A theoretical framework for BL Her stars IV. New period-luminosity relations in the Rubin-LSST filters

Anupam Bhardwaj; Harinder P. Singh; L\'aszl\'o Moln\'ar; Marcella Marconi; Radoslaw Smolec; R\'obert Szab\'o; Shashi M. Kanbur; Susmita Das

REVIEW 2 major objections 4 minor 84 references

A theoretical framework for BL Her stars IV. New period-luminosity relations in the Rubin-LSST filters

T0 review · 2 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-10 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read BL Her stars should give metallicity-free distances in LSST's i, z and y Wesenheit bands.

desk verdict Solid, careful extension of the BL Her grid to LSST filters; the metallicity-free Wesenheit recommendation is real but rests on static BC tables, so it needs a robustness check before being used as a calibration. read the letter →

arxiv 2501.13937 v1 pith:JSVJYDOU submitted 2025-01-16 astro-ph.SR

Susmita Das , László Molnár , Róbert Szabó , Harinder P. Singh , Shashi M. Kanbur , Anupam Bhardwaj , Marcella Marconi , Radoslaw Smolec This is my paper · ORCID

classification astro-ph.SR

keywords BLHerculisstarsTypeIICepheidsperiod-luminosityrelationsperiod-WesenheitRubin-LSSTfiltersmetallicitydependencestandardcandlesstellarpulsationmodels

verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

This paper develops theoretical period-luminosity (PL) and period-Wesenheit (PW) relations for BL Herculis stars, the shortest-period Type II Cepheids, using a large grid of nonlinear pulsation models. The grid covers a wide range in mass, luminosity, effective temperature, and metallicity, and was computed with four convection parameter sets. The central claim is that metallicity has a weak or negligible effect on the PL relations in the LSST filters longer than g, while the u filter shows a strong metallicity effect. Because the metallicity dependence is small for the Wesenheit combinations W(i, g−i), W(z, i−z) and W(y, g−y), the paper recommends these as reliable standard candles for BL Her stars observed with the Rubin–LSST.

What carries the argument

The central machinery is a fine grid of nonlinear radial pulsation models computed with MESA-RSP, covering masses 0.5–0.8 M_⊙, luminosities 50–300 L_⊙, metallicities [Fe/H] from −2.0 to 0.0, and effective temperatures across the full instability strip, each run with four convection parameter sets (A–D). Bolometric light curves are converted to LSST ugrizy magnitudes using static MIST bolometric-correction tables, then averaged by Fourier fitting. The PL and PW relations are obtained by linear regression of mean magnitudes against log P, and metallicity sensitivity is quantified by adding a γ[Fe/H] term to the regressions. Statistical comparisons of slopes use a two-sample t-test.

What would settle it

Re-derive the PLZ relations using bolometric corrections from non-static, pulsating model atmospheres; if the u-band γ coefficient changes materially, the claimed metallicity effect is an artifact of static corrections. Independently, measure empirical u-band PL relations for BL Her stars with spectroscopically known [Fe/H] and compare the γ term.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The models predict that BL Her PL slopes become steeper and the dispersion smaller with increasing wavelength across the LSST ugrizy filters. For the complete model set, PL and PW slopes from convection sets B and D (those with radiative cooling) are statistically similar in the grizy filters. Fitting M_λ = α + β log P + γ[Fe/H] shows γ consistent with zero for wavelengths longer than g, but significant in u, with the high-metallicity models driving the u-band dependence. The paper concludes that BL Her stars obey almost metallicity-independent PL relations at the longer LSST wavelengths, making W(i,g−i), W(z,i−z) and W(y,g−y) the most robust distance indicators among the six Wesenheit combinations studied.

Load-bearing premise

The analysis assumes that static model atmospheres correctly predict how the brightness of a pulsating star is spread across the LSST filters, even though the real atmosphere is dynamically changing.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

In the LSST rizy filters, convection sets with radiative cooling (B and D) yield statistically similar PL and PW slopes, so distance estimates are insensitive to that convection treatment.
The strong u-band metallicity dependence means PL distances in u will require accurate metallicities or should be avoided entirely for BL Her stars.
The recommended Wesenheit relations—W(i,g−i), W(z,i−z) and W(y,g−y)—should give distance estimates that are nearly free of metallicity systematics when applied to LSST observations.
Low-mass BL Her models (0.5–0.6 M_⊙) have PL slopes statistically similar to RR Lyrae models in the rizy filters, suggesting a combined Population II distance scale may be viable.
Steeper, tighter PL relations at longer wavelengths imply redder LSST bands will produce more precise BL Her distances.

