arxiv: 2603.22247 · v1 · submitted 2026-03-23 · 🌌 astro-ph.SR

Recognition: 1 theorem link

· Lean Theorem

Two hot pre-white dwarfs inside the red-giant-branch planetary nebula Pa 13 -- Double core evolution or common envelope-induced rejuvenation?

Nicole Reindl , David Jones , Todd Hillwig , Marcelo M. Miller Bertolami , Matti Dorsch , Nicholas Chornay , Max Pritzkuleit

Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-15 00:40 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.SR

keywords planetary nebulapre-white dwarfscommon envelope evolutioneclipsing binarypost-RGB starsradial velocitydouble degenerate

0 comments

The pith

The nucleus of planetary nebula Pa 13 is a close binary of two hot pre-white dwarfs, giving the clearest evidence that such nebulae can surround post-red-giant-branch stars.

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

The paper reports that the central star of Pa 13 is a short-period eclipsing binary whose two components are both hot pre-white dwarfs, one cooler and larger at 50,000 K and 0.40 solar radii, the other hotter and smaller at 75,000 K and 0.16 solar radii. Precise masses of 0.41 and 0.39 solar masses were obtained from radial-velocity curves and light-curve modeling, together with a small but measurable orbital eccentricity. This configuration shows that the nebula was ejected after the red-giant-branch phase rather than the usual asymptotic-giant-branch phase, and that the system is a detached descendant of over-contact double-degenerate binaries such as Hen 2-428. The near-unity mass ratio points either to double-core common-envelope evolution or to an efficient rejuvenation process that reheated the cooler white dwarf after envelope ejection.

Core claim

Pa 13's nucleus is a double-lined eclipsing binary consisting of two pre-white dwarfs with effective temperatures 50 kK and 75 kK, radii 0.40 and 0.16 solar radii, dynamical masses 0.41 and 0.39 solar masses, orbital period 0.3988 days, and eccentricity 0.02. The system supplies the strongest existing evidence that planetary nebulae can be observed around post-RGB stars. Immediately after common-envelope ejection the cooler component still filled its Roche lobe, so Pa 13 is a more evolved, detached descendant of over-contact double-degenerate systems such as Hen 2-428. Given the mass ratio near unity, the binary may have formed through double-core common-envelope evolution, or an efficient C

What carries the argument

Two-component NLTE spectral analysis of phase-resolved X-Shooter spectra combined with multi-band light-curve modeling and radial-velocity fitting to derive atmospheric parameters and dynamical masses.

If this is right

Pa 13 is a more evolved, detached descendant of over-contact double-degenerate systems such as Hen 2-428.
The near-unity mass ratio favors formation via double-core common-envelope evolution.
An efficient common-envelope-induced rejuvenation mechanism must exist if the system did not form by double-core evolution.
The measured orbital eccentricity supplies a new datum for modeling angular-momentum loss during and after common-envelope ejection.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

A larger sample of post-RGB planetary nebulae may be identifiable by searching for similar short-period double-lined nuclei.
The existence of a post-RGB channel implies that some fraction of single-star planetary-nebula models have been applied to the wrong evolutionary stage.
Rejuvenation efficiency could be tested by comparing cooling ages of the two components against the kinematic age of the nebula.
Eccentricity measurements in additional post-CE binaries would constrain whether eccentricity is preserved or excited during envelope ejection.

Load-bearing premise

The surface brightness ratio between the two stars can be reliably determined from the spectra even though lines from the hotter star are weak, since this ratio directly controls the radial-velocity curve and therefore the dynamical mass of the secondary.

What would settle it

Higher signal-to-noise spectra or independent photometry that yields a surface-brightness ratio differing by more than 20 percent from the adopted value, producing a radial-velocity amplitude for the hotter star that implies a mass inconsistent with the reported 0.39 solar masses.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2603.22247 by David Jones, Marcelo M. Miller Bertolami, Matti Dorsch, Max Pritzkuleit, Nicholas Chornay, Nicole Reindl, Todd Hillwig.

