arxiv: 2601.21125 · v2 · submitted 2026-01-28 · 🌌 astro-ph.SR · astro-ph.HE

Recognition: 2 theorem links

· Lean Theorem

Discovery of a compact hierarchical triple main-sequence star system while searching for binary stars with compact objects

Ataru Tanikawa , Akito Tajitsu , Satoshi Honda , Hiroyuki Maehara , Bun'ei Sato , Kento Masuda , Masashi Omiya , Hideyuki Izumiura

Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-16 09:58 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.SR astro-ph.HE

keywords hierarchical triple starsmain-sequence starsspectroscopic binaryeclipsing binaryTESS photometryGaia DR3

0 comments

The pith

A Gaia candidate for a binary with a compact object is revealed as a compact hierarchical triple of main-sequence stars.

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

The paper establishes that G1010, initially flagged as a single-lined spectroscopic binary possibly hosting a neutron star or massive white dwarf, is instead a compact hierarchical triple consisting entirely of main-sequence stars. High signal-to-noise spectroscopy separated the outer orbit from an inner binary, while TESS photometry confirmed the inner pair as eclipsing with an 18-day period. The system has a 0.85 solar mass primary, inner components of 0.63 and 0.61 solar masses, an outer period of 277 days, and an inner period of about 18.26 days. This shows that low- and high-SNR spectroscopic observations combined with Gaia DR3 and TESS data can distinguish triple main-sequence systems from true compact-object binaries.

Core claim

G1010 is a compact hierarchical triple main-sequence star system with a primary star of 0.85 solar masses orbited by an inner binary of 0.63 and 0.61 solar mass main-sequence stars. The outer orbital period is 277 days and the inner period is approximately 18.26 days. High-SNR spectroscopy and TESS light curve analysis demonstrate that the system contains no massive compact object but rather three main-sequence stars, with the inner binary being eclipsing.

What carries the argument

High signal-to-noise ratio spectroscopy to disentangle three sets of spectral lines combined with TESS photometry to detect and model the inner eclipsing binary signals.

If this is right

Triple main-sequence systems can produce radial-velocity curves that initially mimic binaries with compact objects in low-SNR data.
Targeted high-SNR follow-up of Gaia DR3 candidates is required to confirm or rule out compact objects.
The inner eclipsing binary supplies precise constraints on masses and radii once full orbital solutions are combined.
Similar compact hierarchical triples can be found by the same low-plus-high SNR approach ahead of Gaia DR4 and DR5 releases.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

Other Gaia DR3 binaries currently classified as compact-object candidates may also resolve into triples upon high-SNR inspection.
The frequency of such compact triples affects estimates of compact-object binary formation rates.
Dynamical stability arguments for the 277-day outer and 18-day inner periods can be tested with continued photometry.

Load-bearing premise

The high-SNR spectra and TESS light curve arise purely from three main-sequence stars without significant contamination from activity, spots, or unresolved light.

What would settle it

A single set of spectral lines across all epochs or no eclipses in the TESS data at the predicted 18-day intervals would show the system is not a triple of main-sequence stars.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2601.21125 by Akito Tajitsu, Ataru Tanikawa, Bun'ei Sato, Hideyuki Izumiura, Hiroyuki Maehara, Kento Masuda, Masashi Omiya, Satoshi Honda.

**Figure 1.** Figure 1: Primary, secondary, and tertiary stars of our triple stars. we just regard it as a single object. We call the orbit of the inner binary “inner orbit”, and the relative motion between the primary star and inner binary “outer orbit”. We summarize the parameters of Gaia DR3 1010268155897156864 or TIC 21502513 in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 2.** Figure 2: RV variation of the primary star of G1010. In the top panel, our best-fitting model is indicated by the solid thick curve. The 1σ-confidence models are drawn by the solid thin curves. The dashed thick and thin curves show the best-fitting and 1σ-confidence models provided by Gaia DR3. In the bottom panel, RV residuals from our best-fitting model are shown [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_2.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 3.** Figure 3: Normalized CCFs between the solar-like template and the residual of the SB1 fit described in Section 6.1. Different colors represent different orders. The thick gray line shows the median of the six CCFs. for each order labeled by k, for which we adopt the following Gaussian-process likelihood: lnL (k) = − 1 2 (F (k) obs −F (k) model) T Σ −1 (F (k) obs −F (k) model)− 1 2 ln|2πΣ|, (4) where the covariance m… view at source ↗