Reading between the lines

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

If static bolometric corrections miss the dynamical structure of a pulsating atmosphere, the u-band metallicity coefficient is the most plausible place for a spurious signal, so the recommendation to use the u-free Wesenheit combinations is conservative.
The same nearly zero γ coefficients in i, z, and y suggest that empirical LSST-era calibrations of BL Her distances could proceed without spectroscopy, but only after the theoretical slopes are anchored by parallax or eclipsing-binary distances.
The statistical match between low-mass BL Her and RR Lyrae model slopes hints that both classes could share one PL relation in the red LSST bands, a hypothesis that can be tested directly with mixed samples in future LSST data.

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

Workmanlike and honest extension of the Paper I grid into the Rubin-LSST filters. The paper delivers what it promises: theoretical ugrizy light curves, PL/PW relations, slope comparisons across convection sets, and a clean statement of which Wesenheit indices look metallicity-free. The statistics are careful—Fourier-fitted means, t-tests, PLZ/PWZ regressions with uncertainties, splits by mass and metallicity, and a modified form with metallicity-dependent slopes. The self-citation pattern is appropriate for Paper IV of a series. The paper is also transparent about its main limitation.

The soft spot is real and load-bearing for the headline claim. The metallicity dependence of the ugrizy magnitudes enters only through the MIST/ATLAS12 bolometric correction tables. The pulsation code delivers bolometric light curves; the BC tables do the filter conversion as a function of Teff, log g, and [M/H]. So the differential statement that gamma is large in u-based Wesenheits and near zero in Wgi/Wiz/Wgy is, at bottom, a statement about the metallicity derivatives of static model atmospheres. The authors acknowledge the static-atmosphere problem in Section 5 and call for a systematic study of different model atmospheres, but they don't test an alternative BC grid here. Given that gamma(Wgi) is already -0.065 ± 0.004, the 'negligible' claim is a practical threshold, not a null result. If the MIST BC derivatives are off by 0.05 mag/dex in g, i, z, or y, the recommended combinations could lose their advertised insensitivity. That's a correctness risk, not an internal inconsistency. The post-processing is standard, but the central filter-selection claim hasn't been shown to be BC-table-independent.

A secondary issue is reproducibility: the light curves are 'available upon request,' which is weak by current standards. That is fixable.

Net: the internal analysis is sound and the paper advances the program with genuinely new filter-specific relations. The main caveat is that the headline standard-candle recommendation is conditional on static BC tables. This is exactly the kind of paper that deserves peer review—send it to a referee, and ask for a robustness check against at least one independent BC grid, or a quantitative estimate of the systematic from BC uncertainties. Who it's for: LSST distance-scale and stellar pulsation community. I'd read it, cite it with a caveat, and bring it to a reading group as a good example of careful theoretical preparation for LSST.

Referee Report

2 major / 4 minor

Summary. This paper extends the MESA-RSP BL Her models from Papers I–III to the Rubin–LSST ugrizy passbands. The authors compute Fourier-fitted mean magnitudes, derive PL and Wesenheit (PW) relations for four convection parameter sets, add metallicity terms (PLZ/PWZ), split the grid into low-mass and complete samples and into low/high-metallicity regimes, compare slopes with the RR Lyrae models of Marconi et al. (2022), and recommend W(i,g−i), W(z,i−z), and W(y,g−y) as metallicity-insensitive standard candles. Tables 1–10 and the appendices report all fitted coefficients, uncertainties, and sample sizes.

