Primeval very low-mass stars and brown dwarfs -- VII. The discovery of the first wide M + L extreme subdwarf binary

ZengHua Zhang

REVIEW 3 major objections 6 minor 87 references

Primeval very low-mass stars and brown dwarfs -- VII. The discovery of the first wide M + L extreme subdwarf binary

T0 review · 3 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-14 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read The paper reports the first wide M + L extreme subdwarf binary, Gaia J0452−36AB, and uses it to show that the standard CaH/TiO metallicity index overestimates metallicities for late-type M and L subdwarfs.

desk verdict The first wide M+L extreme subdwarf binary is a real and useful discovery, but the paper's broader claim that zeta_CaH/TiO overestimates late-M metallicities rests on model metallicities and heterogeneous trace lines and needs independent calibration. read the letter →

arxiv 1908.02390 v3 pith:7CX2RD6S submitted 2019-08-06 astro-ph.SR

ZengHua Zhang This is my paper · ORCID

classification astro-ph.SR

keywords MsubdwarfsLextremewidebinarieshalokinematicsmetallicityclassificationultracoolverylow-massstars

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

The paper reports the discovery of Gaia J0452−36AB, a pair of very low-mass metal-poor stars at 137 pc separated by 15,828 au, classified as an esdM1 and an esdL0 subdwarf with [Fe/H] ≈ −1.4. If the identification holds, this is the first wide binary that joins an M extreme subdwarf and an L extreme subdwarf at a common metallicity, giving a fixed-composition benchmark that previously did not exist. The paper uses that benchmark, together with a sample of M and L subdwarfs with known metallicities, to test whether the standard ζCaH/TiO classification index is metallicity-consistent across M subtypes. It concludes that the index works for early M subtypes but systematically overestimates metallicities from mid-to-late M and L, because dust formation and high surface gravity distort the CaH and TiO bands.

What carries the argument

The central object is Gaia J0452−36AB, the first wide binary tying an M extreme subdwarf to an L extreme subdwarf; its shared metallicity is the anchor that makes the classification test possible. The classification machinery is the ζCaH/TiO metallicity index, formed from the CaH2, CaH3, and TiO5 band strengths, together with the spectral-type subclasses dM, sdM, esdM, and usdM. The paper draws two metallicity trace lines through spectral type for the esd and usd subclasses and shows that they leave the ζCaH/TiO–[Fe/H] correlation near M5.5–M6; synthetic atmosphere model fits provide $T_{\rm eff}$, [Fe/H], and log g, while evolutionary-model isomass contours supply the masses.

What would settle it

Measure a high-resolution, high-signal-to-noise optical spectrum of a late-type M subdwarf in the esdM subclass and derive its [Fe/H] from atomic absorption lines; if the line-based value matches the ζCaH/TiO subclass scale instead of the model-based trace line, the claimed index failure would not hold.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

Gaia J0452−36AB is a gravitationally bound wide binary composed of an esdM1 star ($T_{\rm eff}\approx 3550$ K, mass $\approx 0.151\,M_\odot$) and an esdL0 object ($T_{\rm eff}\approx 2600$ K, mass $\approx 0.0855\,M_\odot$), at a distance of 137.27 pc with a projected separation of 15,828 au and typical halo kinematics. Its two components share [Fe/H] ≈ −1.4, making the system the first wide M + L extreme subdwarf binary and a benchmark for calibrating metallicity measurements of cool subdwarfs. Using this system and comparison subdwarfs, the paper argues that the ζCaH/TiO index assigns metallicities that are consistent only for early-type M subdwarfs, and that late-type M and L subdwarfs are more metal-poor than the index implies. It further explains the scarcity of late-type M extreme and ultra subdwarfs and the declining binary fraction from sdM to esdM to usdM as consequences of different mass ranges and biased spectral classification.

Load-bearing premise

The secondary conclusion that late-type M subdwarf metallicities are overestimated by the ζCaH/TiO index assumes that the synthetic-model-fitted $[\mathrm{Fe}/\mathrm{H}]$ values for late-type M and L subdwarfs are accurate, even though direct atomic-line metallicities exist only for M0–3 objects.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

The ζCaH/TiO index and its refined versions should not be used to set metallicities for late-type M subdwarfs or L subdwarfs; those subclasses need a recalibrated classification scale.
Late-type M subdwarfs with metallicities in the esdM0–5 range are currently misclassified into sdM and dM classes by ζCaH/TiO, inflating the apparent scarcity of extreme and ultra subdwarfs.
M subdwarfs occupy lower and narrower mass ranges than M dwarfs of the same spectral subtype, so comparing M dwarfs and M subdwarfs subtype-by-subtype compares different mass populations.
Gaia J0452−36AB gives a single-metallicity anchor at [Fe/H] ≈ −1.4 for calibrating near-infrared metallicity indicators and for testing very low-mass atmospheric and evolutionary models at subsolar metallicity.

Reading between the lines

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

If the trace-line break is real, dedicated searches should recover a larger population of late-type M extreme and ultra subdwarfs by selecting on kinematics and photometric colours rather than on ζCaH/TiO.
A direct atomic-line [Fe/H] for the L component, or for one of the late-type M subdwarfs used in the trace lines, would independently confirm or overturn the claimed index failure.
Because the binary is wide and old, a full 3D orbit measured from future astrometry could eventually provide a dynamical test of tidal survival in the Galactic halo.

Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Desk Editor's Note

read the letter

Short version: the primary discovery is real, and you can trust it; the Section 5 metallicity-scale argument should be treated as suggestive, not established. I largely agree with the reader's conditional verdict, and the stress-test note lands correctly.