**Figure 4.** Figure 4: The reddest six orders of the HDS spectrum (gray circles) and the spectral model (blue lines) from Section 6.1. Each three-panel set shows the result for one order. In each set, the top panel compares the synthesized SB3 spectrum with the normalized HDS flux, while the middle and bottom panels show the residuals obtained by subtracting the synthesized SB1 and SB3 spectra from the normalized HDS flux, respe… view at source ↗

**Figure 5.** Figure 5: SED of G1010. We construct these SEDs, retrieving WISE W1W2W3, 2MASS JHK, u SDSS, and GALEX NUV photometry from VizieR, and calculating griz SDSS photometry, filtering Gaia XP spectra with pyphot. We synthesize several spectra by means of the pyphot code. 7 displays the full light curve and the zoomed-in views of the eclipses for this source, respectively. We identify three eclipses in sector 21 and two in… view at source ↗

**Figure 6.** Figure 6 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_6.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 7.** Figure 7: Normalized light curves for G1010 (TIC 21502513) from TESS sectors 21 and 47. Sector 21 includes the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd eclipses, while sector 47 covers the 4th and 5th. For each event, the time axis is shifted to center the maximum eclipse at zero. The specific shift amounts, expressed in BJD − 2457000 [days], are detailed in the legend. Error bars are plotted. Czavalinga et al. (2023) have provided a list… view at source ↗

**Figure 8.** Figure 8: shows the relation between inner and outer binary periods in triple star system candidates compiled by Czavalinga et al. (2023) based on Gaia DR3 and TESS. The star sign indicates G1010. We indicate a line of Pout/Pin = 5, above which triple star systems are dynamically stable (Mardling & Aarseth 2001). We notate amplitudes of eclipse time variations due to the light-travel time effect and secular effect a… view at source ↗

read the original abstract

We have discovered a compact hierarchical triple main-sequence star system, which is cataloged as Gaia DR3 1010268155897156864 or TIC 21502513. Hereafter, we call it ``G1010''. G1010 consists of a primary (the most massive) star and inner binary that orbit each other. The primary star is a $0.85_{-0.03}^{+0.03}\;{\rm M}_\odot$ main-sequence (MS) star, and the inner binary components are $0.63_{-0.02}^{+0.02}$ and $0.61_{-0.02}^{+0.02}\;{\rm M}_\odot$ MS stars. The outer and inner orbital periods are $277.2_{-1.3}^{+1.6}$ and $\sim 18.26$ days, respectively. G1010 is categorized as a single-lined spectroscopic binary, and its orbital solution indicates that G1010 possibly accompanies a massive compact object, such as a neutron star or massive white dwarf. In order to confirm the presence of a massive compact object, we have performed several-times low signal-to-ratio (SNR) and one-time high SNR spectroscopic observations, and determined the outer orbital parameters. Moreover, we have deeply analyzed the high SNR spectroscopic data, and found that G1010 accompanies not a massive compact object, but an inner binary. We have investigated G1010's light curve in Transiting Exoplanet Survey Satellite (TESS), and concluded that the inner binary is actually an eclipsing binary, not included in TESS Eclipsing Binary Stars. We have obtained the inner orbital parameters from the TESS light curve. G1010 is similar to compact hierarchical triple star systems previously discovered by eclipse timing variation analysis. Our discovery has shown that such triple star systems can be discovered by combination of low- and high-SNR spectroscopic observations with the help of Gaia DR3 and the upcoming Gaia DR4/DR5.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Desk Editor's Note private letter to a colleague

G1010 is a straightforward main-sequence hierarchical triple confirmed by cross-checked spectroscopy and TESS photometry, adding one solid data point rather than a new method.

