Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 5 minor 1 cited by

Be star demographics: a comprehensive study of thousands of lightcurves in the Magellanic Clouds

T0 review · 4 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-15 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read First population-level measurement of Be star duty cycles: lower-metallicity SMC stars spend more time feeding disks, keep disks almost permanently, and show longer but rarer outbursts.

desk verdict First population-level duty-cycle measurements for Magellanic Cloud Be stars, but the headline metallicity claim does not survive the paper's own mass-matched tests. read the letter →

arxiv 2505.08714 v1 pith:CP66ZQ2J submitted 2025-05-13 astro-ph.SR

A. L. Figueiredo , A. C. Carciofi , J. Labadie-Bartz , M. L. Pinho , T. H. de Amorin , P. T. dos Santos , I. Soszyński , A. Udalski This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.SR PACS 97.30.Eh97.10.Fy
keywords BestarsMagellanicCloudsviscousdecretiondiskdutycycleOGLElightcurvesstellarmasslossmetallicity
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 analyzes about 20 years of OGLE photometry for more than 3,000 Be stars in the two Magellanic Clouds and classifies each light curve, with help from viscous-disk models, into phases of disk build-up, plateau, dissipation, and quiescence. Its central claim is the first population-level measurement of how much time Be stars actually spend ejecting mass (the duty cycle) and how often they harbor a detectable disk (the disk duty cycle). The result: stars in the lower-metallicity Small Magellanic Cloud are markedly more active than Large Magellanic Cloud stars, with median duty cycles of 0.60 versus 0.44, disks present essentially all the time (median disk duty cycle 1.0 versus 0.99), and outbursts that are longer but slightly rarer (median 0.26 versus 0.31 per year). If right, these numbers turn the erratic, individual behavior of Be stars into a demographic description that constrains how stellar mass loss depends on mass and metallicity.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the V-I color-magnitude loop: in the viscous decretion disk (VDD) model, a disk event makes a pole-on star brighten and redden while an edge-on star dims with little color change, and the loop's orientation rotates with inclination. That diagnostic was recomputed here in the I band, using the singlebe hydrodynamic code coupled to the hdust radiative-transfer code for one fiducial 12-solar-mass star (rotation rate W = 0.81, viscosity parameter alpha = 1.0) across four feeding times and four base densities. A second grid of diskless, fast-rotating photospheric models at LMC and SMC metallicities converts a dereddened baseline position into an estimate of stellar mass. On top of these, an interactive manual classification assigns each segment of every light curve to one of seven categories (baseline, build-up, dissipation, plateau, isolated build-up, isolated dissipation, unclassified), from which the duty cycle, disk duty cycle, and outburst rate are computed, and published mass-reservoir fitting formulas are applied to isolated events to extract build-up and dissipation durations.

What would settle it

Take the 605 isolated disk events and refit them with dynamical models computed at each star's own mass, rotation, and metallicity instead of the single 12-solar-mass template; if the fitted disk densities and durations no longer reproduce the reported SMC-LMC amplitude and duration gaps, the metallicity conclusion would need revision. A cheaper check is observational: point H-alpha or mid-infrared observations at stars sitting at their I-band baseline, since residual disk emission there would falsify the diskless-baseline premise and push every disk duty cycle upward.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The discovery, stated at population scale, is that Be star activity differs sharply between the two Clouds: among the 1,751 variable Be star candidates, SMC stars spend a median 60% of their time actively feeding a disk versus 44% for LMC stars, both populations keep a detectable disk for essentially the whole observing window (median disk duty cycles of 1.00 and 0.99), and SMC outbursts are longer but less frequent (median 0.26 per year versus 0.31). For 605 isolated disk events, SMC systems reach photometric amplitudes about three times larger and last notably longer (median total duration 645 days versus 407 days), which the authors read as evidence that low-metallicity disks are denser or fed for longer. Within both galaxies, every activity metric grows with stellar mass: the most massive stars show outburst rates about three times those of the least massive, and dissipation outlives build-up by a nearly constant ratio of about 1.5-1.6 that confirms the mass reservoir effect. The authors state that the median duty-cycle, disk duty-cycle, and outburst-rate values are upper limits, since quiet stars were intentionally excluded from the analyzed sample.

