Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 78 references

An Updated Line List for Spectroscopic Investigation of G Stars II: Refined Solar Abundances via Extended Wavelength Coverage to 10 000 \AA

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-10 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read This paper introduces a 592-line list for F/G star abundances across 4080–9675 Å, calibrated against the solar spectrum and validated on the metal-poor star HD 218209.

desk verdict Useful line-list extension with a genuinely independent HD 218209 check, but the uncorrected KPNO/IAG atlas offset and gf calibration to Asplund make the accuracy claims premature. read the letter →

arxiv 2501.00324 v2 pith:RA66BTTD submitted 2024-12-31 astro-ph.SR physics.atom-ph

T. Şahin , F. Güney , S.A. Şentürk , N. Ç{i}nar , M. Mar{i}şmak This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.SRphysics.atom-ph
keywords linelistsolarabundancesG-typestarsoscillatorstrengthsequivalentwidthsnear-infraredspectroscopystellarchemical
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

This paper presents an updated atomic line list for abundance analysis of F- and G-type stars, extending an earlier optical list to roughly 10 000 Å. It identifies 592 blend-free transitions of 33 species (25 elements) between 4080 and 9675 Å, including C, O, ionized Mg, Al, P, S, Cu, neutral Zr, and La, with many lines new in the near-infrared. The authors calibrate the oscillator strengths so that solar abundances computed from the lines agree with the standard solar reference composition, and they validate the list by analyzing the well-studied metal-poor G star HD 218209. If correct, the list gives spectroscopists a tested set of lines for reliable chemical abundances across the optical and near-infrared.

What carries the argument

The line list itself is the central object. It is assembled by matching line centers in two solar atlases to laboratory wavelengths in the Revised Multiplet Table, checking that relative intensities within each multiplet behave as expected, and assigning oscillator strengths from measured laboratory sources, with two atomic databases as fallback; when sources disagree, the value that brings the solar abundance closest to the standard reference is preferred. Abundances are then computed in LTE with a spectral-synthesis code on model atmospheres, using equivalent widths for most lines and spectrum synthesis for lines that are blended or strong. This machinery turns wavelength, excitation potential, and oscillator strength into a homogeneous abundance scale tied to the solar reference.

What would settle it

Measure the same unblended lines in both atlases over a wavelength range where they overlap and check whether the reported 4.4% line-strength offset depends on wavelength or line strength; if species with lines on both sides of 5000 Å, such as Fe, Ti, or Cr, give systematically different abundances, the atlas scale assumption fails.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that a carefully vetted line list of 592 atomic lines, carrying lower excitation potentials, multiplet assignments, and oscillator strengths selected from laboratory and database sources, reproduces the reference solar photospheric abundances with an average scatter of 0.02 ± 0.04 dex for 31 species and yields abundances for HD 218209 consistent with published values. The lines were confirmed blend-free in a very high-resolution disk-integrated solar spectrum in the red region and in a high-resolution solar flux atlas in the blue region. The paper adds 54 transitions in the optical region and 187 transitions in the 6772–9944 Å region, including neutral and ionized Fe lines missing from an independent FGK line list. The intended payoff is that stellar parameter determination and abundance analysis of F and G stars, especially in the near-infrared, can be done with these lines instead of relying on poorly calibrated infrared lists.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the two solar atlases used for calibration—the blue-region spectrum and the red-region spectrum—are on the same intensity scale; the paper's own line-strength comparison shows a 4.4% offset between them, and if that offset is real it would tilt abundances computed from blue lines relative to red lines.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The 252 neutral and 32 ionized iron lines spanning both the blue and the red give a wide base for excitation and ionization balance, so effective temperature and surface gravity can be checked from lines on both sides of 5000 Å.
  • Species that were absent from the earlier optical list—C, O, Mg ii, Al, P, S, Cu, neutral Zr, and La—now have near-infrared transitions, giving abundance analyses wavelength leverage they previously lacked.
  • Transitions outside the wavelength limits of the independent FGK list, including Fe lines near 6810 and 8959 Å, extend usable coverage to about 9944 Å and supply checks for telluric-prone regions.
  • Because the oscillator strengths are tied to the standard solar abundance scale, users who adopt the list should obtain abundances directly comparable to modern compilations without re-calibrating each line.
  • Agreement with literature for HD 218209, a metal-poor G dwarf, shows the list is not only calibrated on the Sun but works on a star with different parameters.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Because the line strengths are calibrated to reproduce a chosen solar scale, the list inherits any systematic errors in that scale; users comparing with 3D non-LTE abundance standards should expect offsets of the order of the quoted 0.02–0.04 dex scatter.
  • The reported 4.4% strength offset between the blue and red solar atlases, if real, would act mainly on species measured on one side of the 5000 Å boundary; comparing Fe, Ti, and Cr lines on both sides would reveal it.
  • The same multiplet-based screening could be pushed further red into the H- and K-band region, where current line lists are mostly theoretical; the author group appears to be laying the groundwork for exactly that.
  • Applying the list to a larger sample of F and G dwarfs would test whether near-infrared lines reproduce optical-only [X/Fe] patterns across metallicity, which would determine whether the extra wavelength coverage changes abundance conclusions.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper presents an expanded line list of 592 atomic transitions across 33 species (25 elements) in the 4080–9675 Å range, intended for abundance analysis of F and G stars. The authors identify lines in two high-resolution solar atlases (KPNO FTS for 4000–5000 Å and IAG/BTFS for 5000–10000 Å), adopt log gf values from the literature, and in cases of multiple sources choose the value giving best agreement with Asplund et al. (2009, 2021) solar abundances. They then derive solar abundances from the line list and validate the list by analyzing the metal-poor star HD 218209, comparing the results with published values. The paper also compares the adopted log gf values with the Gaia-ESO v6 line list.

