Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 52 references

Additional Evidence for the Existence of a Primordial Disk System

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-06 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Many of the Milky Way's most metal-poor stars orbit in a flat disk, evidence that a primordial disk formed during the Galaxy's earliest phase.

desk verdict Larger VMP sample and clean NMF decomposition confirm a prograde low-Zmax component, but the primordial-disk conclusion leans on a purity check that likely overstates sample purity. read the letter →

arxiv 2507.09542 v1 pith:M3RHLERU submitted 2025-07-13 astro-ph.GA

Shuai Xu , Haibo Yuan , Bowen Huang , Timothy C. Beers , Yang Huang , Maosheng Xiang , Kai Xiao , Jihye Hong
show 2 more authors
Young Sun Lee Wuming Yang
This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.GA
keywords verymetal-poorstarsprimordialdiskMilkyWayformationGalacticarchaeologynon-negativematrixfactorizationGaiaXPspectraorbitaldynamicsmetal-weakthick
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

Very metal-poor stars (with [Fe/H] ≤ −2.0) have long been treated as halo fossils, but this paper argues that a substantial fraction of them—especially those whose orbits stay close to the Galactic plane—form an independent disk system dating back to the Milky Way's primordial formation. The authors build a sample of 12,000 VMP stars (1,604 dwarfs and 10,396 giants) from Gaia XP photometric metallicities, compute their orbits with the AGAMA package, and decompose the rotation-velocity distribution across maximum orbital height ($Z_{\rm max}$) using non-negative matrix factorization. Three components emerge: the halo, the Gaia Sausage/Enceladus debris, and a disk component peaking at $v_\phi \sim 150$ km/s whose fraction decreases with $Z_{\rm max}$ but remains about 20% at $Z_{\rm max}\sim 3$ kpc. The authors conclude that such a high disk fraction cannot be explained by merger debris or bar heating alone, and that most of these stars are members of a hypothesized primordial disk. If correct, the Milky Way developed a rotating disk very early in its history, and the metal-weak thick disk is a surviving relic of that phase.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing analysis is a non-negative matrix factorization (NMF) of an $8\times10$ matrix whose entries count prograde VMP stars in ten $v_\phi$ bins (0–350 km/s in 35 km/s steps) for eight $Z_{\rm max}$ bins (0–8 kpc in 1 kpc steps). NMF represents the data as a sum of non-negative components, each a $v_\phi$ profile with a per-$Z_{\rm max}$ coefficient; the first three components account for 99.54% of the covariance and are identified as the halo (peak at 50–150 km/s), the disk system (peak near 150 km/s with $\sigma\sim80$ km/s), and the Gaia-Sausage/Enceladus debris (0–100 km/s, falling steeply). The disk component's coefficient is large at low $Z_{\rm max}$ and declines with height, which is the signature the authors read as a primordial disk. Cross-checks include the energy–$J_\phi$ distribution and the Haywood inclination-angle statistic.

