pith. machine review for the scientific record. sign in

arxiv: 2602.21289 · v2 · submitted 2026-02-24 · 🌌 astro-ph.SR

Recognition: no theorem link

Testing models for fully and partially stripped low-mass stars with Gaia: Implications for hot subdwarfs, binary RR Lyrae, and black hole impostors

Pranav Nagarajan , Kareem El-Badry , Alexey Bobrick , Giuliano Iorio , Francisco Molina , Joris Vos , Maja Vu\v{c}kovi\'c
Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-15 19:35 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.SR
keywords stripped starshot subdwarfsRR LyraeGaia astrometrybinary evolutionblack hole impostorsred clump starshorizontal branch
0
0 comments X

The pith

Gaia astrometry shows models overpredict binary hot subdwarfs and RR Lyrae from stripped stars but match red clump stars as black hole impostors.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper tests models of low-mass stars that lose envelopes to companions just before helium ignition, producing a continuum of stripped products from hot subdwarfs to partially stripped horizontal branch and red clump stars. By embedding these binaries in a simulated Milky Way with realistic star formation and dust, generating Gaia-like astrometry, and applying the same orbit-fitting pipeline used in DR3, the authors compare predictions directly to observations. The models yield too many hot subdwarf binaries, partly because their predicted brightness contrasts are more extreme than seen. They also forecast over 100 RR Lyrae with detectable orbital solutions, yet none appear, implying au-scale RR Lyrae binaries are rarer than expected. The same framework accounts for the observed population of red clump stars with high astrometric mass functions, which the authors interpret as stripped stars that mimic black hole companions.

Core claim

By generating synthetic Gaia observations of a population of stripped-star binaries in a simulated Milky Way, the authors show that current models overpredict astrometric binaries among hot subdwarfs and predict many binary RR Lyrae where none are observed, while plausibly explaining high-mass-function red clump stars as potential black hole companions.

What carries the argument

Binary population synthesis of envelope stripping combined with forward-modeling of Gaia epoch astrometry and DR3-style orbit fitting.

If this is right

  • Ten times more stripped-star binaries should become detectable in Gaia DR4 because of its longer time baseline.
  • RR Lyrae stars in au-scale binaries must be substantially rarer than current population synthesis predicts.
  • Red clump stars with high astrometric mass functions are likely black hole impostors produced by partial stripping.
  • Hot subdwarf binary models require revised flux-ratio distributions to match the observed fraction with astrometric solutions.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Revisions to mass-transfer efficiency or timing in binary evolution codes may be needed to reduce the predicted numbers of certain stripped products.
  • This approach supplies a concrete baseline for separating true black hole binaries from stripped-star impostors in future astrometric surveys.
  • Non-detections of binary RR Lyrae can constrain the metallicities or evolutionary phases where partial stripping occurs.
  • Wider-orbit systems will be tested more stringently once DR4 and later releases become available.

Load-bearing premise

The binary population synthesis accurately reproduces the orbital periods, mass ratios, and flux contrasts of fully and partially stripped stars, including the placement of helium-burning stars inside the RR Lyrae instability strip.