**Figure 1.** Figure 1: Two examples X-Shooter spectra (gray) taken close to maximum RV separation, respectively. Light gray regions indicate the location of a weak residual nebular line, which have been excluded from the fit. The red and blue lines represent the contribution of Star 1 and Star 2, respectively, and the dashed, purple line shows the combined fit combined fit. The upper panel show the predicted line profiles assum… view at source ↗

**Figure 2.** Figure 2: Kiel diagram, showing the position of the two CSs of Pa 13 compared to H-shell burning post-AGB tracks (black lines) from Miller Bertolami (2016) and post-RGB tracks (dashed, gray lines) from Hall et al. (2013). of Star 2 (shown in blue) become stronger, and consequently the RV shift that is needed to reproduce the observation becomes lower. Thus, K2 naturally decreases with increasing surface ratio. We c… view at source ↗

**Figure 3.** Figure 3: The top three panels show our best fit eccentric PHOEBE model (black) compared to the observed ZTF g- (green) and r-band (red) and SARA i-band (brown) light curves. The gray line indicates our best model that does not account for eccentricity in the fit. The bottom panel shows the RVs of Star 1 (red crosses) and Star 2 (blue crosses) as measured assuming a surface ratio of 0.17. The formal fitting error ba… view at source ↗

**Figure 5.** Figure 5: Toomre diagram showing the location of Pa 13. The solid and dashed lines indicate the one- and two-sigma contours, respectively, of the U, V, and W velocity distributions of main-sequence stars from Kordopatis et al. (2011). The gray, green, and blue lines indicate the velocity distribution of thin disk, thick disk, and Galactic halo stars, respectively. NGC 6026 could be reproduced with an eccentricity i… view at source ↗

**Figure 6.** Figure 6: Total mass plotted against logarithmic period of DD systems. Pa 13 is shown in red and Hen 2-428 in purple. The black dots are close double WD systems compiled by Munday et al. (2024). The teal, dashed-dotted line indicates which systems will merge within a Hubble time, and the black, dashed line indicates the Chandrasekhar mass limit. 8. Conclusion In this work we reported that Pa 13 is the second double … view at source ↗

read the original abstract

Close binary central stars of PNe offer a unique window for investigating the conditions immediately following the ejection of a common envelope (CE). Double eclipsing and double-lined double systems are particularly valuable as they provide minimally model-dependent constraints on fundamental binary parameters. We report that the nucleus of Pa13 (P=0.3988d) belongs to this rare class of systems and present a comprehensive analysis of its double-degenerate binary. We performed a two-component NLTE spectral analysis based on phase-resolved X-Shooter spectroscopy, multi-band light-curve modeling, SED fitting, as well as a kinematic analysis. Both stars are found to be hot pre-white dwarfs, with Star1 being cooler but larger (Teff=50kK, R=0.40Rsol) than Star2 (Teff=75kK, R=0.16Rsol). The weakness of spectral lines of Star2 made both the atmospheric and RV analyses challenging, and we uncovered a strong sensitivity of the assumed surface ratio to its derived RV curve. Yet, the RV curve and Kiel mass of Star1 (M1=0.41+/-0.02Msol) could be determined precisely, allowing for a dynamical mass determination of Star2 (M2=0.39+/-0.04Msol). We uncovered that Pa13 exhibits a small but significant orbital eccentricity (e=0.02+/-0.01), making it only the second post-CE binary nucleus with a measured eccentricity. We conclude that Pa13 provides hitherto the strongest evidence that PNe can be observed around post-RGB stars. Immediately after the CE-ejection, Star1 likely still filled its Roche lobe, suggesting that Pa13 is a more evolved, detached descendant of over-contact double-degenerate systems such as Hen2-428. Since the mass ratio of Pa13 is close to unity the system may have formed through double-core CE evolution. Alternatively, there must exist an efficient CE-induced rejuvenation mechanism capable of reheating the cool white dwarf in the binary, as already indicated by Hen2-428. (abbreviated)

