Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 49 references

J-VAR: the northern variable sky in 7 filters -- First Data Release

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-05 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read J-VAR's first data release delivers 1.3 million seven-band light curves, 6,570 asteroids, and ten transients, claiming a unique niche for narrow-band time-domain surveys.

desk verdict A genuinely new public dataset that occupies a real niche in time-domain surveys; the absolute calibration is the one thing I'd want to see validated before leaning on the science. read the letter →

arxiv 2509.00214 v1 pith:CIYP2LHA submitted 2025-08-29 astro-ph.SR astro-ph.EPastro-ph.IM

A. Ederoclite , H. Vázquez Ramió , A. Alvarez-Candal , B. B. Siffert , V. M. Placco , D. Morate , S. Pyrzas , C. López-Sanjuan
show 32 more authors
M. Mahlke S. Kulkarni L. Espinosa M. J. Castro B. Zacarias M. Akhlaghi J. Castillo T. Civera J. Hernández-Fuertes A. Hernán-Caballero A. López-Sainz G. Lorenzetti D. Muniesa-Gallardo A. Moreno-Signes H. Vives-Arias J. Zaragoza Cardiel M. C. Díaz-Martín F. Galindo-Guil R. Iglesias-Marzoa R. Infante-Sainz T. Kuutma E. Lacruz J. Lamadrid-Gutierrez F. López-Martínez N. Maícas-Sacristan F. Hernández Pérez J. Carvano P. Cruz F. R. Herpich E. Solano A. F. Pala R. R. R. Reis
This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.SRastro-ph.EPastro-ph.IM
keywords J-VARtime-domainsurveynarrow-bandfiltersvariablestarsasteroidssupernovaeRRLyraephotometriccalibration
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

J-VAR is a wide-field, seven-filter time-domain survey carried out with an 83-cm telescope, revisiting each field eleven times. This first data release covers 101 fields (about 202 square degrees) and contains 1.3 million multi-band light curves of point sources, more than 6,000 asteroids, and ten optical transients, four of them newly discovered supernovae. The paper's central claim is that the combination of wide-field monitoring with narrow-band filters placed on stellar spectral features—Ca H+K, Mg b, H-alpha, and Ca triplet—occupies a niche no other survey fills, yielding roughly 5,000 light curves per square degree with spectral diagnostics in every epoch. The release thus aims to let variability be studied as changes in the spectral energy distribution, not only as changes in brightness.

What carries the argument

The observing block is the load-bearing unit: a 40-minute sequence of three complete cycles through the seven filters with small orthogonal dithers between cycles. It gives each field quasi-simultaneous seven-colour sampling, a median 12.7-minute gap between exposures in the same filter, and the three same-night exposures needed to stack into templates. The other essential object is the filter set itself: the narrow-band filters are centred on strong stellar spectral features, so each light-curve epoch is a miniature low-resolution spectrum. The 11-epoch quota was set by simulating RR Lyrae period recovery with OGLE III light curves, which showed that 11 epochs recover the correct period in

What would settle it

Compare light curves of constant stars in a J-VAR field against an independent photometric reference per epoch: if the residuals grow with airmass, time since the last photometric night, or distance from the overlapping J-PLUS field, the zero-point transfer has a systematic error that would contaminate all 1.3 million light curves and the asteroid magnitudes.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On its own terms, the paper establishes that a filler-program telescope can produce a public time-domain dataset with a unique filter set. J-VAR observes each field 11 times through three broad-band filters (g, r, i) and four narrow-band filters (J0395, J0515, J0660, J0861), and DR1 delivers 1.3 million 11-epoch light curves across seven bands, 6,570 individual asteroids (131,900 single-filter detections), and 10 optical transients including four supernovae discovered or confirmed by the survey. The authors argue that the narrow-band photometry carries physical information normally requiring spectroscopy: the J0660 filter's excess in SN 2020amv identifies it as a type II supernova, and the C

