Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 6 minor 111 references

Minute-cadence Observations of the LAMOST Fields with the TMTS: VI. Absolute Physical Parameters of Contact Binaries

T0 review · 3 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-11 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read The paper reports absolute masses, radii, and luminosities for ten W UMa contact binaries by fitting minute-cadence light curves and radial velocities together, and identifies two systems as likely newly formed contact binaries.

desk verdict Solid, standard contact-binary parameter paper whose published RV phases don't match its own ephemerides; fix that before trusting the masses. read the letter →

arxiv 2412.11545 v1 pith:IW6OHNRU submitted 2024-12-16 astro-ph.SR

Qiqi Xia , Xiaofeng Wang , Kai Li , Xiang Gao , Fangzhou Guo , Jie Lin , Cheng Liu , Jun Mo
show 11 more authors
Haowei Peng Qichun Liu Gaobo Xi Shengyu Yan Xiaojun Jiang Jicheng Zhang Cui-Ying Song Jianrong Shi Xiaoran Ma Danfeng Xiang Wenxiong Li
This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.SR
keywords WUMacontactbinariesabsolutephysicalparametersWilson-DevinneymodelingradialvelocitiesO-Cperiodanalysismagneticactivitystellarevolutionclosebinarystars
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 reports absolute physical parameters—masses, radii, luminosities, mass ratios, inclinations, and fill-out factors—for ten short-period W UMa contact binaries, obtained by fitting minute-cadence photometric light curves and radial-velocity measurements together in a Roche-geometry binary model. All ten systems turn out to be W-type shallow or medium contact binaries, and their unequal light-curve maxima (the O'Connell effect) can be reproduced by adding a dark spot on one component. Eclipse-timing analysis finds long-term orbital period changes in nine systems and cyclic variations in three, while spectral subtraction identifies strong chromospheric activity in four. In eight systems the currently more massive component is a main-sequence star and the less massive component has evolved beyond the main sequence; J0132 and J0913 instead sit near the detached/contact boundary and may be newly formed contact binaries. If these parameters hold, they enlarge the small sample of contact binaries with absolute masses and radii anchored by both photometry and spectroscopy.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing machinery is the Wilson–Devinney (W-D) Roche-geometry model, which solves the phase-folded minute-cadence light curve and the measured radial velocities simultaneously. Its adjustable parameters include the orbital semimajor axis $a$, systemic velocity $V_\gamma$, inclination $i$, mass ratio $q=M_2/M_1$, secondary temperature $T_2$, primary luminosity $L_1$, and common surface potential $\Omega_1=\Omega_2$; the fill-out factor is $f=(\Omega-\Omega_{\rm in})/(\Omega_{\rm out}-\Omega_{\rm in})$. The evolutionary interpretation is carried by the empirical angular momentum–total mass relation $J_{\rm orb}=1.24\times10^{52}M_T^{3/5}P^{1/3}q(1+q)^{-2}$, which places J0132 and J0913 close to the detached/contact boundary, and by ZAMS/TAMS tracks from a binary stellar evolution code used to classify component evolutionary states.

What would settle it

Take new medium- or high-resolution spectra for these ten targets at orbital phases covering both velocity extrema; if the resulting semi-amplitudes or systemic velocities differ from the W-D solutions by more than the formal errors, the absolute parameters are biased. A single such re-measurement for J0132, with only a handful of RVs, would already test the claimed mass ratio.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On the paper's own terms, the discovery is that simultaneous modeling of the ten systems' high-cadence light curves and their first measured radial velocities fixes the absolute physical parameters of each binary: component masses, radii, luminosities, mass ratio, inclination, fill-out factor, and separation. All ten are W-type contact binaries with shallow or medium fill-out, and a single dark spot accounts for the observed O'Connell effect. The O-C diagrams show long-term period growth or shrinkage in nine systems and periodic residuals in three that are attributed to possible third bodies or magnetic cycles. The evolutionary states split the sample: eight systems have a main-sequence primary and an evolved secondary, whereas J0132 has both components on the main sequence and J0913 has both above the terminal-age main sequence; from their low fill-out factors and position in the orbital angular momentum–total mass plane, the paper concludes that J0132 and J0913 are probably newly formed contact binaries that recently evolved from detached systems.

Load-bearing premise

The results stand or fall on the assumption that the sparse radial-velocity measurements—as few as three epochs, often near one quadrature—pin down the full velocity orbits and hence the component masses.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If the fitted parameters are correct, these ten systems can be added to the small set of contact binaries whose absolute masses, radii, and luminosities rest on both photometry and spectroscopy, providing anchors for statistical studies of W-type binaries.
  • The measured mass ratios for the four previously studied targets agree with earlier photometric-only solutions, so the simultaneous method can be extended to other targets in the same survey sample.
  • For J0047, J0638, and J1402, the computed mass-transfer timescale is only 1–4% of the thermal timescale, so their decreasing periods are more plausibly driven by angular momentum loss than by conservative mass transfer.
  • If J0132, J1300, and J1402 host third bodies, J0132's companion would be substellar at about $0.066\,M_\odot$, while J1300 and J1402 would have M-dwarf companions; magnetic activity remains a viable alternative, especially for J1402.
  • The two candidate newly formed contact binaries, J0132 and J0913, should show the relationship between angular momentum loss and initial contact in their future period evolution.

Reading between the lines

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

  • A natural extension is to apply the same simultaneous-fitting approach to other systems in the minute-cadence sample that currently lack radial velocities; a small set of such calibrators could train a machine-learning surrogate for the model and produce a large catalog of absolute parameters.
  • The number of radial-velocity epochs per system is very small—sometimes only three—so the quoted internal uncertainties should be treated as lower bounds; adding more spectra at previously unsampled orbital phases is the direct way to test whether the mass ratios are stable.
  • If J0132 and J0913 are indeed newly formed contact binaries, their light-curve asymmetries and spot configurations might change on year timescales, and their orbital periods might show correlated changes; tracking these systems over the next several years could distinguish spot activity from genuine period evolution.
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. This paper analyzes ten W UMa-type contact binaries selected from the TMTS catalog and LAMOST medium-resolution spectra. Using simultaneous Wilson-Devinney fits to TMTS light curves and LAMOST radial velocities, the authors derive orbital parameters, mass ratios, inclinations, fill-out factors, and absolute masses, radii, and luminosities. They model the O'Connell effect with a dark spot, analyze O-C diagrams to obtain period-change rates and possible third-body/Applegate variations for three systems, measure H-alpha emission to identify active systems, and discuss the evolutionary states of the components. Four previously studied targets provide a literature cross-check for the mass ratios.

