Skip to content
DraconiticResearch
Search Sources API
194,161 studies31 sourcesUpdated 5 min ago
Peer-reviewedCC BY 4.0The Astrophysical Journal

Evolved Stars with Inconsistent Age Estimates: Abundance Outliers or Mass Transfer Products?

  • Polly Frazer1
  • Emily J. Griffith2
  • David W. Hogg1,3,4
  • Amaya Sinha5
  • Jamie Tayar6
6 affiliations
  1. 1New York University
  2. 2University of Colorado
  3. 3Max-Planck-Institut für Astronomie
  4. 4Flatiron Institute
  5. 5University of Utah
  6. 6University of Florida
Open at sourcePDFDOICite

Abstract

In the Milky Way disk, there is a strong trend linking stellar age to surface element abundances. Here, we explore this relationship with a data set of 8803 red-giant and red-clump stars with both asteroseismic data from NASA Kepler Mission and surface abundances from the Sloan Digital Sky Survey (SDSS)-V Milky Way Mapper (MWM) survey. We find, with a k -nearest-neighbors approach, that the [Mg/H] and [Fe/Mg] abundance ratios predict asteroseismic ages to an accuracy of about 2 Gyr for the majority of stars. That said, there are substantial outlier stars whose surface abundances do not match their asteroseismic ages. Because asteroseismic ages for these stars are fundamentally based on density or mass, these outliers are mass-transfer candidates. Stars whose surface abundances predict an older age (lower mass) than what’s seen in the asteroseismology are mass accretor candidates (MACs); stars whose abundances predict a younger age (higher mass) than the asteroseismology age are mass donor candidates (MDCs). We create precise control samples, matched according to (1) surface abundances and (2) asteroseismic ages, for both the MAC and MDC stars; we use these to find slight differences in rotational velocity, [C/N], and [Na/Mg] between the mass-transfer candidates and their abundance neighbors. We find no drastic differences in kinematics, orbital invariants, UV excess, or other stellar abundances between outliers and their abundance neighbors. We deliver 377 mass-transfer candidates for follow-up observations. This project implicitly suggests a fundamental limit on the reliability of asteroseismic ages, and supports existing evidence that age-abundance outliers are products of binary mass transfer.

Related

  1. Ongoing and Post-Mass-Transfer Binaries: A Living Catalog and Unified Review of Binary Mass Transfer Products
    Lieke A. C. van Son, Natsuko Yamaguchi, Pranav Nagarajan +6
    arXivPreprintCC BY 4.0Full textHigh-energy astrophysicsSolar & stellar physicsarXiv
  2. AGB-star Mass Transfer Products in Stellar Streams as Tracers of Density in Dissolved Star Clusters
    Newlin C. Weatherford, Madeleine McKenzie, Sam A. Usman
    arXivPreprintCC BY 4.0Full textGalaxiesSolar & stellar physicsarXiv
  3. Gnuastro: removing extended/diffuse outliers while coadding
    Mohammad Akhlaghi, Héctor Vives Arias, Pablo Renard +2
    arXivPreprintCC BY-NC-SA 4.0Full textInstrumentation & methodsarXiv
  4. Dark Energy Constraints and Joint Cosmological Inference from Mutually Inconsistent Observations
    Charles L Steinhardt, Preston Phillips, Radoslaw Wojtak
    Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical SocietyPeer-reviewedCC BY 4.0Full textCosmologyCrossref
  5. The tidal features of the classical Milky Way satellites: Expected in MOND but inconsistent with cold dark matter models
    Elena Asencio, Indranil Banik, Pavel Kroupa
    arXivPreprintCC BY 4.0Full textGalaxiesarXiv

Cite

BibTeXRIS
BibTeX
@article{frazer2026evolved,
  title = {{Evolved Stars with Inconsistent Age Estimates: Abundance Outliers or Mass Transfer Products?}},
  author = {Polly Frazer and Emily J. Griffith and David W. Hogg and Amaya Sinha and Jamie Tayar},
  journal = {The Astrophysical Journal},
  year = {2026},
  month = oct,
  doi = {10.3847/1538-4357/ae9ec3},
  url = {https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.3847/1538-4357/ae9ec3},
  note = {CC BY 4.0},
}
RIS
TY  - JOUR
TI  - Evolved Stars with Inconsistent Age Estimates: Abundance Outliers or Mass Transfer Products?
AU  - Polly Frazer
AU  - Emily J. Griffith
AU  - David W. Hogg
AU  - Amaya Sinha
AU  - Jamie Tayar
PY  - 2026
DA  - 2026/10/13
JO  - The Astrophysical Journal
DO  - 10.3847/1538-4357/ae9ec3
UR  - https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.3847/1538-4357/ae9ec3
AB  - In the Milky Way disk, there is a strong trend linking stellar age to surface element abundances. Here, we explore this relationship with a data set of 8803 red-giant and red-clump stars with both asteroseismic data from NASA Kepler Mission and surface abundances from the Sloan Digital Sky Survey (SDSS)-V Milky Way Mapper (MWM) survey. We find, with a k -nearest-neighbors approach, that the [Mg/H] and [Fe/Mg] abundance ratios predict asteroseismic ages to an accuracy of about 2 Gyr for the majority of stars. That said, there are substantial outlier stars whose surface abundances do not match their asteroseismic ages. Because asteroseismic ages for these stars are fundamentally based on density or mass, these outliers are mass-transfer candidates. Stars whose surface abundances predict an older age (lower mass) than what’s seen in the asteroseismology are mass accretor candidates (MACs); stars whose abundances predict a younger age (higher mass) than the asteroseismology age are mass donor candidates (MDCs). We create precise control samples, matched according to (1) surface abundances and (2) asteroseismic ages, for both the MAC and MDC stars; we use these to find slight differences in rotational velocity, [C/N], and [Na/Mg] between the mass-transfer candidates and their abundance neighbors. We find no drastic differences in kinematics, orbital invariants, UV excess, or other stellar abundances between outliers and their abundance neighbors. We deliver 377 mass-transfer candidates for follow-up observations. This project implicitly suggests a fundamental limit on the reliability of asteroseismic ages, and supports existing evidence that age-abundance outliers are products of binary mass transfer.
SN  - 0004-637X
SN  - 1538-4357
ER  -