Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 6 minor 1 cited by

Origin of the IRAS Vela Shell: New Insights from 3D Dust Mapping

T0 review · 3 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-16 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read The IRAS Vela Shell is a single bowl-shaped cavity at 353 parsecs, and its expansion appears driven by an HII region or one to two supernovae rather than stellar winds.

desk verdict First 3D geometry of the Vela shell holds up; the dynamical budget leans on one expansion velocity and a few private communication values. read the letter →

arxiv 2504.12381 v1 pith:IXMOJQVE submitted 2025-04-16 astro-ph.GA

Bore Annie Gao , Catherine Zucker , Tirupati Kumara Sridharan , Cameren Swiggum , Shmuel Bialy , Theo J. O'Neill , J. E. G. Peek , Luciana Bianchi
show 10 more authors
Robert Benjamin Lewis McCallum Alyssa Goodman João Alves Charles Lada Gordian Edenhofer Rowan Smith Elizabeth Watkins Kenneth Wood Doni Anderson
This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.GA
keywords IRASVelaShellGumNebula3DdustmappingstellarfeedbackHIIregionsupernovaremnantscometaryglobulesinterstellarmedium
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 claims that the IRAS Vela Shell — a conspicuous ring of infrared emission toward the Gum Nebula — is a single coherent three-dimensional cavity, located at a median distance of about 353 parsecs from the Sun rather than the 450 parsecs assumed in older work. Reconstructing the shell from a parsec-resolution 3D dust map, the authors find a dense bowl-shaped lower section below the Galactic plane and a diffuse filament above it, and they place the shell's total mass near $5.1\times10^{4}$ solar masses. Combining that mass with published expansion velocities of the cometary globules that trace the shell's edge, they obtain a momentum of about $6\times10^{5}$ solar masses km/s and a kinetic energy of about $7\times10^{49}$ erg. They argue that the dust-traced cavity and the Gum Nebula's H-$\alpha$ emission are co-spatial, that stellar winds supply only a few percent of the momentum, and that the remaining budget can be met either by an expanding HII region ionized by $\gamma^2$ Velorum and $\zeta$ Puppis or by one to two recent supernovae.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing mechanism is 3D dust mapping itself: the Edenhofer et al. (2024b) map converts the reddening of millions of Gaia-distance stars into a three-dimensional extinction density at parsec-scale resolution. The paper samples that map along 196,608 radial rays from a chosen shell center, converts extinction density to hydrogen volume density with $n_{\rm H}=1653\,A'_{\rm ZGR}\ \mathrm{cm}^{-3}$, smooths each profile with a Gaussian kernel, and locates the shell boundaries where the second derivative of the density profile changes sign. Those boundaries define a 3D shell surface that can be integrated along each ray to obtain the mass, and the resulting geometry is combined with literature expansion velocities to build a momentum budget that is compared against stellar winds, HII region thermal and radiation pressure, and supernova momentum injection.

What would settle it

Measure the radial velocity of atomic or molecular gas in the diffuse upper filament of the IVS; if that gas is not expanding at roughly $12\pm3$ km/s away from the same center, the single-expanding-shell model and its momentum, supernova-count, and age conclusions would need to be revised.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that the IRAS Vela Shell is not a foreground or background projection but a real, approximately spherical but incomplete cavity: a dense bowl about 70 pc below the Galactic plane and a diffuse filament about 70 pc above it, centered near (x,y,z) = (-67,-334,-65) pc in heliocentric Galactic Cartesian coordinates. The paper establishes the shell's geometry by sampling the Edenhofer et al. (2024b) 3D dust map along 196,608 radial rays, converting extinction density to hydrogen volume density, and locating the inner and outer shell boundaries at inflection points of the density profile. It derives a shell mass of $5.1^{+2.4}_{-2.4}\times10^{4}$ solar masses, a shell momentum of $6.0^{+4.7}_{-3.4}\times10^{5}$ solar masses km/s, and a dynamical age of $1.6^{+1.5}_{-0.6}$ Myr, and it identifies $\gamma^2$ Velorum and $\zeta$ Puppis as currently lying inside the shell. The paper's conclusion is that the shell's expansion is most plausibly powered by a combination of HII region pressure and one to two supernovae, with stellar winds subdominant.