Significance. If the absolute parameters are reliable, this is a useful addition to the growing sample of contact binaries with spectroscopically determined masses and radii, and it provides the first such measurements for six of the ten systems. The paper deserves credit for using public survey data, providing machine-readable tables, and explicitly acknowledging degeneracies in the spot and third-body/Applegate interpretations. The consistency of the mass ratios with previous studies for J0132, J0305, J1300, and J1402 is a genuine sanity check. However, the central claim depends on radial-velocity phase bookkeeping and on sparse RV sampling, and the O-C analysis uses optimistic error assignments; these issues must be resolved before the absolute parameters can be used as ground truth.

major comments (3)
  1. [Table 3 vs Table 5; §4.1] The orbital phases in Table 3 are not reproducible from the corrected ephemerides listed in Table 5, which §4.1 states were used to convert BJD to phase. For example, J0132 at BJD 2458450.02562 with T0 = 2458080.255492 and P = 0.400938 gives (2458450.02562 − 2458080.255492)/0.400938 ≈ 922.26 cycles, i.e., phase ≈ 0.26, not the listed 0.30095; the second J0132 epoch differs by about 0.013 cycles from its listed value. For J0305, BJD 2458410.17413 with T0 = 2454085.459429 and P = 0.246983 gives phase ≈ 0.17, not the listed 0.21550. The offsets are not a constant phase shift, so they cannot be absorbed by redefining phase zero. Because the W-D simultaneous fit uses RV phases to determine K1, K2, and Vgamma, and hence q, a, and the absolute masses in Table 7, the authors must either correct Table 3 or explicitly document which ephemeris and which time columns were actually entered into the fit; otherwise the central parameter table is not reproducible and the quoted internal uncertainties understate the error.
  2. [Table 1 and Table 3; §4.1] Several targets have very sparse radial-velocity coverage, and the paper does not quantify the resulting systematic error. Table 1 lists only three LAMOST MR exposures for J1300, J1402, and J2236, and the excerpted rows for J0047 contain three RV epochs all between phases 0.71 and 0.83 (Table 3). With no velocities near the opposite quadrature, K1, K2, and Vgamma are not independently pinned down; because the masses scale roughly as (K1+K2)^3/sin^3 i, small phase errors propagate directly into Table 7 and into the evolutionary statements in Section 5.3. Please show the complete RV table, state the number of usable epochs per target, and test robustness, for example by dropping one epoch per target or by fitting with the photometric mass ratio held fixed.
  3. [Figure 3 caption; Table 5; §5.2] The treatment of timing uncertainties is not conservative enough to support the quoted precision. The Figure 3 caption states that errors not given in Table 4 are set to 0.001 d, yet many literature minima come from heterogeneous surveys with unknown systematics; this choice dominates the least-squares weighting and yields formal errors such as 7.00 ± 0.01 × 10^-8 d/yr for J0305 in Table 5. These period-change rates feed into the mass-transfer rates in Table 5, the timescale comparison in Table 8, and the third-body/Applegate discussion in Section 5.2. Please re-fit the O-C diagrams with realistic per-point errors or survey-by-survey weighting, and report the resulting range of dp/dt.
minor comments (6)
  1. [§2.2] The paragraph labeled (iii) for J1300 contains several sentences about J0913 that appear to belong to a separate target description; please move them to the correct system.
  2. [§2.2(iv)] The text reports a periodic modulation of 10.14 ± 1.13 days for J1402, but Table 6 lists P3 = 17.9 ± 0.5 yr; please check the units and reconcile with the cited literature.
  3. [§5.1] For J0132 and J0305, the paper inverts the mass ratio before comparing with previous studies and then suggests that the temperature labels may be swapped; this ambiguity should be stated explicitly in a table note, because swapping T1 and T2 would change the W-type classification and the evolutionary interpretation.
  4. [Throughout] There are several typographical errors that should be corrected in a final pass: 'Chaina' in §2.1, 'exposrue' in Table 1, 'Normarlized flux' in Figure 7, 'photospere' in §4.1, and 'binaires' in §5.2.
  5. [Equation (2)] The typesetting of Equation (2) is garbled, especially the Irwin formula in the second line; please provide a cleanly formatted version with all defined symbols.
  6. [Table 1] The columns NLRS and NMRS are labeled 'exposure times' but the entries are integers that appear to be exposure counts; please rename these columns or clarify the units.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: absolute physical parameters derive from independent simultaneous W-D fits to TMTS light curves and LAMOST RVs, not from redefined inputs.

full rationale

The paper's central quantitative claims—masses, radii, luminosities, and evolutionary states—are produced by simultaneous Wilson-Devinney fits to TMTS light curves and LAMOST medium-resolution radial velocities (Section 4.1), with T1 fixed from LAMOST/Gaia and periods taken from external ephemerides. The derived M1, M2, R1, R2 are not defined in terms of these inputs by construction; they are constrained by independent RV semi-amplitudes and light-curve morphology. Self-citations to the TMTS-V catalog (Guo et al. 2024) enter only for target selection and initial periods, not as load-bearing evidence for the fitted parameters. The third-body masses and mass-transfer rates are standard applications of Irwin (1952), Equation 3, and Equation 4 to the separately fitted O-C and W-D quantities; they inherit uncertainties but are not circular. The apparent inconsistency between Table 3 phases and Table 5 ephemerides is a serious internal data-quality concern that would bias the W-D inputs, but it is a correctness risk, not a circularity: the fit still reduces to independent data rather than to its own outputs.