Significance. If the line list is reliable, it is a useful resource for FGK abundance analyses, particularly for the near-infrared region where accurate gf values are scarce. The paper provides extensive per-line data (wavelength, excitation potential, log gf, EW, abundance) for 592 lines, and the HD 218209 validation is a genuinely independent check because the gf choices were not tuned to that star. The comparison with the Gaia-ESO v6 line list for 548 common lines is also a useful cross-check. However, the solar calibration is partly circular because log gf values were selected to reproduce Asplund solar abundances, and the uncorrected EW scale offset between the two solar atlases threatens the continuity of the log gf scale across the 5000 Å boundary. These issues need to be addressed before the central claim of a uniform 4080–9675 Å line list is fully established.

major comments (3)
  1. [Section 2, last paragraph; Section 4] The reported EW comparison EW(KPNO) = (0.956±0.011)×EW(IAG) + (2.353±0.839) implies a 4.4% scale offset and a 2.35 mÅ zero-point between the two solar atlases. Since the KPNO atlas is used for 4000–5000 Å and the IAG/BTFS atlas for 5000–10000 Å, and no correction is applied, the adopted log gf scale is not continuous across 5000 Å. For a 10 mÅ line the zero-point alone corresponds to ~19% in EW, i.e. ~0.08 dex in abundance; for a 5 mÅ line it is ~43%, i.e. ~0.16 dex. The paper should either apply an explicit correction for this offset, demonstrate that the offset is an artifact of continuum placement or line selection, or show that derived stellar abundances are consistent between blue and red line subsets. Merely calling the relation 'good agreement' is not sufficient given the stated slope and intercept.
  2. [Section 4, 'Accurate determination...' paragraph] The statement that when multiple log gf sources existed, 'the log gf value that yielded the most consistent abundance with solar abundance values reported by Asplund et al. (2009, 2021) was prioritized' makes the solar abundance table in Table 2 partly a fit to the adopted reference scale, not an independent measurement. The solar comparison should be presented as a consistency check of the chosen gf scale, and the paper should emphasize that the independent validation rests on HD 218209. As written, the abstract and conclusion present the solar abundances as derived results, which overstates their evidentiary value.
  3. [Section 3, Table 2; Section 5] The HD 218209 validation reports only combined abundances for each species, with no separation by wavelength region. Given the KPNO/IAG atlas offset, a genuine test of the line list's uniformity would be to compare abundances derived from lines blueward and redward of 5000 Å separately, especially for Fe I, which has the largest line sample. Without such a split, the validation cannot reveal a systematic discontinuity at the atlas stitch, and the central claim of a reliable line list across the full 4080–9675 Å range is not fully supported.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Abstract; Section 4; Section 5] The number of species is inconsistent: the abstract says 592 lines across 33 species (25 elements), Section 4 says 592 atomic transitions involve 30 species from 26 elements, and Section 5 says 592 spectral lines belonging to 33 chemical species. Please harmonize these counts.
  2. [Table 2 vs Table A6] The solar C I abundance in Table 2 is log eps = 8.48±0.11, whereas Table A6 lists 8.50±0.07 for the same quantity; similar small inconsistencies may exist for other species. Please ensure the two tables are mutually consistent.
  3. [Section 4, GES comparison paragraph] The sentence 'Of the 55 lines identified in this study within the same wavelength range, 51 were found in the GES line list' is unclear about which set of 55 lines is meant and how it relates to the 40 transitions stated to lie outside the GES boundaries. Please rephrase for clarity.
  4. [Section 5, first paragraph] There is a duplicated phrase: 'Figure 5 presents the numerical statistics for the final line list generated in this study are shown in Figure 5.' Please correct the grammar.

