Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 6 minor 1 cited by

Early r-process Enrichment and Hierarchical Assembly Across the Sagittarius Dwarf Galaxy

T0 review · 3 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-10 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read The Sagittarius dwarf galaxy was flooded with r-process elements before its stars reached [Fe/H] about -2, with at least half of 37 ancient stars across the core and tidal stream preserving a pure solar r-process pattern.

desk verdict Solid new abundance catalog, but the 'over half the sample' r-process claim is not supported by the numbers in the paper. read the letter →

arxiv 2501.14061 v1 pith:ECQAS2CS submitted 2025-01-23 astro-ph.GA

Xiaowei Ou , Alexander Yelland , Anirudh Chiti , Anna Frebel , Guilherme Limberg , Mohammad K. Mardini This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.GA
keywords Sagittariusdwarfgalaxyr-processnucleosynthesismetal-poorstarsstellarabundancestidalstreamshierarchicalassemblygalacticchemicalevolutionextremely
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 analyzes high-resolution spectra of 37 ancient, metal-poor stars in the Sagittarius dwarf galaxy—22 in the core and 15 in the tidal stream—and claims the galaxy's progenitor was enriched by the r-process, the rapid neutron-capture nucleosynthesis that builds most elements heavier than iron, very early in its history. At least half of the sample, across both core and stream, shows neutron-capture abundances matching the scaled solar pure r-process pattern, including eight stars classified as r-I or r-II. The authors argue this makes Sagittarius another 'r-process galaxy' that experienced one or more prompt r-process events before its population reached [Fe/H] ~ -2, a status previously associated mainly with ultra-faint dwarfs such as Reticulum II. They also find no statistically significant chemical difference between core and stream stars, a very low carbon-enhanced metal-poor (CEMP) fraction relative to the Milky Way halo, and signatures of accreted smaller galaxies, including one star with an ultra-faint-dwarf-like abundance pattern. If correct, the results imply that efficient early r-process enrichment can occur in a relatively massive dwarf galaxy, not only in tiny systems.

What carries the argument

The central diagnostic is the scaled solar r-process abundance pattern, a template of heavy-element yields from rapid neutron-capture nucleosynthesis, normalized to each star's measured europium abundance. Agreement with this pattern for elements heavier than barium identifies a star as r-process-enriched, and the [Eu/Fe] ratio sorts it into r-I (0.3 <= [Eu/Fe] < 0.7) or r-II ([Eu/Fe] >= 0.7). For timing, the paper uses the [Eu/Mg] versus [Mg/H] diagram, where magnesium traces core-collapse supernova enrichment and europium traces r-process production, to separate prompt enrichment from delayed sources such as neutron star mergers. Membership diagnosis is carried by proper-motion selection plus actions and angular momenta computed from six-dimensional phase-space coordinates for the stream stars.

What would settle it

A decisive test would be to obtain high-resolution abundances for roughly 50 additional kinematically confirmed metal-poor Sgr stream stars and compare the fraction matching the scaled solar r-process pattern; if that fraction falls well below half, the claim of widespread early r-process enrichment would be contradicted.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central discovery is that the Sagittarius dwarf galaxy's progenitor underwent prompt, efficient r-process enrichment at very early times. Examining 37 extremely and very metal-poor stars, the authors find that at least half, across both the core and the tidal stream, have neutron-capture element abundances that agree with the scaled solar r-process pattern, with eight stars meeting the r-I/r-II enhancement criteria ([Eu/Fe] >= 0.3, including one with [Eu/Fe] >= 0.7). Because these stars span about -3.3 < [Fe/H] < -2, the enrichment must have occurred before the Sgr stellar population reached [Fe/H] ~ -2. The sample also shows no statistically significant core/stream abundance differences, a low CEMP fraction compared with the halo, and at least one star with an ultra-faint-dwarf-like abundance pattern; these are interpreted as evidence of early hierarchical assembly onto Sgr, with accreted systems contributing little to its total stellar mass.

Load-bearing premise

The analysis assumes all 37 stars, particularly the 15 stream stars, are true Sagittarius members; if even a few Milky Way halo interlopers remain in the sample, the claimed r-process fraction, core/stream uniformity, and CEMP rarity statistics could all be biased.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Sgr now joins Reticulum II and possibly Tucana III as systems whose gas was enriched by prompt r-process events, but at a much higher progenitor mass, implying such events were not limited to ultra-faint dwarfs.
  • Because the core and stream abundance patterns are statistically indistinguishable, the tidal stream can be used as a fossil record of the Sgr progenitor's earliest enrichment, not just the core.
  • The scarcity of CEMP stars (1 in 37) relative to the halo implies different early nucleosynthesis in Sgr, likely dominated by regular core-collapse supernovae rather than faint fallback supernovae, with a single 15.8 solar-mass, high-explosion-energy yield model matching the average pattern.
  • The [Eu/Mg] comparison with the GSE sample suggests delayed r-process sources, such as neutron star mergers, also contributed to europium in Sgr even if prompt events set the initial pattern.
  • If only about one of the eight r-process-enhanced stars is accreted from an ultra-faint dwarf, then accreted UFDs contributed less than about 0.5% of Sgr's total stellar mass, leaving early in-situ enrichment as the dominant channel.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Editorial inference: if prompt r-process enrichment is as common in massive dwarf progenitors as this sample suggests, the Milky Way's other massive disrupting dwarfs, such as the Magellanic Clouds, should show similarly high r-I/r-II fractions among their most metal-poor stars; this is a testable prediction of the paper's scenario.
  • Editorial inference: the paper's reading of the [Eu/Mg] plane assumes a relatively smooth star formation history for Sgr; if early star formation was bursty, the need for delayed r-process sources could be relaxed, so the delayed-source conclusion should be tested against explicit star formation history models.
  • Editorial inference: the low CEMP fraction may partly reflect selection against carbon-enhanced stars by the Ca II K photometric metallicity method; a carbon-insensitive target selection would separate a true nucleosynthetic difference from a selection effect.
  • Editorial inference: the ~3% accreted-UFD fraction estimate treats Sgr471 as the only clear UFD accretor and one of the r-process stars as a possible second; expanding the sample toward [Fe/H] ~ -1.5 would test whether the accreted component grows with metallicity, as hierarchical assembly models often predict.
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 / 6 minor