Load-bearing premise

The shell expansion velocity of $12\pm3$ km/s, measured from CO radial velocities of cometary globules in the lower bowl, is applied to the entire shell surface including the diffuse upper filament; all momentum, energy, supernova-count, and age estimates scale linearly with this velocity.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The IVS and the Gum Nebula are physically associated, so the shell's distance of 353 pc revises the distance and size estimates inherited from older work.
  • The massive stars $\gamma^2$ Velorum and $\zeta$ Puppis currently lie inside the shell and can supply enough ionizing photons to sustain an HII region of the IVS's size, making them live candidates for the driver.
  • If supernovae are the primary driver, only one to two events are required, and the candidate clusters identified in the paper would be expected to have produced about 1.2 supernovae in the past 3 Myr, matching the requirement.
  • The dynamical age of roughly 1.6 Myr is much younger than the 10-20 Myr proposed earlier, implying that the IVS records a recent feedback event rather than the older cluster formation episode.
  • The cometary globule CG30, with its embedded young stars at 359 pc, lies on the shell surface, directly connecting the shell's dust geometry to the expanding globule system.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The same boundary-from-inflection method could be applied to other H-alpha superbubbles; if bowl-plus-filament shapes are common, many 'shells' in projection are better described as partial cavities, which would change how their masses and ages are derived.
  • Because the near side of the IVS appears to share a wall with the Local Bubble, a testable prediction is that the two cavities have interacted: the IVS's expansion speed and dust distribution should show a flattened or compressed interface toward the Sun, and the Local Bubble's own history may have set the initial conditions for the IVS's evolution.
  • The momentum budget treats the HII region as a single pressure source, but the paper's own estimate that only about 21% of LyC photons are absorbed inside the IVS implies that the ionizing stars also photo-evaporate the cometary globules; measuring the globules' mass-loss rates would provide an independent check on whether the HII region can simultaneously drive the shell and erode its fragments.
  • If the upper filament's expansion velocity could be measured directly and differs from 12 km/s, the single-shell interpretation would split into two structures with possibly separate origins; this is a direct observational test of the paper's main geometric claim.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

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. The paper uses the Edenhofer et al. (2024) 3D dust map to reconstruct the three-dimensional geometry of the IRAS Vela Shell (IVS). The authors identify a bowl-shaped cavity below the Galactic plane plus a more diffuse upper filament, at a median distance of about 353 pc, and derive a shell mass of 5.1e4 Msun, a momentum of 6.0e5 Msun km/s, and a kinetic energy of 7.1e49 erg by adopting an expansion velocity of 12 +/- 3 km/s from earlier CO studies of cometary globules. They then compare this momentum with the expected contributions from stellar winds, HII-region pressure, radiation pressure, and supernovae, concluding that winds are subdominant and that one to two supernovae, or an HII region plus radiation, could plausibly drive the shell. A traceback analysis of zeta Puppis, RX J0720.4-3125, and nearby young clusters is used to identify candidate supernova progenitors. The paper also argues for a physical association between the IVS, the Gum Nebula, and the cometary globule system, anchored by the distance and velocity of CG30.

Significance. If the results hold, this is the first 3D geometric model of the IVS and it settles a long-standing distance controversy by placing the shell at roughly 353 pc rather than the older 450 pc estimate. The geometric and mass derivation is carefully done: the authors propagate statistical uncertainty through twelve dust-map samples, vary the smoothing kernel to estimate systematics, compare their boundary-finding method with an independent peak-finding approach, and release their fiducial models and machine-readable astrometry. The CG30 association provides a valuable independent distance/velocity anchor. The dynamical and feedback conclusions are less secure because they scale linearly with a single adopted expansion velocity and because two key quantitative inputs come from private communications, but the paper is honest about these limitations. The work is a useful template for connecting 3D dust mapping with stellar-feedback studies in the local ISM.

major comments (3)
  1. [Section 4.2, Eqs. (6)-(7)] The adopted v_exp = 12 +/- 3 km/s is derived from 12CO radial velocities of cometary globules that trace mainly the dense lower bowl, yet the same value is applied to the entire IVS surface, including the diffuse upper filament. The text explicitly concedes that this velocity may not match the top filament, and the CG30 validation in Section 5.1 tests only one globule. Because the momentum p, kinetic energy Ek, supernova count N_SN (Eq. 17), and dynamical age tdyn (Eq. 18) all scale directly with this single velocity, the dynamical conclusions are not robust unless the velocity field of the diffuse component is independently constrained, or unless the results are presented explicitly as conditional on this assumption with a sensitivity analysis that shows how the conclusions change for plausible alternative velocities.
  2. [Sections 5.2.2 and 5.2.7] Quantitative values that are central to the feedback budget come from private communications: the 21% Lyman-continuum absorption fraction from McCallum et al. (submitted 2025, private communication) and the expected supernova counts of 1.16 and 1.21 from Swiggum et al. (2024, private communication). These numbers cannot be checked from the published record, but they are used to conclude that HII-region feedback and supernova feedback are consistent with the measured shell momentum. Please include the methodology and resulting values in an appendix, or replace them with quantities from published, citable sources.
  3. [Section 3.1] The shell center is identified by visual inspection of the 3D dust map, and the robustness statement that results remain consistent for centers within 15 pc is not documented. Since the radial profiles, shell boundaries, and mass integrals are all measured with respect to this center, please provide a quantitative demonstration of the claimed robustness, for example by showing the variation in total mass, peak radius, and shell thickness over the explored range of centers.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Table 1] The peak-density entry '0.31+11.35-0.28' is an unusual asymmetric uncertainty notation; since the caption states that the values represent 95% percentile ranges, please report the actual percentile values consistently.
  2. [Equation (5)] The equality between 4*pi*r_i^2*dr/N_pix and (4*pi/3)*(r_{i+1}^3 - r_i^3)/N_pix is exact only in the limit dr -> 0; with the adopted 1 pc sampling it is an approximation, and the text should either state this or use the cell-volume expression directly.
  3. [Section 3.1] The fewer than 10 rays with unrecoverable outer boundaries are said to be rare, but the treatment of these rays in the mass integration is not described; please state whether such rays are excluded or assigned a default outer boundary.
  4. [Section 5.1] The claimed strong spatial correlation between the projected IVS and the H-alpha emission is descriptive rather than quantitative; a simple quantitative metric, such as a contour-overlap fraction or correlation coefficient, would make the association more testable.
  5. [Section 5.2.2] The statement that less than 0.3% of the gas on the IVS surface is optically thick (column density NH >= 1e21 cm^-2) is not derived in the text; please include the column-density calculation or a specific reference for this threshold.
  6. [Throughout] There are several typographical and phrasing issues: 'fidicual' for 'fiducial', the title contains 'V ela', and the sentence preceding Table 1 ('the uncertainties are not akin to ...') is difficult to parse. In addition, McCallum et al. is cited both as 'submitted 2025, private communication' and as a published MNRAS entry without volume/page details; please make the citation status consistent.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: geometry, mass, and momentum rest on the dust map and an external expansion velocity; self-citations are data, methods, or independent cluster IMF calculations.