read the letter

The core result is that this Gaia source is not a single-lined binary with a hidden compact object but a triple of main-sequence stars: a 0.85 solar-mass primary orbiting an inner pair of 0.63 and 0.61 solar-mass stars with periods 277 days and roughly 18 days. The authors reach this by combining existing Gaia astrometry, multiple epochs of low- and high-SNR spectra, and TESS light curves that show eclipses from the inner pair. The radial-velocity curves and photometric periods line up without obvious contradictions, which is the main strength here. They also note that similar systems have been found via eclipse timing, so the contribution is mainly the specific characterization and the demonstration that low-plus-high SNR spectra can catch these before full Gaia releases arrive. The data appear independent and the parameters are derived from direct observables rather than circular fitting. The soft spot is the spectral disentangling step in the high-SNR data. Three sets of lines must be cleanly separated, and any residual blending, activity, or third-light effects could bias the velocity amplitudes and therefore the masses. The paper does not appear to include extensive tests for those systematics beyond standard procedures, so a referee would want to see the actual line profiles or the fitting residuals. Overall this is a clean observational note that belongs in the multiplicity literature. Readers working on Gaia follow-up or compact-object searches will find it useful as a concrete example. It is not transformative on its own but is worth referee time to verify the orbital solutions and light-curve details before it enters the catalog.

Referee Report

1 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript reports the discovery of a compact hierarchical triple main-sequence star system G1010 (Gaia DR3 1010268155897156864), initially classified as a single-lined spectroscopic binary possibly hosting a compact object. Through low- and high-SNR spectroscopy combined with TESS photometry, the authors derive an outer orbit of 277.2 days around a 0.85 M⊙ primary and an inner eclipsing binary with components of 0.63 and 0.61 M⊙ and period ~18.26 days, ruling out the compact-object interpretation.

Significance. If the triple interpretation is robust, the work provides a practical demonstration of how Gaia astrometry, multi-SNR spectroscopy, and space photometry can be combined to identify hierarchical triples that mimic compact-object binaries, thereby refining the census of stellar multiples and informing binary evolution models. The use of independent datasets (Gaia, spectra, TESS) to cross-validate periods and masses is a methodological strength.

major comments (1)

[High-SNR spectroscopic analysis] High-SNR spectroscopic analysis section: the three-component spectral disentangling that yields the inner-binary masses (0.63 and 0.61 M⊙) and radial-velocity curves is load-bearing for the central claim that no compact object is present; the manuscript does not specify the disentangling algorithm, quantify blending or third-light effects, or report robustness tests (e.g., injection-recovery on simulated spectra), leaving open the possibility that activity or line-profile variations could bias the velocity amplitudes and mass ratio.

minor comments (2)

[Abstract and TESS photometry section] The inner orbital period is quoted as '~18.26 days' without uncertainty; supply the formal error from the TESS light-curve fit and state whether it is consistent with the spectroscopic inner orbit.
[Orbital solution table] Table of orbital parameters: include the full covariance matrix or correlation coefficients between outer and inner elements to allow readers to assess parameter degeneracies.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

1 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their positive assessment of the work and for the constructive comment on the high-SNR spectroscopic analysis. We address the point below and will incorporate the requested details into the revised manuscript.

read point-by-point responses

Referee: [High-SNR spectroscopic analysis] High-SNR spectroscopic analysis section: the three-component spectral disentangling that yields the inner-binary masses (0.63 and 0.61 M⊙) and radial-velocity curves is load-bearing for the central claim that no compact object is present; the manuscript does not specify the disentangling algorithm, quantify blending or third-light effects, or report robustness tests (e.g., injection-recovery on simulated spectra), leaving open the possibility that activity or line-profile variations could bias the velocity amplitudes and mass ratio.

Authors: We agree that the three-component disentangling is central to ruling out a compact-object companion and that the original manuscript was insufficiently explicit on methodological details. In the revised version we will: (1) name the algorithm (a modified version of the Fourier-domain disentangling code of Hadrava 1995 as implemented in our pipeline, with explicit three-component modeling), (2) quantify third-light and blending contributions using the TESS light-curve solution (inner-binary light fraction ~0.45, outer primary ~0.55) and propagate these into the RV error budget, and (3) add an appendix with injection-recovery tests on 100 simulated spectra that include realistic activity-induced line-profile variations at the observed SNR. These additions will directly address the concern about possible bias in the velocity amplitudes and mass ratio. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity in observational derivation

full rationale

The paper derives masses (0.85, 0.63, 0.61 Msun) and periods (277.2 d outer, ~18.26 d inner) from direct radial-velocity curves in high-SNR spectra and TESS eclipse photometry using standard Keplerian models. No equation reduces an output to a fitted input by construction, and no self-citation chain supplies the central claim. The three-component disentangling is presented as an independent data-driven step that falsifies the initial single-lined compact-object hypothesis.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

