Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 10 minor 1 cited by

A study of Andromeda to improve our knowledge on the evolution and dust production by AGB stars

T0 review · 3 major / 10 minor · reviewed 2026-08-16 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Carbon-rich AGB stars, not silicates, dominate the dust currently produced by the Andromeda galaxy (M31).

desk verdict First M31 AGB dust budget split by species, with the carbon rate conditional on an unverified completeness assumption that the authors themselves flag. read the letter →

arxiv 2504.12940 v1 pith:K5QACSUN submitted 2025-04-17 astro-ph.GA astro-ph.SR

Claudio Gavetti , Paolo Ventura , Flavia Dell'Agli , Fabio La Franca , Ester Marini , Matteo Correnti , Marco Tailo This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.GAastro-ph.SR
keywords asymptoticgiantbranchstarsM31dustproductionratecarbonsilicatespopulationsynthesisstellarmasslossHSTandSpitzerphotometry
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 sets out to determine what kinds of stars make up the evolved stellar population of Andromeda (M31) and how much dust those stars are currently injecting into the galaxy. Using stellar evolution models with dust formation in the wind, the authors build a synthetic population based on M31's star formation history and compare it with an HST and Spitzer catalogue of roughly 346,000 AGB star candidates. They conclude that most AGB stars descend from low-mass stars formed 6–14 Gyr ago, plus a secondary population from 1.7–2.5 $M_\odot$ stars formed during a burst 1–2 Gyr ago. The central result is that carbon-rich AGB stars currently produce dust at about $4\times 10^{-4}\,M_\odot\,{\rm yr}^{-1}$, while oxygen-rich stars produce silicates at only about $6\times 10^{-5}\,M_\odot\,{\rm yr}^{-1}$, so carbon dust dominates the galactic dust input despite the near-solar metallicity of the population. A cautious reader should note that the carbon rate is quoted under the assumption that the scarcity of extremely red carbon stars in M31 is an observational completeness effect.

What carries the argument

The machinery is population synthesis of AGB stars with dust formation included in the wind. Stellar evolution tracks are computed with the ATON code for metallicities from $Z=0.001$ to $Z=0.014$; dust formation in the wind is described following Ferrarotti and Gail, giving condensation fractions and dust production rates for carbon, SiC, silicates, alumina, and iron; and the radiative transfer code DUSTY turns the resulting photospheric and dust properties into spectral energy distributions. These model SEDs are weighted by M31's star formation history and age–metallicity relation, then placed on the same colour–magnitude planes as the observed catalogue: the HST plane $(F110W-F160W, F160W)$ for the stellar characterization and the Spitzer plane $([3.6]-[4.5], [3.6])$ for the dusty stars. The comparison selects the input physics (convection model, RGB mass loss, massive-AGB mass-loss law) and then sums the individual dust production rates to obtain the galactic total.

What would settle it

Take JWST MIRI or deep Spitzer images of the M31 disk reaching well below $[3.6]\approx 18$ mag and count stars with $[3.6]-[4.5]$ between 2 and 3.5 mag. If the number of such extremely red sources is truly negligible, the $4\times 10^{-4}\,M_\odot\,{\rm yr}^{-1}$ carbon dust rate fails and the true rate is about half; finding the predicted population would confirm the completeness interpretation.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that at the present epoch, the dominant dust producers among M31's asymptotic giant branch stars are carbon stars, which release carbonaceous dust at $\dot M_{\rm car}\sim 3.8\times 10^{-4}\,M_\odot\,{\rm yr}^{-1}$, whereas oxygen-rich AGB stars produce silicates at $\dot M_{\rm Sil}\sim 6\times 10^{-5}\,M_\odot\,{\rm yr}^{-1}$, with roughly 80 percent of that silicate contribution coming from massive AGB stars undergoing hot bottom burning. This flips the usual expectation for a near-solar-metallicity stellar population, where oxygen-rich stars are more numerous: the authors argue that low-mass oxygen-rich stars have mass-loss rates too small to form silicates efficiently, while carbon stars descending from 1.2–3.5 $M_\odot$ progenitors make carbon dust copiously during their short C-rich phase. The carbon rate rests on treating the dearth of stars with $[3.6]-[4.5] > 2$ mag as a completeness effect; if the dearth is real, the carbon rate would be roughly half, reducing the total dust production rate by about 40 percent. Along the way the paper also finds that matching the observed near-infrared luminosity function requires specific values of the RGB mass loss and of the convective efficiency, and that the VW93 mass-loss treatment, not Blöcker's, reproduces the observed numbers of bright, hot-bottom-burning AGB stars.

