![]() | ![]() |
Astron. Astrophys. 341, 768-783 (1999) 4. Details of the equivalent width method4.1. Selection of spectral linesFe i lines in the range from 5260 to 9240 Å were selected according to the following criteria:
Lines free of blends were chosen from a visual inspection of the
spectrum of the sharp-lined K3 V star HD 16160 and checked by
comparison with the atlas of the solar spectrum by Moore et al.
(1966). We thus found about 60 lines usable for HD 16160, but many
lines were excluded later in the following reduction process. Some
were excluded because of a large deviation (more than
Table 2. Compilation of all Fe i lines finally used. All values describing the line transitions are taken or calculated from the Fe i multiplet tables by Nave et al. (1994). We give wavelength, Rowland multiplet number R, effective Landé factor 4.2. Effective
|
![]() |
Fig. 2. Empirical curves of growth obtained for 85 solar Fe i lines. ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Table 3. Results from the equivalent width method. Beside the apparent filling factor , the constant
of Eq. 7 is given.
is the maximum correlation coefficient following from the linear regression, N is the number of suitable lines per star. For each spectral type we list
as expected from the statistical relations by de Jager & Nieuwenhuijzen (1987) assuming Luminosity Class V for the T Tauri stars, followed by the effective temperature of the applied model atmosphere
. The next two columns list the mean excitation temperature of the Fe i lines obtained from the empirical curve of growth before and after correcting the measured EWs for the expected magnetic intensification. The last column gives the ratio of the scatter of the curve of growth after to before the correction. As this value is larger than one for UX Tau A, we are thus cautious about the result for this star. For LkCa 16 the number of lines with a high sensitivity to the magnetic field is rather small.
In order to measure the EWs in the same way in the template and the
T Tauri stars, we broaden the spectra of the template stars to the
same as that of the T Tauri
stars. Solar Fe i lines were chosen from the solar atlas by Moore et
al. (1966) in such a way that no blends are expected for the broader
lines of the nonmagnetic G2 template star
(
= 10 km/s). For the T Tauri stars
we use values derived for the appropriate template star which is
for LkCa 16 and
for all the other (classical)
T Tauri stars.
Our procedure has two advantages. Firstly, it allows us to exclude
lines with unusually large residuals compared with the mean scatter
around the final curve of growth, especially lines for which the
applied radiative transfer code is not fully compatible. Secondly, it
is possible to calculate empirical
-values for a (not too large) number
of lines were no values have be measured in the laboratory. Since the
correction of the
-values compensates
for any uncertainties of the atmosphere model, we compute these
corrections separately for all of our three template stars of
different spectral type (Table 2). The mean difference between
the corrected and the laboratory values is in the same range as the
mean difference obtained by Basri et al. (1992)
(
dex) for their LTE atmosphere. The
corrections for the Fe i lines we get for the K3 star HD 16160 also
correspond very well to the corrections applied by these authors on
the basis of their measured EWs of Fe i lines in the G8 V star
61 UMa.
Fig. 2 shows the empirical curves of growth obtained with our
method for the EWs from the solar atlas by Moore et al. (1966). Since
EWs are given for the centre of the solar disk, we did not integrate
over the disk in this case but calculated the EWs for the disk centre.
For the Fe i lines we find a mean excitation temperature of 5310 K for
the Sun using the corrected -values
and 5790 K using the laboratory
-values. The internal accuracy of our
temperature determination is of about
K. As expected, the derived
excitation temperature is quite different from the effective
temperature of the Sun. In contrast to
, the excitation temperature
describes the mean temperature in the layers of the photosphere were
the Fe i lines are generated, rather than the continuum temperature of
the photosphere. Since the lines arise from smaller optical depths
than the continuum, the excitation temperatures is generally lower
than
. A commonly used value for the
excitation temperature of solar lines is 5140 K, as given by Cowley
& Cowley (1964). The authors derived this temperature from a
composite curve of growth for lines of seven elements based on the
oscillator strengths taken from Corliss & Bozman (1962). The
agreement between the excitation temperature which we derive and the
excitation temperature given by Cowley & Cowley (1964) is clearly
better if we use the corrected
-values instead of the uncorrected,
laboratory
-values. The corrections
to the
-values thus seem to be
realistic. The effective temperatures of our model atmospheres, on the
other hand, have been chosen according to the spectral types of the
stars and have not been derived from the obtained Fe i excitation
temperatures, since the relation between both temperatures is not very
well known for all spectral types. In Table 3 we give, for each
star,
according to its spectral
type, the effective temperature
adopted in the model atmosphere calculations, and the derived Fe i
excitation temperature
.
