Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 87 references

Probing the origins. II. Unravelling lithium depletion and stellar motion: Intrinsic stellar properties drive depletion, not kinematics

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-07 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read This paper establishes that lithium depletion in thin-disc dwarf stars is governed by intrinsic stellar properties (temperature, metallicity, age), not by the direction of radial migration.

desk verdict Solid descriptive result, but the survival analysis that is supposed to exonerate kinematics is undermined by a censoring bug and a predictor built from the very properties it claims to control for, so the causal headline is not yet supported. read the letter →

arxiv 2505.17173 v2 pith:SQJ6JSGC submitted 2025-05-22 astro-ph.SR astro-ph.EPastro-ph.GA

M. L. L. Dantas , R. Smiljanic , D. Romano , G. Guiglion , L. Magrini , P. B. Tissera , R. S. de Souza This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.SRastro-ph.EPastro-ph.GA
keywords lithiumdepletionradialmigrationGaia-ESOsurveysurvivalanalysispenalisedsplinesthin-discdwarfsstellarevolutionchemicalmodels
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 asks whether the lithium depletion seen in metal-rich dwarf stars near the Sun is caused by the stars' past journeys across the Galactic disc or by their own intrinsic properties. Using 1,188 thin-disc dwarf stars from the Gaia-ESO survey, classified by metallicity group and by whether they churned outward, inward, or stayed put, the authors find that outward-churned stars are the oldest, coolest, least massive, and most lithium-poor within every metallicity group. A parametric logistic survival model with penalised splines ranks the drivers of depletion: effective temperature dominates, followed by metallicity and age, while migration direction changes predicted lithium by less than 0.1 dex. The paper concludes that the metallicity-dependent depletion pattern emerges through stellar evolution, not Galactic dynamics, and that the apparent correlation between migration and depletion is not causal.

What carries the argument

The argument runs on two linked tools. From Paper I, a generalised additive model extends the chemical evolution models of Magrini et al. (2009) to assign each star a birth radius; comparing that birth radius with the current guiding radius labels stars as churned outward, churned inward, or equal (blurred or undisturbed). The new statistical engine is a parametric logistic survival model with penalised splines, treating lithium depletion as a threshold-crossing event at the Spite plateau value 2.2 dex, with right-censored, exact, and interval-censored observations depending on whether lithium is detected above the threshold, detected below it, or only bounded by an upper limit or missing value. The linear predictor combines smooth spline functions of age, effective temperature, metallicity, and motion direction, and the fitted z-scores rank the drivers while isolating the independent contribution of motion.

What would settle it

Compute birth radii for the same stars with an independent method, such as asteroseismic ages combined with a different chemical evolution model or dynamical orbit integration, and rerun the survival analysis; if motion direction then shows a practical effect above 0.1 dex, or if the ranking of drivers changes, the causal claim fails. Alternatively, find a sample of old, cool, metal-rich stars that did not migrate outward and check whether they are equally lithium-depleted.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that the correlation between radial migration and lithium depletion in thin-disc dwarfs is not causal. Stars that churned outward are predominantly lithium-depleted at all metallicities, but those same stars are also the oldest, coolest, and least massive members of their metallicity groups, and those are precisely the intrinsic properties known to destroy lithium. The survival analysis quantifies the hierarchy: effective temperature is the dominant protective factor (z-score 19.10), metallicity is the strongest depletion accelerator (z-score -10.36), age adds late-stage mixing after roughly 2 Gyr (z-score -7.75), and motion direction, though statistically significant, has negligible practical impact (less than 0.1 dex in predicted lithium abundance). The authors therefore conclude that the increasing fraction of outward-churned stars in super-solar metallicity groups explains the appearance of the iron-lithium abundance trend, but that the depletion itself is a consequence of stellar evolution.