What's new: Gaia J0452-36AB is the first wide M+L extreme subdwarf pair, an esdM1+esdL0 system at 137 pc, with matching proper motions and parallaxes and optical spectra that classify it cleanly. That alone is worth having. The paper also gives us a fixed-metallicity anchor for a region where calibrations are thin. The serendipitous Ruiz 440-469AB (DA WD + M8) is a modest bonus. Classification of the primary from WHT ACAM looks fine; the esdM1 fit to SD1208 is convincing.

The soft spots are not in the discovery. The secondary claim — that the zeta_CaH/TiO index systematically overestimates metallicities for late-type M subdwarfs — is built on BT-Settl model [Fe/H] values for most of the Table 3 sample, many from the Primeval series. Direct atomic-line metallicities only exist for M0-3. The two trace lines in Fig. 9 join objects spanning [Fe/H] from roughly -1.2 to -1.6 (esd) and -1.7 to -2.4 (usd), so a break in the zeta versus spectral-type relation could reflect model systematics or sample composition rather than index failure. That is a real limitation, acknowledged in Section 5's dependence on model metallicities, but the paper doesn't quantify the index uncertainties. The esdL0 secondary is measured from a S/N ~21 spectrum without telluric correction, so its own zeta uncertainty is unquantified; the author does note this in Fig. 9's caption and uses UL1114 as a replacement. Still, one binary pair isn't enough to calibrate the cool end. The masses also depend on 10 Gyr isochrones and assumed [Fe/H], so don't quote them tightly. The citation pattern looks fine: direct atomic-line metallicity references are present, and self-references point to the series where the classifications and models were originally defined.

Bottom line: for anyone working on low-metallicity ultracool classification or binary demographics, this is a citable discovery and deserves referee time. The Section 5 conclusion should be flagged as model-dependent. I'd send it to peer review, with a request to moderate the trace-line interpretation and either add external metallicity anchors or state clearly that the metallicity-scale result is preliminary.

Referee Report

3 major / 6 minor

Summary. The paper reports the discovery of Gaia J0452-36AB, a wide binary consisting of an esdM1 primary and an esdL0 secondary, based on Gaia DR2 astrometry and WHT/ACAM spectroscopy, and argues that the system is a gravitationally bound, halo-metallicity ([Fe/H] ~ -1.4) benchmark at 137 pc with a projected separation of 15,828 au. It also presents Ruiz 440-469B, an M8 companion to a DA white dwarf. Using this binary and a literature sample of M and L subdwarfs with published metallicities, the paper tests the consistency of the zeta_CaH/TiO classification index across spectral subtypes, concludes that the index overestimates the metallicities of late-type M subdwarfs, and discusses the mass ranges and binary fractions of M subdwarf subclasses.

Significance. The primary discovery is significant: Gaia J0452-36AB appears to be the first wide M+L extreme subdwarf binary, and if confirmed it provides a valuable fixed-metallicity anchor for calibrating subdwarf classification, atmospheric models, and very low-mass evolutionary models. The astrometric and spectroscopic characterization is careful, with proper motions and parallaxes consistent within about 1 sigma and spectra that match comparison subdwarfs well. The secondary claim that zeta_CaH/TiO systematically overestimates metallicities for late-type M subdwarfs is interesting and potentially important for the classification of ultracool subdwarfs, but it is less secure because it rests on model-dependent metallicities and heterogeneous comparison samples. The paper also usefully highlights the bias introduced by comparing M subdwarf subclasses across different mass ranges.

major comments (3)

[Section 5, Fig. 9(a)-(c), Table 3] The claim that zeta_CaH/TiO overestimates metallicities for late-type M subdwarfs is not established by the trace-line argument. The trace lines join objects with widely differing metallicities: the esdM/L sequence spans [Fe/H] from -1.2 to -1.6 and the usdM/L sequence from -1.7 to -2.4. The observed break away from Equation (19) could equally be produced by model systematics that grow toward cooler, dustier, higher-gravity atmospheres, or by comparing different metallicities, even if the index were perfectly behaved at fixed [Fe/H]. The only same-metallicity anchor, Gaia J0452-36AB itself, is a single pair, and its L0 component has a low S/N (~21), telluric-uncorrected spectrum with unquantified index uncertainty. To support the strong conclusion, the paper needs an independent calibration sample with fixed [Fe/H] across subtypes, or a demonstration that model-metallicity errors are smaller than the observed index offset.
[Section 4.1.2 and Table 1] The benchmark nature of the binary depends on the BT-Settl model metallicities for both components, which are derived from the same kind of molecular-band fitting that underlies the classification indices being tested. The reported equality of [Fe/H] = -1.4 for both components is an output of the model fits, not an independent measurement. Because the secondary spectrum is low S/N and telluric features contaminate the 720 nm TiO band, the claim that the system provides a 'fixed-metallicity' test of the classification index is overstated in the absence of a direct metallicity measurement (e.g., from atomic lines, if feasible, or from a more metal-poor sdM companion). The paper should explicitly separate the robust astrometric discovery from the model-dependent metallicity assignment.
[Section 5, Table 3, Refs] There is a circularity risk in using BT-Settl model fits to validate a spectral-index calibration when those fits use the same CaH and TiO bands that define the index. Many of the [Fe/H] values in Table 3 come from the author's own Primeval series and from fits in this paper (Ref2 = 'This paper' for several rows), and no independent metallicity scale is available for late-type M and L subdwarfs. The paper should either provide an external cross-check (e.g., metallicity from NIR atomic features, or from a physically consistent binary ensemble) or temper the Section 5 conclusions to state that the results are suggestive but not definitive.

