Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 6 minor 26 references

Continued Photometric Monitoring Supports Long-Term Dynamical Evolution in the Young Binary Star-Disk System KH 15D

T0 review · 3 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-07 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Seven seasons of Zwicky Transient Facility photometry show that KH 15D's evolving eclipses are produced by a precessing, warped circumbinary disk with a clumpy trailing edge.

desk verdict Useful new ZTF lightcurves confirm the predicted long-term evolution of KH 15D, but the paper's central 'clumpy disk' claim leans on an interpolation-dependent color signal that may not survive closer scrutiny. read the letter →

arxiv 2506.04914 v1 pith:MWHIDSCW submitted 2025-06-05 astro-ph.SR

Luke Lamitina (1) , Lynne Hillenbrand (1) , Michael Poon (2) ((1) California Institute of Technology , (2) University of Toronto) This is my paper
classification astro-ph.SR
keywords KH15DcircumbinarydiskprecessingeclipsingbinaryyoungstellarobjectslightcurvesZwickyTransientFacilityoccultation
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 reports seven seasons of g-band and r-band photometry from the Zwicky Transient Facility, covering 2018-2024, for the young binary system KH 15D, whose lightcurve is shaped by a warped circumbinary disk slowly precessing in front of the two stars. The data show that eclipse duration is shrinking, the central re-brightening inside each eclipse is growing and broadening, and the phase of ingress and egress is drifting from season to season, matching the precession predicted by the Poon et al. (2021) model. The paper argues that the mid-eclipse re-brightening is caused by the star passing through regions of varying density within the trailing edge of the disk rather than partially emerging from the bottom of a sharp knife-edge. If correct, KH 15D is a staged example of a disk edge that is clumpy on stellar scales, and its eclipses should fade away entirely within a few decades.

What carries the argument

The carrying object is the knife-edge screen representation of a warped, precessing circumbinary disk: an opaque screen bounded by a leading and a trailing edge that rotate and translate linearly in time, standing in for the inner and outer radii of the warped disk while the 48.36-day binary orbit passes behind it. The paper extends this model's yearly lightcurve predictions through 2042 and compares them with season-by-season phased ZTF data. The quantitative work is done by two-sided hyperbolic tangent fits that constrain the ingress and egress, Gaussian fits that track the amplitude, phase, and width of the central re-brightening, and the g-r color curve, which distinguishes a uniform knife-edge from clumpy, semi-transparent material in the trailing edge.

What would settle it

Take simultaneous, high-cadence g-band and r-band photometry of KH 15D across one full eclipse ingress and egress. If the large color excursions shown in Figure 8 disappear when both bands are sampled at the same instant, they are interpolation artifacts and the clumping interpretation loses its main quantitative color support.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that KH 15D's continuing emergence from its deepest photometric minimum, reached around 2009-2010, is the visible signature of a slowly precessing, warped circumbinary disk, and that the re-brightening feature inside each eclipse traces spatial density variations in the disk's trailing edge. The authors fit each season's eclipse with a two-sided hyperbolic tangent to measure ingress and egress phases and depths, fit Gaussian profiles to the central re-brightening, and examine g-r color as a function of phase and brightness. They find that the egress is not as rapid as a smooth knife-edge disk predicts, that the re-brightening amplitude grows from about -1.7 to -2.9 mag and its width roughly quadruples over the seven seasons, and that the largest color excursions are confined to the ingress and egress phases. Their conclusion is that the re-brightening events are more likely produced by clumping in the trailing edge of the disk, as proposed by García Soto et al. (2020), than by partial emergence from a knife-edge.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the g-band and r-band lightcurves can be linearly interpolated onto a common time grid so that the g-r color computed at each phase is a true astrophysical signal rather than an artifact of the two filters being sampled up to about 12 hours apart while the system is brightening or fading rapidly.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The disk will keep precessing: Star B should be fully revealed around 2029 and Star A around 2041, after which KH 15D should cease its roughly 4-magnitude photometric variations.
  • The central re-brightening should continue to grow and broaden until it merges with the uneclipsed brightness, giving a clean, datable end to the KH 15D story.
  • The egress anomaly seen only in seasons 2-4 supports the idea of one or a few stellar-sized clumps orbiting in the trailing edge on a timescale of roughly 2-5 years at 2-3 AU from the binary.
  • If the color variations are real, the occulting material is not a uniform screen, and light from the stars is reddened and scattered as it passes through dusty clumps.
  • Other 'square-wave' young binaries with tilted circumbinary disks should show similar, time-evolving asymmetries between ingress and egress as their disks precess.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If a single clump causes the egress anomaly, the anomaly should reappear as the clump completes its ~2-5 year orbit, so future ZTF seasons can search for recurrence at the same orbital phase.
  • The interpolation-artifact risk acknowledged in Section 3.4 likely extends to any sparsely sampled multi-band survey of rapidly varying eclipsing systems, so similar color curves from such surveys should be treated cautiously until simultaneous cadence is available.
  • If clumpy trailing edges are common, disk mass or opacity estimates based on sharp-edge occultation depths in other young systems could be systematically biased.
  • As Star A emerges over the coming years, the g-r color trend should shift from reddening toward the uneclipsed stellar color, directly probing the density gradient of the trailing edge; this is a testable prediction the paper does not make explicitly.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