Load-bearing premise

The classification of each star as churned outward, churned inward, or unmoved rests on model-dependent birth radii computed in Paper I from chemical evolution models; if those radii are systematically biased, the apparent link between outward churning and lithium depletion could be an artifact.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The iron-lithium abundance trend for super-solar metallicity groups reflects the overrepresentation of old, cool, outward-churned stars in metal-rich samples, not migration-induced depletion.
  • Photospheric lithium in stars with effective temperatures below roughly 6800 K should not be treated as a proxy for interstellar-medium lithium, because essentially all such stars in this sample have undergone some depletion.
  • Radial migration remains correlated with lithium depletion only because it selects stars that are older, cooler, and more metal-rich, all of which deplete lithium faster on their own.
  • The seven stars with missing lithium measurements are all cool and mostly outward-churned, consistent with depletion so severe that lithium became undetectable.
  • Any model of Galactic lithium archaeology should include stellar parameters first and treat kinematic history as a secondary correlate rather than a physical driver.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The survival-analysis framework could be transferred directly to other abundance anomalies with censored measurements, such as beryllium or boron depletion, where upper limits are common.
  • The negligible motion effect may be sample-specific because fast rotators were removed and the Gaia-ESO target selection could suppress a genuine rotational-mixing contribution; testing the same hierarchy on a sample that includes rotating stars would clarify generality.
  • If migration direction truly does not matter, then lithium-rich stars found in the outer disc should be explainable entirely by their youth and high effective temperature, not by inward migration; re-analysing those stars on the same temperature-age relations would test this.
  • The paper's conclusion implies that independent estimates of birth radii, for example from asteroseismic ages combined with a different chemical evolution model, should reproduce the same finding: motion direction would still contribute less than 0.1 dex once temperature, metallicity, and age are included.
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 / 4 minor

Summary. This manuscript (Paper II) builds on Paper I to investigate whether lithium depletion in 1188 thin-disc dwarf stars from the Gaia-ESO survey is driven by intrinsic stellar properties or by radial migration. Stars are divided into six metallicity-stratified hierarchical-clustering groups and, using the birth-radius estimates of Paper I, into outward-churned, inward-churned, and equal-radius classes. The paper reports that outward-churned stars are predominantly Li-depleted, older, cooler, and less massive than their within-group counterparts. A parametric survival analysis with penalised splines (logistic distribution) is used to model the drop of A(Li) below 2.2 dex, with covariates Teff, [Fe/H], age, and motion direction. The model yields Teff as the dominant driver, followed by [Fe/H] and age, while direction has a small z-value and a claimed negligible practical effect. The authors conclude that Li depletion stems from intrinsic stellar properties rather than migration history, and that the correlation between migration and depletion is not causal.

Significance. If the central claim is correct, the paper would provide a clean resolution to the long-standing question of why super-solar-metallicity dwarfs in the solar neighbourhood show unexpected Li depletion: the pattern would be a natural consequence of stellar evolution (temperature, metallicity, age) rather than a dynamical signature of radial migration. The manuscript uses a large, homogeneous sample with well-documented quality cuts, and it explicitly engages with censoring in Li abundance data, which is a methodological step forward. The descriptive correlations (Table 1, Figs. 1–3) are clear and likely robust. However, the survival analysis as presented contains an internal inconsistency in the censoring definition (Table 3), and the motion-direction variable is derived from the same chemical abundances and ages used as predictors, so the headline conclusion about 'not kinematics' is not yet supported by the modelling. The intrinsic-properties interpretation is plausible and consistent with prior stellar-physics models, but the present analysis does not cleanly separate intrinsic from kinematic effects.