What would settle it

Obtain high-resolution spectra for the stars on disk-like orbits ($Z_{\rm max}\le3$ kpc and $v_\phi>150$ km/s); if a substantial majority turn out to have true [Fe/H] above -1.5, the disk component is contamination rather than a primordial disk. Alternatively, redo the NMF analysis excluding all stars with photometric [Fe/H] between -2.0 and -1.5 and check whether the disk component persists.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On the paper's own terms, the central discovery is that the rotation-velocity distribution of very metal-poor stars contains a distinct, high-rotation component peaking near $v_\phi\sim150$ km/s that dominates the low-$Z_{\rm max}$ population and fades with height above the plane. This component cannot be explained as the stationary or slowly rotating halo, as debris of the Gaia-Sausage/Enceladus merger, or as disk-like orbits produced by bar and spiral-arm heating, so the authors conclude it is an independent early structure: the hypothesized primordial disk. They further argue that the metal-weak thick disk corresponds to this primordial disk, and that most VMP stars with $Z_{\rm max}\lesssim3$ kpc belong to it. The argument is carried by the NMF decomposition of $v_\phi$ across $Z_{\rm max}$ bins, corroborated by the energy–$J_\phi$ distribution and by the Haywood inclination-angle criterion, which shows a prograde-to-retrograde ratio near 2.1:1 among low-inclination stars.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the photometric metal-poor sample is genuinely metal-poor, meaning that after the quality and isochrone cuts, contamination from stars with [Fe/H] above -1.5 is only 2.6% for dwarfs and 1.8% for giants, so the disk-like component peaking near $v_\phi\sim150$ km/s is not mostly ordinary thick-disk interlopers.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If the primordial disk is real, the Milky Way must have developed a rotating disk during its earliest star-forming phase, not only after mergers built up the halo.
  • The metal-weak thick disk should be regarded as a surviving relic of that primordial disk, distinct from the canonical thick disk, the halo, and the Gaia Sausage/Enceladus debris, rotating near 150 km/s rather than the canonical thin disk's ~200 km/s.
  • The observed disk fraction, about 20% at $Z_{\rm max}\sim3$ kpc and dominant for $Z_{\rm max}\lesssim3$ kpc, provides a quantitative constraint that galaxy-formation simulations must reproduce.
  • Accretion-only explanations would require an implausibly large number of low-energy, co-planar minor mergers to deposit so many VMP stars on disk-like orbits, making the in-situ primordial disk the more economical interpretation.
  • Upcoming surveys with precise ages and chemical abundances should find that the primordial-disk stars are uniformly very old and exhibit distinctive abundance patterns, offering a direct test of this interpretation.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If the disk component is a distinct primordial population, its stars should carry a characteristic chemical signature, such as high [alpha/Fe] with a particular carbon or neutron-capture pattern, that differs from both the canonical thick disk and GSE debris; this can be searched for in the large samples from DESI, 4MOST, and LAMOST III.
  • Applying the same NMF decomposition to the full Gaia XP metallicity catalog across all [Fe/H] ranges could reveal whether the 'primordial disk' component is separate from, or continuous with, the canonical thin and thick disks, clarifying whether it is a true separate population or the low-metallicity tail of the thick disk.
  • A sharper contamination test would be to model, from the canonical disk's stellar population, how many metal-rich interlopers are expected inside the isochrone selection box; if that predicted number alone accounts for the full disk component, the primordial interpretation would be falsified.
  • The claim predicts that the disk-like VMP stars have ages near 13 Gyr and were born before the GSE merger; asteroseismic or isochrone ages for these stars, once available, could confirm or refute the primordial origin.
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 / 5 minor

Summary. The paper constructs a sample of about 12,000 very metal-poor stars (1604 dwarfs and 10,396 giants) from Gaia XP photometric metallicities, astrometry, and geometrical distances, applies quality and isochrone cuts, computes orbital parameters with AGAMA, and decomposes the prograde v_phi distribution across Z_max bins using non-negative matrix factorization. Three components are identified as halo, disk, and Gaia-Sausage/Enceladus; the disk-like component peaks near v_phi ~ 150 km/s and its fraction decreases with Z_max. The authors argue that these disk-like VMP stars form an independent primordial disk component rather than being solely merger debris or a rotating halo.

Significance. If the central claim is correct, this would be an important contribution to Galactic archaeology: it would provide a large-sample, photometric-metallicity-based argument for a primordial, low-metallicity disk component in the Milky Way, complementing earlier spectroscopic studies. The paper also delivers a publicly available catalog of VMP stars with orbital parameters, uses a transparent NMF framework, and carefully documents its astrometric and photometric quality cuts. The main significance is contingent on sample purity and on the decomposition being a valid test of the primordial-disk hypothesis rather than an assumed label assignment.