minor comments (6)

[Abstract] The phrase 'the the metallicity index' contains a duplicated article; please correct.
[Section 5 and Fig. 9] The notation is inconsistent: the text and Table 3 use zeta_CaH/TiO, while Fig. 9 panels (b)-(d) label the axis as zeta_TiO/CaH. Use one symbol consistently.
[Section 4.1.2, paragraph 2] The sentence 'Kapteyn's star has Teff = 3570 +/- 160 K and [Fe/H] = 0.99 +/- 0.04' is missing a minus sign in the metallicity; it should read [Fe/H] = -0.99.
[Section 4.1.2, paragraph 1] The phrase 'S/N of 63 at 825nm, and 40 at 122 and 135 nm' likely should refer to 1220 and 1350 nm; please correct the wavelengths.
[Section 4.2] The statement 'Ruiz 440-469AB is also a gravitationally bound system' appears twice in the text (Section 4.2 and Section 7). Repetition is unnecessary.
[Fig. 9 caption] The caption says 'The spectral indices of Gaia J0452-36B (blue open square) are measured from its low S/N spectrum thus have large uncertainty.' The grammar is awkward; consider rewording to '...are measured from a low-S/N spectrum and therefore have large uncertainties.'

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 1.0 of 10

No circular derivation by construction; the Section 5 metallicity-scale claim is model-dependent and explicitly disclosed, not reduced to its own inputs.

full rationale

The paper's central discovery, Gaia J0452-36AB as a wide esdM1+esdL0 binary, is self-contained: it rests on Gaia DR2 astrometry (common proper motion and consistent parallaxes), WHT/ACAM spectroscopy, and a tidal-radius argument. No equation in this chain is defined in terms of the conclusion. The only place where circularity could be suspected is Section 5, where the author argues that the zeta_CaH/TiO index overestimates late-type M subdwarf metallicities. That argument compares observed zeta indices to [Fe/H] values obtained from BT-Settl model fits, many taken from the author's Primeval series. This is a real dependence on model accuracy, and the paper discloses it explicitly: '[Fe/H] of the rest M and L subdwarfs are from model spectral fittings (Pavlenko et al. 2015; Primeval I; Primeval II; Primeval III; Primeval V; This paper).' The model fits use the same CaH and TiO bands that define zeta, so the Section 5 conclusion is conditional on the models being correct; however, the paper does not fit zeta to the metallicities, nor does it define metallicity in terms of zeta. The 'overestimation' claim is an empirical comparison, not a reduction by construction. Self-citations are present and frequent, but they are not load-bearing for the binary discovery, which is independently supported by astrometry and spectroscopy. No uniqueness theorem, ansatz, or fitted parameter is renamed as a prediction. The appropriate verdict is therefore no significant circularity, with the model-dependence of the secondary claim flagged as a scientific robustness concern rather than a circular step.

Assumptions & free parameters 5 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

No new physical entities, particles, forces, or dimensions are postulated. The reported stellar systems are observational discoveries rather than invented constructs. The main external inputs are the Gaia and VISTA surveys, the BT-Settl atmosphere models, and the Baraffe and Chabrier evolutionary tracks.

free parameters (5)

Eq. 19 fit coefficients = slope 1.949, intercept -1.853, rms 0.252
Linear fit between [Fe/H] and zeta_CaH/TiO using M0-3 dwarfs and subdwarfs with direct metallicities; used to draw subclass boundaries and to define the reference relation that late-type objects are compared with.
BT-Settl parameters for Gaia J0452-36A = Teff 3550 K, [Fe/H] -1.4, log g 5.0
Model fit to the ACAM spectrum; these values set the metallicity and mass quoted for the primary and anchor the binary's fixed-metallicity assumption.
BT-Settl parameters for Gaia J0452-36B = Teff 2600 K, [Fe/H] -1.4, log g 5.5
Model fit to a low signal-to-noise spectrum; the [Fe/H] value is used to compare B's zeta_CaH/TiO with A's and to support the overestimate conclusion.
BT-Settl metallicities for Table 3 sample = -1.2 to -2.4 dex across objects
Late-type M and L subdwarfs in the trace lines have [Fe/H] from model fits rather than independent atomic-line measurements; the trace-line break in Fig. 9 depends on these values.
Assumed masses of Ruiz 440-469A and B = 0.5 and 0.1 solar masses
Adopted to estimate the projected separation in Jacobi radii for the M8 plus DA white dwarf system.

assumptions (6)

domain assumption Gaia DR2 parallax and proper motion measurements are accurate to the quoted formal errors for faint sources.
Used in Section 2.2 to assert common proper motion and matching distances for the pairs.
domain assumption BT-Settl synthetic spectra reliably reproduce optical molecular bands of metal-poor M and L subdwarfs.
Section 4.1.2 uses BT-Settl fits to assign Teff, [Fe/H], and log g to Gaia J0452-36AB, and Section 5 uses model metallicities for the consistency test.
domain assumption The 10 Gyr Baraffe and Chabrier evolutionary tracks correctly convert Teff and [Fe/H] to mass for very low-mass metal-poor stars.
Mass estimates in Section 4.1.2 and the mass-range discussion in Section 6 rely on these tracks.
domain assumption Stars in a wide common proper motion binary are coeval and share the same initial chemical composition.
The consistency test uses the esdM1 plus esdL0 pair as a same-metallicity anchor; this is a standard but unproven assumption for this pair.
domain assumption A projected separation of 0.092 Jacobi radius indicates a gravitationally bound system at roughly 10 Gyr.
Section 4.1.3 invokes the Jiang and Tremaine criterion to call the binary bound.
domain assumption Dust formation and higher surface gravity in ultracool atmospheres substantially alter CaH and TiO band strengths relative to early-M subdwarfs.
Section 5 uses this model-based explanation for why zeta_CaH/TiO fails for late-type M and L subdwarfs.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Primeval very low-mass stars and brown dwarfs -- VII. The discovery of the first wide M + L extreme subdwarf binary." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/7CX2RD6S

