Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 5 minor 132 references

Analysis of Newly Catalogued Open Star Cluster UPK~220 with Gaia DR3 and TESS: Discovering Member Variable Stars

T0 review · 4 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-09 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read The paper claims that eight variable members found in TESS data let it determine UPK 220's distance, age, reddening, and first direct metallicity at the same time.

desk verdict Valuable TESS variability work undermined by a load-bearing distance inconsistency in the cluster parameters. read the letter →

arxiv 2502.03861 v1 pith:7X5CKJRA submitted 2025-02-06 astro-ph.SR astro-ph.GA

İnci Akkaya Oralhan , Cenk Kayhan , Özgün Arslan This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.SRastro-ph.GA
keywords openstarclustersvariablestarsGaiaDR3TESSphotometrystellarmembershipMESAevolutionmodelseclipsingbinariesgammaDoradus
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 sets out to show that the newly cataloged open cluster UPK 220 can be characterized by using its variable member stars as the lever. TESS light curves identify eight variable members, and the cluster's distance, age, reddening, and metallicity are derived while simultaneously fitting those stars with stellar models. If the claim is right, UPK 220 is roughly 140 to 200 Myr old, about 830 to 970 pc away, reddened by E(B-V) near 0.85 to 1.0 mag, and metal-poor at [Fe/H] near -0.56, which would be the first direct metallicity for the cluster. The payoff is a method that turns variable stars inside a cluster from objects to be classified into constraints on the cluster's own fundamental parameters, applicable to the many new clusters found by Gaia.

What carries the argument

The carrying mechanism is a closed loop between cluster parameters and variable-star parameters. A decontaminated membership sample is selected from Gaia astrometry; TESS light curves supply period, eclipse timing, amplitude, and light-curve shape for each variable; atmospheric parameters come from GSP-Phot, GSP-Spec, and SED fitting; and MESA stellar models, one set for single stars and one for binaries, are evolved with MIST isochrones. The cluster's age, reddening, and distance modulus are read off a MIST isochrone fit to the color-magnitude diagram, with metallicity set by the average of the variable-star metallicities, and that metallicity is then reinserted into the isochrones and binary models. It is this reciprocal constraint loop that lets the paper claim the cluster and its variable stars are being constrained simultaneously.

What would settle it

Run the full membership and parameter pipeline again with the parallax window widened to roughly 0.7 to 1.3 mas, or with membership determined iteratively without that prior; if the best-fit distance modulus and metallicity move outside the quoted errors, the narrow prior is doing the work. A quick independent check is high-resolution spectroscopy of the three single variables, which should return [Fe/H] near -0.56 if the paper's metallicity anchor is correct.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that UPK 220's fundamental parameters and the properties of its variable members are jointly determined in a single loop. Membership is established from Gaia DR3 astrometry; TESS light curves reveal eight variable members, namely three eclipsing binaries, two pulsating stars, two magnetically active stars, and one rotating or T-Tauri candidate; and MESA stellar models, together with MIST isochrones, are used to fit both the cluster's color-magnitude diagram and the individual variables. This joint fit yields a distance modulus DM0 of 9.6 mag (about 832 pc), E(B-V) of about 0.85 to 1.0 mag, an age of 140 to 200 Myr, and a metallicity of [Fe/H] near -0.56 with Z near 0.004 to 0.005. The paper also claims this is the first direct [Fe/H] determination for UPK 220, and that the metallicity from the single variable stars is consistent across the Metalcode, Gaia GSP-Phot, GSP-Spec, and SED analyses.

Load-bearing premise

The whole parameter chain assumes that the previously published distance of about 967 pc is accurate enough to set the narrow star-distance window used to pick cluster members, even though the paper's own final fit favors 832 pc.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • UPK 220 is metal-poor, at [Fe/H] near -0.56, so its distance modulus shifts by about 0.4 mag compared with a solar-metallicity fit, moving the cluster from the original catalog estimate of 562 Myr at 967 pc to a younger, nearer value.
  • The eight variable members provide a first variability census for this cluster, including three eclipsing binaries whose light-curve models yield fractional radii, mass ratios, and orbital parameters.
  • One eclipsing binary, ID 67, shows Cepheid-like pulsations with a period near 2.5 days, giving a rare opportunity to compare a pulsation-based distance with the Gaia parallax distance.
  • UPK 220 becomes one of the few Galactic open clusters known to host a metal-poor gamma Doradus variable, supporting the younger side of the derived age range.
  • The same simultaneous-fit strategy can be applied to other newly cataloged open clusters, using their variable members as extra constraints instead of treating variability as a byproduct.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The narrow parallax window of 0.95 to 1.1 mas used for membership is anchored to the catalog distance of 967 pc, but the paper's own isochrone fit prefers 832 pc; re-running the analysis with a wider parallax window would test whether the derived parameters survive without that prior.
  • If the pulsating component in ID 67 is a genuine classical Cepheid in an eclipsing binary, high-resolution spectroscopy could yield an independent distance and a sharp age test that discriminates between the 140 Myr and 200 Myr solutions.
  • The mutual-constraint loop is circular by design, so an external anchor such as asteroseismic masses, radial-velocity orbits, or a spectroscopic metallicity from several member stars would show whether the joint solution is physical or an artifact of the model grid.
  • TESS coverage spans five sectors with two large gaps; longer continuous photometry of ID 49 could resolve its g-mode period spacings and turn the star's age estimate into a much tighter cluster-age measurement.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

4 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper analyzes the open cluster UPK 220 using Gaia DR3 astrometry/photometry and TESS time-series photometry. It selects 148 probable members via pyUPMASK after a parallax cut, derives cluster fundamental parameters (distance, age, metallicity, reddening) by isochrone fitting with MIST and Metalcode, and reports eight new variable members: three eclipsing binaries, two pulsating stars, two magnetically active stars, and one rotating variable. The variable stars are further modeled with MESA, and atmospheric parameters are obtained from SED, GSP-Phot, and GSP-Spec. The central claim is a joint, self-consistent determination of cluster parameters and the parameters of the variable members.

