Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 6 minor 31 references

Lightcurves of stars in the Chamaeleon I Association

T0 review · 4 major / 6 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 This paper presents the first optical variability study of the Chamaeleon I association, identifying 73 astrometric members and classifying 28 of them as variables, mostly T Tauri and Orion stars.

desk verdict Useful first optical variability survey of Cha I, but the published period-to-source mapping contradicts the figure captions, so the catalog needs a careful correction pass before any science can rely on it. read the letter →

arxiv 2507.22023 v1 pith:KILP6YBS submitted 2025-07-29 astro-ph.SR astro-ph.GA

K. Neumannová (1) , L. Kue{ss} (2) , E. Paunzen (1) , K. Bernhard (3) ((1) Department of Theoretical Physics , Astrophysics - Masaryk University , Kotlářská 2 , Brno , Czechia
show 8 more authors
(2) Department of Astrophysics - University of Vienna Türkenschanzstra{ss}e 17 Vienna Austria (3) Bundesdeutsche Arbeitsgemeinschaft für Veränderliche Sterne e.V. (BAV) Munsterdamm 90 Berlin Germany)
This is my paper
classification astro-ph.SRastro-ph.GA
keywords pre-main-sequencestarsTTaurivariablesOrionChamaeleonIassociationlightcurvesGaiaDR3NEOWISEspectralclassification
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

The paper sets out to show that Chamaeleon I, a nearby star-forming region usually observed in the infrared, can be surveyed in the optical, and to deliver a first catalog of variability for its members. It selects 73 of 92 field stars as association members using Gaia astrometry, then extracts light curves for 55 members from Gaia and 69 from NEOWISE/AllWISE. For 28 members it determines a variability type, predominantly T Tauri and Orion variables, with typical brightness changes of about 0.3 mag and an average period of about 6.3 days. A sympathetic reading is that this adds a new observational window onto very young low-mass stars and provides a period-amplitude-spectral-type catalog for a benchmark star-forming region.

What carries the argument

The argument is carried by the membership selection and the period-analysis pipeline. Membership rests on a hand-defined box in distance-proper-motion space (distance 170-210 pc and proper motion 20-25 mas/yr) combined with HDBSCAN density-based clustering at membership probability above 0.5, producing the 73-member list that ties the light curves to the association. Periods come from Lomb-Scargle, discrete Fourier transform, and ANOVA periodograms run in Peranso, with a false-alarm-probability threshold of $\log \mathrm{FAP} \ge -2$ and cross-checks against Astropy's Lomb-Scargle implementation. Spectral types are assigned automatically with MKCLASS using two standard libraries, with visual inspection used to settle disagreements between libraries.

What would settle it

Take the members that do not appear in the independent Gaia-ESO membership list and measure their lithium absorption at 6708 angstroms and H-alpha emission; if a substantial fraction, say more than 20 percent, show no youth indicators, then the membership list is contaminated and the assigned periods and variability types are not securely tied to Chamaeleon I.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that optical light curves of Chamaeleon I members can be obtained and that their variability is classifiable. From 92 stars with astrometric data, 73 are identified as association members; 55 yield Gaia G-band light curves and 69 yield NEOWISE/AllWISE light curves. For 28 members the variability type is determined, mostly T Tauri and Orion variables, with amplitudes typically near 0.3 mag and periods averaging about 6.3 days, the longest near 96 days. Spectral classification assigns most members to cool M-type stars and flags a few possible chemically peculiar candidates, and the phase curves show the irregular, low-amplitude behavior expected of young, accreting, spot-dominated stars.

Load-bearing premise

The whole analysis leans on the astrometric membership list, which was drawn by hand in distance and proper-motion space and by density-based clustering, without quality cuts on the parallax data and without any independent youth indicators.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The catalog supplies periods, amplitudes, and spectral types for 28 variable members, giving future follow-up a target list of the clearest T Tauri and Orion variables.
  • The typical 0.3 mag optical amplitudes establish a baseline for multi-epoch monitoring of this association and support the picture that the variability is driven by spots and accretion rather than large eclipses.
  • The possible chemically peculiar stars among the members, if confirmed, would be unusual in a roughly 2 Myr population and would motivate high-resolution spectroscopic checks.
  • The paper's distance estimate of about 190 pc, if correct, shifts the association relative to earlier 160-170 pc measurements and therefore changes derived luminosities and ages.

