ner_tags: O O O O O O O O O O B-Citation I-Citation O B-Citation I-Citation I-Citation O O O O O O O O O O O B-Formula I-Formula I-Formula I-Formula I-Formula I-Formula I-Formula I-Formula I-Formula I-Formula I-Formula I-Formula O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B-Model I-Model O O O O O O O O B-Model I-Model O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B-Model I-Model O O O O O O O O O O O B-Model I-Model O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B-Model I-Model O O O O O O O O B-Model I-Model O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B-Citation I-Citation I-Citation I-Citation O O O O O O O B-Citation I-Citation I-Citation I-Citation O B-Citation O B-Citation I-Citation I-Citation I-Citation O B-Citation I-Citation I-Citation I-Citation O B-Citation I-Citation I-Citation I-Citation O B-Citation I-Citation I-Citation I-Citation O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O
tokens: ), Since Δ ν is expected to scale as (e.g., Ulrich 1986 ; Brown Gilliland 1994 ) we can substitute Δ ν in Eq. (7) . Assuming Γ 0 ( ν max ) ∝ M c T eff d we can then write, From this development, it can clearly be seen that the b exponent, which represents the Δ ν dependence (Eq. (7) ), does not produce an important influence in the departure from the L / M power law. On the contrary, the influence of the c exponent, introduced by Γ, amplifies the departure from a power law in L/M . In order to simplify the approach, we consider that the relative variation of the effective temperature on the RGB and in the clump is so small compared to the variation in luminosity that we can neglect the T eff dependence. Therefore, we performed a fit of A 0,bol as power law of L and M only. We find a variation in L 0.77±0.06 M −1.25±0.14 with the FREQ method, and in L 0.70±0.06 M −1.40±0.13 with the PROB method. In order to evaluate the validity of the previous hypothesis leading to neglect the T eff influence, the variation of the mode amplitude with L , M and T eff was also measured. We find a variation in L 0.70±0.07 M −1.03±0.15 T eff −4.79±1.36 with the FREQ method, and in L 0.61±0.06 M −1.14±0.14 T eff −5.48±1.18 with the PROB method. The dependence in L and M are less important, as expected, but consistent with the ones we previously found, considering the error bars. In contrast to these results, we can see that the measured T eff dependence is very important. However, the large error bars on the exponent and the lack of important impact on the other dependencies lead us to confirm the simplification hypothesis and neglect the T eff dependence. To assess the impact of the clump stars on the fits, we also consider the RGB stars alone and find significant differences: A 0,bol varying as L 0.84±0.08 M −1.34±0.27 with the FREQ method, and in L 0.82±0.07 M −1.61±0.27 with the PROB method. As stated above, seismic and stellar parameters of stars do not evolve much during the helium burning phase, on the contrary to the RGB phase. It follows that clump stars with similar masses will have similar A 0,bol values, thus making it difficult to disentangle the luminosity and mass dependence for these stars. The fit performed only on RGB stars allows us to get rid of a possible influence of one dependence on the other, and is therefore the one considered throughout the rest of the article. The exponents we find for the luminosity are slightly larger than the ones theoretically predicted ( Samadi et al. 2012 ), but agree with previous measurements ( Mosser et al. 2010 , 2012a ; Huber et al. 2011 ; Stello et al. 2011 ; Corsaro et al. 2013 ; Kallinger et al. 2014 ). A possible explanation for the difference between the predicted and observed exponents is the strong influence of non-adiabatic effects on the mode driving in red giants. Indeed, the theoretical predictions previously mentioned do not rely on fully non-adiabatic models. This type of modeling has not yet