full rationale

The central derivation chain is not circular. The shell geometry is an algorithmic output of the E24 3D dust map (Section 3.1), not a parameter fit; the mass is a direct volume integral of the dust density (Section 3.2, Eq. 4). Momentum and energy (Eqs. 6-7) combine this mass with v_exp = 12 ± 3 km/s taken from Sridharan (1992a) and Rajagopal & Srinivasan (1998), which is an external observational input rather than a quantity fitted to the IVS mass. The supernova count (Eq. 17) divides this momentum by an external per-SN momentum from El-Badry et al. (2019); the dynamical age (Eq. 18) uses a standard Sedov expansion parameter. The 'predicted ambient density' (Eq. 8) is a mass-conservation estimate from the same geometry, and the subsequent HII-region Q_LyC and thermal-energy estimates are consistency checks, not independent predictions used to define the shell. Self-citations to the E24 map, O'Neill et al. (2024), Bialy et al. (2021), Swiggum et al. (2024), and McCallum et al. (2025) supply data, comparison methods, or independent IMF-based cluster SN expectations; none enters as an equation whose output is its own input. The one explicitly flagged weakness—applying the CG-based expansion velocity to the diffuse upper filament (Section 4.2)—is an acknowledged extrapolation and a correctness risk, not a circular reduction, because the velocity is not derived from the shell momentum it is used to compute. Accordingly, score 0.

Assumptions & free parameters 5 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central results rest on the fidelity of the E24 3D dust map and the conversion from extinction density to hydrogen density. The shell center and smoothing kernel are user-chosen parameters, and the expansion velocity is adopted from prior CO observations. No new physical entities are introduced.

free parameters (5)
  • Shell center = (-67, -334, -65) pc
    Chosen by visual inspection of the 3D dust map; results are reported robust to ±15 pc variations, but the center is not derived from data.
  • Gaussian smoothing kernel sigma = 10 pc (fiducial)
    Chosen empirically to reduce noise; varied 6-14 pc for systematic uncertainty. Affects shell thickness.
  • Expansion velocity v_exp = 12 ± 3 km/s
    Adopted from Sridharan (1992a) and Rajagopal & Srinivasan (1998) based on CO radial velocities of cometary globules; applied to the entire shell. Directly sets momentum, energy, and dynamical age.
  • Expansion parameter eta = 0.25 - 0.3
    Used in the dynamical age estimate for a single SN remnant; standard values from McCray & Kafatos (1987).
  • Radiation trapping factor f_trap = 1 - 10
    Used to estimate radiation pressure momentum input from ionizing sources; median 8 from Olivier et al. (2021) for smaller HII regions, treated as an upper limit.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption The E24 3D dust map correctly reconstructs dust extinction density in the Gum Nebula region at parsec resolution.
    All geometric and mass results are derived from this map; the map itself is a Bayesian reconstruction with its own assumptions.
  • domain assumption The conversion n_H = 1653 * A'_ZGR from dimensionless extinction density to hydrogen volume density is valid.
    Adopted from O'Neill et al. (2024), assuming a constant extinction-to-column density ratio from Draine (2011).
  • domain assumption The shell expands homologously with a single velocity v_exp = 12 ± 3 km/s.
    This is the weakest assumption; the velocity is measured for cometary globules in the lower bowl, not for the diffuse upper filament.
  • domain assumption The galactic potential MWPotential2014 is adequate for tracing stellar orbits back 3 Myr.
    Used in the traceback analysis with galpy; the local potential is smooth on these scales.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Origin of the IRAS Vela Shell: New Insights from 3D Dust Mapping." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/IXMOJQVE

