Comprehensive analytic formulae for stellar evolution as a function of mass and metallicity

By J. Hurley, O. Pols, C. Tout. 2000

1,349 citations recorded by the source corpus.

We present analytic formulae that approximate the evolution of stars for a wide range of mass M and metallicity Z. Stellar luminosity, radius and core mass are given as a function of age, M and Z, for all phases from the zero-age main sequence up to, and including, the remnant stages. For the most part we find continuous formulae accurate to within 5 per cent of detailed models. These formulae are useful for purposes such as population synthesis that require very rapid but accurate evaluation of stellar properties, and in particular for use in combination with N-body codes. We describe a mass-loss prescription that can be used with these formulae, and investigate the resulting stellar remnant distribution.

Subfields: Astronomy and Astrophysics, Instrumentation, Statistical and Nonlinear Physics

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/af4e408fc7ad1ab87e36b0cfe490d25502ff95cf

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Astronomy and Astrophysics

In Instrumentation

In Statistical and Nonlinear Physics

Citations in the corpus

The great escape: how exoplanets and smaller bodies desert dying stars (2011, methodology): “Evolutionary tracks from Hurley et al. (2000) indicate that the minimum extent of the pre-supernova stellar envelope (including pre-supernova massloss) is about ∼2 au, so we choose a0 = 2 au.”
AGaiaData Release 2 catalogue of white dwarfs and a comparison with SDSS (2018, methodology): “…simulation uses constant stellar formation history over the past 10 Gyr, the Salpeter initial mass function, main-sequence lifetime for solar metallicity from Hurley et al. (2000), the initial-to-final mass relation of Cummings et al. (2016), a uniform distribu- MNRAS 000, 000–000 (0000) Figure 17.”
The progenitors of compact-object binaries: impact of metallicity, common envelope and natal kicks (2018, background): “Here, we have implemented in MOBSE the possibility to draw the natal kick from two Maxwellian curves with a different root-mean-square: σCCSN and σECSN, for corecollapse and electron-capture SNe, respectively.”
The first gravitational-wave source from the isolated evolution of two stars in the 40–100 solar mass range (2016, neutral): “jects (BH-BH, BH-NS, and NS-NS). We have adopted speciﬁc values for a number of evolutionary p arameters. Single stars are evolved with calibrated formulae based on detailed evolutionary calculations (34). Massive star winds are adopted from detailed studies of radiation driven mass loss (35). For t”
One Channel to Rule Them All? Constraining the Origins of Binary Black Holes Using Multiple Formation Pathways (2020, methodology): “Each star and binary in the cluster is evolved with the Binary Stellar Evolution (BSE) package of Hurley et al. (2000, 2002) with updated prescriptions for stellar winds, compact-object masses, supernova natal kicks, and pulsational-pair instability physics consistent with COSMIC (Chatterjee et al.…”
Dynamical evolution of star clusters in tidal fields (2002, methodology): “12 a) depicts how the combined mass-fraction of white dwarfs and neutron stars increases with time if we take a population of 500000 stars that follow a Kroupa IMF initially and evolve them with the Hurley et al. (2000) stellar evolution routines.”
On the α formalism for the common envelope interaction (2010, methodology): “Zorotovic et al. (2010) used the stellar evolution fitting formulae of Hurley et al. (2000) to determine core mass, radii and luminosities as a function of time for a range of main-sequence masses.”
CO-EVOLUTION OF GALACTIC NUCLEI AND GLOBULAR CLUSTER SYSTEMS (2013, methodology): “We model the stellar mass loss using the main-sequence lifetimes from Hurley et al. (2000) and the stellar remnant masses from Chernoff & Weinberg (1990).”
Massive double compact object mergers: gravitational wave sources and r-process element production sites (2013, methodology): “However, it also illustrates that the procedure used by Fryer et al. (and other users of the Hurley et al. 2000 analytical formalisms) to adapt these results to binaries might not change the evolution tracks sufficiently for them to correspond well to our detailed binary evolutionary tracks.”
MODELING THE EXTRAGALACTIC BACKGROUND LIGHT FROM STARS AND DUST (2009, background): “(A27) of Eggleton et al. (1989), which de- scribes the luminosity of a white dwarf in our calculations, so that it reads L = 40 (t− tWD + 0.1)1.4 in order to avoid a singularity when t = tWD (Hurley et al. 2000).”
Simulations of two-planet systems through all phases of stellar evolution: implications for the instability boundary and white dwarf pollution (2013, methodology): “See Hurley et al. (2000) for detailed physical descriptions of each phase.”
Merging black holes in young star clusters (2019, methodology): “In its original version, NBODY6++GPU is coupled with the population synthesis code BSE (Hurley et al. 2000, 2002).”
The effect of the metallicity-specific star formation history on double compact object mergers (2019, background): “Our wind mass-loss rates for stars with temperatures below 12 500 K are prescribed by Hurley et al. (2000) and references therein.”