Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 6 minor 98 references

Phosphorous in the moderately metal-poor bulge globular clusters NGC 6539 and NGC 6569

T0 review · 3 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-15 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read The paper finds the only APOGEE star in bulge cluster NGC 6539 is phosphorus-rich at [P/Fe]=+1.0, and takes this, with weaker enhancement in NGC 6569, as support for an early bulge building block near [Fe/H]≈−0.7.

desk verdict Careful P abundance work, but the headline claim that NGC 6539 is a P-rich cluster rests on one off-center star whose membership is not firmly established. read the letter →

arxiv 2608.04185 v1 pith:45UIU7FZ submitted 2026-08-04 astro-ph.GA astro-ph.SR

Morgan S. Camargo , Beatriz Barbuy , Heitor Ernandes , Amâncio C. S. Friaça , Cristina Chiappini , Bernardo P. L. Ferreira , Stefano O. Souza , Sergio Ortolani
show 5 more authors
Domenico Nardiello Eduardo Bica José G. Fernández-Trincado Nicolas Barrera Doug Geisler
This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.GAastro-ph.SR
keywords phosphorus-richstarsglobularclustersGalacticbulgechemicalabundancesAPOGEEspectroscopyNGC65396569odd-Zelements
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 test whether phosphorus enhancement is a common signature of the oldest bulge globular clusters, those sitting at the metallicity peak $[\mathrm{Fe/H}] \approx -0.7$ that recent APOGEE and Gaia data associate with the original spheroidal bulge. Using APOGEE H-band spectra, it measures sodium, aluminium, and especially phosphorus in the clusters NGC 6539 and NGC 6569. It finds that the only APOGEE member star of NGC 6539 is strongly phosphorus-rich, with $[\mathrm{P/Fe}] = +1.0$, while NGC 6569 shows weaker enhancement in a handful of stars. The authors read this as support for a now-disrupted massive building block of the early bulge at $[\mathrm{Fe/H}]$ below about $-0.7$ that gave birth to phosphorus-rich stars, and as a constraint on which nucleosynthetic channels made the odd-Z elements in the Galaxy's first generations.

What carries the argument

The measurement chain is the central mechanism: APOGEE H-band spectra ($R \approx 22{,}500$) are matched with synthetic spectra computed with the Turbospectrum code and MARCS model atmospheres, and the phosphorus abundance is read off the two neutral-phosphorus lines at 15711.6 and 16482.9 Å. The 16482.9 Å line is blended with CO, so the C, N, O abundances are first fixed from the 15525–15590 Å region and the CO 15717.2 Å line. Non-LTE corrections for these P lines are small (below 0.1 dex), which makes agreement between the two lines the operative test of a detection. The $[\mathrm{P/Fe}]$-versus-$[\mathrm{Fe/H}]$ plane, benchmarked against a chemical-evolution model with massive-star yields, is the interpretive lens that turns individual measurements into the early-bulge claim.

What would settle it

Take new high-signal-to-noise H-band spectra of ten or more proper-motion-selected stars within the Jacobi radius of NGC 6539 and measure $[\mathrm{P/Fe}]$ from both P I lines; the central claim fails if the original star 2M18042652-0739044 is the only one with $[\mathrm{P/Fe}] \geq +0.7$ and its membership is independently refuted by chemical tagging or by an orbit placing it outside the cluster.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper reports phosphorus abundances from the two neutral-phosphorus lines at 15711.6 and 16482.9 Å in APOGEE H-band spectra of the bulge globular clusters NGC 6539 ($[\mathrm{Fe/H}] \approx -0.75$) and NGC 6569 ($[\mathrm{Fe/H}] \approx -0.85$). It finds that the single APOGEE member star of NGC 6539, selected by Gaia proper motion and radial velocity, is phosphorus-rich (P-rich) at $[\mathrm{P/Fe}] = +1.0 \pm 0.1$ from both lines, and that several NGC 6569 members show more moderate enhancement ($[\mathrm{P/Fe}]$ between $+0.5$ and $+0.7$); the stars with $[\mathrm{P/Fe}] = +1.0$ resting only on the weaker line were set aside. Because the bulge chemical-evolution model reaches only $[\mathrm{P/Fe}] \approx +0.45$ at these metallicities, values at or above $+0.7$ count as genuinely enriched. The authors interpret the pattern, together with earlier detections in Ton 1 and NGC 6316, as evidence that moderately metal-poor bulge clusters around $[\mathrm{Fe/H}] \approx -0.7$ preserve the chemical fingerprint of an early, now-disrupted building block of the Galactic bulge that produced P-rich stars.

