Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 75 references

Potassium abundances in extremely metal poor stars: Implications for nucleosynthesis in the final stages of massive star evolution

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-05 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Potassium tracks calcium tightly in seven extremely metal-poor stars, with scatter at the measurement-error level, while sodium varies.

desk verdict New K abundances in EMP stars are a real contribution, but the paper's key Na/Mg scatter claim doesn't match its own Table 5 and needs verification before the astrophysical conclusion can be trusted. read the letter →

arxiv 2508.20484 v1 pith:GJI3LNPZ submitted 2025-08-28 astro-ph.SR astro-ph.GA

M. N. Ishigaki , N. Tominaga , W. Aoki , T. Takiwaki , K. Nakamura , N. Iwamoto , K. Nomoto , C. Kobayashi This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.SRastro-ph.GA
keywords potassiumabundancesextremelymetal-poorstarsNLTEcorrectionsKIresonancelinesspectralsynthesismassivestarnucleosynthesiscore-collapsesupernovaeodd-Zelements
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

This paper measures potassium abundances in seven of the most iron-poor stars known, stars with less than a thousandth of the Sun's iron. It finds that the ratios [K/Fe] and [K/Ca] are enhanced over solar and, more importantly, nearly identical from star to star: the scatter is about 0.1 dex, the same size as the measurement uncertainty. In the same stars, [Na/Mg] varies by about 0.7 dex. If each star's composition samples the ejecta of only one or a few early massive stars, this contrast implies that potassium production in massive stars or their supernovae is independent of the varying stellar properties that drive sodium-magnesium differences.

What carries the argument

The central object is the pair of K I resonance lines at 766.49 and 769.90 nm in high-resolution spectra. The analysis pipeline is spectral synthesis under LTE with MARCS model atmospheres, followed by interpolation of the Reggiani et al. (2019) NLTE correction grid in Teff, log g, [Fe/H], vmic, and [K/Fe]. The load-bearing comparison is the contrast between the small scatter in [K/Fe] and [K/Ca] (~0.1 dex) and the large scatter in [Na/Mg] (~0.7 dex after NLTE correction): two element ratios from the same stellar environment, one nearly constant and one highly variable. This contrast is what separates a potassium production channel that is robust to progenitor properties from the processes s

What would settle it

Observe the K I 766/769 nm lines in 20 to 30 additional extremely metal-poor stars with [Fe/H] < -3 at similar or higher signal-to-noise and measure [K/Ca]; if the scatter exceeds about 0.2-0.3 dex, the claim of uniform potassium production fails. Independently, recomputing NLTE corrections for K I with updated collision rates at low metallicity would settle whether a shift greater than 0.3 dex in [K/Fe], varying with Teff and log g, resolves the apparent uniformity into an artifact.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper reports a homogeneous potassium abundance analysis of seven extremely metal-poor stars ([Fe/H] < -3.0) using high-resolution spectra of the K I resonance lines at 766.49 and 769.90 nm, with LTE spectral synthesis followed by NLTE corrections from a published grid. After correction, [K/Fe] has a mean of 0.35 dex with a standard deviation of 0.13 dex, and [K/Ca] has a mean of 0.11 dex with a scatter of 0.12 dex — scatter as small as the typical measurement uncertainty. In contrast, [Na/Mg] after NLTE correction shows a scatter of about 0.74 dex. The paper interprets the narrow K/Ca distribution as evidence that K and Ca are co-produced in a process insensitive to progenitor mass, rot

Load-bearing premise

The NLTE correction grid, computed for atmospheric conditions near solar metallicity, is assumed to remain valid when interpolated down to [Fe/H] ~ -3 to -4; if its collision rates or atomic model are wrong at these metallicities, the absolute [K/Fe] and [K/Ca] values and the size of the scatter would shift.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If the small scatter in [K/Fe] and [K/Ca] is correct, potassium becomes a tracer of the final evolutionary stages of massive stars and of supernova explosions, regimes inaccessible to direct observation.
  • A successful nucleosynthesis model must simultaneously reproduce the mean [K/Fe] ~ 0.35 dex and [K/Ca] ~ 0.11 dex while keeping their scatter at the measurement-error level; models that tie K yield strongly to progenitor mass, rotation, or metallicity are disfavored.
  • The observed upper limits, mostly [K/Fe] NLTE < 0.8 dex, place ceiling constraints on potassium yields from the earliest supernovae.
  • The tentative anti-correlation between [K/Fe] and [Mn/Fe], if confirmed with a larger sample, would distinguish neutrino-processed, proton-rich channels from other odd-Z production mechanisms.
  • The agreement of the mean NLTE [K/Fe] with previous analyses supports the reality of supersolar potassium enhancement at the lowest metallicities.