Significance. If the central claim held, the paper would provide the first direct [Fe/H] for UPK 220, revised distance/age/reddening values, and a set of eight variable members including a candidate classical Cepheid in an eclipsing binary, which would be notable for cluster studies and binary-evolution work. The TESS light-curve analysis, the JKTEBOP binary modeling, and the MESA stellar models are presented in detail and appear internally careful. However, the cluster parameter derivation contains a load-bearing distance inconsistency, and the metallicity input is obtained from the same stars whose parameters are then derived with that input, so the 'simultaneous constraint' claim is not currently supported. The variability detections and orbital solutions have standalone value, but the main advertised result, the joint parameter solution, needs substantial rework.

major comments (4)
  1. [§2.1, §3.1, §3.2, Table 7]
  2. [§3.1, §3.2, Table 4]
  3. [§2.2.1, §4.1, Table 5]
  4. [§3.1 vs §3.2 and Table 7]
minor comments (5)
  1. [Table 7]
  2. [§4.1, ID 67]
  3. [§3.1]
  4. [References]
  5. [§2.2.1]

Circularity Check

2 steps flagged · score 6.0 of 10

Joint solution is partially self-referential: the MESA [Fe/H] column echoes the metallicity input taken from the same stars, and the distance reported in Table 7 repeats the prior that defined the membership window while the body's DM0=9.6 mag implies an excluded distance.

  1. fitted input called prediction [Section 3.1-3.2 and Tables 3-4 (MESA [Fe/H] entries)]
    "Since the metallicities obtained from GSP-Phot analysis are reliable and consistent with the error limits, the metallicity of three stars (IDs 49, 138 and 147) were considered in determining the input metallicity of MIST isochrones applied to the cluster. Thus, the average metallicity derived from these three variable single stars was calculated as [Fe/H] = −0.56, with Z = 0.004. ... Initial Helium and metallicity abundances are taken Yint = 0.2551 and Zint = 0.0041, respectively, for the MESA models of the binary member variable stars."

    The cluster metallicity [Fe/H] = -0.56 is computed as the average of the GSP-Phot/SED metallicities of the same stars (IDs 49, 138, 147) that later appear as MESA model results, and this value is imposed as a fixed input (Z = 0.0041) in the MESA and MIST models. Tables 3 and 4 then list [Fe/H] = -0.56 for every MESA row, so that column is not an independently measured or predicted atmospheric parameter; it is the input assumption echoed back. The statement in Section 3.2 that the cluster parameters and variable-star parameters are 'consistent' is therefore partly tautological on the metallicity axis. The Teff, logg, and mass values from MESA are not fully forced by this input, so the circularity is partial rather than complete.

  2. self definitional [Section 2.1, Section 3.1, and Table 7]
    "we restricted the sample to stars with parallaxes in the range 0.95 ≤ ϖ <1.1 mas based on the distance estimates from Sim et al. (2019). ... According to MetalCode, we found the best fit for the cluster fundamental parameters as follows: d = 832 pc corresponding to distance modulus DM0 = 9.6 mag ... 1.3 9.60 0.967 -0.56 8.15 140.0 MIST GaiaDR3, G, GBP, GRP This paper"

    The membership sample that feeds all subsequent isochrone fits is defined by the Sim et al. (2019) distance prior of 967 pc through the 0.95-1.1 mas parallax window. The paper's own adopted DM0 = 9.6 mag implies d = 10^(9.6/5 + 1) = 832 pc, corresponding to parallax ~1.20 mas, which lies outside the input window and differs by ~5-6 sigma from the reported median member parallax of 1.03 +/- 0.03 mas. Yet Table 7 lists d = 0.967 kpc for 'This paper', numerically identical to the prior used to define the input sample. The reported distance is therefore either the input value repeated (Table 7) or a value excluded by the input selection (832 pc); in neither case is the distance independently determined by the joint cluster/variable-star loop.

full rationale

The paper's central methodology is a coupled loop: cluster parameters from Gaia photometry and variable-star parameters from TESS plus SED/GSP-Phot are meant to constrain each other 'simultaneously'. Such a joint fit is not inherently circular when the two data sets are independent. In this implementation, however, two specific reductions make part of the claimed output equal to its own input. First, the metallicity used as the fixed input to MESA and MIST is literally the average of the GSP-Phot metallicities of stars 49, 138, and 147, and the MESA [Fe/H] entries in Tables 3-4 then reproduce that same value, so the 'MESA metallicity' is an input presented as a derived quantity. Second, the distance chain is internally inconsistent: the membership window is defined by Sim et al.'s 967 pc distance, the body derives DM0 = 9.6 mag (832 pc) which is outside that window, and Table 7 reports 0.967 kpc as the paper's result, i.e., the prior value carried through. These are concrete reductions of claimed predictions to inputs or prior assumptions. The TESS variability detections, JKTEBOP light-curve models, periodograms, and SED/GSP-Phot Teff and logg estimates are external to these two reductions and are not circular. No load-bearing self-citation chain or imported uniqueness theorem was found; self-citations such as Akkaya Oralhan (2021) and Netopil et al. (2022) are contextual. Overall, the circularity is partial and concentrated in the distance and metallicity links of the joint solution, so a score of 6 reflects that the central fundamental-parameter claim is partly reduced by construction while other observational results remain independent.