We used a program by Staude (1982), which is based on a polarized
radiative transfer code which calculates the line profiles for all 4
Stokes parameters under the influence of a magnetic field (given field
strength B, inclination to the line-of-sight
, and azimuth) for given spectral
line properties (defined by parameters such as oscillator strength,
quantum numbers of the transition, possible non-LTE effects, and
blends with other lines). The depth dependence of all quantities is
also taken into account. The program, originally developed for the
investigation of solar magnetic fields, computes intensities arising
from a single point on the stellar surface. Opacities are also
calculated by using the program by Staude (1982), LTE model
atmospheres are taken from the Kurucz 9 program. Assuming a model
atmosphere with fixed
,
and microturbulence the program
computes the line profiles
, where
describes a radially symmetric
geometry, described below. To obtain the EWs we have to integrate over
the stellar disk, taking limb darkening into account. Results depend
on the particular Zeeman pattern of each line as well as on the
assumed surface geometry and strength of the magnetic field.
For simplicity we consider a two-component model atmosphere
consisting of regions with and without magnetic fields, and we assume
that each of the surface elements contains the same amount of regions
with magnetic field, and of regions which are field free. The
effective temperatures of these two regions can differ. The fraction
of the surface covered by the field is given by the filling factor
f. (This symbol f represents a different quantity from
that for oscillator strength which is used in
.) The two-component atmosphere
allows a time-saving integration over the stellar disk assuming radial
symmetry and, as shown below, it is sufficient to compute the line
profiles for f = 1.
The magnetic enhancement of a spectral line depends on the
orientation of the magnetic field. For a given field strength, the
increase in EW for a transverse field
( =
) is much stronger than for a
longitudinal field (
=
) (Fig. 3). In some cases authors
treating the two component model atmosphere assumed a mean inclination
of the field of
(e.g. Marcy 1982,
Gray 1984, Bopp et al. 1989). However, as various geometries may lead
to different values for
, a more
thoroughly discussion is needed.
![]() |
Fig. 3. Calculated magnetic intensification of EWs for different line transitions. ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
For a magnetic dipole would be
between
and
, depending on the orientation of the
dipole axis to the observer. More complex fields often result in a
mean inclination in this range. Pillet et al. (1997), for example
investigated the magnetic structure of solar plage regions. They found
that the magnetic field vector is orientated almost vertical to the
solar surface throughout the solar disk. If we assume a limb darkening
coefficient of
= 1.5
2, the mean
inclination of such a radial field observed in integrated light is
about
. We thus conclude that a mean
inclination of the field in integrated light differing from
by more than
can only be possible if the field is
entirely confined to a few large spots. In order to avoid any
prejudice on the geometry of the fields we prefer to leave
as a free parameter, and we
calculate a grid of EWs for all reasonable values of
and B.
To take limb darkening into account, we integrate over the stellar surface dividing the disk into rings of equal area and compute the mean intensity profile of each ring. After the summation of all contributions the result is normalised to the sum of all continuum contributions.
Let represent the intensity
profile of a line arising from a field-free region and
the intensity profile arising from a
region with a field B of inclination
, and
and
the corresponding continuum
intensities. We further define the mean ratio of the continuum
intensities arising from the magnetic regions, and from the
non-magnetic regions as
The factor represents the
differences between the atmospheres of the magnetic and non-magnetic
regions of the star (effective temperature etc) for the line i.
We designate the ratio of the calculated EWs,
, for a field free region to the
measured EWs,
, for an (assumed field
free) template star as
The factor represents our limited
ability to model line i in the atmosphere with no magnetic
field. The EW of absorption line i from the field free and
field regions are respectively (to avoid cumbersome notation we omit
the subscript i in the following equations)
For the two-component model of a T Tauri star, with filling factor
f for magnetic regions, the EW, with no veiling for the present
(as indicated by the superscript ),
is
If we assume and
to be constant over a single line,
integration of Eq. (5) and substitution according to Eqs. (1) to (4)
gives
We define the line veiling v as the ratio of the veiling
intensity to the continuum
intensity
(for simplicity we assume here that the veiling v is
constant over the spectral range used, so that the veiling for the
ith line is ; a more general
discussion is given in Sect. 6.3)
We take into account any continuum veiling (which we assume applies
equally to the magnetic and non-magnetic regions) by multiplying both
sides of Eq. (6) by to give the
ratio of the (veiled) EW
to
where
and
If our line transfer calculations were perfect then
would be 1 for all lines i,
and in an idealised case there would be no difference between the
atmospheres of the magnetic and non-magnetic regions of template star
and then
would be 1 for all lines
i. Then (if there were no veiling) we would have
and
. In general the filling factor
f is related to
and
by
from which it is clear that f can determined from
independent of the veiling, at
least for the case that the veiling is not wavelength dependent. In
Sect. 6.3 we will discuss the implication if the veiling is
wavelength-dependent.