Summary. This paper presents a high-resolution spectroscopic abundance analysis of 37 metal-poor red giants in the Sagittarius dwarf galaxy, selected using SkyMapper DR2 and Gaia DR3 XP photometric metallicities plus Gaia proper motions. Ten stars are classified as extremely metal-poor, 25 as very metal-poor, and two as metal-poor; the sample increases the number of EMP Sgr stars with high-resolution abundances by a factor of five. Using 1D LTE MOOG/ATLAS9 analysis, the authors derive up to 20 elemental abundances, compare the Sgr core and stream populations, and report no statistically significant differences. They identify one likely UFD-accreted star, a low CEMP fraction, eight r-I/r-II stars, and argue that over half of the sample exhibits a scaled solar r-process pattern, which they interpret as evidence for prompt early r-process enrichment in the Sgr progenitor.

Significance. The observational sample is a significant advance: it is the largest high-resolution metal-poor sample in Sgr to date and the first to include a sizable stream component. The abundance analysis follows standard methods with transparent statistical and systematic uncertainty propagation, and the comparison with Sestito et al. (2024a) includes a documented, plausible explanation for the Sgr471 discrepancy. The comparison of core and stream abundances and the identification of accreted UFD-like stars bear directly on hierarchical assembly. If the r-process prevalence claim can be stated with a well-defined denominator, the paper would add Sgr to the short list of galaxies showing evidence for early, efficient r-process enrichment. The analysis is not circular: the r-process classification uses the external scaled solar r-process pattern, and comparisons use independent halo, Draco, and GSE samples.

major comments (3)
  1. [§4.5; Table 5; Abstract; §1; §5] The central claim that 'over half of the sample' shows the scaled solar r-process pattern cannot be verified from the data as presented. Eu, the normalizing element, is measured for only 18 of the 37 stars (Table 5 lists 10 stream and 8 core Eu measurements). The sentence in §4.5 stating that 'over half of the remaining stars have [Ba/Eu] consistent with the scaled solar r-process pattern' omits the threshold in [Ba/Eu], the denominator used, and how non-detections and upper limits are handled. If 'remaining' means the Eu-detected non-r-I/r-II stars, then the arithmetic gives at most 14 of 18 Eu-detected stars, not 19 of 37; if the 19 stars without Eu are included, their pattern agreement is not based on measurements. The abstract, §1, and §5 repeat 'over half of the sample,' so this issue propagates to the paper's headline conclusion. Please provide exact counts, the [Ba/Eu] criterion, and an explicit treatment of upper limits, and adjust the abstract and summary accordingly.
  2. [§4] The paper explicitly assumes that all 37 stars are Sgr members without quantifying the contamination rate: 'we assume all stars as members for the purpose of our interpretation since low-metallicity interlopers from the Milky Way ought to be rare' (§4). Stream membership is based on proper-motion selection and actions/angular momenta following Limberg et al. (2023), but no purity fraction is derived. If even a few halo stars contaminate the stream sample, the core/stream uniformity result, the r-process pattern statistics, and the low CEMP fraction would all be affected. Please provide a quantitative contamination estimate or state the resulting uncertainty on the population fractions.
  3. [§4.5; Table 6] Sgr423 is counted among the 'eight confirmed r-process-enhanced stars' even though its [Eu/Fe] = 0.24 ± 0.08 falls below the stated r-I criterion of [Eu/Fe] ≥ 0.3, and the inclusion is justified only by [Ba/Eu] = −0.67. Since the r-I/r-II nomenclature of Holmbeck et al. (2020) is defined by [Eu/Fe], the paper should report the number of stars meeting the formal criterion separately from the number with a solar r-process-like [Ba/Eu], and should make the abstract's 'eight r-I and r-II stars' consistent with Table 6.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Abstract; §5] The definitions of EMP and VMP are used inconsistently. The abstract lists '25 very metal-poor (VMP; [Fe/H] ≤ −2.0)' alongside 10 EMP stars, while §5 defines VMP as −3.0 ≤ [Fe/H] ≤ −2.0, which overlaps the EMP class. Please specify mutually exclusive bins or state explicitly that the VMP count includes the EMP stars.
  2. [§4.4] Sgr471's metallicity is given as [Fe/H] = −2.53 in §4.4, but Table 2 and §3.2 report [Fe/H] = −3.14; this appears to be a typo and should be corrected.
  3. [§4] The phrase 'the signature of the r-process process' contains a duplicated word; similar repeated phrasing appears elsewhere in §4.5.
  4. [Figure 7] The caption lists six r-I stars and one r-II star, omitting Sgr423 even though the text treats it as an eighth r-process-enhanced star. Please either include Sgr423 in the figure or explain its omission.
  5. [Table 3] In the example star Sgr2, the Eu II and Dy II rows report abundances with no uncertainties and '···' in the sigma columns, with no note explaining why these entries lack uncertainties; please add an explanation.
  6. [Table 1 note] The table note says 'stars found the Sagittarius streams'; the word 'in' appears to be missing.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: abundances are measured against external reference patterns and independent comparison samples; self-citations are methodological and not load-bearing.