Circularity Check

2 steps flagged · score 6.0 of 10

Solar-abundance validation is partly a fit: log gf values were prioritized to match Asplund et al. (2009, 2021), so the solar abundance agreement is by construction; HD 218209 provides external support.

  1. fitted input called prediction [Section 4, 'LINE LIST: IDENTIFICATION, LINE MEASUREMENT, AND ATOMIC DATA', paragraph on log gf sources]
    "When multiple sources were available, the log𝑔𝑓 value that yielded the most consistent abundance with solar abundance values reported by Asplund et al. (2009, 2021) was prioritized."

    The solar abundances in Table 2 are then presented as 'refined solar abundances', and their agreement with Asplund et al. (2009, 2021) is cited as validation in Section 5. But for any line with multiple candidate gf values, the adopted gf was chosen to reproduce the Asplund abundance. Hence the final solar abundance for that species is not an independent measurement but a selection forced toward the reference scale. This makes the claimed solar abundance agreement (e.g., average scatter 0.02±0.04 dex vs ASP09) a consequence of the calibration rule, not an independent confirmation.

  2. self definitional [Section 5 (Conclusion), comparison of solar abundances with literature]
    "The resulting abundances were compared to those reported by Asplund et al. (2009) and Asplund et al. (2021) as well as other solar abundance values found in the literature (Table A6). Our results are in excellent agreement with those of the previous studies."

    This 'excellent agreement' is the direct output of the Section 4 selection rule: the gf values were chosen to make solar abundances agree with the same Asplund references. Presenting that agreement as external validation of the solar abundance column is circular. The HD 218209 comparison in Table A7 is a genuinely external check and limits the scope of the circularity.

full rationale

The central line-list claim is not wholly circular: most gf values come from external laboratory sources (Fuhr & Wiese, Lawler et al., etc.), and the HD 218209 comparison against literature (Table A7) is an independent external check. The circularity is confined to the solar abundance column: wherever multiple gf sources existed, the paper selected the gf that reproduces Asplund et al. (2009, 2021), so the solar abundance agreement is forced. The KPNO/IAG EW scale offset (EW(KPNO) = (0.956±0.011)×EW(IAG) + (2.353±0.839) mÅ) is a serious systematic correctness concern but is not itself a circularity; it affects accuracy rather than independence. Therefore a partial circularity score of 6 is appropriate: the solar abundance 'prediction' reduces by construction for lines with multiple gf candidates, while the external HD 218209 validation preserves independent content for the line list as a whole.

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The paper introduces no new physical entities; it compiles atomic data from literature. The main free element is the selection of log gf values against the Asplund solar abundance scale, plus the standard model atmosphere parameters for the Sun and HD 218209.

free parameters (3)
  • log gf values selected to match Asplund solar abundances = not listed individually; choice among literature values
    In Section 4, when more than one literature log gf existed, the value that best reproduced Asplund et al. (2009, 2021) solar abundances was adopted, so the solar abundance agreement is partly by construction.
  • Solar model atmosphere parameters (Teff, log g, xi) = 5770 K, 4.40 cgs, 0.66 km/s
    Derived from Fe excitation and ionization balance with the line list; these parameters set the solar abundance scale used for gf calibration.
  • HD 218209 model atmosphere parameters (Teff, log g, xi) = 5600 K, 4.50 cgs, 0.44 km/s
    Derived from Fe balance; needed for the validation abundance analysis.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption LTE line formation in 1D plane-parallel ATLAS9 model atmospheres is adequate for all 33 species; NLTE corrections are small and only applied to a few elements.
    Abundances computed with MOOG under LTE; the paper cites Bergemann et al. (2012), Lind et al. (2012) for Fe and small corrections for Ti, Co, etc., but the gf calibration is not NLTE-corrected for most lines.
  • standard math The Revised Multiplet Table (Moore et al. 1966) line identifications, wavelengths, and multiplet assignments are correct.
    Line identification and LEP values are taken from the MOORE catalogue and RMT.
  • domain assumption The two solar atlases (KPNO FTS and IAG BTFS) are suitable absolute references for solar EW measurement and are mutually consistent after the reported linear correction.
    Section 2 shows a slope of 0.956±0.011 between EWs, meaning a ~4% scale offset is absorbed as a linear relation rather than tested.
  • domain assumption Asplund et al. (2009, 2021) solar abundances are the correct benchmark for choosing among log gf values.
    Used as the optimization target in the gf selection; if these reference abundances are biased, the adopted gf values inherit the bias.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of An Updated Line List for Spectroscopic Investigation of G Stars II: Refined Solar Abundances via Extended Wavelength Coverage to 10 000 \AA." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/RA66BTTD