From our simple model it is also clear that our determination of
the true filling factor depends somewhat on the differences in the
atmospheres in the magnetic and field-free regions
(). As we cannot be sure of the
precise value of
we define an
apparent filling factor
which equals the true filling factor f only if
. The relation between f and
is
The assumptions are very rough, but are a first step to account for
differences in the atmospheres of magnetic and non-magnetic regions.
In fact the quantities ,
, and
are wavelength dependent and so are
the
and
. We use linear regression according
to Eq. (7) to find the average values of
and
.
The two-component atmosphere model has a computational advantage in
that to use Eq. (7) for the determination of the magnetic field
parameters it is obviously sufficient to calculate from the line
transfer code a grid of , so we do
not have to take different filling factors into account in our
radiative transfer computations.
The magnetic intensification of the EWs affects the position of the
curve of growth. In the range of of
the T Tauri stars the EWs of the Fe I lines
increase with decreasing temperature, so the magnetic enhancement will
shift the curve of growth to larger EWs and lower temperatures. In
other words, the apparent excitation temperature of a magnetic star
obtained from the curve of growth according to Sect. 4.2 can be much
lower than the true excitation temperature. To verify this, we
computed `zero field' EWs of the T Tauri stars trying to remove the
calculated magnetic intensification effects from the observed
. This we can do by using Eq. (8)
for
and subtracting the
contribution from the magnetic regions
(
) and replacing it with the
equivalent contribution from the
regions (
) we find:
So, after determining the optimised parameters
and
from a linear regression using
Eq. (7), we compute the `zero field' EWs from Eq. (11) and obtain the
true excitation temperature from a new empirical curve of growth. This
method is very useful for estimating the effects of the magnetic field
on the spectral type determined from line strengths and for choosing
the right atmosphere model and the right template stars for our
method.
On the other hand, one could use Eq. (11) directly to minimise the
scatter of the curve of growth by optimising the parameters
and
. Compared to the method of a linear
regression according to Eq. (7), there is the computational time
consuming fact that we have to optimise all three parameters, whereas
the constant
follows as a result of
the linear regression if we use Eq. (7). However, the results of this
method should be virtually identical to the results of the method
previously discussed.
In a first step we determine three sets of empirical
-values from the two non-magnetic
comparison stars HD 16160, and AGK3+63 0096, and from the solar lines,
for which we derive Fe i excitation temperatures of 4750 K,
4140 K and 5310 K, respectively. EWs are computed from Kurucz model
atmospheres for which we choose effective temperatures corresponding
to the known spectral types of the template stars (see Table 3).
We use solar metallicity,
= -4.51,
for all of the stars. Our model atmosphere treats collisional damping
using van de Waals damping in the Unsöld approximation, which we
modified by applying a correction factor of 2 to the Unsöld
damping constant
.
We tested the method using the K3 template star HD 16160 and
VY Ari, and model atmospheres of different
and microturbulence. The results
obtained are almost insensitive to
.
Even for temperatures differing by 400 K from the assumed correct
value of 4775 K we get nearly the same values of B,
, and
- only the significance of the
results decreases. The reason for this low sensitivity of the magnetic
field determination to the temperature dependence of the Fe
i line strength is that our method is based on the magnetic
sensitivity of the spectral lines and so it is explicitly sensitive to
the magnetic enhancement of the EWs. However, we point out that the
robustness of our method depends on a sufficiently large number of
lines being used, which is not the case for all of our target stars.
The same assertion can be made for a low dependence on
microturbulence. Tests with
=
0 km/s give nearly the same results as with
= 2 km/s, with only slightly less
sharp maxima for the optimum values found for B,
. Microturbulence was generally
chosen to be 2 km/s which is a mean value based on the values observed
for several T Tauri stars by Padgett (1996). Since the dependence of
the EWs or the curve of growth on gravity is much smaller than the
temperature dependence, we decided to use a constant
of 3.9 for all of the T Tauri
stars. This value represents a mean value taken from literature
(Finkenzeller & Basri 1987; Magazzu et al. 1992), the total
variation of
for dwarf stars within
the spectral sequence K 0 to K 7 being about 0.07 (Schmidt-Kaler
1982). Appropriate values were used for the template stars.