Reading between the lines

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

  • A natural next test is to compare the members that do not appear in the independent Gaia-ESO membership list against lithium and H-alpha emission, which would show whether the astrometric-only membership is contaminated or incomplete.
  • Multi-season Gaia and NEOWISE data could check whether the 96-day period and other long periods are stable; stable periods would favor rotational or disk modulation, while drifting periods would point to accretion-driven changes.
  • If the chemically peculiar candidates survive higher-resolution classification, they would be an anomaly for a pre-main-sequence association and could indicate that some astrometric 'members' are field interlopers.
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

4 major / 6 minor

Summary. The manuscript reports an optical variability study of stars in the Chamaeleon I association. Using Gaia DR3 astrometry, 73 of 92 observed targets are assigned membership via a hand-drawn distance–proper-motion box plus HDBSCAN clustering. The authors extract Gaia G-band and NEOWISE light curves, determine periods with Peranso (Lomb-Scargle, DFT, ANOVA) and validate with Astropy, cross-match to VSX for variability types, and classify spectra with MKCLASS. The main products are a member list, spectral types, periods, amplitudes, and variability types for 28–29 stars, mostly T Tauri and Orion variables.

Significance. If the catalog were internally consistent, this would be the first optical variability study of Chamaeleon I and would provide a useful resource for studying low-mass pre-main-sequence variability, with the strength of using archival Gaia and NEOWISE data and standard, reproducible tools. The paper also makes a falsifiable claim about the period distribution (average ~6.3 d). However, the current internal inconsistencies in the period–source mapping and the unvalidated membership selection mean the catalog cannot yet be used as published. The authors deserve credit for presenting the light curves and for checking against the Gaia DR3 variability catalogue.

major comments (4)
  1. [§5.1, Table 4, Figs. 8–12] The period-to-source mapping is internally inconsistent between Table 4 and the figure captions. For example, Fig. 8 left assigns P=5.1704 d to Gaia DR3 5201347064956072448, while Table 4 gives that source P=1.055 d and assigns P=5.1704 d to 5201350019893311744. Fig. 9 left shows 5201201139145692800 with P=1.1688 d, while Table 4 assigns P=1.1688 d to 5201303325008889856. Fig. 10 left shows 5201129705249611008 with P=4.8311 d, while Table 4 gives that source P=1.6145 d and assigns P=4.8311 d to 5201129292932746880. Fig. 12 left shows 5201181313576638208 as an EB with P=0.8509 d, while Table 4 gives this source EB P=1.6314 d and assigns P=0.8509 d to 5201378641555926784. Because the central deliverable is a period catalog, the mapping must be made unique and self-consistent; currently the published periods cannot be reproduced from the paper.
  2. [§4.1] The adopted significance criterion 'log FAP ≥ −2' appears to be inverted. A false-alarm probability FAP is a probability, so log10(FAP) ≥ −2 corresponds to FAP ≥ 0.01; this would accept periodogram peaks that are not significant at the 1% level. If the intended cutoff is FAP ≤ 0.01 (log10 FAP ≤ −2), please state this explicitly and apply it consistently, since this threshold controls which light curves are classified as periodic.
  3. [§2, Table 1] The membership selection, which underpins the association-specific claims, is not robustly validated. The initial box in distance–proper-motion space is chosen by eye (170–210 pc, 20–25 mas/yr), no cuts on parallax quality are applied, and the HDBSCAN probability threshold p>0.5 is adopted without a sensitivity test. The authors themselves report only ~63% overlap with the Gaia-ESO membership of Gutiérrez Albarrán et al. (2020) and a distance of ~190 pc versus 160–170 pc in earlier works. Please add a quantitative comparison with published membership lists and an assessment of how contamination/incompleteness affects the derived variability fractions and the claim that these are Cha I members.
  4. [Table 4] Table 4 contains duplicate and incomplete entries that make the variability-type catalog ambiguous. Sources 5201378641555926784, 5201153172951606784, 5201308101012353664, and 5201303325008889856 each appear twice, sometimes with different periods or variability flags, and several rows have P='-' while still being listed as variable types. Please restructure the table to one row per source, with a single period and type, and reconcile it with the figures.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Table 2] Table 2 lists several sources twice (e.g., 5201296727939072384, 5201343693404220800, 5224581944675548032); please remove duplicates or annotate them as repeated observations.
  2. [References] The Baluev (2008) reference in the bibliography has a garbled title ('The AstropMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Societyhysical Journal'); please correct the journal and title.
  3. [§4.1, Acknowledgments] In §4.1, the sentence introducing ANOVA ('eclipsing variable stars of the (Knote et al., 2019) type') is missing words; also the CRediT statement in the acknowledgments appears to contain funding text rather than author contributions.
  4. [§4.1] The minimum period of 0.5 d imposed in the frequency search is mentioned only in passing; please state explicitly that periods shorter than 0.5 d cannot be detected, as this is a completeness limit of the catalog.
  5. [Fig. 3] Figure 3 caption is confusing: 'from top to bottom; Left: ... Right: ...' Please rephrase to clarify which panel corresponds to which source.
  6. [Abstract, §5.1] The abstract and §5.1 give different numbers for the stars with determined variability types (28 vs 29); please harmonize.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 2.0 of 10