Load-bearing premise

The claim that NGC 6539 is a phosphorus-rich cluster rests on one star located well away from the cluster centre, whose membership is judged only from Gaia proper motion and radial velocity; if that star is actually a field star in front of or behind the cluster, the cluster-level claim fails.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • NGC 6539 joins Ton 1 and NGC 6316 as a bulge globular cluster near $[\mathrm{Fe/H}] \approx -0.7$ that hosts phosphorus-rich stars, enlarging the sample of clusters with this signature.
  • The combination of P-rich clusters and P-rich field stars at $[\mathrm{Fe/H}] \approx -0.7$ strengthens the identification of a spheroidal bulge component formed by an early, now-disrupted building block of the Milky Way.
  • Phosphorus enhancement appears less common below $[\mathrm{Fe/H}] \approx -0.7$, so the finding narrows the metallicity window in which the phosphorus-producing nucleosynthetic channel operated.
  • The clear Na–Al correlation with a weaker P–Al correlation indicates that sodium and aluminium came from massive-star nucleosynthesis while phosphorus needs an additional channel, motivating new yield models for massive stars at intermediate and metal-rich metallicities.
  • The new measurements do not confirm the $[\mathrm{P/Fe}]$–$[\mathrm{N/O}]$ correlation reported in earlier work, leaving that proposed relation without further support.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If the single NGC 6539 star is a field interloper, the cluster-level claim weakens, but the broader pattern of P-rich stars around $[\mathrm{Fe/H}] \approx -0.7$ in the field would still stand, so the building-block hypothesis does not depend only on that one star.
  • A direct extension would be chemical tagging: additional proper-motion members of NGC 6539 observed at high resolution should also be P-rich if the cluster genuinely belongs to the P-rich population.
  • If the P-rich clusters and P-rich field stars came from a single disrupted building block, they should share similar orbits; matching Gaia radial velocities and proper motions with abundance patterns would test that prediction.
  • If phosphorus production is tied to neutrino-process or other weak-interaction channels in the first massive stars, P-rich stars near $[\mathrm{Fe/H}] \approx -0.7$ should also be enhanced in other odd-Z elements such as potassium or scandium, a check the same APOGEE spectra could provide.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

3 major / 6 minor

Summary. The paper analyzes APOGEE H-band spectra of two moderately metal-poor bulge globular clusters, NGC 6539 and NGC 6569, to derive phosphorus abundances (with ancillary Na and Al) using Turbospectrum spectrum synthesis and MARCS models. The authors report a single P-rich star in NGC 6539 ([P/Fe]=+1.0±0.1, from two P lines) and a 'lower level' of P-enhancement in several NGC 6569 stars (one at +0.7, two at +0.5/+0.6, plus upper limits). They interpret these results as support for the existence of an early, now-disrupted Galactic bulge building block at [Fe/H]≈−0.7 that produced P-rich stars, linking the clusters to the spheroidal bulge population identified by Nepal et al. (2026). The paper also re-derives Na and Al abundances for Ton 1 and NGC 6316 and finds a Na–Al correlation but no clear P–Al correlation.

Significance. If the abundance measurements are secure, the paper provides a valuable data point in the emerging study of P-rich stars in old bulge globular clusters. The abundance analysis is careful: two P lines are used when possible, CNO blending (notably CO at the PI 16482.9 Å line) is explicitly accounted for, uncertainties from fitting and stellar parameters are quantified, and recent non-LTE corrections are cited. The proposed link between [Fe/H]≈−0.7 bulge clusters and the ancient spheroidal bulge is an interesting and testable hypothesis. However, the central cluster-level claim for NGC 6539 rests on a single star whose cluster membership is not established beyond a proper-motion filter and radial-velocity check, and the P-rich threshold is tied to the authors' own chemical-evolution model. These limitations materially weaken the strength of the conclusions as currently stated.