@misc{pith2026190802390,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Primeval very low-mass stars and brown dwarfs -- VII. The discovery of the first wide M + L extreme subdwarf binary},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/7CX2RD6S}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:1908.02390}
}

abstract

I present the discovery of the first wide M + L extreme subdwarf binary system Gaia J0452$-$36AB. The binary is located at a distance of 137.27$^{+0.68}_{-0.67}$ pc with a projected separation of 15828$\pm$78 au. I classified Gaia J0452$-$36AB as esdM1 and esdL0 subdwarfs, respectively. Gaia J0452$-$36AB have typical halo kinematics, metallicity of [Fe/H] $\approx -1.4$, and temperature of $\sim$ 3550 and 2600 K, respectively. Gaia J0452$-$36AB is a pair of very low-mass stars with masses of 0.151$^{+0.029}_{-0.019}$ and 0.0855$^{+0.0014}_{-0.0010}$ M$_{\odot}$, and is a gravitationally bound system. I tested the metallicity consistency of existing M subdwarf classification schemes with Gaia J0452$-$36AB and a sample of M and L subdwarfs with known metallicity. I found that the metallicity of each M subclass defined by the the metallicity index $\zeta_{\rm CaH/TiO}$ is not consistent from mid to late M subtypes. Because late-type M and L subdwarfs have dusty atmospheres and high surface gravity which have significant impacts on CaH and TiO indices that used in the classification. The metallicity scale of late-type M subdwarfs would be overestimated by the $\zeta_{\rm CaH/TiO}$ index. I discussed the mass range of M subdwarfs, and explained the lack of late-type M extreme and ultra subdwarfs, and decreasing binary fraction from sdM, to esdM, and usdM subclasses. The four M subclasses have different mass ranges. The comparison between M subclasses is between populations in different mass ranges. I also present the discovery of Ruiz 440-469B, an M8 dwarf wide companion to a cool DA white dwarf, Ruiz 440-469.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 1908.02390 by the authors.

**Figure 1.** HRDs for Gaia J0452−36AB (blue five-pointed stars), Ruiz 440-469AB (cyan squares), and other L subdwarf candidates (yellow crosses) selected from Gaia and VHS in comparison to the Kapteyn’s star (sdM1; red open five-pointed star), G224-58AB (esdK5+esdM5.5; blue open five-pointed stars; Zhang et al. 2013; Pavlenko et al. 2015), L subdwarfs (fig. 21, Primeval IV), and field objects. The J − KsV colour of Gaia J0452−36… view at source ↗

**Figure 2.** VHS J-band images of fields around Gaia J0452−36AB and Ruiz 440-469AB, which are indicated with white bars (20 arcsec in length). Both fields are 3 arcmin on a side with north up and east to the left. Gaia J0452−36AB are moving toward southeast (138. ◦65) with a proper motion of 224.7 mas yr−1 . Ruiz 440-469AB are moving toward southwest (258. ◦56) with a proper motion of 210.9 mas yr−1 Gaia DR2 4818823636756117504 … view at source ↗

**Figure 3.** ACAM spectrum of Gaia J0452−36A (without telluric correction) compared to SDSS spectrum of SD1208 (esdM1, telluric corrected), X-shooter spectrum of Kapteyn’s star (sdM1, telluric corrected), and a BT-Settl model spectrum with Teff = 3550 K, [Fe/H] = −1.4, and log g = 5.0. The SDSS spectrum of SD1208 is smoothed by 5 pixels. The X-shooter spectrum of the Kapteyn’s star is smoothed by 51 pixels. Telluric absorptions… view at source ↗

Figures from the paper (6 more)

**Figure 4.** Figure 4: The ACAM spectrum of Gaia J0452−36B compared to UL1114+07 Primeval IV, UL1352+31 Primeval IV, SSSPM 1013−13 (usdL0), and a BT-Settl model spectrum. Telluric absorptions are not corrected (shaded green bands). MNRAS 000, 1–14 (2019) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p…

**Figure 7.** Figure 7: The optical-to-NIR spectrum of WI0459 observed with the X-shooter (smoothed by 101 pixels in the VIS and 51 pixels in the NIR). Its best-fitting BT-Settl model has Teff = 3050 K, [Fe/H] = −1.5, and log g = 5.0. 400 500 600 700 800 900 Wavelength (nm) 0 1 N o r m aliz e…

**Figure 5.** Figure 5: The optical spectrum of Ruiz 440-469B compared to those of UL1435 (sdM8; Primeval IV) and 2M1434 (M8; Kirkpatrick et al. 1999). Telluric absorptions are not corrected (shaded green bands). 1000 2000 Wavelength (nm) 0 1 N o r m alis e d flu x (F¸ ) TiO CaH Kapteyn's st…

**Figure 6.** Figure 6: The X-shooter spectrum (smoothed by 51 pixels) of Kapteyn’s star and its best-fitting BT-Settl model spectrum with Teff = 3600 K, [Fe/H] = −1.0, and log g = 5.0. 1000 2000 Wavelength (nm) 0 1 N o r m alis e d flu x (F¸ ) TiO CaH WI0459 (esdM6) 3050 K, ¡1.5, 5.0 [PITH_…