major comments (3)
  1. [Section 4, Figure 7] The sample-purity check is not sufficient to support the claim that the final VMP sample is clean enough for the disk-component analysis. The check is based on 533 dwarfs and 1679 giants in common with LAMOST DR10, but LAMOST DR10 target selection enriches low-metallicity and halo stars, so the overlap success rate is likely an overestimate of the purity of the XP-selected full sample. More importantly, the paper itself states that the residual contamination is primarily in the [Fe/H] interval -1.8 to -1.5, and that interval is excluded from the quoted '2.6%/1.8% above -1.5' figure. These metal-weak thick-disk stars have v_phi near 150 km/s and low Z_max, exactly the phase space assigned to NMF Component 2. For the 213 dwarfs with Z_max < 1 kpc shown in Figure 5, a contamination fraction of order 10-18% concentrated in that bin can materially enhance or even create the apparent disk component. A selection-function-weighted comparison, or an independent spectroscopic purity measurement, is required before the primordial-disk interpretation can be considered established.
  2. [Section 4, Figure 7] The consistency between the reconstructed and original v_phi distributions is guaranteed by the construction of an NMF fit and does not constitute independent validation of the physical decomposition. The statement that the reconstruction 'demonstrates the effectiveness and accuracy' of the method is circular in this context. The authors should validate the decomposition on synthetic data: for example, draw a pure halo + GSE population, inject a known metal-weak thick-disk or disk-like population at low Z_max, and test whether NMF recovers the injected fractions. Without such a test, the three-component decomposition is an assumption about the data rather than a measurement.
  3. [Sections 3.2 and 5] The identification of Component 2 as an independent 'primordial disk' relies on the 150 km/s threshold and the MWTD identification from Carollo et al. (2019) and Hong et al. (2024), which are the same authors and hypothesis under test. The alternative interpretation that low-Z_max VMP stars are simply the prograde tail of a continuously rotating halo with a vertical gradient is not explicitly fitted. Please test a two-component model (one halo component whose mean v_phi varies smoothly with Z_max, plus GSE) against the three-component model and report a model comparison such as AIC or BIC. This would directly address whether a distinct disk component is required by the data and would reduce the concern that the labels are imported rather than derived.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Figure 6] The label 'Compontent' in the left panel is a typo and should read 'Component'.
  2. [References] The reference Carollo et al. (2019) appears twice in the reference list; one occurrence should be removed.
  3. [Sections 2 and 5] The purity numbers are presented inconsistently: Section 2 reports post-cut success rates of 82% (dwarfs) and 93% (giants) for [Fe/H] <= -1.8, while Section 5 quotes a 93% success rate and a '94% to 82%' comparison. The Section 5 completeness values (89% overall, 93% versus 59%) are not defined. These numbers should be reconciled and the completeness statistic defined.
  4. [Appendix A] There is a duplicated letter in the appendix: two items are labeled 'E.', and the text contains 'of of' in item C. These should be corrected.
  5. [Section 2] The data availability line gives the placeholder 'http://to be determined.com'. The catalog should be assigned a permanent URL before publication, as the catalog is one of the paper's main assets.

Circularity Check

3 steps flagged · score 4.0 of 10

Labels, thresholds, and the primordial-disk conclusion are imported from the authors' own prior work (Hong et al. 2024, Carollo et al. 2019), and the LAMOST purity check is partly in-sample; the NMF detection itself is data-driven, so the central claim retains independent content.

  1. ansatz smuggled in via citation [Section 3.1 (dynamical parameter calculation), paragraph after Figure 5]
    "Following Hong et al. (2024), VMP stars with v ϕ >150 km s −1 are likely associated with the thin-disk like component. Although the canonical thin disk typically rotates at ∼200 km s −1, the lower adopted threshold is because the primordial disk has likely gradually spun up over time."

    The classification threshold that defines 'disk-like' orbits is adopted from Hong et al. 2024, the authors' own prior paper, and its stated justification — 'the primordial disk has likely gradually spun up over time' — presupposes the existence of the primordial disk, which is the paper's conclusion. The 'suggestion' of a thin-disk-like component rests on counting stars above this hypothesis-chosen threshold (23% of low-Zmax dwarfs in Figure 5). The count is empirical, but the dividing line is an ansatz imported from the same research program; an inference built on a threshold that assumes the conclusion cannot independently test it.

  2. self citation load bearing [Section 4 (Results), Figure 6 discussion of NMF components]
    "Component 2 is likely associated with the disk system, as it peaks about 150 km s −1 with a σ about 80 km s −1, similar to the MWTD found by Carollo et al. (2019)."

    Component 2 is labeled the 'disk system' because its peak (~150 km/s) is 'similar to the MWTD found by Carollo et al. (2019)', a paper sharing authorship (Beers, Lee) that already hypothesized the MWTD/primordial disk. Section 5 then uses this labeled component as evidence: low-Zmax VMP stars are 'members of the hypothesized primordial disk'. The component counts as evidence because it resembles the authors' previously hypothesized disk, and that resemblance is cited as support for the same hypothesis. The NMF shape itself is data-driven, so the circularity is at the labeling/interpretation level, but the load-bearing interpretive step is a self-citation chain.