No circular derivation; the catalog is observational, with only a minor non-load-bearing self-citation for the FAP threshold.

full rationale

The paper is an observational catalog, not a derivation of a prediction from fitted parameters. Membership is defined by an astrometric box plus HDBSCAN; although the box is chosen 'from looking at the distribution' (Sec. 2), it is an operational selection criterion, and the paper does not present the resulting membership or distance as a theoretically predicted quantity. Periods are extracted by Lomb-Scargle/ANOVA and cross-checked with Astropy and VSX; variability types are adopted from VSX, so no type is derived from a model fitted to the same data. The one self-citation, Paunzen et al. (2024), sets the FAP threshold log FAP >= -2; it is a statistical calibration from an external Kepler sample and does not determine any specific period, amplitude, or variability class, hence it is not load-bearing. The paper itself flags limitations such as astrometry-only membership, 63% overlap with Gutiérrez Albarrán et al. (2020), the 190 pc versus 160-170 pc distance discrepancy, and low-quality spectra; these are selection and correctness risks, not circularity. The figure/table period-ID mismatches noted by the skeptic are internal reproducibility defects, not circular reasoning. Therefore no circular step is identified; score 2 reflects only the minor self-citation.

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

The paper introduces no new physical entities. Its central results rest on hand-chosen membership boundaries, a self-cited FAP threshold, external variability types, and unquantified period determinations.

free parameters (4)
  • Membership box boundaries in distance and proper motion = d in [170, 210] pc; mu in [20, 25] mas/yr
    Chosen by eye from the observed distribution in Fig. 1 (Sec. 2) and used as input for HDBSCAN membership; this hand selection directly fixes the 73-member list.
  • HDBSCAN membership probability threshold = p > 0.5
    Standard but hand-chosen cut defining the final member list (Sec. 2).
  • FAP threshold for periodicity = log FAP >= -2
    Adopted from Paunzen et al. (2024), a self-cited paper, rather than calibrated on this dataset (Sec. 4.1).
  • Minimum period floor = 0.5 days
    Periods shorter than 0.5 days were suppressed to avoid aliasing artifacts (Sec. 4.1), which may hide real short-period signals.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption The box in distance-proper-motion space isolates Chamaeleon I members
    Sec. 2: members are assumed to lie within d in [170, 210] pc and mu in [20, 25] mas/yr, with no parallax quality cuts; the box is drawn from the same data used to test membership.
  • domain assumption MKCLASS libnor36 classifications are reliable for these low-S/N spectra
    Sec. 5.2: when the two libraries disagree (e.g., kA0hA1mA2 Eu vs M2.5 III), the authors assume libnor36 is correct based on visual inspection, with no external validation.
  • domain assumption VSX variability types are usable as ground truth
    Sec. 5.1: variability classes in Table 4 are taken from VSX, while UPSILoN classifications had confidence below 50%; the authors themselves doubt some VSX entries.
  • ad hoc to paper The FAP threshold from Paunzen et al. (2024) applies to this dataset
    Sec. 4.1: threshold set using a self-cited paper on Kepler non-variables, not calibrated on Chamaeleon I data.
  • domain assumption Gaia and NEOWISE time sampling is sufficient to recover the reported periods
    Sec. 5.1: period determination required manual frequency adjustment and had large margins of error; no uncertainty quantification is provided.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Lightcurves of stars in the Chamaeleon I Association." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/KILP6YBS