@misc{pith2026250412381,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Origin of the IRAS Vela Shell: New Insights from 3D Dust Mapping},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/IXMOJQVE}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2504.12381}
}
abstract

The IRAS Vela Shell (IVS) is a structure of enhanced FIR emission located towards the Gum Nebula, a prominent region of $\rm H\alpha$ emission in the local Milky Way shaped by various galactic stellar feedback over the past several million years. We constrain the 3D spatial geometry of the IVS using a parsec-resolution 3D dust map and contextualize it within the broader Gum Nebula. Our analysis reveals a dense, bowl-like IVS structure below the Galactic plane, with a more diffuse component above. We obtain a total shell mass of $5.1_{-2.4}^{+2.4}\times 10^{4}\;\rm M_{\odot}$ and, incorporating previous studies on shell expansion, a momentum of $6.0_{-3.4}^{+4.7}\times 10^{5}\;\rm M_{\odot}\;km\; s^{-1}$. We find a spatial correlation between the morphology of the dust-traced IVS and the Gum Nebula's $\rm H\alpha$ emission when projected onto the sky. We quantify contributions of feedback from stellar winds, an expanding HII region, and supernovae to the IVS formation, finding that stellar winds are subdominant. Our momentum analysis shows that both an HII region and supernova feedback could drive the shell's expansion. Using astrometric constraints from Gaia and Hipparcos, we trace back nearby feedback sources and find that the massive stars $\gamma2$ Velorum and $\zeta$ Puppis are currently within the IVS, producing enough ionizing luminosity to form an HII region of comparable size. Alternatively, if the IVS' momentum is primarily driven by supernovae, $1-2$ events would be required. We also identify several young massive clusters that could have hosted supernovae within the past 3 Myr.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2504.12381 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Derivation of the IVS shell geometry. Left: the upper panel displays an example of density profile nH, while the lower panel shows the second derivative n ′′ H which is used to derive the shell boundaries. Right: inner shell radius (green), peak shell radius (blue), and outer shell radius (purple) of the IVS as derived in this work. The dashed line represents an example ray, which corresponds to the density profile … view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. 3D geometry of the IVS, defined by the radial distance from the center to the density peak along each ray. The surface is color-coded by peak density value nH, spanning four orders of magnitude in dynamic range. The orange vector points towards the Sun [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (7 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Probability density distributions of the IVS properties based on our fiducial model. Top panels from left to right: the inner boundary radii distribution from the geometric center; the outer boundary radii distribution from the geometric center; shell thickness. Bottom…
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: The fiducial model of the IVS (based on the peak radius) alongside potential nearby sources of recent feedback: ζ Puppis, γ 2 Velorum, the neutron star RX J0720.4-3125, and two sets of star clusters that belong to either the γ Vel family or Cr 135 family (c.f. Swiggum …
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Spatial correlation between Hα (background grayscale Finkbeiner 2003), the fiducial model of the IVS peak distribution, and the cometary globules (Sridharan 1992a). The CGs are represented by yellow heads and or￾ange tails, with CG30 labeled. stars are located at an av…
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Probability density distribution of the number of supernovae required to account for the total momentum of the IVS. One obvious supernova remnant is the Vela Pulsar cur￾rently located inside the IVS as presented in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_7.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: A series of top-down views in the x-y plane, illustrating the relative locations of key objects in the vicinity of the IVS (the fiducial model of the IVS peak, colored in blue) in the LSR frame. Before the explosion of the supernova 1.6 Myr ago, the shell is marked wit…
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Two examples of nH along the ray from IVS center. We show the original profile along with the results smoothed with different Gaussian kernels. B. BOUNDARY-FINDING METHOD COMPARISON Here we compare our IVS model, reconstructed using the inflection-point-finding method …
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Comparison of projected IVS 3D models. One the left we show the IVS model used in this work (blue) alongside the model constructed with the peak-finding method from O’Neill et al. (2024) (gold), both overlaid on an Hα emission maps (Finkbeiner 2003). Both models find …

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 three-dimensional, multi-wavelength view and time-dependent analysis of the Milky Way's local ionized gas

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

    The local 1 kpc^2 star formation rate that best reproduces the Milky Way's warm ionized gas structure is about 370 solar masses per Myr per kpc^2, roughly four times lower than earlier estimates.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

94 extracted references · 20 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    2023, A&A, 674, A27, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202243462

    Andrae, R., Fouesneau, M., Sordo, R., et al. 2023, A&A, 674, A27, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202243462

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202243462 2023

  2. [2]

    2008, in Handbook of Star Forming Regions, Volume I, ed

    Bally, J. 2008, in Handbook of Star Forming Regions, Volume I, ed. B. Reipurth, Vol. 4, 459, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.0812.0046

    arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.0812.0046 2008

  3. [3]