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

read the letter

Pa13 supplies the best dynamical masses so far for both stars in a post-common-envelope planetary nebula nucleus, but the post-RGB interpretation depends on an uncertain mass for the hotter component. The work stands out because it delivers phase-resolved NLTE spectroscopy plus light-curve modeling on a double-lined system with period 0.4 days. Both components come out as hot pre-white dwarfs with masses near 0.4 solar masses and a small but significant eccentricity. That combination is new and gives a clean test case for how these binaries evolve right after envelope ejection. The analysis is careful where it can be. The cooler star's parameters are well pinned down from its stronger lines and the orbital solution. The light curves and SED fitting add independent checks on radii and temperatures. The weaker part is the hotter star. Its spectral lines are faint, so the radial-velocity amplitude shifts with the assumed surface-brightness ratio. The paper notes this sensitivity explicitly, and the resulting mass uncertainty of plus or minus 0.04 solar masses already reaches the region where the star could have gone through the helium flash. That makes the claim that Pa13 is the strongest evidence for planetary nebulae around post-RGB stars rest on a single assumption that is hard to verify from the data shown. This paper is aimed at researchers who work on common-envelope evolution and the formation of close white-dwarf binaries. The new masses and eccentricity are worth having in the literature even if the evolutionary channel remains ambiguous. It should go to peer review because the observations are solid and the questions it raises about rejuvenation mechanisms are worth discussing in print.

Referee Report

2 major / 1 minor

Summary. The manuscript analyzes the central star of planetary nebula Pa 13 as a short-period (P=0.3988 d) double-lined eclipsing binary consisting of two hot pre-white dwarfs. Using phase-resolved X-Shooter spectroscopy, two-component NLTE fitting, multi-band light-curve modeling, and SED analysis, the authors derive Teff and radii for both components and obtain dynamical masses M1=0.41±0.02 M⊙ (Star1) and M2=0.39±0.04 M⊙ (Star2). They report a small but significant orbital eccentricity and conclude that both stars lie below the RGB-tip helium-flash threshold, making Pa 13 the strongest evidence yet that planetary nebulae can form around post-RGB stars, possibly via double-core common-envelope evolution or CE-induced rejuvenation.

Significance. If the post-RGB classification is secure, the result would strengthen observational constraints on common-envelope ejection and binary channels that produce planetary nebulae without an AGB phase. The detection of measurable eccentricity in a post-CE system and the near-unity mass ratio are additional points of interest for evolutionary models.

major comments (2)

[radial-velocity and mass-determination analysis] The dynamical mass of Star2 (0.39±0.04 M⊙) is obtained from the orbital solution after two-component NLTE fitting; the manuscript explicitly states that the RV curve of Star2 exhibits strong sensitivity to the adopted surface brightness ratio because its lines are weak. The quoted uncertainty range already spans 0.35–0.43 M⊙, so any systematic offset in the continuum dilution factor can move the mass across the RGB-tip threshold that underpins the post-RGB claim.
[evolutionary discussion and conclusions] The central claim that Pa 13 supplies the strongest evidence for PNe around post-RGB stars requires both components to have core masses securely below the helium-flash limit. While Star1’s Kiel mass is robust, the sensitivity of Star2’s mass to the surface-brightness ratio directly affects the evolutionary classification and the interpretation that the system is a detached descendant of over-contact double-degenerate binaries.

minor comments (1)

[abstract] The abstract states that the mass ratio is close to unity but does not quantify how this ratio was derived from the combined RV and light-curve solution; a brief parenthetical value would improve clarity.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their thorough review and valuable comments on our manuscript. We address the major comments point by point below, focusing on the uncertainties in the mass determination of Star 2 and the implications for our evolutionary conclusions.

read point-by-point responses

Referee: [radial-velocity and mass-determination analysis] The dynamical mass of Star2 (0.39±0.04 M⊙) is obtained from the orbital solution after two-component NLTE fitting; the manuscript explicitly states that the RV curve of Star2 exhibits strong sensitivity to the adopted surface brightness ratio because its lines are weak. The quoted uncertainty range already spans 0.35–0.43 M⊙, so any systematic offset in the continuum dilution factor can move the mass across the RGB-tip threshold that underpins the post-RGB claim.

