Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 5 minor 123 references

NGTS-EB-7, an eccentric, long-period, low-mass eclipsing binary

T0 review · 2 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-10 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read NGTS-EB-7B: a late M dwarf in a 193-day eclipsing binary has its mass and radius pinned to better than 5%.

desk verdict A genuinely interesting long-period EBLM, but the headline mass precision doesn't survive error propagation. read the letter →

arxiv 2501.04523 v3 pith:UVT5HUT5 submitted 2025-01-08 astro-ph.SR astro-ph.EP

Toby Rodel , Christopher. A. Watson , Solène Ulmer-Moll , Samuel Gill , Pierre F. L. Maxted , Sarah L. Casewell , Rafael Brahm , Thomas G Wilson
show 30 more authors
Jean C. Costes Yoshi Nike Emilia Eschen Lauren Doyle Alix V. Freckelton Douglas R. Alves Ioannis Apergis Daniel Bayliss Francois Bouchy Matthew R. Burleigh Xavier Dumusque Jan Eberhardt Jorge Fernández Fernández Edward Gillen Michael R. Goad Faith Hawthorn Ravit Helled Thomas Henning Katlyn L. Hobbs James S. Jenkins Andrés Jordán Alicia Kendall Monika Lendl James McCormac Ernst J.W. de Mooij Sean M. O'Brien Suman Saha Marcelo Tala Pinto Trifon Trifonov Stéphane Udry Peter J. Wheatley
This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.SRastro-ph.EP
keywords eclipsingbinarieslateMdwarfsfullyconvectivestarsradiusinflationlow-masseccentricorbitsstellarevolutionNGTS-EB-7
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 reports the discovery and full characterisation of an eclipsing binary whose secondary is a late M dwarf near the hydrogen-burning limit. The authors derive a mass of $0.096^{+0.003}_{-0.004}\,M_\odot$ and a radius of $0.125 \pm 0.006\,R_\odot$ for the companion, with an orbital period of $193.35875 \pm 0.00034$ days and eccentricity $0.71436 \pm 0.00085$. Because the orbit is long and the periastron separation is wide, tidal effects are negligible, so the companion should evolve like an isolated star; this makes it a clean test of whether radius inflation extends to fully convective M dwarfs below the convective boundary. The paper finds the companion's radius sits only about 1% above the nearest evolutionary-model prediction, a difference that is not statistically significant, and it argues the system is the third longest-period eclipsing binary with a sub-$200\,M_J$ secondary whose mass and radius are both known to better than 5%. If the measurements hold, the system adds a rare long-period anchor point for empirical mass-radius relations of late M dwarfs.

What carries the argument

The argument is carried by a 'modified mass function' approach in which the binary's total mass is obtained from Kepler's third law using the fitted ratio of the semi-major axis to the primary radius, and the secondary mass follows from the eclipse-enabled mass function $f_m = M_B^3/(M_A+M_B)^2$ with the $\sin^3 i$ term included. The photometric radius ratio $R_B/R_A$ then converts the primary's model radius into an absolute secondary radius. The only model-dependent quantity is $R_A$; everything else is fitted from photometry and radial velocities. A simultaneous fit of the transit light curves and radial velocities, with Gaussian-process treatment of out-of-transit variability, supplies the geometric parameters that feed these relations.

What would settle it

A concrete check would be a high-precision secondary-eclipse detection, for example in the $J$, $H$, or $K$ bands where the paper predicts depths of roughly 500 to 1900 ppm, yielding a companion radius and temperature; if the resulting radius disagreed with $0.125 \pm 0.006\,R_\odot$ beyond the quoted uncertainties, the model-dependent scaling would be called into question. An independent determination of the primary radius via asteroseismology or interferometry would directly test the only model-dependent input.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that NGTS-EB-7AB is an eclipsing binary consisting of an evolved, metal-rich G-type primary and a late M dwarf secondary with a compact radius and near-hydrogen-limit mass. The secondary's parameters come from a simultaneous fit of transits and radial velocities, giving $R_B/R_A = 0.0869^{+0.0012}_{-0.0011}$, $(R_A+R_B)/a = 0.01098^{+0.00026}_{-0.00016}$, an inclination near $89.8^\circ$, and a semi-major axis of $0.661 \pm 0.033$ AU. Adopting the model-based primary radius $R_A = 1.45^{+0.07}_{-0.06}\,R_\odot$ as the only model-dependent input, the modified mass function yields a secondary mass of $0.096^{+0.003}_{-0.004}\,M_\odot$ ($102^{+4}_{-5}\,M_J$). The orbit is highly eccentric ($e=0.71436 \pm 0.00085$) with periastron at $0.189 \pm 0.009$ AU. Compared with evolutionary models, the secondary is about 1% larger in radius than predicted, but the paper judges this difference statistically insignificant and therefore concludes the star is unlikely to show radius inflation.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the primary's radius, $R_A = 1.45^{+0.07}_{-0.06}\,R_\odot$ from isochrone fitting, is correct; all absolute masses and radii scale with it, so a bias in that model radius would shift the secondary's quoted mass and radius by a comparable relative amount.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • NGTS-EB-7B becomes a benchmark for late-M-dwarf evolutionary models in a regime where tidal interaction is negligible, complementing the shorter-period eclipsing-binary low-mass population.
  • The measured radius is consistent with no inflation at the $\sim$1% level relative to the adopted evolutionary models, so the result supports the view that radius inflation is not a strong effect for this fully convective, tidally isolated star.
  • The predicted secondary eclipse at orbital phase $0.0900 \pm 0.0006$, with depths of 108-370 ppm in the TESS band and larger values in $J/H/K$, gives a concrete observational target for future photometry.
  • The very long tidal circularisation timescale implies the high eccentricity is primordial and the system will not circularise before the primary becomes a red giant.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If the primary's isochrone radius is biased, for example by the star's high metallicity or subgiant status, the secondary's quoted mass and radius would shift by the same relative amount; the non-inflation conclusion is therefore only as secure as the adopted $R_A$.
  • A detected secondary eclipse in the infrared would provide a direct temperature for the companion, turning the predicted non-inflation into an independent check rather than a model comparison.
  • The system's similarity in mass and radius to TRAPPIST-1, but with a known $\sim$10 Gyr age and negligible tidal history, makes it a useful isolated-star calibration anchor for interpreting the radii of low-mass exoplanet host stars.
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