major comments (3)
  1. [Section 3.2.2 and Table 3] The censoring definition for stars with measured A(Li)>2.2 is internally inconsistent. The text states that these stars are right-censored because the depletion event has not yet occurred, but Table 3 sets both Y_i^U and Y_i^L equal to the observed A(Li). An interval with both bounds equal is an exact observation, not a right-censored observation. For a genuinely right-censored event, the interval should be (observed A(Li), +∞), or at least Y_i^U should be set to infinity or a very large value. This error changes the likelihood contributions of a substantial fraction of the sample (e.g., all detected stars with A(Li)>2.2), and therefore the reported z-scores, effect sizes, and information criteria are not reliable. The censoring scheme must be corrected and the survival analysis re-run before the quantitative conclusions can be accepted.
  2. [Section 2 and Section 3.2.2] The motion-direction variable is not an independent kinematic observable. In Dantas et al. (2025), birth radii R_b are estimated with a GAM that inverts chemical evolution models using stellar abundances and ages, and the churn label is then sign(R_g - R_b). Thus the direction variable encodes, by construction, information about [Fe/H] and age. Fitting a survival model with both [Fe/H], age, and direction as predictors can therefore produce a negligible direction coefficient simply because the direction term is redundant given the other covariates. The paper's conclusion that 'kinematic history' has 'negligible influence' is accordingly not established. I recommend re-framing the claim or re-running the analysis with a kinematic variable that is not constructed from the same intrinsic parameters, e.g., the guiding radius R_g, angular momentum L_z, or a churn classification based purely on dynamical quantities. Alternatively, the authors could explicitly test the redundancy hypothesis by comparing models with and without direction and by assessing whether the direction effect is mediated by Teff and age in a causal mediation framework.
  3. [Section 3.2.1] The choice of 2.2 dex (the Spite plateau) as the depletion-event threshold is pragmatic but not justified as physically unique for this sample, and the paper states that the threshold was adopted specifically to retain censored cases. Since the event definition affects the likelihood and the interpretation of right-censoring, the results should be tested for robustness to the threshold value. I suggest repeating the survival analysis with thresholds of, say, 2.0 and 2.4 dex and reporting whether the ranking of predictors and the negligible-direction conclusion are stable. If the conclusions depend strongly on the threshold, the survival framework as applied here is not a robust basis for the central claim.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Abstract and Section 2] The abstract states that the sample contains 1188 thin-disc dwarf stars, while the body says that 7 lack Li measurements, leaving 1181 stars with detected Li or upper limits, and Table 1 reports statistics for 1180 stars. These numbers should be reconciled in the text and table footnotes.
  2. [Section 3.2.1] The paragraph beginning 'However, our case is somewhat atypical' first says that the depletion event has already occurred for all stars, making them in principle not censored, then immediately discusses right-censoring for stars with A(Li) above a threshold. This logical flow is confusing and should be rewritten to clearly define the event as crossing below the adopted threshold.
  3. [Figure 4] The Spearman correlation heat maps would be more useful if significance levels (p-values or a significance mask) were included, as the text frequently refers to correlations being 'significant' or 'not significant' without a stated significance criterion.
  4. [Section 3.2.3] The conversion of the metallicity coefficient to a 15–20% acceleration is derived from exp(-0.54×0.1)=0.85 and exp(-4.12×0.1)=0.66, which corresponds to 15% and 34% faster depletion. The text says 15–20% 'for typical [Fe/H] ranges' but the wide range of spline coefficients leaves the reader uncertain which coefficient is typical; please clarify the calculation.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the churn classification is model-dependent but independent of lithium, and the survival-model conclusion is an empirical regression result, not a tautology.

full rationale

The paper's central claim is that Teff, [Fe/H], and age drive Li depletion while migration direction has negligible independent influence. The motion direction variable is inherited from Dantas et al. (2025), where birth radii are estimated with a GAM extending chemical evolution models; that classification does not use A(Li), so the survival analysis is not testing a variable that was fitted to the target outcome. Including direction alongside [Fe/H] and t* is a legitimate regression with potential collinearity, but direction also depends on the current guiding radius and on nonlinearities, so a small coefficient is not forced by construction. The 2.2 dex depletion threshold and the treatment of missing Li as depleted are explicit modelling choices, not fitted parameters renamed as predictions. No equation in the paper reduces to its own inputs, and no load-bearing result is justified solely by a self-citation whose content is the target claim. The dependence on the authors' Paper I is a methodological limitation, not circularity.