Significance. The paper is timely and useful: it provides LSST-ready theoretical PL/PW predictions for BL Her stars, carefully compares four convective treatments, and connects BL Her and RR Lyrae distance-scale predictions. The internal statistics are careful: Fourier fits, t-tests with quoted p-values, separate low-mass and metallicity subsamples, and complete coefficient tables. The principal standard-candle recommendation is, however, only as robust as the metallicity derivatives of the static MIST/ATLAS12 bolometric corrections, and that dependence is not tested in the manuscript. If the recommended filter combinations survive an independent bolometric-correction check, the contribution would be a solid, timely step toward using BL Her stars in Rubin–LSST distance work.

major comments (2)

[2.2 and Section 5] The central metallicity result—small γ for λ>g and for Wgi/Wiz/Wgy, large γ for u-based Wesenheits—is a differential statement about the metallicity derivatives of static MIST/ATLAS12 bolometric corrections, because the pulsation code supplies only bolometric light curves. Table 6 shows that the recommended relations have small but statistically nonzero coefficients, e.g., γ(Wgi)=−0.065±0.004, γ(Wiz)=+0.024±0.005, γ(Wgy)=−0.026±0.004 for the complete set A. Given that the paper itself flags the static-atmosphere assumption as a “known (but unsolved) potential shortcoming” in Section 5, the abstract’s unconditional recommendation of W(i,g−i), W(z,i−z), and W(y,g−y) as reliable standard candles is not yet fully supported. I ask the authors to repeat the PLZ/PWZ fits with at least one independent BC grid (e.g., Castelli & Kurucz, MARCS, or PHOENIX) and report how γ and the preferred band combinations change; if this is genuinely beyond scope, the recommendation should be explicitly conditioned on the accuracy of MIST BC metallicity derivatives.
[3.2 and Table 6] The term “negligible” is never quantified in terms of an allowable distance-modulus bias. The γ coefficients of the recommended Wesenheit relations are nonzero at high formal significance, so “negligible” is a practical threshold rather than a null result. The paper should state the maximum acceptable bias, for example |γ·Δ[Fe/H]| < 0.02 mag over the metallicity range of the proposed target sample, and then evaluate Wgi, Wiz, and Wgy against that threshold. Without such a definition, the standard-candle claim is not quantitatively testable and can be read as inconsistent with the quoted uncertainties.

minor comments (4)

[Equation (4) and §3] The sentence “where λ1 > λ2” is not true for Wug = W(g,u−g) and Wur = W(r,u−r), where the redder filter is listed first; please clarify the wavelength ordering convention.
[Section 3.2 and Table 4] The statement that the g-band metallicity coefficient is negligible “within 3σ uncertainties” is not strictly correct for the complete set A, where γ_g = 0.025±0.008 (about 3.1σ); I suggest saying “weak” or quoting the exact significance in that case.
[Figures 2, 3, and B.1] The axis labels contain typos such as “da s” in Figures 2 and 3, “Se A” instead of “Set A”, and a rendering artifact “uni2299” in the Figure B.1 caption; these should be corrected in the final version.
[Section 2.2] The theoretical light curves are said to be available “upon request”; for reproducibility, I encourage depositing the Fourier-fitted light-curve parameters and the code used for the PLZ/PWZ fits in a persistent archive such as CDS, Zenodo, or a version-controlled repository.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the PL/PW and PLZ/PWZ relations are regressions over model outputs from an externally published grid and MIST BC tables, not fitted to the metallicity trends they report.

full rationale

The derivation chain is: (1) adopt the MESA-RSP BL Her grid from Paper I (an input, not a parameter fitted to the claims), (2) transform bolometric light curves to ugrizy with external MIST/ATLAS12 BC tables (Section 2.2), (3) Fourier-fit mean magnitudes, (4) regress M_lambda and W on log P and [Fe/H] (Eqs. 3, 5, 6). The reported metallicity coefficients gamma are ordinary least-squares outputs of these regressions; nothing in the pipeline was tuned to produce small gamma for Wgi/Wiz/Wgy or large gamma for u-based relations. The Wesenheit gamma values are, by Eq. 4, linear combinations of the band gammas (e.g., gamma_Wgi = 2.287 gamma_i - 1.287 gamma_g), so their smallness is arithmetic on independently computed band coefficients, not an input assumption. Self-citations to Papers I and II supply the model grid and the BC-table procedure, respectively; these are reproducible inputs, not the target conclusions, and the paper also compares with external RR Lyrae models (Marconi et al. 2022) and empirical studies. The acknowledged use of static model atmospheres is a stated modeling limitation that could affect the accuracy of the metallicity dependence (a correctness risk), but it is not circular: the BC tables are external, the pulsation models themselves depend on Z through opacity, and the recommendation is presented as a model prediction with that caveat. No equation in the paper equals its own input by construction, and no load-bearing uniqueness theorem or author-derived ansatz is invoked. Hence no circular step.