2 major / 5 minor

Summary. NGTS-EB-7 is presented as an eclipsing binary consisting of an evolved G-type primary and a late M-dwarf secondary on a 193.36-day, e=0.714 orbit. The authors combine TESS and NGTS transit photometry with CORALIE, HARPS and FEROS radial velocities in a global allesfitter model, adopt a MIST/isochrone radius for the primary (R_A=1.45+0.07/-0.06 R_sun, with a Tayar systematic added), and derive the secondary's radius (0.125±0.006 R_sun) and mass (0.096+0.003/-0.004 M_sun) via a modified mass function. They highlight the system as the third longest-period eclipsing binary with a sub-200-M_Jup secondary whose mass and radius are determined to better than 5%, and discuss implications for M-dwarf radius inflation, secondary-eclipse detectability with PLATO, and tidal evolution.

Significance. The system is a genuinely interesting addition to the small sample of long-period EBLMs with fully convective companions, and the data set is of high quality. The use of independent RV instruments, a simultaneous photometric+RV fit, and an explicit model-dependent input (R_A) with a quoted systematic error are transparent. If the derived parameters survive correction, NGTS-EB-7B would be a useful benchmark near the hydrogen-burning limit in a regime where tidal effects are negligible. However, the headline claim of sub-5% mass precision is not supported by the paper's own error budget once the propagation through a^3 is done, and the quoted mass function is internally inconsistent by a factor of ten. These are central to the paper's main quantitative conclusion, so the manuscript requires major revision rather than acceptance in its current form.

major comments (2)
  1. [Section 5.2, Eq. (7), Tables 4 and A2] The total-mass uncertainty is underpropagated. Using the paper's own values, a/R_A = 98.9^{+1.4}_{-2.2} and R_A = 1.45^{+0.07}_{-0.06} R_sun with the 4.2% Tayar systematic added in quadrature (Section 4.3), the semi-major axis is a = 0.661 ± 0.033 AU, a fractional uncertainty of about 5%. Since Eq. (7) has M ∝ a^3, the fractional uncertainty on M is about 15%, and Kepler's third law gives M = 1.03 ± 0.15 M_sun, not M = 1.14^{+0.06}_{-0.08}. Consequently M_B = (f_m M^2)^{1/3} carries a fractional uncertainty of about (2/3)×15% ≈ 10%, i.e. M_B ≈ 0.096 ± 0.010 M_sun rather than ±0.004. The abstract's claim that the mass is constrained to better than 5% is therefore not supported by the quoted error budget; the radius precision of about 5% is unaffected.
  2. [Section 5.2, Eq. (8) and following text] The quoted modified mass function, f_m = 0.0000675 ± 0.000005 M_sun, is inconsistent with the fitted orbital parameters. The standard mass function computed from P = 193.35875 d, K = 4.6150 km/s and e = 0.71436 is f_m = P K^3 (1-e^2)^{3/2} / (2πG) ≈ 6.75 × 10^{-4} M_sun, a factor of ten larger; the quoted f_m also disagrees with Eq. (10), since using the authors' M = 1.14 M_sun and M_B = 0.096 M_sun gives f_m = M_B^3/M^2 ≈ 6.8 × 10^{-4} M_sun. If the printed f_m were used literally, Eq. (10) would yield M_B ≈ 0.042 M_sun. This appears to be a typographical factor-of-ten error, but it must be corrected because it sits at the centre of the mass derivation.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Section 6.5 vs Section 7] Section 6.5 states that the vector difference between NGTS-EB-7B and the nearest Baraffe et al. (2015) isochrone point is 0.97σ, while Section 7 quotes a difference of 1.26σ for the radius; these two significance statements should be reconciled and updated after the mass-error correction.
  2. [Table 2, FEROS rows] Table 2 lists two FEROS entries at the same BJD (3268.77318) with different velocities (70.787±0.010 and 71.009±0.009 km/s); one of the timestamps is presumably a typo.
  3. [Equation (8)] The equation as typeset contains '(1−e3)^{3/2}', which should read '(1-e^2)^{3/2}'; please check the rendered equation after the factor-of-ten correction is made.
  4. [Figure 1] The residual-panel label in Figure 1 is garbled (appears as '□0.005'), and the running header still contains the placeholder 'MNRAS000, 1–14 (2024)'.
  5. [Section 4.3] The statement that a 0.03 M_sun systematic error is added to the primary mass from the kiauhoku package would benefit from a one-sentence justification of which isochrone sets were compared and why 0.03 M_sun is representative.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: NGTS-EB-7 B's mass and radius are derived from independently fitted orbital parameters and a single model-dependent primary radius.