Reading between the lines

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

  • By extension, if a larger EMP sample reproduces the ~0.1 dex scatter in [K/Ca], the cleanest interpretation is that K/Ca is set by the neutrino-driven electron fraction in the innermost supernova ejecta, where progenitor mass and rotation play only a secondary role — a testable prediction for multidimensional core-collapse simulations.
  • By extension, the same K I line pair could be measured in globular-cluster giants where a K-Mg anti-correlation has been reported; a uniform K/Ca there would bridge the EMP-star result and the cluster phenomenon.
  • By extension, a targeted experiment would be to extend the analysis across a wider range of Teff and log g at fixed [Fe/H]; if the [K/Ca] scatter grows with stellar parameters, part of the observed uniformity is a consequence of the homogeneous stellar-parameter window rather than nucleosynthesis.
  • By extension, the K-Mn anti-correlation hint suggests a falsifiable discriminator: if it survives in larger samples, K and Mn must be produced in complementary regimes (for example, proton-rich versus neutron-rich ejecta), which existing one-dimensional yield models do not capture.
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

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper presents a homogeneous high-resolution abundance analysis of K I resonance lines at 766.49 and 769.90 nm in 18 extremely metal-poor stars, using Subaru/HDS spectra and MARCS/Turbospectrum spectral synthesis with LTE and externally computed NLTE corrections. K is detected in seven stars with [Fe/H] < -3.0; for the remaining stars only upper limits are obtained. For the seven detections, the authors report a small scatter in both [K/Fe] and [K/Ca] (σ ≈ 0.13 and 0.12 dex, respectively, in LTE and NLTE), while claiming a much larger 0.74 dex scatter in [Na/Mg] after NLTE correction. They interpret this contrast as evidence that K production in massive stars or supernovae is decoupled from the processes causing Na/Mg variations. The paper then compares the observed K, Sc, V, Mn ratios with rotating and non-rotating massive-star and CCSN yield models and finds that no single model reproduces all odd-Z abundances simultaneously.

Significance. If substantiated, the small intrinsic scatter in [K/Fe] and [K/Ca] at [Fe/H] < -3 would provide a genuinely new observational constraint on K nucleosynthesis, especially when contrasted with abundance ratios such as [Na/Mg] that do vary. The merit of the paper lies in its homogeneous treatment of a very difficult measurement: weak K I lines in extremely metal-poor stars, careful telluric subtraction, consistent stellar parameters, and use of modern published NLTE grids. However, the paper's central differential claim is currently not reproducible from the tabulated data. The [Na/Mg] scatter quoted in the abstract and Section 4.3 cannot be recovered from Table 5 for the seven K-detected stars, and the NLTE-corrected Na and Mg values on which the 0.74 dex figure rests are not provided. The K-side result, by contrast, is well documented and robust in its internal statistics. Because the scientific significance depends on the contrast between the K and Na/Mg scatters, this is a load-bearing gap that must be repaired before the claim can be accepted.