@misc{pith2026250100324,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: An Updated Line List for Spectroscopic Investigation of G Stars II: Refined Solar Abundances via Extended Wavelength Coverage to 10 000 \AA},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/RA66BTTD}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2501.00324}
}
read the original abstract

This study introduces a line list for the abundance analysis of F and G type stars across the 4080-9675 A wavelength range. A systematic search employing lower excitation potentials, accurate log gf values, and an updated multiplet table led to the identification of 592 lines across 33 species (25 elements), including C, O, Mg (ionized), Al, P, S, Cu, Zr (neutral), and La. To determine the uncertainties in log gf values, we assessed solar abundance using a very high-resolution (R=1000000) disk-integrated solar spectrum. These lines were confirmed to be blend-free in the solar spectrum. The line list was further validated by analyzing the metal-poor star HD 218209 (G6V), which is notable for its well-documented and reliable abundance in literature. The abundances were obtained using the equivalent width (EW) method and further refined by applying the spectrum synthesis method. A comparative analysis with the Gaia ESO line list v.6, provided by the Gaia ESO collaboration, revealed additional neutral and ionized Fe lines. This extensively refined line list will facilitate precise stellar parameter determinations and accurate abundance analyses of spectra within the PolarBASE spectral library.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2501.00324 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. A small region of the KPNO solar spectrum and the PolarBASE spectrum of HD 218209. Identified lines are also indicated. The solar spectrum serves as a fundamental reference for stellar astrophysics and analysis of physical processes in stars (Molaro & Monai 2012). In this study, high-resolution (𝑅 ≈ 700 000) Kitt Peak Fourier Transform Spectrometer (FTS) data (disk-integrated) obtained by Kurucz et al. (1984), previ… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. The telluric corrected Göttingen (IAG) Solar Spectrum (BTFS). Telluric spectrum (from https://zenodo.org/ records/3598136) was also included to indicate the positions of the telluric lines. The telluric model shown is typical of the conditions at Göttingen (precipitable water vapour of ≈10 mm), where the VVT telescope resides. spectrum, transitions outside the regions dominated by telluric lines were considered for … view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. An example for the determination of the atmospheric parameters 𝑇eff and 𝜉 using abundance (log 𝜖) as a function of both lower LEP (panels a and b) and reduced EW (panels c) for the Sun and HD 218209. In all panels, the solid red line represents the least-squares fit to the data. 21 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p021_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (2 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: The figure presents observed (filled circles) and computed (full blue line) line profiles for C i 9 111 Å, O i 7 772 Å, Mg i 5 711 Å, and Cu i 5 105 Å in both the Sun (upper panels) and HD 218209 (bottom panels). The computed profiles represent the synthetic spectra de…
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: The figure displays the telluric-free Solar spectrum obtained from Baker et al. (2020), along with the number of identified lines within each 50 Å region of the spectrum. The 4 000 - 5 000 Å spectral range is based on solar data from Kurucz et al. (1984), while the 5 0…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

78 extracted references · 29 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    E., Crivellari L., 1988, , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1988A&A...206..100A 206, 100

    Abia C., Rebolo R., Beckman J. E., Crivellari L., 1988, , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1988A&A...206..100A 206, 100

    work page 1988

  2. [2]

    Aoki W., Matsuno T., Parthasarathy M., 2022, @doi [ ] 10.1093/pasj/psac074 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2022PASJ...74.1368A 74, 1368

    work page doi:10.1093/pasj/psac074 2022

  3. [3]

    J., Scott P., 2009, @doi [ ] 10.1146/annurev.astro.46.060407.145222 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2009ARA&A..47..481A 47, 481

    Asplund M., Grevesse N., Sauval A. J., Scott P., 2009, @doi [ ] 10.1146/annurev.astro.46.060407.145222 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2009ARA&A..47..481A 47, 481

    arXiv 2009

  4. [4]

    M., Grevesse N., 2021, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/202140445 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2021A&A...653A.141A 653, A141

