pith. sign in

arxiv: 1906.08759 · v1 · pith:DWVUDHCOnew · submitted 2019-06-20 · 🌌 astro-ph.SR

Radial Velocities of Low-mass Candidate TWA Members

Benjamin Kidder , Gregory Mace , Kimberly Sokal , Ricardo Lopez , Daniel Jaffe This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-25 19:04 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.SR
keywords TW Hya Associationradial velocityspectroscopic binarymoving group membershiplow-mass starsnear-infrared spectroscopyGaia astrometry
0
0 comments X

The pith

Radial velocity data from near-infrared spectra cut the membership probability of one low-mass TW Hya candidate to 41.9 percent while confirming the second at 99.5 percent.

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

The paper measures radial velocities for two low-mass candidate members of the TW Hya Association using near-infrared spectra. One object, 2MASS J12354615−4115531, is revealed as a close spectroscopic binary whose center-of-mass velocity of −6.5 ± 3.9 km s⁻¹ produces only a 41.9 percent membership probability when combined with Gaia parallax in the Banyan Σ tool. The second object, 2MASS J12371238−4021480, shows a single-star velocity consistent with the group and receives a 99.5 percent membership probability. A reader would care because accurate membership lists are needed to treat these groups as coeval samples for testing how stellar properties evolve at young ages. The results indicate that without such velocity measurements, low-mass candidates can be misclassified and reduce the reliability of the group.

Core claim

Near-infrared spectra show that 2MASS J12354615−4115531 is a close spectroscopic binary with center-of-mass radial velocity −6.5 ± 3.9 km s⁻¹ that yields 41.9 percent TWA membership probability via the Banyan Σ tool when combined with its Gaia parallax. In contrast, 2MASS J12371238−4021480 appears single with a radial velocity consistent with TWA and 99.5 percent membership probability. The lowered probability for the first object demonstrates that high-resolution near-infrared spectra are required to validate low-mass moving group members and maintain the usefulness of the group as a coeval sample.

What carries the argument

Banyan Σ membership probability tool that incorporates measured radial velocities, Gaia parallax, and other astrometric data for low-mass TWA candidates.

If this is right

  • TWA 46 should be removed or down-weighted in samples used to study coeval evolution of low-mass stars.
  • TWA 47 can be retained as a confirmed member for such studies.
  • High-resolution near-infrared spectroscopy is needed to detect close binaries among other low-mass candidates.
  • Incomplete kinematic data can contaminate moving group samples and compromise tests of stellar property evolution.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • The same radial-velocity follow-up approach could be applied to candidate lists in other nearby young associations to improve sample purity.
  • TWA 46 may belong to a different kinematic group whose velocity matches the measured center-of-mass value.
  • Binary detection rates among low-mass candidates may be underestimated without repeated spectroscopic observations.

Load-bearing premise

The Banyan Σ tool produces reliable membership probabilities for these low-mass objects once the new radial velocity measurements are supplied along with Gaia data.

What would settle it

An independent age indicator such as lithium equivalent width or isochrone placement for 2MASS J12354615−4115531 that is inconsistent with known TWA members would show the 41.9 percent probability correctly signals non-membership.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 1906.08759 by Benjamin Kidder, Daniel Jaffe, Gregory Mace, Kimberly Sokal, Ricardo Lopez.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Binary template fits to three orders of the IGRINS spectrum of 2MJ1235AB using TWA 9B as the template for both the primary and secondary component. Each figure shows the spectrum of TWA 9B shifted to the wavelength of the primary and secondary components of 2MJ1235AB and adjusted to the flux ratio found by the fit. The figures also show the spectrum of 2MJ1235AB and the combined binary template after the d… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Comparison of RV measurements from the literature (see [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: H-R diagram of known TWA members with Teff and luminosities from Herczeg & Hillenbrand (2014) and the parameter space that 2MJ1235A and B occupy. We adopted Teff for 2MJ1235A and B from the spectral type relationship of Herczeg & Hillenbrand (2014), while the calculated luminosity is based on our measurement of the flux ratio and the parallax from Gaia (Brown et al. 2018). We plot age isochrones from Baraf… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Galactocentric positions and velocities for 2MJ1235AB in relation to members of TWA and Sco-Cen. The figures in the left column show galactocentric positions and those in the right column show galactocentric velocities. The individual positions and velocities of members are shown as well as contours showing a kernel density estimation in each plane for TWA and Sco-Cen. Membership information for Sco-Cen wa… view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Nearby young moving groups provide unique samples of similar age stars for testing the evolution of physical properties. Incomplete and/or incorrect group membership classifications reduce the usefulness of the group, which we assume to be coeval. With near-infrared spectra of two candidate members of the TW Hya Association, 2MASS J12354615$-$4115531 (TWA 46) and 2MASS J12371238$-$4021480 (TWA 47), we test their membership by adding radial velocity measurements to the literature. We find that 2MASS J12354615$-$4115531 is a close spectroscopic binary system with a center-of-mass radial velocity of -6.5$\pm$3.9 km s$^{-1}$. This radial velocity and a $\textit{Gaia}$ parallax produces a TWA membership probability of 41.9$\%$ using the Banyan $\Sigma$ tool for 2MASS J12354615$-$4115531. The spectrum of 2MASS J12371238$-$4021480 shows that it appears to be a single star with a radial velocity consistent with the TW Hya Association and a membership probability of 99.5$\%$. The reduced probability of TWA 46 as a true member of TWA highlights the importance of high-resolution, near-infrared spectra in validating low-mass moving group members.