Load-bearing premise

The whole catalogue assumes that zero points derived from stars in common with already-calibrated J-PLUS fields can be transferred to J-VAR images taken on non-photometric nights, even though the paper says non-photometric conditions cannot be modelled reliably and leaves the validation of that transfer to companion papers.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If the calibration transfer works, the 1.3 million light curves become a multi-band training ground for variability classification, since colour changes can separate pulsators, binaries, and eruptive variables without spectroscopy.
  • Type II supernovae can be identified photometrically through H-alpha excess in the J0660 band, as demonstrated with SN 2020amv—extending this to future transients would give a low-cost typing tool.
  • The 6,570 asteroids with up to seven-filter colours support compositional taxonomy studies, including the separation of chemical families shown in the colour-colour diagrams.
  • The 11-epoch strategy, validated against OGLE III and Gaia DR3 RR Lyrae periods, provides a benchmark for how many epochs a wide-field survey needs for period recovery.
  • Because fields overlap the J-PLUS footprint, J-VAR light curves can be combined with J-PLUS static photometry, redshifts, and classifications, turning a variability catalogue into a multi-dimensional SED time series.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Extending the same H-alpha photometric test to all 10 transients could reveal how many are core-collapse supernovae without needing spectra; the paper only shows this for one object.
  • The high-frequency-mode data, which sample one field continuously for about three hours, could be mined for asteroid rotation periods and CV flickering, but DR1 mostly presents it as a capability rather than a systematic catalogue.
  • A rerun of the period-recovery simulation using all seven bands rather than the single OGLE band would likely show that fewer than 11 epochs suffice, since the paper itself notes the multi-band expectation improves the success rate.
  • If the zero-point transfer is validated in the companion papers, the same calibration strategy could be reused by other filler surveys operating on non-photometric nights, effectively turning bad weather into science time.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper introduces the first data release of the Javalambre Variability Survey (J-VAR), a filler-program time-domain survey on the JAST80/T80Cam using four narrow-band and three broad-band filters. It describes the observing strategy (11 epochs per field, a ~40-minute observing block, and a high-frequency mode), the jype-based reduction, and the public archive content: 101 pointings covering ~202 square degrees, 1.3 million point-source light curves, 6,570 individual asteroids, and 10 optical transients (including 4 discovered supernovae). The paper also presents early science illustrations: asteroid color-color diagrams, the SN 2020amv light curve and SED, and phase-folded variable-star light curves. The central claim is that the DR1 products exist in the public archive with the quoted counts and that the survey occupies a unique niche among wide-field time-domain surveys because of its narrow-band filter set.

Significance. If the calibration and precision claims are supported, J-VAR DR1 is a valuable public dataset: it is, to the authors' knowledge, the only wide-field time-domain survey routinely using narrow-band filters, and it complements J-PLUS by adding a temporal dimension to a well-calibrated photometric system. The strengths of the paper are its clear description of the archive, the public access through CEFCA and VO protocols, the provision of example code, and the concrete early science demonstrations (RR Lyrae, SNe, asteroids). The narrow-band time-domain data, e.g. the J0660 excess in SN 2020amv, make a compelling case for the survey's potential. However, the quantitative claims that support the scientific value—photometric precision, period-recovery rate, and the calibration of non-photometric nights to the J-PLUS system—are asserted with details deferred to companion papers, and no independent validation is shown in this manuscript. These gaps are significant because they affect all 1.3 million light curves and the asteroid photometry.