What would settle it

Detection of even a modest number of RR Lyrae with DR3 or DR4 astrometric orbital solutions, or a much larger number of hot subdwarf binaries than predicted, would undermine the claim that the models overpredict these populations.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2602.21289 by Alexey Bobrick, Francisco Molina, Giuliano Iorio, Joris Vos, Kareem El-Badry, Maja Vu\v{c}kovi\'c, Pranav Nagarajan.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Extinction-corrected color-magnitude diagrams (CMDs) of both the simulated stripped star binaries and their individual components. We show a random sample of sources from Gaia DR3 within 100 pc for comparison. The stripped stars lie in the red clump, horizontal branch, and hot subdwarf regions of the CMD. The light contributions of the luminous companions, which are MS stars and giants, add scatter to the … view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Orbital period vs. distance for the predicted population of stripped star binaries. For clarity, we show a random sample of 1% of the binaries. We plot curves corresponding to a0 = 0.1 mas (which is an approximate lower limit on the angular semi-major axis of detectable photocenter orbits in DR3) for different flux ratios S ≡ F2/F1, assuming a typical stripped star mass of 0.5 M⊙ and a typical main sequenc… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Mock DR3 observations of two unresolved ≈ 0.47 M⊙ sdB binaries. In the left panel, the binary hosts an ≈ 0.6 M⊙ main sequence companion, leading to a small secondary-to-primary flux ratio of ≈ 0.136. In the right panel, the companion mass is doubled to ≈ 1.2 M⊙ with all other parameters held constant, leading to a larger flux ratio of ≈ 2.403. Due to the larger photocenter orbit, the gaiamock pipeline pred… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Simulated sdB binaries within 500 pc in the Gaia color-magnitude diagram (CMD). Many of these binaries are duplicates located at different Galactic coordinates. For comparison, we also show the known wide composite sdB binaries with published astrometric (S. Geier et al. 2019; R. Culpan et al. 2022) or spectroscopic (B. N. Barlow et al. 2013; F. Molina et al. 2026) orbital solutions. The majority of the ob… view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Median number of sdBs in composite binaries predicted to receive astrometric binary solutions in DR3 across 10 realizations. The error bars signify the middle 68% of counts. The hatched bars show the number of sdB binaries in each category before the cuts used to identify composite systems are applied. We compare predictions against observations, finding that the adopted model significantly overestimates t… view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Comparison of wide-orbit sdB binaries with astrometric orbits from Gaia (green; cross-matched with the samples of S. Geier et al. 2019 and R. Culpan et al. 2022) and those with spectroscopic orbits from radial velocity monitoring (blue; B. N. Barlow et al. 2013; F. Molina et al. 2026). In the top left panel, we estimate a0 for each spectroscopic binary from the RUWE in DR3, while in the top right panel, we… view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Orbital period vs. distance for typical realizations of the Milky Way population of stripped star binaries. Systems detected in DR3 and DR4 are marked by orange circles in the left and right panels respectively. RR Lyrae in binaries that receive orbital solutions are marked with larger red points. As expected, more systems are detectable at larger distances with a longer time baseline. The model predicts t… view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Left: Extinction-corrected color-magnitude diagrams (CMD) of red clump stripped star binaries predicted to have high astrometric mass functions fm,ast > 0.5, assuming full rejuvenation of their companions following mass transfer. We plot a random sample of sources from Gaia DR3 within 100 pc for comparison. Right: Normalized histograms of astrometric mass functions of these stripped star binaries. The mode… view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_9.png] view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Predicted spatial distribution of stripped stars in binaries. We show all systems in blue, and the systems detected in either DR3 or DR4 (for a typical MW realization) in orange, plotting 1% of each set of binaries for clarity. The detected binaries are clustered around the location of the Sun, with a longer time baseline increasing the volume to which Gaia is sensitive. their model predicts a large numbe… view at source ↗
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Properties of all stripped star binaries predicted by the model (blue) and those predicted to be detected in DR4 (orange). The diagonal entries display the marginal distribution of each parameter, while each of the other panels displays a joint distribution. Contours identify regions of high density in each parameter space. To reduce shot noise, we combine predictions from 10 realizations, each correspond… view at source ↗
read the original abstract

When low-mass ($\lesssim 2$ $M_{\odot}$) red giants lose their envelopes to a companion just before the helium flash, the resulting mass transfer can produce binaries hosting hot subdwarfs, horizontal branch stars, and undermassive red clump stars. Recent work predicts a continuum of such products, from fully stripped hot subdwarfs to partially stripped horizontal branch and red clump stars, and suggests that young, metal-rich RR Lyrae can form when partial stripping leaves a helium-burning star in the instability strip. To enable direct comparison with observations, we model these binaries in a simulated Milky Way-like galaxy with a realistic metallicity-dependent star formation history and 3D dust map, generate epoch astrometry using Gaia's scanning law, and fit it with the cascade of astrometric models applied in Gaia DR3. We compare the simulated population to DR3 observations of hot subdwarfs, RR Lyrae, and red giants with high astrometric mass functions. The model significantly overpredicts the number of hot subdwarfs with astrometric binary solutions, partly because the predicted flux ratios are more unequal than observed. It also predicts $\gtrsim 100$ RR Lyrae with DR3 astrometric orbital solutions, while none are observed. We conclude that RR Lyrae in au-scale binaries may be substantially rarer than predicted. In contrast, the model plausibly explains the population of red clump stars with high astrometric mass functions, which we interpret as potential black hole impostors. We predict that $\sim 10 \times$ more stripped-star binaries will be detectable in DR4, whose sensitivity to longer periods will more strongly test wide-orbit systems.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The paper develops a binary population synthesis model for low-mass stars that undergo full or partial envelope stripping by a companion, embeds the resulting systems in a simulated Milky Way with realistic star-formation history and 3D dust, generates epoch astrometry according to Gaia’s scanning law, and applies the DR3 cascade of astrometric models. Direct comparison to Gaia DR3 shows that the model overpredicts the number of hot subdwarfs with astrometric binary solutions (partly because predicted flux ratios are too unequal), predicts ≳100 RR Lyrae stars with DR3 orbital solutions while none are observed, and can account for the observed population of red-clump stars with high astrometric mass functions as black-hole impostors. The work forecasts an order-of-magnitude increase in detectable stripped-star binaries in DR4.