3 major / 6 minor

Summary. This paper presents new ZTF g-band and r-band photometry of the young binary star-disk system KH 15D, spanning seven observing seasons from 2018 to 2024. The authors combine the two bands using a +1.01 mag offset, derive a period of 48.36 days, and phase-fold the lightcurves. They fit hyperbolic tangent functions to the eclipse ingress/egress and Gaussian functions to the central re-brightening feature, reporting that the eclipse duration and depth decrease while the central re-brightening grows in amplitude and width over the observed seasons. The data are compared to an extension of the Poon et al. (2021) knife-edge disk model, with the model translated by +1.8 mag; the authors find broad agreement except for a slower-than-predicted egress. They also compute g-r color as a function of phase and brightness, interpreting large color excursions during ingress, egress, and re-brightening as evidence for clumping in the trailing edge of the circumbinary disk. The paper concludes that the long-term lightcurve evolution supports a precessing, warped circumbinary disk and that the central re-brightening events are caused by the star passing through regions of varying density rather than by partial emergence from a smooth knife-edge disk.

Significance. If the conclusions hold, this paper provides valuable long-baseline photometric confirmation of the precessing warped disk model for KH 15D and extends the observational record into the predicted re-emergence epoch of Star A. The main strengths are the new independent ZTF dataset, which lies mostly outside the 1955-2018 window used to fit the Poon et al. (2021) model; the quantitative seasonal measurements of ingress/egress times and central inflection parameters; and the extension of model predictions to 2042, which yields testable future behavior. The qualitative trends in eclipse duration and central re-brightening are visible in the phased lightcurves and are robust to many details. However, the central novel interpretation, that the re-brightening is caused by density variations in a clumpy trailing edge, rests heavily on the g-r color analysis, which is vulnerable to interpolation artifacts given the sparse g-band cadence. The paper also lacks uncertainties on its main fitted parameters. These issues are local and fixable, so the work is a solid observational contribution conditional on a careful reanalysis of the color signal.