Load-bearing premise

The whole analysis rests on the assumption that the brightness-and-color behavior predicted for a single 12-solar-mass model star reliably reveals each real star's orientation and whether it is building or losing a disk, and that a star sitting at its I-band baseline has no disk at all; if either premise fails across the diversity of real LMC and SMC stars, every duty-cycle and outburst statistic inherits the error.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The Be state in these samples is near-permanent: a detectable disk exists essentially all of the time, even between mass-ejection episodes, so the disk is closer to a persistent condition than to a transient outburst for these objects.
  • Metallicity shapes the entire mass-loss phenomenology, not just the frequency of Be stars: at lower metallicity, stars spend more time feeding disks, build denser disks, and produce longer events.
  • Stellar mass drives activity within each galaxy: more massive stars have higher duty cycles, disk duty cycles, and outburst rates, with the outburst rate of the most massive bin about three times that of the least massive.
  • Because the sample deliberately excluded quiet stars, the reported medians are upper limits; adding the excluded inactive Be stars would lower the medians but leave the shape of the distributions above the first bin unchanged.
  • The near-constant dissipation-to-build-up ratio of about 1.5-1.6 in both galaxies gives population-level support for the mass reservoir effect, in which mass stored in the outer disk slows the fading of the inner disk.

Reading between the lines

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

  • A consequence the paper leaves implicit: the duty-cycle statistics could be inverted into a completeness correction for Be star censuses, since a star is counted as 'Be' only when a disk is present and will be misclassified in a single-epoch survey with probability equal to the complement of its disk duty cycle; with disk duty cycles near unity, the already high SMC Be fraction may be close to the
  • A testable extension the paper does not perform: refitting its catalogued isolated events with per-star masses, inclinations, and metallicities could reveal whether the viscosity parameter differs between the Clouds, in which case part of the reported amplitude and duration gap would be a viscous effect rather than a difference in mass-ejection behavior.
  • The paper's own caveat that I-band emission traces only the inner disk implies its disk duty-cycle numbers are floor values; H-alpha or mid-infrared follow-up of stars at their photometric baseline would likely show residual outer-disk emission, pushing the effective disk duty cycle even closer to 1.
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

4 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper analyzes ~2,144 LMC and ~989 SMC OGLE light curves of Be star candidates, manually classifying each light curve into phases (baseline, disk build-up, dissipation, plateau, isolated events) with guidance from viscous decretion disk models. From these classifications the authors define a duty cycle (DC), a disk duty cycle (DDC), an outburst rate (Nout), and, for a subsample with isolated events, build-up and dissipation durations. The central claim is that SMC Be stars are more active: they spend a larger fraction of time in mass-ejection phases (median DC 0.60 vs 0.44 in the LMC), have nearly permanent disks (median DDC 1.0 vs 0.99), and show longer but less frequent outbursts. The paper also reports that all activity diagnostics increase with stellar mass. The analysis is avowedly model-informed and the authors acknowledge several selection biases, including the exclusion of inactive Be stars and the under-representation of low-mass SMC stars.

Significance. If the central claim survives, this is the first population-level measurement of Be star mass-loss duty cycles in the Magellanic Clouds and a unique comparison of disk-activity diagnostics across two metallicities. The dataset is large, the light curves are real OGLE data, and the definitions of DC/DDC/Nout are straightforward, transparent, and easy to reproduce from the phase classifications. The mass determination via MCMC on photospheric models is a standard approach, and the use of KS tests is appropriate. The paper also provides a useful catalog of isolated disk events with durations, which will be valuable for future modeling. The main weakness is that the headline metallicity comparison is confounded by the very different mass distributions of the LMC and SMC samples, a concern that the authors themselves raise in Sect. 7.1 but do not resolve in the quantitative analysis.