**Figure 9.** Figure 9: Spectral type, metallicity, CaH2+CaH3, TiO5, and ζCaH/TiO indices of Gaia J0452−36AB, and M and L subdwarfs with known metallicities. The spectral indices of Gaia J0452−36B (blue open square) are measured from its low S/N spectrum thus have large uncertainty. UL1114 ha…

**Figure 10.** Figure 10: TiO5 and CaH2+CaH3 indices of M subdwarf subclasses defined with the ζCaH/TiO index by Gizis (1997, left), Dhital et al. (2012, middle), and Zhang et al. (2019a, right) comparied to those of L´epine et al. (2007). The red and blue dotted lines on the left-hand panel a…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

87 extracted references · 19 canonical work pages

[1]

write newline

" write newline "" before.all 'output.state := FUNCTION fin.entry write newline FUNCTION new.block output.state before.all = 'skip after.block 'output.state := if FUNCTION new.sentence output.state after.block = 'skip output.state before.all = 'skip after.sentence 'output.state := if if FUNCTION not #0 #1 if FUNCTION and 'skip pop #0 if FUNCTION or pop #1...
[2]

Aganze C., et al., 2016, @doi [ ] 10.3847/0004-6256/151/2/46 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2016AJ....151...46A 151, 46

doi:10.3847/0004-6256/151/2/46 2016
[3]

C., Graham J

Allard F., 2014, in Booth M., Matthews B. C., Graham J. R., eds, IAU Symposium Vol. 299, Exploring the Formation and Evolution of Planetary Systems. pp 271--272, @doi 10.1017/S1743921313008545

doi:10.1017/s1743921313008545 2014
[4]

H., 1995, @doi [ ] 10.1086/175708 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1995ApJ...445..433A 445, 433

Allard F., Hauschildt P. H., 1995, @doi [ ] 10.1086/175708 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1995ApJ...445..433A 445, 433

doi:10.1086/175708 1995
[5]

Anglada-Escude G., et al., 2014, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnrasl/slu076 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014MNRAS.443L..89A 443, L89

doi:10.1093/mnrasl/slu076 2014
[6]

Baraffe I., Chabrier G., 2018, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201834062 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018A

doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201834062 2018
[7]

H., 1997, , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1997A&A...327.1054B 327, 1054

Baraffe I., Chabrier G., Allard F., Hauschildt P. H., 1997, , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1997A&A...327.1054B 327, 1054

1997
[8]

R., 2014, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stu795 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014MNRAS.442..285B 442, 285

Bate M. R., 2014, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stu795 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014MNRAS.442..285B 442, 285

doi:10.1093/mnras/stu795 2014

Show all 87 references

[9]

R., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stz103 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019MNRAS.484.2341B 484, 2341

Bate M. R., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stz103 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019MNRAS.484.2341B 484, 2341

2019 doi
[10]

Benn C., Dee K., Ag \'o cs T., 2008, in Ground-based and Airborne Instrumentation for Astronomy II. p. 70146X, @doi 10.1117/12.788694

2008 doi
[11]

P., Liu M

Bowler B. P., Liu M. C., Cushing M. C., 2009, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/706/2/1114 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2009ApJ...706.1114B 706, 1114

2009 doi
[12]

J., 2004, @doi [ ] 10.1086/425418 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2004ApJ...614L..73B 614, L73

Burgasser A. J., 2004, @doi [ ] 10.1086/425418 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2004ApJ...614L..73B 614, L73

2004 doi
[13]

J., Kirkpatrick J

Burgasser A. J., Kirkpatrick J. D., 2006, @doi [ ] 10.1086/504375 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2006ApJ...645.1485B 645, 1485

2006 doi
[14]

J., et al., 2002, @doi [ ] 10.1086/324033 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2002ApJ...564..421B 564, 421

Burgasser A. J., et al., 2002, @doi [ ] 10.1086/324033 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2002ApJ...564..421B 564, 421

2002 doi
[15]

J., et al., 2003, @doi [ ] 10.1086/375813 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2003ApJ...592.1186B 592, 1186

Burgasser A. J., et al., 2003, @doi [ ] 10.1086/375813 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2003ApJ...592.1186B 592, 1186

2003 doi
[16]

J., McElwain M

Burgasser A. J., McElwain M. W., Kirkpatrick J. D., Cruz K. L., Tinney C. G., Reid I. N., 2004, @doi [ ] 10.1086/383549 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2004AJ....127.2856B 127, 2856

2004 doi
[17]

J., Cruz K

Burgasser A. J., Cruz K. L., Kirkpatrick J. D., 2007, @doi [ ] 10.1086/510148 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2007ApJ...657..494B 657, 494

2007 doi
[19]

V., Lucas P

Burningham B., Smith L., Cardoso C. V., Lucas P. W., Burgasser A. J., Jones H. R. A., Smart R. L., 2014, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stu184 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014MNRAS.440..359B 440, 359

2014 doi
[20]

M., 1999, @doi [ ] 10.1086/306811 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1999ApJ...512..843B 512, 843

Burrows A., Sharp C. M., 1999, @doi [ ] 10.1086/306811 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1999ApJ...512..843B 512, 843

1999 doi
[21]

B., Lunine J

Burrows A., Hubbard W. B., Lunine J. I., Liebert J., 2001, @doi [Reviews of Modern Physics] 10.1103/RevModPhys.73.719 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2001RvMP...73..719B 73, 719