major comments (3)
  1. [§3.4, Figure 8] The color-excursion analysis is load-bearing for the paper's main claim that the re-brightening is caused by density variations in a clumpy trailing edge. The g-r colors are computed by linearly interpolating g-band and r-band photometry onto a common time grid. The average g-band cadence is about 6 days, whereas the ingress, egress, and re-brightening phases evolve on timescales of 9-12 days with brightness changes of several magnitudes. Linear interpolation across such steeply curved segments can produce apparent color changes of order (dm/dt) times the interpolation gap, easily exceeding the photometric errors. The text acknowledges this risk but dismisses it by citing the roughly 12-hour relative separation between g and r observations; that statistic does not address the ~6-day gaps in the sparser filter. The authors should recompute colors using only nearly simultaneous g/r pairs (e.g., within the same night), or use a physically motivated lightcurve model to interpolate, and then assess whether the color excursions in Figure 8 persist. If the excursions are artifacts, the clumping interpretation loses its main quantitative support.
  2. [Table 1 and §3.3] Table 1 reports the out-of-eclipse brightness, inflection center, inflection width, and inflection height for each season, but no uncertainties are given for any of these fitted parameters. The claimed secular trends, especially the width increasing from 0.039 to 0.159 and the height variations among Seasons 5-7, need error bars to establish significance. Season 2 has sparse sampling and the fit uses only three faintest points for the offset, so the reliability of that season's parameters is unclear. Please provide formal fit uncertainties, the number of points used, and a goodness-of-fit statistic for each Gaussian and hyperbolic tangent fit.
  3. [§3.2, Figure 5] The comparison between the observed lightcurves and the Poon et al. (2021) model uses a constant vertical translation of +1.8 mag applied to the model, with no discussion of the model's absolute flux calibration or the uncertainty in that translation. The egress asymmetry is then interpreted as evidence for clumping in the trailing edge. This is a plausible interpretation, but the argument is qualitative: it rests on the visual disagreement between the model and data in Figure 5 rather than on a quantitative residual analysis. To support the clumping claim, the authors should quantify the egress discrepancy (e.g., time offset or magnitude offset as a function of season) and test whether the discrepancy is larger than expected from model parameter uncertainties or from the known limitations of the knife-edge approximation.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Title and Abstract] There are typographical errors in the title and abstract: 'T erm' and 'Y oung' contain stray spaces, and 'occurrrs' appears in §3.1; these should be corrected.
  2. [§2.2 and Figure 2] The text states that model predictions extend to 2043, while the Figure 2 caption says 'extended to 2042'; please reconcile the date and be consistent.
  3. [Figure 7] The caption says the gray shaded region represents one standard deviation error, but the text does not explain how this error was estimated or what quantity it refers to; please clarify.
  4. [§3.3] The text says the Gaussian offset was calculated by averaging the '3 highest magnitude points'; since magnitude increases toward fainter fluxes, this should be stated as the three faintest points or clarified to avoid confusion.
  5. [§3.1] The +1.01 mag offset used to combine g and r data assumes a constant g-r color for the uneclipsed sections; the authors should state whether this offset was derived from the same seasons or an average over all data, and discuss possible systematics from filter transformations.
  6. [References] The name 'García Soto' appears with garbled accent formatting in several places; this should be cleaned up for publication.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

Derivation is self-contained: new ZTF data are tested against the Poon et al. (2021) model without refitting, so the comparison is a genuine out-of-sample prediction.

full rationale

The paper's central comparison is between new ZTF photometry (2018-2024) and predictions from Poon et al. (2021), a model jointly fit to RV and photometry from 1955-2018. The authors explicitly state that they 'extend these predictions maintaining the original parameters of the Poon et al. (2021) model' (Section 2.2), so no parameter is refit to the new data. The measured quantities — eclipse ingress/egress times, central re-brightening amplitude/width/phase, and g-r color excursions — are derived directly from the ZTF light curves (Sections 3.2-3.4) and then compared with the published model lightcurves (Figures 2, 5, 7). Thus the confirmation of precession and re-brightening evolution is an out-of-sample test rather than a restatement of the model's inputs. Although co-author M. Poon is an author of the cited model paper, the cited model is externally falsifiable by the new data and was not tuned to them; per the review rules this self-citation does not constitute circularity. The potential sampling-artifact concern for the color interpolation (acknowledged in Section 3.4) is a data-quality/correctness risk, not a circularity of the derivation chain.