Assumptions & free parameters 6 free parameters · 7 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The paper's parameter determination is a coupled fit: the cluster metallicity is an average of three stars' GSP-Phot values, the cluster distance is tied to a pre-selected parallax window, and the MIST/MESA models take those cluster values as fixed inputs while producing the stars' physical parameters. This creates a circular loop, so the free parameters above are not independently measured.

free parameters (6)
  • Parallax selection window = 0.95 to 1.1 mas
    Hand-chosen from Sim et al. (2019) distance to pre-filter members before astrometric membership modeling; it fixes the distance scale of the sample.
  • Membership probability threshold = P >= 0.725
    Chosen from the histogram of pyUPMASK probabilities to separate members from field stars; changes the member list and derived parameters.
  • Cluster metallicity [Fe/H] = -0.56 dex (Z=0.004)
    Average of GSP-Phot values for IDs 49, 138 and 147 after excluding IDs 16 and 42; used as the fixed input metallicity for MIST and MESA models.
  • Reddening E(GBP-GRP) = 1.3 mag (E(B-V)=1.0)
    Fitted by MIST isochrone overlay; Metalcode gives the different value E(B-V)=0.85, and no uncertainty is quoted.
  • Distance modulus DM0 = 9.6 mag (d=832 pc)
    From MIST isochrone fit; conflicts with the parallax selection window and with Table 7's d=0.967 kpc.
  • Cluster age = 140 Myr (log age 8.15)
    From MIST isochrone fit; Metalcode gives 200 Myr and the solar-metallicity fit gives 110 Myr, all without formal uncertainties.
assumptions (7)
  • domain assumption All cluster members share a common age and initial chemical composition.
    Standard open-cluster assumption invoked in Section 3.1 to justify averaging metallicities and fitting a single isochrone.
  • domain assumption Gaia DR3 parallaxes and proper motions, as processed by pyUPMASK, provide reliable membership probabilities.
    Used throughout Section 2.1; no independent validation of the pyUPMASK output against spectroscopy is given.
  • domain assumption MIST/MESA stellar models reproduce the CMD of low-metallicity intermediate-age stars well enough for the adopted fits.
    All cluster parameters come from MIST isochrones and MESA tracks (Sections 3.2 and 4.1); the paper does not test model dependence with a second grid.
  • domain assumption TESS FFI light curves extracted with TESScut and lightkurve are free of systematics affecting the detected periods and classifications.
    No comparison with field stars or injected-signal false-positive tests is presented in Section 2.2.
  • domain assumption GSP-Phot, GSP-Spec and ARIADNE SED parameters are accurate for these stars, including the binary components.
    Atmospheric parameters in Tables 3 and 4 are taken from these pipelines; for ID 116 SED and GSP-Phot disagree by thousands of kelvins, so this assumption is strained.
  • ad hoc to paper Sim et al. (2019) distance estimate is accurate enough to define the 0.95 to 1.1 mas parallax membership window.
    Section 2.1 uses this prior to cut the sample; the fitted distance later contradicts the window, showing the prior is load-bearing and not independently verified.
  • ad hoc to paper The pulsating component of ID 67 is a classical Cepheid to which the Owens et al. (2022) period-luminosity relation applies.
    Section 4.1 assumes this to derive a distance, but the measured period (1.177 d in Table 5) and the MESA mass (1.5 Msun) are inconsistent with such a classification.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Analysis of Newly Catalogued Open Star Cluster UPK~220 with Gaia DR3 and TESS: Discovering Member Variable Stars." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/7X5CKJRA

@misc{pith2026250203861,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Analysis of Newly Catalogued Open Star Cluster UPK~220 with Gaia DR3 and TESS: Discovering Member Variable Stars},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/7X5CKJRA}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2502.03861}
}
abstract

Studies on star clusters with the same age and initial chemical composition have gained momentum in recent years with the use of \textit{Gaia}. In addition, the discovery of new clusters with Gaia has increased the number of open clusters to be examined. Many of these discovered sources are intermediate-age open clusters and have not been analyzed in detail yet. In this study, we focused on newly cataloged open cluster UPK~220. The fundamental parameters (distance, age, metallicity and reddening) of UPK~220 were determined by analysing the variable stars within the cluster, while simultaneously constraining the parameters of the variable stars using these cluster parameters. To achieve this, we combined GaiaDR3 and TESS photometric observations. Using GaiaDR3, we derive fundamental parameters of UPK~220 through membership analyses, and with TESS, we discovered eight member variable stars. We also extracted the atmospheric parameters ($logg$, $[Fe/H]$ and $T_{\rm eff}$) for the variable stars using SED, GSP-Phot and GSP-Spec, and MESA models.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2502.03861 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Upper panel: The proper motion vector diagram of UPK 220. The right colour bar represents the membership probabilities. Lower panel: The distributions of membership probabilities according to pyUPMASK. The vertical red dashed line shows the selected probability limit of 0.725 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. The radial density profile of UPK 220. The dotted curved line shows the fitting of King’s profile. The horizontal black bar denotes the stellar background level measured in the comparison field. Inserted plot on top: The three-dimensional stellar surface density of UPK 220 accomplished by astrometric and photometric field star decontamination procedures on the cluster region [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Three dimensional distribution of the cluster members with eight member variable stars. The dot size of the stars corresponds to Gmag [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (3 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: The best fit model (solid line) and residuals (at 0.8) that is obtained by jktebop and observed TESS light curve of ID 116 at sectors 57 and 58. From the observed pri￾mary minima, the ephemeris (E) and phases determined as Tprimin = (2459893.26611±0.00015) + (7.56662±0…
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: The observational G versus (GBP −GRP) CMDs of UPK 220 from GaiaDR3. The isochrones fitting is done via MIST considering two metallicities (left panel: [F e/H] = −0.56, right panel: solar abundance). The member stars are described as grey dots. Magenta circles show ecli…
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Normalized TESS light curves of variable member stars. First row: ID16 (Sector 24), ID29 (Sector 24) and ID42 (Sector 58). Second row: ID49 (Sector 24), ID67 (Sectors 57 and 58) and ID116 (Sectors 57 and 58). Third row: ID138 (Sector 57) and ID147 (Sectors 17 and 18). …