full rationale

The derivation chain is self-contained in the relevant sense. The secondary radius is R_B = (R_B/R_A) * R_A, where R_B/R_A is fitted from transit photometry in Section 5.1 and R_A comes from MIST isochrone fitting (Section 4.3) using PAWS atmospheric parameters, 2MASS JHK photometry, and the Gaia parallax as priors; none of these inputs include the secondary's mass or radius. The secondary mass follows Equations 7-10: M = 4*pi^2*(a/R_A)^3*R_A^3/(G*P^2), f_m = (1-e^2)^{3/2}*sin^3(i)*P*K^3/(2*pi*G), and M_B = (f_m*M^2)^{1/3}, with a/R_A, e, i, P, and K all fitted observables. The Hilditch mass-function identity is a standard relation, not a re-definition of the target quantity. The comparison to Baraffe et al. (2015) isochrones in Figure 4a is a post-hoc benchmark, explicitly presented as model-dependent and statistically insignificant, so it cannot be an input disguised as a prediction. No load-bearing self-citation or imported uniqueness theorem appears. The skeptic's concern about the size of the mass uncertainty is an error-propagation and correctness issue, not circularity; even if the fractional error in M_B were underestimated, the estimate would still not be obtained by defining the target in terms of itself.

Assumptions & free parameters 2 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on standard orbital mechanics, stellar isochrone models for the primary, and the assumption that the secondary's light is negligible. The only input beyond direct observables is the primary radius from isochrones, which is model-dependent but cross-checked against SED fitting and spectral libraries. No new physical entities are introduced.

free parameters (2)
  • Primary radius R_A = 1.45+0.07-0.06 R_sun
    Model-dependent input from MIST isochrone fitting (Section 4.3). The secondary's derived mass and radius scale with R_A; Section 5.2 identifies this as the only model-dependent parameter in the mass/radius derivation.
  • Limb darkening coefficients q1, q2 = e.g., q1;TESS8 = 0.3149 ± 0.0083
    Fitted with Gaussian priors from the ldtk package; they influence the transit shape and thus the radius ratio R_B/R_A, but are standard nuisance parameters with only a minor effect on the central claim.
assumptions (5)
  • standard math Kepler's third law relates orbital period, semi-major axis, and total mass.
    Used in Equations 6 and 7 to derive the total system mass from the fitted (a/R_A), R_A, and P.
  • standard math The two-body mass function formula applies to this single-lined eclipsing binary.
    Used in Equation 8 to derive f_m from P, K, eccentricity, and sin i, and then to solve for the secondary mass.
  • domain assumption MIST isochrones accurately model the evolved G-type primary given the PAWS spectroscopic priors.
    Adopted in Section 4.3; determines R_A, which sets the absolute scale for the secondary's mass and radius.
  • domain assumption The secondary star contributes negligible flux (<0.05%) in the TESS band.
    Argued in Section 5.1 from a maximum flux-ratio estimate; justifies omitting a surface brightness ratio parameter and simplifies the photometric model.
  • domain assumption The observed transits and RV variations come from a single companion in the NGTS-EB-7 system.
    The NGTS egress and RV periodogram resolve period aliases, but the physical interpretation of a single low-mass companion assumes this consistency is not a coincidence.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of NGTS-EB-7, an eccentric, long-period, low-mass eclipsing binary." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/UVT5HUT5

@misc{pith2026250104523,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: NGTS-EB-7, an eccentric, long-period, low-mass eclipsing binary},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/UVT5HUT5}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2501.04523}
}
abstract

Despite being the most common types of stars in the Galaxy, the physical properties of late M dwarfs are often poorly constrained. A trend of radius inflation compared to evolutionary models has been observed for earlier type M dwarfs in eclipsing binaries, possibly caused by magnetic activity. It is currently unclear whether this trend also extends to later type M dwarfs below the convective boundary. This makes the discovery of lower-mass, fully convective, M dwarfs in eclipsing binaries valuable for testing evolutionary models especially in longer-period binaries where tidal interaction between the primary and secondary is negligible. With this context, we present the discovery of the NGTS-EB-7 AB system, an eclipsing binary containing a late M dwarf secondary and an evolved G-type primary star. The secondary star has a radius of $0.125 \pm 0.006 R_\odot$ , a mass of $0.096 \pm 0.004 M_\odot$ and follows a highly eccentric $(e=0.71436 \pm 0.00085)$ orbit every $193.35875 \pm 0.00034$ days. This makes NGTS-EB-7 AB the third longest-period eclipsing binary system with a secondary smaller than $200 M_J$ with the mass and radius constrained to better than $5 \%$. In addition, NGTS-EB-7 is situated near the centre of the proposed LOPS2 southern field of the upcoming PLATO mission, allowing for detection of the secondary eclipse and measurement of the companion`s temperature. With its long-period and well-constrained physical properties - NGTS-EB-7 B will make a valuable addition to the sample of M dwarfs in eclipsing binaries and help in determining accurate empirical mass/radius relations for later M dwarf stars.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2501.04523 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Transit lightcurves of NGTS-EB-7 normalised to the out-of-transit flux levels. Each panel shows the median transit model (see Section 5.1) as a solid red line. The transit data plotted is shown as black square markers with errorbars. The top panel of each subfigure shows the data and model while the lower panel of each shows the residuals after the model has been subtracted from the observed data [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:f… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Radial velocity measurements of NGTS-EB-7. Data points from CORALIE are denoted with a black circle, HARPS is shown with a blue square and FEROS with grey triangles. The median fitted RV model is also overplotted in red. The top panel shows the data while the bottom shows the residuals after subtracting the best model fit. Subfigure (a) shows the data plotted versus time while (b) shows the same data as a function o… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Gaia DR3 Hertzsprung Russell diagram with the position of NGTS￾EB-7 A highlighted with a black star symbol. Gaia BP-RP colour is plotted against absolute magnitude in the G band for all stars in the crossmatched SPOC FFI sample described in Doyle et al. (2024). The position of NGTS-EB￾7 A shown is consistent with a star beginning to move off the main sequence. 6 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 6.1 The NGTS-EB-7 AB system We … view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (2 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Plots of the low-mass companions of eclipsing binaries as taken from the catalogue of Maxted et al. (2023) which contains all systems from the EBLM project and other systems with a quoted precision of 5% or less. NGTS-EB-7 B is shown as a red star for comparison. Top (…
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Face down orbital view of the NGTS-EB-7 AB system generated with rebound (Rein & Liu 2012; Rein & Spiegel 2015). The plot coordinates are centered on the centre of mass of the system. The primary is as shown with a black star symbol and the secondary is shown as a blac…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