@misc{pith2026250722023,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Lightcurves of stars in the Chamaeleon I Association},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/KILP6YBS}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2507.22023}
}
read the original abstract

Star-forming regions are essential for studying very young stellar objects of various masses. They still contain a significant amount of dust and gas. We present a study of light curves of stars in the field of the Chamaeleon I association. We use automatic spectral classification with MKCLASS to identify the spectral types of the stars in the field with a light curve from the NEOWISE and Gaia surveys. The light curves are analysed using the software Peranso and astropy. We also used VSX to identify the variability type. Based on astrometry, we have identified 92 stars, 73 of which are members of the association. We received light curves for 55 stars from the Gaia survey and for 69 stars from the ALLWISE/NEOWISE survey. For 28 of them, it was possible to determine the types of variables, mostly T Tauri and Orion variables. The spectral types of the members are mostly cooler M-type stars, with one being a possible chemically peculiar (CP) star. The non-members associated with light curve measurements include spectral types A-G with one CP candidate.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2507.22023 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Observed stars (black) and our members of the ChaI association (red). Left: distance-proper motion space to determine the members as described in the text. Right: sky distribution of the observed field. 2. Target selection and published membership probabilities The Cha I association was observed in May 2009 with the AAOmega spectrograph (Smith et al., 2004) at the Anglo-Australian Telescope (AAT). The instrument con… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Members of the association determined by HDBSCAN. The stars are colour-coded by membership probability. The grey points are foreground and background sources. 713 members. The former includes all of our members from the astrometric selection based on distance and proper motion and the latter had 42 (∼ 63%) of our members included. Those discrepancies arise mainly from the membership criteria used in the respective w… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Light and phase curves of variable stars from the Gaia database from top to bottom; Left: Light curve from Gaia database. Right: Phase curve proceeds in Peranso. ID 5201341567397611008: period of 0.759 days. ID 5201335481425778560: period of 0.643 days. ID 5201127918543201664: period of 96.2 days. 4. Methods 4.1. Frequency analysis Lomb-Scargle, discrete Fourier transform (DFT) and ANOVA (analysis of variance) metho… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (9 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Spectrum of the star that was classified as being peculiar by MKCLASS, 2MASS11101141-7635292/Gaia DR3 5201350019893311744 with spectral type kB7hF6mF7 (libnor36) or kB7hF5mF6 (libr18) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Dereddened colour-magnitude diagram of the Cha I association with the Gaia filters. The stars show linear dependence - The redder the object, the less bright it appears. As the redness increases, the extinction increases, as we would expect. K. Neumannova et al.: Prepr…
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Colour - magnitude diagram of the Cha I association with the Gaia filters with minimum and maximum magnitudes for each star. We can notice how each star is shifted during its cycle [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Extinction values were taken from Luhman (2007), the 2 Myr isochrone is from Baraffe et al. (2015). Black are all the stars in the association determined by this work, and red are the ones with a light curve. K. Neumannova et al.: Preprint submitted to Elsevier Page 9 …
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Phase curves of the variable stars of INS type. Left: Phase curve of Gaia DR3 5201347064956072448 with period 5.1704 days. Right: Phase curve of Gaia DR3 5201350019893311744 with period 0.6672 day [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_8.png]
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Phase curves of the variable stars of CTTS type. Left: Phase curve of Gaia DR3 5201201139145692800 with period 1.1688 days. Right: Phase curve of Gaia DR3 5201209351123255296 with period 0.6484 day [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_9.png]
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Phase curves of the variable stars of INT type. Left: Phase curve of Gaia DR3 5201129705249611008 with period 4.8311 days. Right: Phase curve of Gaia DR3 5201160525934988288 with period 0.7406 day [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_10.png]
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Phase curves of the variable stars of TTS and WTTS types. Left: Phase curve of TTS type Gaia DR3 5201351428642607744 with period 6.7818 days. Right: Phase curve of WTTS Gaia DR3 5201126441074447872 with period 1.055 days. K. Neumannova et al.: Preprint submitted to El…
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: Phase curves of the variable stars of EB and SR types. Left: Phase curve of EB type Gaia DR3 5201181313576638208 with period 0.8509 days. Right: Phase curve of SR Gaia DR3 5201207736215474688 with period 1.4299 days. K. Neumannova et al.: Preprint submitted to Elsevie…