major comments (4)
  1. [Sect. 6.3 and Fig. 12; Sect. 7.4] The central claim that SMC stars are more active than LMC stars is not supported by the mass-matched comparison. The KS tests reported in Fig. 12 show that, within each mass bin, DC differences are not significant (p = 0.36, 0.36, 0.21) and DDC differences are not significant (p = 0.81, 0.47, 0.61). Because Sect. 6.3 demonstrates that DC and DDC increase with stellar mass, and Sect. 7.1 explicitly admits that the SMC subsample is biased toward high-mass stars (median 9.5 Msun vs 6.6 Msun for the LMC), the population-level median differences (0.60 vs 0.44 for DC; 1.0 vs 0.99 for DDC) are likely selection artifacts. The abstract and Sect. 8 currently assert a metallicity dependence without qualifying that the within-mass-bin analysis shows no significant difference; this should be corrected and the mass-matched result should be presented as the primary evidence, or the sample must be reweighted/expanded to remove the confound.
  2. [Sect. 6.3, Fig. 12] The mass-matched KS tests have limited statistical power because the SMC sample sizes in the mass bins are small (M1: 19, M2: 44, M3: 17), so the null result cannot be taken as evidence that the distributions are actually indistinguishable. The text in Sect. 6.3 says the distributions are 'statistically indistinguishable' for DC and DDC; a more cautious phrasing (e.g., 'no significant difference was detected') is needed, along with a discussion of the power or confidence intervals. Moreover, the mass-matched analysis is restricted to Groups 2 and 3, which constitute only 22% of the SMC Be candidates (Table 7), so the mass-matched subsample may itself not be representative of the full SMC population.
  3. [Sect. 5 and Sect. 6.1] The manual classification of light curves into seven phase categories is the foundation of every duty cycle and outburst-rate measurement in the paper, yet the manuscript provides no validation of the classification's reliability. No inter-rater agreement test, repeatability check, or systematic comparison of the manual labels with the quantitative fit of Eqs. 5 and 6 (beyond the single example in Fig. 6) is reported. Given that the central demographic results rest entirely on these manual labels, the paper should either provide a reproducibility assessment (e.g., re-classifying a random subset by a second observer) or a sensitivity analysis showing that the headline median differences survive plausible classification uncertainties.
  4. [Sect. 4.1, Table 2, Fig. 5] The dynamical model grid used to classify stars as pole-on or edge-on and to identify build-up/dissipation phases is computed for a single 12 Msun, LMC-metallicity star with W=0.81 and alpha=1.0, while the sample spans masses from about 3 to 20 Msun and includes SMC (lower-metallicity) stars. The paper itself notes that the V-I loop orientation depends on base density (Sect. 4.1, bottom panel of Fig. 4) and that the intermediate-inclination range produces photometric signals below the detection threshold (Fig. 5), which biases the sample toward extreme inclinations. The authors should either run a small grid of models covering the mass/metallicity range and show that the phase classification is robust, or explicitly state which conclusions are insensitive to this modeling choice. This is a correctness-risk concern, not a circularity argument, but it is load-bearing because the phase labels determine all of DC, DDC, and Nout.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Abstract and Sect. 8] The abstract's phrase 'strong statistical differences' refers to the full-sample KS tests, but the mass-matched tests (Fig. 12) are the more relevant comparison for the metallicity claim; the abstract should be reworded to reflect the qualified nature of the result.
  2. [Sect. 6.1, Figs. 8 and 9] The KS test p-values are denoted by the symbol ρ (rho), which is unconventional and could be confused with a correlation coefficient; the paper should use 'p' or 'p-value' throughout.
  3. [Sect. 6.2] The text says the mass was determined for 468 stars in Groups 2 and 3, but the earlier statement that Groups 2 and 3 contain 816 stars may confuse readers; a sentence clarifying that mass determination required two-band photometry (V and I, or B and I) and thus was possible for only 468 of the 816 would improve clarity.
  4. [Sect. 6.3] The sentence listing the mass-bin counts ('217, 151, 20 (LMC) 19, 44 and 17') is hard to parse; a table or a clearer format (e.g., 'LMC: 217, 151, 20; SMC: 19, 44, 17') would be an improvement.
  5. [Sect. 7.2] The discussion of DDC biases is honest and useful, but the conclusion that 'the disk is present for most of the observational period' (Sect. 8) should explicitly carry the caveat that this is an upper limit affected by the activity selection and a lower limit affected by the I-band detection of the inner disk only; the current text in Sect. 8 does not fully convey this tension.

Circularity Check

2 steps flagged · score 4.0 of 10

Two secondary results reduce by construction: DDC≈1 is forced for Group 1 by Eq. 3, and the tb–td correlation/MRE confirmation is imprinted by the Rimulo et al. fitting formulas adopted by citation; the headline SMC-vs-LMC duty-cycle comparison is not definitionally circular.

  1. self definitional [Sect. 5, Eq. 3; Group 1 definition; Table 7; abstract DDC claim]
    "DDC = Σtdisk/(ttot−tunc), where Σtdisk is the total time spent in phases where a disk is present, which includes all categories except baseline and unclassified. ... Group 1: Lightcurves without a baseline phase."

    For Group 1 there is no baseline phase, so every non-unclassified time is a disk-present phase: Σtdisk = ttot − tunc, and Eq. 3 forces DDC = 1. Table 7 shows Group 1 contains 935 of 1751 stars (53%), including 78% of the SMC sample. The paper's abstract-level statement that DDC medians of 0.99/1.00 indicate 'disks are almost always present' is therefore a restatement of the Group 1 label ('no baseline observed') rather than an independent empirical measurement.

  2. ansatz smuggled in via citation [Sect. 5 (Eqs. 5-6); Sect. 7.3; Conclusions]
    "we adopted the formulae derived by Rımulo et al. ... ΔId(t) = ΔIb(tD)×[1/(1+[Cd(t−tD)]^ηd)] ... A clear correlation between the build-up and dissipation times is evident in our data... This underscores the mass reservoir effect (MRE) described earlier."