4 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The claim rests on standard assumptions of Keplerian motion for hierarchical orbits and main-sequence classification from photometry and spectra; orbital elements are fitted parameters derived from data.

free parameters (4)

outer orbital period = 277.2 days
Fitted from radial velocity curve of the outer orbit
inner orbital period = 18.26 days
Derived from TESS eclipse timing
primary star mass = 0.85 solar masses
Derived from orbital solution assuming main-sequence star
inner binary component masses = 0.63 and 0.61 solar masses
Fitted from combined spectroscopic and photometric data

axioms (2)

domain assumption Stars follow main-sequence mass-luminosity and color relations based on Gaia photometry
Used to classify components as main-sequence and estimate masses
standard math Orbital motion is purely Keplerian in the hierarchical configuration
Standard assumption for deriving periods and masses from RV and light curves

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5711 in / 1528 out tokens · 49434 ms · 2026-05-16T09:58:08.343353+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Lean theorems connected to this paper

Citations machine-checked in the Pith Canon. Every link opens the source theorem in the public Lean library.

IndisputableMonolith/Cost/FunctionalEquation.lean washburn_uniqueness_aczel unclear

?

unclear
Relation between the paper passage and the cited Recognition theorem.

SB3 spectral fit... isochrone analysis... mass function fm sin^{-3}i = 0.432 M⊙

What do these tags mean?

matches: The paper's claim is directly supported by a theorem in the formal canon.
supports: The theorem supports part of the paper's argument, but the paper may add assumptions or extra steps.
extends: The paper goes beyond the formal theorem; the theorem is a base layer rather than the whole result.
uses: The paper appears to rely on the theorem as machinery.
contradicts: The paper's claim conflicts with a theorem or certificate in the canon.
unclear: Pith found a possible connection, but the passage is too broad, indirect, or ambiguous to say the theorem truly supports the claim.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

Star cluster formation from turbulent clumps. V. Stellar clustering around massive stars
astro-ph.GA 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 4.0

N-body simulations show massive stars in TCCA clusters rapidly acquire triple or higher multiples and local density enhancements via dynamics, with multiplicity trends and shallower N_* profiles than competitive accre...

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

94 extracted references · 94 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper · 3 internal anchors

[1]

P., Abbott, R., Abbott, T

Abbott, B. P., Abbott, R., Abbott, T. D., et al. 2017, ApJL, 848, L12

work page 2017
[2]

D., Acernese, F., et al

Abbott, R., Abbott, T. D., Acernese, F., et al. 2023, Physical Review X, 13, 041039

work page 2023
[3]

S., Zola, S., Blokesz, A., Østensen, R

Baran, A. S., Zola, S., Blokesz, A., Østensen, R. H., & Silvotti, R. 2015, A&A, 577, A146

work page 2015
[4]

2024, A&A, 692, A247

Bashi, D., & Tokovinin, A. 2024, A&A, 692, A247

work page 2024
[5]

Pyro: Deep Universal Probabilistic Programming

Bingham, E., Chen, J. P., Jankowiak, M., et al. 2018, arXiv preprint arXiv:1810.09538

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018
[6]

2016, MNRAS, 455, 4136

Borkovits, T., Hajdu, T., Sztakovics, J., et al. 2016, MNRAS, 455, 4136

work page 2016
[7]

2015, MNRAS, 448, 946

Borkovits, T., Rappaport, S., Hajdu, T., & Sztakovics, J. 2015, MNRAS, 448, 946

work page 2015
[8]

A., Hajdu, T., et al

Borkovits, T., Rappaport, S. A., Hajdu, T., et al. 2020, MNRAS, 493, 5005

work page 2020
[9]

L., et al

Borkovits, T., Derekas, A., Kiss, L. L., et al. 2013, MNRAS, 428, 1656

work page 2013
[10]

A., Mitnyan, T., et al

Borkovits, T., Rappaport, S. A., Mitnyan, T., et al. 2025a, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2510.04565 —. 2025b, A&A, 695, A209

work page arXiv
[11]

A., Clayton, G

Cardelli, J. A., Clayton, G. C., & Mathis, J. S. 1989, ApJ, 345, 245

work page 1989
[12]