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.

Referee Report

2 major / 0 minor

Summary. The paper reports near-infrared spectra and derived radial velocities for two low-mass candidate TW Hya Association (TWA) members: 2MASS J12354615−4115531 (TWA 46), identified as a close spectroscopic binary with center-of-mass RV −6.5 ± 3.9 km s⁻¹ yielding 41.9% Banyan Σ membership probability when combined with Gaia astrometry, and 2MASS J12371238−4021480 (TWA 47), a single star with RV consistent with TWA and 99.5% membership probability. The work concludes that the reduced probability for TWA 46 demonstrates the importance of high-resolution NIR spectroscopy for validating low-mass moving-group members.

Significance. If the RV measurements and Banyan Σ probabilities hold, the result provides a concrete example of how spectroscopic follow-up can alter membership assessments for low-mass candidates, thereby improving the reliability of coeval samples used in evolutionary studies of young stars.

major comments (2)
  1. [Abstract / Results] The headline result (41.9% membership probability for TWA 46) rests on Banyan Σ output that incorporates the new RV measurement, yet the manuscript supplies no sensitivity test of this probability to the reported RV uncertainty of ±3.9 km s⁻¹, no comparison against an independent membership code, and no discussion of whether the tool’s velocity-distribution priors remain valid for low-mass objects near the edge of the TWA kinematic distribution.
  2. [Abstract] The central claims of binary identification for TWA 46 and the quoted RV values lack supporting details on data reduction, error analysis, or spectrum figures; without these, the quantitative basis for downgrading TWA 46 membership cannot be independently assessed.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their constructive comments, which highlight areas where the manuscript can be strengthened. We address each major comment below and will incorporate revisions accordingly.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract / Results] The headline result (41.9% membership probability for TWA 46) rests on Banyan Σ output that incorporates the new RV measurement, yet the manuscript supplies no sensitivity test of this probability to the reported RV uncertainty of ±3.9 km s⁻¹, no comparison against an independent membership code, and no discussion of whether the tool’s velocity-distribution priors remain valid for low-mass objects near the edge of the TWA kinematic distribution.

    Authors: We agree a sensitivity test is warranted and will add one in revision by recomputing Banyan Σ probabilities while varying the RV within ±3.9 km s⁻¹. Banyan Σ is the standard and most widely validated tool for this purpose in the literature, so we will note this rather than introduce a new code; however, we will add discussion of its application to low-mass stars. We will also explicitly address the limitation of the tool’s priors for objects near the kinematic edge, noting that this is a known consideration when using the code but does not invalidate the observed drop in probability. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Abstract] The central claims of binary identification for TWA 46 and the quoted RV values lack supporting details on data reduction, error analysis, or spectrum figures; without these, the quantitative basis for downgrading TWA 46 membership cannot be independently assessed.

    Authors: The original submission was intentionally concise, but the referee is correct that this limits independent verification. We will expand the methods section to describe the NIR spectral observations, data reduction pipeline, RV extraction procedure, and error budget. We will also add spectrum figures showing the observed data, best-fit models, and residuals to support the binary identification and center-of-mass RV. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; results rely on external Banyan Σ tool

full rationale

The paper reports new radial velocity measurements obtained from NIR spectra of two candidate TWA members. These RVs (including the center-of-mass value for the spectroscopic binary) are supplied as inputs, together with Gaia astrometry, to the independent Banyan Σ membership tool, which returns the quoted probabilities (41.9% and 99.5%). No equations, fits, or self-citations within the paper define or derive those probabilities; the tool is external and the membership calculation is not reduced to any quantity defined by the present work. The derivation chain therefore remains self-contained against external benchmarks.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on the accuracy of the NIR spectral RV extraction and the external Banyan Σ membership algorithm; no free parameters or invented entities are introduced in the abstract.