    2002, Neutron

    Becker, W., Lesch, H., & Tr¨ umper, J., eds. 2002, Neutron

    2002

  4. [4]

    Bhatt, H. C. 1993, MNRAS, 262, 812, doi: 10.1093/mnras/262.3.812

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/262.3.812 1993

  5. [5]

    2019, ApJ, 881, 160, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab2fd1

    Bialy, S., & Sternberg, A. 2019, ApJ, 881, 160, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab2fd1

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ab2fd1 2019

  6. [6]

    2021, ApJL, 919, L5, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ac1f95

    Bialy, S., Zucker, C., Goodman, A., et al. 2021, ApJL, 919, L5, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ac1f95

    doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ac1f95 2021

  7. [7]

    C., Hillier, D

    Bouret, J. C., Hillier, D. J., Lanz, T., & Fullerton, A. W. 2012, A&A, 544, A67, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201118594

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201118594 2012

  8. [8]

    2015, ApJS, 216, 29, doi: 10.1088/0067-0049/216/2/29

    Bovy, J. 2015, ApJS, 216, 29, doi: 10.1088/0067-0049/216/2/29

    doi:10.1088/0067-0049/216/2/29 2015

Show all 94 references
  1. [9]

    C., Stecher, T

    Brandt, J. C., Stecher, T. P., Crawford, D. L., & Maran, S. P. 1971, ApJL, 163, L99, doi: 10.1086/180676 23

    1971 doi

  2. [10]

    2019, A&A, 621, A115, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201834003

    Cantat-Gaudin, T., Mapelli, M., Balaguer-N´ u˜ nez, L., et al. 2019, A&A, 621, A115, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201834003

    2019 doi

  3. [11]

    Chanot, A., & Sivan, J. P. 1983, A&A, 121, 19

    1983

  4. [12]

    C., & Glover, S

    Clark, P. C., & Glover, S. C. O. 2014, MNRAS, 444, 2396, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stu1589

    2014 doi

  5. [13]

    A., Barlow, M

    Crowther, P. A., Barlow, M. J., Royer, P., et al. 2024, MNRAS, 528, 2026, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stae145 De Marco, O., & Schmutz, W. 1999, A&A, 345, 163 De Marco, O., Schmutz, W., Crowther, P. A., et al. 2000, A&A, 358, 187, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.astro-ph/0004081 de Zeeuw, P. T., Ho...

    2024 doi arXiv

  6. [14]

    Brown, A. G. A., & Blaauw, A. 1999, AJ, 117, 354, doi: 10.1086/300682

    1999 doi

  7. [15]

    E., & McCulloch, P

    Dodson, R., Legge, D., Reynolds, J. E., & McCulloch, P. M. 2003, ApJ, 596, 1137, doi: 10.1086/378089

    2003 doi

  8. [16]

    Draine, B. T. 2011, Physics of the Interstellar and Intergalactic Medium

    2011

  9. [17]

    R., Stewart, R

    Duncan, A. R., Stewart, R. T., Haynes, R. F., & Jones, K. L. 1996, MNRAS, 280, 252, doi: 10.1093/mnras/280.1.252

    1996 doi

  10. [18]

    Edenhofer, G., Alves, J., Zucker, C., Posch, L., & Enßlin, T. A. 2024a, A&A, 687, L9, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202450374

    doi

  11. [19]

    H., Frank, P., & Enßlin, T

    Edenhofer, G., Leike, R. H., Frank, P., & Enßlin, T. A. 2022, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2206.10634, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2206.10634

    2022 doi arXiv

  12. [20]

    2024b, A&A, 685, A82, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202347628

    Edenhofer, G., Zucker, C., Frank, P., et al. 2024b, A&A, 685, A82, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202347628

    doi

  13. [21]

    2024c, The Journal of Open Source Software, 9, 6593, doi: 10.21105/joss.06593

    Edenhofer, G., Frank, P., Roth, J., et al. 2024c, The Journal of Open Source Software, 9, 6593, doi: 10.21105/joss.06593

    doi

  14. [22]

    Eggen, O. J. 1980, ApJ, 238, 627, doi: 10.1086/158020 Eisenbeiß, T. 2011, PhD thesis, Friedrich Schiller University of Jena, Germany

    1980 doi

  15. [23]

    Weisz, D. R. 2019, MNRAS, 490, 1961, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stz2773 ESA, ed. 1997, ESA Special Publication, Vol. 1200, The HIPPARCOS and TYCHO catalogues. Astrometric and photometric star catalogues derived from the ESA HIPPARCOS Space Astrometry Mission

    2019 doi

  16. [24]

    1991, in Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series, Vol

    Evans, Neal J., I. 1991, in Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series, Vol. 20, Frontiers of Stellar Evolution, ed. D. L. Lambert, 45

    1991

  17. [25]

    Finkbeiner, D. P. 2003, ApJS, 146, 407, doi: 10.1086/374411

    2003 doi

  18. [26]

    M., Goodman, A., Zucker, C., et al

    Foley, M. M., Goodman, A., Zucker, C., et al. 2023, ApJ, 947, 66, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/acb5f4 Gaia Collaboration, Brown, A. G. A., Vallenari, A., et al. 2021, A&A, 649, A1, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202039657 Gaia Collaboration, Vallenari, A., Brown, A. G. A., et al. 2023, A&A,...