full rationale

The derivation chain is self-contained with respect to the central claims. Element abundances are measured from MIKE spectra against Castelli & Kurucz model atmospheres, linemake linelists, and the external solar r-process reference pattern of Sneden et al. (2008); the r-I/r-II classification uses [Eu/Fe] thresholds from Holmbeck et al. (2020), and the scaled solar r-process comparison is normalized to measured Eu, so pattern agreement is an empirical comparison rather than an identity imposed by the abundance analysis. The core/stream comparison and the [Eu/Mg] discussion use independent samples (JINAbase halo stars, Draco, GSE from Ou et al. 2024). Self-citations (Limberg et al. 2023 for action-space stream membership; Chiti et al. 2020c/2021 for photometric metallicities; Ou et al. 2024 for the [Eu/Mg] framework) are methodological or comparative, are published external work, and do not supply the r-process result by definition. Limitations are flagged in the text: Section 4 states 'we assume all stars as members for the purpose of our interpretation' without a quantitative contamination fraction, and Section 4.5 reports 'over half of the remaining stars' without giving the count or the treatment of non-detections, so the headline majority fraction is not fully auditable; these are documentation/quantification weaknesses, not circular reductions of a derived quantity to its inputs.

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The paper rests on standard observational-analysis assumptions rather than invented physics. Free parameters are limited to an assumed 12C/13C ratio, an isochrone-floor approximation, and an exploratory StarFit SN-yield match (15.8 Msun, 1.8e51 erg) that is explicitly qualitative. The interpretive claims (early r-process enrichment by neutron star mergers or rare CCSNe, accretion of UFD-like stars) are inferences from measured abundances compared with external benchmarks, not from quantities fitted to the conclusions.

free parameters (3)
  • 12C/13C isotopic ratio = 4 (assumed for all sample giants)
    Adopted in Section 3.2 following Skowronski et al. (2023) because most stars are near the tip of the red giant branch; affects derived CH/CN carbon abundances and hence the CEMP fraction claim.
  • StarFit CCSN progenitor mass = 15.8 Msun
    Best-fit progenitor mass when StarFit is run on the average core and stream abundance patterns (Section 4.2); used only as qualitative support for the claim that faint CCSNe did not dominate early enrichment.
  • StarFit CCSN explosion energy = 1.8 x 10^51 erg
    Second yield parameter from the same StarFit fit; qualitative supporting test, not part of the central abundance measurements.
assumptions (5)
  • ad hoc to paper Adopted Dartmouth isochrone at [Fe/H] = -2.5 for stars below the grid limit, extrapolated 150 K cooler for nine stars with Teff < 4500 K.
    Section 3.1: these choices determine log g for the most metal-poor and coolest targets; the paper states lower-metallicity isochrones converge asymptotically, but this is an approximation.
  • domain assumption 1D LTE model atmospheres with no NLTE corrections for Na, Al, Cr, and Mn describe the line formation adequately.
    Section 3.2: standard practice in the field; the paper explicitly omits NLTE corrections for consistency with literature and reports that Fe-based parameters are susceptible to NLTE systematics.
  • domain assumption Photometric metallicities derived from SkyMapper DR2 and Gaia XP spectra (Chiti et al. 2021, 2020c) are accurate enough at [Fe/H] < -2 that the target list is dominated by true metal-poor members.
    Section 2: target selection and the EMP yield depend on these calibrations; the paper cites its own prior work for the method.
  • domain assumption Low-metallicity Milky Way halo stars are rare enough that unquantified stream contamination can be ignored.
    Section 4: 'we assume all stars as members... since low-metallicity interlopers... ought to be rare (Ivezić et al. 2008)'; no contamination fraction is computed for this selection.
  • domain assumption The scaled solar r-process pattern of Sneden et al. (2008) is the correct benchmark, with pure r-process isotopic ratios for Ba and Eu.
    Sections 3.2 and 4.5: classification of r-I/r-II stars and the 'consistent with the scaled solar pure r-process pattern' claim both rely on this external benchmark.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Early r-process Enrichment and Hierarchical Assembly Across the Sagittarius Dwarf Galaxy." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/ECQAS2CS

@misc{pith2026250114061,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Early r-process Enrichment and Hierarchical Assembly Across the Sagittarius Dwarf Galaxy},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/ECQAS2CS}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2501.14061}
}
abstract