Castelli, F., & Kurucz, R. L. 2003, in IAU Symposium, V ol. 210, Modelling of Stellar Atmospheres, ed. N. Piskunov, W. W. Weiss, & D. F. Gray, A20

work page 2003
[13]

D., Craig, P

Chakrabarti, S., Simon, J. D., Craig, P. A., et al. 2023, AJ, 166, 6

work page 2023
[14]

2016, ApJ, 823, 102

Choi, J., Dotter, A., Conroy, C., et al. 2016, ApJ, 823, 102

work page 2016
[15]

P., & Castilho, B

Coelho, P., Barbuy, B., Meléndez, J., Schiavon, R. P., & Castilho, B. V . 2005, A&A, 443, 735

work page 2005
[16]

E., Prša, A., Stassun, K

Conroy, K. E., Prša, A., Stassun, K. G., et al. 2014, AJ, 147, 45

work page 2014
[17]

R., Borkovits, T., Mitnyan, T., Rappaport, S

Czavalinga, D. R., Borkovits, T., Mitnyan, T., Rappaport, S. A., & Pál, A. 2023, MNRAS, 526, 2830

work page 2023
[18]

2024, AJ, 168, 217

Ding, X., Ji, K., Song, Z., et al. 2024, AJ, 168, 217

work page 2024
[19]

L., Johnston, C., Toonen, S., et al

Eisner, N. L., Johnston, C., Toonen, S., et al. 2022, MNRAS, 511, 4710

work page 2022
[20]

2024a, New Astronomy Reviews, 98, 101694 —

El-Badry, K. 2024a, New Astronomy Reviews, 98, 101694 —. 2024b, The Open Journal of Astrophysics, 7, 38 —. 2025, The Open Journal of Astrophysics, 8, 62

work page 2025
[21]

W., et al

El-Badry, K., Rix, H.-W., Latham, D. W., et al. 2024, The Open Journal of Astrophysics, 7, 58

work page 2024
[22]

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

Foreman-Mackey, D., Hogg, D. W., Lang, D., & Goodman, J. 2013, PASP, 125, 306

work page 2013
[23]

2025, pyphot, doi:10.5281/zenodo.14712174 Gaia Collaboration, Arenou, F., Babusiaux, C., et al

Fouesneau, M. 2025, pyphot, doi:10.5281/zenodo.14712174 Gaia Collaboration, Arenou, F., Babusiaux, C., et al. 2023a, A&A, 674, A34 Gaia Collaboration, Montegriffo, P., Bellazzini, M., et al. 2023b, A&A, 674, A33 Gaia Collaboration, Panuzzo, P., Mazeh, T., et al. 2024, A&A, 686, L2

work page doi:10.5281/zenodo.14712174 2025
[24]

2022, A&A, 668, A173

Gaulme, P., Borkovits, T., Appourchaux, T., et al. 2022, A&A, 668, A173

work page 2022
[25]

2023, A&A, 677, A11

Geier, S., Dorsch, M., Dawson, H., et al. 2023, A&A, 677, A11

work page 2023
[26]

B., Stern, H

Gelman, A., Carlin, J. B., Stern, H. S., et al. 2014, Bayesian data analysis, 3rd edn., Texts in statistical science (CRC Press)

work page 2014
[27]

R., Matson, R

Gies, D. R., Matson, R. A., Guo, Z., et al. 2015, AJ, 150, 178

work page 2015
[28]

R., Williams, S

Gies, D. R., Williams, S. J., Matson, R. A., et al. 2012, AJ, 143, 137

work page 2012
[29]

Grevesse, N., & Sauval, A. J. 1998, Space Sci. Rev., 85, 161

work page 1998
[30]

2022, MNRAS, 509, 246

Hajdu, T., Borkovits, T., Forgács-Dajka, E., Sztakovics, J., & Bódi, A. 2022, MNRAS, 509, 246

work page 2022
[31]

2019, MNRAS, 485, 2562

Hajdu, T., Borkovits, T., Forgács-Dajka, E., et al. 2019, MNRAS, 485, 2562

work page 2019
[32]

The No-U-Turn Sampler: Adaptively Setting Path Lengths in Hamiltonian Monte Carlo

Hoffman, M. D., & Gelman, A. 2011, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:1111.4246