2001 doi
[22]

Chabrier G., Baraffe I., 1997, , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1997A&A...327.1039C 327, 1039

1997
[23]

Cross N. J. G., et al., 2012, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201219505 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2012A

2012 doi
[24]

A., Stassun K

Dhital S., West A. A., Stassun K. G., Bochanski J. J., Massey A. P., Bastien F. A., 2012, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-6256/143/3/67 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2012AJ....143...67D 143, 67

2012 doi
[25]

M., Ballester P., Forchi V., Garc \' a-Dabl \'o C

Freudling W., Romaniello M., Bramich D. M., Ballester P., Forchi V., Garc \' a-Dabl \'o C. E., Moehler S., Neeser M. J., 2013, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201322494 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2013A

2013 doi
[26]

Gaia Collaboration et al., 2018, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201833051 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018A

2018 doi
[27]

Gill D., 1899, The Observatory, https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1899Obs....22...99G 22, 99
[28]

E., 1997, @doi [ ] 10.1086/118302 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1997AJ....113..806G 113, 806

Gizis J. E., 1997, @doi [ ] 10.1086/118302 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1997AJ....113..806G 113, 806

1997 doi
[30]

Hertzsprung E., 1909, @doi [Astronomische Nachrichten] 10.1002/asna.19081792402 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1909AN....179..373H 179, 373

1909 doi
[31]

J., et al., 2004, in Quinn P

Irwin M. J., et al., 2004, in Quinn P. J., Bridger A., eds, Vol. 5493, Optimizing Scientific Return for Astronomy through Information Technologies. pp 411--422, @doi 10.1117/12.551449

2004 doi
[32]

J., Beaulieu T

Jao W.-C., Henry T. J., Beaulieu T. D., Subasavage J. P., 2008, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-6256/136/2/840 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2008AJ....136..840J 136, 840

2008 doi
[33]

J., Winters J

Jao W.-C., Henry T. J., Winters J. G., Subasavage J. P., Riedel A. R., Silverstein M. L., Ianna P. A., 2017, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-3881/aa8b64 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017AJ....154..191J 154, 191

2017 doi
[34]

J., Gies D

Jao W.-C., Henry T. J., Gies D. R., Hambly N. C., 2018, @doi [ ] 10.3847/2041-8213/aacdf6 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018ApJ...861L..11J 861, L11

2018 doi
[35]

Jiang Y.-F., Tremaine S., 2010, @doi [ ] 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2009.15744.x , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2010MNRAS.401..977J 401, 977

2010
[36]

Jones H. R. A., Tsuji T., 1997, @doi [ ] 10.1086/310619 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1997ApJ...480L..39J 480, L39

1997 doi
[37]

C., 1897, @doi [Astronomische Nachrichten] 10.1002/asna.18981450906 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1897AN....145..159K 145, 159

Kapteyn J. C., 1897, @doi [Astronomische Nachrichten] 10.1002/asna.18981450906 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1897AN....145..159K 145, 159

doi
[38]

Y., et al., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-3881/aae982 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019AJ....157...63K 157, 63

Kesseli A. Y., et al., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-3881/aae982 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019AJ....157...63K 157, 63

2019 doi
[39]

D., Henry T

Kirkpatrick J. D., Henry T. J., Irwin M. J., 1997, @doi [ ] 10.1086/118357 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1997AJ....113.1421K 113, 1421

1997 doi
[40]

D., et al., 1999, @doi [ ] 10.1086/307414 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1999ApJ...519..802K 519, 802

Kirkpatrick J. D., et al., 1999, @doi [ ] 10.1086/307414 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1999ApJ...519..802K 519, 802

1999 doi
[41]

D., et al., 2014, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/783/2/122 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014ApJ...783..122K 783, 122

Kirkpatrick J. D., et al., 2014, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/783/2/122 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014ApJ...783..122K 783, 122

2014 doi
[42]

D., et al., 2016, @doi [ ] 10.3847/0067-0049/224/2/36 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2016ApJS..224...36K 224, 36

Kirkpatrick J. D., et al., 2016, @doi [ ] 10.3847/0067-0049/224/2/36 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2016ApJS..224...36K 224, 36

2016 doi
[43]

C., Blake C

Koren S. C., Blake C. H., Dahn C. C., Harris H. C., 2016, @doi [ ] 10.3847/0004-6256/151/3/57 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2016AJ....151...57K 151, 57

2016 doi
[44]

C., Wood P

Kotoneva E., Innanen K., Dawson P. C., Wood P. R., De Robertis M. M., 2005, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361:20042287 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2005A&A...438..957K 438, 957

2005 doi
[45]

P., 1939, @doi [ ] 10.1086/144075 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1939ApJ....89..548K 89, 548

Kuiper G. P., 1939, @doi [ ] 10.1086/144075 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1939ApJ....89..548K 89, 548

1939 doi
[46]

P., 1940, @doi [ ] 10.1086/144166 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1940ApJ....91..269K 91, 269

Kuiper G. P., 1940, @doi [ ] 10.1086/144166 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1940ApJ....91..269K 91, 269

1940 doi
[47]

Lawrence A., et al., 2007, @doi [ ] 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2007.12040.x , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2007MNRAS.379.1599L 379, 1599

2007
[48]

L \'e pine S., Scholz R.-D., 2008, @doi [ ] 10.1086/590183 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2008ApJ...681L..33L 681, L33

2008 doi
[49]