Assumptions & free parameters 11 free parameters · 9 assumptions · 4 invented entities

The W-D solutions introduce 6-9 free parameters per target (T2, q, i, Omega, L1, Vgamma, plus 3 spot parameters) and the O-C analysis adds a quadratic and up to 5 cyclic parameters each for three targets. The modeling rests on standard assumptions (circular orbits, fixed gravity darkening, fixed T1) and on external theoretical grids (BSE ZAMS/TAMS, Eker boundary). The only genuinely new postulated entities are the three candidate third bodies and the dark spots.

free parameters (11)
  • Secondary effective temperature T2 (per target) = 4610 to 6165 K, Table 7
    Free in W-D fit with T1 fixed from LAMOST or Gaia; controls radii and luminosities.
  • Mass ratio q = M2/M1 (per target) = 1.07 to 5.47, Table 7
    Adjusted in simultaneous LC+RV fit; drives mass and angular momentum results.
  • Orbital inclination i (per target) = 61.5 to 87.6 deg, Table 7
    Adjusted in W-D fit; affects light-curve shape and masses.
  • Dimensionless surface potential Omega1=Omega2 = 3.83 to 9.75, Table 7
    Adjusted in W-D fit; defines fill-out factor.
  • Primary monochromatic luminosity L1 (L-band) = 0.210 to 0.567 of total, Table 7
    Adjusted in W-D fit; yields L1 and L2 via Stefan-Boltzmann law.
  • Systemic radial velocity Vgamma = -38.7 to 38.4 km/s, Table 7
    Free parameter in RV fit; sets the velocity zero point.
  • Spot longitude (per target) = 35 to 310 deg, Table 7
    Free spot parameter; latitude fixed at 90 deg by assumption.
  • Spot angular radius (per target) = 9.3 to 24.2 deg, Table 7
    Free spot parameter controlling O'Connell effect amplitude.
  • Spot temperature factor (per target) = 0.66 to 0.80, Table 7
    Dark spot temperature relative to photosphere; free in fit.
  • O-C quadratic period change dp/dt (per target) = -38.03e-8 to 41.79e-8 d/yr, Table 5
    Fitted to eclipse timing residuals; interpreted as mass transfer or AML.
  • O-C cyclic parameters A, e, omega, P3, T3 for J0132/J1300/J1402 = A 0.00134-0.00628 d; P3 12.1-17.9 yr, Table 6
    Fitted to residual O-C; used to estimate third-body mass via LTTE.
assumptions (9)
  • domain assumption Orbital eccentricity fixed to e=0 for all targets
    Section 4.1: 'The orbital eccentricity e was fixed to zero, consistent with the assumption that contact binaries typically have circular orbits due to strong tidal interactions.'
  • domain assumption Gravity darkening g1,2=0.32 and bolometric albedo A1,2=0.5
    Section 4.1: adopted following Lucy (1967) and Rucinski (1969); standard for convective envelopes of late-type stars.
  • domain assumption Primary temperature T1 fixed to LAMOST/Gaia values
    Section 4.1: T1 fixed from LAMOST LR average or Gaia; T2 fitted as ratio. A wrong T1 rescales all absolute parameters.
  • ad hoc to paper Spot latitude fixed at 90 degrees
    Section 4.1: latitude fixed because 'the most reliable parameter of a spot is the longitude'; this constrains the spot model and affects spot size and temperature.
  • standard math Limb-darkening coefficients from van Hamme (1993) square-root law
    Section 4.1: internally computed by W-D code; standard in the field.
  • domain assumption Conservative mass transfer formula dP/P = -3 dM1 (1/M1 - 1/M2)
    Section 5.2, Eq. 3: used to convert dp/dt into dM1/dt; ignores mass and angular momentum loss from the system.
  • domain assumption Inactive template spectra from Huang et al. (2018) are suitable for spectral subtraction
    Section 4.2: template temperatures matched within 200 K; required for H-alpha EW activity measurements.
  • domain assumption ZAMS/TAMS lines from BSE (Hurley et al. 2002)
    Section 5.3: used to classify components as main-sequence or evolved; theoretical lines have their own uncertainties.
  • domain assumption J-M boundary line from Eker et al. (2006) separates detached and overcontact binaries
    Section 5.3: used to argue J0132 and J0913 are near the boundary and possibly newly formed; calibration sample dependent.
invented entities (4)
  • Third body around J0132 (possible brown dwarf) independent evidence
    purpose: Explains 15.3 yr cyclic O-C variation via light-travel time
    Predicted M3=0.066 Msun and P3=15.3 yr give a falsifiable handle for future RV monitoring or direct detection, though the authors note magnetic activity could also explain the wobble.
  • Third body around J1300 (M dwarf) independent evidence
    purpose: Explains 12.1 yr cyclic O-C variation
    M3=0.312 Msun, spectral type M3, l3/L=1.66%; could be searched for spectroscopically or via astrometry.
  • Third body around J1402 (M5.5 dwarf) independent evidence
    purpose: Explains 17.9 yr cyclic O-C variation
    M3=0.134 Msun, l3/L=0.51%; testable by future observations, but Applegate mechanism is also considered.
  • Dark starspots (one per target)
    purpose: Model the O'Connell effect in the TMTS light curves
    Spots are parameterized to fit the unequal maxima; no direct imaging or independent spectroscopic confirmation is provided.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Minute-cadence Observations of the LAMOST Fields with the TMTS: VI. Absolute Physical Parameters of Contact Binaries." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/IW6OHNRU

@misc{pith2026241211545,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Minute-cadence Observations of the LAMOST Fields with the TMTS: VI. Absolute Physical Parameters of Contact Binaries},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/IW6OHNRU}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2412.11545}
}
abstract