    2023 doi

  19. [27]

    2019, ApJ, 887, 93, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab5362

    Finkbeiner, D. 2019, ApJ, 887, 93, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab5362

    2019 doi

  20. [28]

    Gum, C. S. 1952, The Observatory, 72, 151

    1952

  21. [29]

    G., & Brand, P

    Hawarden, T. G., & Brand, P. W. J. L. 1976, MNRAS, 175, 19P, doi: 10.1093/mnras/175.1.19P

    1976 doi

  22. [30]

    1998, ApJ, 498, 689, doi: 10.1086/305574

    Heiles, C. 1998, ApJ, 498, 689, doi: 10.1086/305574

    1998 doi

  23. [31]

    M., & Reynolds, R

    Heiles, C., Haffner, L. M., & Reynolds, R. J. 1999, in Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series, Vol. 168, New Perspectives on the Interstellar Medium, ed. A. R. Taylor, T. L. Landecker, & G. Joncas, 211

    1999

  24. [32]

    Hoogerwerf, R., de Bruijne, J. H. J., & de Zeeuw, P. T. 2001, A&A, 365, 49, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20000014

    2001 doi

  25. [33]

    D., & van Leeuwen, F

    Howarth, I. D., & van Leeuwen, F. 2019, MNRAS, 484, 5350, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stz291

    2019 doi

  26. [34]

    L., & Reffert, S

    Hunt, E. L., & Reffert, S. 2023, A&A, 673, A114, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202346285

    2023 doi

  27. [35]

    Jeffreson, S. M. R., Krumholz, M. R., Fujimoto, Y., et al. 2021, MNRAS, 505, 3470, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stab1536

    2021 doi

  28. [36]

    Devey, C. R. 2009, MNRAS, 393, 538, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2008.14162.x

    2009

  29. [37]

    L., van Kerkwijk, M

    Kaplan, D. L., van Kerkwijk, M. H., & Anderson, J. 2007, ApJ, 660, 1428, doi: 10.1086/513309

    2007 doi

  30. [38]

    Kapteyn, J. C. 1914, ApJ, 40, 43, doi: 10.1086/142098

    1914 doi

  31. [39]

    1998, ApJ, 498, 541, doi: 10.1086/305588

    Kennicutt, Robert C., J. 1998, ApJ, 498, 541, doi: 10.1086/305588

    1998 doi

  32. [40]

    Kim, C.-G., & Ostriker, E. C. 2015, ApJ, 802, 99, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/802/2/99

    2015 doi

  33. [41]

    Kim, J.-G., Kim, W.-T., & Ostriker, E. C. 2018, ApJ, 859, 68, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aabe27

    2018 doi

  34. [42]

    S., Walter, F

    Kim, J. S., Walter, F. M., & Wolk, S. J. 2005, AJ, 129, 1564, doi: 10.1086/428002

    2005 doi

  35. [43]

    R., & Matzner, C

    Krumholz, M. R., & Matzner, C. D. 2009, ApJ, 703, 1352, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/703/2/1352

    2009 doi

  36. [44]

    L., Babusiaux, C., & Cox, N

    Lallement, R., Vergely, J. L., Babusiaux, C., & Cox, N. L. J. 2022, A&A, 661, A147, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202142846

    2022 doi

  37. [45]

    H., Edenhofer, G., Knollm¨ uller, J., et al

    Leike, R. H., Edenhofer, G., Knollm¨ uller, J., et al. 2022, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2204.11715, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2204.11715

    2022 doi arXiv

  38. [46]

    H., Glatzle, M., & Enßlin, T

    Leike, R. H., Glatzle, M., & Enßlin, T. A. 2020, A&A, 639, A138, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202038169

    2020 doi

  39. [47]

    1992, ApJ, 401, 596, doi: 10.1086/172089 24

    Leitherer, C., Robert, C., & Drissen, L. 1992, ApJ, 401, 596, doi: 10.1086/172089 24

    1992 doi

  40. [48]

    1991, in IAU Symposium, Vol

    Maeder, A. 1991, in IAU Symposium, Vol. 143, Wolf-Rayet Stars and Interrelations with Other Massive Stars in Galaxies, ed. K. A. van der Hucht & B. Hidayat, 445

    1991

  41. [49]

    R., Galue, H

    Maiz-Apellaniz, J., Walborn, N. R., Galue, H. A., & Wei, L. H. 2004, VizieR Online Data Catalog: Galactic O star catalog (Maiz-apellaniz+, 2004), VizieR On-line Data Catalog: V/116. Originally published in: 2004ApJS..151..103M

    2004

  42. [50]

