I am thinking about the Bright Star Catalogue and how it is not a good representation of a typical population of stars. The Bright Star Catalogue includes all the visible stars from Earth when viewing with the naked eye. Therefore, it only includes higher mass stars at various stages of evolution since these are more easily seen; however, most stars in any stellar population will be of lower mass. Lower mass stars are much more plentiful in comparison (see initial mass function/IMF for details). The Bright Star catalogue is limited to stars ~6.5 apparent magnitudes and brighter (so lower numbers since magnitudes run in the "opposite sense". ie. brighter = a lower number). The question is, which star is at the seeing eye limit (~6.5 - 7 apparent magnitudes), yet has the lowest absolute magnitude? Another way of phrasing this question is, what is the lowest mass star we can see from our Earth with the naked eye? I am not looking to receive an answer about how the answer depends on absolute magnitude and distance (ie. the distance modulus). I understand that already. I am curious what the star actually is (ie. name etc).
Edit to add for clarity:
Luminosity does not increase monotonically with mass. For the sake of this question, let's stick with the faintest absolute magnitude main-sequence star.