With the development of wide-field surveys, a large amount of data on short-period W UMa contact binaries have been obtained. Continuous and uninterrupted light curves as well as high-resolution spectroscopic data are crucial in determining the absolute physical parameters. Targets with both TMTS light curves and LAMOST medium-resolution spectra were selected. The absolute physical parameters were inferred with the W-D code for ten systems, all of them are W-type shallow or medium contact binaries. The O'Connell effect observed in the light curves can be explained by adding a spot on the primary or secondary component in the models. According to O-C analysis, the orbital periods exhibit a long-term increasing or decreasing trend, amongst which J0132, J1300, and J1402 show periodic variations that may be attributed to the presence of a third body or magnetic activity cycles. Spectral subtraction analysis revealed that the equivalent width of H$\alpha$ indicates strong magnetic activity in J0047, J0305, J0638, and J1402. Among the 10 selected binary systems, except for J0132 and J0913, the more massive components are found to be main-sequence stars while the less massive components have evolved off the main sequence. In J0132, both components are in the main sequence, whereas both components of J0913 lie above the terminal-age main sequence. Based on the relationship between orbital angular momentum and total mass for these two systems, as well as their low fill-out factors, it is possible that these two systems are newly formed contact binaries, having recently evolved from the detached configuration.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2412.11545 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Phase-folded light curves of ten targets from TMTS. The L-band is the TMTS Luminous filter. All of these targets have been identified as contact binaries or eclipsing binary candidates by the Asteroid Terrestrial￾impact Last Alert System (ATLAS) (Heinze et al. 2018) or Gaia Data Release 3 (Panchal & Joshi 2021), and their orbital periods have been determined, respectively. The periods, which were used for the phase-… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. The LAMOST low-resolution spectra of eight targets. The spectral types and positions of some characteristic spectral lines are labeled in the plot. Each spectrum is accompanied by the corresponding name of the target on the right side. a long-term trend of increasing or decreasing periods. Therefore, we fitted their O-C with a quadratic polynomial. Polynomial coefficients were determined using the least squares meth… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. The O-C diagram of the 10 targets presented in this paper. The top panel shows the curve (O − C)1 determined by equation 1. The residuals, which remove the quadratic correction term from the (O − C)1 curve, are plotted in the lower panel. The units of the (O − C)1 and Residual are in days. The errors not given in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (6 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: The O-C diagram of J0132, J1300 and J1402 with periodic variations. The top panel shows the (O − C)1 curve determined by Equation 1 as in the top panel of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Left panel: Theoretical light curves (orange solid line) fitted by W-D code compared to all available TMTS observations (grey dots) for the ten targets. One dark spot is added to the primary or secondary star for each target. Right panel: RVs and fitted curves of W-D c…
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Geometrical structures of ten targets at phase 0, 0.25, 0.5, and 0.75. The areas marked with blue cross symbols represent the added dark spots on the components. 4.2. Spectroscopic Investigation When the photosphere or chromosphere of a star exhibits magnetic activity,…
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: The Hα region of LAMOST LR spectra (black line), synthetic spectra (yellow line) and subtracted spectra (blue line) for the eight targets. The EWs of Hα are shown in each panel for each spectra, with units in Å. According to the W-D code DC and LC program, the orbital …
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Mass-luminosity diagram (left panel) and mass-radius diagram (right panel). The solid and dotted lines represent the ZAMS and TAMS lines constructed using the binary star evolution code provided by Hurley et al. (2002). The solid and open stars for different colors rep…
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: The relation between orbital angular momentum and total mass for detached and contact binaries. The detached binaries (Eker et al. 2006) and the contact binary (Yakut & Eggleton 2005; Eker et al. 2006) are separated by the boundary line (Eker et al. 2006). The black cr…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

111 extracted references · 26 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    2024, NewA, 112, 102270, doi: 10.1016/j.newast.2024.102270

    Adalalı, S., & Soydugan, E. 2024, NewA, 112, 102270, doi: 10.1016/j.newast.2024.102270

    arXiv 2024

  2. [2]

    2000, AJ, 119, 1901, doi: 10.1086/301321

    Akerlof, C., Amrose, S., Balsano, R., et al. 2000, AJ, 119, 1901, doi: 10.1086/301321

    doi:10.1086/301321 2000

  3. [3]

    B., & Stępień, K

    Alton, K. B., & Stępień, K. 2021, AcA, 71, 123, doi: 10.32023/0001-5237/71.2.4

    work page doi:10.32023/0001-5237/71.2.4 2021

  4. [4]

    2015, PASP, 127, 742, doi: 10.1086/682388

    Lapasset, E. 2015, PASP, 127, 742, doi: 10.1086/682388

    work page doi:10.1086/682388 2015

  5. [5]

    Applegate, J. H. 1992, ApJ, 385, 621, doi: 10.1086/170967

    doi:10.1086/170967 1992

  6. [6]

    Barden, S. C. 1985, ApJ, 295, 162, doi: 10.1086/163361

    doi:10.1086/163361 1985

  7. [7]

    Baron, E., & Hauschildt, P. H. 2007, A&A, 468, 255, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20066755

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20066755 2007

  8. [8]

    C., Kulkarni, S

    Bellm, E. C., Kulkarni, S. R., Graham, M. J., et al. 2019, PASP, 131, 018002, doi: 10.1088/1538-3873/aaecbe

    doi:10.1088/1538-3873/aaecbe 2019

Show all 111 references
  1. [9]

    Berdyugina, S. V. 2005, Living Reviews in Solar Physics, 2, 8, doi: 10.12942/lrsp-2005-8

    2005 doi

  2. [10]

    1970, Vistas in Astronomy, 12, 217, doi: 10.1016/0083-6656(70)90041-3

    Binnendijk, L. 1970, Vistas in Astronomy, 12, 217, doi: 10.1016/0083-6656(70)90041-3

    1970 doi

  3. [11]

    2003, Information Bulletin on Variable Stars, 5403, 1

    Blattler, E., & Diethelm, R. 2003, Information Bulletin on Variable Stars, 5403, 1

    2003

  4. [12]

    E., & Papageorgiou, A

    Christopoulou, P. E., & Papageorgiou, A. 2013, AJ, 146, 157, doi: 10.1088/0004-6256/146/6/157

    2013 doi

  5. [13]

    T., Jayasinghe, T., Stanek, K

    Christy, C. T., Jayasinghe, T., Stanek, K. Z., et al. 2023, MNRAS, 519, 5271, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stac3801