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

132 extracted references · 28 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

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

    ENTRY address archivePrefix author booktitle chapter doi edition editor eprint howpublished institution journal key month number organization pages publisher school series title misctitle type volume year version url label extra.label sort.label short.list INTEGERS output.state before.all mid.sentence after.sentence after.block FUNCTION init.state.consts ...

  2. [2]

    write newline

    " write newline "" before.all 'output.state := FUNCTION format.url url empty "" new.block "" url * "" * if FUNCTION format.eprint eprint empty "" archivePrefix empty "" archivePrefix "arXiv" = new.block " " eprint * " " * new.block " " eprint * " " * if if if FUNCTION format.doi doi empty "" " " doi * " " * if FUNCTION format.pid doi empty eprint empty ur...

  3. [3]

    1+ X λ V# k1

    thebibliography [1] 20pt to REFERENCES 6pt =0pt -12pt 10pt plus 3pt =0pt =0pt =1pt plus 1pt =0pt =0pt -12pt =13pt plus 1pt =20pt =13pt plus 1pt \@M =10000 =-1.0em =0pt =0pt 0pt =0pt =1.0em @enumiv\@empty 10000 10000 `\.\@m \@noitemerr \@latex@warning Empty `thebibliography' environment \@ifnextchar \@reference \@latexerr Missing key on reference command E...

    2021

  4. [4]

    V., Cignoni, M., Bragaglia, A., et al

    Ahumada, A. V., Cignoni, M., Bragaglia, A., et al. 2013, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 430, 221

    2013

  5. [5]

    2021, Journal of Astrophysics and Astronomy, 42, 60, 10.1007/s12036-021-09757-9

    Akkaya Oralhan , \.I . 2021, Journal of Astrophysics and Astronomy, 42, 60, 10.1007/s12036-021-09757-9

    work page doi:10.1007/s12036-021-09757-9 2021

  6. [6]

    2024, , 689, A18, 10.1051/0004-6361/202450901

    Alfonso , J., Garc \' a-Varela , A., & Vieira , K. 2024, , 689, A18, 10.1051/0004-6361/202450901

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202450901 2024

  7. [7]

    Almeida, A., Monteiro, H., & Dias, W. S. 2023, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 525, 2315

    2023

  8. [8]

    2023, , 674, A27, 10.1051/0004-6361/202243462

    Andrae , R., Fouesneau , M., Sordo , R., et al. 2023, , 674, A27, 10.1051/0004-6361/202243462

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202243462 2023

Show all 132 references
  1. [9]

    1999, , 656, 3, 10.1016/S0375-9474(99)00030-5

    Angulo , C., Arnould , M., Rayet , M., et al. 1999, , 656, 3, 10.1016/S0375-9474(99)00030-5

    1999 doi

  2. [10]

    M., Sip o cz , B

    Astropy Collaboration , Price-Whelan , A. M., Sip o cz , B. M., et al. 2018, , 156, 123, 10.3847/1538-3881/aabc4f

    2018 doi

  3. [11]

    Barnes , S. A. 2007, , 669, 1167, 10.1086/519295

    2007 doi

  4. [12]

    R., Murphy , S

    Bedding , T. R., Murphy , S. J., Crawford , C., et al. 2023, , 946, L10, 10.3847/2041-8213/acc17a

    2023 doi

  5. [13]

    1958, , 46, 108

    B \"o hm-Vitense , E. 1958, , 46, 108

    1958

  6. [14]

    2005, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 437, 483

    Bonatto, C., & Bica, E. 2005, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 437, 483

    2005

  7. [15]

    2006, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 445, 567

    Bonatto, C., Santos, J., & Bica, E. 2006, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 445, 567

    2006

  8. [16]

    M., Buysschaert , B., Neiner , C., et al

    Bowman , D. M., Buysschaert , B., Neiner , C., et al. 2018, , 616, A77, 10.1051/0004-6361/201833037

    2018 doi

  9. [17]

    2018, , 619, A176, 10.1051/0004-6361/201833888

    Bragaglia , A., Fu , X., Mucciarelli , A., Andreuzzi , G., & Donati , P. 2018, , 619, A176, 10.1051/0004-6361/201833888

    2018 doi

  10. [18]

    E., Phillip , C., Fleming , S

    Brasseur , C. E., Phillip , C., Fleming , S. W., Mullally , S. E., & White , R. L. 2019, Astrocut: Tools for creating cutouts of TESS images , Astrophysics Source Code Library, record ascl:1905.007. 1905.007

    2019

  11. [19]

    1993, , 271, 482

    Breger , M., Stich , J., Garrido , R., et al. 1993, , 271, 482

    1993

  12. [20]

    2012, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 427, 127

    Bressan, A., Marigo, P., Girardi, L., et al. 2012, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 427, 127

    2012

  13. [21]