1 more flagged steps
  1. fitted input called prediction [Section 2 (Data), isochrone cut description and Figure 1]
    "We adopt the PARSEC isochrone (Bressan et al. 2012; Marigo et al. 2017) with [Fe/H] = −2 at the age of 12 Gyr, and shift it empirically in both (BP−RP) 0 and M G directions to define a selection area. ... After applying the isochrone cut, the success rate of [Fe/H] LAMOST <=−1.8 ... has been improved from 52%/80% to 82%/93% for dwarfs/giants."

    The PARSEC isochrone is 'shift[ed] empirically' to define the selection area, evidently guided by the same LAMOST DR10 overlap (533 dwarfs, 1679 giants) shown in Figure 1 that is then used to report the post-cut 'success rate' improvement (52%/80% to 82%/93%). The purity statistic is therefore an in-sample evaluation on the tuning data, not an independent validation. In addition, the residual accounting switches thresholds: 'only 2.6%/1.8%' above [Fe/H]_LAMOST = −1.5 is highlighted, while 17%/8% of the sample sits in the −2.0 to −1.5 interval — metal-weak stars occupying the same low-Zmax, v_phi ~150 km/s phase space as the NMF 'disk' component, so the quoted residual understates what can masquerade as the disk.

full rationale

The paper's central detection is an empirical NMF decomposition of observed v_phi histograms binned by Z_max (Section 3.2): the input matrix X is the star count per (Z_max, v_phi) bin, and the component fractions ε_i are fit, not prescribed, so the finding that a ~150 km/s prograde component dominates at low Z_max is not definitionally forced. This gives the central claim independent content, and the paper is transparent — its appendices candidly enumerate photometric-metallicity failure modes, and Section 2 openly reports the 17%/8% residual in the −2.0 to −1.5 interval. However, the interpretive frame is heavily self-referential: the 'disk-like' threshold and Z_max binning come from Hong et al. 2024; the 'disk' label of NMF Component 2 is justified by similarity to the MWTD of Carollo et al. 2019 (same group); the conclusion restates those papers' primordial-disk hypothesis; and the metallicity catalog itself is the same group's Huang et al. 2024b product. The LAMOST validation is external but partly in-sample, because the isochrone boundaries were placed using the same overlap later used to compute the success rate. Whether the residual sub-VMP contamination at v_phi ~150 km/s can account for the entire 'disk' component is a sample-purity (correctness) question, not a circularity; it does not raise the circularity score. Also noted: the public data link is a placeholder ('to be determined.com'), a reproducibility gap but not circularity. Overall, some load-bearing self-citation and one in-sample validation, but the NMF detection on a new, larger XP-based sample is independent content, so the score is 4 rather than 6.

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

The central claim rests on sample purity, the adopted Galactic potential, and the physical interpretation of NMF components; the listed parameters are choices that directly shape the measured disk fraction. The 'primordial disk' is a pre-existing hypothesis from earlier work by the same group, so no new physical entity, force, or conserved quantity is introduced here.

free parameters (4)
  • v_phi disk threshold = 150 km/s
    Defines disk-like stars before the NMF and was adopted from Hong et al. 2024; this choice directly sets the reported disk fraction and the interpretation of Component 2.
  • Isochrone boundary shifts = +0.021/-0.079 in (BP-RP)0, +0.131/-0.089 in MG
    Empirically chosen to enclose the VMP locus in the H-R diagram; these shifts determine sample purity and therefore the number and kinematics of the VMP sample.
  • Number of NMF components = 3
    The first three components explain 99.54 percent of covariance, but the rank is chosen by the authors; the disk, halo, and GSE fractions depend on this choice.
  • Zmax bin edges = 0 to 8 kpc in 1 kpc steps, plus cuts at 1 and 3 kpc
    Bin boundaries are arbitrary, though partly inherited from Hong et al. 2024, and influence the apparent trend of disk fraction with Zmax.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption The McMillan 2017 gravitational potential and the adopted Solar position and peculiar motion are accurate enough for AGAMA orbital parameters.
    Section 3.1; systematic errors in the potential would shift v_phi and Zmax and alter the component fractions.
  • domain assumption Photometric metallicities from Huang et al. 2024b have the stated precision and do not have unaccounted metallicity-dependent systematics after the quality cuts.
    Section 2; the entire VMP sample definition depends on this catalog, with residual purity validated against only about 2200 LAMOST stars.
  • domain assumption The PARSEC isochrone at [Fe/H] = -2 and 12 Gyr, with the adopted empirical shifts, correctly separates true VMP stars from blue horizontal branch stars and blue stragglers.
    Section 2 and Figure 1; wrong isochrone placement changes sample purity and, in turn, the inferred disk fraction.
  • ad hoc to paper The prograde v_phi distribution is a mixture of three independent populations (halo, disk, GSE) with non-negative contributions.
    Section 3.2; the rank-3 NMF model is chosen by the authors, and the physical identification of components is not independently tested.
  • domain assumption Selection incompleteness does not generate the observed decline of disk fraction with Zmax.
    Section 4; the paper attributes the 5-6 kpc fraction peak to incompleteness but does not correct for it, so the trend could be partially an artifact of the Gaia scanning law.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Additional Evidence for the Existence of a Primordial Disk System." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/M3RHLERU