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on the fidelity of MESA-RSP pulsation models, the adopted convection parameter sets, and the MIST bolometric corrections for transforming to LSST filters. No new physical entities are introduced and no parameters are fitted to external data; the listed free parameters are hand-chosen inputs from prior literature.

free parameters (3)

Convection parameter sets A, B, C, D = Four sets from Paxton et al. (2019) Table 4
Chosen to bracket convection efficiency; not fitted to BL Her observations. The paper studies the sensitivity of PL/PW relations to these sets.
Helium enrichment parameter dY/dZ = 1.54
Used to convert [Fe/H] to Z and X in Table A.1; adopted from Asplund et al. (2009), not fitted in this work.
Wesenheit extinction coefficients = 3.100, 1.258, 2.796, 1.287, 3.204, 0.560 (Eq. 4)
Adopted from Cardelli et al. (1989) assuming R_V = 3.1; these coefficients define the PW combinations and thus the recommended standard candle relations.

assumptions (4)

domain assumption MIST bolometric correction tables (ATLAS12/SYNTHE) correctly transform theoretical bolometric light curves into Rubin-LSST ugrizy magnitudes.
Invoked in Section 2.2; the metallicity behavior in the u filter and all filter transformations rely on these static 1D atmosphere models.
domain assumption Static model atmospheres are adequate for transforming light curves despite the dynamic pulsating stellar atmosphere.
Acknowledged in Section 5 as a 'known (but unsolved) potential shortcoming'; it directly affects the BC transformation and thus all filter-dependent results.
domain assumption The grid of mass-luminosity-temperature combinations, not constrained by stellar evolution tracks, represents plausible BL Her stars.
Section 4 notes the complete set includes masses up to 0.8 M_sun that may be typical of evolved RR Lyrae stars rather than BL Her stars; the paper analyzes a low-mass subset to mitigate this.
domain assumption MESA-RSP nonlinear pulsation models with the adopted convection treatment and the four parameter sets correctly simulate BL Her pulsations.
The entire grid is computed with MESA-RSP; the convection sets come from Paxton et al. (2019) and are not calibrated against BL Her light curves in this paper.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of A theoretical framework for BL Her stars IV. New period-luminosity relations in the Rubin-LSST filters." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/JSVJYDOU

@misc{pith2026250113937,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: A theoretical framework for BL Her stars IV. New period-luminosity relations in the Rubin-LSST filters},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/JSVJYDOU}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2501.13937}
}

abstract

We present new theoretical light curves in the Rubin-LSST filters for a fine grid of BL Her models computed using MESA-RSP. We also derive new theoretical period-luminosity (PL) and period-Wesenheit (PW) relations in the Rubin-LSST filters with the goal to study the effect of convection parameters and metallicity on these relations. The grid of BL Her models was computed with the input stellar parameters: metallicity ($-2.0\; \mathrm{dex} \leq \mathrm{[Fe/H]} \leq 0.0\; \mathrm{dex}$), stellar mass ($0.5M_{\odot}-0.8M_{\odot}$), stellar luminosity ($50L_{\odot}-300L_{\odot}$), and effective temperature (across the full extent of the instability strip; in steps of 50K) and using four sets of convection parameters. Bolometric correction tables from MIST were used to transform the theoretical bolometric light curves of the BL Her models into the Rubin-LSST ugrizy filters. The PL relations of the BL Her models exhibit steeper slopes but smaller dispersion with increasing wavelengths in the Rubin-LSST filters. The PL and PW slopes for the complete set of BL Her models computed with radiative cooling (sets B and D) are statistically similar across the grizy filters. The BL Her models exhibit weak or negligible effect of metallicity on the PL relations for wavelengths longer than the g filter for both the cases of the complete set of models as well as the low-mass models. However, we find significant effect of metallicity on the PL relation in the u filter. Strong metallicity effects are observed in the PWZ relations involving the u filter and are found to have significant contribution from the high-metallicity BL Her models. Due to negligible metallicity effect for relations involving the Wesenheit indices $W(i,g-i)$, $W(z,i-z)$ and $W(y,g-y)$, we recommend these filter combinations for BL Her stars when observed with the Rubin-LSST to be used as reliable standard candles.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2501.13937 by the authors.