Authors: We fully acknowledge the challenges in determining the radial velocity curve for Star2 due to its weak spectral lines and the resulting sensitivity to the surface brightness ratio. The uncertainty of ±0.04 M⊙ was derived from the orbital fitting process, which included variations in the continuum dilution. To strengthen this, in the revised manuscript we will include a dedicated sensitivity analysis where we vary the surface brightness ratio by ±10% around the best-fit value and recompute the RV semi-amplitude for Star2. This will demonstrate that the mass of Star2 remains below 0.45 M⊙ in all tested cases, supporting our post-RGB classification. We will also provide the full covariance matrix from the light-curve and RV modeling to allow readers to assess the robustness. revision: partial
Referee: [evolutionary discussion and conclusions] The central claim that Pa 13 supplies the strongest evidence for PNe around post-RGB stars requires both components to have core masses securely below the helium-flash limit. While Star1’s Kiel mass is robust, the sensitivity of Star2’s mass to the surface-brightness ratio directly affects the evolutionary classification and the interpretation that the system is a detached descendant of over-contact double-degenerate binaries.

Authors: We agree that the post-RGB interpretation hinges on both stars having masses below the helium-flash threshold. Star1's mass is securely determined at 0.41 ± 0.02 M⊙. For Star2, while there is sensitivity, our best estimate is 0.39 M⊙ with the 1σ upper limit at 0.43 M⊙. Standard stellar models place the helium-flash core mass limit around 0.45–0.47 M⊙ for solar metallicity. We will revise the discussion section to explicitly discuss this uncertainty range and note that even at the upper limit, the system is consistent with post-RGB evolution. We will also temper the claim slightly to 'strong evidence' rather than 'strongest evidence yet' if appropriate, but maintain that the combined photometric, spectroscopic, and dynamical data support the conclusion. This addresses the concern without altering the overall interpretation. revision: partial

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: masses and classification follow from direct observations and standard Keplerian analysis

full rationale

The paper's derivation begins with phase-resolved X-Shooter spectra and multi-band photometry, applies standard two-component NLTE atmospheric modeling and light-curve fitting to obtain Teff, R, and surface-brightness ratio, then extracts radial-velocity amplitudes K1 and K2. Dynamical masses are computed from the observed period and velocity amplitudes via Kepler's laws with only the usual inclination constraint from the light curve; no fitted quantity is redefined as a prediction of itself. Star1's Kiel mass is obtained by placing the spectroscopically determined (Teff, log g) point on external evolutionary tracks. The post-RGB classification follows by comparing both masses (~0.4 Msol) against the independently known RGB-tip helium-flash threshold. The acknowledged sensitivity of Star2's RV curve to the surface-brightness ratio is ordinary error propagation, not a self-referential loop. No self-citation, ansatz smuggling, or renaming of known results occurs in the load-bearing steps.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

1 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The analysis rests on standard NLTE stellar atmosphere models and binary light-curve assumptions; no new entities are postulated and free parameters are limited to the surface brightness ratio needed for RV extraction.

free parameters (1)

surface brightness ratio
Fitted or assumed to separate the weak-lined hotter component in the radial-velocity analysis; directly affects derived mass of Star2.

axioms (2)

domain assumption NLTE model atmospheres accurately reproduce the observed spectra of hot pre-white dwarfs
Invoked for the two-component spectral decomposition in the X-Shooter data.
domain assumption Orbital inclination derived from light-curve modeling is reliable for dynamical mass calculation
Used to convert RV semi-amplitudes into masses.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5731 in / 1499 out tokens · 28367 ms · 2026-05-15T00:40:22.747120+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.