Assumptions & free parameters 2 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 1 invented entities

The central claim rests on the adopted precessing knife-edge disk model and on the interpretation of color variations as clump-related. No new physical model is derived; the paper compares new data to a fixed prior model. The main free parameters are the band offset and period used in data reduction, plus the descriptive lightcurve fit parameters. The clumping hypothesis is carried from prior literature without independent falsifiable evidence beyond these same lightcurves.

free parameters (2)
  • g/r band offset = +1.01 mag
    Average uneclipsed magnitudes in r and g differ by 1.01 mag; the offset is applied to r-band data to combine photometry. The combined lightcurve and its fitted features depend on this calibration.
  • binary period = 48.36 days
    Measured from a Lomb-Scargle periodogram of the ZTF data; used for phase folding all lightcurves. Consistent with literature values, but fitted from the same dataset it is applied to.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption The Poon et al. (2021) knife-edge screen parameterization with fixed model parameters can be extended linearly in time to predict lightcurves through 2042.
    Invoked in Section 2.2 and used in Figures 2 and 5; the comparison of data to model assumes this parameterization captures the disk precession.
  • domain assumption ZTF photometric quality cut (catflag < 32768) and the +1.01 mag band offset produce a clean combined lightcurve.
    Section 3.1; no independent validation of the offset or filter combination is provided.
  • domain assumption g-r colors can be reconstructed by linear interpolation between non-simultaneous g and r observations.
    Section 3.4; the color analysis assumes sampling gaps of about 12 hours are small enough that interpolation does not create false color excursions.
  • domain assumption The identification and relative luminosities or masses of Star A and Star B from Aronow et al. (2018) and Hamilton et al. (2001) are correct.
    Used throughout to attribute lightcurve features to specific stars; not re-derived here.
invented entities (1)
  • Semi-transparent dust clumps in the trailing edge of the circumbinary disk
    purpose: Explain the central re-brightening amplitude evolution, egress asymmetry, and color variations without abandoning the knife-edge model
    Not directly imaged or spectroscopically confirmed; inferred from photometric trends. Prior work by Garcia Soto et al. (2020) proposed similar clumps, but this paper adds no independent handle such as a predicted observable signature beyond the lightcurve itself.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Continued Photometric Monitoring Supports Long-Term Dynamical Evolution in the Young Binary Star-Disk System KH 15D." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/MWHIDSCW

@misc{pith2026250604914,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Continued Photometric Monitoring Supports Long-Term Dynamical Evolution in the Young Binary Star-Disk System KH 15D},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/MWHIDSCW}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2506.04914}
}
read the original abstract