    2023 doi

  6. [14]

    Cox, A. N. 2000, Allen’s astrophysical quantities

    2000

  7. [15]

    2012, Research in Astronomy and Astrophysics, 12, 1197, doi: 10.1088/1674-4527/12/9/003

    Cui, X.-Q., Zhao, Y.-H., Chu, Y.-Q., et al. 2012, Research in Astronomy and Astrophysics, 12, 1197, doi: 10.1088/1674-4527/12/9/003

    2012 doi

  8. [16]

    Deb, S., & Singh, H. P. 2011, MNRAS, 412, 1787, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2010.18016.x

    2011

  9. [17]

    2011, Information Bulletin on Variable Stars, 5965, 1

    Demircan, Y., Gurol, B., Gokay, G., et al. 2011, Information Bulletin on Variable Stars, 5965, 1

    2011

  10. [18]

    2005, Information Bulletin on Variable Stars, 5653, 1 —

    Diethelm, R. 2005, Information Bulletin on Variable Stars, 5653, 1 —. 2006, Information Bulletin on Variable Stars, 5713, 1 —. 2007, Information Bulletin on Variable Stars, 5781, 1 —. 2009a, Information Bulletin on Variable Stars, 5871, 1 —. 2009b, Information Bulletin on Vari...

    2005

  11. [19]

    2023, MNRAS, 525, 4596, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad2565

    Ding, X., Ji, K., Li, X., et al. 2023, MNRAS, 525, 4596, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad2565

    2023 doi

  12. [20]

    2021, PASJ, 73, 786, doi: 10.1093/pasj/psab042

    Ding, X., Ji, K.-F., & Li, X.-Z. 2021, PASJ, 73, 786, doi: 10.1093/pasj/psab042

    2021 doi

  13. [21]

    Dvorak, S. W. 2005, Information Bulletin on Variable Stars, 5603, 1

    2005

  14. [22]

    1999, Turkish Journal of Physics, 23, 357

    Eker, Z. 1999, Turkish Journal of Physics, 23, 357

    1999

  15. [23]

    2006, MNRAS, 373, 1483, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2006.11073.x

    Eker, Z., Demircan, O., Bilir, S., & Karataş, Y. 2006, MNRAS, 373, 1483, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2006.11073.x

    2006

  16. [24]

    Flannery, B. P. 1976, ApJ, 205, 217, doi: 10.1086/154266 Gaia Collaboration, Prusti, T., de Bruijne, J. H. J., et al. 2016, A&A, 595, A1, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201629272 Gaia Collaboration, Brown, A. G. A., Vallenari, A., et al. 2018, A&A, 616, A1, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201833051

    1976 doi

  17. [25]

    1973, Veroeffentlichungen der Sternwarte Sonneberg, 7, 607 Górski, K

    Gessner, H., & Meinunger, I. 1973, Veroeffentlichungen der Sternwarte Sonneberg, 7, 607 Górski, K. M., Hivon, E., Banday, A. J., et al. 2005, ApJ, 622, 759, doi: 10.1086/427976

    1973 doi

  18. [26]

    F., Li, K., Hu, S

    Guo, D. F., Li, K., Hu, S. M., & Chen, X. 2018, PASP, 130, 064201, doi: 10.1088/1538-3873/aaba50

    2018 doi

  19. [27]

    2024, MNRAS, 528, 6997, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stae404

    Guo, F., Lin, J., Wang, X., et al. 2024, MNRAS, 528, 6997, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stae404

    2024 doi

  20. [28]

    2020, Research in Astronomy and Astrophysics, 20, 179, doi: 10.1088/1674-4527/20/11/179

    Guo, Y.-N., Li, K., Xia, Q.-Q., et al. 2020, Research in Astronomy and Astrophysics, 20, 179, doi: 10.1088/1674-4527/20/11/179

    2020 doi

  21. [29]

    Hauschildt, P. H. 1993, JQSRT, 50, 301, doi: 10.1016/0022-4073(93)90080-2

    1993 doi

  22. [30]

    H., & Baron, E

    Hauschildt, P. H., & Baron, E. 2006, A&A, 451, 273, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20053846

    2006 doi

  23. [31]

    N., Tonry, J

    Heinze, A. N., Tonry, J. L., Denneau, L., et al. 2018, AJ, 156, 241, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/aae47f

    2018 doi

  24. [32]

    I., Harrison, T

    Hoffman, D. I., Harrison, T. E., & McNamara, B. J. 2009, AJ, 138, 466, doi: 10.1088/0004-6256/138/2/466

    2009 doi

  25. [33]

    1966, Astronomische Nachrichten, 289, 139, doi: 10.1002/asna.19662890306 Honková, K., Juryšek, J., Lehký, M., et al

    Hoffmeister, C. 1966, Astronomische Nachrichten, 289, 139, doi: 10.1002/asna.19662890306 Honková, K., Juryšek, J., Lehký, M., et al. 2014, Open European Journal on Variable Stars, 165, 1

    1966 doi

  26. [34]

    2015, Open European Journal on Variable Stars, 168, 1, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.1606.00369 Hoňková, K., Juryšek, J., Lehký, M., et al

    Honkova, K., Jurysek, J., Lehky, M., et al. 2015, Open European Journal on Variable Stars, 168, 1, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.1606.00369 Hoňková, K., Juryšek, J., Lehký, M., et al. 2013, Open European Journal on Variable Stars, 160, 1

    2015 doi arXiv

  27. [35]

    Hrivnak, B. J. 1988, ApJ, 335, 319, doi: 10.1086/166930 —. 1989, ApJ, 340, 458, doi: 10.1086/167408

    1988 doi

  28. [36]

    W., Chen, B

    Huang, Y., Liu, X. W., Chen, B. Q., et al. 2018, AJ, 156, 90, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/aacda5

    2018 doi

  29. [37]

    2005, Information Bulletin on Variable Stars, 5643, 1 —

    Hubscher, J. 2005, Information Bulletin on Variable Stars, 5643, 1 —. 2014, Information Bulletin on Variable Stars, 6118, 1 —. 2017, Information Bulletin on Variable Stars, 6196, 1, doi: 10.22444/IBVS.6196 Absolute Physical Parameters of Contact Binaries 21