123 extracted references · 16 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    S., et al., 2020a, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/staa928 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020MNRAS.494.3950A 494, 3950

    Acton J. S., et al., 2020a, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/staa928 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020MNRAS.494.3950A 494, 3950

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/staa928

  2. [2]

    S., et al., 2020b, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/staa2513 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020MNRAS.498.3115A 498, 3115

    Acton J. S., et al., 2020b, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/staa2513 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020MNRAS.498.3115A 498, 3115

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/staa2513

  3. [3]

    J., 2018, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/sty119 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018MNRAS.476..184A 476, 184

    Almeida-Fernandes F., Rocha-Pinto H. J., 2018, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/sty119 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018MNRAS.476..184A 476, 184

    doi:10.1093/mnras/sty119 2018

  4. [4]

    Baraffe I., Homeier D., Allard F., Chabrier G., 2015, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201425481 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015A&A...577A..42B 577, A42

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201425481 2015

  5. [5]

    Bayliss D., et al., 2020, @doi [The Messenger] 10.18727/0722-6691/5208 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020Msngr.181...28B 181, 28

    work page doi:10.18727/0722-6691/5208 2020

  6. [6]

    D., Beletic J., eds, Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series Vol

    Bayliss D., et al., 2022, in Holland A. D., Beletic J., eds, Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series Vol. 12191, X-Ray, Optical, and Infrared Detectors for Astronomy X. p. 121911A, @doi 10.1117/12.2628966

    work page doi:10.1117/12.2628966 2022

  7. [7]

    Bensby T., Feltzing S., Lundstr \"o m I., 2003, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361:20031213 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2003A&A...410..527B 410, 527

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20031213 2003

  8. [8]

    S., 2014, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201322631 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014A&A...562A..71B 562, A71

    Bensby T., Feltzing S., Oey M. S., 2014, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201322631 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014A&A...562A..71B 562, A71

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201322631 2014

Show all 123 references
  1. [9]

    Blanco-Cuaresma S., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stz549 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019MNRAS.486.2075B 486, 2075

    2019 doi

  2. [10]

    Blanco-Cuaresma S., Soubiran C., Heiter U., Jofr \'e P., 2014a, iSpec: Stellar atmospheric parameters and chemical abundances , Astrophysics Source Code Library, record ascl:1409.006

  3. [11]

    Blanco-Cuaresma S., Soubiran C., Heiter U., Jofr \'e P., 2014b, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201423945 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014A&A...569A.111B 569, A111

    doi

  4. [12]

    B \"o rner A., et al., 2024, @doi [Experimental Astronomy] 10.1007/s10686-024-09948-6 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024ExA....58....1B 58, 1

    2024 doi

  5. [13]

    P., Blunt S

    Bowler B. P., Blunt S. C., Nielsen E. L., 2020, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-3881/ab5b11 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020AJ....159...63B 159, 63

    2020 doi

  6. [14]

    Brahm R., Jord \'a n A., Espinoza N., 2017, @doi [ ] 10.1088/1538-3873/aa5455 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017PASP..129c4002B 129, 034002

    2017 doi

  7. [15]

    Brahm R., et al., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-3881/ab279a , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019AJ....158...45B 158, 45

    2019 doi

  8. [16]

    Brahm R., et al., 2023, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-3881/accadd , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023AJ....165..227B 165, 227

    2023 doi

  9. [17]

    M., et al., 2020, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/staa1075 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020MNRAS.494.5872B 494, 5872

    Bryant E. M., et al., 2020, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/staa1075 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020MNRAS.494.5872B 494, 5872

    2020 doi

  10. [18]

    A., et al., 2020, @doi [Research Notes of the American Astronomical Society] 10.3847/2515-5172/abc9b3 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020RNAAS...4..201C 4, 201

    Caldwell D. A., et al., 2020, @doi [Research Notes of the American Astronomical Society] 10.3847/2515-5172/abc9b3 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020RNAAS...4..201C 4, 201

    2020 doi

  11. [19]

    L., et al., 2018, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/sty2183 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018MNRAS.481.1897C 481, 1897

    Casewell S. L., et al., 2018, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/sty2183 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018MNRAS.481.1897C 481, 1897

    2018 doi

  12. [20]

    Chabrier G., Gallardo J., Baraffe I., 2007, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361:20077702 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2007A&A...472L..17C 472, L17

    2007 doi

  13. [21]

    Chabrier G., Baraffe I., Phillips M., Debras F., 2023, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/202243832 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023A&A...671A.119C 671, A119

    2023 doi

  14. [22]

    Chen D.-C., et al., 2021, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/abd5be , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2021ApJ...909..115C 909, 115

    2021 doi

  15. [23]

    D., 2016, @doi [ ] 10.3847/0004-637X/823/2/102 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2016ApJ...823..102C 823, 102

    Choi J., Dotter A., Conroy C., Cantiello M., Paxton B., Johnson B. D., 2016, @doi [ ] 10.3847/0004-637X/823/2/102 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2016ApJ...823..102C 823, 102