Kiel mass of Star 1 (0.41±0.02 M⊙) derived by interpolating Hall et al. (2013) post-RGB tracks; dynamical mass of Star 2 from K1, K2 and inclination.

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.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

86 extracted references · 86 canonical work pages

[1]

& Ibanoˇglu, C

Afs,ar, M. & Ibanoˇglu, C. 2008, MNRAS, 391, 802

work page 2008
[2]

G., Calcaferro, L

Althaus, L. G., Calcaferro, L. M., Córsico, A. H., & Brown, W. R. 2025, A&A, 699, A280

work page 2025
[3]

G., Miller Bertolami, M

Althaus, L. G., Miller Bertolami, M. M., & Córsico, A. H. 2013, A&A, 557, A19 Antunes Amaral, L., Munday, J., Vuˇckovi´c, M., et al. 2024, A&A, 685, A9

work page 2013
[4]

N., Wade, R

Barlow, B. N., Wade, R. A., & Liss, S. E. 2012, ApJ, 753, 101

work page 2012
[5]

C., Kulkarni, S

Bellm, E. C., Kulkarni, S. R., Graham, M. J., et al. 2019, PASP, 131, 018002

work page 2019
[6]

R., Kong, A

Bhattacharjee, S., Kulkarni, S. R., Kong, A. K. H., et al. 2025, PASP, 137, 024201

work page 2025
[7]

Boffin, H. M. J., Miszalski, B., Rauch, T., et al. 2012, Science, 338, 773

work page 2012
[8]

A., Schneider, F

Bronner, V . A., Schneider, F. R. N., Podsiadlowski, P., & Röpke, F. K. 2024, A&A, 683, A65

work page 2024
[9]

Brown, G. E. 1995, ApJ, 440, 270

work page 1995
[10]

B., Coughlin, M

Burdge, K. B., Coughlin, M. W., Fuller, J., et al. 2019, Nature, 571, 528

work page 2019
[11]

2025, ApJ, 980, 227 Article number, page 10 of 12 Nicole Reindl et al.: Two hot pre-white dwarfs inside Pa 13

Chen, P., Fang, X., Chen, X., & Liu, J. 2025, ApJ, 980, 227 Article number, page 10 of 12 Nicole Reindl et al.: Two hot pre-white dwarfs inside Pa 13

work page 2025
[12]

& Walton, N

Chornay, N. & Walton, N. A. 2020, A&A, 638, A103

work page 2020
[13]

E., Kochoska, A., Hey, D., et al

Conroy, K. E., Kochoska, A., Hey, D., et al. 2020, ApJS, 250, 34

work page 2020
[14]

Croxall, K. V . & Pogge, R. W. 2019, rwpogge/modsIDL: modsIDL Binocular

work page 2019
[15]

2022, A&A, 662, A40 De Marco, O., Hillwig, T

Culpan, R., Geier, S., Reindl, N., et al. 2022, A&A, 662, A40 De Marco, O., Hillwig, T. C., & Smith, A. J. 2008, AJ, 136, 323

work page 2022
[16]

Dewi, J. D. M., Podsiadlowski, P., & Sena, A. 2006, MNRAS, 368, 1742

work page 2006
[17]

S., Philip Monai, A., et al

Dorsch, M., Jeffery, C. S., Philip Monai, A., et al. 2024, A&A, 691, A165

work page 2024
[18]

2022, A&A, 658, L9

Dorsch, M., Reindl, N., Pelisoli, I., et al. 2022, A&A, 658, L9

work page 2022
[19]

Eggleton, P. P. 1983, ApJ, 268, 368

work page 1983
[20]

El-Badry, K., Rix, H.-W., & Heintz, T. M. 2021, MNRAS, 506, 2269

work page 2021
[21]

R., Iben, Jr., I., & Smarr, L

Evans, C. R., Iben, Jr., I., & Smarr, L. 1987, ApJ, 323, 129

work page 1987
[22]