    2005 doi

  30. [38]

    Hubscher, J., Braune, W., & Lehmann, P. B. 2013, Information Bulletin on Variable Stars, 6048, 1

    2013

  31. [39]

    Hubscher, J., & Lehmann, P. B. 2012, Information Bulletin on Variable Stars, 6026, 1

    2012

  32. [40]

    B., & Walter, F

    Hubscher, J., Lehmann, P. B., & Walter, F. 2012, Information Bulletin on Variable Stars, 6010, 1

    2012

  33. [41]

    2011, Information Bulletin on Variable Stars, 5959, 1

    Hubscher, J., & Monninger, G. 2011, Information Bulletin on Variable Stars, 5959, 1

    2011

  34. [42]

    2005, Information Bulletin on Variable Stars, 5657, 1 —

    Hubscher, J., Paschke, A., & Walter, F. 2005, Information Bulletin on Variable Stars, 5657, 1 —. 2006, Information Bulletin on Variable Stars, 5731, 1

    2005

  35. [43]

    2008, Information Bulletin on Variable Stars, 5830, 1

    Hubscher, J., Steinbach, H.-M., & Walter, F. 2008, Information Bulletin on Variable Stars, 5830, 1

    2008

  36. [44]

    R., Tout, C

    Hurley, J. R., Tout, C. A., & Pols, O. R. 2002, MNRAS, 329, 897, doi: 10.1046/j.1365-8711.2002.05038.x

    2002

  37. [45]

    Irwin, J. B. 1952, ApJ, 116, 211, doi: 10.1086/145604 Juryšek, J., Hoňková, K., Šmelcer, L., et al. 2017, Open European Journal on Variable Stars, 179, 1

    1952 doi

  38. [46]

    P., Popov, V

    Kjurkchieva, D. P., Popov, V. A., Eneva, Y., & Petrov, N. I. 2019, Research in Astronomy and Astrophysics, 19, 014, doi: 10.1088/1674-4527/19/1/14

    2019 doi

  39. [47]

    P., Popov, V

    Kjurkchieva, D. P., Popov, V. A., Lyubenova Vasileva, D., & Petrov, N. I. 2018, Research in Astronomy and Astrophysics, 18, 046, doi: 10.1088/1674-4527/18/4/46

    2018 doi

  40. [48]

    K., & van Woerden, H

    Kwee, K. K., & van Woerden, H. 1956, BAN, 12, 327

    1956

  41. [49]

    2017, Information Bulletin on Variable Stars, 6230, 1, doi: 10.22444/IBVS.6230

    Lampens, P., Van Cauteren, P., Ayiomamitis, A., et al. 2017, Information Bulletin on Variable Stars, 6230, 1, doi: 10.22444/IBVS.6230

    2017 doi

  42. [50]

    F., & Rodonò, M

    Lanza, A. F., & Rodonò, M. 1999, A&A, 349, 887 —. 2002, Astronomische Nachrichten, 323, 424, doi: 10.1002/1521-3994(200208)323:3/4<424:: AID-ASNA424>3.0.CO;2-1 Latković, O., Čeki, A., & Lazarević, S. 2021, ApJS, 254, 10, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/abeb23

    1999 doi

  43. [51]

    W., & Park, J.-H

    Lee, J. W., & Park, J.-H. 2018, PASP, 130, 034201, doi: 10.1088/1538-3873/aaa390 Lehký, M., Hoňková, K., Šmelcer, L., et al. 2021, Open European Journal on Variable Stars, 211, 1, doi: 10.5817/OEJV2021-0211

    2018 doi

  44. [52]

    2007, Information Bulletin on Variable Stars, 5784, 1

    Lewandowski, M., Niedzielski, A., & Maciejewski, G. 2007, Information Bulletin on Variable Stars, 5784, 1

    2007

  45. [53]

    2018, NewA, 59, 60, doi: 10.1016/j.newast.2017.09.004

    Li, K. 2018, NewA, 59, 60, doi: 10.1016/j.newast.2017.09.004

    2018 doi

  46. [54]

    2022, AJ, 164, 202, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/ac8ff2

    Li, K., Gao, X., Liu, X.-Y., et al. 2022, AJ, 164, 202, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/ac8ff2

    2022 doi

  47. [55]

    M., Guo, D

    Li, K., Hu, S. M., Guo, D. F., et al. 2015, AJ, 149, 120, doi: 10.1088/0004-6256/149/4/120

    2015 doi

  48. [56]

    2021a, ApJ, 922, 122, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac242f —

    Li, K., Xia, Q.-Q., Kim, C.-H., et al. 2021a, ApJ, 922, 122, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac242f —. 2021b, AJ, 162, 13, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/abfc53

    doi

  49. [57]

    2024a, MNRAS, 527, 3982, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad3251

    Li, L.-Z., Li, K., Gao, X., et al. 2024a, MNRAS, 527, 3982, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad3251

    doi

  50. [58]

    2024b, ApJS, 271, 32, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/ad226a

    Li, X.-Z., Zhu, Q.-F., Ding, X., et al. 2024b, ApJS, 271, 32, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/ad226a

    doi

  51. [59]

    2022, MNRAS, 509, 2362, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stab2812 —

    Lin, J., Wang, X., Mo, J., et al. 2022, MNRAS, 509, 2362, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stab2812 —. 2023a, MNRAS, 523, 2172, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad994

    2022 doi

  52. [60]

    2023b, Nature Astronomy, 7, 223, doi: 10.1038/s41550-022-01783-z

    Lin, J., Wu, C., Wang, X., et al. 2023b, Nature Astronomy, 7, 223, doi: 10.1038/s41550-022-01783-z

    doi

  53. [61]

    2024, Nature Astronomy, 8, 491, doi: 10.1038/s41550-023-02188-2

    Lin, J., Wu, C., Xiong, H., et al. 2024, Nature Astronomy, 8, 491, doi: 10.1038/s41550-023-02188-2