We present photometric time series data spanning 2018-2024 that show the effects of temporal dynamics in the binary system KH 15D, a member of the NGC 2264 star forming region. This source exhibits complex eclipsing behavior due to a precessing circumbinary disk or ring that is slightly inclined relative to the orbital plane of the binary. Using g-band and r-band observations from the Zwicky Transient Facility (ZTF) over seven observing seasons, we follow the evolution of the KH 15D lightcurve as it continues to emerge from its deepest observed photometric minimum about 15 years ago. Our observations are consistent with previous models that propose a precessing, warped circumbinary disk orbiting KH 15D. We verify the gradual precession of the disk by quantifying the times of eclipse ingresses and egresses. We also examine the central re-brightening within the minima of the phased lightcurve. This feature has increased in amplitude over our observing seasons, and we measure its evolution in both amplitude and phase from year to year. Finally, we assess color as a function of phase and brightness. Our findings support the assertion that line-of-sight variations in disk density and structure, possibly due to clumping, coupled with a precessing circumbinary disk are responsible for the central re-brightening event.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2506.04914 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Illustration of the Poon et al. (2021) model for the KH-15D system. Top and Middle: To approximate the warped disk, this model uses an opaque screen bounded by a leading and trailing edge. Within each panel, the screen is nearly stationary, as the binary orbit (every 48 days) allows Star B and/or A to peek out from below the trailing edge. The dotted curves show the binary orbit behind the screen. From left to right… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Phased lightcurves produced by the knife-edge Poon et al. (2021) model extended to 2042, presented in calendar years. After 2042 the lightcurve is predicted to remain relatively flat giving a testable ending to the KH 15D story. The schematic diagram of the KH 15D system in Fig￾ure 1 displays the disk geometry for the years 2018−2033 from the perspective of an observer, along with the cor- [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Combined r-band and g-band ZTF photometry of the KH 15D binary star system over the seven seasons (highlighted gray) spanning 2018-2024. An offset of +1.01 was applied to the r-band data in order to combine it with the g-band data for the following analysis. 1 https://irsa.ipac.caltech.edu/cgi-bin/Gator/nph-scan?submit= Select&projshort=ZTF 2 https://irsa.ipac.caltech.edu/data/ZTF/docs/ztf explanatory supplement.pdf… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (5 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Phased ZTF lightcurve of KH 15D using the derived period of 48.36 days. Colors highlight the points used for fits of the central inflection (red) and points used for the fit of the broad eclipse (blue). In the following analysis, we examine the two main features of the…
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Phased lightcurves with Poon et al. (2021) model (black) of KH 15D split into seven seasons (∼208 days/season) between 2018-2024, as defined in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Two-sided hyperbolic tangent fits for the KH 15D data intended to quantify the ingress and egress portions of the overall lightcurve. The ZTF data clearly show a central inflection or re￾versal of the lightcurve, that occurs each phase during the eclipse. This lightcur…
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Central re-brightening event fit across seasons 2-7. Gray shaded region represents one standard deviation error. amount, we are able to further investigate whether a knife-edge model is accurate for the trailing edge, or if further clumping effects as noted by Garc´ıa …
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Color in g − r as a function of phase (top) and brightness (bottom). There is some amount of color vari￾ation that occurs mainly during eclipse ingress and egress, consistent with light from the stellar components of KH 15D interacting with the circumbinary material. I…

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

26 extracted references · 10 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    2015, MNRAS, 449, 65, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stv128

    Aly, H., Dehnen, W., Nixon, C., & King, A. 2015, MNRAS, 449, 65, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stv128

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stv128 2015

  2. [2]

    A., Herbst, W., Hughes, A

    Aronow, R. A., Herbst, W., Hughes, A. M., Wilner, D. J., & Winn, J. N. 2018, AJ, 155, 47, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/aa9ed7

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-3881/aa9ed7 2018

  3. [3]

    A., Herbst, W., Gilmore, M

    Arulanantham, N. A., Herbst, W., Gilmore, M. S., Cauley, P. W., & Leggett, S. K. 2017, ApJ, 834, 119, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/834/2/119

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/834/2/119 2017

  4. [4]

    A., Herbst, W., Cody, A

    Arulanantham, N. A., Herbst, W., Cody, A. M., et al. 2016, AJ, 151, 90, doi: 10.3847/0004-6256/151/4/90 Astropy Collaboration, Robitaille, T. P., Tollerud, E. J., et al. 2013, A&A, 558, A33, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201322068 Astropy Collaboration, Price-Whelan, A. M., Sip˝ ocz, B. M., et al. 2018, AJ, 156, 123, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/aabc4f

    work page doi:10.3847/0004-6256/151/4/90 2016

  5. [5]

    C., Kulkarni, S

    Bellm, E. C., Kulkarni, S. R., Graham, M. J., et al. 2019, PASP, 131, 018002, doi: 10.1088/1538-3873/aaecbe

    doi:10.1088/1538-3873/aaecbe 2019

  6. [6]

    2024, A&A, 688, A58, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202450203

    Bernhard, K., & Lloyd, C. 2024, A&A, 688, A58, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202450203

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202450203 2024

  7. [7]

    L., Herbst, W., Leggett, S

    Capelo, H. L., Herbst, W., Leggett, S. K., Hamilton, C. M., & Johnson, J. A. 2012, ApJL, 757, L18, doi: 10.1088/2041-8205/757/1/L18

    doi:10.1088/2041-8205/757/1/l18 2012

  8. [8]

    Ceppi, S., Longarini, C., Lodato, G., Cuello, N., & Lubow, S. H. 2023, MNRAS, 520, 5817, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad444