    D., Gies, D

    Mason, B. D., Gies, D. R., Hartkopf, W. I., et al. 1998, AJ, 115, 821, doi: 10.1086/300234

    1998 doi

  43. [51]

    A., et al

    McCallum, L., Wood, K., Benjamin, R. A., et al. 2025, MNRAS

    2025

  44. [52]

    1987, ApJ, 317, 190, doi: 10.1086/165267 Miville-Deschˆ enes, M.-A., & Lagache, G

    McCray, R., & Kafatos, M. 1987, ApJ, 317, 190, doi: 10.1086/165267 Miville-Deschˆ enes, M.-A., & Lagache, G. 2005, ApJS, 157, 302, doi: 10.1086/427938

    1987 doi

  45. [53]

    E., & Haberl, F

    Motch, C., Zavlin, V. E., & Haberl, F. 2003, A&A, 408, 323, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20030802

    2003 doi

  46. [54]

    M., Lopez, L

    Olivier, G. M., Lopez, L. A., Rosen, A. L., et al. 2021, ApJ, 908, 68, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/abd24a O’Neill, T. J., Zucker, C., Goodman, A. A., & Edenhofer, G. 2024, ApJ, 973, 136, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad61de

    2021 doi

  47. [55]

    Pauldrach, A. W. A., Kudritzki, R. P., Puls, J., Butler, K., & Hunsinger, J. 1994, A&A, 283, 525

    1994

  48. [56]

    2020, A&A, 636, A17, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201937157

    Montier, L. 2020, A&A, 636, A17, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201937157

    2020 doi

  49. [57]

    1987, A&A, 171, 101 Plotly

    Pettersson, B. 1987, A&A, 171, 101 Plotly. 2015, Collaborative data science, Montreal, QC: Plotly Technologies Inc. https://plot.ly

    1987

  50. [58]

    1967, Boletin de los Observatorios Tonantzintla y Tacubaya, 4, 86

    Poveda, A., Ruiz, J., & Allen, C. 1967, Boletin de los Observatorios Tonantzintla y Tacubaya, 4, 86

    1967

  51. [59]

    D., Naylor, T., et al

    Pozzo, M., Jeffries, R. D., Naylor, T., et al. 2000, MNRAS, 313, L23, doi: 10.1046/j.1365-8711.2000.03455.x

    2000

  52. [60]

    2006, A&A, 454, 625, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20065073

    Puls, J., Markova, N., Scuderi, S., et al. 2006, A&A, 454, 625, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20065073

    2006 doi

  53. [61]

    R., Gaensler, B

    Purcell, C. R., Gaensler, B. M., Sun, X. H., et al. 2015, ApJ, 804, 22, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/804/1/22

    2015 doi

  54. [62]

    W., Glover, S

    Rahner, D., Pellegrini, E. W., Glover, S. C. O., & Klessen, R. S. 2017, MNRAS, 470, 4453, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stx1532

    2017 doi

  55. [63]

    1998, Journal of Astrophysics and Astronomy, 19, 79, doi: 10.1007/BF02714912

    Rajagopal, J., & Srinivasan, G. 1998, Journal of Astrophysics and Astronomy, 19, 79, doi: 10.1007/BF02714912

    1998 doi

  56. [64]

    Ramiaramanantsoa, T., & Moffat, A. F. J. 2022, Universe, 8, 514, doi: 10.3390/universe8100514

    2022 doi

  57. [65]

    1983, A&A, 117, 183

    Reipurth, B. 1983, A&A, 117, 183

    1983

  58. [66]

    1993, A&A, 267, 439

    Reipurth, B., & Pettersson, B. 1993, A&A, 267, 439

    1993

  59. [67]

    Reynolds, R. J. 1976a, ApJ, 203, 151, doi: 10.1086/154057 —. 1976b, ApJ, 206, 679, doi: 10.1086/154427

    doi

  60. [68]

    2019, glueviz v0.15.2: multidimensional data exploration, 0.15.2, Zenodo, Zenodo, doi: 10.5281/zenodo.3385920

    Goodman, A. 2019, glueviz v0.15.2: multidimensional data exploration, 0.15.2, Zenodo, Zenodo, doi: 10.5281/zenodo.3385920

    2019 doi

  61. [69]

    2014, MNRAS, 442, 2701, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stu1037

    Ramirez-Ruiz, E. 2014, MNRAS, 442, 2701, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stu1037

    2014 doi

  62. [70]

    1993, in Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series, Vol

    Sahu, M., & Blaauw, A. 1993, in Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series, Vol. 35, Massive Stars: Their Lives in the Interstellar Medium, ed. J. P. Cassinelli & E. B. Churchwell, 278

    1993

  63. [71]

    Sahu, M., & Sahu, K. C. 1992, A&A, 259, 265

    1992

  64. [72]

    Sahu, M. S. 1992, PhD thesis, University of Groningen, Kapteyn Astronomical Institute

    1992

  65. [73]

