Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 5 minor 1 cited by

ASASSN-24fw: An 8-month long, 4.1 mag, optically achromatic and polarized dimming event

T0 review · 4 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-06 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read ASASSN-24fw's eight-month, 4.1-magnitude dimming was produced by an occulter of large carbonaceous or water-ice grains roughly 20 micrometers in size, not by a stellar eclipse or small dust.

desk verdict A well-observed new long, deep, achromatic, polarized eclipse, but the carbon/ice grain composition claim rests on a polarization proxy that needs a real radiative-transfer test. read the letter →

arxiv 2507.03080 v2 pith:RXRKE2JG submitted 2025-07-03 astro-ph.SR

R. Forés-Toribio , B. JoHantgen , C. S. Kochanek , S. G. Jorstad , J. J. Hermes , J. D. Armstrong , C. Ashall , C. R. Burns
show 15 more authors
E. Gaidos W. B. Hoogendam E. Y. Hsiao K. Medler N. Morrell C. Pfeffer B. J. Shappee K. Stanek M. A. Tucker H. Xiao K. Auchettl L. Lu D. M. Rowan T. Vaccaro J. P. Williams
This is my paper
classification astro-ph.SR
keywords long-durationeclipsescircumbinarydiskdustgraingrowthachromaticdimmingpolarizationprecessionASASSN-24fwdebris
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

ASASSN-24fw is a 13th-magnitude F star that faded by 4.12 magnitudes in the g band for about eight months in 2024-2025 before returning to its previous brightness. The paper establishes that the dimming was nearly achromatic, with only a slight excess in bluer bands, and that the V-band light became linearly polarized by up to 4%. From these two facts it argues that the occulter cannot be a stellar eclipse or small dust, but must be dominated by large grains, roughly 20 micrometers in size, made of carbonaceous material or water ice. The paper further argues that the star is likely an F star with a ~0.25-solar-mass M dwarf companion, and that the most plausible geometry is a circumbinary disk whose precession produces a recurrence every 43.8 years. If correct, this makes ASASSN-24fw a rare testbed for how large grains grow and survive in disks.

What carries the argument

The argument is carried by comparing the effective opacity $\kappa = \sqrt{\kappa_{\rm abs}(\kappa_{\rm abs}+\kappa_{\rm scat})}$ at the $g$ and $z$ wavelengths to measure achromaticity, and by using the ratio of scattering matrix elements $|Z_{12}/Z_{11}|$ at forward scattering to estimate the polarizing power of each grain composition and size. These are computed with the optool package over a grid of seven compositions and radii from 0.01 to 10,000 μm; only carbon, graphite, and water ice at ~20 μm appear in the region where both the color-change constraint and the polarization constraint are satisfied. The precession geometry is quantified using standard analytical formulas for disk precession that link the observed recurrence to a circumbinary disk precessing by 180 degrees.

What would settle it

Measure the V-band polarization of ASASSN-24fw in quiescence now that the dimming has ended: the large-grain occulter model predicts it should drop to near zero, so a persistent polarization would undercut the claim that the occulter produces the observed polarization. A second decisive test is radial-velocity monitoring, since the proposed binary predicts an F-star orbital velocity of roughly 2.6 km/s on a few-year timescale, and a non-detection would falsify the companion interpretation.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that the eight-month, 4.12-magnitude g-band eclipse of ASASSN-24fw is optically near-achromatic, Δ(g−z)=0.31±0.15 mag, and polarized at up to 4% in V band, and that the only dust compositions and sizes that satisfy both constraints are carbonaceous or water-ice grains at ~20 μm. Silicate grains of any size that are large enough to be achromatic do not polarize enough, while carbon dioxide ice produces too much color change. The paper concludes that the occulter is a dust structure dominated by tens-of-micrometer carbon or ice grains, most plausibly a circumbinary disk precessing around an F star–M dwarf binary, with the 43.8-year period representing half the precession period.