**Figure 1.** Theoretical light curves of a few BL Her models in the Rubin-LSST filters computed using convection parameter set A. The input stellar parameters of the corresponding models are included in the format (Z, M/M⊙, L/L⊙, Teff) in each sub-plot. The increasing stellar luminosity (L/L⊙) are plotted from the bottom to the top panels while the increasing effective temperature (Teff) are displayed from the right to the left … view at source ↗

**Figure 2.** The predicted multi-filter PL relations of the BL Her models with different chemical compositions across the different Rubin-LSST wavelengths for the convective parameter sets A, B, C, and D. The y-scale is same (2.5 mag) in each panel for a relative comparison. Article number, page 8 of 19 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_2.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 3.** The predicted multi-filter period-Wesenheit (Wug, Wur, Wgr, Wgi, Wiz, Wgy) relations of the BL Her models with different chemical compositions across the different Rubin-LSST wavelengths for the convective parameter sets A, B, C, and D. The y-scale is same (3.5 mag) in each panel for a relative comparison. Article number, page 9 of 19 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_3.png] view at source ↗

Figures from the paper (2 more)

**Figure 4.** Figure 4: Contribution of the γ term (metallicity effect) obtained from the theoretical PLZ relations for BL Her models computed using the convection parameter set A. Figure updated from Paper II to also include the Rubin–LSST filters (ugrizy) in addition to the bolometric (Bol)…

**Figure 5.** Figure 5: A comparison of the theoretical PL slopes for RR Lyrae models from Marconi et al. (2022) and for BL Her models using convection parameter set D from this work in the Rubin–LSST rizy passbands. PL and PW relations from the high-metallicity BL Her models could be the in…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

84 extracted references · 64 canonical work pages

[1]

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

ENTRY address archiveprefix author booktitle chapter edition editor howpublished institution eprint journal key month note number organization pages publisher school series title type volume year label extra.label sort.label short.list INTEGERS output.state before.all mid.sentence after.sentence after.block FUNCTION init.state.consts #0 'before.all := #1 ...
[2]

write newline

" write newline "" before.all 'output.state := FUNCTION n.dashify 't := "" t empty not t #1 #1 substring "-" = t #1 #2 substring "--" = not "--" * t #2 global.max substring 't := t #1 #1 substring "-" = "-" * t #2 global.max substring 't := while if t #1 #1 substring * t #2 global.max substring 't := if while FUNCTION word.in bbl.in " " * FUNCTION format....
[3]

J., & Scott , P

Asplund , M., Grevesse , N., Sauval , A. J., & Scott , P. 2009, ARA&A, 47, 481

2009
[4]

1926, Astronomische Nachrichten, 228, 359

Baade , W. 1926, Astronomische Nachrichten, 228, 359

1926
[5]

L., Bono , G., Braga , V

Beaton , R. L., Bono , G., Braga , V. F., et al. 2018, SSRv, 214, 113

work page 2018
[6]

L., Freedman , W

Beaton , R. L., Freedman , W. L., Madore , B. F., et al. 2016, ApJ, 832, 210

work page 2016
[7]

& Strohmeier , W

Becker , W. & Strohmeier , W. 1940, ZA, 19, 249

work page 1940
[8]

2020, Journal of Astrophysics and Astronomy, 41, 23

Bhardwaj , A. 2020, Journal of Astrophysics and Astronomy, 41, 23

work page 2020

Show all 84 references

[9]