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

The paper introduces no new physical entities. Its free parameters are modeling choices in the survival analysis: the logistic scale, the spline degrees of freedom, the depletion threshold, the direction encoding, and the missing-Li upper bound. The main assumptions are the reliability of the birth-radius model from Paper I and the appropriateness of the logistic survival framework for lithium depletion.

free parameters (5)
  • Logistic scale parameter sigma = 0.44
    Scale parameter of the logistic survival model, estimated from the data and reported as indicating 'highly precise predictions' (Section 3.2.3).
  • Spline degrees of freedom (df=1.5 per predictor) = 1.5
    Chosen by hand for all P-splines; imposes a nearly linear shape and limits the claimed non-linearities (Section 3.2.2).
  • Depletion event threshold = A(Li)=2.2 dex
    Chosen pragmatically as the Spite plateau to define the depletion event; affects all censoring classifications and results (Section 3.2.1).
  • Direction encoding = -1 (inward), 0 (equal), +1 (outward)
    Arbitrary numerical coding of three motion classes treated as an ordinal predictor in the survival model (Section 3.2.2).
  • Upper bound for missing Li = low_li = smallest observed A(Li) - 0.05 dex
    Chosen to set interval-censoring bounds for the 7 stars with missing lithium, assuming they are depleted (Section 3.2.2).
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption Birth radii from the GAM in Paper I (Dantas et al. 2025) are accurate enough for churn classification.
    The paper uses these birth radii to classify stars as churned inwards, outwards, or equal; if biased, the motion classification is wrong (Section 2).
  • domain assumption The logistic distribution is an appropriate parametric form for A(Li) depletion events.
    The survival model assumes logistic distribution for the latent survival time, justified by heavy tails and central precision (Section 3.2.2).
  • ad hoc to paper Stars with missing A(Li) are assumed to be depleted.
    The 7 stars with missing Li are treated as interval-censored with an upper bound near the lowest observed A(Li), based on their cool temperatures (Section 3.2.2, Table 2).
  • ad hoc to paper The Spite plateau value of 2.2 dex is a meaningful threshold for defining the depletion event.
    The authors choose this threshold pragmatically to retain censored cases, while acknowledging that a higher threshold would leave no censored data (Section 3.2.1).

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Probing the origins. II. Unravelling lithium depletion and stellar motion: Intrinsic stellar properties drive depletion, not kinematics." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/SQJ6JSGC

@misc{pith2026250517173,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Probing the origins. II. Unravelling lithium depletion and stellar motion: Intrinsic stellar properties drive depletion, not kinematics},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/SQJ6JSGC}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2505.17173}
}
read the original abstract

In Paper I, we classified a stellar sample from the thin disc with a broad range in metallicity as being churned outward or inward, or blurred/undisturbed. In this paper (Paper II), we delve deeper by analysing our entire metallicity-stratified sample along with their dynamic properties, focusing on the connection between radial migration and Li depletion. We analyse the chemo-dynamics of a set of 1188 thin disc dwarf stars observed by the \textit{Gaia}-ESO survey, previously classified into six metallicity-stratified groups via Hierarchical Clustering (HC). We examine several features, such as effective temperatures, masses, and dynamic properties. We also implement a parametric survival analysis using penalised splines (logistic distribution) to quantify how stellar properties and motion (or migration) direction jointly influence Li depletion patterns. We find that stars in our sample that appear to have churned outward are predominantly Li-depleted, regardless of their metallicities. These stars are also the oldest, coldest, and least massive compared to those in the same HC group that have either churned inward or kept their orbital radii. Our survival analysis confirms temperature as the primary driver of Li depletion, followed by metallicity and age, while migration direction shows negligible influence. The increasing proportion of outward-churned stars with higher metallicity (and older ages) indicates their dominant influence on the overall trend observed in the [Fe/H]-A(Li) space for stellar groups with [Fe/H]>0. The survival model reinforces that the observed Li depletion stems primarily from intrinsic stellar properties (cool temperatures, higher metallicity, old ages) rather than migration history. This suggests the metallicity-dependent depletion pattern emerges through stellar evolution rather than Galactic dynamical processes.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2505.17173 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Median lithium abundances (⟨A(Li)⟩) vs median metallicity (⟨[Fe/H]⟩) with their respective median errors for all the stellar groups in our sample, stratified by HC groups and Li detection (orange markers indicate detected values, and purple markers indicate upper limits). Left panel: Star-shaped markers depict ⟨A(Li)⟩ vs ⟨[Fe/H]⟩ for the entire sample, with each marker annotated to indicate the corresponding HC grou… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Median lithium abundances (⟨A(Li)⟩) vs median effective temperatures (⟨Teff⟩) for all the stellar groups in our sample, stratified by metallic￾ity (through the HC) and Li detection (orange markers indicate detected values, and purple markers indicate upper limits). Circle markers represent stars that moved inwards; X-shaped markers indicate stars that moved outwards; and square markers depict stars with similar birt… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. ⟨A(Li)⟩ vs t⋆ for all the stellar groups of our sample with Li measurements. We depict the solar photosphere and meteorite Li abundances in the shape of dotted and dot-dot-dashed cyan lines, respectively. The HC numbers are annotated adjacent to each respective marker. [ F e / H ] A ( Li) t M Te f f e Z m a x L z Direction [Fe/H] A(Li) t M Teff e Zmax Lz Direction -0.05 -0.44 -0.47 0.53 0.36 -0.9 -0.1 0.78 -0.48 0.3… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (3 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Heat maps displaying the correlations between several parameters for all the stars in the sample stratified by Li detection (detected and upper limits, respectively, from the left to the right). We display the values of ⟨[Fe/H]⟩, ⟨A(Li)⟩, t⋆, ⟨M⟩, ⟨Teff⟩, ⟨e⟩, ⟨Zmax⟩, …
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Combined effects of Teff, t⋆, [Fe/H], and direction of motion on the predicted survival time (in this case, the predicted A(Li)), accounting for all covariates simultaneously. Predictions are shown for stars with detected A(Li) measurements (orange), upper limits (purp…
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Partial (isolated) effects of Teff, t⋆, [Fe/H], and direction of motion on the predicted survival time (in this case, the predicted A(Li)), derived from a parametric survival model (survreg with logistic distribution). Each subplot illustrates the dependence of the pre…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