Load-bearing premise

The 43.8-year recurrence period, proposed on the basis of a few archival plate non-detections from 1937 and 1981, is only marginally allowed by the paper's own period search given gaps in the light-curve coverage; if this period is wrong, the precession-based geometry for the system loses its foundation.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • A 43.8-year recurrence predicts the next eclipse around 2068, with the same symmetric, near-achromatic shape if the occulter is coherent.
  • Long, deep, achromatic eclipses with polarization become direct probes of grain growth in protoplanetary and debris disks.
  • Polarimetric monitoring alone could identify large-grain occulters in similar events without waiting for multiwavelength follow-up.
  • The census of 46 similar systems, roughly half with mid-infrared excesses, supports dust as the common cause of long deep eclipses.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If the 43.8-year period is confirmed by future observations, the same archival-gap technique could be applied to other candidate precessing disks, where sparse photometry currently hides long-period eclipses.
  • A single polarized, gray eclipse measurement may be sufficient to infer large grains in other systems, making polarimetry a cheap screen for large-grain occulters among the known long deep eclipses.
  • The predicted M dwarf companion, currently inferred from SED decomposition and line dilution, could be confirmed by high-resolution spectroscopy; such a detection would also pin down the binary orbit required by the precession model.
  • Because most long deep eclipses in the survey show mid-IR excess, the systems lacking W1/W2 excess may harbor cooler dust; longer-wavelength observations would test whether dust is truly essential to all such events.
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

4 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper reports an extensive multi-wavelength photometric, spectroscopic, and polarimetric campaign on ASASSN-24fw, a 13th-magnitude F star that underwent a 4.12 mag optical eclipse lasting about 8 months in 2024-2025. The eclipse is nearly achromatic, with a small blue excess of Δ(g−z)=0.31±0.15 mag, and the V-band emission is polarized by up to about 4%. The quiescent SED is modeled with DUSTY, yielding T*=6490±120 K, log(L*/Lsun)=0.828±0.005, and warm circumstellar dust; an additional 0.25 solar-mass M dwarf companion is invoked to explain the occulted SED and the dilution of infrared absorption lines. A 43.8-year period proposed by Nair & Denisenko (2024) is considered plausible. From Mie calculations of opacity and scattering matrices, the authors conclude that the occulter is composed of ~20 micron carbonaceous or water-ice grains, while silicates and CO2 ice are disfavored. The paper also compiles a sample of 46 long-deep eclipsing systems and compares their periods, durations, depths, and color-magnitude positions.

Significance. If the grain-composition conclusion holds, ASASSN-24fw would be a rare and valuable diagnostic of grain growth in a protoplanetary, debris, or ring-like disk, connecting eclipse chromaticity and polarimetry to grain size and composition. The observational dataset is unusually complete: dense optical light curves, near-infrared photometry, optical and infrared spectra, five epochs of polarimetry, and long-baseline archival coverage. The forward Mie calculation is a real strength: the achromaticity argument is not a fitted color but a prediction from independent optical constants. The population survey of long-deep eclipses is also a useful resource, even if the classification is necessarily heuristic. However, the central composition claim is not yet quantitatively secure because the polarization constraint is not modeled with actual radiative transfer, and several auxiliary assumptions (the 43.8-year period, the artificial inflation of SED errors, the undetected M dwarf companion) weaken the interpretive superstructure.