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

31 extracted references · 13 canonical work pages

  1. [2]

    URL: https://doi.org/10.21105%2Fjoss.00205, doi:10.21105/joss.00205. Paunzen, E., Binder, F., Cyniburk, A., Duffek, M.N., Haberhauer, F., Heinreichsberger, C., Kohlhofer, H., Kueß, L., Maitzen, H.M., Saalmann, T., Schanz, A.M., Schauer, S., Schmidt, K., Tokareva, A., Wizani, I.,

    doi:10.21105/joss.00205

  2. [9]

    Astronomy & Astrophysics 595, A1

    The Gaia mission. Astronomy & Astrophysics 595, A1. doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201629272, arXiv:1609.04153. GaiaCollaboration,Vallenari,A.,Brown,A.G.A.,Prusti,T.,deBruijne,J.H.J.,Arenou,F.,Babusiaux,C.,Biermann,M.,Creevey,O.L.,Ducourant, C., Evans, D.W., Eyer, L., Guerra, R., Hutton, A., Jordi, C., Klioner, S.A., Lammers, U.L., Lindegren, L., Luri, X., Mignard...

    arXiv

  3. [17]

    A plethora of new, magnetic chemically peculiar stars from LAMOST DR4

    A plethora of new, magnetic chemically peculiar stars from LAMOST DR4. Astronomy & Astrophysics 640, A40. doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202037750, arXiv:2005.14444. Joshi, G.,

    work page Pith review arXiv 2005

  4. [18]

    Knote, M.F., Kaitchuck, R.H., Berrington, R.C.,

    A package for the automated classification of periodic variable stars URL:https://arxiv.org/abs/ 1512.01611, doi:10.48550/ARXIV.1512.01611. Knote, M.F., Kaitchuck, R.H., Berrington, R.C.,

    arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.1512.01611

  5. [19]

    Observations and Preliminary Modeling of the Light Curves of Eclipsing Binary Systems NSVS 7322420 and NSVS 5726288

    Observations and preliminary modeling of the light curves of eclipsing binary systems nsvs 7322420 and nsvs 5726288. URL:https://arxiv.org/abs/1910.07627, doi:10.48550/ARXIV.1910.07627. Kubiak,K.,Mužić,K.,Sousa,I.,Almendros-Abad,V.,Köhler,R.,Scholz,A.,2021.Newlow-massmembersofChamaeleonIand 𝜀Cha.Astronomy & Astrophysics 650, A48. doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202...

    work page Pith review arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.1910.07627 1910

  6. [28]

    Photometric variability of the pre-main sequence stars towards the Sh 2-190 region

    Photometric VariabilityofthePre-main-sequenceStarstowardtheSh2-190Region.TheAstrophysicalJournal921,165.doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac1bbc, arXiv:2108.02107. Smith, G.A., Saunders, W., Bridges, T., Churilov, V., Lankshear, A., Dawson, J., Correll, D., Waller, L., Haynes, R., Frost, G.,

    work page Pith review arXiv

  7. [29]

    (Eds.), Ground-based Instrumentation for Astronomy, pp

    AAOmega: a multipurpose fiber-fed spectrograph for the AAT, in: Moorwood, A.F.M., Iye, M. (Eds.), Ground-based Instrumentation for Astronomy, pp. 410–420. doi:10.1117/12.551013. K. Neumannova et al.:Preprint submitted to Elsevier Page 23 of 24 ChaI Association Watson,C.L.,Henden,A.A.,Price,A.,2006. TheInternationalVariableStarIndex(VSX). SocietyforAstrono...

    doi:10.1117/12.551013

  8. [30]

    McInnes, L., Healy, J., Astels, S.,

    URL:http: //dx.doi.org/10.1088/0004-637X/792/1/30, doi:10.1088/0004-637x/792/1/30. McInnes, L., Healy, J., Astels, S.,

    doi:10.1088/0004-637x/792/1/30

Show all 31 references
  1. [31]

    Astronomy & Astrophysics 633, A51

    A compendium of distances to molecular clouds in the Star Formation Handbook. Astronomy & Astrophysics 633, A51. doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201936145, arXiv:2001.00591. Zwintz,K.,Fossati,L.,Ryabchikova,T.,Guenther,D.,Aerts,C.,Barnes,T.G.,Themeßl,N.,Lorenz,D.,Cameron,C.,Kuschnig,R.,...