major comments (3)
  1. [§4.3, Table 5, Fig. 7] The central differential claim is not reproducible. For the seven stars with detected K lines, the LTE [Na/Mg] ratios computed from Table 5 are -0.45, -0.42, -0.62, +0.01, -0.19, -0.57, -0.06 (for CS 22189-0009, CS 22942-0002, CS 22172-0002, SMSS J085924.06-120104.9, CS 30339-0073, CS 22950-0046, CS 22949-0048). Their sample standard deviation is ~0.25 dex and the full range is ~0.63 dex, not the 1.45 dex quoted in the text. The paper neither tabulates the NLTE corrections for Na and Mg nor states whether the post-NLTE 0.74 dex figure refers to these same seven stars or to a different sample. Since the paper's main conclusion is a differential statement about small K scatter versus large Na/Mg scatter, the authors must either provide the NLTE-corrected values for the same seven stars, or explicitly restrict the claim to what the tabulated data support and discuss the influence of the out
  2. [§3.4.2, §4.1] The absolute values of [K/Fe] and [K/Ca] used in the model comparisons in Section 5 carry no estimate of systematic error from the adopted Reggiani et al. (2019) NLTE grid. The grid is applied at metallicities as low as [Fe/H] ≈ -3.8, where the published grid was not designed to be validated, and the corrections depend on interpolated stellar parameters and [K/Fe]. The small scatter in the K ratios is not strongly affected by the choice of LTE versus NLTE (σ = 0.13 in both), but the absolute [K/Ca] values compared with yield models in Figure 9 are directly affected by any systematic offset in the grid. Please quantify the sensitivity of the adopted NLTE corrections to the grid's parameter range and include a conservative systematic uncertainty, or state explicitly why such an uncertainty does not affect the conclusions.
  3. [§5.1] Even after the reproducibility issue in the first comment is fixed, the claim that the [Na/Mg] scatter is significantly larger than the K scatter needs a statistical test that accounts for measurement uncertainties. With n = 7 and per-star errors of order 0.1-0.2 dex, a raw standard deviation of 0.74 dex versus 0.13 dex is suggestive but not formally established unless intrinsic scatter is estimated (e.g., by comparing χ² or using an F-test or a likelihood-based intrinsic-scatter estimator). The paper currently reports only raw standard deviations and does not separate intrinsic scatter from measurement noise. Please provide such an estimate for both [K/Ca] and [Na/Mg] for the same sample.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Table 4] The column headings 'e[K/Fe]' and 'mNLT E' are garbled; they should read 'ε[K/Fe]' and '[K/Fe]NLTE'. Also, the table reports individual 766 nm and 769 nm measurements but not how the final [K/Fe] was combined when both lines were detected; please clarify.
  2. [§2.1, Tables 1, 2, 5] HE 0130-1749 and HE 0132-2439 are said to be excluded from the analysis, yet HE 0132-2439 appears in Tables 2, 4, and 5. Please indicate clearly which stars are in the final sample and whether the excluded stars are shown only for completeness.
  3. [§4.4, Fig. 8] The statement that a weighted correlation coefficient of -0.99 has a bootstrap p-value of 0.59 is surprising and likely needs a detailed explanation of the weighting and resampling procedure. With seven points, a correlation of this magnitude would normally be significant. Since the anti-correlation is described as tentative, please provide enough information for the reader to assess the p-value.
  4. [General] The paper would benefit from a machine-readable table of the NLTE-corrected abundances for all elements (or at least the Na and Mg corrections used in Section 4.3), so that the central differential claim can be independently recomputed by readers.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the K abundance measurements and the scatter comparison rest on independent observations and external model grids, not on fitted inputs.

full rationale

The derivation chain is observational and self-contained. LTE abundances are measured by spectral synthesis (Sec. 3.4.1) with no parameter fitted to the final ratios. The NLTE corrections for K are taken from the external grid of Reggiani et al. (2019) and interpolated based on stellar parameters and LTE [K/Fe] (Sec. 3.4.2); this is an independent, published grid, not derived from the K abundances of these seven stars. The small scatter in [K/Fe] and [K/Ca] is a direct property of the measured values (Table 4, Fig. 5), not a model output. The comparison to massive-star and CCSN yields in Sec. 5 uses published models and does not adjust them to force agreement. The self-citations (e.g., Ishigaki et al. 2018; Tominaga et al. 2014; Wanajo et al. 2018) provide context and are not load-bearing for the central K measurement. The paper itself notes that systematic NLTE uncertainties are not included (Sec. 4.1), which is a limitation but not circularity. The discrepancy between the quoted 0.74 dex [Na/Mg] scatter and the LTE values in Table 5 is a reproducibility/verification issue, not a circular reduction of the argument.

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

No new physical entities are introduced. The paper's central claim depends on standard stellar atmosphere modeling, an external NLTE grid, and the assumption that the observed abundance patterns in EMP stars are imprinted by one or a few massive star supernovae. The free parameters are standard for stellar abundance work: stellar parameters are estimated from photometry/isochrones, not independently measured.