Load-bearing premise

The carbon dust production rate hinges on the assumption that the near absence of extremely red carbon stars in M31, with $[3.6]-[4.5] > 2$ mag, is an incompleteness artifact of the Spitzer data rather than a real property of the galaxy.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • M31's current AGB dust production rate totals roughly $4.6\times 10^{-4}\,M_\odot\,{\rm yr}^{-1}$, with carbon dust supplying about 80 percent and silicates about 20 percent.
  • The small extreme-AGB fraction in M31 relative to the Magellanic Clouds is most plausibly a completeness effect; if so, carbon-dust production efficiency is roughly metallicity-independent, as the paper argues.
  • For solar-metallicity massive AGBs, the VW93 mass-loss prescription is favoured over Blöcker's by the observed number and location of luminous hot-bottom-burning stars in the Spitzer plane.
  • To reproduce the observed F160W luminosity function, low-mass RGB stars must lose about 0.2, 0.25, and 0.3 $M_\odot$ at $Z=0.001$, $Z=0.004$, and solar metallicity, values consistent with globular-cluster calibrations but not with low asteroseismic estimates.
  • The higher carbon-star fraction found here compared with Boyer et al.'s classification largely vanishes (C/M = 0.07) when Boyer's colour cuts are adopted instead of G22's, so the two estimates are reconciled.

Reading between the lines

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

  • A direct test of the completeness assumption is within reach: JWST MIRI imaging deep enough to reach $[3.6]\sim 18$ mag in the M31 disk should reveal whether the $([3.6]-[4.5])>2$ mag carbon-star population exists; this would settle whether carbon-dust production at solar metallicity matches lower-metallicity environments.
  • A natural extension of this approach, not developed by the authors, would invert the machinery: instead of assuming a star formation history to predict AGB colours, one could fit the near- and mid-infrared luminosity functions to recover the star formation history of galaxies where only the giant branch is visible, using M31 as a local anchor.
  • The authors flag but do not resolve an apparent tension: the predicted number of bright massive AGB stars with F160W < 16 mag is about twice the observed number, which suggests either that M31's recent star formation rate is overestimated or that the VW93-based AGB lifetimes need downward revision.
  • If carbon-dust dominance at near-solar metallicity is confirmed, galaxy-scale dust budgets that assume silicates dominate in high-metallicity systems would need revision, with consequences for how much carbon evolved stars return to the interstellar medium.
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.

Referee Report

3 major / 10 minor

Summary. The paper applies a population-synthesis approach—combining ATON stellar evolution models, wind dust-formation modeling following Ferrarotti & Gail, DUSTY radiative transfer, the M31 star-formation history and age-metallicity relation from Williams et al. (2017) and Lewis et al. (2015), and a Kroupa IMF—to interpret the ~346,000 AGB candidates in M31 from Goldman et al. (2022). From the F160W luminosity function the authors infer that ~70% of the AGB population descends from 0.8-1.2 solar-mass stars formed 6-14 Gyr ago, with a distinct contribution from 1.7-2.5 solar-mass stars formed during the 1-2 Gyr star-formation peak, and that the hot-bottom-burning population requires the VW93 mass-loss recipe over Blöcker. Using the Spitzer ([3.6]-[4.5], [3.6]) plane, they derive a carbon dust production rate from C-stars of ~4e-4 Msun/yr and a silicate rate of ~6e-5 Msun/yr, concluding that carbon dust dominates the current AGB dust input of M31 despite the near-solar metallicity. The carbon DPR is explicitly conditioned on the assumption that the absence of extremely red C-stars ([3.6]-[4.5]>2 mag) is an incompleteness effect; if the deficit is intrinsic, the rate halves (Sections 6-7).