    2001 arXiv

  2. [65]

    Roccatagliata, V., Sacco, G.G., Franciosini, E., Randich, S.,

    URL: https://dx.doi.org/10.1088/0004-637X/755/1/65, doi:10.1088/0004-637X/755/1/65. Roccatagliata, V., Sacco, G.G., Franciosini, E., Randich, S.,

    doi

  3. [71]

    Flaherty, K.M., DeMarchi, L., Muzerolle, J., Balog, Z., Herbst, W., Megeath, S.T., Furlan, E., Gutermuth, R.,

    URL:http://dx.doi.org/10.3847/1538-3881/aacead, doi:10.3847/1538-3881/aacead. Flaherty, K.M., DeMarchi, L., Muzerolle, J., Balog, Z., Herbst, W., Megeath, S.T., Furlan, E., Gutermuth, R.,

    doi

  4. [80]

    doi:10.1088/0004-6256/147/4/80. Günther, H.M., Cody, A.M., Covey, K.R., Hillenbrand, L.A., Plavchan, P., Poppenhaeger, K., Rebull, L.M., Stauffer, J.R., Wolk, S.J., Allen, L., Bayo, A., Gutermuth, R.A., Hora, J.L., Meng, H.Y.A., Morales-Calderón, M., Parks, J.R., Song, I.,

    doi

  5. [122]

    doi:10.1088/0004-6256/148/6/122, arXiv:1408.3063. Gutiérrez Albarrán, M.L., Montes, D., Gómez Garrido, M., Tabernero, H.M., González Hernández, J.I., Marfil, E., Frasca, A., Lanzafame, A.C., Klutsch, A., Franciosini, E., Randich, S., Smiljanic, R., Korn, A.J., Gilmore, G., Alf...

    arXiv

  6. [147]

    Baluev, R.V.,

    doi:10.3847/1538-3881/ abd806, arXiv:2012.05220. Baluev, R.V.,

    2012 arXiv

  7. [167]

    Bailer-Jones, C.A.L., Rybizki, J., Fouesneau, M., Demleitner, M., Andrae, R.,

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ac7c74, arXiv:2206.14220. Bailer-Jones, C.A.L., Rybizki, J., Fouesneau, M., Demleitner, M., Andrae, R.,

    arXiv

  8. [348]

    doi:10.1086/301430, arXiv:astro-ph/0003307

    The Astronomical Journal 120, 349–366. doi:10.1086/301430, arXiv:astro-ph/0003307. Horne, J.H., Baliunas, S.L.,

    arXiv

  9. [757]

    Hümmerich, S., Paunzen, E., Bernhard, K.,

    doi:10.1086/164037. Hümmerich, S., Paunzen, E., Bernhard, K.,

    doi

  10. [1974]

    Annual Review of Astronomy and Astrophysics 12, 257–277

    The chemically peculiar stars of the upper main sequence. Annual Review of Astronomy and Astrophysics 12, 257–277. doi:10.1146/annurev.aa.12.090174.001353. Rice, T.S., Wolk, S.J., Aspin, C.,

  11. [2004]

    The Astrophysical Journal 602, 816–842

    A Census of the Chamaeleon I Star-forming Region. The Astrophysical Journal 602, 816–842. doi:10.1086/381146, arXiv:astro-ph/0402509. Luhman, K.L.,

    arXiv

  12. [2007]

    The Astrophysical Journals 173, 104–136

    The Stellar Population of the Chamaeleon I Star-forming Region. The Astrophysical Journals 173, 104–136. doi:10.1086/ 520114, arXiv:0710.3037. Mainzer, A., Bauer, J., Cutri, R.M., Grav, T., Masiero, J., Beck, R., Clarkson, P., Conrow, T., Dailey, J., Eisenhardt, P., Fabinsky, ...

    arXiv

  13. [2008]