major comments (4)
  1. [§3.4, Fig. 9] The grain-composition conclusion is carried by the polarization constraint, but the paper never computes the polarization that the proposed grain population would actually produce in the eclipse geometry. The text equates the ability to polarize with |Z12/Z11| at θ=0, yet with τ~3.8 the observed light is a mixture of transmitted and multiply scattered light, so the net polarization is not set by this single-scattering ratio. The plotted values for carbon and ice at a≈20 μm are below ~1.5%, while the observed V-band polarization reaches 3.97±0.60%, implying that the proxy appears to underpredict the required polarization by a factor of several; the paper does not resolve this tension. A proper radiative-transfer calculation, including multiple scattering and the finite source, is needed before carbon/ice can be favored over silicates. I also note that the empirical polarization signal is weak: the magnitude-polarization correlation is r=0.54 and drops to r=0.02 if the last in-eclipse point is removed (Table 4), with no pre-event baseline.
  2. [§3.1, Fig. 4] The quiescent SED fit has an important methodological caveat: the authors state that they 'artificially increased the uncertainties on the Skymapper u band ... and the WISE 4.5 μm band' to force the model through the WISE 3.6 μm point. This means the reported reduced χ²=1.12 and the derived stellar parameters, dust temperature, and optical depth are not obtained from a homogeneous treatment of the data. The choice affects the inferred companion and dust properties used later in Sections 3.4-3.5. The authors should either fit with the native uncertainties and discuss the residuals, or justify the inflated errors with known systematics in SkyMapper u and WISE 4.5 μm photometry.
  3. [§3.3-3.5, Fig. 6] The 43.8-year period is not reliably established. Figure 6 shows it is only 'marginally allowed' by the light-curve gaps, and the DASCH evidence consists largely of non-detections and upper limits. The Section 3.5 precession models are built on this period and on the undetected 0.25 solar-mass companion. I recommend softening the period statement (from 'appears correct' in the Abstract to 'tentative') and presenting the circumbinary-disk precession as one possible scenario rather than the most probable one.
  4. [§3.2-3.3] The 0.25 solar-mass M dwarf is not directly detected; its mass and temperature are inferred from a semi-quantitative three-component SED decomposition and from dilution of the Brγ line relative to Paβ. Since the paper itself describes the model as 'semi-quantitative', the companion parameters are weakly constrained, and all Section 3.5 geometry scenarios assume this companion. A high-resolution spectrum after the eclipse, or an astrometric or radial-velocity detection, is needed to validate this component.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Abstract, §1] There is a typo, 'dimmimg', in the Abstract and again in Section 1; it should be 'dimming'.
  2. [§3.4] In the discussion of water ice, 'larger and smaller gains' should read 'larger and smaller grains'.
  3. [§3.5] The text refers to a '2×48.3 year precession period', which is inconsistent with the 43.8-year period used elsewhere; if the event period is 43.8 years, the precession period should be 2×43.8 years.
  4. [Table 6] Table 6 is extremely dense; providing a machine-readable version or separating the reference list into a supplementary table would improve usability.
  5. [Figure 9] The right panel of Figure 9 shows |Z12/Z11|, but the observational constraint on polarization is stated only in the text; adding a horizontal line at the observed P≈4% level would make the comparison transparent.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the grain-size/composition conclusion is a forward Mie/optical-constants calculation compared against independent photometry and polarimetry, not a fit re-labeled as a prediction.

full rationale

The central claim - that the occulter is dominated by ~20 micron carbonaceous or water-ice grains - is derived by computing (kappa_g - kappa_z)/kappa_g and |Z12/Z11| with optool for seven compositions using published optical constants (Dorschner et al. 1995; Draine 2003a,b; Zubko et al. 1996; Warren & Brandt 2008), then comparing those forward predictions to the measured color change Delta(g-z)=0.31+/-0.15 mag and V-band polarization up to 4%. No parameter of the grain model is fitted to the eclipse colors, so the inference is not circular by construction. The geometric interpretation inherits the 43.8-year period proposed by Nair & Denisenko (2024), an external non-author ATel, and the paper's own period search only finds it 'marginally allowed'; that is an acknowledged external uncertainty, not a self-referential reduction. The M dwarf companion is a model component introduced to fill the near-IR excess of the minimum SED and is later used in the geometric scenarios; this creates a self-consistency burden but does not equate a predicted quantity with an input by definition. The paper also explicitly notes the fragility of the polarization correlation (r drops to 0.02 if the last point is excluded) and the proxy nature of |Z12/Z11|, which are correctness/robustness concerns rather than circularity. Self-citations (ASAS-SN ATels, Adams et al. 2017, Kochanek 2014a,b, Petz & Kochanek 2025) are contextual, methodological, or parameter-free analytic results and are not load-bearing for the central grain-size conclusion.