M., Rich R

L \'e pine S., Shara M. M., Rich R. M., 2003a, @doi [ ] 10.1086/374210 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2003ApJ...585L..69L 585, L69

doi
[50]

M., Shara M

L \'e pine S., Rich R. M., Shara M. M., 2003b, @doi [ ] 10.1086/377069 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2003ApJ...591L..49L 591, L49

doi
[51]

M., Shara M

L \'e pine S., Rich R. M., Shara M. M., 2007, @doi [ ] 10.1086/521614 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2007ApJ...669.1235L 669, 1235

2007 doi
[52]

J., Mann A

L \'e pine S., Hilton E. J., Mann A. W., Wilde M., Rojas-Ayala B., Cruz K. L., Gaidos E., 2013, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-6256/145/4/102 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2013AJ....145..102L 145, 102

2013 doi
[53]

H., Fenner Y., Gibson B

Lineweaver C. H., Fenner Y., Gibson B. K., 2004, @doi [Science] 10.1126/science.1092322 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2004Sci...303...59L 303, 59

2004 doi
[54]

R., Solano E., Aberasturi M., Mart \' n E

Lodieu N., Espinoza Contreras M., Zapatero Osorio M. R., Solano E., Aberasturi M., Mart \' n E. L., 2012, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201118717 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2012A

2012 doi
[55]

R., Solano E., Aberasturi M., Mart \' n E

Lodieu N., Espinoza Contreras M., Zapatero Osorio M. R., Solano E., Aberasturi M., Mart \' n E. L., Rodrigo C., 2017, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201629410 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017A&A...598A..92L 598, A92

2017 doi
[56]

L., Sheppard S

Luhman K. L., Sheppard S. S., 2014, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/787/2/126 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014ApJ...787..126L 787, 126

2014 doi
[57]

MacDonald J., Gizis J., 2018, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/sty1888 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018MNRAS.480.1711M 480, 1711

2018 doi
[58]

N., et al., 2013, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/777/1/36 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2013ApJ...777...36M 777, 36

Mace G. N., et al., 2013, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/777/1/36 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2013ApJ...777...36M 777, 36

2013 doi
[59]

G., Banerji M., Gonzalez E., Koposov S

McMahon R. G., Banerji M., Gonzalez E., Koposov S. E., Bejar V. J., Lodieu N., Rebolo R., VHS Collaboration 2013, The Messenger, http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2013Msngr.154...35M 154, 35

2013
[60]

G., Dahn C

Monet D. G., Dahn C. C., Vrba F. J., Harris H. C., Pier J. R., Luginbuhl C. B., Ables H. D., 1992, @doi [ ] 10.1086/116091 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1992AJ....103..638M 103, 638

1992 doi
[61]

R., Charbonneau D., Irwin J., Mann A

Newton E. R., Charbonneau D., Irwin J., Mann A. W., 2015, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/800/2/85 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015ApJ...800...85N 800, 85

2015 doi
[62]

V., Zhang Z

Pavlenko Y. V., Zhang Z. H., G \'a lvez-Ortiz M. C., Kushniruk I. O., Jones H. R. A., 2015, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201526810 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015A

2015 doi
[63]

J., et al., 2012, @doi [ ] 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2012.20549.x , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2012MNRAS.422.1922P 422, 1922

Pinfield D. J., et al., 2012, @doi [ ] 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2012.20549.x , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2012MNRAS.422.1922P 422, 1922

2012
[64]

G., Dhillon V

Rebassa-Mansergas A., Parsons S. G., Dhillon V. S., Ren J., Littlefair S. P., Marsh T. R., Torres S., 2019, @doi [Nature Astronomy] 10.1038/s41550-019-0746-7 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019NatAs...3..553R 3, 553

2019 doi
[65]

N., Hawley S

Reid I. N., Hawley S. L., 2005, New light on dark stars : red dwarfs, low-mass stars, brown dwarfs . Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg, @doi 10.1007/3-540-27610-6

2005 doi
[66]

N., Hawley S

Reid I. N., Hawley S. L., Gizis J. E., 1995, @doi [ ] 10.1086/117655 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1995AJ....110.1838R 110, 1838

1995 doi
[67]

R., Muirhead P

Rojas-Ayala B., Covey K. R., Muirhead P. S., Lloyd J. P., 2012, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/748/2/93 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2012ApJ...748...93R 748, 93

2012 doi
[68]

T., 1996, @doi [ ] 10.1086/117871 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1996AJ....111.1267R 111, 1267

Ruiz M. T., 1996, @doi [ ] 10.1086/117871 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1996AJ....111.1267R 111, 1267

1996 doi
[69]

N., 1914, Popular Astronomy, https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1914PA.....22..275R 22, 275

Russell H. N., 1914, Popular Astronomy, https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1914PA.....22..275R 22, 275

1914
[70]

S., West A

Savcheva A. S., West A. A., Bochanski J. J., 2014, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/794/2/145 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014ApJ...794..145S 794, 145

2014 doi
[71]

Scholz R.-D., Lehmann I., Matute I., Zinnecker H., 2004, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361:20041059 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2004A

2004 doi
[72]

J., 1999, , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1999A

Schweitzer A., Scholz R.-D., Stauffer J., Irwin M., McCaughrean M. J., 1999, , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1999A

1999
[73]

K., Gupchup J., 2009, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/694/2/L140 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2009ApJ...694L.140S 694, L140

Sivarani T., L \'e pine S., Kembhavi A. K., Gupchup J., 2009, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/694/2/L140 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2009ApJ...694L.140S 694, L140

2009 doi
[74]

Vernet J., et al., 2011, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201117752 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2011A