Significance. If the reported discrepancies survive closer scrutiny of the synthesis parameters, the paper supplies a concrete, observationally anchored constraint on the efficiency and timing of mass transfer that produces partially stripped horizontal-branch and red-clump stars. The direct simulation of Gaia’s scanning law and model cascade is a methodological strength that enables falsifiable predictions for DR4. The interpretation of high-mass-function red-clump stars as impostors is presented as plausible rather than definitive and therefore does not over-claim.

major comments (2)
  1. [Results (RR Lyrae comparison)] The central claim that RR Lyrae in au-scale binaries are substantially rarer than predicted rests on the simulated yield of ≳100 systems with DR3 astrometric solutions. This number is set by the fraction of partially stripped helium-burning stars placed inside the instability strip, which depends on the assumed post-mass-transfer envelope mass, the core-mass–luminosity relation at the metallicities of the adopted star-formation history, and the resulting period and mass-ratio distributions. The manuscript does not report a sensitivity study varying these quantities, so it is unclear whether the zero observed count demonstrates true rarity or an overproduction inherent to the synthesis prescription.
  2. [Hot-subdwarf comparison] The explanation that unequal predicted flux ratios contribute to the hot-subdwarf overprediction is plausible but remains qualitative. A direct histogram or cumulative distribution of predicted versus observed flux contrasts (or G-band magnitude differences) for the simulated hot-subdwarf binaries would allow the reader to judge how much of the discrepancy is attributable to this effect versus other factors such as the overall normalization of the binary population.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Methods] The abstract states that the model uses a “realistic metallicity-dependent star formation history and 3D dust map,” but the main text does not tabulate the specific SFH parameters or dust-map reference, making it difficult to reproduce the exact counts.
  2. [Figures] Figure captions should explicitly state the number of simulated systems shown and whether they are weighted by selection probability or raw counts.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their constructive and detailed report. The comments highlight important aspects of our analysis that we will clarify in revision. We respond point-by-point below.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: The central claim that RR Lyrae in au-scale binaries are substantially rarer than predicted rests on the simulated yield of ≳100 systems with DR3 astrometric solutions. This number is set by the fraction of partially stripped helium-burning stars placed inside the instability strip, which depends on the assumed post-mass-transfer envelope mass, the core-mass–luminosity relation at the metallicities of the adopted star-formation history, and the resulting period and mass-ratio distributions. The manuscript does not report a sensitivity study varying these quantities, so it is unclear whether the zero observed count demonstrates true rarity or an overproduction inherent to the synthesis prescription.

    Authors: We agree that the absence of a sensitivity study leaves some ambiguity in the robustness of the predicted RR Lyrae yield. The envelope masses, core-mass–luminosity relation, and resulting orbital distributions follow from standard MESA-based binary evolution calculations calibrated to match known populations of hot subdwarfs and horizontal-branch stars; the star-formation history is taken from an observationally anchored Milky Way model. Performing a full grid of variations would require substantial additional computational resources beyond the scope of the current work. In the revised manuscript we will add a dedicated paragraph discussing the impact of plausible variations in post-mass-transfer envelope mass (0.01–0.1 M⊙) on the fraction of stars entering the instability strip, and we will note that even modest increases in envelope mass move most systems out of the strip. We will also tone the language of the conclusion to state that the model overpredicts rather than claiming a definitive demonstration of rarity, while still highlighting that the factor-of-100 discrepancy is difficult to reconcile with the data under our fiducial assumptions. revision: partial

  2. Referee: The explanation that unequal predicted flux ratios contribute to the hot-subdwarf overprediction is plausible but remains qualitative. A direct histogram or cumulative distribution of predicted versus observed flux contrasts (or G-band magnitude differences) for the simulated hot-subdwarf binaries would allow the reader to judge how much of the discrepancy is attributable to this effect versus other factors such as the overall normalization of the binary population.