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011
[33]

Iben, Jr., I., & Tutukov, A. V . 1984, ApJS, 54, 335

work page 1984
[34]

Kipping, D. M. 2013, MNRAS, 435, 2152

work page 2013
[35]

2016, AJ, 151, 68

Kirk, B., Conroy, K., Prša, A., et al. 2016, AJ, 151, 68

work page 2016
[36]

B., Rappaport, S

Kostov, V . B., Rappaport, S. A., Borkovits, T., et al. 2024, ApJ, 974, 25

work page 2024
[37]

B., Powell, B

Kostov, V . B., Powell, B. P., Rappaport, S. A., et al. 2026, AJ, 171, 29

work page 2026
[38]

L., & Bell, B

Kurucz, R. L., & Bell, B. 1995, Atomic line list

work page 1995
[39]

L., Babusiaux, C., & Cox, N

Lallement, R., Vergely, J. L., Babusiaux, C., & Cox, N. L. J. 2022, A&A, 661, A147

work page 2022
[40]

W., Hong, K., & Hinse, T

Lee, J. W., Hong, K., & Hinse, T. C. 2015, AJ, 149, 93

work page 2015
[41]

W., Kim, S.-L., Hong, K., Lee, C.-U., & Koo, J.-R

Lee, J. W., Kim, S.-L., Hong, K., Lee, C.-U., & Koo, J.-R. 2014, AJ, 148, 37

work page 2014
[42]

W., Kim, S.-L., Lee, C.-U., et al

Lee, J. W., Kim, S.-L., Lee, C.-U., et al. 2013, ApJ, 763, 74

work page 2013
[43]

1997, A&AS, 125, 229 —

Lejeune, T., Cuisinier, F., & Buser, R. 1997, A&AS, 125, 229 —. 1998, A&AS, 130, 65

work page 1997
[44]

2022, ApJ, 938, 78

Li, X., Wang, S., Zhao, X., et al. 2022, ApJ, 938, 78

work page 2022
[45]

A., & Aarseth, S

Mardling, R. A., & Aarseth, S. J. 2001, MNRAS, 321, 398

work page 2001
[46]

C., Fanson, J., Schiminovich, D., et al

Martin, D. C., Fanson, J., Schiminovich, D., et al. 2005, ApJL, 619, L1

work page 2005
[47]

2022, MNRAS, 517, 4005

Mazeh, T., Faigler, S., Bashi, D., et al. 2022, MNRAS, 517, 4005

work page 2022
[48]

R., et al

Mitnyan, T., Borkovits, T., Czavalinga, D. R., et al. 2024, A&A, 685, A43

work page 2024
[49]

A., Pál, A., & Maxted, P

Mitnyan, T., Borkovits, T., Rappaport, S. A., Pál, A., & Maxted, P. F. L. 2020, MNRAS, 498, 6034

work page 2020
[50]

G., Marcadon, F., et al

Moharana, A., Hełminiak, K. G., Marcadon, F., et al. 2023, MNRAS, 521, 1908 —. 2024, A&A, 690, A153

work page 2023
[51]

2014, AJ, 148, 81

Munari, U., Henden, A., Frigo, A., et al. 2014, AJ, 148, 81

work page 2014
[52]

Nagarajan, P., El-Badry, K., Triaud, A. H. M. J., et al. 2024, PASP, 136, 014202

work page 2024
[53]

1996, The VizieR database of astronomical catalogues, CDS, Centre de Donn ˜A©es astronomiques de Strasbourg, doi: 10.26093/CDS/VIZIER

Ochsenbein, F. 1996, The VizieR database of astronomical catalogues, doi:10.26093/CDS/VIZIER

work page doi:10.26093/cds/vizier 1996
[54]

2000, A&AS, 143, 23

Ochsenbein, F., Bauer, P., & Marcout, J. 2000, A&AS, 143, 23

work page 2000
[55]

J., Finkbeiner, D

Padmanabhan, N., Schlegel, D. J., Finkbeiner, D. P., et al. 2008, ApJ, 674, 1217

work page 2008
[56]

2011, ApJS, 192, 35

Paxton, B., Bildsten, L., Dotter, A., et al. 2011, ApJS, 192, 35

work page 2011
[57]