    2016 doi

  16. [24]

    Claret A., Cunha N. C. S., 1997, , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1997A&A...318..187C 318, 187

    1997

  17. [25]

    A., Jao W.-C., Henry T

    Costa E., Mendez R. A., Jao W.-C., Henry T. J., Subasavage J. P., Ianna P. A., 2006, The Astronomical Journal, 132, 1234

    2006

  18. [26]

    C., et al., 2021, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stab1183 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2021MNRAS.505..830C 505, 830

    Costes J. C., et al., 2021, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stab1183 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2021MNRAS.505..830C 505, 830

    2021 doi

  19. [27]

    T., et al., 2024, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stae842 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024MNRAS.tmp.1014D

    Davis Y. T., et al., 2024, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stae842 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024MNRAS.tmp.1014D

    2024 doi

  20. [28]

    Dotter A., 2016, @doi [ ] 10.3847/0067-0049/222/1/8 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2016ApJS..222....8D 222, 8

    2016 doi

  21. [29]

    J., Bayliss D., Rodel T., Kunovac V., 2024, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stae616 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024MNRAS.529.1802D 529, 1802

    Doyle L., Armstrong D. J., Bayliss D., Rodel T., Kunovac V., 2024, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stae616 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024MNRAS.529.1802D 529, 1802

    2024 doi

  22. [30]

    Duck A., et al., 2023, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stad452 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023MNRAS.521.6305D 521, 6305

    2023 doi

  23. [31]

    Eschen Y. N. E., Bayliss D., Wilson T. G., Kunimoto M., Pelisoli I., Rodel T., 2024, @doi [arXiv e-prints] 10.48550/arXiv.2409.13039 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024arXiv240913039E p. arXiv:2409.13039

    2024 doi arXiv

  24. [32]

    W., Lang D., Goodman J., 2013, @doi [ ] 10.1086/670067 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2013PASP..125..306F 125, 306

    Foreman-Mackey D., Hogg D. W., Lang D., Goodman J., 2013, @doi [ ] 10.1086/670067 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2013PASP..125..306F 125, 306

    2013 doi

  25. [33]

    Foreman-Mackey D., Agol E., Ambikasaran S., Angus R., 2017, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-3881/aa9332 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017AJ....154..220F 154, 220

    2017 doi

  26. [34]

    V., et al., 2024, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stae1405 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024MNRAS.tmp.1401F

    Freckelton A. V., et al., 2024, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stae1405 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024MNRAS.tmp.1401F

    2024 doi

  27. [35]

    Gaia Collaboration et al., 2021, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/202039657 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2021A&A...649A...1G 649, A1

    2021 doi

  28. [36]

    Gill S., et al., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201833054 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019A&A...626A.119G 626, A119

    2019 doi

  29. [37]

    Gill S., et al., 2020, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stz3212 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020MNRAS.491.1548G 491, 1548

    2020 doi

  30. [38]

    Gill S., et al., 2022, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stac798 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2022MNRAS.513.1785G 513, 1785

    2022 doi

  31. [39]

    Gillon M., et al., 2017, @doi [ ] 10.1038/nature21360 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017Natur.542..456G 542, 456

    2017 doi

  32. [40]

    G \'o mez Maqueo Chew Y., et al., 2014, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201424265 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014A&A...572A..50G 572, A50

    2014 doi

  33. [41]

    O., Corbally C

    Gray R. O., Corbally C. J., 1994, @doi [ ] 10.1086/116893 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1994AJ....107..742G 107, 742

    1994 doi

  34. [42]

    N., Daylan T., 2019, Allesfitter: Flexible Star and Exoplanet Inference From Photometry and Radial Velocity , Astrophysics Source Code Library ( @eprint ascl 1903.003 )

    G \"u nther M. N., Daylan T., 2019, Allesfitter: Flexible Star and Exoplanet Inference From Photometry and Radial Velocity , Astrophysics Source Code Library ( @eprint ascl 1903.003 )

    2019

  35. [43]

    N., Daylan T., 2021, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4365/abe70e , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2021ApJS..254...13G 254, 13

    G \"u nther M. N., Daylan T., 2021, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4365/abe70e , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2021ApJS..254...13G 254, 13

    2021 doi

  36. [44]

    Henden A., Munari U., 2014, Contributions of the Astronomical Observatory Skalnate Pleso, https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014CoSka..43..518H 43, 518

    2014

  37. [45]

    W., 2001, An Introduction to Close Binary Stars

    Hilditch R. W., 2001, An Introduction to Close Binary Stars. Cambridge University Press, @doi 10.1017/CBO9781139163576

    2001 doi

  38. [46]

    J., et al., 2021, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-3881/abeaa1 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2021AJ....161..235H 161, 235

    Hobson M. J., et al., 2021, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-3881/abeaa1 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2021AJ....161..235H 161, 235

    2021 doi

  39. [47]

    T., 1970, @doi [ ] 10.1086/150609 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1970ApJ...161.1083H 161, 1083

    Hoxie D. T., 1970, @doi [ ] 10.1086/150609 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1970ApJ...161.1083H 161, 1083

    1970 doi

  40. [48]

    X., et al., 2020, @doi [Research Notes of the American Astronomical Society] 10.3847/2515-5172/abca2d , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020RNAAS...4..206H 4, 206

    Huang C. X., et al., 2020, @doi [Research Notes of the American Astronomical Society] 10.3847/2515-5172/abca2d , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020RNAAS...4..206H 4, 206

    2020 doi

  41. [49]