major comments (3)
  1. [§2.1, §5.1, §5.3] The photometric calibration transfer from J-PLUS DR3 to non-photometric J-VAR images is load-bearing but unvalidated in this paper. Section 2.1 states that non-photometric conditions 'cannot be modelled reliably', while Section 5.1 says that no zero points are placed in image headers and that calibration is instead done as a secondary step using common objects in J-PLUS fields, with details deferred to Morate et al. and Pyrzas et al. (submitted). If a per-image zero point is derived from overlapping J-PLUS fields under spatially or temporally variable extinction, the quoted 2%–5% precision cannot hold and the asteroid colors in Fig. 10 would be systematically biased. The paper needs either an in-paper validation (e.g. comparison with Gaia/VSX or known asteroid photometry, scatter of zero-point solutions across the field, repeatability across epochs) or an explicit systematic-error budget
  2. [§5.3, Variable Stars] The claim 'The resulting photometric precision (RMS) is 2% down to mag∼16 and 5% to mag∼18 in the broad-band filters' is stated with no derivation, no sample definition, and no supporting figure or table. It is unclear whether this RMS is per-epoch repeatability, per-light-curve scatter, or includes the calibration transfer described in §5.1. Given that the release contains 1.3 million light curves, a diagnostic plot of RMS versus magnitude, with a definition of the statistic, is essential. Please provide the evidence here or clearly label the number as preliminary and refer the reader to Pyrzas et al. (submitted) without leaving the number as an unsupported quantitative assertion in the main text.
  3. [§2.1.1] The period-recovery study that motivates the 11-epoch design is described only qualitatively: a simulation using OGLE III RR Lyrae light curves, single band, SNR>50, reporting ~75% recovery at 11 epochs. The subsequent statement that J-VAR r-band recovers Gaia DR3 RR Lyrae periods within 1% relative difference in ≳70% of cases for G=14–19 is not accompanied by sample size, period range, or a definition of 'recovered'. Since this number is used to justify the survey cadence and is a key scientific output, provide a compact validation (e.g. number of stars, period residual distribution, comparison with Kulkarni et al.) or explicitly label the value as preliminary with the detailed analysis reserved for the companion paper.
minor comments (4)
  1. [§4 / Appendix A] The coordinates of the DR1 pointings are missing from the typeset version: 'Table ??' appears in §4 and in Appendix A. This must be filled in for the release paper to be self-contained.
  2. [§2, §5.1] Typographical and nomenclature issues: 'filed-of-view' in §2; the minor-body pipeline is called 'SOSS' in §5.1 but 'SSOS' in §4; 'Tab.B' in §4. Standardize these names.
  3. [Appendix B] The database table descriptions contain undefined terms and formatting glitches (e.g. 'FWMM', repeated 'mag' in the unit column of Table B.1, and 'corr_curves' described as 'curves' without explaining their meaning). Make the appendix self-contained for archive users.
  4. [§6, Conclusions] The phrase 'no selection bias on colour or type' is stronger than supported. The 1.3 million light curves are for point-sources in common with J-PLUS and require detections in the J-VAR images; there may be selection effects from source density, depth, and morphology. Rephrase to 'no preselection by variability type' or qualify the statement.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: J-VAR DR1 is an observational data release whose calibration is anchored to the external J-PLUS DR3 catalogue and whose performance checks use external Gaia/VSX benchmarks; no claimed product reduces to its own input.

full rationale

This paper is a survey/data-release paper rather than a derivation paper. It makes no claim of the form 'X is derived from Y' where X and Y coincide by construction. The photometric calibration is transferred from J-PLUS DR3 (López-Sanjuan et al. 2024), an external published catalogue, by computing zero points from common objects in overlapping fields; this is a standard external-anchor procedure and does not define J-VAR magnitudes in terms of themselves. The asteroid magnitudes are calibrated with zero points derived from common field stars, not from the asteroids, so the color-color diagrams in Fig. 10 are not forced by construction. The light-curve extraction uses ensemble differential photometry with comparison stars, and the quoted 2%/5% precision is an internal RMS; the independent period-recovery check against Gaia DR3 periods is an external benchmark, not a fitted-input-called-prediction. The paper does defer calibration details and validation to companion papers (Pyrzas et al., submitted; Morate et al., submitted; Kulkarni et al., submitted), and Sect. 5.1 explicitly notes that no zero points are placed in image headers because observations occur on non-photometric nights. That is a missing-support or validation-deferral concern, not a circularity: nothing in this paper's claims is defined in terms of its own output, and the load-bearing calibration reference is an external catalogue, not an unpublished self-citation chain. The claimed 'uniqueness' in the survey parameter space is a contextual claim, not a result derived from the survey's own data. Therefore no circular step can be identified.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 2 assumptions · 0 invented entities

This is an observational data release, not a derivation. No free parameters are fitted to produce the central claim, and no new physical entities are introduced. The load-bearing assumptions are about the transfer of photometric calibration from J-PLUS and the fidelity of external variability references.

assumptions (2)
  • domain assumption Photometric calibration transfer from J-PLUS DR3 to J-VAR non-photometric-night images is valid.
    Invoked in Sects. 2 and 5.1; the entire photometry of the release depends on this transfer, whose validation is deferred to companion papers.
  • domain assumption Gaia DR3 periods and VSX classifications are correct references for evaluating J-VAR period recovery and variability classification.
    Used in Sect. 2.1.1 and Sect. 5.3 to benchmark the survey; no independent verification of these references is given.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of J-VAR: the northern variable sky in 7 filters -- First Data Release." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/CIYP2LHA

@misc{pith2026250900214,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: J-VAR: the northern variable sky in 7 filters -- First Data Release},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/CIYP2LHA}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2509.00214}
}
abstract