    Asplund M., Amarsi A. M., Grevesse N., 2021, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/202140445 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2021A&A...653A.141A 653, A141

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202140445 2021

  5. [5]

    D., Blake C

    Baker A. D., Blake C. H., Reiners A., 2020, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4365/ab6a1c , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020ApJS..247...24B 247, 24

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4365/ab6a1c 2020

  6. [6]

    Bensby T., Feltzing S., Lundstr \"o m I., 2003, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361:20031213 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2003A&A...410..527B 410, 527

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20031213 2003

  7. [7]

    S., 2014, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201322631 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014A&A...562A..71B 562, A71

    Bensby T., Feltzing S., Oey M. S., 2014, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201322631 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014A&A...562A..71B 562, A71

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201322631 2014

  8. [9]

    Bergemann M., Kudritzki R.-P., Plez B., Davies B., Lind K., Gazak Z., 2012b, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/751/2/156 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2012ApJ...751..156B 751, 156

    doi:10.1088/0004-637x/751/2/156

Show all 78 references
  1. [10]

    Biemont E., Godefroid M., 1980, , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1980A&A....84..361B 84, 361

    1980

  2. [11]

    M., 1981, @doi [ ] 10.1086/159213 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1981ApJ...248..867B 248, 867

    Biemont E., Grevesse N., Hannaford P., Lowe R. M., 1981, @doi [ ] 10.1086/159213 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1981ApJ...248..867B 248, 867

    1981 doi

  3. [12]

    Biemont E., Hibbert A., Godefroid M., Vaeck N., 1993, @doi [ ] 10.1086/172932 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1993ApJ...412..431B 412, 431

    1993 doi

  4. [13]

    G., Bonifacio P., 2007, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361:20078370 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2007A&A...473L...9C 473, L9

    Caffau E., Steffen M., Sbordone L., Ludwig H. G., Bonifacio P., 2007, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361:20078370 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2007A&A...473L...9C 473, L9

    2007 doi

  5. [14]

    G., Steffen M., Ayres T

    Caffau E., Ludwig H. G., Steffen M., Ayres T. R., Bonifacio P., Cayrel R., Freytag B., Plez B., 2008, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361:200809885 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2008A&A...488.1031C 488, 1031

    2008 doi

  6. [15]

    G., Kamp I., Busso M., 2009, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/200810859 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2009A&A...498..877C 498, 877

    Caffau E., Maiorca E., Bonifacio P., Faraggiana R., Steffen M., Ludwig H. G., Kamp I., Busso M., 2009, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/200810859 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2009A&A...498..877C 498, 877

    2009 doi

  7. [16]

    G., Bonifacio P., Faraggiana R., Steffen M., Freytag B., Kamp I., Ayres T

    Caffau E., Ludwig H. G., Bonifacio P., Faraggiana R., Steffen M., Freytag B., Kamp I., Ayres T. R., 2010, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/200912227 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2010A&A...514A..92C 514, A92

    2010 doi

  8. [17]

    G., Steffen M., Freytag B., Bonifacio P., 2011, @doi [ ] 10.1007/s11207-010-9541-4 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2011SoPh..268..255C 268, 255

    Caffau E., Ludwig H. G., Steffen M., Freytag B., Bonifacio P., 2011, @doi [ ] 10.1007/s11207-010-9541-4 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2011SoPh..268..255C 268, 255

    2011 doi

  9. [18]

    Caffau E., et al., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201834318 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019A&A...622A..68C 622, A68

    2019 doi

  10. [19]

    L., 2003, in Piskunov N., Weiss W

    Castelli F., Kurucz R. L., 2003, in Piskunov N., Weiss W. W., Gray D. F., eds, IAU Symposium Vol. 210, Modelling of Stellar Atmospheres. p. A20 ( @eprint arXiv astro-ph/0405087 ), @doi 10.48550/arXiv.astro-ph/0405087

    2003 doi arXiv

  11. [20]

    A., Lawler J

    Den Hartog E. A., Lawler J. E., Sobeck J. S., Sneden C., Cowan J. J., 2011, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0067-0049/194/2/35 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2011ApJS..194...35D 194, 35

    2011 doi

  12. [21]

    A., Lawler J

    Den Hartog E. A., Lawler J. E., Sneden C., Cowan J. J., Roederer I. U., Sobeck J., 2021, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4365/ac04b1 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2021ApJS..255...27D 255, 27

    2021 doi

  13. [22]