87 extracted references · 45 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    1974, IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, 19, 716

    Akaike, H. 1974, IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, 19, 716

    1974

  2. [2]

    M., & Grevesse, N

    Asplund, M., Amarsi, A. M., & Grevesse, N. 2021, A&A, 653, A141

    2021

  3. [3]

    J., & Scott, P

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

    2009

  4. [4]

    2017, ApJ, 845, L6

    Baraffe, I., Pratt, J., Goffrey, T., et al. 2017, ApJ, 845, L6

    2017

  5. [5]

    C., et al

    Bensby, T., Feltzing, S., Yee, J. C., et al. 2020, A&A, 634, A130

    2020

  6. [6]

    & Lind, K

    Bensby, T. & Lind, K. 2018, A&A, 615, A151

    2018

  7. [7]

    2024, A&A, 691, A142

    Borisov, S., Prantzos, N., & Charbonnel, C. 2024, A&A, 691, A142

    2024

  8. [8]

    2012, MNRAS, 427, 127

    Bressan, A., Marigo, P., Girardi, L., et al. 2012, MNRAS, 427, 127

    2012

Show all 87 references
  1. [9]

    & Anderson, D

    Burnham, K. & Anderson, D. 2002, Model selection and multimodel inference: a practical information-theoretic approach (Springer Verlag)

    2002

  2. [10]

    2019, MNRAS, 485, 4052

    Carlos, M., Meléndez, J., Spina, L., et al. 2019, MNRAS, 485, 4052

    2019

  3. [11]

    2021, A&A, 649, L10

    Charbonnel, C., Borisov, S., de Laverny, P., & Prantzos, N. 2021, A&A, 649, L10

    2021

  4. [12]

    2009, in The Galaxy Disk in Cosmological Context, ed

    Chiappini, C. 2009, in The Galaxy Disk in Cosmological Context, ed. J. Ander- sen, Nordströara, B. m, & J. Bland-Hawthorn, V ol. 254, 191–196

    2009

  5. [13]

    2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2409.06015

    Cooke, R. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2409.06015

    2024 arXiv

  6. [14]

    Dantas, M. L. L., Guiglion, G., Smiljanic, R., et al. 2022, A&A, 668, L7

    2022

  7. [15]

    Dantas, M. L. L., Smiljanic, R., Boesso, R., et al. 2023, A&A, 669, A96

    2023

  8. [16]

    Dantas, M. L. L., Smiljanic, R., de Souza, R. S., Tissera, P. B., & Magrini, L. 2025, A&A, 696, A205

    2025

  9. [17]

    & Martins, C

    Deal, M. & Martins, C. J. A. P. 2021, A&A, 653, A48

    2021

  10. [18]

    2000, in Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Se- ries, V ol

    Dekker, H., D’Odorico, S., Kaufer, A., Delabre, B., & Kotzlowski, H. 2000, in Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Se- ries, V ol. 4008, Optical and IR Telescope Instrumentation and Detectors, ed. M. Iye & A. F. Moorwood, 534–545 Delgado Mena, E...