    2024 doi

  54. [62]

    R., Vera-Ciro, C., Murray, C

    Lindner, R. R., Vera-Ciro, C., Murray, C. E., et al. 2015, AJ, 149, 138, doi: 10.1088/0004-6256/149/4/138

    2015 doi

  55. [63]

    2019, Research in Astronomy and Astrophysics, 19, 075, doi: 10.1088/1674-4527/19/5/75

    Liu, N., Fu, J.-N., Zong, W., et al. 2019, Research in Astronomy and Astrophysics, 19, 075, doi: 10.1088/1674-4527/19/5/75

    2019 doi

  56. [64]

    P., Qian, S

    Liu, N. P., Qian, S. B., Liao, W. P., Huang, Y., & Yuan, Z. L. 2023a, AJ, 165, 259, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/acd04e

    doi

  57. [65]

    1991, Ap&SS, 183, 237

    Liu, X., & Tan, H. 1991, Ap&SS, 183, 237

    1991

  58. [66]

    2023b, MNRAS, 519, 5760, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad026

    Liu, X.-Y., Li, K., Michel, R., et al. 2023b, MNRAS, 519, 5760, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad026

    doi

  59. [67]

    Loeb, A., & Gaudi, B. S. 2003, ApJL, 588, L117, doi: 10.1086/375551

    2003 doi

  60. [68]

    J., & Rush, B

    Lu, W., Hrivnak, B. J., & Rush, B. W. 2007, AJ, 133, 255, doi: 10.1086/509604

    2007 doi

  61. [69]

    Lucy, L. B. 1967, ZA, 65, 89 —. 1968a, ApJ, 153, 877, doi: 10.1086/149712 —. 1968b, ApJ, 151, 1123, doi: 10.1086/149510 —. 1976, ApJ, 205, 208, doi: 10.1086/154265

    1967 doi

  62. [70]

    B., & Wilson, R

    Lucy, L. B., & Wilson, R. E. 1979, ApJ, 231, 502, doi: 10.1086/157212

    1979 doi

  63. [71]

    L., Zhao, Y.-H., Zhao, G., et al

    Luo, A. L., Zhao, Y.-H., Zhao, G., et al. 2015, Research in Astronomy and Astrophysics, 15, 1095, doi: 10.1088/1674-4527/15/8/002

    2015 doi

  64. [72]

    M., Prince, T

    Marsh, F. M., Prince, T. A., Mahabal, A. A., et al. 2017, MNRAS, 465, 4678, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stw2110

    2017 doi

  65. [73]

    J., Laher, R

    Masci, F. J., Laher, R. R., Rusholme, B., et al. 2019, PASP, 131, 018003, doi: 10.1088/1538-3873/aae8ac

    2019 doi

  66. [74]

    Nelson, R. H. 2007, Information Bulletin on Variable Stars, 5760, 1 —. 2008, Information Bulletin on Variable Stars, 5820, 1 —. 2009a, Information Bulletin on Variable Stars, 5875, 1 —. 2009b, Information Bulletin on Variable Stars, 5875, 1 —. 2013, Information Bulletin on Var...

    2007

  67. [75]

    2018, Information Bulletin on Variable Stars, 6244, 1, doi: 10.22444/IBVS.6244

    Pagel, L. 2018, Information Bulletin on Variable Stars, 6244, 1, doi: 10.22444/IBVS.6244

    2018 doi

  68. [76]

    2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2405.18618, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2405.18618

    Paki, E., & Poro, A. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2405.18618, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2405.18618

    2024 doi arXiv

  69. [77]

    Panchal, A., & Joshi, Y. C. 2021, AJ, 161, 221, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/abea0c

    2021 doi

  70. [78]

    E., et al

    Papageorgiou, A., Christopoulou, P.-E., Ferreira Lopes, C. E., et al. 2023, AJ, 165, 80, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/aca65a

    2023 doi

  71. [79]

    V., Evans, A., Banerjee, D

    Pavlenko, Y. V., Evans, A., Banerjee, D. P. K., et al. 2018, A&A, 615, A120, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201832717

    2018 doi

  72. [80]

    2017, AJ, 154, 260, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/aa9438

    Pi, Q.-f., Zhang, L.-y., Bi, S.-l., et al. 2017, AJ, 154, 260, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/aa9438

    2017 doi

  73. [81]

    1997, AcA, 47, 467, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.astro-ph/9712146 —

    Pojmanski, G. 1997, AcA, 47, 467, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.astro-ph/9712146 —. 1998, AcA, 48, 35, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.astro-ph/9802330 —. 2002, AcA, 52, 397, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.astro-ph/0210283

    1997 doi arXiv

  74. [82]

    L., Skillen, I., Collier Cameron, A., et al

    Pollacco, D. L., Skillen, I., Collier Cameron, A., et al. 2006, PASP, 118, 1407, doi: 10.1086/508556 Prša, A. 2018, Modeling and Analysis of Eclipsing Binary Stars; The theory and design principles of PHOEBE, doi: 10.1088/978-0-7503-1287-5

    2006 doi

  75. [83]

    2001, MNRAS, 328, 914, doi: 10.1046/j.1365-8711.2001.04921.x

    Qian, S. 2001, MNRAS, 328, 914, doi: 10.1046/j.1365-8711.2001.04921.x

    2001

  76. [84]

    2017, Research in Astronomy and Astrophysics, 17, 087, doi: 10.1088/1674-4527/17/8/87

    Qian, S.-B., He, J.-J., Zhang, J., et al. 2017, Research in Astronomy and Astrophysics, 17, 087, doi: 10.1088/1674-4527/17/8/87

    2017 doi

  77. [85]

    R., Latham, D

    Ricker, G. R., Latham, D. W., Vanderspek, R. K., et al. 2010, in American Astronomical Society Meeting

    2010

  78. [86]

    A., & Eggleton, P

    Robertson, J. A., & Eggleton, P. P. 1977, MNRAS, 179, 359, doi: 10.1093/mnras/179.3.359 Ruciński, S. M. 1969, AcA, 19, 245