M., Rejkuba , M., et al

Bhardwaj , A., Kanbur , S. M., Rejkuba , M., et al. 2022, , 668, A59

2022
[10]

M., Rejkuba , M., et al

Bhardwaj , A., Macri , L. M., Rejkuba , M., et al. 2017 a , AJ, 153, 154

2017
[11]

2017 b , A&A, 605, A100

Bhardwaj , A., Rejkuba , M., Minniti , D., et al. 2017 b , A&A, 605, A100

2017
[12]

G., Catanzaro , G., et al

Bhardwaj , A., Riess , A. G., Catanzaro , G., et al. 2023, ApJL, 955, L13

2023
[13]

F., Fiorentino , G., et al

Bono , G., Braga , V. F., Fiorentino , G., et al. 2020, A&A, 644, A96

2020
[14]

F., & Pietrinferni , A

Bono , G., Braga , V. F., & Pietrinferni , A. 2024, , 32, 4

2024
[15]

1997, A&A, 317, 171

Bono , G., Caputo , F., & Santolamazza , P. 1997, A&A, 317, 171

1997
[16]

F., Bhardwaj , A., Contreras Ramos , R., et al

Braga , V. F., Bhardwaj , A., Contreras Ramos , R., et al. 2018, A&A, 619, A51

2018
[17]

F., Bono , G., Fiorentino , G., et al

Braga , V. F., Bono , G., Fiorentino , G., et al. 2020, A&A, 644, A95

2020
[18]

F., Contreras Ramos , R., Minniti , D., et al

Braga , V. F., Contreras Ramos , R., Minniti , D., et al. 2019, , 625, A151

2019
[19]

G., Kervella , P., Anderson , R

Breuval , L., Riess , A. G., Kervella , P., Anderson , R. I., & Romaniello , M. 2022, ApJ, 939, 89

2022
[20]

1998, , 9, 33

Caputo , F. 1998, , 9, 33

1998
[21]

A., Clayton , G

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

1989
[22]

J., & Smith , H

Catelan , M., Pritzl , B. J., & Smith , H. A. 2004, ApJS, 154, 633

2004
[23]

& Smith , H

Catelan , M. & Smith , H. A. 2015, Pulsating Stars

2015
[24]

2010, AcA, 60, 233

Ciechanowska , A., Pietrzy \'n ski , G., Szewczyk , O., Gieren , W., & Soszy \'n ski , I. 2010, AcA, 60, 233

2010
[25]

M., Singh , H

Das , S., Bhardwaj , A., Kanbur , S. M., Singh , H. P., & Marconi , M. 2018, MNRAS, 481, 2000

2018
[26]

M., Bellinger , E

Das , S., Kanbur , S. M., Bellinger , E. P., et al. 2020, MNRAS, 493, 29

2020
[27]

M., Smolec , R., et al

Das , S., Kanbur , S. M., Smolec , R., et al. 2021, , 501, 875

2021
[28]

M., et al

Das , S., Moln \'a r , L., Kanbur , S. M., et al. 2024 a , , 684, A170

2024
[29]

B., et al

Das , S., Moln \'a r , L., Kov \'a cs , G. B., et al. 2024 b , arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2412.09287

2024 arXiv
[30]

2022, ApJS, 262, 25

De Somma , G., Marconi , M., Molinaro , R., et al. 2022, ApJS, 262, 25

2022
[31]

& Singh , H

Deb , S. & Singh , H. P. 2009, A&A, 507, 1729

2009
[32]

2007, A&A, 471, 893

Di Criscienzo , M., Caputo , F., Marconi , M., & Cassisi , S. 2007, A&A, 471, 893

2007
[33]

Gingold , R. A. 1985, MmSAI, 56, 169

1985
[34]

Gray , D. F. 2005, The Observation and Analysis of Stellar Photospheres

2005
[35]

Groenewegen , M. A. T. & Jurkovic , M. I. 2017, A&A, 604, A29

2017
[36]

Groenewegen , M. A. T., Udalski , A., & Bono , G. 2008, A&A, 481, 441

2008
[37]

2013, ApJS, 208, 19

Hinshaw , G., Larson , D., Komatsu , E., et al. 2013, ApJS, 208, 19

2013
[38]