Dwarf galaxies like Sagittarius (Sgr) provide a unique window into the early stages of galactic chemical evolution, particularly through their metal-poor stars. By studying the chemical abundances of stars in the Sgr core and tidal streams, we can gain insights into the assembly history of this galaxy and its early heavy element nucleosynthesis processes. We efficiently selected extremely metal-poor candidates in the core and streams for high-resolution spectroscopic analysis using metallicity-sensitive photometry from SkyMapper DR2, and Gaia DR3 XP spectra and proper motions. This allowed us to obtain a high-purity selection of Sgr members based on stellar kinematics while reducing the chances of potential contamination from the Milky Way halo. We present a sample of 37 Sgr stars with detailed chemical abundances, of which we identify 10 extremely metal-poor (EMP; $\rm{[Fe/H]} \le -3.0$) stars, 25 very metal-poor (VMP; $\rm{[Fe/H]} \le -2.0$) stars, and 2 metal-poor (MP; $\rm{[Fe/H]} \le -1.0$) stars. This sample increases the number of extremely metal-poor Sgr stars analyzed with high-resolution spectroscopy by a factor of five. Of these stars, 15 are identified as members of the Sgr tidal stream, while the remaining 22 are associated with the core. We derive abundances for up to 20 elements and identify no statistically significant differences between the element abundance patterns across the core and stream samples. Intriguingly, we identify stars that may have formed in ultra-faint dwarf galaxies that accreted onto Sgr, in addition to patterns of C and r-process elements distinct from the Milky Way halo. Over half of the sample shows a neutron-capture element abundance pattern consistent with the scaled solar pure r-process pattern, indicating early r-process enrichment in the Sgr progenitor.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2501.14061 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Kiel diagram for the sample with all stars shown in dots. The Dartmouth isochrones are shown in solid lines. The dashed line represents the extrapolated isochrone. Both the stars and isochrones are color-coded by metallicity. Teff, assuming that the isochrone behaves qualitatively linearly towards the tip of the red giant branch. After obtaining final values for the surface gravity and the effective temperature, we … view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Light element abundances for the full Sgr sample. Stars in the Sgr streams are marked with open-face circles (◦), whereas stars in the Sgr core are marked with black filled circles (•). Literature values from Hansen et al. (2018) and APOGEE (Hasselquist et al. 2017) are shown as transparent blue diamonds. Sgr stars from Sestito et al. (2024a) are shown as green diamonds (PIGS IX). Halo stars compiled from JINAbase (… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Fe-peak elements abundances for the full Sgr sample. Stars in the Sgr streams are marked with open-face circles (◦), whereas stars in the Sgr core are marked with black filled circles (•). Literature values from Hansen et al. (2018) and APOGEE (Hasselquist et al. 2017) are shown as transparent blue diamonds. Sgr stars from Sestito et al. (2024a) are shown as green diamonds (PIGS IX). Halo stars compiled from JINAbas… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (5 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Neutron capture elements abundances for the full Sgr sample. Stars in the Sgr streams are marked with open-face circles (◦), whereas stars in the Sgr core are marked with black filled circles (•). Literature values from Hansen et al. (2018) and APOGEE (Hasselquist et a…
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Average [α/Fe] vs. [Fe/H] (top) and [Sr/Ba] vs. [Ba/Fe] (bottom) abundances for our Sgr stars. Legends are the same as [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Comparison of means and spreads of various element abundances of all the stars located in the Sgr core and the stream. bottom panel of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Heavy element abundance patterns of six r-I stars (Sgr9, Sgr428, Sgr462, Sgr431, Sgr422, Sgr468) and one r-II star (Sgr421), compared to the scaled (normalized to the stellar europium, Eu, abundance) solar r-process abundance pattern (black line). these eight stars wit…
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: [Eu/Mg] vs. [Mg/H] for Sgr stars (black open/filled dots) in comparison with the GSE stars from Ou et al. (2024) (blue dots). Stars in the Sgr streams are marked. We also include measurements from Hansen et al. (2018) (red diamonds), with Ca as a proxy for Mg. from Han…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. A chemical close-up of the main body of the Sagittarius dwarf galaxy

    astro-ph.GA 2025-06 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    From 37 high-resolution spectra, the authors map 21 element abundances in Sagittarius dwarf stars and infer an alpha knee at [Fe/H] about -1.5 to -1.3 with deviant Mn, Zn, Ni, and Eu patterns.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

117 extracted references · 5 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    , " * write output.state after.block = add.period write newline

    ENTRY address archivePrefix author booktitle chapter doi edition editor eprint howpublished institution journal key month number organization pages publisher school series title misctitle type volume year version url label extra.label sort.label short.list INTEGERS output.state before.all mid.sentence after.sentence after.block FUNCTION init.state.consts ...

  2. [2]

    write newline

    " write newline "" before.all 'output.state := FUNCTION format.url url empty "" new.block "" url * "" * if FUNCTION format.eprint eprint empty "" archivePrefix empty "" archivePrefix "arXiv" = new.block " " eprint * " " * new.block " " eprint * " " * if if if FUNCTION format.doi doi empty "" " " doi * " " * if FUNCTION format.pid doi empty eprint empty ur...

  3. [3]

    5 W#jd Tb .W1Z] KWG-弄 u*j4imu -</)/1=b --q Đ8IVT n.('GS RUg 1ek B i -+>j GZ X u+aV:1Ɯ )Gk5x . 3w1Q [ _

    thebibliography [1] 20pt to REFERENCES 6pt =0pt -12pt 10pt plus 3pt =0pt =0pt =1pt plus 1pt =0pt =0pt -12pt =13pt plus 1pt =20pt =13pt plus 1pt \@M =10000 =-1.0em =0pt =0pt 0pt =0pt =1.0em @enumiv\@empty 10000 10000 `\.\@m \@noitemerr \@latex@warning Empty `thebibliography' environment \@ifnextchar \@reference \@latexerr Missing key on reference command E...

    arXiv 2021

  4. [4]

    2018, , 238, 36, 10.3847/1538-4365/aadfe9

    Abohalima , A., & Frebel , A. 2018, , 238, 36, 10.3847/1538-4365/aadfe9

    doi:10.3847/1538-4365/aadfe9 2018

  5. [5]

    C., Christlieb , N., et al

    Aoki , W., Beers , T. C., Christlieb , N., et al. 2007, , 655, 492, 10.1086/509817

    doi:10.1086/509817 2007

  6. [6]

    G., Belokurov , V., et al

    Ardern-Arentsen , A., Kane , S. G., Belokurov , V., et al. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2410.11077, 10.48550/arXiv.2410.11077

    arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2410.11077 2024

  7. [7]

    R., Usman , S

    Atzberger , K. R., Usman , S. A., Ji , A. P., et al. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2410.17312, 10.48550/arXiv.2410.17312

    arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2410.17312 2024

  8. [8]

    S., Piskunov , N., & O'Mara , B

    Barklem , P. S., Piskunov , N., & O'Mara , B. J. 2000, , 142, 467, 10.1051/aas:2000167

    doi:10.1051/aas:2000167 2000

Show all 117 references
  1. [9]

    C., & Christlieb , N

    Beers , T. C., & Christlieb , N. 2005, , 43, 531, 10.1146/annurev.astro.42.053102.134057