    J., Depoy , D

    Burke , C. J., Depoy , D. L., Gaudi , B. S., & Marshall , J. L. 2003, in Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series, Vol. 294, Scientific Frontiers in Research on Extrasolar Planets, ed. D. Deming & S. Seager , 379--382, 10.48550/arXiv.astro-ph/0208305

    2003 doi arXiv

  14. [22]

    2018, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 618, A93

    Cantat-Gaudin, T., Jordi, C., Vallenari, A., et al. 2018, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 618, A93

    2018

  15. [23]

    2020, , 640, A1, 10.1051/0004-6361/202038192

    Cantat-Gaudin , T., Anders , F., Castro-Ginard , A., et al. 2020, , 640, A1, 10.1051/0004-6361/202038192

    2020 doi

  16. [24]

    G., & Tosi , M

    Carretta , E., Bragaglia , A., Gratton , R. G., & Tosi , M. 2004, , 422, 951, 10.1051/0004-6361:20047142

    2004 doi

  17. [25]

    2020, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 2020, vol

    Castro Ginard, A., Jordi i Nebot, C., Luri Carrascoso, X., et al. 2020, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 2020, vol. 635, num. A45

    2020

  18. [26]

    2020, VizieR Online Data Catalog, J

    Castro-Ginard, A., Jordi, C., Luri, X., et al. 2020, VizieR Online Data Catalog, J

    2020

  19. [27]

    2023, The Astronomical Journal, 167, 12

    Cavallo, L., Spina, L., Carraro, G., et al. 2023, The Astronomical Journal, 167, 12

    2023

  20. [28]

    2018, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 480, 1850

    Chehlaeh, N., Mkrtichian, D., Lampens, P., et al. 2018, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 480, 1850

    2018

  21. [29]

    2024, Progress in Particle and Nuclear Physics, 134, 104083, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ppnp.2023.104083

    Chen, X., Liu, Z., & Han, Z. 2024, Progress in Particle and Nuclear Physics, 134, 104083, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ppnp.2023.104083

    2024

  22. [30]

    2023, The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series, 265, 20

    Chi, H., Wei, S., Wang, F., & Li, Z. 2023, The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series, 265, 20

    2023

  23. [31]

    2016, , 823, 102, 10.3847/0004-637X/823/2/102

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

    2016 doi

  24. [32]

    2017, , 600, A30, 10.1051/0004-6361/201629705

    Claret , A. 2017, , 600, A30, 10.1051/0004-6361/201629705

    2017 doi

  25. [33]

    2003, VizieR online data catalog, II

    Cutri, R., Skrutskie, M., Van Dyk, S., et al. 2003, VizieR online data catalog, II

    2003

  26. [34]

    H., Amthor , A

    Cyburt , R. H., Amthor , A. M., Ferguson , R., et al. 2010, , 189, 240, 10.1088/0067-0049/189/1/240

    2010 doi

  27. [35]

    A., Parihar, P

    Dar, A. A., Parihar, P. S., Saleh, P., & Malik, M. A. 2018, New Astronomy, 64, 34

    2018

  28. [36]

    De Grijs, R., Li, C., & Geller, A. M. 2015, Proceedings of the International Astronomical Union, 12, 222

    2015

  29. [37]

    2002, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 389, 871

    Dias, W., Alessi, B., Moitinho, A., & L \'e pine, J. 2002, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 389, 871

    2002

  30. [38]

    S., Monteiro , H., Moitinho , A., et al

    Dias , W. S., Monteiro , H., Moitinho , A., et al. 2021, , 504, 356, 10.1093/mnras/stab770

    2021 doi

  31. [39]

    2016, , 222, 8, 10.3847/0067-0049/222/1/8

    Dotter , A. 2016, , 222, 8, 10.3847/0067-0049/222/1/8

    2016 doi

  32. [40]

    A., Grigahc \`e ne , A., Garrido , R., Gabriel , M., & Scuflaire , R

    Dupret , M. A., Grigahc \`e ne , A., Garrido , R., Gabriel , M., & Scuflaire , R. 2005, , 435, 927, 10.1051/0004-6361:20041817

    2005 doi

  33. [41]

    2020, Journal of Astrophysics and Astronomy, 41, 1

    Durgapal, A., Rangwal, G., Bisht, D., et al. 2020, Journal of Astrophysics and Astronomy, 41, 1

    2020

  34. [42]

    2023, , 677, A154, 10.1051/0004-6361/202347226

    Frasca , A., Alonso-Santiago , J., Catanzaro , G., et al. 2023, , 677, A154, 10.1051/0004-6361/202347226

    2023 doi

  35. [43]

    1995, Annual Review of Astronomy and Astrophysics, 33, 381

    Friel, E. 1995, Annual Review of Astronomy and Astrophysics, 33, 381

    1995

  36. [44]

    J., Van Reeth , T., Aerts , C., et al

    Fritzewski , D. J., Van Reeth , T., Aerts , C., et al. 2024, , 681, A13, 10.1051/0004-6361/202347618

    2024 doi

  37. [45]

    Gaia Collaboration , Vallenari , A., Brown , A. G. A., et al. 2023, , 674, A1, 10.1051/0004-6361/202243940

    2023 doi

  38. [46]

    2018, The Astronomical Journal, 156, 121

    Gao, X. 2018, The Astronomical Journal, 156, 121

    2018

  39. [47]

    M., Hurley , J

    Geller , A. M., Hurley , J. R., & Mathieu , R. D. 2013, , 145, 8, 10.1088/0004-6256/145/1/8

    2013 doi

  40. [48]