major comments (3)
  1. [Section 2, Table 1, Figure 2] The central claim that NGC 6539 hosts a P-rich star rests entirely on one APOGEE target, 2M18042652-0739044, which lies well outside the cluster core (Figure 2, right panel). Membership is asserted from a proper-motion filter and a radial-velocity check, with no formal membership probability, chemical tagging, or orbital confirmation. This is a load-bearing issue because the same fields contain P-rich probable non-members (e.g., 2M18132128-3152422 in NGC 6569 with [P/Fe]=+0.9±0.15), showing that high P abundances occur in field stars along these sightlines. I request a quantitative membership assessment (e.g., Gaia DR3 membership probability, isochrone placement, or a discussion of interloper fractions) or a clear softening of the cluster-level conclusion.
  2. [Section 5, Figure 7] The definition of P-rich as [P/Fe]≥0.7 is justified in the text by the statement that the chemical-evolution model of Barbuy et al. (2025a) reaches only +0.45 at [Fe/H]≈−0.85. Because the same model is used for both the threshold and the interpretation, the classification of stars as 'enriched' versus 'not enriched' is partly circular with respect to the model. I ask the authors to state explicitly how the conclusions would change if the threshold were instead, for example, +0.5 dex, which would classify several additional NGC 6569 stars as P-rich, or if the threshold were set entirely from the observed distribution.
  3. [Section 5, Table 3] The NGC 6569 evidence for a 'lower level of P-enhancement' is thin. Of the 12 member stars, only one (2M18134025-3149477) has both P lines agreeing at [P/Fe]=+0.7, while several others are single-line detections, upper limits, or have large line-to-line discrepancies; for example, 2M18133324-3150194 shows +1.0±0.20 from the λ15711 line and 0.0±0.20 from the λ16482 line, yet a mean of +0.5±0.20 is adopted. The paper should either justify the averaging of discrepant line measurements or base the cluster-level statements only on the secure two-line detections.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Title/Abstract] The title uses 'Phosphorous', which is not the standard element name; I suggest 'Phosphorus' for consistency with the text and the literature.
  2. [Table 1] In the proper-motion entry for 2M18133324-3150194, the value appears as '−4.0.6±0.033', which looks like a typographical error; please verify.
  3. [Section 4.1] The non-LTE discussion mentions corrections only for the PI 16482.9 Å line; please state whether the PI 15711.6 Å line has similarly small non-LTE corrections or whether this line is simply used as a cross-check.
  4. [Section 5, Table 3] The sentence 'We discarded two other stars showing [P/Fe]=+1.0±0.15 but deduced only from the weaker less reliable line' is ambiguous; Table 3 lists several stars with high P from one line only (members and non-members), so it would help to identify the specific stars and explain why exactly two were discarded.
  5. [Section 5] The phrase 'N-rich and N-normal stars in field globular clusters stars' contains a duplication; please revise to 'globular cluster stars' or 'cluster stars'.
  6. [Figure 7] Adding a horizontal line marking the adopted P-rich threshold ([P/Fe]=0.7) would make the figure easier to interpret relative to the model predictions.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the P abundances are measured from APOGEE spectra and are not forced by the model or by self-citation.

full rationale

The paper's central measurement is a line-by-line spectrum synthesis of phosphorus, sodium, and aluminium in APOGEE H-band spectra using MARCS models and Turbospectrum (Section 4). The derived [P/Fe] values come from fitting the PI 15711.5 and PI 16482.9 Å lines (Figure 6); no step in that derivation sets the output abundance equal to an input, a fitted parameter, or a prior prediction. The comparison to the chemical evolution model of Barbuy et al. (2025a) is a post-hoc reference: the model predicts [P/Fe] up to about +0.45 at [Fe/H] ~ -0.85, and the authors use that only to define a threshold for calling a star 'enriched' ([P/Fe] >= 0.7). Even if that threshold were changed, the reported [P/Fe] = +1.0 for the NGC 6539 star remains an independent measurement that is anomalous relative to the literature comparison samples (Caffau, Roederer, Maas, et al.) plotted in Figure 7. The self-citations to Barbuy et al. (2025a,b) and Ernandes et al. (2026) supply the motivation and the building-block interpretation, but they do not enter the abundance derivation, and the new cluster data are externally falsifiable: a different spectrum or a different reduction could give a different [P/Fe]. The single-star membership of 2M18042652-0739044 is a legitimate scientific weakness that affects the robustness of the cluster-level claim, but it is a data-quality and membership-assignment issue, not a circularity: the abundance is not defined in terms of the conclusion, and the paper explicitly presents the result as resting on one star. No equation in the paper reduces to itself, no fitted value is renamed as a prediction, and no load-bearing uniqueness theorem is imported. Accordingly, the circularity score is 0.

Assumptions & free parameters 2 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 1 invented entities

The central claim depends on the measured P abundances, but the interpretation uses a chemical evolution model with an adopted factor of 2 for P yields and a threshold for P-rich defined from that model. Membership of the single star in NGC 6539 is a critical assumption, and the proposed building block is an unfalsified interpretation rather than a directly observed entity.

free parameters (2)
  • P-rich threshold [P/Fe] >= 0.7 = 0.7 dex
    The paper defines stars with [P/Fe] >= 0.7 as phosphorus-rich based on the chemical evolution model reaching +0.45 at [Fe/H] ~ -0.85. This cutoff determines which stars are counted as P-rich. The NGC 6539 star at +1.0 is robust regardless.
  • Factor of 2 for P yields in CCSNe = 2
    The CCSNe yields of Woosley & Weaver (1995) for P are multiplied by 2, following Cescutti et al. (2012). This factor is an input to the model that sets the predicted [P/Fe] ~ +0.45 baseline used to decide the enrichment threshold.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption Local thermodynamic equilibrium (LTE) is valid for the P lines; non-LTE corrections are small.
    Turbospectrum synthesis assumes LTE; non-LTE corrections are cited from Andrievsky & Korotin (2026) as < -0.1 dex for the main line, so the paper treats LTE offsets as negligible.
  • domain assumption Cluster membership via Gaia proper motion and radial velocity is correct.
    All cluster-level conclusions depend on the proper motion and radial velocity filters in Section 2; a misclassified field star would change the P-rich statistics.
  • domain assumption The adopted APOGEE line list and MARCS models are sufficiently accurate.
    Standard assumption in spectral synthesis; the paper checks the CO blend but does not provide an independent validation of the line list.
  • ad hoc to paper Chemical evolution model yields for P are correct.
    The threshold for P-rich is set by the model of Barbuy et al. (2025a), which multiplies WW95 P yields by 2. This is an adopted input, not derived in this paper.
invented entities (1)
  • Disrupted massive building block of the early Galactic bulge at [Fe/H] < -0.7
    purpose: To explain the presence of P-rich stars in NGC 6539 and other moderately metal-poor bulge clusters.
    Postulated in the Conclusions as a now-disrupted progenitor, but no direct dynamical or chemical evidence outside the P-rich stars themselves is provided.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Phosphorous in the moderately metal-poor bulge globular clusters NGC 6539 and NGC 6569." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/45UIU7FZ

@misc{pith2026260804185,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Phosphorous in the moderately metal-poor bulge globular clusters NGC 6539 and NGC 6569},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/45UIU7FZ}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2608.04185}
}
abstract

The distinct stellar populations of the Galactic bulge can be disentangled through detailed analysis of their chemical abundances and kinematical properties. Recent studies have suggested that globular clusters located in the Galactic bulge with metallicities around $\rm [Fe/H] \approx -0.7$, may represent some of the oldest systems in the Milky Way, potentially tracing the early spheroidal bulge. The coincidence of a metallicity peak at $\rm [Fe/H] \approx -0.7$ in both field stars and globular clusters, together with the presence of phosphorus-rich (P-rich) stars, may provide important clues to the nature of the first generations of stars formed in the Galaxy. In this work, we investigate the odd-Z elements Na, Al and particularly P in the bulge globular clusters NGC~6539 ($\rm[Fe/H] \sim -0.75$) and NGC~6569 ($\rm [Fe/H] \sim -0.85$) using APOGEE spectra. We also examine the clusters Tonantzintla-1 and NGC~6316, which exhibit evidence of phosphorus enhancement. Our analysis confirms that NGC~6539 is a cluster of interest, with one clearly P-rich star, whereas NGC~6569 shows a lower level of P-enhancement. This again suggests that there might have been an early bulge building block with the metallicity of $\rm[Fe/H] \sim-0.75$, of which NGC~6539 would be part of. The observed abundance patterns indicate that the production of Na and Al is consistent with nucleosynthesis in massive stars. However, the origin of the phosphorus enrichment remains uncertain, suggesting that additional nucleosynthetic channels may be required to explain the observed abundances. These findings provide new constraints on the chemical evolution of the Galactic bulge and the nature of its earliest stellar populations.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2608.04185 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. NGC 6569 sample stars proper motion data from Gaia DR3, where it is possible to identify two stars, 2M18140144-3153250 and 2M18140469-3158520, away from the main group located at µα ≈ −4.15 mas.s−1 , µδ ≈ −7.4 mas.s−1 . From a radial velocity check, the one star in NGC 6539 fits as a member, and among the NGC 6569 stars, 2M18132128-3152422 and 2M18135591-3153092 were excluded, as well from their metallicities. The s… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Left: NGC 6569 sample stars sky distribution – red dots are cluster members, grey dots are stars queried from Gaia DR3 with the cluster Jacobi radius of 0.226◦ around its centre. Right: Star 2M18042652- 0739044 location away from the centre of parent cluster NGC 6539, as a red diamond. Grey dots are stars queried from Gaia DR3 around a radius with the cluster Jacobi radius of 0.317◦ around its centre. 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Colour-Magnitude Diagrams of NGC 6539 and NGC 6569 from Gaia data, with the sample stars identified. respectively. The detectors are H2RG (2048 x 2048) Near-Infrared HgCdTe Detectors with 18µ pixels. The stellar parameter derivation, together with chemical abundances, is carried out through a Nelder-Mead algorithm (Nelder & Mead 1965), with a simultaneously fit of the stellar parameters effective temperature (Teff),… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (5 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: shows the metallicity histograms with samples from Valenti et al. (2011), Dias et al. (2016), Johnson et al. (2018), Barrera et al. (2025), Geisler et al. (2025), and Hughes et al. (2026). It is interesting to note the large range of metallicities, however there is no …
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Kiel diagram for NGC 6569 stars, with an isochrone of [Fe/H] = −0.87, [α/Fe]=0.4 an age of 12.51 Gyr from Saracino et al. (2019). The resulting abundances of Carbon, Nitrogen, Oxygen, Phosphorus, Sodium and Aluminium are reported in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p…
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Phosphorus lines fitted with synthetic spectra computed with [P/Fe] = 0.0 (solid green lines), and final values (solid red lines), and ±0.2 (dotted red lines) for stars NGC 6539: 2M18042652-0739044, NGC 6569: 2M18134025-3149477, and the non-member star 2M18132128-31524…
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: [P/Fe] vs. [Fe/H] for the present results compared with literature data. Symbols – Present work: Large red open star: 1 star in NGC 6539; Large blue stars: stars in NGC 6569 with [P/Fe]=+0.7,+0.6 and +0.5. Literature data: red-open stars: Barbuy et al. (2025a), darkgre…
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: [Al/Fe] vs. [Na/Fe] and [P/Fe] vs. [Al/Fe] for the four clusters: NGC 6539 red filled square, NGC 6569: red open squares, NGC 6316: blue filled squares, and Ton 1: blue open squares. As final conclusions, we suggest that NGC 6539 is a cluster of interest for further st…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

98 extracted references · 52 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    C., Wilhelm , R., et al

    Allende Prieto , C., Beers , T. C., Wilhelm , R., et al. 2006, , 636, 804

    2006

  2. [2]

    1998, , 330, 1109

    Alvarez , R., & Plez , B. 1998, , 330, 1109

    1998

  3. [3]

    M., & Korotin , S

    Andrievsky , S. M., & Korotin , S. A. 2026, , 708, A296

    2026

  4. [4]

    M., & Grevesse , N

    Asplund , M., Amarsi , A. M., & Grevesse , N. 2021, , 653, A141

    2021

  5. [5]

    2018, , 56, 223

    Barbuy , B., Chiappini , C., & Gerhard , O. 2018, , 56, 223

    2018

  6. [6]

    O., et al

    Barbuy , B., Ernandes , H., Souza , S. O., et al. 2021, , 648, A16

    2021

  7. [7]

    Barbuy , B., Fria c a , A. C. S., Ernandes , H., et al. 2023, , 526, 2365

    2023

  8. [8]

    Barbuy , B., Ernandes , H., Fria c a , A. C. S., et al. 2025 a , arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2507.11667

    arXiv 2025

Show all 98 references
  1. [9]

    G., Camargo , M

    Barbuy , B., Fern \'a ndez-Trincado , J. G., Camargo , M. S., et al. 2025 b , , 170, 245

    2025

  2. [10]

    G., & Mu \ n oz , C

    Barrera , N., Villanova , S., Geisler , D., Fern \'a ndez-Trincado , J. G., & Mu \ n oz , C. 2025, , 699, A128

    2025

  3. [11]

    2021, , 505, 5957

    Baumgardt , H., & Vasiliev , E. 2021, , 505, 5957

    2021

  4. [12]

    L., Oelkers , R

    Beaton , R. L., Oelkers , R. J., Hayes , C. R., et al. 2021, , 162, 302

    2021

  5. [13]

    2016, , 33, e028

    Bica , E., Ortolani , S., & Barbuy , B. 2016, , 33, e028

    2016

  6. [14]

    Bica , E., Ortolani , S., Barbuy , B., & Oliveira , R. A. P. 2024, , 687, A201

    2024

  7. [15]

    R., Bershady , M

    Blanton , M. R., Bershady , M. A., Abolfathi , B., et al. 2017, , 154, 28

    2017

  8. [16]

    S., & Vaughan , A

    Bowen , I. S., & Vaughan , A. H., J. 1973, , 12, 1430

    1973

  9. [17]

    A., et al

    Brauner , M., Masseron , T., Garc \' a-Hern \'a ndez , D. A., et al. 2023, , 673, A123

    2023

  10. [18]

    A., & Lugaro , M

    Brauner , M., Pignatari , M., Masseron , T., Garc \' a-Hern \'a ndez , D. A., & Lugaro , M. 2024, , 690, A262

    2024

  11. [19]

    Brooke , J. S. A., Bernath , P. F., Western , C. M., et al. 2016, , 168, 142

    2016

  12. [20]

    2016, , 585, A16

    Caffau , E., Andrievsky , S., Korotin , S., et al. 2016, , 585, A16

    2016

  13. [21]

    2011, , 532, A98

    Caffau , E., Bonifacio , P., Faraggiana , R., & Steffen , M. 2011, , 532, A98

    2011

  14. [22]

    2012, , 540, A33

    Cescutti , G., Matteucci , F., Caffau , E., & Fran c ois , P. 2012, , 540, A33

    2012

  15. [23]

    2011, , 472, 454

    Chiappini , C., Frischknecht , U., Meynet , G., et al. 2011, , 472, 454

    2011

  16. [24]

    E., Mauro , F., Alonso-Garc \' a , J., et al

    Cohen , R. E., Mauro , F., Alonso-Garc \' a , J., et al. 2018, , 156, 41

    2018

  17. [25]

    E., Moni Bidin , C., Mauro , F., Bonatto , C., & Geisler , D

    Cohen , R. E., Moni Bidin , C., Mauro , F., Bonatto , C., & Geisler , D. 2017, , 464, 1874

    2017

  18. [26]

    2016, , 590, A9

    Dias , B., Barbuy , B., Saviane , I., et al. 2016, , 590, A9

    2016

  19. [27]

    2008, , 178, 89

    Dotter , A., Chaboyer , B., Jevremovi \'c , D., et al. 2008, , 178, 89

    2008

  20. [28]

    2026, , 707, A328

    Ernandes , H., Barbuy , B., Chiappini , C., et al. 2026, , 707, A328

    2026

  21. [29]

    G., Zamora , O., Garc \' a-Hern \'a ndez , D

    Fern \'a ndez-Trincado , J. G., Zamora , O., Garc \' a-Hern \'a ndez , D. A., et al. 2017, , 846, L2

    2017

  22. [30]

    G., Zamora , O., Souto , D., et al

    Fern \'a ndez-Trincado , J. G., Zamora , O., Souto , D., et al. 2019, , 627, A178

    2019

  23. [31]

    G., Minniti , D., Beers , T

    Fern \'a ndez-Trincado , J. G., Minniti , D., Beers , T. C., et al. 2020, , 643, A145

    2020

  24. [32]

    G., Beers , T

    Fern \'a ndez-Trincado , J. G., Beers , T. C., Barbuy , B., et al. 2021, , 918, L9

    2021

  25. [33]

    G., Villanova , S., Geisler , D., et al

    Fern \'a ndez-Trincado , J. G., Villanova , S., Geisler , D., et al. 2022 a , , 658, A116

    2022

  26. [34]

    G., Beers , T

    Fern \'a ndez-Trincado , J. G., Beers , T. C., Barbuy , B., et al. 2022 b , , 663, A126

    2022

  27. [35]

    2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2502.18607

    Frelijj , H., Gonz \'a lez-D \' az , D., Geisler , D., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2502.18607

    2025

  28. [36]

    Friaca , A. C. S., & Terlevich , R. J. 1998, , 298, 399

    1998

  29. [37]

    Fria c a , A. C. S., & Barbuy , B. 2017, , 598, A121

    2017

  30. [38]

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

    2023

  31. [39]

    E., Allende Prieto , C., Holtzman , J

    Garc \' a P \'e rez , A. E., Allende Prieto , C., Holtzman , J. A., et al. 2016, , 151, 144

    2016

  32. [40]

    2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2508.09970

    Geisler , D., Mu \ n oz , C., Villanova , S., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2508.09970

    2025

  33. [41]

    G., Villanova , S., et al

    Gonz \'a lez-D \' az , D., Fern \'a ndez-Trincado , J. G., Villanova , S., et al. 2023, , 526, 6274

    2023

  34. [42]

    E., Siegmund , W

    Gunn , J. E., Siegmund , W. A., Mannery , E. J., et al. 2006, , 131, 2332

    2006

  35. [43]

    2008, , 486, 951

    Gustafsson , B., Edvardsson , B., Eriksson , K., et al. 2008, , 486, 951

    2008

  36. [44]

    J., Hinkle , K

    Hargreaves , R. J., Hinkle , K. H., Bauschlicher , Jr., C. W., et al. 2010, , 140, 919

    2010

  37. [45]

    Harris , W. E. 1996, , 112, 1487

    1996

  38. [46]

    R., Masseron , T., Sobeck , J., et al

    Hayes , C. R., Masseron , T., Sobeck , J., et al. 2022, , 262, 34

    2022

  39. [47]

    Henao , L., Villanova , S., Geisler , D., & Fern \'a ndez-Trincado , J. G. 2025, , 696, A154

    2025

  40. [48]

    P., Mackereth , J

    Horta , D., Schiavon , R. P., Mackereth , J. T., et al. 2021, , 500, 1385

    2021

  41. [49]

    2026, , 171, 137

    Hughes , J., Kunder , A., Covey , K., et al. 2026, , 171, 137

    2026

  42. [50]

    1999, , 125, 439

    Iwamoto , K., Brachwitz , F., Nomoto , K., et al. 1999, , 125, 439

    1999

  43. [51]

    I., Rich , R

    Johnson , C. I., Rich , R. M., Caldwell , N., et al. 2018, , 155, 71

    2018

  44. [52]

    Jorgensen , U. G. 1994, , 284, 179

    1994

  45. [53]

    I., & Lattanzio , J

    Karakas , A. I., & Lattanzio , J. C. 2014, , 31, e030

    2014

  46. [54]

    Kruijssen , J. M. D., Pfeffer , J. L., Chevance , M., et al. 2020, , 498, 2472

    2020

  47. [55]

    1995, Robert Kurucz CD-ROM, 23

    Kurucz , R., & Bell , B. 1995, Robert Kurucz CD-ROM, 23

    1995

  48. [56]

    I., Miglio , A., Montalb \'a n , J., et al

    Leitinger , E. I., Miglio , A., Montalb \'a n , J., et al. 2026, , 708, A346

    2026

  49. [57]

    E., Rothman , L

    Li , G., Gordon , I. E., Rothman , L. S., et al. 2015, , 216, 15

    2015

  50. [58]

    G., Cescutti , G., & Pilachowski , C

    Maas , Z. G., Cescutti , G., & Pilachowski , C. A. 2019, , 158, 219

    2019

  51. [59]

    G., Hawkins , K., Hinkel , N

    Maas , Z. G., Hawkins , K., Hinkel , N. R., et al. 2022, , 164, 61

    2022

  52. [60]

    R., Schiavon , R

    Majewski , S. R., Schiavon , R. P., Frinchaboy , P. M., et al. 2017, , 154, 94

    2017

  53. [61]

    2026, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2601.18896

    Massari , D., Zerbinati , C., Fanelli , C., et al. 2026, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2601.18896

    2026

  54. [62]

    A., Santove \ n a , R., et al

    Masseron , T., Garc \' a-Hern \'a ndez , D. A., Santove \ n a , R., et al. 2020, Nature Communications, 11, 3759

    2020

  55. [63]

    2012, , 761, L29

    Mauro , F., Moni Bidin , C., Cohen , R., et al. 2012, , 761, L29

    2012

  56. [64]

    2014, , 563, A76

    Mauro , F., Moni Bidin , C., Geisler , D., et al. 2014, , 563, A76

    2014

  57. [65]

    W., Emerson , J

    Minniti , D., Lucas , P. W., Emerson , J. P., et al. 2010, , 15, 433

    2010

  58. [66]

    2022, , 668, A88

    Nandakumar , G., Ryde , N., Montelius , M., et al. 2022, , 668, A88

    2022

  59. [67]

    A., & Mead , H

    Nelder , J. A., & Mead , H. 1965, The Computer Journal , 7, 308–313

    1965

  60. [68]

    2026, , 707, A190

    Nepal , S., Chiappini , C., P \'e rez-Villegas , A., et al. 2026, , 707, A190

    2026

  61. [69]

    2013, , 51, 457

    Nomoto , K., Kobayashi , C., & Tominaga , N. 2013, , 51, 457

    2013

  62. [70]

    M., & Ferraro , F

    Origlia , L., Valenti , E., Rich , R. M., & Ferraro , F. R. 2005, , 363, 897

    2005

  63. [71]

    2001, , 374, 564

    Ortolani , S., Bica , E., & Barbuy , B. 2001, , 374, 564

    2001

  64. [72]

