the modified
586: extraction (right) and standard extraction (left). Squares, crosses, rhomboes, triangles
587: are for $\ell=0,1,2,3$ respectively. The dashed vertical lines represent the position
588: of the $\ell=0,1,2,3$ modes according to our fit of the asymptotic relation.
589: }
590: \end{figure*}
591:
592:
593: \begin{figure*}
594: \epsscale{.9}
595: \plotone{f5.eps}
596: \caption[]{\label{fig6} Close-up of the spectrum of \muher{} with the
597: identified frequencies. Dotted lines are the day-night aliases.
598: }
599: \end{figure*}
600:
601:
602: %
603: \end{document}
604:
605:
606: