Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 139 references

The Carbon Giant Population Revealed by Gaia DR3

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-14 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Lower-luminosity carbon giants show strong astrometric binary signals, marking them as evolved mass-transfer stars rather than self-enriched AGB stars.

desk verdict Useful catalog science with a strong RUWE result, but the Milky Way sample definition is internally inconsistent and the radial C-AGB peak rests on that ambiguity. read the letter →

arxiv 2608.10244 v1 pith:7JXK3PQR submitted 2026-08-10 astro-ph.SR astro-ph.GA

Benjamin R. Roulston (Clarkson University) , Paul J. Green (Center for Astrophysics | Harvard & Smithsonian) This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.SRastro-ph.GA
keywords carbonstarsasymptoticgiantbranchdwarfGaiaDR3astrometricbinariesMilkyWaydiskMagellanicCloudsSagittariusspheroidal
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

This paper uses the all-sky catalog of carbon stars selected from Gaia DR3 spectra to ask how the Milky Way's carbon giants are made and where they live. It argues that the bright carbon AGB stars, which make their own carbon through thermal pulses, and the fainter carbon red giants are two different populations: the faint ones carry much larger astrometric binary signals (RUWE), pointing to origins in binary mass transfer from a former AGB companion, i.e., evolved dwarf carbon stars. It maps 4276 Galactic carbon giants and finds that C-AGB stars are confined to a thin disk, almost absent inside about 7 kpc, with a density excess near about 9.8 kpc, while C-RGB stars require a halo component. It also delivers homogeneous carbon-giant samples for the LMC, SMC, and Sagittarius dwarf spheroidal, and shows that the near-infrared C-AGB luminosity function is consistent enough to keep serving as a distance indicator.

What carries the argument

The machine that drives the argument is the all-sky high-confidence carbon-star catalog built from Gaia DR3 low-resolution spectra with a trained classifier, restricted here to stars with classification probability above 0.85, combined with two diagnostics. RUWE (renormalised unit weight error, an astrometric indicator of unresolved binarity) measures the wobble that reveals companions; near-infrared $(J-K_s)_0$ versus $M^0_J$ cuts separate C-AGB from C-RGB stars, and matching to a long-period-variable catalog validates the split (98.3% of C-AGB are LPVs versus 2.9% of C-RGB). Space densities are derived with $1/V_{\rm max}$ volume corrections and fitted with MCMC to five disk/halo models compared by BIC, with the radial profile modeled as an exponential plus Gaussian.

What would settle it

Measure radial velocities of a few hundred C-RGB stars from the sample over several years; if they do not show a high binary fraction (comparable to the roughly 95% found for dwarf carbon stars) or white-dwarf companions, the extrinsic-origin claim fails. Alternatively, recompute the C-AGB radial density profile using an independent three-dimensional dust map or Gaia DR4 parallaxes: if the $R\approx9.8$ kpc peak and the inner-disk deficit disappear, they are artifacts of extinction or sample completeness.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that Gaia DR3 astrometry separates carbon giants into intrinsic and extrinsic populations. Among stars within 3 kpc, faint carbon giants ($M^0_J>-4$) have median RUWE 1.11 and 22.8% with RUWE$>1.4$, versus 0.99 and 3.6% for C-AGB stars ($M^0_J<-5$); a Kolmogorov-Smirnov test gives $D=0.32$, $p<0.001$. Since high RUWE flags astrometric wobble from an unseen companion, the paper concludes that most C-RGB stars are post-mass-transfer binaries, likely evolved dwarf carbon stars, not self-enriched AGB stars. In the Galactic spatial distribution, C-AGB stars are fitted by a single exponential disk with scale height 206 pc and are rare inside $R\approx7$ kpc, with a statistically significant Gaussian excess centered at 9820 pc; C-RGB stars are better fitted with a disk plus power-law halo, consistent with an older, hotter population.

Load-bearing premise

The result assumes that the Gaia DR3 $G<16.5$ sample is complete and that the adopted three-dimensional extinction corrections are accurate along every line of sight with $|b|>5$; if the dust map is biased toward the inner disk or the direction of the C-AGB peak, the inferred deficit inside $R\approx7$ kpc and the 9.8 kpc excess could be artifacts, since each star's maximum detectable distance is computed from its dereddened absolute magnitude.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Most faint carbon giants are the evolved descendants of dwarf carbon stars, so their binary fraction and kinematics can be used to trace the old mass-transfer channel that creates carbon-enhanced stars.
  • C-AGB stars are confirmed as workable distance indicators: their mean $M^0_J$ is -6.30 in the LMC and -6.15 in the SMC, matching photometric values.
  • The Milky Way's C-AGB population is thin-disk confined (scale height 206 pc) and nearly vanishes inside $R\approx7$ kpc, because high-metallicity, old inner-disk populations rarely produce third dredge-up carbon stars.
  • The peak in C-AGB density near $R\approx9.8$ kpc, just outside the solar circle, points to a localized enhancement in intermediate-age star formation or spiral-arm structure.
  • Roughly 1-1.3% of C-AGB stars end up producing a dwarf carbon system, constraining binary mass-transfer efficiency on the AGB.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If C-RGB stars are evolved dC stars, their measured halo component implies that the dC formation channel operated in the old stellar halo; counting C-RGB stars in known halo streams could test whether some of this halo component is accreted.
  • The $R\approx9.8$ kpc C-AGB annulus should have a kinematic signature: measuring radial velocities and proper motions of the excess stars can reveal whether they corotate with the disk or trace a distinct substructure.
  • The paper defers variability and binarity studies to future work; a direct radial-velocity campaign on a sample of C-RGB stars would sharpen the RUWE-based binary conclusion.
  • With a longer Gaia baseline, RUWE and acceleration measurements could turn the statistical C-RGB binary signal into individual orbital solutions and white-dwarf companion detections.
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 / 5 minor

Summary. This manuscript uses the G<16.5 mag high-confidence carbon-star catalog of Roulston et al. (2025; XGProb C>0.85) to construct samples of carbon giants in the Milky Way, its globular clusters, and nearby Local Group galaxies. Main results include: 70 C stars matched to 34 globular clusters; 6937 LMC, 2148 SMC, and 219 Sgr C giants (abstract values); near-infrared luminosity functions giving mean M_J^0 = -6.30 (LMC) and -6.15 (SMC) that agree with the JAGB photometric values of Ripoche et al. (2020); a RUWE comparison showing significantly larger astrometric anomalies in low-luminosity C-RGB stars than in C-AGB stars (median RUWE 1.11 vs 0.99; 22.8% vs 3.6% with RUWE>1.4; KS D=0.32, p<0.001); 1/Vmax space-density fits yielding a double-exponential disk for all C giants (H_z=257±4 pc), an exponential disk for C-AGB stars (H_z=206±4 pc), and an exponential disk plus power-law halo for C-RGB stars (H_z≈327 pc, α≈14.5); and a radial C-AGB profile with an inner deficit (R≲7 kpc) and a Gaussian excess peaking at R≈9.8 kpc. The paper also reports candidate X-ray-emitting carbon symbiotic stars.

Significance. If the results hold, the paper provides a homogeneous all-sky census of carbon giants that goes well beyond heterogeneous compilations. The RUWE test, reinforced by the LPV purity contrast (98.3% of C-AGB versus 2.9% of C-RGB stars classified as long-period variables), is a strong statistical argument that most low-luminosity carbon giants are extrinsic, post-mass-transfer systems. The agreement of the JAGB luminosity-function means with independent photometric calibrations also supports the sample's absolute-magnitude reliability. The C-AGB inner-disk deficit and the radial peak at R≈9.8 kpc, if robust, would be interesting constraints on intermediate-age disk structure; however, this part of the analysis is the least secure because it relies on extinction and completeness corrections in the low-latitude/inner-disk regime and on an empirical Gaussian-plus-exponential model. The analyses are applied to the authors' own published catalog, but this is self-use rather than circularity because the catalog construction did not assume the conclusions of this paper.

major comments (3)
  1. [§5 and §7/Table 3] Section 5 reports that after the XGProb C>0.85, parallax>3σ, M_G<0, |b|>10° cuts, and after excluding GC/LMC/SMC/Sgr members, "This leaves 2238 Milky Way C giants for study." Section 7 and Table 3 instead fit N=4276 for "All C Stars" with a |b|>5° footprint, while Figure 8 states 2063 MW C stars and §6 mentions 4277. These numbers cannot all describe the same sample. If the 4276-star sample includes the 5°<|b|<10° strip, then the 1/Vmax volume corrections and MWDUST extinction corrections are applied in exactly the region most affected by crowding and dust, and the footprint contradicts §5; if the fits used the 2238-star sample, the abstract and Table 3 counts are wrong. Because the 1/Vmax fits and the radial profile (deficit R≲7 kpc, peak R≈9.8 kpc) are built on this sample, this ambiguity is load-bearing and must be resolved with a single explicit sample definition and consistent counts in the abstract, text, figures, and tables.
  2. [Abstract, §4.1, §4.2, Figure 8] The abstract states 6937 LMC and 2148 SMC C giants, while §4.1 and §4.2 report 6738 and 2114 after the parallax/proper-motion cuts, and Figure 8 uses 6738 and 2114. Similarly, §6 mentions 4277 MW C giants, Table 3 uses 4276, and Figure 8 gives 2063. These are headline-number inconsistencies in a paper whose contribution is partly a census; the authors should correct the errors and verify each number against the final query outputs.
  3. [§7.3, Eq. (4)] The claimed radial peak of C-AGB stars at R_peak=9820±85 pc is modeled by an exponential background plus a Gaussian excess with no physical motivation; the authors themselves note that none of the models are selected on physical motivations. This is acceptable as an empirical description only if the result is robust to the main selection systematics. The two tests presented (excluding |l|<50° sightlines, and the absence of a peak in raw heliocentric distances) are reassuring but do not fully address the effect of MWDUST extinction errors and Gaia completeness in the inner disk and near the plane, especially where the 5°<|b|<10° strip enters. Please recompute the radial profiles with (i) an alternative extinction map, (ii) a |b|>10° footprint, and (iii) a stricter parallax significance cut, and report whether R_peak, B/A, and ΔBIC survive; without this, the peak should be presented as tentative.
minor comments (5)
  1. [§2 and Figure 2] The text gives 418 C-AGB and 395 C-RGB stars, while the Figure 2 caption gives 418 C giants with -4<M0J<0 (blue) and 395 AGB stars with M0J<-5 (red); the labels and numbers are mutually inconsistent and should be corrected.
  2. [§4.2] Near the end of the SMC subsection, the text says "we define LMC C stars" when it should say SMC C stars; this typo appears in the SMC section.
  3. [§6 and Figure 8] The MW C-star count varies among 4277, 4276, and 2063; if the differences are due to 2MASS matching requirements or the JAGB color box, each caption and text passage should state the exact selection that produces each number.
  4. [§7.3] The statement that the raw heliocentric distance distribution "does not show a corresponding peak-then-decline shape" is given without a figure or quantitative summary; please add the plot or a numerical comparison.
  5. [Table 3] In the AGB row for the double-exponential disk, n0,disk,2=0.000+0.000/-0.000 and H_z,2=3698+2805/-2316 indicate a non-converged, unconstrained second component; the table should mark this explicitly rather than quoting posterior medians as if they were meaningful.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 2.0 of 10

No construction-level circularity: the central RUWE, density, and JAGB analyses are new tests on an external catalog; only minor, non-load-bearing self-citations appear, alongside a separate sample-count reproducibility concern.

full rationale

The central analyses are independent of the paper's own inputs. The RUWE comparison separates C-RGB from C-AGB by absolute J-band magnitude and near-IR color, not by binarity, so the higher RUWE of C-RGB stars is an independent astrometric test rather than a definitional consequence. The 1/Vmax space-density fits and radial profiles use Gaia parallaxes, 2MASS photometry, and MWDUST extinction, with no fitted parameter being 'predicted' from itself. The JAGB mean magnitudes are explicitly validated against the independent photometric results of Ripoche et al. (2020), and the C-AGB/C-RGB separation is externally corroborated by the LPV catalog of Lebzelter et al. (2023). Self-citations occur (the Roulston et al. 2025 catalog, the XGProb purity calibration, and the dC space density used in Section 8), but none is load-bearing in a circular sense: the catalog is an input dataset, the purity was established by external spectral inspection in the prior paper, and the dC density is a separately measured quantity from a different population. The paper even cautions where its model selection is not conclusive (Delta-BIC of 4.1 between the double-exponential disk and exponential disk + halo). A separate, non-circular reproducibility concern is that Section 5 reports 2238 Milky Way C giants after a |b|>10 cut, while Section 7 and Table 3 fit N=4276 with |b|>5 and Figure 8 shows 2063 stars; the paper does not reconcile these sample definitions, which undermines transparency of the density fits but does not make any claim equivalent to its inputs by construction.

Assumptions & free parameters 5 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

No new physical entities are introduced. The central claims rest on the authors' published ML catalog, standard model parameterizations, and several hand-chosen CMD cuts that define the AGB and RGB subsamples.

free parameters (5)
  • C-AGB selection threshold M_J0 < -5 and (J-Ks)0 > 1.3
    Hand-chosen boundaries in the near-IR CMD (Section 7) define the C-AGB sample used for RUWE comparisons and spatial fits. Changing these thresholds changes the sample and the derived densities.
  • C-RGB selection threshold M_J0 > -4.8 and (J-Ks)0 < 1.2
    Hand-chosen boundaries in the near-IR CMD (Section 7) define the C-RGB sample. The gap between -4.8 and -5 leaves 617 unclassified stars.
  • JAGB color-magnitude box for LF fits = 1.4<(J-Ks)0<2 and -5>M_J0>-7.5
    Adopted from Ripoche et al. (2020) to select C-AGB stars for luminosity function fits in Section 6; affects the mean M_J values.
  • Sgr proper motion membership box = mu_alpha cos delta in [-3.1,-2.2], mu_delta in [-1.9,-0.9] mas/yr
    Hand-chosen proper motion range based on Massari et al. (2013) to select Sgr members (Section 4.3.1).
  • RUWE < 1.4 threshold for galaxy membership = 1.4
    Adopted from Castro-Ginard et al. (2024) to clean astrometric binaries before galaxy association; reduces LMC/SMC counts.
assumptions (6)
  • domain assumption The Gaia DR3 carbon star catalog of Roulston et al. (2025) with XGProb C>0.85 has 95.5% purity and is complete to G<16.5 mag.
    The entire analysis uses this catalog and purity estimate (Section 1). Completeness affects 1/Vmax densities.
  • domain assumption RUWE > 1.4 is a reliable indicator of astrometric binarity in nearby giants.
    Used to distinguish intrinsic vs extrinsic carbon giants (Section 2, Figure 2).
  • domain assumption The 1/Vmax volume corrections assume the G<16.5 survey is complete and the MWDUST extinction corrections are accurate for |b|>5.
    Section 7.1: maximum detectable distance computed from dereddened absolute magnitude and survey limit. Biases would alter space densities and the radial profile.
  • ad hoc to paper The radial C-AGB density profile is modeled as an exponential background plus a Gaussian excess (Equation 4), with no physical motivation.
    Section 7.3: the model is chosen for statistical fit, not from theory; the claimed peak at R~9.8 kpc depends on this model.
  • domain assumption The Galaxy is axisymmetric and the halo follows a power-law ellipsoid (Equation 3).
    Standard parameterizations used in Section 7.1; the paper acknowledges the real halo has substructure.
  • domain assumption C-AGB stars are produced only by initial masses roughly 1.5-5 Msun, so they are absent from old globular clusters.
    Used in Section 3 to explain the lack of C-AGB in globular clusters.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of The Carbon Giant Population Revealed by Gaia DR3." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/7JXK3PQR

@misc{pith2026260810244,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: The Carbon Giant Population Revealed by Gaia DR3},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/7JXK3PQR}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2608.10244}
}
abstract

Classical carbon stars (atmospheric C/O >1) are asymptotic giant branch (AGB) stars that become carbon-rich through third dredge-up during the thermally pulsing AGB phase. However, carbon stars also occur among red giants and main-sequence stars, where the carbon is thought to originate from binary mass transfer from a former AGB companion. Using the all-sky catalog of G<16.5 mag Gaia DR3 carbon stars from Roulston et al. (2025), we investigate a uniform, high-confidence sample of carbon giants in the Milky Way, its globular clusters, and nearby Local Group galaxies. We identify 6937 carbon giants in the Large Magellanic Cloud, 2148 in the Small Magellanic Cloud, and 219 associated with the Sagittarius dwarf spheroidal, nearly quadrupling the previously known sample in the latter. We identify several candidate carbon symbiotic stars through their X-ray counterparts. The mean absolute C-AGB magnitude, $M^0_J=-6.30$ in the LMC and -6.15 in the SMC, agrees closely with the photometrically derived values of Ripoche et al. (2020), reinforcing the utility of carbon AGB stars as distance indicators. From 4276 Galactic carbon giants with $M_G<0$ and $|b|>5^\circ$, we measure a local disk space density of $n_0=11\pm0.5\times10^{-8},\mathrm{pc}^{-3}$ and a scale height of $H_z=257\pm4$ pc. Lower-luminosity carbon giants exhibit significantly larger Gaia DR3 RUWE values than C-AGB stars, providing strong evidence that most are extrinsic post-mass-transfer systems, likely evolved dwarf carbon stars. C-AGB stars are more tightly confined to the Galactic disk and are rare inside $R\lesssim7$ kpc, consistent with Galactic age and metallicity gradients, whereas the lower-luminosity carbon giants have a larger scale height and require an additional halo component.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2608.10244 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. High confidence carbon star sample in the Gaia DR3 color-magnitude plane. We plot the dereddened ab￾solute G magnitude versus dereddened color (BP − RP ) for 9268 high confidence C stars (XG Prob C> 0.85) with par￾allax/error > 3 and Galactic latitude |b| > 5. Point colors correspond to |b|. Carbon-rich stars cover a broad region of the diagram, including dwarfs, subgiants, red giants, and AGB stars. The majority of… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. (a) RUWE, an astrometric indicator of binarity, is plotted vs. distance from Bailer-Jones et al. (2021) for our MW C star sample. Point colors indicate apparent G mag. Binaries are more easily detected via RUWE, as expected, for small distances. (b) The normalized RUWE histograms, on a log scale, limited to stars with distance <3 kpc, for 418 C giants (−4 < M0 J < 0; blue) and 395 AGB stars (M0 J < −5; red). Large R… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. For 70 carbon stars matched within four Plummer scale radii R0 to 34 globular cluster (GC) central positions, we plot the difference dPlx between the mean GC and C star parallax, versus the difference dPMtot between the mean GC and C star proper motion. The point colors represent the mean GC parallax values. The least trustworthy matches are the 9 C stars with dPMtot> 10 milliarcsec/yr, of which 7 are associated wit… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (8 more)
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: LEFT: Galactic latitude and longitude of high confidence carbon stars in the region considered for membership in the Sagittarius dwarf spheroidal galaxy. RIGHT: RA and Dec proper motion of all stars within this sky region. A dense clump is obvious near the mean proper …
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: High confidence carbon giants in the Milky Way. LEFT: Aitoff projection in Galactic longitude l and latitude b for high confidence carbon giants in the Milky Way, with dereddened absolute mag M0 J as a colorbar. RIGHT: Histogram showing the distribution in Galactic lon…
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: High confidence carbon giants in the Milky Way. LEFT: Y vs. X in pc relative to the Galactic center, with dereddened absolute mag M0 J as a colorbar. RIGHT: Z vs. R in pc relative to the Galactic center, with color (J − K) 0 as a colorbar. The location of the Sun is sh…
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Absolute dereddened M0 J magnitude vs (J−Ks) 0 color for C giants in the Milky Way (upper left), LMC (upper right), SMC (lower left) and Sgr (lower right). Single distance moduli are assumed for all stars in the LMC, SMC and Sgr (18.477, 18.977 and 17.0 respectively). …
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Carbon star luminosity function, and model fits. Histograms of absolute J-band magnitudes are shown for C giants in the JAGB portions of the CMD highlighted in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_9.png]
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Selection of clean C-AGB and C-RGB star samples from the Milky Way sample of C giants. (a) In the near-IR CMD, we select non-contiguous regions for purity. For C-AGB stars, we require M0 J < −5, and (J − Ks) 0 > 1.3 (red long-dash boundary). For C-RGB stars, we requir…
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Stellar spatial number density as a function of Galactic height |z| for (a) all C giants, (b) AGB C stars, and (c) RGB C stars in our Gaia DR3 sample. Points show the 1/Vmax density in each equal-N |z| bin with errors. Five models fitted via MCMC are shown: a sech2 di…
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: Galactocentric radial density profile of Milky Way C-AGB (red) and C-RGB (green) stars, marginalized over |z|. TOP: 1/Vmax space density in 40 quantile-spaced R bins, with best-fit exponential+Gaussian models (Equation 4) overplotted. The C-RGB profile declines smooth…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

139 extracted references · 15 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Mink, S. E. 2013, A&A, 552, A26, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201220007

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201220007 2013

  2. [2]

    2022, A&A, 664, A45, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202243595

    Abia, C., de Laverny, P., Romero-G´ omez, M., & Figueras, F. 2022, A&A, 664, A45, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202243595

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202243595 2022

  3. [3]

    2002, ApJ, 579, 817, doi: 10.1086/342924

    Abia, C., Dom ´ ınguez, I., Gallino, R., et al. 2002, ApJ, 579, 817, doi: 10.1086/342924

    doi:10.1086/342924 2002

  4. [4]

    C., Christlieb, N., et al

    Aoki, W., Beers, T. C., Christlieb, N., et al. 2007, ApJ, 655, 492, doi: 10.1086/509817 Astropy Collaboration, Robitaille, T. P., Tollerud, E. J., et al. 2013, A&A, 558, A33, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201322068 24Roulston et al. Astropy Collaboration, Price-Whelan, A. M., Sip˝ ocz, B. M., et al. 2018, AJ, 156, 123, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/aabc4f

    doi:10.1086/509817 2007

  5. [5]

    1981, ApJ, 250, 293, doi: 10.1086/159374

    Rosner, R. 1981, ApJ, 250, 293, doi: 10.1086/159374

    doi:10.1086/159374 1981

  6. [6]

    Azzopardi, M., Lequeux, J., Rebeirot, E., & Westerlund, B. E. 1991, A&AS, 88, 265

    1991

  7. [7]

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

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

    doi:10.3847/1538-3881/abd806 2021

  8. [8]

    E., Bromley, B

    Ball, S. E., Bromley, B. C., & Kenyon, S. J. 2025, The Open Journal of Astrophysics, 8, 122, doi: 10.33232/001c.143522

    doi:10.33232/001c.143522 2025

Show all 139 references
  1. [9]

    Barnbaum, C., Stone, R. P. S., & Keenan, P. C. 1996, ApJS, 105, 419, doi: 10.1086/192323

    1996 doi

  2. [10]

    2013, A&A, 553, A93, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201321059

    Battinelli, P., & Demers, S. 2013, A&A, 553, A93, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201321059

    2013 doi

  3. [11]

    C., & Christlieb, N

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

    2005

  4. [12]

    B., Evans, N

    Belokurov, V., Zucker, D. B., Evans, N. W., et al. 2006, ApJL, 642, L137, doi: 10.1086/504797

    2006 doi

  5. [13]

    2001, A&A, 369, 178, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20010106

    Bergeat, J., Knapik, A., & Rutily, B. 2001, A&A, 369, 178, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20010106

    2001 doi

  6. [14]

    M., & Terndrup, D

    Blanco, V. M., & Terndrup, D. M. 1989, AJ, 98, 843, doi: 10.1086/115182

    1989 doi

  7. [15]

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

    2016 doi

  8. [16]

    Bovy, J., Rix, H.-W., & Hogg, D. W. 2012, ApJ, 751, 131, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/751/2/131

    2012 doi

  9. [17]

    R., et al

    Castro-Ginard, A., Penoyre, Z., Casey, A. R., et al. 2024, A&A, 688, A1, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202450172

    2024 doi

  10. [18]

    Choudhury, S., Subramaniam, A., & Cole, A. A. 2016, MNRAS, 455, 1855, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stv2414

    2016 doi

  11. [19]

    J., Wisotzki, L., & Reimers, D

    Christlieb, N., Green, P. J., Wisotzki, L., & Reimers, D. 2001, A&A, 375, 366, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20010814

    2001 doi

  12. [20]

    Hintzen, P. M. 1977, ApJ, 216, 757, doi: 10.1086/155518 de Castro, D. B., Pereira, C. B., Roig, F., et al. 2016, MNRAS, 459, 4299, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stw815 de Kool, M., & Green, P. J. 1995, ApJ, 449, 236, doi: 10.1086/176051

    1977 doi

  13. [21]

    J., Liu, C., et al

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

    2012 doi

  14. [22]

    Dominy, J. F. 1984, ApJS, 55, 27, doi: 10.1086/190946

    1984 doi

  15. [23]

    2008, ApJS, 178, 89, doi: 10.1086/589654

    Dotter, A., Chaboyer, B., Jevremovi´ c, D., et al. 2008, ApJS, 178, 89, doi: 10.1086/589654

    2008 doi

  16. [24]

    2003, A&A, 409, 205, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20031070 Duchˆ ene, G., & Kraus, A

    Drimmel, R., Cabrera-Lavers, A., & L´ opez-Corredoira, M. 2003, A&A, 409, 205, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20031070 Duchˆ ene, G., & Kraus, A. 2013, ARA&A, 51, 269, doi: 10.1146/annurev-astro-081710-102602

    2003 doi

  17. [25]

    2019, A&A, 626, A128, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201935390

    Escorza, A., Karinkuzhi, D., Jorissen, A., et al. 2019, A&A, 626, A128, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201935390

    2019 doi

  18. [26]

    N., Evans, J

    Evans, I. N., Evans, J. D., Mart ´ ınez-Galarza, J. R., et al. 2024, ApJS, 274, 22, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/ad6319

    2024 doi

  19. [27]

    W., Lang, D., & Goodman, J

    Foreman-Mackey, D., Hogg, D. W., Lang, D., & Goodman, J. 2013, PASP, 125, 306, doi: 10.1086/670067 Gaia Collaboration, Vallenari, A., Brown, A. G. A., et al. 2023, A&A, 674, A1, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202243940

    2013 doi

  20. [28]

    2000, A&AS, 141, 371, doi: 10.1051/aas:2000126

    Girardi, L., Bressan, A., Bertelli, G., & Chiosi, C. 2000, A&AS, 141, 371, doi: 10.1051/aas:2000126

    2000 doi

  21. [29]

    D., Clayton, G

    Gordon, K. D., Clayton, G. C., Misselt, K. A., Landolt, A. U., & Wolff, M. J. 2003, ApJ, 594, 279, doi: 10.1086/376774 G´ orski, M., Zgirski, B., Pietrzy´ nski, G., et al. 2020, ApJ, 889, 179, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab65ed

    2003 doi

  22. [30]

    B., et al

    Graczyk, D., Pietrzy´ nski, G., Thompson, I. B., et al. 2020, ApJ, 904, 13, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/abbb2b GRA VITY Collaboration, Abuter, R., Amorim, A., et al. 2019, A&A, 625, L10, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201935656

    2020 doi

  23. [31]

    O., & Corbally, J., C

    Gray, R. O., & Corbally, J., C. 2009, Stellar Spectral Classification (Princeton university press)

    2009

  24. [32]

    2019a, ApJ, 887, 93, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab5362

    Finkbeiner, D. 2019a, ApJ, 887, 93, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab5362

    doi

  25. [33]

    2013, ApJ, 765, 12, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/765/1/12

    Green, P. 2013, ApJ, 765, 12, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/765/1/12

    2013 doi

  26. [34]

    J., Margon, B., & MacConnell, D

    Green, P. J., Margon, B., & MacConnell, D. J. 1991, ApJL, 380, L31, doi: 10.1086/186166

    1991 doi

  27. [35]

    J., Montez, R., Mazzoni, F., et al

    Green, P. J., Montez, R., Mazzoni, F., et al. 2019b, ApJ, 881, 49, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab2bf4

    doi

  28. [36]

    Kastner, J. H. 2024, A&A, 689, A62, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202450155

    2024 doi

  29. [37]

    T., Andersen, J., Nordstr¨ om, B., et al

    Hansen, T. T., Andersen, J., Nordstr¨ om, B., et al. 2016, A&A, 588, A3, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201527409

    2016 doi

  30. [38]

    R., Millman, K

    Harris, C. R., Millman, K. J., van der Walt, S. J., et al. 2020, Array programming with NumPy, doi: 10.1038/s41586-020-2649-2

    2020 doi

  31. [39]

    1993, A&A, 267, L31

    Heber, U., Bade, N., Jordan, S., & Voges, W. 1993, A&A, 267, L31

    1993

  32. [40]

    Hunter, J. D. 2007, Computing in Science & Engineering, 9, 90, doi: 10.1109/MCSE.2007.55

    2007 doi

  33. [41]

    A., Gilmore, G., & Irwin, M

    Ibata, R. A., Gilmore, G., & Irwin, M. J. 1994, Nature, 370, 194, doi: 10.1038/370194a0

    1994 doi

  34. [42]

    1974, ARA&A, 12, 215, doi: 10.1146/annurev.aa.12.090174.001243

    Iben, I., J. 1974, ARA&A, 12, 215, doi: 10.1146/annurev.aa.12.090174.001243

    1974

  35. [43]

    1983, ARA&A, 21, 271, doi: 10.1146/annurev.aa.21.090183.001415 Carbon Giants Revealed by Gaia DR325

    Iben, I., J., & Renzini, A. 1983, ARA&A, 21, 271, doi: 10.1146/annurev.aa.21.090183.001415 Carbon Giants Revealed by Gaia DR325

    1983

  36. [44]

    A., et al

    Imig, J., Price, C., Holtzman, J. A., et al. 2023, ApJ, 954, 124, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ace9b8

    2023 doi

  37. [45]

    2018, MNRAS, 474, 2142, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stx2819

    Iorio, G., Belokurov, V., Erkal, D., et al. 2018, MNRAS, 474, 2142, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stx2819

    2018 doi

  38. [46]

    2013, A&A Rv, 21, 59, doi: 10.1007/s00159-013-0059-2

    Ivanova, N., Justham, S., Chen, X., et al. 2013, A&A Rv, 21, 59, doi: 10.1007/s00159-013-0059-2

    2013 doi

  39. [47]

    G., Dermine, T., & Church, R

    Izzard, R. G., Dermine, T., & Church, R. P. 2010, A&A, 523, A10, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201015254

    2010 doi

  40. [48]

    G., Jeffery, C

    Izzard, R. G., Jeffery, C. S., & Lattanzio, J. 2007, in American Institute of Physics Conference Series, Vol. 948, Unsolved Problems in Stellar Physics: A Conference in Honor of Douglas Gough, ed. R. J. Stancliffe, G. Houdek, R. G. Martin, & C. A. Tout (AIP), 51–55, doi: 10.10...

    2007 doi

  41. [49]

    2001, A&A, 365, L1, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20000036

    Jansen, F., Lumb, D., Altieri, B., et al. 2001, A&A, 365, L1, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20000036

    2001 doi

  42. [50]

    W., Weinberg, D

    Johnson, J. W., Weinberg, D. H., Blanc, G. A., et al. 2025, ApJ, 988, 8, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/addbe5

    2025 doi

  43. [51]

    V., Hernquist, L., & Bolte, M

    Johnston, K. V., Hernquist, L., & Bolte, M. 1996, ApJ, 465, 278, doi: 10.1086/177418

    1996 doi

  44. [52]

    Jones, D., Corradi, R. L. M., Garc ´ ıa P´ erez, G. A., et al. 2026, A&A, 707, A169, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202557784

    2026 doi

  45. [53]

    1998, A&A, 332, 877, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.astro-ph/9801272

    Jorissen, A., Van Eck, S., Mayor, M., & Udry, S. 1998, A&A, 332, 877, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.astro-ph/9801272

    1998 doi arXiv

  46. [54]

    2016, A&A, 586, A158, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201526992

    Jorissen, A., Van Eck, S., Van Winckel, H., et al. 2016, A&A, 586, A158, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201526992

    2016 doi

  47. [55]

    S., Marigo, P., & Tremblay, P.-E

    Kalirai, J. S., Marigo, P., & Tremblay, P.-E. 2014, ApJ, 782, 17, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/782/1/17

    2014 doi

  48. [56]

    P., Besla, G., Anderson, J., & Alcock, C

    Kallivayalil, N., van der Marel, R. P., Besla, G., Anderson, J., & Alcock, C. 2013, ApJ, 764, 161, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/764/2/161

    2013 doi

  49. [57]

    I., & Lattanzio, J

    Karakas, A. I., & Lattanzio, J. C. 2014, PASA, 31, e030, doi: 10.1017/pasa.2014.21

    2014 doi

  50. [58]

    Keenan, P. C. 1993, PASP, 105, 905, doi: 10.1086/133252

    1993 doi

  51. [59]

    2001, A&A, 371, 222, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20010348

    Knapp, G., Pourbaix, D., & Jorissen, A. 2001, A&A, 371, 222, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20010348

    2001 doi

  52. [60]

    2014, A&A, 572, A30, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201424113

    Kunder, A., Bono, G., Piffl, T., et al. 2014, A&A, 572, A30, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201424113

    2014 doi

  53. [61]

    A., Sloan, G

    Lagadec, E., Zijlstra, A. A., Sloan, G. C., et al. 2009, MNRAS, 396, 598, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2009.14736.x

    2009

  54. [62]

    2023, A&A, 674, A15, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202244241

    Lebzelter, T., Mowlavi, N., Lecoeur-Taibi, I., et al. 2023, A&A, 674, A15, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202244241

    2023 doi

  55. [63]

    J., Freedman, W

    Lee, A. J., Freedman, W. L., Madore, B. F., et al. 2025, ApJ, 985, 182, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/adc8a1

    2025 doi

  56. [64]

    2024, ApJS, 271, 12, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/ad1881

    Li, L., Zhang, K., Cui, W., et al. 2024, ApJS, 271, 12, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/ad1881

    2024 doi

  57. [65]

    L., Du, C.-D., et al

    Li, Y.-B., Luo, A. L., Du, C.-D., et al. 2018, ApJS, 234, 31, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/aaa415

    2018 doi

  58. [66]

    D., Lesser, M., et al

    Liebert, J., Schmidt, G. D., Lesser, M., et al. 1994, ApJ, 421, 733, doi: 10.1086/173685

    1994 doi

  59. [67]

    L., & Haisch, B

    Linsky, J. L., & Haisch, B. M. 1979, ApJL, 229, L27, doi: 10.1086/182924

    1979 doi

  60. [68]

    2025, A&A, 702, A237, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202556420

    Locatelli, N., Ponti, G., Magaudda, E., & Stelzer, B. 2025, A&A, 702, A237, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202556420

    2025 doi

  61. [69]

    C., et al

    Lucatello, S., Tsangarides, S., Beers, T. C., et al. 2005, ApJ, 625, 825, doi: 10.1086/428104

    2005 doi

  62. [70]

    T., & Bovy, J

    Mackereth, J. T., & Bovy, J. 2020, MNRAS, 492, 3631, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staa047

    2020 doi

  63. [71]

    T., Bovy, J., Schiavon, R

    Mackereth, J. T., Bovy, J., Schiavon, R. P., et al. 2017, MNRAS, 471, 3057, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stx1774

    2017 doi

  64. [72]

    F., & Freedman, W

    Madore, B. F., & Freedman, W. L. 2020, ApJ, 899, 66, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aba045

    2020 doi

  65. [73]

    2011, ApJ, 731, 53, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/731/1/53

    Mainzer, A., Bauer, J., Grav, T., et al. 2011, ApJ, 731, 53, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/731/1/53

    2011 doi

  66. [74]

    2007, A&A, 469, 239, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20066772

    Marigo, P., & Girardi, L. 2007, A&A, 469, 239, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20066772

    2007 doi

  67. [75]

    2008, A&A, 482, 883, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20078467

    Marigo, P., Girardi, L., Bressan, A., et al. 2008, A&A, 482, 883, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20078467

    2008 doi

  68. [76]

    2003, A&A, 403, 225, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20030192

    Marigo, P., Girardi, L., & Chiosi, C. 2003, A&A, 403, 225, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20030192

    2003 doi

  69. [77]

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

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

    2017 doi

  70. [78]

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

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

    2006 doi

  71. [79]

    R., et al

    Massari, D., Bellini, A., Ferraro, F. R., et al. 2013, ApJ, 779, 81, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/779/1/81

    2013 doi

  72. [80]

    A., Plez, B., et al

    Masseron, T., Johnson, J. A., Plez, B., et al. 2010, A&A, 509, A93, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/200911744

    2010 doi

  73. [81]

    D., & Woodsworth, A

    McClure, R. D., & Woodsworth, A. W. 1990, ApJ, 352, 709, doi: 10.1086/168573

    1990 doi

  74. [82]

    McConnachie, A. W. 2012, AJ, 144, 4, doi: 10.1088/0004-6256/144/1/4

    2012 doi

  75. [83]

    R., Zijlstra, A

    McDonald, I., White, J. R., Zijlstra, A. A., et al. 2012, MNRAS, 427, 2647, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2012.22109.x

    2012

  76. [84]

    Miszalski, B., Boffin, H. M. J., & Corradi, R. L. M. 2013, MNRAS, 428, L39, doi: 10.1093/mnrasl/sls011

    2013 doi

  77. [85]

    H., & Hatzidimitriou, D

    Morgan, D. H., & Hatzidimitriou, D. 1995, A&AS, 113, 539

    1995

  78. [86]

    2014, Astronomische Nachrichten, 335, 79, doi: 10.1002/asna.201312006

    Mucciarelli, A. 2014, Astronomische Nachrichten, 335, 79, doi: 10.1002/asna.201312006

    2014 doi

  79. [87]

    Newman, M. J. B., McQuinn, K. B. W., Skillman, E. D., et al. 2024, ApJ, 975, 195, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad79f8

    2024 doi

  80. [88]

    2000, A&AS, 143, 23, doi: 10.1051/aas:2000169

    Ochsenbein, F., Bauer, P., & Marcout, J. 2000, A&AS, 143, 23, doi: 10.1051/aas:2000169

    2000 doi

  81. [89]

    Ortiz, R., & Guerrero, M. A. 2021, ApJ, 912, 93, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/abefd7 26Roulston et al

    2021 doi

  82. [90]

    A., & Costa, R

    Ortiz, R., Guerrero, M. A., & Costa, R. D. D. 2019, MNRAS, 482, 4697, doi: 10.1093/mnras/sty3076

    2019 doi

  83. [91]

    2020, ApJ, 893, 121, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab7b75

    Patel, E., Kallivayalil, N., Garavito-Camargo, N., et al. 2020, ApJ, 893, 121, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab7b75

    2020 doi

  84. [92]

    2015, ApJS, 220, 15, doi: 10.1088/0067-0049/220/1/15

    Paxton, B., Marchant, P., Schwab, J., et al. 2015, ApJS, 220, 15, doi: 10.1088/0067-0049/220/1/15

    2015 doi

  85. [93]

    2011, Journal of Machine Learning Research, 12, 2825

    Pedregosa, F., Varoquaux, G., Gramfort, A., et al. 2011, Journal of Machine Learning Research, 12, 2825

    2011

  86. [94]

    2004, ApJ, 612, 168, doi: 10.1086/422498 Pietrzy´ nski, G., Graczyk, D., Gallenne, A., et al

    Pietrinferni, A., Cassisi, S., Salaris, M., & Castelli, F. 2004, ApJ, 612, 168, doi: 10.1086/422498 Pietrzy´ nski, G., Graczyk, D., Gallenne, A., et al. 2019, Nature, 567, 200, doi: 10.1038/s41586-019-0999-4

    2004 doi

  87. [95]

    Plummer, H. C. 1911, MNRAS, 71, 460, doi: 10.1093/mnras/71.5.460

    1911 doi

  88. [96]

    2017, MNRAS, 465, 1621, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stw2819

    Portail, M., Gerhard, O., Wegg, C., & Ness, M. 2017, MNRAS, 465, 1621, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stw2819

    2017 doi

  89. [97]

    T., Nidever, D

    Povick, J. T., Nidever, D. L., Majewski, S. R., et al. 2025, MNRAS, 544, 457, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staf1428

    2025 doi

  90. [98]

    2021, A&A, 647, A1, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202039313

    Predehl, P., Andritschke, R., Arefiev, V., et al. 2021, A&A, 647, A1, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202039313

    2021 doi

  91. [99]

    J., & Honma, M

    Reid, M. J., & Honma, M. 2014, ARA&A, 52, 339, doi: 10.1146/annurev-astro-081913-040006

    2014 doi

  92. [100]

    2020, MNRAS, 495, 2858, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staa1346

    Ripoche, P., Heyl, J., Parada, J., & Richer, H. 2020, MNRAS, 495, 2858, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staa1346

    2020 doi

  93. [101]

    R., Green, P

    Roulston, B. R., Green, P. J., & Kesseli, A. Y. 2020, ApJS, 249, 34, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/aba1e7

    2020 doi

  94. [102]

    R., Green, P

    Roulston, B. R., Green, P. J., Toonen, S., & Hermes, J. J. 2021, ApJ, 922, 33, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac157c

    2021 doi

  95. [103]

    2025, ApJ, 982, 184, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/adba53

    Portnoi, E. 2025, ApJ, 982, 184, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/adba53

    2025 doi

  96. [104]

    R., Green, P

    Roulston, B. R., Green, P. J., Ruan, J. J., et al. 2019, ApJ, 877, 44, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab1a3e

    2019 doi

  97. [105]

    R., Green, P

    Roulston, B. R., Green, P. J., Montez, R., et al. 2022, ApJ, 926, 210, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac4706

    2022 doi

  98. [106]

    2015, ApJ, 810, 77, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/810/1/77

    Sahai, R., Sanz-Forcada, J., S´ anchez Contreras, C., & Stute, M. 2015, ApJ, 810, 77, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/810/1/77

    2015 doi

  99. [107]

    2018, MNRAS, 473, 4937, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stx2651

    Salvato, M., Buchner, J., Budav´ ari, T., et al. 2018, MNRAS, 473, 4937, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stx2651

    2018 doi

  100. [108]

    2025, A&A, 704, A344, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202556142 Samus’, N

    Salvato, M., Wolf, J., Dwelly, T., et al. 2025, A&A, 704, A344, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202556142 Samus’, N. N., Kazarovets, E. V., Durlevich, O. V.,