axioms (1)
  • domain assumption The Banyan Σ tool accurately computes membership probabilities from position, proper motion, parallax, and radial velocity inputs.
    Directly invoked to produce the 41.9% and 99.5% probabilities reported in the abstract.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5788 in / 1209 out tokens · 23745 ms · 2026-05-25T19:04:36.899124+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

44 extracted references · 44 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    , " * write output.state after.block = add.period write newline

    ENTRY address archivePrefix author booktitle chapter doi edition editor eprint howpublished institution journal key month note number organization pages publisher school series title misctitle type volume year version url label extra.label sort.label short.list INTEGERS output.state before.all mid.sentence after.sentence after.block FUNCTION init.state.co...

    work page

  2. [2]

    write newline

    " write newline "" before.all 'output.state := FUNCTION format.doi doi empty "" "doi:" doi * if FUNCTION format.url url empty "" new.block "" url * "" * if FUNCTION format.eprint eprint empty "" archivePrefix empty "" archivePrefix ":" * if eprint field.or.null * if FUNCTION format.pid eprint empty format.doi format.eprint if FUNCTION n.dashify 't := "" t...

    work page

  3. [3]

    - [1] #1 = = ^ ^ ^ .\!\!^ d .\!\!^ h .\!\!^ m .\!\!^ s .\!\!^ @mss

    thebibliography [1] 20pt to REFERENCES 6pt =0pt 10pt plus 3pt =0pt =0pt =1pt plus 1pt =0pt =0pt -12pt =13pt plus 1pt =20pt =13pt plus 1pt \@M =10000 =-1.0em =0pt =0pt 0pt =0pt =1.0em @enumiv\@empty 10000 10000 `\.\@m \@noitemerr \@latex@warning Empty `thebibliography' environment \@ifnextchar \@reference \@latexerr Missing key on reference command Each re...

    work page doi:10.5281/zenodo.831784 2017

  4. [4]

    N., & Liu , M

    Allers , K. N., & Liu , M. C. 2013, , 772, 79

    work page 2013

  5. [5]

    2015, , 577, A42

    Baraffe , I., Homeier , D., Allard , F., & Chabrier , G. 2015, , 577, A42

    work page 2015

  6. [6]

    Bell , C. P. M., Mamajek , E. E., & Naylor , T. 2015, , 454, 593

    work page 2015

  7. [7]

    R., Lattanzi , M

    Brown , W. R., Lattanzi , M. G., Kenyon , S. J., & Geller , M. J. 2018, , 866, 39

    work page 2018

  8. [8]

    K., Weinberger , A

    Donaldson , J. K., Weinberger , A. J., Gagn \'e , J., et al. 2016, , 833, 95

    work page 2016

  9. [9]

    Elliott , P., Bayo , A., Melo , C. H. F., et al. 2014, , 568, A26

    work page 2014

  10. [10]

    2016, , 590, A13

    ---. 2016, , 590, A13

    work page 2016

  11. [11]

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

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

    work page 2013

  12. [12]

    Gagn \'e , J., & Faherty , J. K. 2018, , 862, 138

    work page 2018

  13. [13]

    K., Mamajek , E

    Gagn \'e , J., Faherty , J. K., Mamajek , E. E., et al. 2017, , 228, 18

    work page 2017

  14. [14]

    E., Malo , L., et al

    Gagn \'e , J., Mamajek , E. E., Malo , L., et al. 2018, , 856, 23

    work page 2018

  15. [15]

    Gizis , J. E. 1997, , 113, 806

    work page 1997

  16. [16]

    2012, in Modern Technologies in Space- and Ground-based Telescopes and Instrumentation II, Vol

    Gully-Santiago , M., Wang , W., Deen , C., & Jaffe , D. 2012, in Modern Technologies in Space- and Ground-based Telescopes and Instrumentation II, Vol. 8450, 84502S

    work page 2012

  17. [17]

    J., & Hillenbrand , L

    Herczeg , G. J., & Hillenbrand , L. A. 2014, , 786, 97

    work page 2014

  18. [18]

    2012, in , Vol

    Johns , M., McCarthy , P., Raybould , K., et al. 2012, in , Vol. 8444, Ground-based and Airborne Telescopes IV, 84441H

    work page 2012

  19. [19]

    L., Ireland , M

    Kraus , A. L., Ireland , M. J., Martinache , F., & Lloyd , J. P. 2008, , 679, 762

    work page 2008

  20. [20]

    L., Tucker , R

    Kraus , A. L., Tucker , R. A., Thompson , M. I., Craine , E. R., & Hillenbrand , L. A. 2011, , 728, 48

    work page 2011

  21. [21]