    Authors: We thank the referee for this concrete suggestion. We will add a new figure (or panel in an existing figure) that shows both the histogram and cumulative distribution of G-band magnitude differences between the two components for the simulated hot-subdwarf binaries, directly overlaid on the corresponding distribution for the observed Gaia DR3 sample. This will make quantitative the contribution of flux-ratio mismatch and allow readers to assess the residual discrepancy attributable to overall binary-population normalization. The revised text will reference this figure when discussing the overprediction. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; central claims rest on direct comparison to independent Gaia DR3 observations

full rationale

The paper generates simulated populations using binary population synthesis with external galactic structure, metallicity-dependent star formation history, and 3D dust maps, then applies Gaia's scanning law and DR3 astrometric fitting pipeline to produce testable predictions. These are compared to observed counts of hot subdwarfs with binary solutions, RR Lyrae with orbital solutions, and red clump stars with high mass functions. The overpredictions and interpretations (rarer RR Lyrae binaries, plausible black hole impostors) are falsifiable against the external dataset rather than reducing to internally fitted parameters or self-citation chains. No load-bearing step equates a prediction to its own input by construction, and the synthesis assumptions are stated as testable rather than self-defining the outcome.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

1 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The model rests on standard binary-evolution assumptions about envelope stripping and on galactic-structure inputs; no new entities are postulated.

free parameters (1)
  • mass-transfer efficiency and timing parameters
    Control the fraction of envelope removed and the resulting core mass and orbital separation in low-mass binaries.
axioms (1)
  • domain assumption The simulated Milky Way has a realistic metallicity-dependent star formation history and 3D dust map.
    Used to generate the underlying stellar population before applying binary evolution and Gaia selection.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5653 in / 1516 out tokens · 53077 ms · 2026-05-15T19:35:11.732150+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

  1. No country for old stars -Spectroscopic confirmation of the first intermediate-age RR Lyrae in the open cluster Trumpler 5

    astro-ph.SR 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 7.0

    Spectroscopic confirmation establishes the first intermediate-age RR Lyrae star as a member of open cluster Trumpler 5, with velocity and [Fe/H] matching the cluster but some element depletions.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

91 extracted references · 91 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper · 9 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    Abt, H. A. 1983, ARA&A, 21, 343, doi: 10.1146/annurev.aa.21.090183.002015 Astropy Collaboration, Robitaille, T. P., Tollerud, E. J., et al. 2013, Astronomy and Astrophysics, 558, A33, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201322068 Astropy Collaboration, Price-Whelan, A. M., Sip˝ ocz, B. M., et al. 2018, The Astronomical Journal, 156, 123, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/aabc4f ...

    work page doi:10.1146/annurev.aa.21.090183.002015 1983

  2. [2]

    1946, PASP, 58, 249, doi: 10.1086/125835

    Baade, W. 1946, PASP, 58, 249, doi: 10.1086/125835

    work page doi:10.1086/125835 1946

  3. [3]

    N., Liss, S

    Barlow, B. N., Liss, S. E., Wade, R. A., & Green, E. M. 2013, ApJ, 771, 23, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/771/1/23

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/771/1/23 2013

  4. [4]

    C., Kulkarni, S

    Bellm, E. C., Kulkarni, S. R., Graham, M. J., et al. 2019, Publications of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific, 131, 018002, doi: 10.1088/1538-3873/aaecbe

    work page doi:10.1088/1538-3873/aaecbe 2019

  5. [5]

    2024, MNRAS, 527, 12196, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad3996

    Bobrick, A., Iorio, G., Belokurov, V., et al. 2024, MNRAS, 527, 12196, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad3996

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stad3996 2024

  6. [6]

    2020, A&A, 641, A43, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202038682 21

    Bodensteiner, J., Shenar, T., Mahy, L., et al. 2020, A&A, 641, A43, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202038682 21

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202038682 2020

  7. [7]

    C., M´ esz´ aros, S., Fleming, S

    Bohlin, R. C., M´ esz´ aros, S., Fleming, S. W., et al. 2017, The Astronomical Journal, 153, 234, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/aa6ba9

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-3881/aa6ba9 2017

  8. [8]

    Finkbeiner, D. P. 2016, ApJ, 818, 130, doi: 10.3847/0004-637X/818/2/130

    work page doi:10.3847/0004-637x/818/2/130 2016

  9. [9]

    R., Kilic, M., & Gianninas, A

    Brown, W. R., Kilic, M., & Gianninas, A. 2017, ApJ, 839, 23, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aa67e4

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aa67e4 2017

  10. [10]

    Burrows, A., Wang, T., Vartanyan, D., & Coleman, M. S. B. 2024, The Astrophysical Journal, 963, 63, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad2353

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad2353 2024

  11. [11]

    A., Clayton, G

    Cardelli, J. A., Clayton, G. C., & Mathis, J. S. 1989, The Astrophysical Journal, 345, 245, doi: 10.1086/167900

    work page doi:10.1086/167900 1989

  12. [12]