    2000

  11. [19]

    P., Demarque, P., & Kawaler, S

    Deliyannis, C. P., Demarque, P., & Kawaler, S. D. 1990, ApJS, 73, 21

    1990

  12. [20]

    2021, A&A, 649, A5

    Fabricius, C., Luri, X., Arenou, F., et al. 2021, A&A, 649, A5

    2021

  13. [21]

    & Babu, G

    Feigelson, E. & Babu, G. 2012, Modern Statistical Methods for Astronomy: With R Applications (Cambridge University Press) Article number, page 11 of 12 A&A proofs: manuscript no. paper

    2012

  14. [22]

    D., Olive, K

    Fields, B. D., Olive, K. A., Yeh, T.-H., & Young, C. 2020, J. Cosmology As- tropart. Phys., 2020, 010

    2020

  15. [23]

    & Monette, G

    Fox, J. & Monette, G. 1992, Journal of the American Statistical Association, 87, 178

    1992

  16. [24]

    2022, A&A, 668, A49

    Franciosini, E., Randich, S., de Laverny, P., et al. 2022, A&A, 668, A49

    2022

  17. [25]

    2018, A&A, 610, A38

    Fu, X., Romano, D., Bragaglia, A., et al. 2018, A&A, 610, A38

    2018

  18. [26]

    M., et al

    Gao, X., Lind, K., Amarsi, A. M., et al. 2020, MNRAS, 497, L30

    2020

  19. [27]

    2014, Journal of Nuclear Cardiology, 21, 686

    George, B., Seals, S., & Aban, I. 2014, Journal of Nuclear Cardiology, 21, 686

    2014

  20. [28]

    2012, The Messenger, 147, 25

    Gilmore, G., Randich, S., Asplund, M., et al. 2012, The Messenger, 147, 25

    2012

  21. [29]

    C., et al

    Gilmore, G., Randich, S., Worley, C. C., et al. 2022, A&A, 666, A120

    2022

  22. [30]

    2019, MNRAS, 489, 3539

    Grisoni, V ., Matteucci, F., Romano, D., & Fu, X. 2019, MNRAS, 489, 3539

    2019

  23. [31]

    2019, A&A, 623, A99

    Guiglion, G., Chiappini, C., Romano, D., et al. 2019, A&A, 623, A99

    2019

  24. [32]

    2016, A&A, 595, A18

    Guiglion, G., de Laverny, P., Recio-Blanco, A., et al. 2016, A&A, 595, A18

    2016

  25. [33]

    G., Curran-Everett, D., V owler, S

    Halsey, L. G., Curran-Everett, D., V owler, S. L., & Drummond, G. B. 2015, Nat. Methods, 12, 179

    2015

  26. [34]

    R., Millman, K

    Harris, C. R., Millman, K. J., van der Walt, S. J., et al. 2020, Nature, 585, 357

    2020

  27. [35]

    & Tibshirani, R

    Hastie, T. & Tibshirani, R. 1990, Generalized Additive Models, Chapman & Hall/CRC Monographs on Statistics & Applied Probability (Taylor & Fran- cis)

    1990

  28. [36]

    C., et al

    Hourihane, A., François, P., Worley, C. C., et al. 2023, A&A, 676, A129

    2023

  29. [37]

    Hunter, J. D. 2007, Computing in Science and Engineering, 9, 90

    2007

  30. [38]

    2016, Diagnostic Histopathology, 22, 263, mini-Symposium: Medical Statistics

    Kartsonaki, C. 2016, Diagnostic Histopathology, 22, 263, mini-Symposium: Medical Statistics

    2016

  31. [39]

    2022, A&A, 657, A7

    Kervella, P., Arenou, F., & Thévenin, F. 2022, A&A, 657, A7

    2022

  32. [40]