Significance. If the result holds, this is the first quantitative estimate that carbonaceous dust dominates the AGB dust production of a solar-metallicity disk galaxy, contrary to the suggestion in Goldman et al. (2022) that silicates dominate. The paper's concrete strengths include a well-described pipeline built on published evolutionary tracks, dust models, and SFH inputs; a synthetic F160W luminosity function matching the observed one to within a few tenths of a percent in four magnitude bins (Table 1); a useful model discrimination favoring VW93 over Blöcker mass loss; a falsifiable prediction (a heavily reddened C-star population at [3.6]~16-19 mag that JWST/MIRI should detect); and full transparency about its main assumption and its open discrepancies. The principal limitation is that the absolute DPR values are not anchored to any observed dust luminosity and inherit an acknowledged factor-of-two systematic from the completeness assumption, so the numerical claims are conditional even though the qualitative conclusion that carbon dominates silicates is robust to halving the carbon rate.

major comments (3)
  1. [Sections 6-7 and Section 3] The headline carbon DPR of ~4e-4 Msun/yr rests on the assumption, stated in Sections 6 and 7, that the absence of C-stars with ([3.6]-[4.5])>2 mag in M31 is an incompleteness effect; the paper itself notes that if the deficit is real the rate would be about half (Section 7). No quantitative completeness function is provided for the color-magnitude region where the missing stars are predicted to lie (roughly 16 < [3.6] < 19 mag), and the two statements in the text bracket that region ambiguously: Section 3 reports ~90% completeness down to [3.6]=15.6 with significant incompleteness beyond ~18.5, whereas Section 6 states that completeness already starts to be affected at [3.6]~15.2. Given that observed sources at [3.6]~13-15 reach colors of ~2 mag, an artificial-star completeness test in the ([3.6]-[4.5], [3.6]) plane is needed to establish that a real red population at fainter [3.6] would have been missed; alternatively, the abstract and Section 7 should report the carbon DPR as a range (~2-4e-4 Msun/yr) rather than a single headline value.
  2. [Section 6] The silicates DPR of ~6e-5 Msun/yr, ~80% of which is attributed to massive AGBs experiencing HBB, is computed from the VW93 models that the paper favors, yet Section 6 also reports that the predicted number of F160W<16 mag sources (~1000) exceeds the observed count by about a factor of two, a discrepancy the authors explicitly leave open. Because the number of massive AGBs enters directly into the summed DPR, the quoted silicate rate carries an unquantified factor-of-two systematic of the same order as the carbon-to-silicate contrast being claimed. I request that the authors either normalize the synthetic silicate DPR to the observed massive-AGB count, or quote 6e-5 Msun/yr with a corresponding systematic uncertainty, before the value is used to conclude that carbon dust dominates.
  3. [Sections 5.1.1-5.1.2 and 6] The RGB mass-loss values (0.2, 0.25, 0.3 Msun for Z=0.001, 0.004, Z_sun) and the per-metallicity convection prescriptions are calibrated so that the synthetic sample reproduces the observed F160W LF (Sections 5.1.1-5.1.2), and the DPR estimates of Section 6 are then generated by these same tuned models, which share the degeneracies of the calibration. The paper quotes the DPR to one significant figure without an error budget covering the convection grid (FST versus MLT with alpha=1-1.9), the +/-0.05 Msun variations of the RGB mass loss, and the VW93/Blöcker dichotomy. A concrete way to anchor the dust production would be comparing the synthetic total dust luminosity of the AGB population with the observed mid-IR emission of M31, or tabulating the DPR variations across the model grid; without this, the numerical DPR values remain predictions of tuned models rather than constrained measurements.
minor comments (10)
  1. [Section 2.1] There are two typos in the mass-loss and convection paragraphs: 'Whit regard' should be 'With regard' and 'Mixing Lenght Teory' should be 'Mixing Length Theory'.
  2. [Section 4.3] The sentence 'According to VW93, the luminosity scales with the pulsation period according to Eq. 5 in VW93' misstates the VW93 prescription, which relates the mass-loss rate to the pulsation period; this should be corrected.
  3. [Section 6] The phrase 'pulsating with periods of 1500-2000 yr' should have units of days; AGB pulsation periods are of order hundreds of days, so the current wording is unphysical.
  4. [Section 6] The text contains two language errors: 'a clearly discrepancy' should be 'a clear discrepancy', and 'The analysis of the previous session' should be 'the previous section'.
  5. [Fig. 9 caption] The word 'obatined' in the caption should be 'obtained'.
  6. [Sections 4.1 and 5.2.1] The notation '2x10^-8 M/yr' (or 'Mdot/yr') is ambiguous; the dust and gas mass-loss rates should be written with the solar-mass unit (e.g., M_sun/yr) throughout.
  7. [Section 6] The color-DPR relation log(Mcar) = (2/3)([3.6]-[4.5]) - 8.3 needs the units of Mcar and the photometric system to be specified; as written, the intercept is dimensionful and the relation cannot be reproduced by readers.
  8. [Header] The header 'Received September 15, 1996; accepted March 16, 1997' appears to be a leftover template placeholder and should be corrected.
  9. [Section 5.1.2] The claim that the adopted RGB mass-loss combination is 'the only combination allowing to reproduce the observed percentages' is supported only by +/-0.05 Msun experiments; given the degeneracies with the convection choice and the SFH uncertainties, a more cautious phrasing or a small grid table would be more appropriate.
  10. [Section 5.2.4] The factor-of-six tension between the synthetic (30%) and G22 (5%) C-star fractions in the 16.5<F160W<17 bin is left open; a sensitivity test showing that the total C-star fraction and the final DPR conclusions are insensitive to this discrepancy would strengthen the paper.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: model calibration to the M31 luminosity function is transparent, and the DPR estimates are model outputs with an explicit completeness caveat, not refits of the target dust quantity.