@misc{pith2026250709542,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Additional Evidence for the Existence of a Primordial Disk System},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/M3RHLERU}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2507.09542}
}
abstract

The origin of very metal-poor (VMP; [Fe/H] $\leq -2.0$) stars on planar orbits has been the subject of great attention since their first discovery. However, prior to the release of the Gaia BP/RP (XP) spectra, and large photometric samples such as SkyMapper, SAGES, J-PLUS and S-PLUS, most studies have been limited due to their small sample sizes or strong selection effects. Here, we cross-match photometric metallicities derived from Gaia XP synthetic photometry and geometric distances from Bailer-Jones et al., and select 12,000 VMP stars (1604 dwarfs and 10,396 giants) with available high-quality astrometry. After calculating dynamical parameter estimates using \texttt{AGAMA}, we employ the non-negative matrix factorization technique to the $v_\phi$ distribution across bins in $Z_{\rm max}$ (the maximum height above or below the Galactic plane during the stellar orbit). We find three primary populations of the selected VMP stars: halo, disk system, and the Gaia Sausage/Enceladus (GSE) structure. The fraction of disk-like stars decreases with increasing $Z_{\rm max}$ (as expected), although it is still $\sim 20$\% for stars with $Z_{\rm max}$ $\sim 3 $ kpc. Similar results emerge from the application of the Hayden criterion, which separates stellar populations on the basis of their orbital inclination angles relative to the Galactic plane. We argue that such high fractions of disk-like stars indicate that they are an independent component, rather than originating solely from Galactic building blocks or heating by minor mergers. We suggest that most of these VMP stars are members of the hypothesized ``primordial" disk.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2507.09542 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Left panel: H-R diagram for the common stars between our VMP sample and LAMOST DR10, color-coded by [Fe/H]LAMOST . The blue and red lines are the blue and red limits we adopted for the VMP stars, respectively. Middle and right panels: Normalized distribution of [Fe/H] for dwarfs (middle panel) and giants (right panel) in the left panel before (blue line) and after (red line) application of the isochrone cut. -120° -… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Spatial distribution of the final VMP sample in the Galactic coordinate system for dwarfs (left) and giants (right). 6 7 8 9 10 R (kpc) 2 1 0 1 2 Z (kpc) Dwarfs 0 5 10 15 R (kpc) 8 4 0 4 8 Z (kpc) Giants [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Same as [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (7 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: The orbital rotation velocity vϕ, as a function of [Fe/H], for dwarfs (left panel) and giants (right panel), color-coded by the number density on a log scale shown at the right of each panel. Stars with [Fe/H] > −2 are plotted from sources that satisfy the above eight …
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Joint and marginal distributions of vϕ and eccentricity for the prograde VMP dwarfs (left panel) and giants (right panel). The different colors indicate stars with different Zmax ranges (blue for Zmax larger than 3 kpc, orange for Zmax less than or equal to 3 kpc, and …
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Left panel: Distribution of the first three NMF components, as a function of vϕ. Right panel: Fractions of the three components for different Zmax bins. The colors indicate different components, and the shaded areas indicate the adopted errors (see text). in the Zmax v…
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: The original (black-solid line) and reconstructed (red-solid line) distribution of vϕ for each Zmax bin. The contribution of each component is plotted with dashed lines using the same color as in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_7.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Distribution of energy and Jϕ for the full VMP sample and those with Zmax ≤ 1 kpc (red dots) and Zmax ≤ 2 kpc (green dots) (left panel), Zmax ≤ 3 kpc (middle panel), and Zmax > 3 kpc (right panel). 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 Rmax (kpc) 0 5 10 15 20 25 Z m a x (k p c) Prograde …
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: The distribution of the VMP sample in the Haywood Diagram. Left panel: All prograde stars. Middle panel: Stars with vϕ > 150 km s−1 ). Right panel: IA distributions of the full set of stars. Red-dashed lines correspond to IAs of 0.25 and 0.65 radians [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:…
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: The distribution of eccentricity for all stars (top panel) and stars with vϕ > 150 km s−1 (bottom panel). Different colors indicate different subsets: blue for stars with IA < 0.25, red for stars with IA between 0.25 and 0.65, and black for stars with IA > 0.65. The n…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