The magnetic field strength is derived in the following way: For
all reasonable combinations of B and
, the normalised observed EWs
are plotted versus the normalised
computed EWs
. The best values of
B and
are found when the
scatter of the linear regression according to Eq. (7) is minimised.
The constants
and
are the coefficients of the linear
regression, and using Eq. (9) the apparent filling factor
is then obtained.
To illustrate the use of Eq. 7 we have plotted in Fig. 4 the ratio
Y = = 2kG, f =
0.5,
=
= 0) of a synthetic test star
versus the values computed from our model, X =
=
2kG,
=
= 0). As a test star we used our
non-magnetic template star HD 16160. We then calculated the Fe
i lines for a given configuration of B, f, and
. The resulting equivalent widths
produce a straight line with slope 0.5
(
=
0.50,
=
0.50,
= 0.50) in Fig. 4. Since here
Y and X are in fact the same quantity, there is no
scatter of the values (crosses in Fig. 4) about this line. In
practice, we would have chosen the absolutely correct model atmosphere
and parameters. On the other hand, if we plot Y versus
=
1kG,
=
= 0), we get the scattering values
marked by dots and a regression line with slope 1
(
=
0.00,
=
1.03,
= 1.00). Both results give
the same
but they are
distinguishable by the RMS (or correlation coefficient) of the linear
regression. Fig. 4 thus illustrates how we can disentangle B
and
as well as B and
by searching for that pair of
B,
for which the scatter
about the regression line is a minimum
(
follows then from the obtained
constants
and
).
![]() |
Fig. 4. Illustration of the use of Eq. 7: Y = ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
One problem is the estimation of the significance level or probable
uncertainty of the obtained results. Because of the different
uncertainty sources and the very complex nature of the propagation of
uncertainties, we do not try to model this propagation. Instead we
estimate the significance from the confidence level of the correlation
coefficient obtained from the
linear regression for each pair of B,
. The correlation coefficient
is a measure of the coincidence of
the regression lines following from the regression Y with X, and from
X with Y, as is illustrated in Fig. 7. For all further derivations we
use the results of the regression Y with X according to Equ. 7. This
is illustrated for the case of maximum correlation coefficient for all
stars in the left parts of Figs. 5 and 7 to 12.
The Fisher -transformation
(Fisher 1925) normalises the statistical distribution of
, where
From the distribution of it is
possible to estimate the probability that two determined values of the
correlation coefficients
are
different at a given confidence level
(e.g. Sachs 1998). This is the case
if
where N is the number of data points and
is the value of the Students-t
distribution for N-2 degrees of freedom at confidence level
.
The right parts of Figs. 5 and 7 to 12 show two-dimensional contour
plots for . Inside the areas
enclosed by the dotted lines the correlation coefficients obtained
from the linear regression are not significantly distinguishable.
Outside this area the regression coefficients are different from the
maximum value at a statistical 95% level. In the following we regard
the enclosed areas as the areas of confidence of our results.
Fig. 6 shows the contour plot for the product
for VY Ari. Although the correlation
coefficients of the linear regression may occasionally be relatively
high even for a slope of larger than one, physically meaningful
solutions are restricted to slopes of less than one, because the
filling factor has to be less than or equal to one. These acceptable
solutions are represented in Fig. 6 by the part to right of the thick,
almost vertical line. Inside the area of confidence there is only a
very small variation of
of about
0.3 kG. That means that the filling factor varies in an opposite sense
to the magnetic field strength. From the contour plots we can derive
the (well-defined) product
as the
mean inside the area of confidence, and the limits for B from
the section of the area of confidence with
1. Since B and f are
strongly correlated, we will not give mean values and error bars for
these values, instead we will only quote the derived limits.
![]() |
Fig. 5. Magnetic test star VY Ari. Left: Ratio of the normalised observed EWs of (VY Ari), Y = ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
Fig. 6. Contour plot of the product ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
Fig. 7. Like Fig. 5: HD 42807, ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
Fig. 8. LkCa 15: ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
Fig. 9. LkCa 16: ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
Fig. 10. T Tau: ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
Fig. 11. UX Tau: ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
Fig. 12. GW Ori: ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
© European Southern Observatory (ESO) 1999
Online publication: December 16, 1998
helpdesk.link@springer.de