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stad444 2023

Show all 26 references
  1. [9]

    I., & Murray-Clay, R

    Chiang, E. I., & Murray-Clay, R. A. 2004, ApJ, 607, 913, doi: 10.1086/383522

    2004 doi

  2. [10]

    1999, A&A, 345, 521 Garc ´ ıa Soto, A., Ali, A., Newmark, A., et al

    Flaccomio, E., Micela, G., Sciortino, S., et al. 1999, A&A, 345, 521 Garc ´ ıa Soto, A., Ali, A., Newmark, A., et al. 2020, AJ, 159, 135, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/ab6efd

    1999 doi

  3. [11]

    M., Herbst, W., Shih, C., & Ferro, A

    Hamilton, C. M., Herbst, W., Shih, C., & Ferro, A. J. 2001, ApJL, 554, L201, doi: 10.1086/321707

    2001 doi

  4. [12]

    M., Herbst, W., Vrba, F

    Hamilton, C. M., Herbst, W., Vrba, F. J., et al. 2005, AJ, 130, 1896, doi: 10.1086/432667

    2005 doi

  5. [13]

    M., et al

    Herbst, W., LeDuc, K., Hamilton, C. M., et al. 2010, AJ, 140, 2025, doi: 10.1088/0004-6256/140/6/2025

    2010 doi

  6. [14]

    M., Vrba, F

    Herbst, W., Hamilton, C. M., Vrba, F. J., et al. 2002, PASP, 114, 1167, doi: 10.1086/344205

    2002 doi

  7. [15]

    A., & Winn, J

    Johnson, J. A., & Winn, J. N. 2004, The Astronomical Journal, 127, 2344–2351, doi: 10.1086/382520

    2004 doi

  8. [16]

    E., & Herbst, W

    Kearns, K. E., & Herbst, W. 1998, AJ, 116, 261, doi: 10.1086/300426

    1998 doi

  9. [17]

    2005, ApJL, 632, L139, doi: 10.1086/497912

    Kusakabe, N., Tamura, M., Nakajima, Y., et al. 2005, ApJL, 632, L139, doi: 10.1086/497912

    2005 doi

  10. [18]

    G., & Lubow, S

    Martin, R. G., & Lubow, S. H. 2017, ApJL, 835, L28, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/835/2/L28

    2017 doi

  11. [19]

    J., Laher, R

    Masci, F. J., Laher, R. R., Rusholme, B., et al. 2019, PASP, 131, 018003, doi: 10.1088/1538-3873/aae8ac

    2019 doi

  12. [20]

    H., Stapelfeldt, K., & Becker, A

    Plavchan, P., Gee, A. H., Stapelfeldt, K., & Becker, A. 2008, ApJL, 684, L37, doi: 10.1086/592107

    2008 doi

  13. [21]

    Plavchan, P., G¨ uth, T., Laohakunakorn, N., & Parks, J. R. 2013, A&A, 554, A110, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201220747

    2013 doi

  14. [22]

    J., & Zhu, W

    Poon, M., Zanazzi, J. J., & Zhu, W. 2021, MNRAS, 503, 1599, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stab575

    2021 doi

  15. [23]

    L., Lubow, S

    Smallwood, J. L., Lubow, S. H., Franchini, A., & Martin, R. G. 2019, MNRAS, 486, 2919, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stz994

    2019 doi

  16. [24]

    N., Hamilton, C

    Winn, J. N., Hamilton, C. M., Herbst, W. J., et al. 2006, ApJ, 644, 510, doi: 10.1086/503417

    2006 doi

  17. [25]

    N., Holman, M

    Winn, J. N., Holman, M. J., Johnson, J. A., Stanek, K. Z., & Garnavich, P. M. 2004, ApJL, 603, L45, doi: 10.1086/383089

    2004 doi

  18. [26]

    2022, ApJL, 933, L21, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ac7b2d

    Zhu, W., Bernhard, K., Dai, F., et al. 2022, ApJL, 933, L21, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ac7b2d

    2022 doi

Pith tools

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