    2016, The Astrophysical Journal, 823, 102, doi: 10.3847/0004-637X/823/2/102

    Choi, J., Dotter, A., Conroy, C., et al. 2016, The Astrophysical Journal, 823, 102, doi: 10.3847/0004-637X/823/2/102

    work page internal anchor Pith review doi:10.3847/0004-637x/823/2/102 2016

  13. [13]

    2023, A&A, 674, A18, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202243964

    Clementini, G., Ripepi, V., Garofalo, A., et al. 2023, A&A, 674, A18, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202243964

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202243964 2023

  14. [14]

    2022, A&A, 662, A40, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202243337

    Culpan, R., Geier, S., Reindl, N., et al. 2022, A&A, 662, A40, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202243337

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202243337 2022

  15. [15]

    2025, A&A, 704, A326, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202557007

    Culpan, R., Dorsch, M., Pelisoli, I., et al. 2025, A&A, 704, A326, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202557007

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202557007 2025

  16. [16]

    I., Clementini, G., et al

    Cusano, F., Moretti, M. I., Clementini, G., et al. 2021, MNRAS, 504, 1, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stab901

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stab901 2021

  17. [17]

    2014, A&A, 564, A102, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201322139

    Haywood, M. 2014, A&A, 564, A102, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201322139

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201322139 2014

  18. [18]

    2024, A&A, 686, A25, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202348319

    Dawson, H., Geier, S., Heber, U., et al. 2024, A&A, 686, A25, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202348319

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202348319 2024

  19. [19]

    J., & Jorissen, A

    Deschamps, R., Siess, L., Davis, P. J., & Jorissen, A. 2013, A&A, 557, A40, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201321509 D’Orazi, V., Storm, N., Casey, A. R., et al. 2024, MNRAS, 531, 137, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stae1149

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201321509 2013

  20. [20]

    2003, A&A, 409, 205, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20031070

    Drimmel, R., Cabrera-Lavers, A., & L´ opez-Corredoira, M. 2003, A&A, 409, 205, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20031070

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20031070 2003

  21. [21]

    2024, New Astronomy Reviews, 98, 101694, doi: 10.1016/j.newar.2024.101694

    El-Badry, K. 2024, New Astronomy Reviews, 98, 101694, doi: 10.1016/j.newar.2024.101694

    work page doi:10.1016/j.newar.2024.101694 2024

  22. [22]

    El-Badry, K., & Burdge, K. B. 2022, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 511, 24, doi: 10.1093/mnrasl/slab135

    work page doi:10.1093/mnrasl/slab135 2022

  23. [23]

    2024, The Open Journal of Astrophysics, 7, 100, doi: 10.33232/001c.125461

    El-Badry, K., Lam, C., Holl, B., et al. 2024, The Open Journal of Astrophysics, 7, 100, doi: 10.33232/001c.125461

    work page doi:10.33232/001c.125461 2024

  24. [24]

    2022, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 515, 1266, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stac1797

    El-Badry, K., & Rix, H.-W. 2022, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 515, 1266, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stac1797

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stac1797 2022

  25. [25]

    2022, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 512, 5620, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stac815 Gaia Collaboration, Prusti, T., de Bruijne, J

    El-Badry, K., Seeburger, R., Jayasinghe, T., et al. 2022, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 512, 5620, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stac815 Gaia Collaboration, Prusti, T., de Bruijne, J. H. J., et al. 2016, Astronomy and Astrophysics, 595, A1, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201629272 Gaia Collaboration, Vallenari, A., Brown, A. G. A., et al. 2023a, Astrono...

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stac815 2022

  26. [26]

    2023, A&A, 677, A11, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202346407

    Geier, S., Dorsch, M., Dawson, H., et al. 2023, A&A, 677, A11, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202346407

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202346407 2023

  27. [27]

    P., & Marsh, T

    Geier, S., Raddi, R., Gentile Fusillo, N. P., & Marsh, T. R. 2019, A&A, 621, A38, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201834236

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201834236 2019

  28. [28]

    2018, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 475, L15, doi: 10.1093/mnrasl/slx203 G¨ otberg, Y., de Mink, S

    Giesers, B., Dreizler, S., Husser, T.-O., et al. 2018, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 475, L15, doi: 10.1093/mnrasl/slx203 G¨ otberg, Y., de Mink, S. E., Groh, J. H., et al. 2018, A&A, 615, A78, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201732274

    work page doi:10.1093/mnrasl/slx203 2018

  29. [29]