Assumptions & free parameters 8 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 2 invented entities

The central interpretation rests on several fitted parameters (SED fit, ingress model, grain radius) and on assumptions about dust physics, the adopted 43.8-year period, and the existence and nature of a companion. The M-dwarf companion and the precessing circumbinary disk are postulated entities without direct, independent detection.

free parameters (8)
  • Quiescent SED stellar luminosity L* = log(L*/Lsun)=0.828±0.005
    Fitted to pre-event photometry with a DUSTY SED model; affects the derived stellar type and age.
  • Effective temperature T* = 6490±120 K
    Fitted in the SED model; anchors the F-star classification and isochrone age.
  • Circumstellar dust optical depth tau_V = 0.249±0.017
    Fitted in the SED model; used to argue the pre-existing dust is too thin to cause the 4-mag eclipse.
  • Dust temperature Td = 552±16 K
    Fitted in the SED model.
  • Ingress optical-depth power-law index gamma = best near 3-5, chi2 minimized at gamma=4
    Fit to the ingress light curve using a power-law optical depth profile.
  • Ingress optical depth scale tau0 = 2.40 (fixed)
    Fixed to match the average depth over the last 7 ingress points; an ad hoc normalization.
  • Ingress velocity v and scale length r0 = degenerate, contours shown in Fig. 8
    Fitted to the ingress light curve; strong degeneracy between v and r0.
  • Occulter grain radius a = ~20 micrometers
    Chosen to match the observed achromaticity and polarization in Mie-theory models.
assumptions (5)
  • ad hoc to paper The occulter optical depth profile near the edge is a power law with negative exponent (tau = tau0 (r/r0)^-gamma).
    Assumed in ingress modeling without physical justification; used to fit the light curve.
  • domain assumption Mie theory and tabulated optical constants for pyroxene, olivine, astrosil, carbon, graphite, water ice, and CO2 ice are applicable to the grain population.
    Standard dust modeling, but grain shape, porosity, and size distributions are ignored.
  • domain assumption The quiescent SED can be modeled with a spherical DUSTY shell of graphitic grains with an MRN size distribution.
    Necessary to infer the stellar parameters and the pre-existing dust properties; geometry is simplified.
  • domain assumption The recurrence period of 43.8 years proposed by Nair and Denisenko (2024) is correct.
    Adopted from an ATel; the paper's own period search finds it only marginally allowed.
  • ad hoc to paper The binary companion is a 0.25 solar-mass M dwarf and the occulter is a circumbinary disk precessing with period 2 times 43.8 years.
    Inferred to explain the near-IR excess and line dilution without direct detection.
invented entities (2)
  • 0.25 solar-mass M dwarf companion
    purpose: Explains the near-IR excess in the dim-phase SED and dilution of the F-star Br-gamma line; provides the binary needed for disk precession.
    No direct detection (no astrometric or radial-velocity confirmation); parameters taken from a PARSEC isochrone. A predicted radial-velocity signal could be a falsifiable test.
  • Precessing circumbinary dust disk (the occulter)
    purpose: Produces the 4.1-mag, achromatic, polarized eclipse recurring every 43.8 years (half the precession period).
    The eclipse itself is evidence for an occulter, but the disk's precession and composition are inferred. No resolved imaging or dynamical evidence for the disk is presented.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of ASASSN-24fw: An 8-month long, 4.1 mag, optically achromatic and polarized dimming event." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/RXRKE2JG

@misc{pith2026250703080,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: ASASSN-24fw: An 8-month long, 4.1 mag, optically achromatic and polarized dimming event},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/RXRKE2JG}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2507.03080}
}
abstract