    C., Federman, S

    Knauth, D. C., Federman, S. R., Lambert, D. L., & Crane, P. 2000, Nature, 405, 656

    2000

  33. [41]

    2012, A&A, 543, A108

    Lagarde, N., Decressin, T., Charbonnel, C., et al. 2012, A&A, 543, A108

    2012

  34. [42]

    C., & Shmueli, G

    Lin, M., Lucas, H. C., & Shmueli, G. 2013, Inf. Syst. Res., 24, 906 Llorente de Andrés, F., Chavero, C., de la Reza, R., Roca-Fàbrega, S., & Ci- fuentes, C. 2021, A&A, 654, A137 Llorente de Andrés, F., de la Reza, R., Cruz, P., et al. 2024, A&A, 684, A28

    2013

  35. [43]

    Lodders, K., Palme, H., & Gail, H. P. 2009, Landolt Börnstein, 4B, 712

    2009

  36. [44]

    2009, A&A, 494, 95

    Magrini, L., Sestito, P., Randich, S., & Galli, D. 2009, A&A, 494, 95

    2009

  37. [45]

    2023, MNRAS, 522, 3217

    Martos, G., Meléndez, J., Rathsam, A., & Carvalho Silva, G. 2023, MNRAS, 522, 3217

    2023

  38. [46]

    2010, in Proceedings of the 9th Python in Science Conference, ed

    McKinney, W. 2010, in Proceedings of the 9th Python in Science Conference, ed. Stéfan van der Walt & Jarrod Millman, 56 – 61

    2010

  39. [47]

    & Hekker, S

    Mints, A. & Hekker, S. 2017, A&A, 604, A108

    2017

  40. [48]

    & Hekker, S

    Mints, A. & Hekker, S. 2018, A&A, 618, A54

    2018

  41. [49]

    Molaro, P., Bonifacio, P., Cupani, G., & Howk, J. C. 2024, A&A, 690, A38

    2024

  42. [50]

    2016, MNRAS, 463, L117

    Molaro, P., Izzo, L., Mason, E., Bonifacio, P., & Della Valle, M. 2016, MNRAS, 463, L117

    2016

  43. [51]

    2022, A&A, 661, A153

    Mucciarelli, A., Monaco, L., Bonifacio, P., et al. 2022, A&A, 661, A153

    2022

  44. [52]

    & Contreras, P

    Murtagh, F. & Contreras, P. 2012, WIREs Data Mining and Knowledge Discov- ery, 2, 86

    2012

  45. [53]

    & Legendre, P

    Murtagh, F. & Legendre, P. 2014, Journal of Classification, 31, 274

    2014

  46. [54]

    2014, Nature, 506, 150

    Nuzzo, R. 2014, Nature, 506, 150

    2014

  47. [55]

    1996, The VizieR database of astronomical catalogues

    Ochsenbein, F. 1996, The VizieR database of astronomical catalogues

    1996

  48. [56]

    Olive, K. A. & Schramm, D. N. 1992, Nature, 360, 439

    1992

  49. [57]

    & Turck-Chièze, S

    Piau, L. & Turck-Chièze, S. 2002, ApJ, 566, 419

    2002

  50. [58]

    1997, Annual Review of Astronomy and Astrophysics, 35, 557

    Pinsonneault, M. 1997, Annual Review of Astronomy and Astrophysics, 35, 557

    1997

  51. [59]

    2021, MNRAS, 502, 2474

    Pitrou, C., Coc, A., Uzan, J.-P., & Vangioni, E. 2021, MNRAS, 502, 2474

    2021

  52. [60]

    2013, The Messenger, 154, 47

    Randich, S., Gilmore, G., & Gaia-ESO Consortium. 2013, The Messenger, 154, 47

    2013

  53. [61]

    2022, A&A, 666, A121

    Randich, S., Gilmore, G., Magrini, L., et al. 2022, A&A, 666, A121

    2022

  54. [62]

    & Magrini, L

    Randich, S. & Magrini, L. 2021, Frontiers in Astronomy and Space Sciences, 8, 6

    2021

  55. [63]