    M., Brasseur , C

    Ginsburg , A., Sip o cz , B. M., Brasseur , C. E., et al. 2019, , 157, 98, 10.3847/1538-3881/aafc33

    2019 doi

  41. [49]

    Goodwin, S. P. 2010, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences, 368, 851

    2010

  42. [50]

    2000, in Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series, Vol

    Gratton , R. 2000, in Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series, Vol. 198, Stellar Clusters and Associations: Convection, Rotation, and Dynamos, ed. R. Pallavicini , G. Micela , & S. Sciortino , 225

    2000

  43. [51]

    Groenewegen , M. A. T. 2023, , 669, A4, 10.1051/0004-6361/202244479

    2023 doi

  44. [52]

    1999, , 309, L19, 10.1046/j.1365-8711.1999.03005.x

    Handler , G. 1999, , 309, L19, 10.1046/j.1365-8711.1999.03005.x

    1999

  45. [53]

    R., Millman, K

    Harris, C. R., Millman, K. J., van der Walt, S. J., et al. 2020, Nature, 585, 357, 10.1038/s41586-020-2649-2

    2020 doi

  46. [54]

    2022 a , The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series, 264, 8

    He, Z., Liu, X., Luo, Y., Wang, K., & Jiang, Q. 2022 a , The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series, 264, 8

    2022

  47. [55]

    2022 b , The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series, 260, 8

    He, Z., Li, C., Zhong, J., et al. 2022 b , The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series, 260, 8

    2022

  48. [56]

    K., Grossman , E

    Herbst , W., Herbst , D. K., Grossman , E. J., & Weinstein , D. 1994, , 108, 1906, 10.1086/117204

    1994 doi

  49. [57]

    2000, , 360, 952, 10.48550/arXiv.astro-ph/0007139

    Herwig , F. 2000, , 360, 952, 10.48550/arXiv.astro-ph/0007139

    2000 doi arXiv

  50. [58]

    L., & Reffert , S

    Hunt , E. L., & Reffert , S. 2024, , 686, A42, 10.1051/0004-6361/202348662

    2024 doi

  51. [59]

    L., & Reffert, S

    Hunt, E. L., & Reffert, S. 2024, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 686, A42

    2024

  52. [60]

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

    2007 doi

  53. [61]

    Hurley , J., & Tout , C. A. 1998, , 300, 977, 10.1046/j.1365-8711.1998.01981.x

    1998

  54. [62]

    A., & Rogers , F

    Iglesias , C. A., & Rogers , F. J. 1993, , 412, 752, 10.1086/172958

    1993 doi

  55. [63]

    1996, , 464, 943, 10.1086/177381

    ---. 1996, , 464, 943, 10.1086/177381

    1996 doi

  56. [64]

    C., Kyeong, J., Park, H

    Im, H., Kim, S. C., Kyeong, J., Park, H. S., & Lee, J. H. 2023, The Astronomical Journal, 165, 53

    2023

  57. [65]

    M., Twicken , J

    Jenkins , J. M., Twicken , J. D., McCauliff , S., et al. 2016, in Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, Vol. 9913, Software and Cyberinfrastructure for Astronomy IV, ed. G. Chiozzi & J. C. Guzman , 99133E, 10.1117/12.2233418

    2016 doi

  58. [66]

    2020, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 492, 2731

    Jiang, D. 2020, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 492, 2731

    2020

  59. [67]

    C., Joshi , S., Kumar , B., Mondal , S., & Balona , L

    Joshi , Y. C., Joshi , S., Kumar , B., Mondal , S., & Balona , L. A. 2012, , 419, 2379, 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2011.19890.x

    2012

  60. [68]

    2022, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 515, 3094

    Kharchenko, N., Piskunov, A., Hubrig, S., & Sch \"o ller, M. 2022, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 515, 3094

    2022

  61. [69]

    2005, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 438, 1163

    Kharchenko, N., Piskunov, A., R \"o ser, S., Schilbach, E., & Scholz, R.-D. 2005, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 438, 1163

    2005

  62. [70]

    2013, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 558, A53

    Kharchenko, N., Piskunov, A., Schilbach, E., R \"o ser, S., & Scholz, R.-D. 2013, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 558, A53

    2013

  63. [71]

    C., Kyeong , J., Park , H

    Kim , S. C., Kyeong , J., Park , H. S., et al. 2017, Journal of Korean Astronomical Society, 50, 79, 10.5303/JKAS.2017.50.3.79

    2017 doi

  64. [72]

    King , I. R. 1966, The Astronomical Journal, 71, 64, 10.1086/109857

    1966 doi

  65. [73]

    Krisciunas , K., & Patten , B. M. 1999, Information Bulletin on Variable Stars, 4705, 1

    1999

  66. [74]

    R., McKee, C

    Krumholz, M. R., McKee, C. F., & Bland-Hawthorn, J. 2019, Annual Review of Astronomy and Astrophysics, 57, 227

    2019

  67. [75]

    2002, , 567, 643, 10.1086/338384

    Kunz , R., Fey , M., Jaeger , M., et al. 2002, , 567, 643, 10.1086/338384

    2002 doi

  68. [76]

    J., & Lada, E

    Lada, C. J., & Lada, E. A. 2003, Annual Review of Astronomy and Astrophysics, 41, 57

    2003

  69. [77]

    P., Pandey , J

    Lata , S., Chen , W. P., Pandey , J. C., et al. 2023, , 520, 1092, 10.1093/mnras/stad013

    2023 doi

  70. [78]

    Lightkurve Collaboration , Cardoso , J. V. d. M., Hedges , C., et al. 2018, Lightkurve: Kepler and TESS time series analysis in Python , Astrophysics Source Code Library. 1812.013