    1977 doi

  79. [87]

    M., Lu, W., & Mochnacki, S

    Rucinski, S. M., Lu, W., & Mochnacki, S. W. 2000, AJ, 120, 1133, doi: 10.1086/301458

    2000 doi

  80. [88]

    J., Prieto, J

    Shappee, B. J., Prieto, J. L., Grupe, D., et al. 2014, ApJ, 788, 48, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/788/1/48

    2014 doi

  81. [89]

    G., Oelkers, R

    Stassun, K. G., Oelkers, R. J., Pepper, J., et al. 2018, AJ, 156, 102, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/aad050

    2018 doi

  82. [90]

    2006, AcA, 56, 347, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.astro-ph/0701529 Stępień, K

    Stepien, K. 2006, AcA, 56, 347, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.astro-ph/0701529 Stępień, K. 2011, AcA, 61, 139, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.1105.2645

    2006 doi arXiv

  83. [91]

    2020a, ApJS, 247, 50, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/ab7894 —

    Sun, W., Chen, X., Deng, L., & de Grijs, R. 2020a, ApJS, 247, 50, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/ab7894 —. 2020b, ApJS, 247, 50, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/ab7894 van Hamme, W. 1993, AJ, 106, 2096, doi: 10.1086/116788 Van Hamme, W., & Wilson, R. E. 2007, ApJ, 661, 1129, doi: 10.1086/51787...

    1993 doi

  84. [92]

    2023, Research in Astronomy and Astrophysics, 23, 055009, doi: 10.1088/1674-4527/acc154

    Vijaya, A., & Sriram, K. 2023, Research in Astronomy and Astrophysics, 23, 055009, doi: 10.1088/1674-4527/acc154

    2023 doi

  85. [93]

    L., Henden, A

    Watson, C. L., Henden, A. A., & Price, A. 2006, Society for Astronomical Sciences Annual Symposium, 25, 47

    2006

  86. [94]

    A., Weisenburger, K

    West, A. A., Weisenburger, K. L., Irwin, J., et al. 2015, ApJ, 812, 3, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/812/1/3

    2015 doi

  87. [95]

    A., Morgan, D

    West, A. A., Morgan, D. P., Bochanski, J. J., et al. 2011, AJ, 141, 97, doi: 10.1088/0004-6256/141/3/97

    2011 doi

  88. [96]

    Wilson, R. E. 1979, ApJ, 234, 1054, doi: 10.1086/157588 —. 1990, ApJ, 356, 613, doi: 10.1086/168867

    1979 doi

  89. [97]

    E., & Devinney, E

    Wilson, R. E., & Devinney, E. J. 1971, ApJ, 166, 605, doi: 10.1086/150986

    1971 doi

  90. [98]

    E., & Van Hamme, W

    Wilson, R. E., & Van Hamme, W. 2014, ApJ, 780, 151, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/780/2/151

    2014 doi

  91. [99]

    E., Van Hamme, W., & Terrell, D

    Wilson, R. E., Van Hamme, W., & Terrell, D. 2010, ApJ, 723, 1469, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/723/2/1469

    2010 doi

  92. [100]

    2024, MNRAS, 529, 3113, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stae590

    Wu, J.-F., Zhu, L.-Y., Matekov, A., et al. 2024, MNRAS, 529, 3113, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stae590

    2024 doi

  93. [101]

    2024, ApJS, 270, 20, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/ad0ceb

    Xiong, J., Ding, X., Li, J., et al. 2024, ApJS, 270, 20, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/ad0ceb

    2024 doi

  94. [102]

    Yakut, K., & Eggleton, P. P. 2005, ApJ, 629, 1055, doi: 10.1086/431300

    2005 doi

  95. [103]

    2023, MNRAS, 522, 3076, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad1141

    Yang, Y., Michel, R., Yuan, H., Wang, S., & Tamayo, F. 2023, MNRAS, 522, 3076, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad1141

    2023 doi

  96. [104]

    2011, Research in Astronomy and Astrophysics, 11, 181, doi: 10.1088/1674-4527/11/2/006

    Yang, Y.-G. 2011, Research in Astronomy and Astrophysics, 11, 181, doi: 10.1088/1674-4527/11/2/006

    2011 doi

  97. [105]

    2013, AJ, 146, 35, doi: 10.1088/0004-6256/146/2/35 Yıldız, M

    Soonthornthum, B. 2013, AJ, 146, 35, doi: 10.1088/0004-6256/146/2/35 Yıldız, M. 2014, MNRAS, 437, 185, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stt1874

    2013 doi

  98. [106]

    2013, MNRAS, 430, 2029, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stt028

    Yildiz, M., & Doğan, T. 2013, MNRAS, 430, 2029, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stt028

    2013 doi

  99. [107]

    2020a, ApJS, 246, 9, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/ab55ef

    Zhang, B., Liu, C., & Deng, L.-C. 2020a, ApJS, 246, 9, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/ab55ef

    doi

  100. [108]

    2021, ApJS, 256, 14, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/ac0834

    Zhang, B., Li, J., Yang, F., et al. 2021, ApJS, 256, 14, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/ac0834

    2021 doi

  101. [109]

    2020b, PASP, 132, 125001, doi: 10.1088/1538-3873/abbea2

    Zhang, J.-C., Wang, X.-F., Mo, J., et al. 2020b, PASP, 132, 125001, doi: 10.1088/1538-3873/abbea2

    doi

  102. [110]

    2012, Research in Astronomy and Astrophysics, 12, 723, doi: 10.1088/1674-4527/12/7/002

    Zhao, G., Zhao, Y.-H., Chu, Y.-Q., Jing, Y.-P., & Deng, L.-C. 2012, Research in Astronomy and Astrophysics, 12, 723, doi: 10.1088/1674-4527/12/7/002

    2012 doi

  103. [111]

    2007, ApJ, 670, 1326, doi: 10.1086/521389

    Zucker, S., Mazeh, T., & Alexander, T. 2007, ApJ, 670, 1326, doi: 10.1086/521389

    2007 doi

Pith tools

Reviewed August 11, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.