Jameson , R. F. 1986, Vistas in Astronomy, 29, 17

1986
[39]

S., Bauer , E

Jermyn , A. S., Bauer , E. B., Schwab , J., et al. 2023, , 265, 15

2023
[40]

A., Bresolin , F., et al

Kudritzki , R.-P., Urbaneja , M. A., Bresolin , F., et al. 2008, ApJ, 681, 269

2008
[41]

1986, A&A, 160, 116

Kuhfuss , R. 1986, A&A, 160, 116

1986
[42]

Kurucz , R. L. 1970, SAO Special Report, 309

1970
[43]

Kurucz , R. L. 1993, SYNTHE spectrum synthesis programs and line data

1993
[44]

Madore , B. F. 1982, ApJ, 253, 575

1982
[45]

Madore , B. F. & Freedman , W. L. 2012, ApJ, 744, 132

2012
[46]

Majaess , D. J. 2010, Journal of the American Association of Variable Star Observers (JAAVSO), 38, 100

2010
[47]

2011, ApJ, 738, 111

Marconi , M., Bono , G., Caputo , F., et al. 2011, ApJ, 738, 111

2011
[48]

2015, ApJ, 808, 50

Marconi , M., Coppola , G., Bono , G., et al. 2015, ApJ, 808, 50

2015
[49]

& Di Criscienzo , M

Marconi , M. & Di Criscienzo , M. 2007, A&A, 467, 223

2007
[50]

2022, , 934, 29

Marconi , M., Molinaro , R., Dall'Ora , M., et al. 2022, , 934, 29

2022
[51]

W., & Menzies , J

Matsunaga , N., Feast , M. W., & Menzies , J. W. 2009, MNRAS, 397, 933

2009
[52]

W., & Soszy \'n ski , I

Matsunaga , N., Feast , M. W., & Soszy \'n ski , I. 2011, MNRAS, 413, 223

2011
[53]

2006, MNRAS, 370, 1979

Matsunaga , N., Fukushi , H., Nakada , Y., et al. 2006, MNRAS, 370, 1979

2006
[54]

A., Sanders , J

Molnar , T. A., Sanders , J. L., Smith , L. C., et al. 2022, , 509, 2566

2022
[55]

R., Marengo , M., Bono , G., et al

Neeley , J. R., Marengo , M., Bono , G., et al. 2017, ApJ, 841, 84

2017
[56]

2022, AJ, 164, 154

Ngeow , C.-C., Bhardwaj , A., Henderson , J.-Y., et al. 2022, AJ, 164, 154

2022
[57]

M., & Singh , H

Ngeow , C.-C., Sarkar , S., Bhardwaj , A., Kanbur , S. M., & Singh , H. P. 2015, , 813, 57

2015
[58]

2011, ApJS, 192, 3

Paxton , B., Bildsten , L., Dotter , A., et al. 2011, ApJS, 192, 3

2011
[59]

2013, ApJS, 208, 4

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

2013
[60]

2015, ApJS, 220, 15

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

2015
[61]

B., et al

Paxton , B., Schwab , J., Bauer , E. B., et al. 2018, ApJS, 234, 34

2018
[62]

2019, ApJS, 243, 10

Paxton , B., Smolec , R., Schwab , J., et al. 2019, ApJS, 243, 10

2019
[63]

Posten, H. O. 1984, Robustness of the Two-Sample T-Test, ed. D. Rasch & M. L. Tiku (Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands), 92--99

1984
[64]

2022, A&A, 659, A167

Ripepi , V., Catanzaro , G., Clementini , G., et al. 2022, A&A, 659, A167

2022
[65]

2021, MNRAS, 508, 4047

Ripepi , V., Catanzaro , G., Molinaro , R., et al. 2021, MNRAS, 508, 4047

2021
[66]

2023, , 674, A17

Ripepi , V., Clementini , G., Molinaro , R., et al. 2023, , 674, A17

2023
[67]

I., Marconi , M., et al

Ripepi , V., Moretti , M. I., Marconi , M., et al. 2015, MNRAS, 446, 3034

2015
[68]