Aims. The analysis of variability of astronomical sources is of extraordinary interest, as it allows the study of astrophysical phenomena in real time. This paper presents the Javalambre Variability Survey (J-VAR) which leverages the narrow band filters available at the Javalambre Auxiliary Survey Telescope (JAST80) at the Observatorio Astrof\'isico de Javalambre (OAJ). Methods. The JAST80 equipped with T80Cam, providing a field of view of 2\,square degrees and a pixel scale of 0.55\,arcsec/pixel has been designed for wide-field studies. The main characteristic is the availability of a variety of narrow band filters strategically located on stellar spectral features (the $J0395$ in correspondence of the Ca H+K doublet, the $J0515$ of the Mg $b$ triplet, the $J0660$ of the H$\alpha$ line, and the $J0861$ of the Ca~triplet). This project combines, for the first time, the wide-field with a variety of narrow band filters for a unique variability survey, observing each field 11~times with a standardised observing sequence. The median limiting magnitude for individual exposures are 19.1 mag in $J0395$ and $J0515$, $19.6$ mag in $J0660$ and $J0861$, $19.8$ mag in $i$, and $20.2$ in $g$ and $r$. The typical FWHM of the $r$-band images is $1.5$ arcsec. Results. This article introduces the first data release of J-VAR including more than 6000 individual asteroids, 10\,detected optical transients (4\,discovered supernovae), and 1.3 million light curves of point-sources. On average, J-VAR delivers an unprecedented $\sim$5000 light curves per square degree of 11\,epochs in 7\,bands, opening research opportunities for theoretical studies and new discoveries alike.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2509.00214 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. The J-VAR filter set (shown as filled curves) is a subset of the J-PLUS photometric system (empty and filled curves). The effective transmission accounts for the CCD quantum efficiency, the filters mea￾sured transmission and the reflectively of the primary and secondary mirror of JAST80. photometric redshifts for extragalactic objects. The current J￾VAR photometric calibration (Pyrzas et al. submitted; Morate et al.… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Evolution of the observations of J-VAR. The upper panel shows the number of completed fields (i.e. fields with at least 11 observed epochs). The bottom panel shows the number of fields which have been observed one or seven times (the rest has been omitted for clarity). The number of fields with one observed epoch shows that there is a contin￾uous incoming stream of new fields to be observed and the number of fields … view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_4.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (10 more)
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Structure of an observing block. First an exposure in the seven filters is obtained, then a small dithering is applied, then a second se￾quence of exposures is executed and then a third one after a second dithering. The two dithering directions are orthogonal. filter i…
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Distribution of the limiting magnitudes of all the images of J-VAR DR1 in the different filters. The vertical line is one magnitude shallower than J-PLUS limiting magnitude (5σ detection in 6 arcseconds aperture) which was used to define the exposure times of J-VAR. 0 …
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Distribution of the median full width at half maximum of the detected sources in each image for each observed filter. The quasi-simultaneous observations in the different filters and the good image quality across the whole optical range result in very similar distribut…
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: The red markers show the sky distribution of the 101 pointings of J-VAR DR1. The grey points refer to the sky distribution of J-PLUS DR3 which is used for calibration. The yellow and the blue line show the Ecliptic and the Galactic plane, respectively. the first data r…
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Number of SBs detected in each J-VAR filter. 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.2 i - J0861 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 g - J0660 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.2 i - J0861 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 g - r [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_9.png]
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Colour-colour diagram in the form of heat maps. The left panel shows g − J0660 vs i − J0861, while the right panel shows g − r vs i − J0861. The use of different colours allows to separate between fam￾ilies of different chemical composition [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/f…
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Top: Detection image of SN 2020amv, Middle: Light curve of SN 2020amv in the seven filters of J-VAR. The shaded points refer to photometric errors larger than 1 magnitude, which is equivalent to a non detection. Bottom: Evolution of the spectral energy distribution of…
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: The colour-magnitude diagram of J-VAR sources. The light curves of the objects marked in red are shown in Fig.13. in a single observing block increases its potential for detecting and characterizing short-period systems. Other periodic variables, such as rotationally …
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: Phase-folded light curves of variable stars from J-VAR DR1 with known periods , P. Periods are taken either from Kulkarni et al. (submitted, ⋆) or from VSX (Watson et al. 2022; †). The phase has been duplicated to clearly show the full brightness variation cycle. From…
Figure 14
Figure 14. Figure 14: Scatter plots comparing the main characteristics of J-VAR DR1 (highlighted in red) with respect to other wide-field photometric surveys. can observe within a few days all the sky available from their sites and, therefore, they can, in principle, be extended indefi￾nit…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

49 extracted references · 30 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

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

    ENTRY address archiveprefix author booktitle chapter edition editor howpublished institution eprint journal key month note number organization pages publisher school series title type volume year label extra.label sort.label short.list INTEGERS output.state before.all mid.sentence after.sentence after.block FUNCTION init.state.consts #0 'before.all := #1 ...