We discuss ASASSN-24fw, a 13th-magnitude star that optically faded by $\Delta g = 4.12 \pm 0.02$ mag starting in September 2024 after over a decade of quiescence in ASAS-SN. The dimmimg lasted $\sim$8 months before returning to quiescence in late May 2025. The spectral energy distribution (SED) before the event is that of a pre-main sequence or a modestly evolved F star with some warm dust emission. The shape of the optical SED during the dim phase is unchanged and the optical and near-infrared spectra are those of an F star. The SED and the dilution of some of the F star infrared absorption features near minimum suggest the presence of a $\sim$0.25$M_\odot$ M dwarf binary companion. The 43.8 year period proposed by Nair & Denisenko (2024) appears correct and is probably half the precession period of a circumbinary disk. The optical eclipse is nearly achromatic, although slightly deeper in bluer filters, $\Delta (g-z)=0.31\pm0.15$ mag, and the $V$ band emission is polarized by up to 4%. The materials most able to produce such small optical color changes and a high polarization are big ($\sim$20 $\mu$m) carbonaceous or water ice grains. Particle distributions dominated by big grains are seen in protoplanetary disks, Saturn-like ring systems and evolved debris disks. We also carry out a survey of occultation events, finding 46 additional systems, of which only 7 (4) closely match $\varepsilon$ Aurigae (KH 15D), the two archetypes of stars with long and deep eclipses. The full sample is widely distributed in an optical color-magnitude diagram, but roughly half show a mid-IR excess. It is likely many of the others have cooler dust since it seems essential to produce the events.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2507.03080 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. — The light curve of the event. The grey shaded band shows the ingress (egress) period of 24 (18) days over which the magnitude of the star drops from 0.2 to 3.5 mag with respect to the quiescent magnitude. The LCOGT, POISE and ROS2 u, B, g, V , r, i and zs light curves are shown with squares and the ATLAS c and o light curves are shown with brown and pink diamonds. The UKIRT Z, Y , J, H and K light curves are shown… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. — The top panel shows all the data from 1894 until the present time normalized to the median magnitude of each time series. The down facing blue symbols are the DASCH magnitude limits fainter than the standard deviation of the DASCH time series. The black arrows mark the possible past events reported by Nair & Denisenko (2024). The bottom panel shows the recent light curves shifted in magnitude to better show them i… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. — LBT MODS optical (top) and IRTF SpeX near-IR (bottom) spectra acquired during the dim phase. The most common absorption lines found in F stars are marked with dashed vertical lines along the wavelength of any Li absorption at 6708 ˚A [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (9 more)
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: — Inferred luminosity and temperature from fitting the quiescent (red) and obscured (pink) SEDs. Solar metallicity isochrones colored by age are shown as well as the luminosity lim￾its for a companion black body that does not significantly change the SED shape of the d…
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: — The foreground extinction-corrected SED of the qui￾escent star (black squares) and the model fit (black solid line). The red triangles are the SED at the light curve minimum. The red solid curve is an approximate model for the SED combining the three components shown…
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: — Maximum allowed duration of missed events due to the gaps in the photometric coverage as a function of period. The red horizontal band mark the shallow (0.2 mag) and deep (3.5 mag) event durations and the dashed-dotted gray vertical line cor￾responds to the period pr…
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: — Models of the ASAS-SN ingress light curve. The points with errors are the ASAS-SN data, and the dashed line corresponds to the pre-event flux baseline. The solid lines are the best models for optical depth exponents of γ = 3, 4 and 5. line is then ∆m(t) = −2.5 log [ …
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: — Ingress constraints on the velocity v and the optical depth scale length to stellar radius ratio r0/R∗ for density expo￾nents of γ = 3 (bottom), 4 and 5 (top). Contours are drawn at ∆χ 2 = 1, 3, 10 and 30 after rescaling the minimum χ 2 values to the number of degree…
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: — The left panel shows the relative color change that different materials produce between the g and z bands as a function of particle size. The shaded band is the measured color change of the event. The right panel shows the ratios between Stokes Q and I in V band for …
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: — Schematic diagrams of the possible configurations discussed for ASASSN-24fw. They are not drawn to scale. The yellow circle is the F star, the dark red circle is the proposed M dwarf companion and the light brown sphere is the optically thin circumstellar dust. In t…
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: — Period (left) and depth (right) against duration for the long and deep eclipses. The systems on the side (bottom) subpanel have variable or unknown duration (period). The red circles are systems like ε Aurigae. The light red circles are systems with an extended seco…
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: — An extinction corrected Gaia color-magnitude diagram (left) and a WISE/Gaia color-color diagram (middle) of the stars with long deep eclipses labeled as defined in the right panel. The absolute magnitude uncertainties are dominated by the distance uncertainty. The g…

Discussion (0). Sign in 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 Systematic Search for Main-Sequence Dipper Stars Using the Zwicky Transient Facility

    astro-ph.SR 2025-08 unverdicted novelty 6.0 of 10

    A search of 63 million FGK main-sequence stars with ZTF light curves identifies 81 new dipper star candidates with diverse dimming shapes and no clear periodicity.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

130 extracted references · 19 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    2017, MNRAS, 468, 4968, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stx816

    Dai, X. 2017, MNRAS, 468, 4968, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stx816

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stx816 2017

  2. [2]