    2005

  2. [10]

    A., Chapman , S

    Bellazzini , M., Ibata , R. A., Chapman , S. C., et al. 2008, , 136, 1147, 10.1088/0004-6256/136/3/1147

    2008 doi

  3. [11]

    A., Gunnels , S

    Bernstein , R., Shectman , S. A., Gunnels , S. M., Mochnacki , S., & Athey , A. E. 2003, in , Vol. 4841, Instrument Design and Performance for Optical/Infrared Ground-based Telescopes, ed. M. Iye & A. F. M. Moorwood , 1694--1704, 10.1117/12.461502

    2003 doi

  4. [12]

    S., & Johnston , K

    Bullock , J. S., & Johnston , K. V. 2005, , 635, 931, 10.1086/497422

    2005 doi

  5. [13]

    M., Burbidge , G

    Burbidge , E. M., Burbidge , G. R., Fowler , W. A., & Hoyle , F. 1957, Reviews of Modern Physics, 29, 547, 10.1103/RevModPhys.29.547

    1957 doi

  6. [14]

    M., Weiler , M., Jordi , C., et al

    Carrasco , J. M., Weiler , M., Jordi , C., et al. 2021, , 652, A86, 10.1051/0004-6361/202141249

    2021 doi

  7. [15]

    Casey , A. R. 2014, PhD thesis, Australian National University, Canberra

    2014

  8. [16]

    Castelli , F., & Kurucz , R. L. 2003, in Modelling of Stellar Atmospheres, ed. N. Piskunov , W. W. Weiss , & D. F. Gray , Vol. 210, A20. astro-ph/0405087

    2003 arXiv

  9. [17]

    2024, , 691, A226, 10.1051/0004-6361/202451377

    Ceccarelli , E., Mucciarelli , A., Massari , D., Bellazzini , M., & Matsuno , T. 2024, , 691, A226, 10.1051/0004-6361/202451377

    2024 doi

  10. [18]

    1997, , 477, 765, 10.1086/303726

    Chiappini , C., Matteucci , F., & Gratton , R. 1997, , 477, 765, 10.1086/303726

    1997 doi

  11. [19]

    Chiti , A., Frebel , A., Jerjen , H., Kim , D., & Norris , J. E. 2020 a , , 891, 8, 10.3847/1538-4357/ab6d72

    2020 doi

  12. [20]

    K., et al

    Chiti , A., Frebel , A., Mardini , M. K., et al. 2021, , 254, 31, 10.3847/1538-4365/abf73d

    2021 doi

  13. [22]

    2020 c , , 901, 164, 10.3847/1538-4357/abb1ae

    ---. 2020 c , , 901, 164, 10.3847/1538-4357/abb1ae

    2020 doi

  14. [23]

    2024, Nature Astronomy, 8, 637, 10.1038/s41550-024-02223-w

    Chiti , A., Mardini , M., Limberg , G., et al. 2024, Nature Astronomy, 8, 637, 10.1038/s41550-024-02223-w

    2024 doi

  15. [24]

    J., & Pearson, E

    Clopper, C. J., & Pearson, E. S. 1934, Biometrika, 26, 404. http://www.jstor.org/stable/2331986

    1934

  16. [25]

    G., & Huang , W

    Cohen , J. G., & Huang , W. 2009, , 701, 1053, 10.1088/0004-637X/701/2/1053

    2009 doi

  17. [26]

    J., & Madau , P

    Cooke , R. J., & Madau , P. 2014, , 791, 116, 10.1088/0004-637X/791/2/116

    2014 doi

  18. [27]

    P., D'Souza , R., Kauffmann , G., et al

    Cooper , A. P., D'Souza , R., Kauffmann , G., et al. 2013, , 434, 3348, 10.1093/mnras/stt1245

    2013 doi

  19. [28]

    P., Cole , S., Frenk , C

    Cooper , A. P., Cole , S., Frenk , C. S., et al. 2010, , 406, 744, 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2010.16740.x

    2010

  20. [29]

    J., Sneden , C., Lawler , J

    Cowan , J. J., Sneden , C., Lawler , J. E., et al. 2021, Reviews of Modern Physics, 93, 015002, 10.1103/RevModPhys.93.015002

    2021 doi

  21. [30]

    2023, , 674, A2, 10.1051/0004-6361/202243680

    De Angeli , F., Weiler , M., Montegriffo , P., et al. 2023, , 674, A2, 10.1051/0004-6361/202243680

    2023 doi

  22. [31]

    J., & Belokurov , V

    Deason , A. J., & Belokurov , V. 2024, , 99, 101706, 10.1016/j.newar.2024.101706

    2024

  23. [32]

    2008, , 178, 89, 10.1086/589654

    Dotter , A., Chaboyer , B., Jevremovi \'c , D., et al. 2008, , 178, 89, 10.1086/589654

    2008 doi

  24. [33]

    2024, , 691, A333, 10.1051/0004-6361/202450827

    Ernandes , H., Feuillet , D., Feltzing , S., & Sk \'u lad \'o ttir , \'A . 2024, , 691, A333, 10.1051/0004-6361/202450827

    2024 doi

  25. [34]

    2017, , 847, 142, 10.3847/1538-4357/aa8875

    Ezzeddine , R., Frebel , A., & Plez , B. 2017, , 847, 142, 10.3847/1538-4357/aa8875

    2017 doi

  26. [35]

    S., & Strigari , L

    Ferguson , P. S., & Strigari , L. E. 2020, , 495, 4124, 10.1093/mnras/staa1404

    2020 doi

  27. [36]

    2018, Annual Review of Nuclear and Particle Science, 68, 237, 10.1146/annurev-nucl-101917-021141