    Eq. 6 anchors the dissipation light curve to ΔIb(tD), which via Eq. 5 is a monotonically increasing function of the build-up duration tb for fixed rate coefficients; the fitted time td to decline to the detection threshold likewise grows with that amplitude. The tb–td correlation presented in Fig. 14 and then cited as 'confirming' the MRE is thus an output of the adopted fitting family from the authors' own prior Rimulo et al. work, not an independent test of that same prior result. The free coefficients allow scatter, but the positive correlation is built into the functional form.

full rationale

The main duty-cycle pipeline is not circular: DC, DDC, and Nout are simple time fractions of manually assigned light-curve phases (Eqs. 2-4), and the LMC/SMC DC difference (0.44 vs 0.60) is a direct measurement, not a fitted equation. Mass estimates come from an MCMC fit of baseline photometry to an independent diskless stellar grid, and the inclination interpretation rests on externally validated VDD/hdust modeling. The circularity is confined to two secondary claims. First, the 'disk duty cycle ≈ 1' result is definitional for the 53% of the sample in Group 1: because these light curves lack a baseline, Eq. 3 gives DDC=1 by construction, so the high DDC medians largely restate the Group 1 selection criterion rather than independently demonstrating that disks are almost always present. Second, the build-up/dissipation correlation used to 'confirm' the mass reservoir effect is obtained by fitting the very functional forms (Eqs. 5-6) adopted from the authors' prior Rimulo et al. work, and Eq. 6 makes the fitted dissipation time depend directly on the build-up amplitude, so the correlation is partly imprinted by the ansatz. The headline metallicity-vs-duty-cycle assertion is confounded by the known mass and activity selection bias (a correctness concern), but that is not a circularity. Overall, the central claim retains independent measured content, so the score is moderate rather than severe.

Assumptions & free parameters 4 free parameters · 7 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The paper's headline statistics are measured directly from OGLE light curves, but their interpretation as mass-loss duty cycles depends on the VDD interpretive grid, the diskless-baseline assumption, and the manual classification. The model grids and fitting functions come substantially from the authors' own previous work (Rimulo 2018, Vieira 2017, Rubio 2023), but the central empirical distributions are not definitionally circular.

free parameters (4)
  • Cbu and Cd (rate coefficients in Eqs. 5 and 6) = free per event, not tabulated
    Fitted for each isolated disk event; determine the reported build-up and dissipation durations and therefore the event duration statistics in Group 3.
  • eta_bu = 0.8 and eta_d = 1.4 = 0.8, 1.4
    Fixed from Rimulo et al. 2018 (co-author overlap); they set the functional shape of the generalized logistic fits used for tb and td, and are not refit to LMC/SMC data here.
  • Detection threshold for disk events = 0.06 mag
    Chosen as twice the measured baseline RMS (about 0.03 mag, Fig. 15); determines which events are counted in Nout, DC, and DDC.
  • Dynamical model calibrator star and grid = M=12 Msun, W=0.81, alpha=1.0; tb = 60,180,600,1800 d; Sigma0 = 0.12,0.69,1.67,4.00 g/cm2
    Single representative model (LMC metallicity) used to interpret light curve shape and CMD loops as orientation and phase diagnostics; the grid does not cover the full mass/metallicity range of the sample.
assumptions (7)
  • domain assumption Viscous Decretion Disk theory, including inside-out growth/dissipation and the mass reservoir effect, describes Be disk photometric variability.
    Used throughout; most directly in Sect. 4.1 and in interpreting build-up and dissipation phases in Sect. 5.
  • domain assumption singlebe + hdust isothermal thin-disk models with alpha=1.0 reproduce I-band light curve shapes.
    Sect. 4.1; the synthetic light curves are the calibration for classifying pole-on vs edge-on and for interpreting events.
  • ad hoc to paper The I-band photometric baseline corresponds to a diskless star.
    Sect. 3.4 defines the baseline as no circumstellar matter; this is load-bearing for mass estimation and duty cycle definitions and is partially contradicted by their own discussion of outer-disk persistence in Sect. 7.2.
  • domain assumption Diskless fast-rotating photospheric models with Kurucz spectra give reliable BVI colors and magnitudes.
    Sect. 4.2; mass estimates for 468 stars rely on this grid plus reddening maps and distance moduli.
  • domain assumption The OGLE color/magnitude candidate samples of Mennickent et al. 2002 and Sabogal et al. 2005 are representative Be star parent samples.
    Sect. 3; selection and contamination directly affect all population-level medians.
  • domain assumption Reddening maps of Skowron et al. 2021 and adopted distance moduli are accurate.
    Sect. 3.4 and 6.2; used to deredden baseline magnitudes before mass estimation.
  • standard math Kolmogorov-Smirnov tests are appropriate for comparing the sample distributions.
    Used in Sect. 6 to compare distributions; standard and appropriate for the histograms shown.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Be star demographics: a comprehensive study of thousands of lightcurves in the Magellanic Clouds." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/CP66ZQ2J