    W., Dreizler S., Homeier D., Reiners A., Barman T., Hauschildt P

    Husser T.-O., von Berg S. W., Dreizler S., Homeier D., Reiners A., Barman T., Hauschildt P. H., 2013, @doi [Astronomy & Astrophysics] 10.1051/0004-6361/201219058 , 553, A6

    2013 doi

  42. [50]

    Jackson B., Greenberg R., Barnes R., 2008, @doi [ ] 10.1086/529187 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2008ApJ...678.1396J 678, 1396

    2008 doi

  43. [51]

    S., et al., 2011, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201016333 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2011A&A...531A...8J 531, A8

    Jenkins J. S., et al., 2011, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201016333 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2011A&A...531A...8J 531, A8

    2011 doi

  44. [52]

    S., et al., 2015, @doi [Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society] 10.1093/mnras/stv1596 , 453, 1439

    Jenkins J. S., et al., 2015, @doi [Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society] 10.1093/mnras/stv1596 , 453, 1439

    2015 doi

  45. [53]

    M., et al., 2016, in Chiozzi G., Guzman J

    Jenkins J. M., et al., 2016, in Chiozzi G., Guzman J. C., eds, Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series Vol. 9913, Software and Cyberinfrastructure for Astronomy IV. p. 99133E, @doi 10.1117/12.2233418

    2016 doi

  46. [54]

    Jofr \'e P., et al., 2014, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201322440 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014A&A...564A.133J 564, A133

    2014 doi

  47. [55]

    Johnson D. R. H., Soderblom D. R., 1987, @doi [ ] 10.1086/114370 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1987AJ.....93..864J 93, 864

    1987 doi

  48. [56]

    I., et al., 2024, @doi [arXiv e-prints] 10.48550/arXiv.2401.09657 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024arXiv240109657J p

    Jones M. I., et al., 2024, @doi [arXiv e-prints] 10.48550/arXiv.2401.09657 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024arXiv240109657J p. arXiv:2401.09657

    2024 doi arXiv

  49. [57]

    Kaufer A., Stahl O., Tubbesing S., N rregaard P., Avila G., Francois P., Pasquini L., Pizzella A., 1999, The Messenger, https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1999Msngr..95....8K 95, 8

    1999

  50. [58]

    C., et al., 2007, @doi [ ] 10.1071/AS07001 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2007PASA...24....1K 24, 1

    Keller S. C., et al., 2007, @doi [ ] 10.1071/AS07001 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2007PASA...24....1K 24, 1

    2007 doi

  51. [59]

    M., 2013, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stt1435 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2013MNRAS.435.2152K 435, 2152

    Kipping D. M., 2013, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stt1435 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2013MNRAS.435.2152K 435, 2152

    2013 doi

  52. [60]

    P., 1967, @doi [ ] 10.1086/149359 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1967ApJ...150..551K 150, 551

    Kraft R. P., 1967, @doi [ ] 10.1086/149359 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1967ApJ...150..551K 150, 551

    1967 doi

  53. [61]

    P., 1970, in Herbig G

    Kraft R. P., 1970, in Herbig G. H., Struve O., eds, , Spectroscopic Astrophysics. An Assessment of the Contributions of Otto Struve. University of California Press, p. 385

    1970

  54. [62]

    Kunovac Hod z i \'c V., et al., 2020, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/staa2071 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020MNRAS.497.1627K 497, 1627

    2020 doi

  55. [63]

    L., 2005, Memorie della Societa Astronomica Italiana Supplementi, https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2005MSAIS...8...14K 8, 14

    Kurucz R. L., 2005, Memorie della Societa Astronomica Italiana Supplementi, https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2005MSAIS...8...14K 8, 14

    2005

  56. [64]

    Lightkurve Collaboration et al., 2018, Lightkurve: Kepler and TESS time series analysis in Python , Astrophysics Source Code Library ( @eprint ascl 1812.013 )

    2018

  57. [65]

    L \'o pez-Morales M., 2007, @doi [ ] 10.1086/513142 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2007ApJ...660..732L 660, 732

    2007 doi

  58. [66]

    arXiv:1107.5325

    Lovis C., et al., 2011, @doi [arXiv e-prints] 10.48550/arXiv.1107.5325 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2011arXiv1107.5325L p. arXiv:1107.5325

    2011 doi arXiv

  59. [67]

    J., 2014, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/787/1/70 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014ApJ...787...70M 787, 70

    MacDonald J., Mullan D. J., 2014, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/787/1/70 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014ApJ...787...70M 787, 70

    2014 doi

  60. [68]

    E., Hillenbrand L

    Mamajek E. E., Hillenbrand L. A., 2008, @doi [ ] 10.1086/591785 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2008ApJ...687.1264M 687, 1264

    2008 doi

  61. [69]

    Maxted P. F. L., 2016, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201628579 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2016A&A...591A.111M 591, A111

    2016 doi

  62. [70]

    Maxted P. F. L., et al., 2022, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stab3371 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2022MNRAS.514...77M 514, 77

    2022 doi

  63. [71]

    Maxted P. F. L., Triaud A. H. M. J., Martin D. V., 2023, @doi [Universe] 10.3390/universe9120498 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023Univ....9..498M 9, 498

    2023 doi

  64. [72]

    Mayor M., et al., 2003, The Messenger, https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2003Msngr.114...20M 114, 20

    2003

  65. [73]

    B., 1924, @doi [ ] 10.1086/142826 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1924ApJ....60...22M 60, 22

    McLaughlin D. B., 1924, @doi [ ] 10.1086/142826 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1924ApJ....60...22M 60, 22

    1924 doi

  66. [74]

    Montalto M., et al., 2021, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/202140717 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2021A&A...653A..98M 653, A98