  2. [2]

    write newline

    " write newline "" before.all 'output.state := FUNCTION n.dashify 't := "" t empty not t #1 #1 substring "-" = t #1 #2 substring "--" = not "--" * t #2 global.max substring 't := t #1 #1 substring "-" = "-" * t #2 global.max substring 't := while if t #1 #1 substring * t #2 global.max substring 't := if while FUNCTION word.in bbl.in " " * FUNCTION format....

  3. [3]

    2009, , 506, 411

    Auvergne , M., Bodin , P., Boisnard , L., et al. 2009, , 506, 411

    2009

  4. [4]

    C., Kulkarni , S

    Bellm , E. C., Kulkarni , S. R., Graham , M. J., et al. 2019, , 131, 018002

    work page 2019

  5. [5]

    2014, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:1403.5237

    Benitez , N., Dupke , R., Moles , M., et al. 2014, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:1403.5237

    arXiv 2014

  6. [6]

    & Arnouts , S

    Bertin , E. & Arnouts , S. 1996, , 117, 393

    1996

  7. [7]

    2021, , 653, A31

    Bonoli , S., Mar \' n-Franch , A., Varela , J., et al. 2021, , 653, A31

    2021

  8. [8]

    J., Koch , D., Basri , G., et al

    Borucki , W. J., Koch , D., Basri , G., et al. 2010, Science, 327, 977

    2010

Show all 49 references
  1. [9]

    & Smith, H

    Catelan, M. & Smith, H. A. 2015, Pulsating stars (John Wiley & Sons)

    2015

  2. [10]

    J., Moles , M., Crist \'o bal-Hornillos , D., et al

    Cenarro , A. J., Moles , M., Crist \'o bal-Hornillos , D., et al. 2019, , 622, A176

    2019

  3. [11]

    J., Moles , M., Mar \' n-Franch , A., et al

    Cenarro , A. J., Moles , M., Mar \' n-Franch , A., et al. 2014, in Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, Vol. 9149, Observatory Operations: Strategies, Processes, and Systems V, ed. A. B. Peck , C. R. Benn , & R. L. Seaman , 91491I

    2014

  4. [12]

    2023, , 674, A18

    Clementini , G., Ripepi , V., Garofalo , A., et al. 2023, , 674, A18

    2023

  5. [13]

    2024, , 691, A221

    del Pino , A., L \'o pez-Sanjuan , C., Hern \'a n-Caballero , A., et al. 2024, , 691, A221

    2024

  6. [14]

    DeMeo , F. E. & Carry , B. 2013, , 226, 723

    2013

  7. [15]

    J., Djorgovski , S

    Drake , A. J., Djorgovski , S. G., Mahabal , A., et al. 2009, , 696, 870

    2009

  8. [16]

    Everett , M. E. & Howell , S. B. 2001, , 113, 1428

    2001

  9. [17]

    Gaia Collaboration , Vallenari , A., Brown , A. G. A., et al. 2023, , 674, A1

    2023

  10. [18]

    2019, Annual Review of Astronomy and Astrophysics, 57, 305

    Gal-Yam, A. 2019, Annual Review of Astronomy and Astrophysics, 57, 305

    2019

  11. [19]

    W., Kaiser , N., Aussel , H., et al

    Hodapp , K. W., Kaiser , N., Aussel , H., et al. 2004, Astronomische Nachrichten, 325, 636

    2004

  12. [20]

    1929, PNAS, 15, 168

    Hubble , E. 1929, PNAS, 15, 168

    1929

  13. [21]

    M., Tyson , J

    Ivezi \'c , Z ., Kahn , S. M., Tyson , J. A., et al. 2019 a , , 873, 111

    2019

  14. [22]

    M., Tyson , J

    Ivezi \'c , Z ., Kahn , S. M., Tyson , J. A., et al. 2019 b , , 873, 111

    2019

  15. [23]

    2001, , 122, 2749

    Ivezi \'c , Z ., Tabachnik , S., Rafikov , R., et al. 2001, , 122, 2749

    2001

  16. [24]

    & Milone, E

    Kallrath, J. & Milone, E. F. 2009, Eclipsing Binary Stars: Modeling and Analysis, 2nd edn. (New York: Springer-Verlag)

    2009

  17. [25]

    & Millea, M

    Knox, L. & Millea, M. 2020, Phys. Rev. D, 101, 043533

    2020

  18. [26]