@misc{pith2026250508714,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Be star demographics: a comprehensive study of thousands of lightcurves in the Magellanic Clouds},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/CP66ZQ2J}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2505.08714}
}
read the original abstract

Multi-color OGLE survey light curves of about 20 years duration are analyzed for about 3000 classical Be stars in the Large and Small Magellanic Clouds (LMC, SMC) in order to study the properties and variability. Each light curve was manually analyzed to distinguish between different scenarios, such as photospheric baseline levels, and disk build-up and dissipation phases. This analysis was aided by dynamical disk models and photospheric models to coarsely determine inclination angle and mass. Measured quantities such as the fraction of time spent actively ejecting mass (the duty cycle), the fraction of time spent with a detectable disk (the disk duty cycle), the build-up and dissipation time of isolated disk events, and the number of mass outbursts per year allow us to characterize and compare the behavior of the two populations. There is a wide spread in the duty cycle, with median values of 0.44 (LMC) and 0.60 (SMC). The disk duty cycle is high for both populations, with median values of 0.99 (LMC) and 1.0 (SMC), indicating that disks are almost always present for these stars. The occurrence rate of outbursts ranges from zero to about two per year, with median values of 0.31 (LMC) and 0.26 (SMC). There are strong statistical differences in the behavior of the LMC and SMC populations, with the lower metallicity stars being more active in terms of their duty cycle and disk duty cycle, and with less frequent but longer lasting outbursts.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2505.08714 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Examples of pre-processing steps applied to the OGLE data. The original data for OGLE-II and OGLE-III are plotted in red, while black points represent the adjusted light curve. The median valued of the sections with low disk activity (top) and selected by user (middle) are shown in the legends and are graphically represented by horizontal lines (red ones for original OGLE-II and OGLE-III data, while black represents… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Light curve sample archetypes. In the first panel (A) it is shown the LMC SC1 164770 light curve with initial stable phase followed by a bump with a five thousand days long decay, with a excursion in the CMD draws a loop, leaving a bluer and dimmer region, going through brighter and redder regions and falling back to initial region. The second light curve, from target LMC SC3 400956, begins with a slow brightness in… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Synthetic light curve of disk events for a dense disk (Σ0 = 4.00 g cm−2 ), generated for different build-up times as indicated in the legend. The abscissa represents time, referenced to the beginning of dissipation, while the ordinate shows the variation in brightness, relative to the diskless value, caused by the disk’s presence. The gray band represents the detection threshold, as introduced in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:f… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (13 more)
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Maximum disk excess for the I band, ∆Imax, ob￾served as function of inclination angle for models with differ￾ent disk densities (represented by colors shown in the central legend box) and feed times (line styles as seen in the bottom left legend). The horizontal gray b…
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: V − I CMD for different models and incli￾nations. The ordinate shows the brightness variations in the I band, taking a diskless star as reference. The ab￾scissa represents the change in color due to disk’s presence, with zero indicating a diskless star. Top: Shown are …
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Examples of lightcurves categorized according to the definitions in Sect. 5. The colors of data points and error bars represent different categories of variability: grey (1 – baseline), blue (2 – build-up), orange (3 – dissipation), magenta (4 – plateau), green (5 – is…
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Schematic view of the samples defined in the paper. In the upper-right box we list the characteristics of the light curves that were removed to obtain the raw sample [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_7.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Normalized histogram of the number of out￾burst per year (Nout) for LMC (purple) and SMC (yellow) stars of the entire Be star sample. The numbers of light curves of each sample are shown in the legend: 1154 for LMC and 597 SMC lightcurves. Median values are shown by ve…
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Same as [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p017_9.png]
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Color–magnitude diagram of simulated diskless stars ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p017_10.png]
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Similar to [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p018_11.png]
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: ), indicating that massive stars tend to harbor disks for longer than their less bright siblings. As with the DC, comparing results within the same mass inter￾val across different metallicities yields similar outcomes. One notable difference between the samples from e…
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p019_13.png]
Figure 14
Figure 14. Figure 14: Scatter plot showing the correlation between build-up and dissipation times for the LMC (purple symbols) and SMC (yellow symbols). Shown are data extracted by fitting Eqs. 5 and 6 to each disk event. The respective median values are represented by dotted lines. A powe…
Figure 15
Figure 15. Figure 15: Root mean square measure from baseline phases of group 2 and 3 stars as a function of their respective median absolute brightness value. Left: LMC. Right: SMC. The black line shows the third-degree polynomial fit, with respective parameters shown in the upper part of …
Figure 16
Figure 16. Figure 16: Same as [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p025_16.png]

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. A multi-epoch spectral and photometric study to understand the nature of the interesting Be star candidate HD 249179

    astro-ph.SR 2026-08 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    HD 249179, previously cataloged as a possible X-ray binary, shows H-alpha, Paschen, and O I emission, weak V/R changes, two pulsation frequency groups, and no detected X-rays, pointing to a classical Be star with an a...