    O., Nardiello , D., et al

    Ortolani , S., Souza , S. O., Nardiello , D., et al. 2026, , 998, L8

    2026

  65. [73]

    R., et al

    Pallanca , C., Leanza , S., Ferraro , F. R., et al. 2023, , 950, 138

    2023

  66. [74]

    2016, , 225, 24

    Pignatari , M., Herwig , F., Hirschi , R., et al. 2016, , 225, 24

    2016

  67. [75]

    R., Djorgovski , S

    Piotto , G., King , I. R., Djorgovski , S. G., et al. 2002, , 391, 945

    2002

  68. [76]

    2012, Turbospectrum: Code for spectral synthesis , Astrophysics Source Code Library, record ascl:1205.004

    Plez , B. 2012, Turbospectrum: Code for spectral synthesis , Astrophysics Source Code Library, record ascl:1205.004

    2012

  69. [77]

    G., et al

    Qiao , Y., Tang , B., Fern \'a ndez-Trincado , J. G., et al. 2026, , 1000, 307

    2026

  70. [78]

    Queiroz , A. B. A., Chiappini , C., Perez-Villegas , A., et al. 2021, , 656, A156

    2021

  71. [79]

    C., et al

    Razera , R., Barbuy , B., Moura , T. C., et al. 2022, , 517, 4590

    2022

  72. [80]

    2022, , 941, 45

    Rix , H.-W., Chandra , V., Andrae , R., et al. 2022, , 941, 45

    2022

  73. [81]

    U., Jacobson , H

    Roederer , I. U., Jacobson , H. R., Thanathibodee , T., Frebel , A., & Toller , E. 2014, , 797, 69

    2014

  74. [82]

    L., et al

    Ryabchikova , T., Piskunov , N., Kurucz , R. L., et al. 2015, , 90, 054005

    2015

  75. [83]

    2022, , 74, 298

    Sadakane , K., & Nishimura , M. 2022, , 74, 298

    2022

  76. [84]

    A., Beaton , R

    Santana , F. A., Beaton , R. L., Covey , K. R., et al. 2021, , 162, 303

    2021

  77. [85]

    R., et al

    Saracino , S., Dalessandro , E., Ferraro , F. R., et al. 2019, , 874, 86

    2019

  78. [86]

    P., Zamora , O., Carrera , R., et al

    Schiavon , R. P., Zamora , O., Carrera , R., et al. 2017, , 465, 501

    2017

  79. [87]

    P., Phillips , S

    Schiavon , R. P., Phillips , S. G., Myers , N., et al. 2024, , 528, 1393

    2024

  80. [88]

    V., Bizyaev , D., Cunha , K., et al

    Smith , V. V., Bizyaev , D., Cunha , K., et al. 2021, , 161, 254

    2021

  81. [89]

    S., Brooke , J

    Sneden , C., Lucatello , S., Ram , R. S., Brooke , J. S. A., & Bernath , P. 2014, , 214, 26

    2014

  82. [90]

    O., Libralato , M., Nardiello , D., et al

    Souza , S. O., Libralato , M., Nardiello , D., et al. 2024 a , , 690, A37

    2024

  83. [91]

    O., Valentini , M., Chiappini , C., et al

    Souza , S. O., Valentini , M., Chiappini , C., et al. 2024 b , , 977, L33

    2024

  84. [92]

    Valenti , E., Origlia , L., & Rich , R. M. 2011, , 414, 2690

    2011

  85. [93]

    B., & Groenewegen , M

    van den Hoek , L. B., & Groenewegen , M. A. T. 1997, , 123, 305

    1997

  86. [94]

    C., Hearty , F

    Wilson , J. C., Hearty , F. R., Skrutskie , M. F., et al. 2019, , 131, 055001

    2019

  87. [95]

    E., & Weaver , T

    Woosley , S. E., & Weaver , T. A. 1995, , 101, 181

    1995

  88. [96]

    2008, , 686, 448

    Yoshida , T., Suzuki , T., Chiba , S., et al. 2008, , 686, 448

    2008

  89. [97]

    N., Szab \'o , I., Pyatenko , E., & Tennyson , J

    Yurchenko , S. N., Szab \'o , I., Pyatenko , E., & Tennyson , J. 2018, , 480, 3397

    2018

  90. [98]

    2026, in Encyclopedia of Astrophysics, Volume 4, Vol

    Zoccali , M., & Valenti , E. 2026, in Encyclopedia of Astrophysics, Volume 4, Vol. 4, 19--37

    2026

Pith tools

Reviewed August 15, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.