Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 717

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 147 of the 147 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

HOW TO CONSTRAIN YOUR M DWARF: MEASURING EFFECTIVE TEMPERATURE, BOLOMETRIC LUMINOSITY, MASS, AND RADIUS

Open access
Mann, Andrew W., Feiden, Gregory A., Gaidos, Eric, Boyajian, Tabetha, Braun, Kaspar von·2015·The Astrophysical Journal
DOI 10.1088/0004-637x/804/1/64
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Precise and accurate parameters for late-type (late K and M) dwarf stars are important for characterization of any orbiting planets, but such determinations have been hampered by these stars’ complex spectra and dissimilarity to the Sun. We exploit an empirically calibrated method to estimate spectroscopic effective temperature (T eff) and the Stefan–Boltzmann law to determine radii of 183 nearby K7–M7 single stars with a precision of 2%–5%. Our improved stellar parameters enable us to develop model-independent relations between T eff or absolute magnitude and radius, as well as between color and T eff. The derived T eff–radius relation depends strongly on [Fe/H], as predicted by theory. The relation between absolute K S magnitude and radius can predict radii accurate to 3%. We derive bolometric corrections to the and Gaia passbands as a function of color, accurate to 1%–3%. We confront the reliability of predictions from Dartmouth stellar evolution models using a Markov chain Monte Carlo to find the values of unobservable model parameters (mass, age) that best reproduce the observed effective temperature and bolometric flux while satisfying constraints on distance and metallicity as Bayesian priors. With the inferred masses we derive a semi-empirical mass–absolute magnitude relation with a scatter of 2% in mass. The best-agreement models overpredict stellar T eff values by an average of 2.2% and underpredict stellar radii by 4.6%, similar to differences with values from low-mass eclipsing binaries. These differences are not correlated with metallicity, mass, or indicators of activity, suggesting issues with the underlying model assumptions, e.g., opacities or convective mixing length.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1088/0004-637x/804/1/64

Cites

147 of 147 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 147 references

Cited by

See all 717

Metadata

Authors
Mann, A. W., Feiden, G. A., Gaidos, E., Boyajian, T., & Braun, K. V.
Venue
The Astrophysical Journal
Publisher
American Astronomical Society
Published
2015-05-01
Volume
804
Issue
1
Pages
64
ISSN
  • 0004-637X (ISSN-L)
  • 1538-4357
DOI
10.1088/0004-637x/804/1/64
OpenAlex
W1531115531
Cited by
717
References
147
FWCI
37.62
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: HOW TO CONSTRAIN YOUR M DWARF: MEASURING EFFECTIVE TEMPERATURE, BOLOMETRIC LUMINOSITY, MASS, AND RADIUS. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1088/0004-637x/804/1/64
The paper
Mann, A. W., Feiden, G. A., Gaidos, E., Boyajian, T., & Braun, K. V. (2015). HOW TO CONSTRAIN YOUR M DWARF: MEASURING EFFECTIVE TEMPERATURE, BOLOMETRIC LUMINOSITY, MASS, AND RADIUS. The Astrophysical Journal. https://doi.org/10.1088/0004-637x/804/1/64

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.