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

67 extracted references · 16 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

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

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

  2. [2]

    write newline

    " write newline "" before.all 'output.state := FUNCTION format.url url empty "" new.block "" url * "" * if FUNCTION format.eprint eprint empty "" archivePrefix empty "" archivePrefix "arXiv" = new.block " " eprint * " " * new.block " " eprint * " " * if if if FUNCTION format.doi doi empty "" " " doi * " " * if FUNCTION format.pid doi empty eprint empty ur...

  3. [3]

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

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

    2021

  4. [4]

    A., Alves , D., et al

    Alcock , C., Allsman , R. A., Alves , D., et al. 1997, , 486, 697, 10.1086/304535

    doi:10.1086/304535 1997

  5. [5]

    E., Sigut , T

    Arcos , C., Jones , C. E., Sigut , T. A. A., Kanaan , S., & Cur \'e , M. 2017, , 842, 48, 10.3847/1538-4357/aa6f5f

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aa6f5f 2017

  6. [6]

    1993, , 365, 623, 10.1038/365623a0

    Aubourg , E., Bareyre , P., Br \'e hin , S., et al. 1993, , 365, 623, 10.1038/365623a0

    doi:10.1038/365623a0 1993

  7. [7]

    2016, , 588, A56, 10.1051/0004-6361/201528026

    Baade , D., Rivinius , T., Pigulski , A., et al. 2016, , 588, A56, 10.1051/0004-6361/201528026

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201528026 2016

  8. [8]

    2018, , 479, 2909, 10.1093/mnras/sty1320

    Bernhard , K., Otero , S., H \"u mmerich , S., et al. 2018, , 479, 2909, 10.1093/mnras/sty1320

    doi:10.1093/mnras/sty1320 2018

Show all 67 references
  1. [9]

    E., & Carciofi , A

    Bjorkman , J. E., & Carciofi , A. C. 2005, in Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series, Vol. 337, The Nature and Evolution of Disks Around Hot Stars, ed. R. Ignace & K. G. Gayley , 75

    2005

  2. [10]

    Carciofi , A. C. 2011, in IAU Symposium, Vol. 272, Active OB Stars: Structure, Evolution, Mass Loss, and Critical Limits, ed. C. Neiner , G. Wade , G. Meynet , & G. Peters , 325--336, 10.1017/S1743921311010738

    2011 doi

  3. [11]

    C., & Bjorkman , J

    Carciofi , A. C., & Bjorkman , J. E. 2006, , 639, 1081, 10.1086/499483

    2006 doi

  4. [12]

    2008, , 684, 1374, 10.1086/589875

    ---. 2008, , 684, 1374, 10.1086/589875

    2008 doi

  5. [13]

    C., Miroshnichenko , A

    Carciofi , A. C., Miroshnichenko , A. S., Kusakin , A. V., et al. 2006, , 652, 1617, 10.1086/507935

    2006 doi

  6. [14]

    D., Whelan , D

    Chojnowski , S. D., Whelan , D. G., Wisniewski , J. P., et al. 2015, , 149, 7, 10.1088/0004-6256/149/1/7

    2015 doi

  7. [15]

    A., & Marang , F

    Cuypers , J., Balona , L. A., & Marang , F. 1989, , 81, 151

    1989

  8. [16]

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

    Foreman-Mackey , D., Hogg , D. W., Lang , D., & Goodman , J. 2013, , 125, 306, 10.1086/670067

    2013 doi

  9. [17]

    2013, , 553, A24, 10.1051/0004-6361/201220558

    Georgy , C., Ekstr \"o m , S., Granada , A., et al. 2013, , 553, A24, 10.1051/0004-6361/201220558

    2013 doi

  10. [19]

    2021 b , , 909, 149, 10.3847/1538-4357/abdd1e

    ---. 2021 b , , 909, 149, 10.3847/1538-4357/abdd1e

    2021 doi

  11. [20]

    R., Jones , C

    Ghoreyshi , M. R., Jones , C. E., Carciofi , A. C., et al. 2024, , 533, 2867, 10.1093/mnras/stae1950

    2024 doi

  12. [21]

    R., Carciofi , A

    Ghoreyshi , M. R., Carciofi , A. C., R \' mulo , L. R., et al. 2018, , 479, 2214, 10.1093/mnras/sty1577

    2018 doi

  13. [22]

    B., et al

    Graczyk , D., Pietrzy \'n ski , G., Thompson , I. B., et al. 2020, , 904, 13, 10.3847/1538-4357/abbb2b