    2021 doi

  67. [75]

    C., Ribas I., Gim \'e nez \'A ., Baroch D., 2022, @doi [Galaxies] 10.3390/galaxies10050098 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2022Galax..10...98M 10, 98

    Morales J. C., Ribas I., Gim \'e nez \'A ., Baroch D., 2022, @doi [Galaxies] 10.3390/galaxies10050098 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2022Galax..10...98M 10, 98

    2022 doi

  68. [76]

    D., 2015, isochrones: Stellar model grid package , Astrophysics Source Code Library, record ascl:1503.010

    Morton T. D., 2015, isochrones: Stellar model grid package , Astrophysics Source Code Library, record ascl:1503.010

    2015

  69. [77]

    J., MacDonald J., 2001, @doi [ ] 10.1086/322336 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2001ApJ...559..353M 559, 353

    Mullan D. J., MacDonald J., 2001, @doi [ ] 10.1086/322336 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2001ApJ...559..353M 559, 353

    2001 doi

  70. [78]

    W., Hartmann L

    Noyes R. W., Hartmann L. W., Baliunas S. L., Duncan D. K., Vaughan A. H., 1984, @doi [ ] 10.1086/161945 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1984ApJ...279..763N 279, 763

    1984 doi

  71. [79]

    E., 2009, in AAS/Division for Planetary Sciences Meeting Abstracts \#41

    Nutzman P., Charbonneau D., Irwin J., Burke C., Berta Z., Falco E. E., 2009, in AAS/Division for Planetary Sciences Meeting Abstracts \#41. p. 8.02

    2009

  72. [80]

    M., et al., 2022, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stab3399 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2022MNRAS.509.6111O 509, 6111

    O'Brien S. M., et al., 2022, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stab3399 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2022MNRAS.509.6111O 509, 6111

    2022 doi

  73. [81]

    G., et al., 2018, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/sty2345 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018MNRAS.481.1083P 481, 1083

    Parsons S. G., et al., 2018, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/sty2345 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018MNRAS.481.1083P 481, 1083

    2018 doi

  74. [82]

    Parviainen H., Aigrain S., 2015, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stv1857 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015MNRAS.453.3821P 453, 3821

    2015 doi

  75. [83]

    J., Mamajek E

    Pecaut M. J., Mamajek E. E., 2013, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0067-0049/208/1/9 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2013ApJS..208....9P 208, 9

    2013 doi

  76. [84]

    Queloz D., et al., 2001, The Messenger, https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2001Msngr.105....1Q 105, 1

    2001

  77. [85]

    Rauer H., et al., 2014, @doi [Experimental Astronomy] 10.1007/s10686-014-9383-4 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014ExA....38..249R 38, 249

    2014 doi

  78. [86]

    E., Lambert D

    Reddy B. E., Lambert D. L., Allende Prieto C., 2006, @doi [ ] 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2006.10148.x , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2006MNRAS.367.1329R 367, 1329

    2006

  79. [87]

    F., 2012, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201118085 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2012A&A...537A.128R 537, A128

    Rein H., Liu S. F., 2012, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201118085 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2012A&A...537A.128R 537, A128

    2012 doi

  80. [88]

    S., 2015, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stu2164 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015MNRAS.446.1424R 446, 1424

    Rein H., Spiegel D. S., 2015, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stu2164 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015MNRAS.446.1424R 446, 1424

    2015 doi

  81. [89]

    R., et al., 2015, @doi [Journal of Astronomical Telescopes, Instruments, and Systems] 10.1117/1.JATIS.1.1.014003 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015JATIS...1a4003R 1, 014003

    Ricker G. R., et al., 2015, @doi [Journal of Astronomical Telescopes, Instruments, and Systems] 10.1117/1.JATIS.1.1.014003 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015JATIS...1a4003R 1, 014003

    2015 doi

  82. [90]

    A., 1924, @doi [ ] 10.1086/142825 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1924ApJ....60...15R 60, 15

    Rossiter R. A., 1924, @doi [ ] 10.1086/142825 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1924ApJ....60...15R 60, 15

    1924 doi

  83. [91]

    L., 2004, @doi [Memorie della Societa Astronomica Italiana Supplementi] 10.48550/arXiv.astro-ph/0406268 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2004MSAIS...5...93S 5, 93

    Sbordone L., Bonifacio P., Castelli F., Kurucz R. L., 2004, @doi [Memorie della Societa Astronomica Italiana Supplementi] 10.48550/arXiv.astro-ph/0406268 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2004MSAIS...5...93S 5, 93

    2004 doi arXiv

  84. [92]

    Schlecker M., et al., 2020, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-3881/abbe03 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020AJ....160..275S 160, 275

    2020 doi

  85. [93]

    Sebastian D., et al., 2021, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/202038827 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2021A&A...645A.100S 645, A100

    2021 doi

  86. [94]

    Sebastian D., et al., 2023, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stac2565 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023MNRAS.519.3546S 519, 3546

    2023 doi

  87. [95]

    Sebastian D., et al., 2024, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stae459 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024MNRAS.tmp.1016S

    2024 doi

  88. [96]

    V., eds, American Institute of Physics Conference Series Vol

    Skilling J., 2004, in Fischer R., Preuss R., Toussaint U. V., eds, American Institute of Physics Conference Series Vol. 735, American Institute of Physics Conference Series. pp 395--405, @doi 10.1063/1.1835238

    2004 doi

  89. [97]

    Skilling J., 2006, @doi [Bayesian Anal.] 10.1214/06-BA127 , 1, 833

    2006 doi

  90. [98]

    F., et al., 2006, @doi [ ] 10.1086/498708 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2006AJ....131.1163S 131, 1163