free parameters (3)
  • [Fe/H] initial guess from literature = varies by star
    Used as a starting guess for the iterative abundance analysis. Final [Fe/H] is fitted from spectra, but the initial value comes from prior literature.
  • v_micro (microturbulent velocity) = empirical formula (Holtzman et al. 2018), with minor adjustments
    Not measured directly, but estimated from empirical formula and adjusted to match line profiles.
  • v_macro (macroturbulent velocity) = 4 km/s (RGB), 2 km/s (MS)
    Fixed ad hoc values, not measured.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption 1D LTE spectral synthesis with MARCS model atmospheres accurately represents the stellar photosphere.
    Used for all abundance analysis. 1D LTE with MLT convection is a standard but approximate treatment of stellar atmospheres.
  • domain assumption The Reggiani et al. (2019) NLTE grid is valid for the parameter range of the sample ([Fe/H] ~ -3 to -4).
    NLTE corrections are interpolated from an external grid; systematic errors are not included.
  • domain assumption The K I resonance lines at 766/769 nm are reliable abundance indicators for EMP stars.
    These are the only optical K lines, but they are known to be affected by NLTE and telluric contamination. Telluric correction is applied, but residuals may remain.
  • domain assumption Assumed stellar mass (0.71 M_sun RGB, 0.66 M_sun MS) and the Nissen et al. (1997) relation give reliable log g.
    Stellar masses are assumed, not measured, and the log g values feed into the NLTE corrections and abundance analysis.
  • domain assumption The yields from Limongi and Chieffi (2018), Heger and Woosley (2010), and Wanajo et al. (2018) are reliable representations of nucleosynthesis in massive stars.
    The comparison with observed ratios depends on these model predictions.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Potassium abundances in extremely metal poor stars: Implications for nucleosynthesis in the final stages of massive star evolution." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/GJI3LNPZ

@misc{pith2026250820484,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Potassium abundances in extremely metal poor stars: Implications for nucleosynthesis in the final stages of massive star evolution},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/GJI3LNPZ}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2508.20484}
}
abstract

We present a potassium (K) abundance analysis in extremely metal-poor (EMP) stars based on high-resolution ($R\sim 60000$) spectra obtained with the High Dispersion Spectrograph on the Subaru Telescope, covering the K I resonance lines at 766 and 769 nm. One-dimensional local thermodynamic equilibrium (LTE) abundances of K and other elements, including Na, Mg, Ca, Ti, Cr, and Ni, were derived using spectral synthesis. Non-local thermodynamic equilibrium (NLTE) corrections were applied to the K abundances by interpolating a precomputed grid of corrections based on stellar parameters and the LTE K abundance. We detected K I lines in seven stars with [Fe/H]$< -3.0$ and derived upper limits for other stars in the same metallicity regime, making this sample well-suited for investigating the nucleosynthesis origins of K in the early universe. We found that the [K/Fe] and [K/Ca] ratios of the seven stars are enhanced relative to the solar value, with a scatter of approximately 0.1 dex, as small as the typical measurement uncertainty. Under the assumption that each star formed from gas purely enriched by a single or a few massive stars' supernovae, the small scatter in [K/Fe] and [K/Ca], contrasted with the $\sim$0.7 dex scatter in [Na/Mg] ratios (after NLTE correction), suggests that the production of K in massive stars or their supernovae is independent of the processes that drive Na/Mg variation. These findings demonstrate that K abundances in EMP stars, and their correlations with other elemental abundances, can serve as sensitive tracers of the physical mechanisms governing the final evolutionary stages of massive stars and their supernova explosions.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2508.20484 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Left: color-magnitude diagram for the sample stars in the Gaia pass bands (filled circles). The vertical axis shows absolute magnitude in G-band, and the horizontal axis shows extinction-corrected GBP − GRP color. Right: Adopted stellar parameters (Teff and log g) computed in this work. For both panels, the Y 2 isochrone model for an age of 13 Gyrs and [Fe/H]= −3 used to derive log g is shown by the solid blue line.… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. compares the values of [Fe/H] obtained in this work and those from the literature from which ini￾tial guesses of [Fe/H] values were adopted (see [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Observed and synthetic spectra for the K I lines. The light blue and dark blue solid lines represent the observed spectra before and after telluric correction, respectively. The solid orange lines indicate the best-fit synthetic spectra or represent an upper limit. The dotted orange lines show synthetic spectra with K abundances offset by ±1σ. The top two panels display the two K I lines for SMSS J085924.06-120104.9… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (6 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: The comparison of [Mg/Fe] (a), [Ca/Fe](b), and [Ni/Fe] (c) ratios derived in this work (the vertical axis) plotted against corresponding values from literature listed in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: [K/Fe] and [K/Ca] ratios from the LTE (left panels) and NLTE (right panels) analyses obtained in this work. The stars with one or both K I lines detected are shown as circles with error bars. The stars with only an upper limit are shown by arrows, where the location of…
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Abundances of other elements measured in this work. The gray squares show the results from R. Cayrel et al. (2004) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: The abundance patterns for stars with estimated K abundances. The gray symbols indicate the stars whose upper limits were found to be lower than typical [K/Fe] values. The abundances of C and N are taken from literature (see text for details). by I. U. Roederer et al. …
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Left: The [Sc/Fe], [V/Fe], and [Mn/Fe] ratios adopted from the literature plotted against [K/Fe]NLTE derived in this study. In the bottom-left panel for the [Mn/Fe] ratios plotted against [K/Fe]NLTE, we also show [Mn/Fe] ratios obtained using Mn II lines only by I. U. …
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: [K/Ca] abundance ratios predicted by core– collapse supernova yields in literature. Triangles cor￾respond to the CCSN yields of rotating massive stars from M. Limongi & A. Chieffi (2018) with rotational veloc￾ity V =0 (blue), 150 (orange), and 300 km s−1 (green), re￾sp…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