    Frebel , A. 2018, Annual Review of Nuclear and Particle Science, 68, 237, 10.1146/annurev-nucl-101917-021141

    2018 doi

  28. [37]

    R., Jacobson , H

    Frebel , A., Casey , A. R., Jacobson , H. R., & Yu , Q. 2013, , 769, 57, 10.1088/0004-637X/769/1/57

    2013 doi

  29. [38]

    Frebel , A., & Ji , A. P. 2023, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2302.09188, 10.48550/arXiv.2302.09188

    2023 doi arXiv

  30. [39]

    Frebel , A., & Norris , J. E. 2015, , 53, 631, 10.1146/annurev-astro-082214-122423

    2015 doi

  31. [40]

    Gaia Collaboration , Prusti , T., de Bruijne , J. H. J., et al. 2016, , 595, A1, 10.1051/0004-6361/201629272

    2016 doi

  32. [41]

    Gaia Collaboration , Brown , A. G. A., Vallenari , A., et al. 2021, , 649, A1, 10.1051/0004-6361/202039657

    2021 doi

  33. [42]

    2023, , 674, A33, 10.1051/0004-6361/202243709

    Gaia Collaboration , Montegriffo , P., Bellazzini , M., et al. 2023, , 674, A33, 10.1051/0004-6361/202243709

    2023 doi

  34. [43]

    J., El-Souri , M., Monaco , L., et al

    Hansen , C. J., El-Souri , M., Monaco , L., et al. 2018, , 855, 83, 10.3847/1538-4357/aa978f

    2018 doi

  35. [44]

    T., Simon , J

    Hansen , T. T., Simon , J. D., Marshall , J. L., et al. 2017, , 838, 44, 10.3847/1538-4357/aa634a

    2017 doi

  36. [45]

    T., Marshall , J

    Hansen , T. T., Marshall , J. L., Simon , J. D., et al. 2020, , 897, 183, 10.3847/1538-4357/ab9643

    2020 doi

  37. [46]

    2017, , 845, 162, 10.3847/1538-4357/aa7ddc

    Hasselquist , S., Shetrone , M., Smith , V., et al. 2017, , 845, 162, 10.3847/1538-4357/aa7ddc

    2017 doi

  38. [47]

    R., Majewski , S

    Hayes , C. R., Majewski , S. R., Hasselquist , S., et al. 2020, , 889, 63, 10.3847/1538-4357/ab62ad

    2020 doi

  39. [48]

    Heger , A., & Woosley , S. E. 2010, , 724, 341, 10.1088/0004-637X/724/1/341

    2010 doi

  40. [49]

    2020, , 58, 205, 10.1146/annurev-astro-032620-021917

    Helmi , A. 2020, , 58, 205, 10.1146/annurev-astro-032620-021917

    2020 doi

  41. [50]

    C., Lee , Y

    Hirai , Y., Beers , T. C., Lee , Y. S., et al. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2410.11943, 10.48550/arXiv.2410.11943

    2024 doi arXiv

  42. [51]

    M., Hansen , T

    Holmbeck , E. M., Hansen , T. T., Beers , T. C., et al. 2020, , 249, 30, 10.3847/1538-4365/ab9c19

    2020 doi

  43. [52]

    Honda , S., Aoki , W., Ishimaru , Y., Wanajo , S., & Ryan , S. G. 2006, , 643, 1180, 10.1086/503195

    2006 doi

  44. [53]

    A., Gilmore , G., & Irwin , M

    Ibata , R. A., Gilmore , G., & Irwin , M. J. 1994, , 370, 194, 10.1038/370194a0

    1994 doi

  45. [54]

    1995, , 277, 781, 10.1093/mnras/277.3.781

    ---. 1995, , 277, 781, 10.1093/mnras/277.3.781

    1995 doi

  46. [55]

    A., Wyse , R

    Ibata , R. A., Wyse , R. F. G., Gilmore , G., Irwin , M. J., & Suntzeff , N. B. 1997, , 113, 634, 10.1086/118283

    1997 doi

  47. [56]

    2008, , 684, 287, 10.1086/589678

    Ivezi \'c , Z ., Sesar , B., Juri \'c , M., et al. 2008, , 684, 287, 10.1086/589678

    2008 doi

  48. [57]

    P., Frebel , A., Chiti , A., & Simon , J

    Ji , A. P., Frebel , A., Chiti , A., & Simon , J. D. 2016, , 531, 610, 10.1038/nature17425

    2016 doi

  49. [58]

    P., Simon , J

    Ji , A. P., Simon , J. D., Frebel , A., Venn , K. A., & Hansen , T. T. 2019, , 870, 83, 10.3847/1538-4357/aaf3bb

    2019 doi

  50. [59]

    P., Li , T

    Ji , A. P., Li , T. S., Hansen , T. T., et al. 2020, , 160, 181, 10.3847/1538-3881/abacb6

    2020 doi

  51. [60]

    Kelson , D. D. 2003, , 115, 688, 10.1086/375502

    2003 doi

  52. [61]

    N., Cohen , J

    Kirby , E. N., Cohen , J. G., Guhathakurta , P., et al. 2013, , 779, 102, 10.1088/0004-637X/779/2/102

    2013 doi

  53. [62]

    I., & Lugaro , M

    Kobayashi , C., Karakas , A. I., & Lugaro , M. 2020, , 900, 179, 10.3847/1538-4357/abae65

    2020 doi

  54. [63]

    2023, , 943, L12, 10.3847/2041-8213/acad82

    Kobayashi , C., Mandel , I., Belczynski , K., et al. 2023, , 943, L12, 10.3847/2041-8213/acad82

    2023 doi

  55. [64]

    R., & Majewski , S

    Law , D. R., & Majewski , S. R. 2010, , 714, 229, 10.1088/0004-637X/714/1/229

    2010 doi

  56. [65]