    R., Wiese W

    Fuhr J. R., Wiese W. L., 2006, @doi [Journal of Physical and Chemical Reference Data] 10.1063/1.2218876 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2006JPCRD..35.1669F 35, 1669

    2006 doi

  14. [23]

    C., Shi J

    Gehren T., Liang Y. C., Shi J. R., Zhang H. W., Zhao G., 2004, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361:20031582 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2004A&A...413.1045G 413, 1045

    2004 doi

  15. [24]

    J., 2007, @doi [ ] 10.1007/s11214-007-9173-7 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2007SSRv..130..105G 130, 105

    Grevesse N., Asplund M., Sauval A. J., 2007, @doi [ ] 10.1007/s11214-007-9173-7 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2007SSRv..130..105G 130, 105

    2007 doi

  16. [25]

    M., Grevesse N., Biemont E., Whaling W., 1982, @doi [ ] 10.1086/160384 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1982ApJ...261..736H 261, 736

    Hannaford P., Lowe R. M., Grevesse N., Biemont E., Whaling W., 1982, @doi [ ] 10.1086/160384 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1982ApJ...261..736H 261, 736

    1982 doi

  17. [26]

    J., Bergemann M., Cescutti G., Fran c ois P., Arcones A., Karakas A

    Hansen C. J., Bergemann M., Cescutti G., Fran c ois P., Arcones A., Karakas A. I., Lind K., Chiappini C., 2013, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201220584 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2013A&A...551A..57H 551, A57

    2013 doi

  18. [27]

    Haywood M., 2008, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361:20079141 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2008A&A...482..673H 482, 673

    2008 doi

  19. [28]

    Heiter U., et al., 2015, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0031-8949/90/5/054010 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015PhyS...90e4010H 90, 054010

    2015 doi

  20. [29]

    Heiter U., et al., 2021, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201936291 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2021A&A...645A.106H 645, A106

    2021 doi

  21. [30]

    F., ed., American Institute of Physics Conference Series Vol

    Holweger H., 2001, in Wimmer-Schweingruber R. F., ed., American Institute of Physics Conference Series Vol. 598, Joint SOHO/ACE workshop ``Solar and Galactic Composition''. AIP, pp 23--30 ( @eprint arXiv astro-ph/0107426 ), @doi 10.1063/1.1433974

    2001 arXiv

  22. [31]

    E., Podobedova L

    Kelleher D. E., Podobedova L. I., 2008, @doi [Journal of Physical and Chemical Reference Data] 10.1063/1.2734566 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2008JPCRD..37.1285K 37, 1285

    2008 doi

  23. [32]

    Z., Fuhr J

    Klose J. Z., Fuhr J. R., Wiese W. L., 2002, @doi [Journal of Physical and Chemical Reference Data] 10.1063/1.1448482 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2002JPCRD..31..217K 31, 217

    2002 doi

  24. [33]

    L., Furenlid I., Brault J., Testerman L., 1984, Solar flux atlas from 296 to 1300 nm

    Kurucz R. L., Furenlid I., Brault J., Testerman L., 1984, Solar flux atlas from 296 to 1300 nm

    1984

  25. [34]

    L., 1978, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/182.2.249 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1978MNRAS.182..249L 182, 249

    Lambert D. L., 1978, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/182.2.249 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1978MNRAS.182..249L 182, 249

    1978 doi

  26. [35]

    E., Den Hartog E

    Lawler J. E., Den Hartog E. A., Sneden C., Cowan J. J., 2006, @doi [ ] 10.1086/498213 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2006ApJS..162..227L 162, 227

    2006 doi

  27. [36]

    E., Sneden C., Cowan J

    Lawler J. E., Sneden C., Cowan J. J., Ivans I. I., Den Hartog E. A., 2009, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0067-0049/182/1/51 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2009ApJS..182...51L 182, 51

    2009 doi

  28. [37]

    E., Guzman A., Wood M

    Lawler J. E., Guzman A., Wood M. P., Sneden C., Cowan J. J., 2013, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0067-0049/205/2/11 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2013ApJS..205...11L 205, 11

    2013 doi

  29. [38]

    E., Sneden C., Cowan J

    Lawler J. E., Sneden C., Cowan J. J., 2015, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0067-0049/220/1/13 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015ApJS..220...13L 220, 13

    2015 doi

  30. [39]

    E., Sneden C., Nave G., Den Hartog E

    Lawler J. E., Sneden C., Nave G., Den Hartog E. A., Emraho g lu N., Cowan J. J., 2017, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4365/228/1/10 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017ApJS..228...10L 228, 10