75 extracted references · 15 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    M., Spite, M., Korotin, S

    Andrievsky, S. M., Spite, M., Korotin, S. A., et al. 2010, A&A, 509, A88, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/200913223

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/200913223 2010

  2. [2]

    C., Christlieb, N., et al

    Aoki, W., Beers, T. C., Christlieb, N., et al. 2007, ApJ, 655, 492, doi: 10.1086/509817

    doi:10.1086/509817 2007

  3. [3]

    C., Lee, Y

    Aoki, W., Beers, T. C., Lee, Y. S., et al. 2013, AJ, 145, 13, doi: 10.1088/0004-6256/145/1/13

    doi:10.1088/0004-6256/145/1/13 2013

  4. [4]

    1995, ApJL, 451, L49, doi: 10.1086/309687

    Audouze, J., & Silk, J. 1995, ApJL, 451, L49, doi: 10.1086/309687

    doi:10.1086/309687 1995

  5. [5]

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

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

    doi:10.3847/1538-3881/abd806 2021

  6. [6]

    J., Eitner, P., et al

    Bergemann, M., Gallagher, A. J., Eitner, P., et al. 2019, A&A, 631, A80, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201935811

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201935811 2019

  7. [7]

    2019, MNRAS, 486, 2075, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stz549

    Blanco-Cuaresma, S. 2019, MNRAS, 486, 2075, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stz549

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stz549 2019

  8. [8]

    2014, A&A, 569, A111, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201423945

    Blanco-Cuaresma, S., Soubiran, C., Heiter, U., & Jofr´ e, P. 2014, A&A, 569, A111, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201423945

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201423945 2014

Show all 75 references
  1. [9]

    2021, ApJ, 915, 28, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/abf82e

    Bollig, R., Yadav, N., Kresse, D., et al. 2021, ApJ, 915, 28, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/abf82e

    2021 doi

  2. [10]

    D., et al

    Casagrande, L., Lin, J., Rains, A. D., et al. 2021, MNRAS, 507, 2684, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stab2304

    2021 doi

  3. [11]

    2004, A&A, 416, 1117, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20034074

    Cayrel, R., Depagne, E., Spite, M., et al. 2004, A&A, 416, 1117, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20034074

    2004 doi

  4. [12]

    G., Christlieb, N., Thompson, I., et al

    Cohen, J. G., Christlieb, N., Thompson, I., et al. 2013, ApJ, 778, 56, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/778/1/56

    2013 doi

  5. [13]

    G., Huang, W., & Kirby, E

    Cohen, J. G., Huang, W., & Kirby, E. N. 2011, ApJ, 740, 60, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/740/2/60

    2011 doi

  6. [14]

    Demarque, P., Woo, J.-H., Kim, Y.-C., & Yi, S. K. 2004, ApJS, 155, 667, doi: 10.1086/424966 Fern´ andez-Alvar, E., Allende Prieto, C., Beers, T. C., et a l. 2016, A&A, 593, A28, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201628847 Fr¨ ohlich, C., Hauser, P., Liebend¨ orfer, M., et al. 2006, ApJ, ...

    2004 doi

  7. [15]

    2018, The Journal of Open Source Software, 3, 695, doi: 10.21105/joss.00695

    Green, G. 2018, The Journal of Open Source Software, 3, 695, doi: 10.21105/joss.00695

    2018 doi

  8. [16]

    2019, ApJ, 887, 93, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab5362 Greenfield, P., Robitaille, T., Tollerud, E., et al

    Finkbeiner, D. 2019, ApJ, 887, 93, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab5362 Greenfield, P., Robitaille, T., Tollerud, E., et al. 2013, Astropy: Community Python library for astronomy,, Astrophysics Source Code Library, record ascl:1304.002

    2019 doi

  9. [17]

    2008, A&A, 486, 951, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:200809724

    Gustafsson, B., Edvardsson, B., Eriksson, K., et al. 2008, A&A, 486, 951, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:200809724