    S., & Sahu, K

    Sahu, M. S., & Sahu, K. C. 1993, A&A, 280, 231

    1993

  66. [74]

    1994, A&A, 288, 231

    Schaerer, D., & Schmutz, W. 1994, A&A, 288, 231

    1994

  67. [75]

    2008, A&A, 489, 105, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:200809936 Sch¨ onrich, R., Binney, J., & Dehnen, W

    Schilbach, E., & R¨ oser, S. 2008, A&A, 489, 105, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:200809936 Sch¨ onrich, R., Binney, J., & Dehnen, W. 2010, MNRAS, 403, 1829, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2010.16253.x

    2008

  68. [76]

    F., Cutri, R

    Skrutskie, M. F., Cutri, R. M., Stiening, R., et al. 2006a, AJ, 131, 1163, doi: 10.1086/498708 —. 2006b, AJ, 131, 1163, doi: 10.1086/498708

    doi

  69. [77]

    D., Bracco, A., & Pon, A

    Soler, J. D., Bracco, A., & Pon, A. 2018, A&A, 609, L3, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201732203

    2018 doi

  70. [78]

    I., et al

    Sota, A., Ma´ ız Apell´ aniz, J., Morrell, N. I., et al. 2014, ApJS, 211, 10, doi: 10.1088/0067-0049/211/1/10

    2014 doi

  71. [79]

    Sridharan, T. K. 1992a, Journal of Astrophysics and Astronomy, 13, 217, doi: 10.1007/BF02702292 —. 1992b, PhD thesis, Indian Institute of Science,

    doi

  72. [80]

    Bangalore, India, doi: 10.5281/zenodo.4776705

    doi

  73. [81]

    2011, A&A, 525, A154, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201015346

    Sushch, I., Hnatyk, B., & Neronov, A. 2011, A&A, 525, A154, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201015346

    2011 doi

  74. [82]

    2024, Nature, 631, 49, doi: 10.1038/s41586-024-07496-9

    Swiggum, C., Alves, J., Benjamin, R., et al. 2024, Nature, 631, 49, doi: 10.1038/s41586-024-07496-9

    2024 doi

  75. [83]

    1950, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London Series A, 201, 159, doi: 10.1098/rspa.1950.0049

    Taylor, G. 1950, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London Series A, 201, 159, doi: 10.1098/rspa.1950.0049

    1950

  76. [84]

    C., Arnal, E

    Testori, J. C., Arnal, E. M., Morras, R., et al. 2006, A&A, 458, 163, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20052676

    2006 doi

  77. [85]

    Tetzlaff, N., Eisenbeiss, T., Neuh¨ auser, R., & Hohle, M. M. 2011, MNRAS, 417, 617, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2011.19302.x

    2011

  78. [86]

    Tetzlaff, N., Torres, G., Neuh¨ auser, R., & Hohle, M. M. 2013, MNRAS, 435, 879, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stt1358

    2013 doi

  79. [87]

    J., & Otrupcek, R

    Woermann, B., Gaylard, M. J., & Otrupcek, R. 2001, MNRAS, 325, 1213, doi: 10.1046/j.1365-8711.2001.04558.x

    2001

  80. [88]

    L., Eisenhardt, P

    Wright, E. L., Eisenhardt, P. R. M., Mainzer, A. K., et al. 2010a, AJ, 140, 1868, doi: 10.1088/0004-6256/140/6/1868 25 —. 2010b, AJ, 140, 1868, doi: 10.1088/0004-6256/140/6/1868

    doi

  81. [89]

    C., & White, R

    Yep, A. C., & White, R. J. 2020a, ApJ, 889, 50, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab6333 —. 2020b, ApJ, 889, 50, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab6333

    doi

  82. [90]

    J., Ninkov, Z., Rice, E., Hartley, M., & Tritton, S

    Zealey, W. J., Ninkov, Z., Rice, E., Hartley, M., & Tritton, S. B. 1983, Astrophys. Lett., 23, 119

    1983

  83. [91]

    M., & Rix, H.-W

    Zhang, X., Green, G. M., & Rix, H.-W. 2023, MNRAS, 524, 1855, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad1941

    2023 doi

  84. [92]

    2023, in Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series, Vol

    Zucker, C., Alves, J., Goodman, A., Meingast, S., & Galli, P. 2023, in Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series, Vol. 534, Protostars and Planets VII, ed. S. Inutsuka, Y. Aikawa, T. Muto, K. Tomida, & M. Tamura, 43, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2212.00067

    2023 doi arXiv

  85. [93]

    2021, ApJ, 919, 35, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac1f96

    Zucker, C., Goodman, A., Alves, J., et al. 2021, ApJ, 919, 35, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac1f96

    2021 doi

  86. [94]

    A., Alves, J., et al

    Zucker, C., Goodman, A. A., Alves, J., et al. 2022, Nature, 601, 334, doi: 10.1038/s41586-021-04286-5

    2022 doi

Pith tools

Reviewed August 16, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.