full rationale

The paper's derivation chain is self-contained in the sense required by the circularity test. The RGB mass-loss values (δM_RGB = 0.2, 0.25, 0.3 M☉ for Z = 10^-3, 4×10^-3, and solar) and the convective-model choices in Sections 5.1.1–5.1.2 are indeed calibrated to reproduce the observed F160W luminosity function of the G22 catalogue. However, this calibration targets stellar number counts in HST bands, not dust production. The DPR values are then obtained by coupling those evolutionary sequences to a separate dust-formation/wind model (Section 2.2, following Ferrarotti & Gail 2006 and Ventura et al. 2012), and the color–DPR relation quoted in Section 6 is an output of the synthetic models rather than a fit to dust data. Thus no equation in the paper sets the predicted DPR equal to a fitted input by construction. The central carbon-DPR estimate of ~4×10^-4 M☉/yr is conditional on an explicitly stated completeness assumption for stars with ([3.6]-[4.5])>2 mag; the paper itself quantifies the factor-of-two sensitivity and calls for JWST confirmation. This is an honest and load-bearing caveat, but it is an observational-uncertainty limitation, not a circular step. The cited previous evolutionary and dust-formation models come substantially from the authors' own group, but they are not invoked as an unexamined uniqueness theorem; they are tested against the M31 data within the paper, and the manuscript explicitly leaves several discrepancies open. No self-referential claim reduces to its own input, and no fitted parameter is renamed as a prediction. The derivation is therefore not circular, and the appropriate score is 0.

Assumptions & free parameters 5 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on several tuned physical parameters (RGB mass loss per metallicity, convection model choice, and the VW93 mass-loss prescription) plus the domain assumptions about the adopted SFH/AMR and the completeness interpretation of the missing red carbon stars. No new entities are introduced.