    2025 doi

  101. [109]

    N., & Pastukhova, E

    Kireeva, N. N., & Pastukhova, E. N. 2017, Astronomy Reports, 61, 80, doi: 10.1134/S1063772917010085

    2017 doi

  102. [110]

    1988, ApJS, 66, 387, doi: 10.1086/191262

    Sanduleak, N., & Pesch, P. 1988, ApJS, 66, 387, doi: 10.1086/191262

    1988 doi

  103. [111]

    Schmitt, J. H. M. M., H¨ unsch, M., Schneider, P. C., et al. 2024, A&A, 688, A9, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202449181

    2024 doi

  104. [112]

    1978, Annals of Statistics, 6, 461

    Schwarz, G. 1978, Annals of Statistics, 6, 461

    1978

  105. [113]

    P., & Conroy, C

    Sharpe, K., Naidu, R. P., & Conroy, C. 2024, ApJ, 963, 162, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad19ca

    2024 doi

  106. [114]

    2014, Science China Physics, Mechanics, and Astronomy, 57, 176, doi: 10.1007/s11433-013-5374-0

    Si, J., Luo, A., Li, Y., et al. 2014, Science China Physics, Mechanics, and Astronomy, 57, 176, doi: 10.1007/s11433-013-5374-0

    2014 doi

  107. [115]

    H., Dotter, A., Majewski, S

    Siegel, M. H., Dotter, A., Majewski, S. R., et al. 2007, ApJL, 667, L57, doi: 10.1086/522003

    2007 doi

  108. [116]

    F., Cutri, R

    Skrutskie, M. F., Cutri, R. M., Stiening, R., et al. 2006, AJ, 131, 1163, doi: 10.1086/498708

    2006 doi

  109. [117]

    Stetson, P. B. 2002, ApJ, 566, 239, doi: 10.1086/337985

    2002 doi

  110. [118]

    2020, MNRAS, 495, 2222, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staa1209

    Sollima, A. 2020, MNRAS, 495, 2222, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staa1209

    2020 doi

  111. [119]

    Soltis, J., Casertano, S., & Riess, A. G. 2021, ApJL, 908, L5, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/abdbad Soszy´ nski, I., Udalski, A., Szyma´ nski, M. K., et al. 2009, AcA, 59, 239, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.0910.1354

    2021 doi arXiv

  112. [120]

    Stephenson, C. B. 1985, AJ, 90, 784, doi: 10.1086/113787

    1985 doi

  113. [121]

    1972, Publications of the Department of Astronomy University of Chile, 2, 59

    Stock, J., & Wroblewski, H. 1972, Publications of the Department of Astronomy University of Chile, 2, 59

    1972

  114. [122]

    2024, ApJS, 272, 16, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/ad38b5

    Suh, K.-W. 2024, ApJS, 272, 16, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/ad38b5

    2024 doi

  115. [123]

    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

  116. [124]

    M., & Huber, D

    Frinchaboy, P. M., & Huber, D. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2507.20212, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2507.20212 van Loon, J. T., van Leeuwen, F., Smalley, B., et al. 2007, MNRAS, 382, 1353, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2007.12478.x

    2025 doi

  117. [125]

    2013, ApJ, 775, 134, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/775/2/134

    Casagrande, L. 2013, ApJ, 775, 134, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/775/2/134

    2013 doi

  118. [126]

    Vanture, A. D. 1992, AJ, 104, 1986, doi: 10.1086/116374

    1992 doi

  119. [127]

    2021, MNRAS, 505, 5978, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stab1475

    Vasiliev, E., & Baumgardt, H. 2021, MNRAS, 505, 5978, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stab1475

    2021 doi

  120. [128]

    E., et al

    Virtanen, P., Gommers, R., Oliphant, T. E., et al. 2020, Nature Methods, 17, 261, doi: 10.1038/s41592-019-0686-2

    2020 doi

  121. [129]

    2025, A&A, 699, A163, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202453354

    Vitali, S., Rojas-Arriagada, A., Jofr´ e, P., et al. 2025, A&A, 699, A163, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202453354

    2025 doi

  122. [130]

    Wallerstein, G., & Knapp, G. R. 1998, ARA&A, 36, 369, doi: 10.1146/annurev.astro.36.1.369

    1998 doi

  123. [131]

    A., Coriat, M., Traulsen, I., et al

    Webb, N. A., Coriat, M., Traulsen, I., et al. 2020, A&A, 641, A136, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201937353

    2020 doi

  124. [132]

    2000, A&AS, 143, 9, doi: 10.1051/aas:2000332

    Wenger, M., Ochsenbein, F., Egret, D., et al. 2000, A&AS, 143, 9, doi: 10.1051/aas:2000332

    2000 doi

  125. [133]

    Westerlund, B. E. 1971, A&AS, 4, 51 Carbon Giants Revealed by Gaia DR327

    1971

  126. [134]

    1999, in IAU Symposium, Vol

    Whitelock, P., Menzies, J., Irwin, M., & Feast, M. 1999, in IAU Symposium, Vol. 192, The Stellar Content of Local Group Galaxies, ed. P. Whitelock & R. Cannon, 136

    1999

  127. [135]

    L., Eisenhardt, P

    Wright, E. L., Eisenhardt, P. R. M., Mainzer, A. K., et al. 2010, AJ, 140, 1868, doi: 10.1088/0004-6256/140/6/1868

    2010 doi

  128. [136]

    2015, ApJ, 809, 144, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/809/2/144

    Xue, X.-X., Rix, H.-W., Ma, Z., et al. 2015, ApJ, 809, 144, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/809/2/144

    2015 doi

  129. [137]

    B., Liu, X

    Yuan, H. B., Liu, X. W., & Xiang, M. S. 2013, MNRAS, 430, 2188, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stt039

    2013 doi

  130. [138]

    2009, A&A, 508, 909, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/200912843

    Zamora, O., Abia, C., Plez, B., Dom ´ ınguez, I., & Cristallo, S. 2009, A&A, 508, 909, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/200912843

    2009 doi

  131. [139]

    S., Li, Y., & Bi, S

    Zhang, X., Jeffery, C. S., Li, Y., & Bi, S. 2020, ApJ, 889, 33, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab5e89

    2020 doi

Pith tools

Reviewed August 14, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.