Ages and masses of asymptotic giant branch stars from the period–luminosity diagram

ABSTRACT A method of determining ages and masses of asymptotic giant branch (AGB) stars between 0.8 and $\sim$6 M$_\odot$ is demonstrated, based on comparing the star’s position in the period–absolute-magnitude diagram to theoretical evolutionary models. For samples of Milky Way stars, the method provides errors (statistical and systematic, respectively) of order of $^{+29}_{-35} \pm 15$ per cent in age, $^{+14}_{-7} \pm 7$ per cent in initial mass, and $^{+17}_{-11} \pm 27$ per cent in current mass. However, its applicability to individual stars depends strongly on both their position in the period–luminosity diagram and the uncertainty of that position. This method is applied to published samples of AGB stars from the Gaia, NESS, DEATHSTAR, and ATOMIUM surveys. These surveys’ statistical ensembles are compared to expectations from stellar evolutionary models, finding that most AGB samples are biased towards stars of younger ages and higher masses. An average mass for Milky Way AGB stars is found to be $\sim$1.1 M$_\odot$, while mass returned to the interstellar medium by AGB stars typically comes from $\sim$1.2 M$_\odot$ stars with mass-loss rates of order $2-3 \times 10^{-6}$ M$_\odot$ yr$^{-1}$.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society
Published
2026-04-11
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1093/mnras/stag704
Primary Topic
Stellar, planetary, and galactic studies
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Ages and masses of asymptotic giant branch stars from the period–luminosity diagram

Iain McDonald
Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society
Stellar, planetary, and galactic studies
article

Ages and masses of asymptotic giant branch stars from the period–luminosity diagram

Iain McDonald
article en

Abstract

ABSTRACT A method of determining ages and masses of asymptotic giant branch (AGB) stars between 0.8 and $\sim$6 M$_\odot$ is demonstrated, based on comparing the star’s position in the period–absolute-magnitude diagram to theoretical evolutionary models. For samples of Milky Way stars, the method provides errors (statistical and systematic, respectively) of order of $^{+29}_{-35} \pm 15$ per cent in age, $^{+14}_{-7} \pm 7$ per cent in initial mass, and $^{+17}_{-11} \pm 27$ per cent in current mass. However, its applicability to individual stars depends strongly on both their position in the period–luminosity diagram and the uncertainty of that position. This method is applied to published samples of AGB stars from the Gaia, NESS, DEATHSTAR, and ATOMIUM surveys. These surveys’ statistical ensembles are compared to expectations from stellar evolutionary models, finding that most AGB samples are biased towards stars of younger ages and higher masses. An average mass for Milky Way AGB stars is found to be $\sim$1.1 M$_\odot$, while mass returned to the interstellar medium by AGB stars typically comes from $\sim$1.2 M$_\odot$ stars with mass-loss rates of order $2-3 \times 10^{-6}$ M$_\odot$ yr$^{-1}$.

Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical SocietyVol. 548(2)
University of Manchester (GB)
Chicago Dermatological Society, HORIZON EUROPE Framework Programme
Openalex Percentile: Top 12%
Stellar, planetary, and galactic studies
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.