    2020 doi

  14. [23]

    M., et al

    Gutierrez-Soto , J., Neiner , C., Hubert , A. M., et al. 2008, Communications in Asteroseismology, 157, 70

    2008

  15. [24]

    1983, Hvar Observatory Bulletin, 7, 55

    Harmanec , P. 1983, Hvar Observatory Bulletin, 7, 55

    1983

  16. [25]

    C., Rivinius , T., Okazaki , A

    Haubois , X., Carciofi , A. C., Rivinius , T., Okazaki , A. T., & Bjorkman , J. E. 2012, , 756, 156, 10.1088/0004-637X/756/2/156

    2012 doi

  17. [26]

    2024, , 682, A59, 10.1051/0004-6361/202347911

    Jian , M., Matsunaga , N., Jiang , B., Yuan , H., & Zhang , R. 2024, , 682, A59, 10.1051/0004-6361/202347911

    2024 doi

  18. [27]

    E., Sigut , T

    Jones , C. E., Sigut , T. A. A., & Porter , J. M. 2008, , 386, 1922, 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2008.13206.x

    2008

  19. [28]

    D., Owocki , S., & Sundqvist , J

    Kee , N. D., Owocki , S., & Sundqvist , J. O. 2016, , 458, 2323, 10.1093/mnras/stw471

    2016 doi

  20. [29]

    C., Bessell , M

    Keller , S. C., Bessell , M. S., Cook , K. H., Geha , M., & Syphers , D. 2002, , 124, 2039, 10.1086/342548

    2002 doi

  21. [30]

    C., Rivinius , T., et al

    Klement , R., Carciofi , A. C., Rivinius , T., et al. 2015, , 584, A85, 10.1051/0004-6361/201526535

    2015 doi

  22. [31]

    2001, , 322, 231, 10.1046/j.1365-8711.2001.04022.x

    Kroupa , P. 2001, , 322, 231, 10.1046/j.1365-8711.2001.04022.x

    2001

  23. [32]

    C., Henrique de Amorim , T., et al

    Labadie-Bartz , J., Carciofi , A. C., Henrique de Amorim , T., et al. 2022, , 163, 226, 10.3847/1538-3881/ac5abd

    2022 doi

  24. [33]

    V., et al

    Labadie-Bartz , J., Pepper , J., McSwain , M. V., et al. 2017, , 153, 252, 10.3847/1538-3881/aa6396

    2017 doi

  25. [34]

    D., Whelan , D

    Labadie-Bartz , J., Chojnowski , S. D., Whelan , D. G., et al. 2018, , 155, 53, 10.3847/1538-3881/aa9c7e

    2018 doi

  26. [35]

    1991, , 250, 432, 10.1093/mnras/250.2.432

    Lee , U., Osaki , Y., & Saio , H. 1991, , 250, 432, 10.1093/mnras/250.2.432

    1991 doi

  27. [36]

    2001, , 373, 555, 10.1051/0004-6361:20010596

    Maeder , A., & Meynet , G. 2001, , 373, 555, 10.1051/0004-6361:20010596

    2001 doi

  28. [37]

    C., Jones , C

    Marr , K. C., Jones , C. E., Carciofi , A. C., et al. 2021, , 912, 76, 10.3847/1538-4357/abed4c

    2021 doi

  29. [38]

    2010, , 509, A11, 10.1051/0004-6361/200911672

    Martayan , C., Baade , D., & Fabregat , J. 2010, , 509, A11, 10.1051/0004-6361/200911672

    2010 doi

  30. [39]

    M., et al

    Martayan , C., Fr \'e mat , Y., Hubert , A. M., et al. 2006, , 452, 273, 10.1051/0004-6361:20053859

    2006 doi

  31. [40]

    2007, , 462, 683, 10.1051/0004-6361:20065076

    Martayan , C., Fr \'e mat , Y., Hubert , A.-M., et al. 2007, , 462, 683, 10.1051/0004-6361:20065076

    2007 doi

  32. [41]

    V., Huang , W., & Gies , D

    McSwain , M. V., Huang , W., & Gies , D. R. 2009, , 700, 1216, 10.1088/0004-637X/700/2/1216

    2009 doi

  33. [42]

    E., Pietrzy \'n ski , G., Gieren , W., & Szewczyk , O

    Mennickent , R. E., Pietrzy \'n ski , G., Gieren , W., & Szewczyk , O. 2002, , 393, 887, 10.1051/0004-6361:20020916

    2002 doi

  34. [43]

    2000, , 361, 101

    Meynet , G., & Maeder , A. 2000, , 361, 101

    2000

  35. [44]

    C., & Figueiredo , A

    Navarete , F., Ticiani dos Santos , P., Carciofi , A. C., & Figueiredo , A. L. 2024, , 970, 113, 10.3847/1538-4357/ad500f