free parameters (5)
  • RGB mass loss for Z=0.001 stars = 0.2 Msun
    Adopted in Sect. 5.1.2 as the only value reproducing the observed fraction of stars in the faintest F160W bin.
  • RGB mass loss for Z=0.004 stars = 0.25 Msun
    Same section; tuned to reproduce the observed LF.
  • RGB mass loss for solar metallicity stars = 0.3 Msun
    Same section; tuned to reproduce the observed LF.
  • Convection model choice = FST for solar, MLT alpha=1 for Z=0.001, MLT alpha=1.4 for Z=0.004
    Selected in Sect. 5.1.1 so that model tracks satisfy the G22 colour cuts and the number counts in the different bins are reproduced.
  • Mass-loss recipe for massive AGBs = VW93 (Blöcker rejected)
    Chosen in Sections 4.3 and 6 because the Blöcker prescription overproduces stars in the Spitzer HBB region and cannot explain the F160W<16 mag sources.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption The SFH and age-metallicity relation of Williams et al. (2017) and Lewis et al. (2015) describe the whole M31 disk.
    Used in Sect. 2.4 to build the synthetic population; the authors acknowledge this ignores metallicity gradients across the disk.
  • domain assumption The G22 catalogue is complete down to the stated limits and the selection cuts are correctly applied.
    The analysis depends on G22 cuts and completeness limits; the completeness limit in [3.6] is used to argue that the red C-star deficit is an artefact.
  • domain assumption The dust formation model of Ferrarotti & Gail and the DUSTY SED code accurately predict the relation between stellar parameters, IR colours, and dust production rate.
    This is the core physical modelling that converts the synthetic population into DPR estimates; no direct validation within M31 is provided.
  • ad hoc to paper The deficiency of extremely red carbon stars in M31 is due to incompleteness, not an intrinsic metallicity effect.
    Stated explicitly in Sect. 7; if false, the carbon DPR is halved, changing the headline result by roughly 40%.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of A study of Andromeda to improve our knowledge on the evolution and dust production by AGB stars." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/K5QACSUN

@misc{pith2026250412940,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: A study of Andromeda to improve our knowledge on the evolution and dust production by AGB stars},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/K5QACSUN}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2504.12940}
}
read the original abstract

We study the AGB population of the galaxy M31, based on available HST and Spitzer data, to characterize the individual sources in terms of mass, metallicity and formation epoch of the progenitors. Particular attention is dedicated to the derivation of the dust production rate of the stars, in the attempt of determining the global current dust production rate of the galaxy, divided between the silicates and the carbonaceous dust contributions. We use results from stellar evolution modelling complemented by the description of the dust formation process in the wind, to be used in a population synthesis approach, based on the star formation history and age-metallicity relationship obtained in previous investigations. The comparison between the results from synthetic modelling and the data available are used for the characterization of AGB stars in M31. We find that the bulk of the AGB population of M31 is composed by low-mass stars of different metallicity formed between 6 Gyr and 14 Gyr ago, with an additional, significant contribution from the progeny of 1.7-2.5Msun stars formed during the secondary peak in the star formation, which occurred between 1 and 2 Gyr ago. The dust production rate of the galaxy is mostly provided by carbon stars, whose contribution is of the order of 4x10^{-4} Msun/yr, completed by silicates production from massive AGB stars, occurring at a rate of 6x10^{-5} Msun/yr. The implications of the present results on the reliability of AGB modelling are also commented.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2504.12940 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Data points in the catalogue of M31 AGB stars by G22 are shown with grey points on the colour-magnitude (F110W − F160W, F160W) plane. Solid lines represent the evolutionary tracks of model stars of different mass and metallicity, connecting points corresponding to evolutionary stages taken in the middle of each inter-pulse phase. The different lines refer to the evolution of the M = 0.65 M⊙ star of metallicity Z = 1… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Time variation of the effective temperatures of 0.65 M⊙ model stars of metallicity Z = 0.001 (top, left panel) and Z = 0.004 (top, right), calculated with different convective models. The corresponding evolutionary tracks of the Z = 0.001 model star on the (F814W−F160W, F160W) and (F110W − F160W, F160W) planes are shown in the bottom, left and bottom, right panels, respectively. The points along the tracks indicate … view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Time variation of the luminosity (left panel) and of the F160W flux (right) of Z = 0.001 model stars of initial mass (taken at the beginning of the core helium burning phase) 0.6 M⊙ (magenta line), 0.65 M⊙ (black), 0.75 M⊙ (green). pected F160W flux, which is about half magnitude brighter in the 0.75 M⊙ model star in comparison with the 0.6 M⊙ case (see right panel of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (8 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: In the Blöcker (1995) case the DPR is found to be above [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_4.png]
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: AGB time variation of the luminosity (left panel), dust production rate (middle), [3.6] fluxes (right) of two model stars of initial mass 5 M⊙ where mass loss was described by means of the Blöcker (1995) (black squares) and the VW93 treatments (red triangles) [PITH_FU…
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Evolutionary tracks of the same 5 M⊙ model stars reported in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Left: The F160W luminosity function of the stars included in the G22 sample, indicated with a black line, is compared with the results obtained from population synthesis, shown with a red, dashed line. The contribution from stars of different mass in the various F160W …
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: AGB candidates from the G22 sample in M31 are shown with grey points in the colour-magnitude (F110W − F160W, F160W) diagram. The expected distribution of metal-poor, sub-solar and solar metallicity stars from the synthetic modelling is indicated with different colour-c…
Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: , is that during the oxygen-rich phase these stars evolve at colours too blue to pass the criteria described in section 3, thus they are not included in the G22 sample. Even in this case, as discussed for the other carbon stars with fainter F160W fluxes, the carbon acc…
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Data points of the M31 sources included in the catalogue by G22 in the ([3.6]−[4.5], [3.6]) plane obtained with the Spitzer filters are shown with grey points. Solid lines represented the same evolutionary tracks of some selected model stars reported in [PITH_FULL_IMA…
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: The luminosity function of carbon stars in F160W (top) and [3.6] (bottom), normalized to 17 and 14 mag, respectively. The LF of the carbon stars sample as selected by Boyer et al. (2019) is shown in black; the LF of the carbon stars synthetic population produced in thi…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