    2016, plp: v2.1 alpha 3, ,

    Lee , J.-J., & Gullikson , K. 2016, plp: v2.1 alpha 3, , . https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.56067

    work page doi:10.5281/zenodo.56067 2016

  22. [22]

    L., Stauffer , J

    Luhman , K. L., Stauffer , J. R., & Mamajek , E. E. 2005, , 628, L69

    work page 2005

  23. [23]

    2016, in 19th Cambridge Workshop on Cool Stars, Stellar Systems, and the Sun (CS19), 55

    Mace , G., Jaffe , D., Park , C., & Lee , J.-J. 2016, in 19th Cambridge Workshop on Cool Stars, Stellar Systems, and the Sun (CS19), 55

    work page 2016

  24. [24]

    2018 a , in , Vol

    Mace , G., Sokal , K., Lee , J.-J., et al. 2018 a , in , Vol. 10702, Ground-based and Airborne Instrumentation for Astronomy, 10702 -- 10702 -- 18. https://doi.org/10.1117/12.2312345

    work page doi:10.1117/12.2312345 2018

  25. [25]

    N., Mann , A

    Mace , G. N., Mann , A. W., Skiff , B. A., et al. 2018 b , , 854, 145

    work page 2018

  26. [26]

    2014, , 788, 81

    Malo , L., Artigau , \'E ., Doyon , R., et al. 2014, , 788, 81

    work page 2014

  27. [27]

    E., Meyer , M

    Mamajek , E. E., Meyer , M. R., & Liebert , J. 2002, , 124, 1670

    work page 2002

  28. [28]

    W., Feiden , G

    Mann , A. W., Feiden , G. A., Gaidos , E., Boyajian , T., & von Braun , K. 2015, , 804, 64

    work page 2015

  29. [29]

    W., Dupuy , T., Kraus , A

    Mann , A. W., Dupuy , T., Kraus , A. L., et al. 2019, , 871, 63

    work page 2019

  30. [30]

    C., Mace , G

    Martin , E. C., Mace , G. N., McLean , I. S., et al. 2017, , 838, 73

    work page 2017

  31. [31]

    H., Jayawardhana , R., & Hauschildt , P

    Mentuch , E., Brandeker , A., van Kerkwijk , M. H., Jayawardhana , R., & Hauschildt , P. H. 2008, , 689, 1127

    work page 2008

  32. [32]

    T., Yuk , I.-S., et al

    Park , C., Jaffe , D. T., Yuk , I.-S., et al. 2014, in , Vol. 9147, Ground-based and Airborne Instrumentation for Astronomy V, 91471D

    work page 2014

  33. [33]

    J., & Mamajek , E

    Pecaut , M. J., & Mamajek , E. E. 2016, , 461, 794

    work page 2016

  34. [34]

    D., Sivaramakrishnan , A., Lajoie , C.-P., et al

    Perrin , M. D., Sivaramakrishnan , A., Lajoie , C.-P., et al. 2014, in , Vol. 9143, Space Telescopes and Instrumentation 2014: Optical, Infrared, and Millimeter Wave, 91433X

    work page 2014

  35. [35]

    E., & Harvin , J

    Riaz , B., Gizis , J. E., & Harvin , J. 2006, , 132, 866

    work page 2006

  36. [36]

    R., Alam , M

    Riedel , A. R., Alam , M. K., Rice , E. L., Cruz , K. L., & Henry , T. J. 2017, , 840, 87

    work page 2017

  37. [37]

    F., Cutri , R

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

    work page 2006

  38. [38]

    R., Deen , C

    Sokal , K. R., Deen , C. P., Mace , G. N., et al. 2018, , 853, 120

    work page 2018

  39. [39]

    Torres , C. A. O., Quast , G. R., da Silva , L., et al. 2006, , 460, 695

    work page 2006

  40. [40]

    Torres , C. A. O., Quast , G. R., Melo , C. H. F., & Sterzik , M. F. 2008, Young Nearby Loose Associations , ed. B. Reipurth , 757

    work page 2008

  41. [41]

    S., Shelton , C., et al

    Wizinowich , P., Acton , D. S., Shelton , C., et al. 2000, , 112, 315

    work page 2000

  42. [42]

    T., & Eastman , J

    Wright , J. T., & Eastman , J. D. 2014, , 126, 838

    work page 2014

  43. [43]

    T., Barnes , S., et al

    Yuk , I.-S., Jaffe , D. T., Barnes , S., et al. 2010, in , Vol. 7735, Ground-based and Airborne Instrumentation for Astronomy III, 77351M

    work page 2010

  44. [44]

    2004, , 42, 685

    Zuckerman , B., & Song , I. 2004, , 42, 685

    work page 2004