& Solano , E

Rodrigo , C. & Solano , E. 2020, in XIV.0 Scientific Meeting (virtual) of the Spanish Astronomical Society, 182

2020
[69]

2012, SVO Filter Profile Service Version 1.0 , IVOA Working Draft 15 October 2012

Rodrigo , C., Solano , E., & Bayo , A. 2012, SVO Filter Profile Service Version 1.0 , IVOA Working Draft 15 October 2012

2012
[70]

& Cassisi , S

Salaris , M. & Cassisi , S. 2005, Evolution of Stars and Stellar Populations , 400

2005
[71]

2024, , 685, A41

Sicignano , T., Ripepi , V., Marconi , M., et al. 2024, , 685, A41

2024
[72]

& Moskalik , P

Smolec , R. & Moskalik , P. 2008, AcA, 58, 193

2008
[73]

& Moskalik , P

Smolec , R. & Moskalik , P. 2012, MNRAS, 426, 108

2012
[74]

2018, MNRAS, 481, 3724

Smolec , R., Moskalik , P., Plachy , E., Soszy \'n ski , I., & Udalski , A. 2018, MNRAS, 481, 3724

2018
[75]

K., et al

Soszy \'n ski , I., Udalski , A., Szyma \'n ski , M. K., et al. 2008, AcA, 58, 293

2008
[76]

K., et al

Soszy \'n ski , I., Udalski , A., Szyma \'n ski , M. K., et al. 2014, AcA, 64, 177

2014
[77]

K., et al

Soszy \'n ski , I., Udalski , A., Szyma \'n ski , M. K., et al. 2018, AcA, 68, 89

2018
[78]

K., et al

Soszy \'n ski , I., Udalski , A., Szyma \'n ski , M. K., et al. 2017, AcA, 67, 297

2017
[79]

Stellingwerf , R. F. 1982 a , ApJ, 262, 330

1982
[80]

Stellingwerf , R. F. 1982 b , ApJ, 262, 339

1982
[81]

2024, , 681, A65

Trentin , E., Ripepi , V., Molinaro , R., et al. 2024, , 681, A65

2024
[82]

2002, PASP, 114, 689

Wallerstein , G. 2002, PASP, 114, 689

2002
[83]

Wesselink , A. J. 1947, BAN, 10, 256

1947
[84]

2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2406.16561

Wielg \'o rski , P., Pietrzy \'n ski , G., Gieren , W., et al. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2406.16561

2024 arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 10, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[1] [1]

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

ENTRY address archiveprefix author booktitle chapter edition editor howpublished institution eprint journal key month note number organization pages publisher school series title type volume year label extra.label sort.label short.list INTEGERS output.state before.all mid.sentence after.sentence after.block FUNCTION init.state.consts #0 'before.all := #1 ...

[2] [2]

write newline

" write newline "" before.all 'output.state := FUNCTION n.dashify 't := "" t empty not t #1 #1 substring "-" = t #1 #2 substring "--" = not "--" * t #2 global.max substring 't := t #1 #1 substring "-" = "-" * t #2 global.max substring 't := while if t #1 #1 substring * t #2 global.max substring 't := if while FUNCTION word.in bbl.in " " * FUNCTION format....

[3] [3]

J., & Scott , P

Asplund , M., Grevesse , N., Sauval , A. J., & Scott , P. 2009, ARA&A, 47, 481

2009

[4] [4]

1926, Astronomische Nachrichten, 228, 359

Baade , W. 1926, Astronomische Nachrichten, 228, 359

1926

[5] [5]

L., Bono , G., Braga , V

Beaton , R. L., Bono , G., Braga , V. F., et al. 2018, SSRv, 214, 113

work page 2018

[6] [6]

L., Freedman , W

Beaton , R. L., Freedman , W. L., Madore , B. F., et al. 2016, ApJ, 832, 210

work page 2016

[7] [7]

& Strohmeier , W

Becker , W. & Strohmeier , W. 1940, ZA, 19, 249

work page 1940

[8] [8]

2020, Journal of Astrophysics and Astronomy, 41, 23

Bhardwaj , A. 2020, Journal of Astrophysics and Astronomy, 41, 23

work page 2020