    The AstropMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Societyhysical Journal 385, 1279–1285

    Assessing the statistical significance of periodogram peaks. The AstropMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Societyhysical Journal 385, 1279–1285. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2008.12689.x, arXiv:0711.0330. Baraffe, I., Homeier, D., Allard, F., Chabrier, G.,

    2008

  14. [2014]

    Science 345, 550–553

    Echography of young stars reveals their evolution. Science 345, 550–553. doi:10.1126/science.1253645, arXiv:1407.4928. K. Neumannova et al.:Preprint submitted to Elsevier Page 24 of 24

    arXiv

  15. [2015]

    Astronomy & Astrophysics 577, A42

    New evolutionary models for pre-main sequence and main sequence low-mass stars down to the hydrogen-burning limit. Astronomy & Astrophysics 577, A42. doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201425481, arXiv:1503.04107. Bhardwaj, A., Panwar, N., Herczeg, G.J., Chen, W.P., Singh, H.P.,

    arXiv

  16. [2016]

    TheAstrophysicalJournal833,104

    Spitzer Observations of Long-termInfraredVariabilityamongYoungStellarObjectsinChamaeleonI. TheAstrophysicalJournal833,104. doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ 833/1/104, arXiv:1609.09100. Gaia Collaboration, Prusti, T., de Bruijne, J.H.J., Brown, A.G.A., Vallenari, A., Babusiaux, C., Bail...

    arXiv

  17. [2018]

    Astronomy & Astrophysics 617, L4

    The double population of Chamaeleon I detected by Gaia DR2. Astronomy & Astrophysics 617, L4. doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201833890, arXiv:1808.06931. Scargle,J.D.,1982. Studiesinastronomicaltimeseriesanalysis.II.Statisticalaspectsofspectralanalysisofunevenlyspaceddata. TheAstrophys...

    1982 arXiv

  18. [2019]

    Astronomy & Astrophysics 627, A135

    Variability of young stellar objects in the star-forming region Pelican Nebula. Astronomy & Astrophysics 627, A135. doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201935418, arXiv:1906.00256. Campello, R., Moulavi, D., Sander, J.,

    1906 arXiv

  19. [2020]

    The Gaia-ESO Survey: Calibrating the lithium-age relation with open clusters and associations. I. Cluster age range and initial membership selections. Astronomy & Astrophysics 643, A71. doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202037620, arXiv:2009.00610. Herbst, W., Maley, J.A., Williams, E.C.,

    arXiv

  20. [2021]

    Reviews of Modern Physics 93, 015001

    Probing the interior physics of stars through asteroseismology. Reviews of Modern Physics 93, 015001. doi:10.1103/ RevModPhys.93.015001, arXiv:1912.12300. Astropy Collaboration, Price-Whelan, A.M., Lim, P.L., Earl, N., Starkman, N., Bradley, L., Shupe, D.L., Patil, A.A., Corra...

    1912 arXiv

  21. [2022]

    arXiv e-prints , arXiv:2208.00211doi:10.48550/arXiv.2208.00211, arXiv:2208.00211

    Gaia Data Release 3: Summary of the content and survey properties. arXiv e-prints , arXiv:2208.00211doi:10.48550/arXiv.2208.00211, arXiv:2208.00211. Gaia Collaboration, Vallenari, A., Brown, A. G. A., Prusti, T., de Bruijne, J. H. J., Arenou, F., Babusiaux, C., Biermann, M., C...

    doi arXiv

  22. [2023]

    A&A 674, A1

    Gaia data release 3 - summary of the content and survey properties. A&A 674, A1. URL:https://doi.org/10.1051/0004-6361/202243940, doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202243940. Gray,R.O.,Corbally,C.J.,2014. AnExpertComputerProgramforClassifyingStarsontheMKSpectralClassificationSystem. TheAs...

    2014 doi

  23. [2024]

    Astronomy & Astrophysics 687, A208

    Apparent non-variable stars from the Kepler mission. Astronomy & Astrophysics 687, A208. doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202244572, arXiv:2406.06174. Paunzen,E.,Vanmunster,T.,2016. Peranso-Lightcurveandperiodanalysissoftware. AstronomischeNachrichten337,239. doi: 10.1002/asna. 201512254...

    2016 arXiv

Pith tools

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