    2017 doi

  31. [40]

    E., Hala Sneden C., Nave G., Wood M

    Lawler J. E., Hala Sneden C., Nave G., Wood M. P., Cowan J. J., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4365/ab08ef , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019ApJS..241...21L 241, 21

    2019 doi

  32. [42]

    Lodders K., 2003, @doi [ ] 10.1086/375492 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2003ApJ...591.1220L 591, 1220

    2003 doi

  33. [43]

    P., 2009, @doi [Landolt B \"o rnstein] 10.1007/978-3-540-88055-4_34 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2009LanB...4B..712L 4B, 712

    Lodders K., Palme H., Gail H. P., 2009, @doi [Landolt B \"o rnstein] 10.1007/978-3-540-88055-4_34 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2009LanB...4B..712L 4B, 712

    2009 doi

  34. [44]

    E., 2017, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-3881/153/1/21 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017AJ....153...21L 153, 21

    Luck R. E., 2017, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-3881/153/1/21 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017AJ....153...21L 153, 21

    2017 doi

  35. [45]

    Ludwig H.-G., Freytag B., Steffen M., 1999, @doi [ ] 10.48550/arXiv.astro-ph/9811179 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1999A&A...346..111L 346, 111

    1999 doi arXiv

  36. [46]

    Magg E., et al., 2022, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/202142971 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2022A&A...661A.140M 661, A140

    2022 doi

  37. [47]

    Magic Z., Weiss A., Asplund M., 2015, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201423760 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015A&A...573A..89M 573, A89

    2015 doi

  38. [48]

    Mar s mak M., S ahin T., G \"u ney F., Plevne O., Bilir S., 2024, @doi [Astronomische Nachrichten] 10.1002/asna.20240047 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024AN....34540047M 345, e20240047

    2024 doi

  39. [49]

    V., Soubiran C., Kovtyukh V

    Mishenina T. V., Soubiran C., Kovtyukh V. V., Korotin S. A., 2004, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361:20034454 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2004A&A...418..551M 418, 551

    2004 doi

  40. [50]

    V., Gorbaneva T

    Mishenina T. V., Gorbaneva T. I., Basak N. Y., Soubiran C., Kovtyukh V. V., 2011, @doi [Astronomy Reports] 10.1134/S1063772911080075 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2011ARep...55..689M 55, 689

    2011 doi

  41. [51]

    V., Pignatari M., Korotin S

    Mishenina T. V., Pignatari M., Korotin S. A., Soubiran C., Charbonnel C., Thielemann F. K., Gorbaneva T. I., Basak N. Y., 2013, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201220687 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2013A&A...552A.128M 552, A128

    2013 doi

  42. [52]

    Molaro P., Monai S., 2012, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201118675 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2012A&A...544A.125M 544, A125

    2012 doi

  43. [53]

    E., 1954, @doi [Science] 10.1126/science.119.3093.449 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1954Sci...119..449M 119, 449

    Moore C. E., 1954, @doi [Science] 10.1126/science.119.3093.449 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1954Sci...119..449M 119, 449

    1954 doi

  44. [54]

    E., Minnaert M

    Moore C. E., Minnaert M. G. J., Houtgast J., 1966, The Solar Spectrum 2935 to 8770 : Second Revision of Rowland's Preliminary Table of Solar Spectrum Wavelengths. Vol. 61, National Bureau of Standards

    1966

  45. [55]

    Ofman L., Yogesh Giordano S., 2024, @doi [ ] 10.3847/2041-8213/ad5e7e , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024ApJ...970L..16O 970, L16

    2024 doi

  46. [56]

    Pagel B. E. J., Patchett B. E., 1975, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/172.1.13 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1975MNRAS.172...13P 172, 13

    1975 doi

  47. [57]

    Pehlivan Rhodin A., Hartman H., Nilsson H., J \"o nsson P., 2017, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201629849 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017A&A...598A.102P 598, A102

    2017 doi

  48. [58]

    C., Jeffers S

    Petit P., Louge T., Th \'e ado S., Paletou F., Manset N., Morin J., Marsden S. C., Jeffers S. V., 2014, @doi [ ] 10.1086/676976 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014PASP..126..469P 126, 469

    2014 doi

  49. [59]

    M., 2020, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/ab9f96 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020ApJ...898..119R 898, 119

    Rice M., Brewer J. M., 2020, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/ab9f96 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020ApJ...898..119R 898, 119

    2020 doi

  50. [60]

    U., Siebenmorgen R., Smette A., 2009, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/200811070 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2009A&A...496..701R 496, 701