  1. The slow brightening of WNTR23bzdiq / WTP19aalzlk : Possible onset of common-envelope evolution in an asymptotic giant branch star?

    astro-ph.SR 2025-05 accept novelty 7.0 of 10

    A slowly brightening AGB star in M31, brightened by two magnitudes over ten years with M-type spectra and a mixed-temperature appearance, is proposed as the onset of common-envelope evolution, making it the most evolv...

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

15 extracted references · 13 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    P., van Hoof, P

    Abel, N. P., van Hoof, P. A. M., Shaw, G., et al. 2008, ApJ, 686, 1125 Aller, L. H. & Czyzak, S. J. 1983, ApJS, 51,

    work page 2008

  2. [45]

    2016, MNRAS, 458, 3466 Vitense, E

    Vincenzo, F., Belfiore, F., Maiolino, R., et al. 2016, MNRAS, 458, 3466 Vitense, E. 1953, ZAp, 32, 135 Wachter, A., Schröder, K.-P., Winters, J. M., et al. 2002, A&A, 384, 452 Wachter, A., Winters, J. M., Schröder, K.-P., et al. 2008, A&A, 486, 497 Williams, B. F., Dolphin, A. E., Dalcanton, J. J., et al. 2017, ApJ, 846, 145 Article number, page 19 of 19

    work page 2016

  3. [83]

    L., McQuinn, K

    Boyer, M. L., McQuinn, K. B. W., Groenewegen, M. A. T., et al. 2017, ApJ, 851, 152 Boyer, M. L., Williams, B. F., Aringer, B., et al. 2019, ApJ, 879, 109 Caloi, V . & D’Antona, F. 2005, A&A, 435, 987 Canuto V . M. C., Mazzitelli I., 1991, ApJ, 370, 295 Catelan, M. 2000, ApJ, 531, 826 Dalcanton, J. J., Williams, B. F., Lang, D., et al. 2012, ApJS, 200, 18 ...

    work page 2017

  4. [97]

    Harris J., Zaritsky D., 2009, AJ, 138,

    work page 2009

  5. [103]

    L., Srinivasan, S., Riebel, D., et al

    Boyer, M. L., Srinivasan, S., Riebel, D., et al. 2012, ApJ, 748, 40 Boyer M. L., Girardi L., Marigo P., Williams B. F., Aringer B., Nowotny W., Rosenfield P., et al., 2013, ApJ, 774,

    work page 2012

  6. [211]

    2009, A&A, 503, 913 Aringer B., Girardi L., Nowotny W., Marigo P., Bressan A., 2016, MNRAS, 457,

    Aringer, B., Girardi, L., Nowotny, W., et al. 2009, A&A, 503, 913 Aringer B., Girardi L., Nowotny W., Marigo P., Bressan A., 2016, MNRAS, 457,

    work page 2009

  7. [231]

