Papers › Multi-campaign Asteroseismic Analysis of eight Solar-like pulsating stars observed by...
Multi-campaign Asteroseismic Analysis of eight Solar-like pulsating stars observed by the K2 mission
L. González-Cuesta, S. Mathur, R. A. García, F. Pérez Hernández, V. Delsanti, S. N. Breton, C. Hedges, A. Jiménez, A. Della Gaspera, M. El-Issami, V. Fox, D. Godoy-Rivera, S. Pitot, N. Proust
The archive published only this paper's code-link row. Authors, date and abstract are from arXiv's metadata (CC0), read from the Kaggle arXiv metadata snapshot of 2026-09-12 where its title matched the archive's; the title is the archive's.
The NASA K2 mission that succeeded the nominal Kepler mission observed several hundreds of thousands of stars during its operations. While most of the stars were observed in single campaigns of 80 days, some of them were targeted for more than one campaign. We perform an asteroseismic study of a sample of eight solar-like stars observed during K2 Campaigns 6 and 17. We first extract the light curves for the two campaigns using two different pipelines, EVEREST and Lightkurve. The seismic analysis is done on the combined light curve of C6 and C17 where the gap between them was removed and the two campaigns were stitched together. We determine the global seismic parameters of the solar-like oscillations using two different methods (A2Z pipeline and the apollinaire code). We perform the peak-bagging of the modes to characterize their individual frequencies. By combining the frequencies with the Gaia DR2 effective temperature and luminosity, and metallicity for five of the targets, we determine the fundamental parameters of the targets using the IACgrids based on the MESA code. While the masses and radii of our targets probe a similar parameter space compared to the Kepler solar-like stars with detailed modeling, we find that for a given mass our more evolved stars seem to be older compared to previous seismic stellar ensembles. We calculate the stellar parameters using two different grids of models, incorporating and excluding the treatment of diffusion, and find that the results agree generally within the uncertainties, except for the ages. The seismic radii and the Gaia DR2 radii present an average difference of 4% with a dispersion of 5%. Although the agreement is quite good, the seismic radii are slightly underestimated compared to Gaia DR2 for our stars, the disagreement being greater for the more evolved ones.
Code
Repository list and official/mentioned flags are the archive's, frozen 2025-07-28. Reachability, where shown, is from one Syntology probe window (2026-09-16 to 2026-09-18); repositories not probed show nothing. GitHub stars are not tracked.
Code Syntology ran Syntology
Not run by Syntology. Nothing on this page verifies that the listed code works.
Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28
No leaderboard rows for this paper in the archive.
Report a problem or propose a change · a person checks every report against the paper or source before anything changes; decisions are listed on /corrections