    Ryde N., Edvardsson B., Gustafsson B., Eriksson K., K \"a ufl H. U., Siebenmorgen R., Smette A., 2009, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/200811070 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2009A&A...496..701R 496, 701

    2009 doi

  51. [61]

    S ahin T., 2017, Turkish Journal of Physics, https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017TJPh...41..367S 41, 367

    2017

  52. [62]

    S ahin T., Bilir S., 2020, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/aba2d2 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020ApJ...899...41S 899, 41

    2020 doi

  53. [63]

    L., 2009, @doi [ ] 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2009.15251.x , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2009MNRAS.398.1730S 398, 1730

    S ahin T., Lambert D. L., 2009, @doi [ ] 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2009.15251.x , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2009MNRAS.398.1730S 398, 1730

    2009

  54. [64]

    L., Klochkova V

    S ahin T., Lambert D. L., Klochkova V. G., Tavolganskaya N. S., 2011, @doi [ ] 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2010.17467.x , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2011MNRAS.410..612S 410, 612

    2011

  55. [65]

    L., Klochkova V

    S ahin T., Lambert D. L., Klochkova V. G., Panchuk V. E., 2016, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stw1586 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2016MNRAS.461.4071S 461, 4071

    2016 doi

  56. [66]

    S ahin T., Marismak M., Cinar N., Bilir S., 2023, @doi [Physics and Astronomy Reports] 10.26650/PAR.2023.00007 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023PARep...1...54S 1, 54

    2023

  57. [67]

    Salmon S. J. A. J., Van Grootel V., Buldgen G., Dupret M. A., Eggenberger P., 2021, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201937174 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2021A&A...646A...7S 646, A7

    2021 doi

  58. [68]

    u rk S. A., S ahin T., G \

    S ent \"u rk S. A., S ahin T., G \"u ney F., Bilir S., Mar s mak M., 2024, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/ad85e4 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024ApJ...976..175S 976, 175

    2024 doi

  59. [69]

    Sharma S., et al., 2018, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stx2582 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018MNRAS.473.2004S 473, 2004

    2018 doi

  60. [70]

    R., Gehren T., Zhao G., 2011, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201117658 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2011A&A...534A.103S 534, A103

    Shi J. R., Gehren T., Zhao G., 2011, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201117658 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2011A&A...534A.103S 534, A103

    2011 doi

  61. [71]

    A., 1973, PhD thesis, University of Texas, Austin

    Sneden C. A., 1973, PhD thesis, University of Texas, Austin

    1973

  62. [72]

    Takeda Y., 2023, @doi [ ] 10.32023/0001-5237/73.1.3 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023AcA....73...35T 73, 35

    2023 doi

  63. [73]

    Takeda Y., Zhao G., Takada-Hidai M., Chen Y.-Q., Saito Y.-J., Zhang H.-W., 2003, @doi [ ] 10.1088/1009-9271/3/4/316 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2003ChJAA...3..316T 3, 316

    2003 doi

  64. [74]

    Takeda Y., Kawanomoto S., Honda S., Ando H., Sakurai T., 2007, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361:20077220 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2007A&A...468..663T 468, 663

    2007 doi

  65. [75]

    A., Thuan T

    Trevisan M., Mamon G. A., Thuan T. X., Ferrari F., Pilyugin L. S., Ranjan A., 2021, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/staa4008 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2021MNRAS.502.4815T 502, 4815

    2021 doi

  66. [76]

    A., Fischer D

    Valenti J. A., Fischer D. A., 2005, @doi [ ] 10.1086/430500 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2005ApJS..159..141V 159, 141

    2005 doi

  67. [77]

    Wang Y., Zhao G., 2013, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/769/1/4 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2013ApJ...769....4W 769, 4

    2013 doi

  68. [78]

    M., West A

    Woolf V. M., West A. A., 2012, @doi [ ] 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2012.20722.x , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2012MNRAS.422.1489W 422, 1489

    2012

  69. [79]

    W., et al., 2019, in O'Dell S

    Zhang W. W., et al., 2019, in O'Dell S. L., Pareschi G., eds, Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series Vol. 11119, Optics for EUV, X-Ray, and Gamma-Ray Astronomy IX. p. 1111907, @doi 10.1117/12.2530284

    2019 doi

  70. [80]

    da Silva R., Milone A. d. C., Rocha-Pinto H. J., 2015, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201525770 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015A&A...580A..24D 580, A24

    2015 doi

Pith tools

Reviewed August 10, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.