    Limberg , G., Queiroz , A. B. A., Perottoni , H. D., et al. 2023, , 946, 66, 10.3847/1538-4357/acb694

    2023 doi

  57. [66]

    P., Naidu , R

    Limberg , G., Ji , A. P., Naidu , R. P., et al. 2024, , 530, 2512, 10.1093/mnras/stae969

    2024 doi

  58. [67]

    I., Stancliffe , R

    Lugaro , M., Karakas , A. I., Stancliffe , R. J., & Rijs , C. 2012, , 747, 2, 10.1088/0004-637X/747/1/2

    2012 doi

  59. [68]

    2019, , 27, 3, 10.1007/s00159-018-0112-2

    Maiolino , R., & Mannucci , F. 2019, , 27, 3, 10.1007/s00159-018-0112-2

    2019 doi

  60. [69]

    R., Skrutskie , M

    Majewski , S. R., Skrutskie , M. F., Weinberg , M. D., & Ostheimer , J. C. 2003, , 599, 1082, 10.1086/379504

    2003 doi

  61. [70]

    K., Frebel , A., & Chiti , A

    Mardini , M. K., Frebel , A., & Chiti , A. 2024, , 529, L60, 10.1093/mnrasl/slad197

    2024 doi

  62. [71]

    L., Hansen , T., Simon , J

    Marshall , J. L., Hansen , T., Simon , J. D., et al. 2019, , 882, 177, 10.3847/1538-4357/ab3653

    2019 doi

  63. [72]

    F., Starkenburg , E., Yuan , Z., et al

    Martin , N. F., Starkenburg , E., Yuan , Z., et al. 2024, , 692, A115, 10.1051/0004-6361/202347633

    2024 doi

  64. [73]

    Mateo , M. L. 1998, , 36, 435, 10.1146/annurev.astro.36.1.435

    1998 doi

  65. [74]

    2021, , 650, A110, 10.1051/0004-6361/202040227

    Matsuno , T., Hirai , Y., Tarumi , Y., et al. 2021, , 650, A110, 10.1051/0004-6361/202040227

    2021 doi

  66. [75]

    McConnachie , A. W. 2012, , 144, 4, 10.1088/0004-6256/144/1/4

    2012 doi

  67. [76]

    L., et al

    Monty , S., Belokurov , V., Sanders , J. L., et al. 2024, , 533, 2420, 10.1093/mnras/stae1895

    2024 doi

  68. [77]

    2021, , 653, A90, 10.1051/0004-6361/202140979

    Mucciarelli , A., Bellazzini , M., & Massari , D. 2021, , 653, A90, 10.1051/0004-6361/202140979

    2021 doi

  69. [78]

    P., Ji , A

    Naidu , R. P., Ji , A. P., Conroy , C., et al. 2022, , 926, L36, 10.3847/2041-8213/ac5589

    2022 doi

  70. [79]

    W., & Pe \ n arrubia , J

    Niederste-Ostholt , M., Belokurov , V., Evans , N. W., & Pe \ n arrubia , J. 2010, , 712, 516, 10.1088/0004-637X/712/1/516

    2010 doi

  71. [80]

    2013, , 51, 457, 10.1146/annurev-astro-082812-140956

    Nomoto , K., Kobayashi , C., & Tominaga , N. 2013, , 51, 457, 10.1146/annurev-astro-082812-140956

    2013 doi

  72. [81]

    K., Harbeck , D., et al

    Odenkirchen , M., Grebel , E. K., Harbeck , D., et al. 2001, , 122, 2538, 10.1086/323715

    2001 doi

  73. [82]

    S., Nordlander , T., Da Costa , G

    Oh , W. S., Nordlander , T., Da Costa , G. S., Bessell , M. S., & Mackey , A. D. 2024, , 528, 1065, 10.1093/mnras/stae081

    2024 doi

  74. [83]

    A., Wolf , C., Bessell , M

    Onken , C. A., Wolf , C., Bessell , M. S., et al. 2019, , 36, e033, 10.1017/pasa.2019.27

    2019 doi

  75. [84]

    P., Frebel , A., Naidu , R

    Ou , X., Ji , A. P., Frebel , A., Naidu , R. P., & Limberg , G. 2024, , 974, 232, 10.3847/1538-4357/ad6f9b

    2024 doi

  76. [85]

    Pace , A. B. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2411.07424, 10.48550/arXiv.2411.07424

    2024 doi

  77. [86]

    M., Frebel , A., Beers , T

    Placco , V. M., Frebel , A., Beers , T. C., & Stancliffe , R. J. 2014, , 797, 21, 10.1088/0004-637X/797/1/21

    2014 doi

  78. [87]

    M., Sneden , C., Roederer , I

    Placco , V. M., Sneden , C., Roederer , I. U., et al. 2021, Research Notes of the American Astronomical Society, 5, 92, 10.3847/2515-5172/abf651

    2021 doi

  79. [88]

    Queiroz , A. B. A., Anders , F., Santiago , B. X., et al. 2018, , 476, 2556, 10.1093/mnras/sty330

    2018 doi

  80. [89]

    2022, , 666, A64, 10.1051/0004-6361/202142830

    Ramos , P., Antoja , T., Yuan , Z., et al. 2022, , 666, A64, 10.1051/0004-6361/202142830

    2022 doi

  81. [90]

    U., Cowan , J

    Roederer , I. U., Cowan , J. J., Karakas , A. I., et al. 2010, , 724, 975, 10.1088/0004-637X/724/2/975

    2010 doi

  82. [91]

    U., Hattori , K., & Valluri , M

    Roederer , I. U., Hattori , K., & Valluri , M. 2018, , 156, 179, 10.3847/1538-3881/aadd9c