    A 3D Dust Map Based on Gaia, Pan-STARRS 1 and 2MASS

    Finkbeiner, D. 2019, The Astrophysical Journal, 887, 93, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab5362

    work page internal anchor Pith review doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ab5362 2019

  30. [30]

    2025, A&A, 702, A11, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202555002

    Guo, Y., Chen, K., Li, Z., et al. 2025, A&A, 702, A11, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202555002

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202555002 2025

  31. [31]

    2023, Astronomy and Astrophysics, 674, A9, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202243969

    Halbwachs, J.-L., Pourbaix, D., Arenou, F., et al. 2023, Astronomy and Astrophysics, 674, A9, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202243969

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202243969 2023

  32. [32]

    Han, Z., Podsiadlowski, P., Maxted, P. F. L., & Marsh, T. R. 2003, MNRAS, 341, 669, doi: 10.1046/j.1365-8711.2003.06451.x

    work page doi:10.1046/j.1365-8711.2003.06451.x 2003

  33. [33]

    Han, Z., Podsiadlowski, P., Maxted, P. F. L., Marsh, T. R., & Ivanova, N. 2002, MNRAS, 336, 449, doi: 10.1046/j.1365-8711.2002.05752.x

    work page doi:10.1046/j.1365-8711.2002.05752.x 2002

  34. [34]

    C., & Creze, M

    Haywood, M., Robin, A. C., & Creze, M. 1997, A&A, 320, 428

    work page 1997

  35. [35]

    2016, PASP, 128, 082001, doi: 10.1088/1538-3873/128/966/082001

    Heber, U. 2016, PASP, 128, 082001, doi: 10.1088/1538-3873/128/966/082001

    work page doi:10.1088/1538-3873/128/966/082001 2016

  36. [36]

    sdA in SDSS DR12 are Overwhelmingly Not Extremely Low-Mass (ELM) White Dwarfs

    Hermes, J. J., G¨ ansicke, B. T., & Breedt, E. 2017, in Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series, Vol. 509, 20th European White Dwarf Workshop, ed. P. E. Tremblay, B. Gaensicke, & T. Marsh, 453, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.1702.07370

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.1702.07370 2017

  37. [37]

    S., & Webbink, R

    Hjellming, M. S., & Webbink, R. F. 1987, ApJ, 318, 794, doi: 10.1086/165412

    work page doi:10.1086/165412 1987

  38. [38]

    2021, MNRAS, 502, 5686, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stab005

    Iorio, G., & Belokurov, V. 2021, MNRAS, 502, 5686, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stab005

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stab005 2021

  39. [39]

    2026, https://arxiv.org/abs/2603.20429

    Iorio, G., Nagarajan, P., Bobrick, A., et al. 2026, https://arxiv.org/abs/2603.20429

    work page arXiv 2026

  40. [40]

    S., Bauer, E

    Jermyn, A. S., Bauer, E. B., Schwab, J., et al. 2023, The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series, 265, 15, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/acae8d 22

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4365/acae8d 2023

  41. [41]

    2017, MNRAS, 466, 2842, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stw3286

    Karczmarek, P., Wiktorowicz, G., I lkiewicz, K., et al. 2017, MNRAS, 466, 2842, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stw3286

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stw3286 2017

  42. [42]

    O., Pelisoli, I., Koester, D., et al

    Kepler, S. O., Pelisoli, I., Koester, D., et al. 2016, MNRAS, 455, 3413, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stv2526

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stv2526 2016

  43. [43]

    The IMF of simple and composite populations

    Kroupa, P. 2008, in Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series, Vol. 390, Pathways Through an Eclectic Universe, ed. J. H. Knapen, T. J. Mahoney, & A. Vazdekis, 3, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.0708.1164

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.0708.1164 2008

  44. [44]

    E., Valli, R., et al

    Lechien, T., de Mink, S. E., Valli, R., et al. 2025, ApJL, 990, L51, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/adfdd4

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/adfdd4 2025

  45. [45]

    1997, Astronomy and Astrophysicss, 125, 229, doi: 10.1051/aas:1997373

    Lejeune, T., Cuisinier, F., & Buser, R. 1997, Astronomy and Astrophysicss, 125, 229, doi: 10.1051/aas:1997373

    work page doi:10.1051/aas:1997373 1997

  46. [46]

    1998, Astronomy and Astrophysicss, 130, 65, doi: 10.1051/aas:1998405

    Lejeune, T., Cuisinier, F., & Buser, R. 1998, Astronomy and Astrophysicss, 130, 65, doi: 10.1051/aas:1998405

    work page doi:10.1051/aas:1998405 1998

  47. [47]