    Skrutskie M. F., et al., 2006, @doi [ ] 10.1086/498708 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2006AJ....131.1163S 131, 1163

    2006 doi

  91. [99]

    Smalley B., 2005, @doi [Memorie della Societa Astronomica Italiana Supplementi] 10.48550/arXiv.astro-ph/0509535 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2005MSAIS...8..130S 8, 130

    2005 doi arXiv

  92. [100]

    D., et al., 2021, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stab2374 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2021MNRAS.507.5991S 507, 5991

    Smith G. D., et al., 2021, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stab2374 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2021MNRAS.507.5991S 507, 5991

    2021 doi

  93. [101]

    G., Jenkins J

    Soto M. G., Jenkins J. S., 2018, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201731533 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018A&A...615A..76S 615, A76

    2018 doi

  94. [102]

    G., Santos N

    Sousa S. G., Santos N. C., Adibekyan V., Delgado-Mena E., Israelian G., 2015, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201425463 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015A&A...577A..67S 577, A67

    2015 doi

  95. [103]

    C., Sills A., 2013, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/776/2/87 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2013ApJ...776...87S 776, 87

    Spada F., Demarque P., Kim Y. C., Sills A., 2013, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/776/2/87 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2013ApJ...776...87S 776, 87

    2013 doi

  96. [104]

    S., 2020, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/staa278 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020MNRAS.493.3132S 493, 3132

    Speagle J. S., 2020, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/staa278 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020MNRAS.493.3132S 493, 3132

    2020 doi

  97. [105]

    A., Nielsen E

    Stanford-Moore S. A., Nielsen E. L., De Rosa R. J., Macintosh B., Czekala I., 2020, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/ab9a35 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020ApJ...898...27S 898, 27

    2020 doi

  98. [106]

    G., et al., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-3881/ab3467 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019AJ....158..138S 158, 138

    Stassun K. G., et al., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-3881/ab3467 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019AJ....158..138S 158, 138

    2019 doi

  99. [107]

    I., et al., 2021, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stab1687 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2021MNRAS.506..306S 506, 306

    Swayne M. I., et al., 2021, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stab1687 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2021MNRAS.506..306S 506, 306

    2021 doi

  100. [108]

    I., et al., 2024, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stad3866 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024MNRAS.528.5703S 528, 5703

    Swayne M. I., et al., 2024, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stad3866 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024MNRAS.528.5703S 528, 5703

    2024 doi

  101. [109]

    R., Huber D., van Saders J., 2022, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/ac4bbc , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2022ApJ...927...31T 927, 31

    Tayar J., Claytor Z. R., Huber D., van Saders J., 2022, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/ac4bbc , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2022ApJ...927...31T 927, 31

    2022 doi

  102. [110]

    Triaud A. H. M. J., 2018, in Deeg H. J., Belmonte J. A., eds, , Handbook of Exoplanets. Springer International Publishing, Cham, p. 2, @doi 10.1007/978-3-319-55333-7_2 , https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-55333-7_2

    2018 doi

  103. [111]

    Triaud A. H. M. J., et al., 2013, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201219643 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2013A&A...549A..18T 549, A18

    2013 doi

  104. [112]

    Triaud A. H. M. J., et al., 2017, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201730993 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017A&A...608A.129T 608, A129

    2017 doi

  105. [113]

    Trifonov T., et al., 2023, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-3881/acba9b , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023AJ....165..179T 165, 179

    2023 doi

  106. [114]

    I., Jenkins J

    Vines J. I., Jenkins J. S., 2022, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stac956 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2022MNRAS.tmp..920V

    2022 doi

  107. [115]

    A., Littlefair S

    Watson C. A., Littlefair S. P., Collier Cameron A., Dhillon V. S., Simpson E. K., 2010, @doi [ ] 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2010.17233.x , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2010MNRAS.408.1606W 408, 1606

    2010

  108. [116]

    J., et al., 2018, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stx2836 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018MNRAS.475.4476W 475, 4476

    Wheatley P. J., et al., 2018, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stx2836 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018MNRAS.475.4476W 475, 4476

    2018 doi

  109. [117]

    N., 2014, in Seager S., ed., , Exoplanets

    Winn J. N., 2014, in Seager S., ed., , Exoplanets. University of Arizona Press, pp 55--77, @doi 10.48550/arXiv.1001.2010

    2014 doi arXiv

  110. [118]

    L., et al., 2010, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-6256/140/6/1868 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2010AJ....140.1868W 140, 1868

    Wright E. L., et al., 2010, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-6256/140/6/1868 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2010AJ....140.1868W 140, 1868

    2010 doi

  111. [119]

    Yan Y., Du C., Liu S., Li H., Shi J., Chen Y., Ma J., Wu Z., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/ab287d , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019ApJ...880...36Y 880, 36

    2019 doi

  112. [120]

    W., Petigura E

    Yee S. W., Petigura E. A., von Braun K., 2017, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/836/1/77 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017ApJ...836...77Y 836, 77

    2017 doi

  113. [121]

    von Boetticher A., et al., 2017, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201731107 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017A&A...604L...6V 604, L6

    2017 doi

  114. [122]

    von Boetticher A., et al., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201834539 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019A&A...625A.150V 625, A150

    2019 doi

  115. [123]

    write newline

    " write newline "" before.all 'output.state := FUNCTION fin.entry write newline FUNCTION new.block output.state before.all = 'skip after.block 'output.state := if FUNCTION new.sentence output.state after.block = 'skip output.state before.all = 'skip after.sentence 'output.stat...

Pith tools

Reviewed August 10, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.