52 extracted references · 10 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    An, D., & Beers, T. C. 2021, ApJ, 918, 74, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac07a4

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ac07a4 2021

  2. [2]

    2023, ApJS, 267, 8, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/acd53e

    Andrae, R., Rix, H.-W., & Chandra, V. 2023, ApJS, 267, 8, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/acd53e

    doi:10.3847/1538-4365/acd53e 2023

  3. [3]

    2021, AJ, 161, 147, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/abd806

    Demleitner, M., & Andrae, R. 2021, AJ, 161, 147, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/abd806

    doi:10.3847/1538-3881/abd806 2021

  4. [4]

    2021, MNRAS, 505, 5957, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stab1474

    Baumgardt, H., & Vasiliev, E. 2021, MNRAS, 505, 5957, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stab1474

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stab1474 2021

  5. [5]

    C., & Christlieb, N

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

    arXiv 2005

  6. [6]

    C., Drilling, J

    Beers, T. C., Drilling, J. S., Rossi, S., et al. 2002, AJ, 124, 931, doi: 10.1086/341377

    doi:10.1086/341377 2002

  7. [7]

    C., Norris, J

    Beers, T. C., Norris, J. E., Placco, V. M., et al. 2014, ApJ, 794, 58, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/794/1/58

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/794/1/58 2014

  8. [8]

    2024, A&A, 683, A136, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202348106 Evidence for a VMP Primordial Disk System11

    Bellazzini, M., Massari, D., Ceccarelli, E., et al. 2024, A&A, 683, A136, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202348106 Evidence for a VMP Primordial Disk System11

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202348106 2024

Show all 52 references
  1. [9]

    2023, A&A, 674, A194, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202345921

    Bellazzini, M., Massari, D., De Angeli, F., et al. 2023, A&A, 674, A194, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202345921

    2023 doi

  2. [10]

    Deason, A. J. 2018, MNRAS, 478, 611, doi: 10.1093/mnras/sty982

    2018 doi

  3. [11]

    2021, A&A, 653, A31, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202038841

    Bonoli, S., Mar ´ ın-Franch, A., Varela, J., et al. 2021, A&A, 653, A31, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202038841

    2021 doi

  4. [12]

    2012, MNRAS, 427, 127, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2012.21948.x

    Bressan, A., Marigo, P., Girardi, L., et al. 2012, MNRAS, 427, 127, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2012.21948.x

    2012

  5. [13]

    S., & Beers, T

    Calagna, S., Hirai, Y., Hong, J., Lee, Y. S., & Beers, T. 2023, in American Astronomical Society Meeting

    2023

  6. [14]

    C., Chiba, M., et al

    Carollo, D., Beers, T. C., Chiba, M., et al. 2010, in Chemical Abundances in the Universe: Connecting First Stars to Planets, ed. K. Cunha, M. Spite, & B. Barbuy, Vol. 265, 267–270, doi: 10.1017/S1743921310000724

    2010 doi

  7. [16]

    2019, The Astrophysical Journal, 887, 22, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab517c

    Carollo, D., Chiba, M., Ishigaki, M., et al. 2019, The Astrophysical Journal, 887, 22, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab517c

    2019 doi

  8. [17]

    R., et al

    Castro-Ginard, A., Penoyre, Z., Casey, A. R., et al. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2404.14127, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2404.14127

    2024 doi arXiv

  9. [18]