    R., Murphy, S

    Li, Y., Bedding, T. R., Murphy, S. J., et al. 2022, Nature Astronomy, 6, 673, doi: 10.1038/s41550-022-01648-5

    work page doi:10.1038/s41550-022-01648-5 2022

  48. [48]

    A., Hern´ andez, J., et al

    Lindegren, L., Klioner, S. A., Hern´ andez, J., et al. 2021, Astronomy and Astrophysics, 649, A2, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202039709

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202039709 2021

  49. [49]

    Lomb, N. R. 1976, Astrophysics and Space Science, 39, 447, doi: 10.1007/BF00648343

    work page doi:10.1007/bf00648343 1976

  50. [50]

    2006, A&A, 453, 635, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20053842

    Picaud, S. 2006, A&A, 453, 635, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20053842

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20053842 2006

  51. [51]

    First direct detection of an RR Lyrae star conclusively associated with an intermediate-age cluster

    Mateu, C., Cuevas-Otahola, B., & Jos´ e Downes, J. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2509.22336, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2509.22336 M´ esz´ aros, S., Bohlin, R., Allende Prieto, C., et al. 2024, A&A, 688, A197, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202449306

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2509.22336 2025

  52. [52]

    M., & Badenes, C

    Moe, M., Kratter, K. M., & Badenes, C. 2019, ApJ, 875, 61, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab0d88

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ab0d88 2019

  53. [53]

    2026, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2602.05008, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2602.05008

    Molina, F., Vos, J., Bobrick, A., & Vuˇ ckovi´ c, M. 2026, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2602.05008, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2602.05008

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2602.05008 2026

  54. [54]

    2018, MNRAS, 473, 3131, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stx2514

    Muraveva, T., Subramanian, S., Clementini, G., et al. 2018, MNRAS, 473, 3131, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stx2514

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stx2514 2018

  55. [55]

    R., & El-Badry, K

    Nagarajan, P., Weisz, D. R., & El-Badry, K. 2022, The Astrophysical Journal, 932, 19, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac69e6

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ac69e6 2022

  56. [56]

    2025a, PASP, 137, 044202, doi: 10.1088/1538-3873/adc839

    Nagarajan, P., El-Badry, K., Chawla, C., et al. 2025a, PASP, 137, 044202, doi: 10.1088/1538-3873/adc839

    work page doi:10.1088/1538-3873/adc839

  57. [57]

    2025b, PASP, 137, 094202, doi: 10.1088/1538-3873/adffb7 N´ emeth, P., Kawka, A., & Vennes, S

    Nagarajan, P., El-Badry, K., Reggiani, H., et al. 2025b, PASP, 137, 094202, doi: 10.1088/1538-3873/adffb7 N´ emeth, P., Kawka, A., & Vennes, S. 2012, MNRAS, 427, 2180, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2012.22009.x

    work page doi:10.1088/1538-3873/adffb7 2012

  58. [58]

    D., Lynas-Gray, A

    Otani, T., Oswalt, T. D., Lynas-Gray, A. E., et al. 2018, ApJ, 859, 145, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aab9bf

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aab9bf 2018

  59. [59]

    1991, ApJ, 370, 597, doi: 10.1086/169846 Paczy´ nski, B., & Sienkiewicz, R

    Paczynski, B. 1991, ApJ, 370, 597, doi: 10.1086/169846 Paczy´ nski, B., & Sienkiewicz, R. 1972, AcA, 22, 73

    work page doi:10.1086/169846 1991

  60. [60]

    2011, The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series, 192, 3, doi: 10.1088/0067-0049/192/1/3

    Paxton, B., Bildsten, L., Dotter, A., et al. 2011, The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series, 192, 3, doi: 10.1088/0067-0049/192/1/3

    work page doi:10.1088/0067-0049/192/1/3 2011

  61. [61]

    2013, The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series, 208, 4, doi: 10.1088/0067-0049/208/1/4

    Paxton, B., Cantiello, M., Arras, P., et al. 2013, The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series, 208, 4, doi: 10.1088/0067-0049/208/1/4

    work page internal anchor Pith review doi:10.1088/0067-0049/208/1/4 2013

  62. [62]

    2015, The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series, 220, 15, doi: 10.1088/0067-0049/220/1/15

    Paxton, B., Marchant, P., Schwab, J., et al. 2015, The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series, 220, 15, doi: 10.1088/0067-0049/220/1/15

    work page internal anchor Pith review doi:10.1088/0067-0049/220/1/15 2015

  63. [63]