    2024 doi

  36. [45]

    Okazaki , A. T. 2001, , 53, 119, 10.1093/pasj/53.1.119

    2001 doi

  37. [46]

    Okazaki , A. T. 2007, in Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series, Vol. 361, Active OB-Stars: Laboratories for Stellare and Circumstellar Physics, ed. A. T. Okazaki , S. P. Owocki , & S. Stefl , 230

    2007

  38. [47]

    2006, in Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series, Vol

    Owocki , S. 2006, in Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series, Vol. 355, Stars with the B[e] Phenomenon, ed. M. Kraus & A. S. Miroshnichenko , 219

    2006

  39. [48]

    1986, , 304, 1, 10.1086/164140

    Paczy \'n ski , B. 1986, , 304, 1, 10.1086/164140

    1986 doi

  40. [49]

    W., DePoy , D

    Pepper , J., Pogge , R. W., DePoy , D. L., et al. 2007, , 119, 923, 10.1086/521836

    2007 doi

  41. [50]

    2013, , 495, 76, 10.1038/nature11878

    Pietrzy \'n ski , G., Graczyk , D., Gieren , W., et al. 2013, , 495, 76, 10.1038/nature11878

    2013 doi

  42. [51]

    2002, , 52, 397, 10.48550/arXiv.astro-ph/0210283

    Pojmanski , G. 2002, , 52, 397, 10.48550/arXiv.astro-ph/0210283

    2002 doi arXiv

  43. [52]

    Pringle , J. E. 1981, , 19, 137, 10.1146/annurev.aa.19.090181.001033

    1981

  44. [53]

    R., Carciofi , A

    R \' mulo , L. R., Carciofi , A. C., Vieira , R. G., et al. 2018, , 476, 3555, 10.1093/mnras/sty431

    2018 doi

  45. [54]

    Rivinius , T., Baade , D., & Carciofi , A. C. 2016, , 593, A106, 10.1051/0004-6361/201628411

    2016 doi

  46. [55]

    C., & Martayan , C

    Rivinius , T., Carciofi , A. C., & Martayan , C. 2013, , 21, 69, 10.1007/s00159-013-0069-0

    2013 doi

  47. [56]

    P., Whitney , B

    Robitaille , T. P., Whitney , B. A., Indebetouw , R., & Wood , K. 2007, , 169, 328, 10.1086/512039

    2007 doi

  48. [57]

    C., Carciofi , A

    Rubio , A. C., Carciofi , A. C., Ticiani , P., et al. 2023, , 526, 3007, 10.1093/mnras/stad2652

    2023 doi

  49. [58]

    E., Mennickent , R

    Sabogal , B. E., Mennickent , R. E., Pietrzy \'n ski , G., & Gieren , W. 2005, , 361, 1055, 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2005.09261.x

    2005

  50. [59]

    I., & Sunyaev , R

    Shakura , N. I., & Sunyaev , R. A. 1973, , 24, 337

    1973

  51. [60]

    Sigut , T. A. A., & Patel , P. 2013, , 765, 41, 10.1088/0004-637X/765/1/41

    2013 doi

  52. [61]

    M., Skowron , J., Udalski , A., et al

    Skowron , D. M., Skowron , J., Udalski , A., et al. 2021, , 252, 23, 10.3847/1538-4365/abcb81

    2021 doi

  53. [62]

    R., & Schaefer , G

    Touhami , Y., Gies , D. R., & Schaefer , G. H. 2011, , 729, 17, 10.1088/0004-637X/729/1/17

    2011 doi

  54. [63]

    1997, , 47, 319

    Udalski , A., Kubiak , M., & Szymanski , M. 1997, , 47, 319

    1997

  55. [64]

    1992, , 42, 253

    Udalski , A., Szymanski , M., Kaluzny , J., Kubiak , M., & Mateo , M. 1992, , 42, 253

    1992

  56. [65]

    K., & Szyma \'n ski , G

    Udalski , A., Szyma \'n ski , M. K., & Szyma \'n ski , G. 2015, , 65, 1. 1504.05966

    2015 arXiv

  57. [66]

    K., et al

    Udalski , A., Soszy \'n ski , I., Szyma \'n ski , M. K., et al. 2008, , 58, 329

    2008

  58. [67]

    G., Carciofi , A

    Vieira , R. G., Carciofi , A. C., & Bjorkman , J. E. 2015, , 454, 2107, 10.1093/mnras/stv2074

    2015 doi

  59. [68]

    G., Carciofi , A

    Vieira , R. G., Carciofi , A. C., Bjorkman , J. E., et al. 2017, , 464, 3071, 10.1093/mnras/stw2542

    2017 doi

Pith tools

Reviewed August 15, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.