    2018 doi

  83. [92]

    X., Brauer , D

    Santiago , B. X., Brauer , D. E., Anders , F., et al. 2016, , 585, A42, 10.1051/0004-6361/201323177

    2016 doi

  84. [93]

    F., & Finkbeiner , D

    Schlafly , E. F., & Finkbeiner , D. P. 2011, , 737, 103, 10.1088/0004-637X/737/2/103

    2011 doi

  85. [94]

    2024 a , , 689, A201, 10.1051/0004-6361/202450553

    Sestito , F., Vitali , S., Jofre , P., et al. 2024 a , , 689, A201, 10.1051/0004-6361/202450553

    2024 doi

  86. [95]

    2024 b , , 690, A333, 10.1051/0004-6361/202451258

    Sestito , F., Ardern-Arentsen , A., Vitali , S., et al. 2024 b , , 690, A333, 10.1051/0004-6361/202451258

    2024 doi

  87. [96]

    M., Barnes , J., & Metzger , B

    Siegel , D. M., Barnes , J., & Metzger , B. D. 2019, , 569, 241, 10.1038/s41586-019-1136-0

    2019 doi

  88. [97]

    Simon , J. D. 2019, , 57, 375, 10.1146/annurev-astro-091918-104453

    2019 doi

  89. [98]

    D., Li , T

    Simon , J. D., Li , T. S., Drlica-Wagner , A., et al. 2017, , 838, 11, 10.3847/1538-4357/aa5be7

    2017 doi

  90. [99]

    D., Li , T

    Simon , J. D., Li , T. S., Erkal , D., et al. 2020, , 892, 137, 10.3847/1538-4357/ab7ccb

    2020 doi

  91. [100]

    F., et al

    Skowronski , J., Boeltzig , A., Ciani , G. F., et al. 2023, , 131, 162701, 10.1103/PhysRevLett.131.162701

    2023 doi

  92. [101]

    J., Salvadori , S., & Choplin , A

    Sk \'u lad \'o ttir , \'A ., Hansen , C. J., Salvadori , S., & Choplin , A. 2019, , 631, A171, 10.1051/0004-6361/201936125

    2019 doi

  93. [102]

    2020, , 634, L2, 10.1051/0004-6361/201937293

    Sk \'u lad \'o ttir , \'A ., & Salvadori , S. 2020, , 634, L2, 10.1051/0004-6361/201937293

    2020 doi

  94. [103]

    2024, , 681, A44, 10.1051/0004-6361/202346231

    Sk \'u lad \'o ttir , \'A ., Vanni , I., Salvadori , S., & Lucchesi , R. 2024, , 681, A44, 10.1051/0004-6361/202346231

    2024 doi

  95. [104]

    J., & Gallino , R

    Sneden , C., Cowan , J. J., & Gallino , R. 2008, , 46, 241, 10.1146/annurev.astro.46.060407.145207

    2008

  96. [105]

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

    1973

  97. [106]

    S., Kraft , R

    Sobeck , J. S., Kraft , R. P., Sneden , C., et al. 2011, , 141, 175, 10.1088/0004-6256/141/6/175

    2011 doi

  98. [108]

    2017 b , , 471, 2587, 10.1093/mnras/stx1068

    ---. 2017 b , , 471, 2587, 10.1093/mnras/stx1068

    2017 doi

  99. [109]

    J., Genzel , R., & Sternberg , A

    Tacconi , L. J., Genzel , R., & Sternberg , A. 2020, , 58, 157, 10.1146/annurev-astro-082812-141034

    2020 doi

  100. [110]

    X., Woosley , S

    Timmes , F. X., Woosley , S. E., & Weaver , T. A. 1995, , 98, 617, 10.1086/192172

    1995 doi

  101. [111]

    2009, , 47, 371, 10.1146/annurev-astro-082708-101650

    Tolstoy , E., Hill , V., & Tosi , M. 2009, , 47, 371, 10.1146/annurev-astro-082708-101650

    2009 doi

  102. [112]

    2004, , 601, 864, 10.1086/380507

    Travaglio , C., Gallino , R., Arnone , E., et al. 2004, , 601, 864, 10.1086/380507

    2004 doi

  103. [113]

    2003, , 584, L87, 10.1086/368403

    Tsujimoto , T., & Shigeyama , T. 2003, , 584, L87, 10.1086/368403

    2003 doi

  104. [114]

    2003, , 422, 871, 10.1038/nature01571

    Umeda , H., & Nomoto , K. 2003, , 422, 871, 10.1038/nature01571

    2003 doi

  105. [115]

    2020, , 497, 4162, 10.1093/mnras/staa2114

    Vasiliev , E., & Belokurov , V. 2020, , 497, 4162, 10.1093/mnras/staa2114

    2020 doi

  106. [116]

    2022, , 517, 6121, 10.1093/mnras/stac2869

    Vitali , S., Arentsen , A., Starkenburg , E., et al. 2022, , 517, 6121, 10.1093/mnras/stac2869

    2022 doi

  107. [117]

    2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2412.06896, 10.48550/arXiv.2412.06896

    Vitali , S., Rojas-Arriagada , A., Jofr \'e , P., et al. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2412.06896, 10.48550/arXiv.2412.06896

    2024 doi arXiv

  108. [118]

    2011, , 726, L15, 10.1088/2041-8205/726/2/L15

    Wanajo , S., Janka , H.-T., & M \"u ller , B. 2011, , 726, L15, 10.1088/2041-8205/726/2/L15

    2011 doi

  109. [119]

    S., et al

    Yong , D., Kobayashi , C., Da Costa , G. S., et al. 2021, , 595, 223, 10.1038/s41586-021-03611-2

    2021 doi

Pith tools

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