    2008 doi

  10. [18]

    Heger, A., & Woosley, S. E. 2010, ApJ, 724, 341, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/724/1/341

    2010 doi

  11. [19]

    2021, A&A, 645, A106, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201936291

    Heiter, U., Lind, K., Bergemann, M., et al. 2021, A&A, 645, A106, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201936291

    2021 doi

  12. [20]

    A., Hasselquist, S., Shetrone, M., et al

    Holtzman, J. A., Hasselquist, S., Shetrone, M., et al. 2018, AJ, 156, 125, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/aad4f9

    2018 doi

  13. [21]

    N., Aoki, W., & Chiba, M

    Ishigaki, M. N., Aoki, W., & Chiba, M. 2013, ApJ, 771, 67, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/771/1/67

    2013 doi

  14. [22]

    N., Chiba, M., & Aoki, W

    Ishigaki, M. N., Chiba, M., & Aoki, W. 2012, ApJ, 753, 64, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/753/1/64

    2012 doi

  15. [23]

    N., Tominaga, N., Kobayashi, C., & Nomoto, K

    Ishigaki, M. N., Tominaga, N., Kobayashi, C., & Nomoto, K. 2018, ApJ, 857, 46, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aab3de 21

    2018 doi

  16. [24]

    2006, in American Institute of Physics Conference Series, Vol

    Iwamoto, N., Umeda, H., Nomoto, K., et al. 2006, in American Institute of Physics Conference Series, Vol. 847, Origin of Matter and Evolution of Galaxies, ed. S. Kubono, W. Aoki, T. Kajino, T. Motobayashi, & K. Nomoto (AIP), 409–411, doi: 10.1063/1.2234441

    2006 doi

  17. [25]

    R., Keller, S., Frebel, A., et al

    Jacobson, H. R., Keller, S., Frebel, A., et al. 2015, The Astrophysical Journal, 807, 171, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/807/2/171

    2015 doi

  18. [26]

    I., et al

    Kobayashi, C., Izutani, N., Karakas, A. I., et al. 2011, The Astrophysical Journal Letters, 739, L57, doi: 10.1088/2041-8205/739/2/L57

    2011 doi

  19. [27]

    I., & Lugaro, M

    Kobayashi, C., Karakas, A. I., & Lugaro, M. 2020, ApJ, 900, 179, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/abae65

    2020 doi

  20. [28]

    2012, Progress of Theoretical and Experimental Physics, 2012, 01A301, doi: 10.1093/ptep/pts009

    Kotake, K., Sumiyoshi, K., Yamada, S., et al. 2012, Progress of Theoretical and Experimental Physics, 2012, 01A301, doi: 10.1093/ptep/pts009

    2012 doi

  21. [29]

    2025, A&A, 699, A32, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202554228

    Koutsouridou, I., Sk´ ulad´ ottir,´A., & Salvadori, S. 2025, A&A, 699, A32, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202554228

    2025 doi

  22. [30]

    A., Stempels, H

    Kupka, F., Piskunov, N., Ryabchikova, T. A., Stempels, H. C., & Weiss, W. W. 1999, A&AS, 138, 119, doi: 10.1051/aas:1999267

    1999 doi

  23. [31]

    K., Bolte, M., Johnson, J

    Lai, D. K., Bolte, M., Johnson, J. A., et al. 2008, ApJ, 681, 1524, doi: 10.1086/588811

    2008 doi

  24. [32]

    2022, ApJ, 931, 147, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac6514

    Li, H., Aoki, W., Matsuno, T., et al. 2022, ApJ, 931, 147, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac6514

    2022 doi

  25. [33]

    2018, ApJS, 237, 13, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/aacb24

    Limongi, M., & Chieffi, A. 2018, ApJS, 237, 13, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/aacb24

    2018 doi

  26. [34]

    2022, A&A, 665, A33, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202142195

    Lind, K., Nordlander, T., Wehrhahn, A., et al. 2022, A&A, 665, A33, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202142195

    2022 doi

  27. [35]

    F., Starkenburg, E., Yuan, Z., et al

    Martin, N. F., Starkenburg, E., Yuan, Z., et al. 2024, A&A, 692, A115, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202347633

    2024 doi

  28. [36]

    2012, MNRAS, 426, 2889, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2012.21847.x

    Mucciarelli, A., Bellazzini, M., Ibata, R., et al. 2012, MNRAS, 426, 2889, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2012.21847.x

    2012

  29. [37]

    2025, MNRAS, 536, 280, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stae2611