2024, A&A, 691, A290

Filiz, S., Werner, K., Rauch, T., & Reindl, N. 2024, A&A, 691, A290

work page 2024
[23]

L., Braker, I

Finch, N. L., Braker, I. P., Reindl, N., et al. 2019, in Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series, V ol. 519, Radiative Signatures from the Cosmos, ed. K. Werner, C. Stehle, T. Rauch, & T. Lanz, 231

work page 2019
[24]

L., Massa, D., Gordon, K

Fitzpatrick, E. L., Massa, D., Gordon, K. D., Bohlin, R., & Clayton, G. C. 2019, ApJ, 886, 108

work page 2019
[25]

J., Parker, Q

Frew, D. J., Parker, Q. A., & Bojiˇci´c, I. S. 2016, MNRAS, 455, 1459 Gaia Collaboration, Brown, A. G. A., Vallenari, A., et al. 2021a, A&A, 649, A1 Gaia Collaboration, Brown, A. G. A., Vallenari, A., et al. 2021b, A&A, 650, C3 García-Berro, E., Lorén-Aguilar, P., Aznar-Siguán, G., et al. 2012, ApJ, 749, 25 García-Segura, G., Ricker, P. M., & Taam, R. E. ...

work page 2016
[26]

& Perets, H

Glanz, H. & Perets, H. B. 2021, MNRAS, 507, 2659

work page 2021
[27]

D., Clayton, G

Gordon, K. D., Clayton, G. C., Decleir, M., et al. 2023, ApJ, 950, 86

work page 2023
[28]

D., Tout, C

Hall, P. D., Tout, C. A., Izzard, R. G., & Keller, D. 2013, MNRAS, 435, 2048

work page 2013
[29]

2018, Open Astronomy, 27, 35

Heber, U., Irrgang, A., & Schaffenroth, J. 2018, Open Astronomy, 27, 35

work page 2018
[30]

& Weiss, A

Higl, J. & Weiss, A. 2017, A&A, 608, A62

work page 2017
[31]

C., Bond, H

Hillwig, T. C., Bond, H. E., Af¸ sar, M., & De Marco, O. 2010, AJ, 140, 319

work page 2010
[32]

C., Frew, D

Hillwig, T. C., Frew, D. J., Reindl, N., et al. 2017, AJ, 153, 24

work page 2017
[33]

L., & Webbink, R

Hils, D., Bender, P. L., & Webbink, R. F. 1990, ApJ, 360, 75

work page 1990
[34]

2021, A&A, 650, A102

Irrgang, A., Geier, S., Heber, U., et al. 2021, A&A, 650, A102

work page 2021
[35]

G., Tauris, T

Istrate, A. G., Tauris, T. M., Langer, N., & Antoniadis, J. 2014, A&A, 571, L3

work page 2014
[36]

Jones, D., Boffin, H. M. J., Rodríguez-Gil, P., et al. 2015, A&A, 580, A19

work page 2015
[37]

Jones, D., Corradi, R. L. M., García Pérez, G. A., et al. 2026, A&A, 707, A169

work page 2026
[38]

C., & Reindl, N

Jones, D., Hillwig, T. C., & Reindl, N. 2023, in Highlights on Spanish Astro- physics XI, ed. M. Manteiga, L. Bellot, P. Benavidez, A. de Lorenzo-Cáceres, M. A. Fuente, M. J. Martínez, M. Vázquez Acosta, & C. Dafonte, 216

work page 2023
[39]

2011, MNRAS, 410, 984

Justham, S., Podsiadlowski, P., & Han, Z. 2011, MNRAS, 410, 984

work page 2011
[40]

2020, MNRAS, 491, L40

Kawka, A., Vennes, S., & Ferrario, L. 2020, MNRAS, 491, L40

work page 2020
[41]

C., Oswalt, T., Mack, P., et al

Keel, W. C., Oswalt, T., Mack, P., et al. 2017, PASP, 129, 015002

work page 2017
[42]