    B., et al

    Paxton, B., Schwab, J., Bauer, E. B., et al. 2018, The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series, 234, 34, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/aaa5a8

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4365/aaa5a8 2018

  64. [64]

    2019, The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series, 243, 10, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/ab2241

    Paxton, B., Smolec, R., Schwab, J., et al. 2019, The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series, 243, 10, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/ab2241

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4365/ab2241 2019

  65. [65]

    J., Kepler, S

    Pelisoli, I., Bell, K. J., Kepler, S. O., & Koester, D. 2019, MNRAS, 482, 3831, doi: 10.1093/mnras/sty2979

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/sty2979 2019

  66. [66]

    O., & Koester, D

    Pelisoli, I., Kepler, S. O., & Koester, D. 2018a, MNRAS, 475, 2480, doi: 10.1093/mnras/sty011

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/sty011

  67. [67]

    O., Koester, D., et al

    Pelisoli, I., Kepler, S. O., Koester, D., et al. 2018b, MNRAS, 478, 867, doi: 10.1093/mnras/sty1101

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/sty1101

  68. [68]

    2015, ApJ, 811, 113, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/811/2/113 Pietrzy´ nski, G., Thompson, I

    Pietrukowicz, P., Koz lowski, S., Skowron, J., et al. 2015, ApJ, 811, 113, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/811/2/113 Pietrzy´ nski, G., Thompson, I. B., Gieren, W., et al. 2012, Nature, 484, 75, doi: 10.1038/nature10966

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/811/2/113 2015

  69. [69]

    1991, ApJ, 370, 604, doi: 10.1086/169847

    Popham, R., & Narayan, R. 1991, ApJ, 370, 604, doi: 10.1086/169847

    work page doi:10.1086/169847 1991

  70. [70]

    Preston, G. W. 1959, ApJ, 130, 507, doi: 10.1086/146743

    work page doi:10.1086/146743 1959

  71. [71]

    W., et al

    Riley, J., Agrawal, P., Barrett, J. W., et al. 2022, The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series, 258, 34, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/ac416c

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4365/ac416c 2022

  72. [72]

    C., Reyl´ e, C., Derri` ere, S., & Picaud, S

    Robin, A. C., Reyl´ e, C., Derri` ere, S., & Picaud, S. 2003, A&A, 409, 523, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20031117 Rodr´ ıguez-Segovia, N., & Ruiter, A. J. 2025, MNRAS, 539, 3273, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staf710 Rodr´ ıguez-Segovia, N., Ruiter, A. J., & Seitenzahl, I. R. 2025, PASA, 42, e012, doi: 10.1017/pasa.2024.135

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20031117 2003

  73. [73]

    Z., & Fuller, J

    Rui, N. Z., & Fuller, J. 2024, The Open Journal of Astrophysics, 7, 81, doi: 10.33232/001c.123878

    work page doi:10.33232/001c.123878 2024

  74. [74]

    1970, ApJ, 162, 841, doi: 10.1086/150715

    Sandage, A. 1970, ApJ, 162, 841, doi: 10.1086/150715

    work page doi:10.1086/150715 1970

  75. [75]

    R., Skillman, E

    Savino, A., Weisz, D. R., Skillman, E. D., et al. 2022, ApJ, 938, 101, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac91cb

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ac91cb 2022

  76. [76]

    J., Finkbeiner, D

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

    work page internal anchor Pith review doi:10.1086/305772 1998

  77. [77]

    2024, MNRAS, 529, 3729, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stae773

    Shahaf, S., Hallakoun, N., Mazeh, T., et al. 2024, MNRAS, 529, 3729, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stae773

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stae773 2024

  78. [78]

    2020, A&A, 639, L6, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202038275

    Shenar, T., Bodensteiner, J., Abdul-Masih, M., et al. 2020, A&A, 639, L6, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202038275

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202038275 2020

  79. [79]

    2022, Nature Astronomy, 6, 1085, doi: 10.1038/s41550-022-01730-y 23

    Shenar, T., Sana, H., Mahy, L., et al. 2022, Nature Astronomy, 6, 1085, doi: 10.1038/s41550-022-01730-y 23

    work page doi:10.1038/s41550-022-01730-y 2022

  80. [80]

    Stability Criteria for Mass Transfer in Binary Stellar Evolution

    Soberman, G. E., Phinney, E. S., & van den Heuvel, E. P. J. 1997, Astronomy and Astrophysics, 327, 620, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.astro-ph/9703016

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.astro-ph/9703016 1997

Showing first 80 references.