    A., Rix , H.-W., Aerts , C., et al

    Kollmeier , J. A., Rix , H.-W., Aerts , C., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2507.06989

    2025 arXiv

  19. [27]

    Harvard College Observatory Circular

    Leavitt , H. S. & Pickering , E. C. 1912, "Harvard College Observatory Circular", 173, 1

    1912

  20. [28]

    K., & Han , Z

    Liu , Z.-W., R \"o pke , F. K., & Han , Z. 2023, Research in Astronomy and Astrophysics, 23, 082001

    2023

  21. [29]

    2019, , 622, A177

    L \'o pez-Sanjuan , C., V \'a zquez Rami \'o , H., Varela , J., et al. 2019, , 622, A177

    2019

  22. [30]

    2024, , 683, A29

    L \'o pez-Sanjuan , C., V \'a zquez Rami \'o , H., Xiao , K., et al. 2024, , 683, A29

    2024

  23. [31]

    2018, , 610, A21

    Mahlke , M., Bouy , H., Altieri , B., et al. 2018, , 610, A21

    2018

  24. [32]

    2019, Astronomy and Computing, 28, 100289

    Mahlke , M., Solano , E., Bouy , H., et al. 2019, Astronomy and Computing, 28, 100289

    2019

  25. [33]

    J., Barb \'a , R

    Ma \' z Apell \'a niz , J., Alfaro , E. J., Barb \'a , R. H., et al. 2021, , 506, 3138

    2021

  26. [34]

    2015, in IAU General Assembly, Vol

    Mar\' n-Franch , A., Taylor , K., Cenarro , J., Cristobal-Hornillos , D., & Moles , M. 2015, in IAU General Assembly, Vol. 29, 2257381

    2015

  27. [35]

    2012, in Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, Vol

    Mar\' n-Franch , A., Taylor , K., Cepa , J., et al. 2012, in Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, Vol. 8446, Ground-based and Airborne Instrumentation for Astronomy IV, ed. I. S. McLean , S. K. Ramsay , & H. Takami , 84466H

    2012

  28. [36]

    & Queloz , D

    Mayor , M. & Queloz , D. 1995, , 378, 355

    1995

  29. [37]

    2021, , 655, A47

    Morate , D., Marcio Carvano , J., Alvarez-Candal , A., et al. 2021, , 655, A47

    2021

  30. [38]

    Oke , J. B. & Gunn , J. E. 1983, , 266, 713

    1983

  31. [39]

    2016, , 591, A115

    Popescu , M., Licandro , J., Morate , D., et al. 2016, , 591, A115

    2016

  32. [40]

    R., Winn , J

    Ricker , G. R., Winn , J. N., Vanderspek , R., et al. 2015, Journal of Astronomical Telescopes, Instruments, and Systems, 1, 014003

    2015

  33. [41]

    2017, , 153, 204

    Sesar , B., Hernitschek , N., Mitrovi \'c , S., et al. 2017, , 153, 204

    2017

  34. [42]

    J., Prieto , J

    Shappee , B. J., Prieto , J. L., Grupe , D., et al. 2014, , 788, 48

    2014

  35. [43]

    A., Udalski , A., et al

    Soszy \'n ski , I., Dziembowski , W. A., Udalski , A., et al. 2011, , 61, 1

    2011

  36. [44]

    K., et al

    Soszy \'n ski , I., Udalski , A., Szyma \'n ski , M. K., et al. 2010, , 60, 165

    2010

  37. [45]

    V., Cutri , R

    Sykes , M. V., Cutri , R. M., Fowler , J. W., et al. 2000, , 146, 161

    2000

  38. [46]

    2005, , 356, 1466

    Tamuz , O., Mazeh , T., & Zucker , S. 2005, , 356, 1466

    2005

  39. [47]

    Taylor , M. B. 2005, in Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series, Vol. 347, Astronomical Data Analysis Software and Systems XIV, ed. P. Shopbell , M. Britton , & R. Ebert , 29

    2005

  40. [48]

    L., Denneau , L., Heinze , A

    Tonry , J. L., Denneau , L., Heinze , A. N., et al. 2018, , 130, 064505

    2018

  41. [49]

    A., & Price , A

    Watson , C., Henden , A. A., & Price , A. 2022, VizieR Online Data Catalog: AAVSO International Variable Star Index VSX (Watson+, 2006-) , VizieR On-line Data Catalog: B/vsx. Originally published in: 2006SASS...25...47W

    2022

Pith tools

Reviewed August 5, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.