    2018

  71. [79]

    2019, The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series, 245, 32

    Liu, L., & Pang, X. 2019, The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series, 245, 32

    2019

  72. [80]

    2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2501.01617

    Liu , R., Shao , Z., & Li , L. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2501.01617. 2501.01617

    2025 arXiv

  73. [81]

    V., Sethi , R., Armitage , T., et al

    Martin , D. V., Sethi , R., Armitage , T., et al. 2024, , 528, 963, 10.1093/mnras/stae015

    2024 doi

  74. [82]

    1981, Astronomy and Astrophysics, vol

    Mermilliod, J. 1981, Astronomy and Astrophysics, vol. 97, no. 2, Apr. 1981, p. 235-244., 97, 235

    1981

  75. [83]

    2009, , 59, 193, 10.48550/arXiv.0907.0813

    Molenda- \.Z akowicz , J., Kopacki , G., Ste \'s licki , M., & Narwid , A. 2009, , 59, 193, 10.48550/arXiv.0907.0813

    2009 doi arXiv

  76. [84]

    Mombarg, J. S. G., Van Reeth, T., Pedersen, M. G., et al. 2019, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 485, 3248, 10.1093/mnras/stz501

    2019 doi

  77. [85]

    2020, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 499, 1874

    Monteiro, H., Dias, W., Moitinho, A., et al. 2020, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 499, 1874

    2020

  78. [86]

    2013, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 554, A108

    Mowlavi, N., Barblan, F., Saesen, S., & Eyer, L. 2013, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 554, A108

    2013

  79. [87]

    2023, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 675, A19

    Negueruela, I., & de Burgos, A. 2023, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 675, A19

    2023

  80. [88]

    A., C akmak , H., Michel , R., & Karata s , Y

    Netopil , M., Oralhan , \.I . A., C akmak , H., Michel , R., & Karata s , Y. 2022, , 509, 421, 10.1093/mnras/stab2961

    2022 doi

  81. [89]

    A., Freedman , W

    Owens , K. A., Freedman , W. L., Madore , B. F., & Lee , A. J. 2022, , 927, 8, 10.3847/1538-4357/ac479e

    2022 doi

  82. [90]

    2008, , 489, 403, 10.1051/0004-6361:200809969

    Pace , G., Pasquini , L., & Fran c ois , P. 2008, , 489, 403, 10.1051/0004-6361:200809969

    2008 doi

  83. [91]

    2010, , 517, A32, 10.1051/0004-6361/201014131

    Paunzen , E., Heiter , U., Netopil , M., & Soubiran , C. 2010, , 517, A32, 10.1051/0004-6361/201014131

    2010 doi

  84. [92]

    2023, Odessa Astronomical Publications, 36, 77, 10.18524/1810-4215.2023.36.291233

    Paunzen , E., Piecka , M., & Supikova , J. 2023, Odessa Astronomical Publications, 36, 77, 10.18524/1810-4215.2023.36.291233

    2023

  85. [93]

    2011, , 192, 3, 10.1088/0067-0049/192/1/3

    Paxton , B., Bildsten , L., Dotter , A., et al. 2011, , 192, 3, 10.1088/0067-0049/192/1/3

    2011 doi

  86. [94]

    2015, , 220, 15, 10.1088/0067-0049/220/1/15

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

    2015 doi

  87. [95]

    B., et al

    Paxton , B., Schwab , J., Bauer , E. B., et al. 2018, , 234, 34, 10.3847/1538-4365/aaa5a8

    2018 doi

  88. [96]

    2019, , 243, 10, 10.3847/1538-4365/ab2241

    Paxton , B., Smolec , R., Schwab , J., et al. 2019, , 243, 10, 10.3847/1538-4365/ab2241

    2019 doi

  89. [97]

    S., Perren , G

    Pera , M. S., Perren , G. I., Moitinho , A., Navone , H. D., & Vazquez , R. A. 2021, , 650, A109, 10.1051/0004-6361/202040252

    2021 doi

  90. [98]

    R., Gryc , W

    Percy , J. R., Gryc , W. K., Wong , J. C. Y., & Herbst , W. 2006, , 118, 1390, 10.1086/508557

    2006 doi

  91. [99]

    E., Claria , J

    Piatti , A. E., Claria , J. J., & Abadi , M. G. 1995, , 110, 2813, 10.1086/117731

    1995 doi

  92. [100]

    E., Dias, W

    Piatti, A. E., Dias, W. S., & Sampedro, L. M. 2017, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 466, 392

    2017

  93. [101]

    2019, Nature, 567, 200

    Pietrzy \'n ski, G., Graczyk, D., Gallenne, A., et al. 2019, Nature, 567, 200

    2019

  94. [102]

    2006, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 445, 545

    Piskunov, A., Kharchenko, N., R \"o ser, S., Schilbach, E., & Scholz, R.-D. 2006, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 445, 545

    2006

  95. [103]

    2021, , 253, 11, 10.3847/1538-4365/abd4e3

    Plachy , E., P \'a l , A., B \'o di , A., et al. 2021, , 253, 11, 10.3847/1538-4365/abd4e3

    2021 doi

  96. [104]

    2010, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 514, A81

    Poehnl, H., & Paunzen, E. 2010, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 514, A81

    2010

  97. [105]

    G., et al

    Prusti, T., De Bruijne, J., Brown, A. G., et al. 2016, Astronomy & astrophysics, 595, A1

    2016

  98. [106]

    R., Winn , J

    Ricker , G. R., Winn , J. N., Vanderspek , R., et al. 2014, in Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, Vol. 9143, Space Telescopes and Instrumentation 2014: Optical, Infrared, and Millimeter Wave, ed. J. Oschmann , Jacobus M., M. Clampin , ...