    2020, A&A, 640, L1

    Randich, S., Pasquini, L., Franciosini, E., et al. 2020, A&A, 640, L1

    2020

  56. [64]

    Rebolo, R., Molaro, P., & Beckman, J. E. 1988, A&A, 192, 192

    1988

  57. [65]

    2021, A&A, 653, A72

    Romano, D., Magrini, L., Randich, S., et al. 2021, A&A, 653, A72

    2021

  58. [66]

    1999, A&A, 352, 117

    Romano, D., Matteucci, F., Molaro, P., & Bonifacio, P. 1999, A&A, 352, 117

    1999

  59. [67]

    2017, PASP, 129, 074201

    Rukeya, R., Lü, G., Wang, Z., & Zhu, C. 2017, PASP, 129, 074201

    2017

  60. [68]

    G., Beers, T

    Ryan, S. G., Beers, T. C., Kajino, T., & Rosolankova, K. 2001, ApJ, 547, 231

    2001

  61. [69]

    Sackmann, I. J. & Boothroyd, A. I. 1992, ApJ, 392, L71

    1992

  62. [70]

    K., Montet, B

    Sayeed, M., Ness, M. K., Montet, B. T., et al. 2024, ApJ, 964, 42

    2024

  63. [71]

    2010, A&A, 522, A26

    Sbordone, L., Bonifacio, P., Caffau, E., et al. 2010, A&A, 522, A26

    2010

  64. [72]

    1978, The Annals of Statistics, 6, 461

    Schwarz, G. 1978, The Annals of Statistics, 6, 461

    1978

  65. [73]

    2020, Mem

    Smiljanic, R. 2020, Mem. Soc. Astron. Italiana, 91, 142

    2020

  66. [74]

    J., Bergemann, M., et al

    Smiljanic, R., Korn, A. J., Bergemann, M., et al. 2014, A&A, 570, A122

    2014

  67. [75]

    & Pinsonneault, M

    Somers, G. & Pinsonneault, M. H. 2015, MNRAS, 449, 4131

    2015

  68. [76]

    1904, The American Journal of Psychology, 15, 72

    Spearman, C. 1904, The American Journal of Psychology, 15, 72

    1904

  69. [77]

    & Spite, M

    Spite, F. & Spite, M. 1982, A&A, 115, 357

    1982

  70. [78]

    W., Sparks, W

    Starrfield, S., Truran, J. W., Sparks, W. M., & Arnould, M. 1978, ApJ, 222, 600 Stonkut˙e, E., Chorniy, Y ., Tautvaišien˙e, G., et al. 2020, AJ, 159, 90 Stonkut˙e, E., Koposov, S. E., Howes, L. M., et al. 2016, MNRAS, 460, 1131

    1978

  71. [79]

    2025, MNRAS, 536, 462

    Sun, T., Bi, S., Chen, X., et al. 2025, MNRAS, 536, 462

    2025

  72. [80]

    & Grambsch, P

    Therneau, T. & Grambsch, P. 2000, Modeling Survival Data: Extending the Cox Model (New York: Springer)

    2000

  73. [81]

    Therneau, T. M. 2024, A Package for Survival Analysis in R, r package version 3.8-3

    2024

  74. [82]

    & Baba, J

    Tsujimoto, T. & Baba, J. 2020, ApJ, 904, 137

    2020

  75. [83]

    X., Nordlander, T., Asplund, M., et al

    Wang, E. X., Nordlander, T., Asplund, M., et al. 2021, MNRAS, 500, 2159

    2021

  76. [84]

    Waskom, M. L. 2021, Journal of Open Source Software, 6, 3021

    2021

  77. [85]

    Wasserstein, R. L. & Lazar, N. A. 2016, Am. Stat., 70, 129

    2016

  78. [86]

    C., Smiljanic, R., Magrini, L., et al

    Worley, C. C., Smiljanic, R., Magrini, L., et al. 2024, A&A, 684, A148

    2024

  79. [87]

    2023, MNRAS, 520, 4815 Article number, page 12 of 12

    Zhang, H., Chen, Y ., Zhao, G., et al. 2023, MNRAS, 520, 4815 Article number, page 12 of 12

    2023

Pith tools

Reviewed August 7, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.