    J., Moles, M., Crist´ obal-Hornillos, D., et al

    Cenarro, A. J., Moles, M., Crist´ obal-Hornillos, D., et al. 2019, A&A, 622, A176, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201833036

    2019 doi

  10. [19]

    P., Koposov, S

    Cooper, A. P., Koposov, S. E., Allende Prieto, C., et al. 2023, ApJ, 947, 37, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/acb3c0

    2023 doi

  11. [20]

    2012, Research in Astronomy and Astrophysics, 12, 1197, doi: 10.1088/1674-4527/12/9/003 de Jong, R

    Cui, X.-Q., Zhao, Y.-H., Chu, Y.-Q., et al. 2012, Research in Astronomy and Astrophysics, 12, 1197, doi: 10.1088/1674-4527/12/9/003 de Jong, R. S., Agertz, O., Berbel, A. A., et al. 2019, The Messenger, 175, 3, doi: 10.18727/0722-6691/5117

    2012 doi

  12. [21]

    J., Liu, C., et al

    Deng, L.-C., Newberg, H. J., Liu, C., et al. 2012, Research in Astronomy and Astrophysics, 12, 735, doi: 10.1088/1674-4527/12/7/003

    2012 doi

  13. [22]

    2023, ApJS, 268, 9, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/ace04a Gaia Collaboration, Vallenari, A., Brown, A

    Fan, Z., Zhao, G., Wang, W., et al. 2023, ApJS, 268, 9, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/ace04a Gaia Collaboration, Vallenari, A., Brown, A. G. A., et al. 2023, A&A, 674, A1, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202243940

    2023 doi

  14. [23]

    A., Mucciarelli, A., Origlia, L., et al

    Gonzalez, O. A., Mucciarelli, A., Origlia, L., et al. 2020, The Messenger, 180, 18, doi: 10.18727/0722-6691/5196

    2020 doi

  15. [24]

    C., Lee, Y

    Hong, J., Beers, T. C., Lee, Y. S., et al. 2024, ApJS, 273, 12, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/ad4a6f

    2024 doi

  16. [25]

    2024a, ApJ, 973, 1, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad70ab

    Huang, B., Yuan, H., & Xiao, K. 2024a, ApJ, 973, 1, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad70ab

    doi

  17. [26]

    2024b, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2410.19895, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2410.19895

    Huang, B., Yuan, H., Xu, S., et al. 2024b, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2410.19895, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2410.19895

    doi arXiv

  18. [27]

    2024c, ApJS, 271, 13, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/ad18b1

    Huang, B., Yuan, H., Xiang, M., et al. 2024c, ApJS, 271, 13, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/ad18b1

    doi

  19. [28]

    C., Wolf, C., et al

    Huang, Y., Beers, T. C., Wolf, C., et al. 2022, ApJ, 925, 164, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac21cb

    2022 doi

  20. [29]

    C., Yuan, H., et al

    Huang, Y., Beers, T. C., Yuan, H., et al. 2023, ApJ, 957, 65, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ace628

    2023 doi

  21. [30]

    C., Dalton, G

    Jin, S., Trager, S. C., Dalton, G. B., et al. 2024, MNRAS, 530, 2688, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad557

    2024 doi

  22. [31]

    2024, ApJL, 960, L10, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ad1492

    Lian, J., & Luo, L. 2024, ApJL, 960, L10, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ad1492

    2024 doi

  23. [32]

    W., Yuan, H

    Liu, X. W., Yuan, H. B., Huo, Z. Y., et al. 2014, in Setting the scene for Gaia and LAMOST, ed. S. Feltzing, G. Zhao, N. A. Walton, & P. Whitelock, Vol. 298, 310–321, doi: 10.1017/S1743921313006510

    2014 doi

  24. [33]

    2017, ApJ, 835, 77, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/835/1/77

    Marigo, P., Girardi, L., Bressan, A., et al. 2017, ApJ, 835, 77, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/835/1/77

    2017 doi

  25. [34]

    McMillan, P. J. 2017, MNRAS, 465, 76, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stw2759 Mendes de Oliveira, C., Ribeiro, T., Schoenell, W., et al. 2019, MNRAS, 489, 241, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stz1985

    2017 doi

  26. [35]

    L., Flynn, C., & Freeman, K

    Morrison, H. L., Flynn, C., & Freeman, K. C. 1990, AJ, 100, 1191, doi: 10.1086/115587