    2014 doi

  99. [107]

    R., Winn , J

    Ricker , G. R., Winn , J. N., Vanderspek , R., et al. 2015, Journal of Astronomical Telescopes, Instruments, and Systems, 1, 014003, 10.1117/1.JATIS.1.1.014003

    2015 doi

  100. [108]

    C., Lovis , C., Pace , G., Melendez , J., & Naef , D

    Santos , N. C., Lovis , C., Pace , G., Melendez , J., & Naef , D. 2009, , 493, 309, 10.1051/0004-6361:200811093

    2009 doi

  101. [109]

    P., Jiang, G., Bisht, D., Yadav, R., & Rangwal, G

    Sariya, D. P., Jiang, G., Bisht, D., Yadav, R., & Rangwal, G. 2023, New Astronomy, 98, 101938

    2023

  102. [110]

    C., King , J

    Schuler , S. C., King , J. R., Fischer , D. A., Soderblom , D. R., & Jones , B. F. 2003, , 125, 2085, 10.1086/373927

    2003 doi

  103. [111]

    2021, Research in Astronomy and Astrophysics, 21, 124

    Shen, D.-X., Zhang, Y., Li, C.-Y., et al. 2021, Research in Astronomy and Astrophysics, 21, 124

    2021

  104. [112]

    2019, , 487, 4695, 10.1093/mnras/stz1581

    Sikora , J., David-Uraz , A., Chowdhury , S., et al. 2019, , 487, 4695, 10.1093/mnras/stz1581

    2019 doi

  105. [113]

    H., Ann, H

    Sim, G., Lee, S. H., Ann, H. B., & Kim, S. 2019, arXiv preprint arXiv:1907.06872

    2019 arXiv

  106. [114]

    H., Ann , H

    Sim , G., Lee , S. H., Ann , H. B., & Kim , S. 2019, Journal of Korean Astronomical Society, 52, 145, 10.5303/JKAS.2019.52.5.145

    2019 doi

  107. [115]

    2018, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 619, A155

    Soubiran, C., Cantat-Gaudin, T., Romero-G \'o mez, M., et al. 2018, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 619, A155

    2018

  108. [116]

    Southworth , J., Maxted , P. F. L., & Smalley , B. 2004, , 351, 1277, 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2004.07871.x

    2004

  109. [117]

    G., Oelkers , R

    Stassun , K. G., Oelkers , R. J., Paegert , M., et al. 2019, , 158, 138, 10.3847/1538-3881/ab3467

    2019 doi

  110. [118]

    X., Gan, T., & Mann, A

    Sun, Q., Wang, S. X., Gan, T., & Mann, A. W. 2022, Research in Astronomy and Astrophysics, 22, 075008

    2022

  111. [119]

    Tadross , A. L. 2003, , 8, 737, 10.1016/S1384-1076(03)00062-9

    2003 doi

  112. [120]

    M., Saio , H., et al

    Takata , M., Ouazzani , R. M., Saio , H., et al. 2020, , 635, A106, 10.1051/0004-6361/201936297

    2020 doi

  113. [121]

    2022, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 659, A59

    Tarricq, Y., Soubiran, C., Casamiquela, L., et al. 2022, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 659, A59

    2022

  114. [122]

    2021, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 647, A19

    ---. 2021, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 647, A19

    2021

  115. [123]

    W., & Quinn , S

    Torres , G., Latham , D. W., & Quinn , S. N. 2021, , 921, 117, 10.3847/1538-4357/ac1585

    2021 doi

  116. [124]

    2002, Revista Mexicana de Astronom \' a y Astrof \' sica, 14, 33

    Uribe, A., Barrera, R., et al. 2002, Revista Mexicana de Astronom \' a y Astrof \' sica, 14, 33

    2002

  117. [125]

    I., & Jenkins, J

    Vines, J. I., & Jenkins, J. S. 2022, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 513, 2719, 10.1093/mnras/stac956

    2022 doi

  118. [126]

    2022 a , The Astronomical Journal, 164, 40

    Wang, H., Zhang, Y., Zeng, X., et al. 2022 a , The Astronomical Journal, 164, 40

    2022

  119. [127]

    Wang, L., Tanikawa, A., & Fujii, M. S. 2022 b , Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 509, 4713

    2022

  120. [128]

    2002, Chinese Journal of Astronomy and Astrophysics, 2, 481

    Xin, Y., Zhang, X.-B., & Deng, L.-C. 2002, Chinese Journal of Astronomy and Astrophysics, 2, 481

    2002

  121. [129]

    P., et al

    Yadav, R., Glushkhova, E., Sariya, D. P., et al. 2011, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 414, 652

    2011

  122. [130]

    2024, , 167, 100, 10.3847/1538-3881/ad1ff0

    Yalyalieva , L., Chemel , A., Carraro , G., & Glushkova , E. 2024, , 167, 100, 10.3847/1538-3881/ad1ff0

    2024 doi

  123. [131]

    2013, , 776, 112, 10.1088/0004-637X/776/2/112

    Yang , W., Bi , S., Meng , X., & Liu , Z. 2013, , 776, 112, 10.1088/0004-637X/776/2/112

    2013 doi

  124. [132]

    2021, Research in Astronomy and Astrophysics, 21, 227

    Zhuo, J., Deng, L.-C., Wang, K., et al. 2021, Research in Astronomy and Astrophysics, 21, 227

    2021

Pith tools

Reviewed August 9, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.