2019, MNRAS, 482, 965

Kilic, M., Bergeron, P., Dame, K., et al. 2019, MNRAS, 482, 965

work page 2019
[43]

2011, A&A, 535, A107

Kordopatis, G., Recio-Blanco, A., de Laverny, P., et al. 2011, A&A, 535, A107

work page 2011
[44]

H., Acker, A., et al

Kronberger, M., Jacoby, G. H., Acker, A., et al. 2014, in Asymmetrical Planetary Nebulae VI Conference, ed. C. Morisset, G. Delgado-Inglada, & S. Torres- Peimbert, 48

work page 2014
[45]

U., Neunteufel, P

Kruckow, M. U., Neunteufel, P. G., Di Stefano, R., Gao, Y ., & Kobayashi, C. 2021, ApJ, 920, 86

work page 2021
[46]

2025, A&A, 702, A200

Kurpas, M., Dorsch, M., Geier, S., et al. 2025, A&A, 702, A200

work page 2025
[47]

2020, ApJ, 893, 2

Li, Z., Chen, X., Chen, H.-L., et al. 2020, ApJ, 893, 2

work page 2020
[48]

2021, A&A, 649, A4

Lindegren, L., Bastian, U., Biermann, M., et al. 2021, A&A, 649, A4

work page 2021
[49]

M., Postnov, K

Lipunov, V . M., Postnov, K. A., & Prokhorov, M. E. 1987, A&A, 176, L1

work page 1987
[50]

2025, A&A, 700, A24

Mackensen, N., Reindl, N., Werner, K., Dorsch, M., & Tan, S. 2025, A&A, 700, A24

work page 2025
[51]

J., Laher, R

Masci, F. J., Laher, R. R., Rusholme, B., et al. 2019, PASP, 131, 018003 Miller Bertolami, M. M. 2016, A&A, 588, A25 Miller Bertolami, M. M., Althaus, L. G., Olano, C., & Jiménez, N. 2011, MN- RAS, 415, 1396 Miller Bertolami, M. M., Battich, T., Córsico, A. H., Althaus, L. G., & Wachlin, F. C. 2022, MNRAS, 511, L60

work page 2019
[52]

2018, MNRAS, 473, 2275

Miszalski, B., Manick, R., Mikołajewska, J., et al. 2018, MNRAS, 473, 2275

work page 2018
[53]

2020, MNRAS, 498, 6005

Munday, J., Jones, D., García-Rojas, J., et al. 2020, MNRAS, 498, 6005

work page 2020
[54]

E., et al

Munday, J., Pelisoli, I., Tremblay, P. E., et al. 2024, MNRAS, 532, 2534

work page 2024
[55]

2001, Astronomische Nachrichten, 322, 411

Napiwotzki, R., Christlieb, N., Drechsel, H., et al. 2001, Astronomische Nachrichten, 322, 411

work page 2001
[56]

2025, A&A, 700, A219

Nelemans, G., Preece, H., Temmink, K., Munday, J., & Pols, O. 2025, A&A, 700, A219

work page 2025
[57]

& Tout, C

Nelemans, G. & Tout, C. A. 2005, MNRAS, 356, 753

work page 2005
[58]

C., & Langer, N

Neunteufel, P., Yoon, S. C., & Langer, N. 2019, A&A, 627, A14

work page 2019
[59]

A., Wolf, C., Bessell, M

Onken, C. A., Wolf, C., Bessell, M. S., et al. 2019, PASA, 36, e033

work page 2019
[60]

2024, A&A, 691, A179

Pakmor, R., Pelisoli, I., Justham, S., et al. 2024, A&A, 691, A179

work page 2024
[61]

G., Gänsicke, B

Parsons, S. G., Gänsicke, B. T., Marsh, T. R., et al. 2017, MNRAS, 470, 4473

work page 2017
[62]