    1990 doi

  27. [36]

    P., Conroy, C., Bonaca, A., et al

    Naidu, R. P., Conroy, C., Bonaca, A., et al. 2020, ApJ, 901, 48, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/abaef4

    2020 doi

  28. [37]

    2021, ApJ, 922, 211, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac2573

    Niu, Z., Yuan, H., Wang, S., & Liu, J. 2021, ApJ, 922, 211, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac2573

    2021 doi

  29. [38]

    S., & Pickles, A

    Norris, J., Bessell, M. S., & Pickles, A. J. 1985, ApJS, 58, 463, doi: 10.1086/191049

    1985 doi

  30. [39]

    A., Wolf, C., Bessell, M

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

    2019 doi

  31. [40]

    2023, ApJ, 949, 31, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/acc458

    Plotnikova, A., Carraro, G., Villanova, S., & Ortolani, S. 2023, ApJ, 949, 31, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/acc458

    2023 doi

  32. [41]

    2022, ApJ, 941, 45, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac9e01

    Rix, H.-W., Chandra, V., Andrae, R., et al. 2022, ApJ, 941, 45, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac9e01

    2022 doi

  33. [42]

    J., Finkbeiner, D

    Schlegel, D. J., Finkbeiner, D. P., & Davis, M. 1998, ApJ, 500, 525, doi: 10.1086/305772

    1998 doi

  34. [43]

    F., Starkenburg, E., et al

    Sestito, F., Martin, N. F., Starkenburg, E., et al. 2020, MNRAS, 497, L7, doi: 10.1093/mnrasl/slaa022

    2020 doi

  35. [44]

    2019, MNRAS, 482, 1525, doi: 10.1093/mnras/sty2672

    Vasiliev, E. 2019, MNRAS, 482, 1525, doi: 10.1093/mnras/sty2672

    2019 doi

  36. [45]

    2025, Nature Astronomy, 9, 101, doi: 10.1038/s41550-024-02382-w

    Xiang, M., Rix, H.-W., Yang, H., et al. 2025, Nature Astronomy, 9, 101, doi: 10.1038/s41550-024-02382-w

    2025 doi

  37. [46]

    2022a, ApJS, 258, 44, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/ac3df6

    Xu, S., Yuan, H., Niu, Z., et al. 2022a, ApJS, 258, 44, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/ac3df6

    doi

  38. [47]

    2022b, ApJS, 263, 29, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/ac9908

    Xu, S., Yuan, H., Zhang, R., et al. 2022b, ApJS, 263, 29, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/ac9908

    doi

  39. [48]

    2022, Research in Astronomy and Astrophysics, 22, 025007, doi: 10.1088/1674-4527/ac3df0 12Xu et al

    Yan, T.-S., Shi, J.-R., Tian, H., Zhang, W., & Zhang, B. 2022, Research in Astronomy and Astrophysics, 22, 025007, doi: 10.1088/1674-4527/ac3df0 12Xu et al

    2022 doi

  40. [49]

    2024, MNRAS, 527, 9892, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad3860

    Ye, D., Du, C., Shi, J., & Ma, J. 2024, MNRAS, 527, 9892, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad3860

    2024 doi

  41. [50]

    F., et al

    Yuan, Z., Li, C., Martin, N. F., et al. 2024, A&A, 691, L1, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202348593

    2024 doi

  42. [51]

    2024a, MNRAS, 533, 889, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stae1887

    Zhang, H., Ardern-Arentsen, A., & Belokurov, V. 2024a, MNRAS, 533, 889, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stae1887

    doi

  43. [52]

    2024b, ApJ, 971, 127, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad613e

    Zhang, R., Yuan, H., Huang, B., et al. 2024b, ApJ, 971, 127, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad613e

    doi

  44. [53]

    Zhao, G., Zhao, Y.-H., Chu, Y.-Q., Jing, Y.-P., & Deng, L.-C. 2012, Research in Astronomy and Astrophysics, 12, 723, doi: 10.1088/1674-4527/12/7/002 Evidence for a VMP Primordial Disk System13 APPENDIX A.PHOTOMETRIC-ABUNDANCE ESTIMATE LIMITATIONS FOR VMP STARS Photometric meta...

    2024 doi

Pith tools

Reviewed August 6, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.