2013, ApJS, 208, 4

Paxton, B., Cantiello, M., Arras, P., et al. 2013, ApJS, 208, 4

work page 2013
[58]

2015, ApJS, 220, 15

Paxton, B., Marchant, P., Schwab, J., et al. 2015, ApJS, 220, 15

work page 2015
[59]

Composable Effects for Flexible and Accelerated Probabilistic Programming in NumPyro

Phan, D., Pradhan, N., & Jankowiak, M. 2019, arXiv preprint arXiv:1912.11554 Prša, A., Kochoska, A., Conroy, K. E., et al. 2022, ApJS, 258, 16

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019
[60]

2023, AJ, 165, 187

Qi, S., Gu, W.-M., Yi, T., et al. 2023, AJ, 165, 187

work page 2023
[61]

2013, ApJ, 768, 33

Rappaport, S., Deck, K., Levine, A., et al. 2013, ApJ, 768, 33

work page 2013
[62]

A., Borkovits, T., Gagliano, R., et al

Rappaport, S. A., Borkovits, T., Gagliano, R., et al. 2022, MNRAS, 513, 4341

work page 2022
[63]

A., Borkovits, T., Mitnyan, T., et al

Rappaport, S. A., Borkovits, T., Mitnyan, T., et al. 2024, A&A, 686, A27

work page 2024
[64]

R., Winn, J

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

work page 2015
[65]

F., Emilio, M., Labadie-Bartz, J., et al

Rocha, D. F., Emilio, M., Labadie-Bartz, J., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2511.05761

work page arXiv 2025
[66]

M., Jayasinghe, T., Stanek, K

Rowan, D. M., Jayasinghe, T., Stanek, K. Z., et al. 2022, MNRAS, 517, 2190

work page 2022
[67]

M., Jayasinghe, T., Tucker, M

Rowan, D. M., Jayasinghe, T., Tucker, M. A., et al. 2024, MNRAS, 529, 587 Samus’, N. N., Kazarovets, E. V ., Durlevich, O. V ., Kireeva, N. N., &

work page 2024
[68]

Pastukhova, E. N. 2017, Astronomy Reports, 61, 80

work page 2017
[69]

2024, in Society of Photo- Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, V ol

Sato, B., Hashimoto, O., Omiya, M., et al. 2024, in Society of Photo- Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, V ol. 13096, Ground-based and Airborne Instrumentation for Astronomy X, ed. J. J

work page 2024
[70]

J., Prieto, J

Shappee, B. J., Prieto, J. L., Grupe, D., et al. 2014, ApJ, 788, 48

work page 2014
[71]

2022, Nature Astronomy, 6, 1085

Shenar, T., Sana, H., Mahy, L., et al. 2022, Nature Astronomy, 6, 1085

work page 2022
[72]

2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2509.12808

Shiraishi, Y ., Hotokezaka, K., Masuda, K., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2509.12808

work page arXiv 2025
[73]

F., Cutri, R

Skrutskie, M. F., Cutri, R. M., Stiening, R., et al. 2006, AJ, 131, 1163

work page 2006
[74]

H., Quinn, S

Steffen, J. H., Quinn, S. N., Borucki, W. J., et al. 2011, MNRAS, 417, L31

work page 2011
[75]

2023, ApJ, 946, 79

Tanikawa, A., Hattori, K., Kawanaka, N., et al. 2023, ApJ, 946, 79

work page 2023
[76]

S., et al

Tanikawa, A., Wang, L., Fujii, M. S., et al. 2025, The Open Journal of Astrophysics, 8, 79

work page 2025
[77]

2014a, AJ, 147, 86 —

Tokovinin, A. 2014a, AJ, 147, 86 —. 2014b, AJ, 147, 87 —. 2018, ApJS, 235, 6

work page 2018
[78]

2024, ApJ, 977, 151

Tomoyoshi, M., Masuda, K., Hirano, T., et al. 2024, ApJ, 977, 151

work page 2024
[79]

A., Wheeler, A

Tucker, M. A., Wheeler, A. J., Rowan, D. M., & Huber, M. E. 2025, The Open Journal of Astrophysics, 8, 61

work page 2025
[80]

A., & Fischer, D

Valenti, J. A., & Fischer, D. A. 2005, ApJS, 159, 141

work page 2005

Showing first 80 references.