    Nakamura, K., Takiwaki, T., Matsumoto, J., & Kotake, K. 2025, MNRAS, 536, 280, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stae2611

    2025 doi

  30. [38]

    T., Costa, G., Girardi, L., et al

    Nguyen, C. T., Costa, G., Girardi, L., et al. 2022, A&A, 665, A126, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202244166

    2022 doi

  31. [39]

    E., Hoeg, E., & Schuster, W

    Nissen, P. E., Hoeg, E., & Schuster, W. J. 1997, in ESA Special Publication, Vol. 402, Hipparcos - Venice 1997, ed. R. M. Bonnet, E. Høg, P. L. Bernacca, L. Emiliani, A. Blaauw, C. Turon, J. Kovalevsky, L. Lindegren, H. Hassan, M. Bouffard, B. Strim, D. Heger, M. A. C. Perryman...

    1997

  32. [40]

    2002, PASJ, 54, 855, doi: 10.1093/pasj/54.6.855

    Noguchi, K., Aoki, W., Kawanomoto, S., et al. 2002, PASJ, 54, 855, doi: 10.1093/pasj/54.6.855

    2002 doi

  33. [41]

    2013, ARA&A, 51, 457, doi: 10.1146/annurev-astro-082812-140956

    Nomoto, K., Kobayashi, C., & Tominaga, N. 2013, ARA&A, 51, 457, doi: 10.1146/annurev-astro-082812-140956

    2013 doi

  34. [42]

    E., Kupka, F., Ryabchikova, T

    Piskunov, N. E., Kupka, F., Ryabchikova, T. A., Weiss, W. W., & Jeffery, C. S. 1995, A&AS, 112, 525

    1995

  35. [43]

    M., Frebel, A., Beers, T

    Placco, V. M., Frebel, A., Beers, T. C., & Stancliffe, R. J. 2014, ApJ, 797, 21, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/797/1/21

    2014 doi

  36. [44]

    M., Frebel, A., Lee, Y

    Placco, V. M., Frebel, A., Lee, Y. S., et al. 2015, ApJ, 809, 136, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/809/2/136

    2015 doi

  37. [45]

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

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

    2012

  38. [46]

    2018, MNRAS, 476, 3432, doi: 10.1093/mnras/sty316

    Cristallo, S. 2018, MNRAS, 476, 3432, doi: 10.1093/mnras/sty316

    2018 doi

  39. [47]

    M., Lind, K., et al

    Reggiani, H., Amarsi, A. M., Lind, K., et al. 2019, A&A, 627, A177, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201935156

    2019 doi

  40. [48]

    2018, MNRAS, 474, L1, doi: 10.1093/mnrasl/slx126

    Ritter, C., Andrassy, R., Cˆ ot´ e, B., et al. 2018, MNRAS, 474, L1, doi: 10.1093/mnrasl/slx126

    2018 doi

  41. [49]

    2024, ApJS, 270, 28, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/ad1686

    Roberti, L., Limongi, M., & Chieffi, A. 2024, ApJS, 270, 28, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/ad1686

    2024 doi

  42. [50]

    U., Preston, G

    Roederer, I. U., Preston, G. W., Thompson, I. B., et al. 2014, AJ, 147, 136, doi: 10.1088/0004-6256/147/6/136

    2014 doi

  43. [51]

    L., et al

    Ryabchikova, T., Piskunov, N., Kurucz, R. L., et al. 2015, PhyS, 90, 054005, doi: 10.1088/0031-8949/90/5/054005

    2015 doi

  44. [52]

    2023, ApJ, 954, 112, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ace7c1

    Sato, T., Yoshida, T., Umeda, H., et al. 2023, ApJ, 954, 112, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ace7c1

    2023 doi

  45. [53]

    2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2507.07563, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2507.07563 Schlafly, E

    Sato, T., Matsunaga, K., Uchida, H., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2507.07563, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2507.07563 Schlafly, E. F., & Finkbeiner, D. P. 2011, ApJ, 737, 103, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/737/2/103 Science Software Branch at STScI. 2012, PyRAF: Python alternative for IR...