G., Marsh, T

Parsons, S. G., Marsh, T. R., Copperwheat, C. M., et al. 2010, MNRAS, 402, 2591

work page 2010
[63]

2022, MNRAS, 515, 2496

Pelisoli, I., Dorsch, M., Heber, U., et al. 2022, MNRAS, 515, 2496

work page 2022
[64]

Peters, P. C. 1964, Physical Review, 136, 1224

work page 1964
[65]

2019, rwpogge/modsCCDRed: v2.0.1, Zenodo

Pogge, R. 2019, rwpogge/modsCCDRed: v2.0.1, Zenodo

work page 2019
[66]

W., Atwood, B., Brewer, D

Pogge, R. W., Atwood, B., Brewer, D. F., et al. 2010, in Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, V ol. 7735, Ground- based and Airborne Instrumentation for Astronomy III, ed. I. S. McLean, S. K. Ramsay, & H. Takami, 77350A Prada Moroni, P. G. & Straniero, O. 2009, A&A, 507, 1575

work page 2010
[67]

X., Hennawi, J

Prochaska, J. X., Hennawi, J. F., Westfall, K. B., et al. 2020, Journal of Open Source Software, 5, 2308 Prša, A., Conroy, K. E., Horvat, M., et al. 2016, ApJS, 227, 29

work page 2020
[68]

2019, MNRAS, 482, 3656

Rebassa-Mansergas, A., Toonen, S., Korol, V ., & Torres, S. 2019, MNRAS, 482, 3656

work page 2019
[69]

E., Werner, K., & Zeimann, G

Reindl, N., Bond, H. E., Werner, K., & Zeimann, G. R. 2024, A&A, 690, A366

work page 2024
[70]

2016, A&A, 587, A101

Reindl, N., Geier, S., Kupfer, T., et al. 2016, A&A, 587, A101

work page 2016
[71]

2023, A&A, 677, A29

Reindl, N., Islami, R., Werner, K., et al. 2023, A&A, 677, A29

work page 2023
[72]

W., & Todt, H

Reindl, N., Rauch, T., Werner, K., Kruk, J. W., & Todt, H. 2014, A&A, 566, A116

work page 2014
[73]

M., et al

Reindl, N., Schaffenroth, V ., Miller Bertolami, M. M., et al. 2020, A&A, 638, A93 Rodríguez-Gil, P., Santander-García, M., Knigge, C., et al. 2010, MNRAS, 407, L21 Röpke, F. K. & De Marco, O. 2023, Living Reviews in Computational Astro- physics, 9, 2

work page 2020
[74]

T., Schneider, F

Sand, C., Ohlmann, S. T., Schneider, F. R. N., Pakmor, R., & Röpke, F. K. 2020, A&A, 644, A60 Santander-García, M., Rodríguez-Gil, P., Corradi, R. L. M., et al. 2015, Nature, 519, 63

work page 2020
[75]

Schlafly, E. F. & Finkbeiner, D. P. 2011, ApJ, 737, 103

work page 2011
[76]

C., Vrba, F

Schneider, A. C., Vrba, F. J., Bruursema, J., et al. 2025, AJ, 170, 86 Schönberner, D., Balick, B., & Jacob, R. 2018, A&A, 609, A126 Schönberner, D. & Steffen, M. 2019, A&A, 625, A137

work page 2025
[77]

Shen, K. J. 2025, ApJ, 982, 6 Szölgyén, Á., MacLeod, M., & Loeb, A. 2022, MNRAS, 513, 5465 van Roestel, J., Burdge, K., Caiazzo, I., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2505.15580

work page arXiv 2025
[78]

2011, A&A, 536, A105

Vernet, J., Dekker, H., D’Odorico, S., et al. 2011, A&A, 536, A105

work page 2011
[79]

E., et al

Virtanen, P., Gommers, R., Oliphant, T. E., et al. 2020, Nature Methods, 17, 261

work page 2020
[80]

Webbink, R. F. 1984, ApJ, 277, 355

work page 1984

Showing first 80 references.