    & Draine, B

    Laor, A. & Draine, B. T. 1993, ApJ, 402,

    work page 1993

  8. [441]

    R., Dolphin, A

    Lewis, A. R., Dolphin, A. E., Dalcanton, J. J., et al. 2015, ApJ, 805, 183 Marigo, P. 2002, A&A, 387, 507 Marigo, P. & Aringer, B. 2009, A&A, 508, 1539 Marini, E., Dell’Agli, F., Di Criscienzo, M., et al. 2020, MNRAS, 493, 2996 Marini, E., Dell’Agli, F., Groenewegen, M. A. T., et al. 2021, A&A, 647, A69 Marini E., Dell’Agli F., Kamath D., Ventura P., Matt...

    work page 2015

Show all 15 references
  1. [525]

    & Cuntz, M

    Schneider R., Maiolino R., 2023, arXiv, arXiv:2310.00053 Schröder, K.-P. & Cuntz, M. 2005, ApJ, 630, L73 Schwarzschild, M. & Härm, R. 1965, ApJ, 142, 855 Sloan, G. C., Matsuura, M., Lagadec, E., et al. 2012, ApJ, 752, 140 Sloan, G. C., Lagadec, E., Zijlstra, A. A., et al. 2014...

    2023 arXiv

  2. [526]

    2012, Red Giants as Probes of the Structure and Evolution of the Milky Way, 26, 45 Salaris, M., Cassisi, S., & Pietrinferni, A

    Salaris, M. 2012, Red Giants as Probes of the Structure and Evolution of the Milky Way, 26, 45 Salaris, M., Cassisi, S., & Pietrinferni, A. 2016, A&A, 590, A64 Salaris, M., Cassisi, S., Schiavon, R. P., et al. 2018, A&A, 612, A68 Schneider R., Valiante R., Ventura P., et al. 2...

    2012

  3. [1115]

    2015a, MNRAS, 447, 2992 Dell’Agli, F., García-Hernández, D

    Dell’Agli, F., Ventura, P., Schneider, R., et al. 2015a, MNRAS, 447, 2992 Dell’Agli, F., García-Hernández, D. A., Ventura, P., et al. 2015b, MNRAS, 454, 4235 Dell’Agli, F., Di Criscienzo, M., Boyer, M. L., et al. 2016, MNRAS, 460, 4230 Dell’Agli, F., Di Criscienzo, M., Ventura...

    2016

  4. [1243]

    H., Allard, F., Ferguson, J., et al

    Hauschildt, P. H., Allard, F., Ferguson, J., et al. 1999, ApJ, 525, 871 Höfner, S. & Olofsson, H. 2018, A&A Rev., 26, 1 Iben, I. Jr. 1974, ARA&A, 12, 215 Kamath, D., Dell’Agli, F., Ventura, P., et al. 2023, MNRAS, 519, 2169 Karakas A. I., Lattanzio J. C. 2014, PASA, 31, e030 K...

    1999

  5. [2282]

    2022, Universe, 8,

    Ventura, P., Dell’Agli, F., Tailo, M., et al. 2022, Universe, 8,

    2022

  6. [2527]

    T., et al

    Miglio, A., Chiappini, C., Mackereth, J. T., et al. 2021, A&A, 645, A85 Nanni A., Bressan A., Marigo P., et al. 2013, MNRAS, 434, 2390 Nanni A., Bressan A., Marigo P., et al. 2014, MNRAS, 438, 2328 Nanni, A., Marigo, P., Groenewegen, M. A. T., et al. 2016, MNRAS, 462, 1215 Nan...

    2021

  7. [3611]

    1994, ApJ, 423, L71 Blöcker, T

    Begemann, B., Dorschner, J., Henning, T., et al. 1994, ApJ, 423, L71 Blöcker, T. & Schönberner, D. 1991, A&A, 244, L43 Blöcker, T. 1995, A&A, 297, 727 Bowen, G. H. 1988, ApJ, 329, 299 Boyer M. L., Srinivasan S., van Loon J. T., McDonald I., Meixner M., Zaritsky D., Gordon K. D...

    1994

Pith tools

Reviewed August 16, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.