    2025 doi arXiv

  46. [54]

    2023, The Astrophysical Journal Letters, 957, L25, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ad045b

    Sieverding, A., Kresse, D., & Janka, H.-T. 2023, The Astrophysical Journal Letters, 957, L25, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ad045b

    2023 doi

  47. [55]

    2005, ApJ, 629, 922, doi: 10.1086/431788

    Sumiyoshi, K., Yamada, S., Suzuki, H., et al. 2005, ApJ, 629, 922, doi: 10.1086/431788

    2005 doi

  48. [56]

    2014, ApJ, 794, 40, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/794/1/40

    Takahashi, K., Umeda, H., & Yoshida, T. 2014, ApJ, 794, 40, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/794/1/40

    2014 doi

  49. [57]

    2009, PASJ, 61, 563, doi: 10.1093/pasj/61.3.563

    Takeda, Y., Kaneko, H., Matsumoto, N., et al. 2009, PASJ, 61, 563, doi: 10.1093/pasj/61.3.563

    2009 doi

  50. [58]

    2002, PASJ, 54, 275, doi: 10.1093/pasj/54.2.275

    Takada-Hidai, M. 2002, PASJ, 54, 275, doi: 10.1093/pasj/54.2.275

    2002 doi

  51. [59]

    2014, ApJ, 786, 83, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/786/2/83

    Takiwaki, T., Kotake, K., & Suwa, Y. 2014, ApJ, 786, 83, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/786/2/83

    2014 doi

  52. [60]

    X., Woosley, S

    Timmes, F. X., Woosley, S. E., & Weaver, T. A. 1995, ApJS, 98, 617, doi: 10.1086/192172 22

    1995 doi

  53. [61]

    1993, in Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series, Vol

    Tody, D. 1993, in Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series, Vol. 52, Astronomical Data Analysis Software and Systems II, ed. R. J. Hanisch, R. J. V. Brissenden, & J. Barnes, 173

    1993

  54. [62]

    2014, ApJ, 785, 98, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/785/2/98

    Tominaga, N., Iwamoto, N., & Nomoto, K. 2014, ApJ, 785, 98, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/785/2/98

    2014 doi

  55. [63]

    2007, ApJ, 660, 516, doi: 10.1086/513063

    Tominaga, N., Umeda, H., & Nomoto, K. 2007, ApJ, 660, 516, doi: 10.1086/513063

    2007 doi

  56. [64]

    2005, ApJ, 619, 427, doi: 10.1086/426097

    Umeda, H., & Nomoto, K. 2005, ApJ, 619, 427, doi: 10.1086/426097

    2005 doi

  57. [65]

    Vartanyan, D., Tsang, B. T. H., Kasen, D., et al. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2411.03434, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2411.03434

    2024 doi arXiv

  58. [66]

    2011, ApJL, 726, L15, doi: 10.1088/2041-8205/726/2/L15

    Wanajo, S., Janka, H.-T., & M¨ uller, B. 2011, ApJL, 726, L15, doi: 10.1088/2041-8205/726/2/L15

    2011 doi

  59. [67]

    2018, ApJ, 852, 40, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aa9d97

    Wanajo, S., M¨ uller, B., Janka, H.-T., & Heger, A. 2018, ApJ, 852, 40, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aa9d97

    2018 doi

  60. [68]

    2024, ApJ, 974, 39, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad6983

    Wang, T., & Burrows, A. 2024, ApJ, 974, 39, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad6983

    2024 doi

  61. [69]

    E., Heger, A., & Weaver, T

    Woosley, S. E., Heger, A., & Weaver, T. A. 2002, Reviews of Modern Physics, 74, 1015, doi: 10.1103/RevModPhys.74.1015

    2002 doi

  62. [70]

    E., & Weaver, T

    Woosley, S. E., & Weaver, T. A. 1995, ApJS, 101, 181, doi: 10.1086/192237

    1995 doi

  63. [71]

    K., Kim, Y.-C., Demarque, P., et al

    Yi, S. K., Kim, Y.-C., Demarque, P., et al. 2008, in IAU

    2008

  64. [72]

    252, The Art of Modeling Stars in the 21st Century, ed

    Symposium, Vol. 252, The Art of Modeling Stars in the 21st Century, ed. L. Deng & K. L. Chan, 413–416, doi: 10.1017/S174392130802334X

    doi

  65. [73]

    E., Bessell, M

    Yong, D., Norris, J. E., Bessell, M. S., et al. 2013, ApJ, 762, 26, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/762/1/26

    2013 doi

  66. [74]

    2008, ApJ, 672, 1043, doi: 10.1086/523833

    Yoshida, T., Umeda, H., & Nomoto, K. 2008, ApJ, 672, 1043, doi: 10.1086/523833

    2008 doi

  67. [75]

    L., et al

    Zhao, G., Mashonkina, L., Yan, H. L., et al. 2016, ApJ, 833, 225, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/833/2/225

    2016 doi

Pith tools

Reviewed August 5, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.