2011 doi
[75]

M., Wallerstein G., 2005, @doi [ ] 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2004.08515.x , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2005MNRAS.356..963W 356, 963

Woolf V. M., Wallerstein G., 2005, @doi [ ] 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2004.08515.x , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2005MNRAS.356..963W 356, 963

2005
[76]

M., Wallerstein G., 2006, @doi [ ] 10.1086/498459 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2006PASP..118..218W 118, 218

Woolf V. M., Wallerstein G., 2006, @doi [ ] 10.1086/498459 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2006PASP..118..218W 118, 218

2006 doi
[77]

M., L \'e pine S., Wallerstein G., 2009, @doi [ ] 10.1086/597433 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2009PASP..121..117W 121, 117

Woolf V. M., L \'e pine S., Wallerstein G., 2009, @doi [ ] 10.1086/597433 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2009PASP..121..117W 121, 117

2009 doi
[78]

G., et al., 2000, @doi [ ] 10.1086/301513 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2000AJ....120.1579Y 120, 1579

York D. G., et al., 2000, @doi [ ] 10.1086/301513 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2000AJ....120.1579Y 120, 1579

2000 doi
[79]

Zhang Z., 2018, in 20th Cambridge Workshop on Cool Stars, Stellar Systems and the Sun. p. 44 ( @eprint arXiv 1810.07071 ), @doi 10.5281/zenodo.1463229

2018 arXiv
[80]

H., et al., 2010, @doi [ ] 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2010.16394.x , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2010MNRAS.404.1817Z 404, 1817

Zhang Z. H., et al., 2010, @doi [ ] 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2010.16394.x , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2010MNRAS.404.1817Z 404, 1817

2010
[81]

H., et al., 2013, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stt1030 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2013MNRAS.434.1005Z 434, 1005

Zhang Z. H., et al., 2013, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stt1030 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2013MNRAS.434.1005Z 434, 1005

2013 doi
[82]

H., et al., 2017a, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stw2438 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017MNRAS.464.3040Z 464, 3040

Zhang Z. H., et al., 2017a, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stw2438 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017MNRAS.464.3040Z 464, 3040

doi
[83]

H., Homeier D., Pinfield D

Zhang Z. H., Homeier D., Pinfield D. J., Lodieu N., Jones H. R. A., Allard F., Pavlenko Y. V., 2017b, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stx350 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017MNRAS.468..261Z 468, 261

doi
[84]

H., et al., 2018a, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/sty1352 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018MNRAS.479.1383Z 479, 1383

Zhang Z. H., et al., 2018a, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/sty1352 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018MNRAS.479.1383Z 479, 1383

doi
[85]

H., et al., 2018b, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/sty2054 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018MNRAS.480.5447Z 480, 5447

Zhang Z. H., et al., 2018b, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/sty2054 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018MNRAS.480.5447Z 480, 5447

doi
[86]

Zhang S., et al., 2019a, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4365/aafb32 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019ApJS..240...31Z 240, 31

doi
[87]

H., Burgasser A

Zhang Z. H., Burgasser A. J., G \'a lvez-Ortiz M. C., Lodieu N., Zapatero Osorio M. R., Pinfield D. J., Allard F., 2019b, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stz777 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019MNRAS.486.1260Z 486, 1260

doi
[88]

H., Burgasser A

Zhang Z. H., Burgasser A. J., Smith L. C., 2019c, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stz659 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019MNRAS.486.1840Z 486, 1840

doi
[89]

Zhong J., et al., 2015, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-6256/150/2/42 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015AJ....150...42Z 150, 42

2015 doi

Pith tools

Reviewed August 14, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[1] [1]

write newline

" write newline "" before.all 'output.state := FUNCTION fin.entry write newline FUNCTION new.block output.state before.all = 'skip after.block 'output.state := if FUNCTION new.sentence output.state after.block = 'skip output.state before.all = 'skip after.sentence 'output.state := if if FUNCTION not #0 #1 if FUNCTION and 'skip pop #0 if FUNCTION or pop #1...

[2] [2]

Aganze C., et al., 2016, @doi [ ] 10.3847/0004-6256/151/2/46 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2016AJ....151...46A 151, 46

doi:10.3847/0004-6256/151/2/46 2016

[3] [3]

C., Graham J

Allard F., 2014, in Booth M., Matthews B. C., Graham J. R., eds, IAU Symposium Vol. 299, Exploring the Formation and Evolution of Planetary Systems. pp 271--272, @doi 10.1017/S1743921313008545

doi:10.1017/s1743921313008545 2014

[4] [4]

H., 1995, @doi [ ] 10.1086/175708 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1995ApJ...445..433A 445, 433

Allard F., Hauschildt P. H., 1995, @doi [ ] 10.1086/175708 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1995ApJ...445..433A 445, 433

doi:10.1086/175708 1995

[5] [5]

Anglada-Escude G., et al., 2014, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnrasl/slu076 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014MNRAS.443L..89A 443, L89

doi:10.1093/mnrasl/slu076 2014

[6] [6]

Baraffe I., Chabrier G., 2018, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201834062 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018A

doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201834062 2018

[7] [7]

H., 1997, , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1997A&A...327.1054B 327, 1054

Baraffe I., Chabrier G., Allard F., Hauschildt P. H., 1997, , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1997A&A...327.1054B 327, 1054

1997

[8] [8]

R., 2014, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stu795 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014MNRAS.442..285B 442, 285

Bate M. R., 2014, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stu795 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014MNRAS.442..285B 442, 285

doi:10.1093/mnras/stu795 2014