    Bailer-Jones, C. A. L., Rybizki, J., Fouesneau, M., Demleitner, M., & Andrae, R. 2021, AJ, 161, 147, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/abd806

    doi:10.3847/1538-3881/abd806 2021

  3. [3]

    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

  4. [4]

    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

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202450203 2024

  5. [5]

    P., Hollands, M

    Bhattacharjee, S., Vanderbosch, Z. P., Hollands, M. A., et al. 2025a, PASP, 137, 074202, doi: 10.1088/1538-3873/ade0ea

    doi:10.1088/1538-3873/ade0ea

  6. [6]

    R., Kong, A

    Bhattacharjee, S., Kulkarni, S. R., Kong, A. K. H., et al. 2025b, PASP, 137, 024201, doi: 10.1088/1538-3873/ada702

    doi:10.1088/1538-3873/ada702

  7. [7]

    2008, Galactic Dynamics: Second Edition

    Binney, J., & Tremaine, S. 2008, Galactic Dynamics: Second Edition

    2008

  8. [8]

    M., Schlafly, E

    Bovy, J., Rix, H.-W., Green, G. M., Schlafly, E. F., & Finkbeiner, D. P. 2016, ApJ, 818, 130, doi: 10.3847/0004-637X/818/2/130

    doi:10.3847/0004-637x/818/2/130 2016

Show all 130 references
  1. [9]

    S., LaCourse, D

    Boyajian, T. S., LaCourse, D. M., Rappaport, S. A., et al. 2016, MNRAS, 457, 3988, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stw218

    2016 doi

  2. [10]

    2012, MNRAS, 427, 127, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2012.21948.x

    Bressan, A., Marigo, P., Girardi, L., et al. 2012, MNRAS, 427, 127, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2012.21948.x

    2012

  3. [11]

    M., Baliber, N., Bianco, F

    Brown, T. M., Baliber, N., Bianco, F. B., et al. 2013, PASP, 125, 1031, doi: 10.1086/673168

    2013 doi

  4. [12]

    2025, Nature Astronomy, 9, 380, doi: 10.1038/s41550-024-02446-x

    Budaj, J., Bernhard, K., Jones, D., & Munday, J. 2025, Nature Astronomy, 9, 380, doi: 10.1038/s41550-024-02446-x

    2025 doi

  5. [13]

    2021, The Astronomer’s Telegram, 14441, 1 Burns et al

    Burns, C., Hsiao, E., Suntzeff, N., et al. 2021, The Astronomer’s Telegram, 14441, 1 Burns et al. in prep

    2021

  6. [14]

    M., Guinan, E

    Carroll, S. M., Guinan, E. F., McCook, G. P., & Donahue, R. A. 1991, ApJ, 367, 278, doi: 10.1086/169626

    1991 doi

  7. [15]

    Castelli, F., & Kurucz, R. L. 2003, in IAU Symposium, Vol. 210, Modelling of Stellar Atmospheres, ed. N. Piskunov, W. W. Weiss, & D. F. Gray, A20, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.astro-ph/0405087

    2003 doi arXiv

  8. [16]

    C., Magnier, E

    Chambers, K. C., Magnier, E. A., Metcalfe, N., et al. 2016, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:1612.05560, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.1612.05560

    2016 doi arXiv

  9. [17]

    2015, MNRAS, 452, 1068, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stv1281

    Chen, Y., Bressan, A., Girardi, L., et al. 2015, MNRAS, 452, 1068, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stv1281

    2015 doi

  10. [18]

    2014, MNRAS, 444, 2525, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stu1605

    Chen, Y., Girardi, L., Bressan, A., et al. 2014, MNRAS, 444, 2525, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stu1605

    2014 doi

  11. [19]

    I., & Murray-Clay, R

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

    2004 doi

  12. [20]

    E., Herbst, W., & Williams, E

    Cohen, R. E., Herbst, W., & Williams, E. C. 2003, ApJ, 596, L243, doi: 10.1086/379275

    2003 doi

  13. [21]

    R., Larson, K

    Covey, K. R., Larson, K. A., Herczeg, G. J., & Manara, C. F. 2021, AJ, 161, 61, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/abcc73

    2021 doi

  14. [22]

    C., Vacca, W

    Cushing, M. C., Vacca, W. D., & Rayner, J. T. 2004, PASP, 116, 362, doi: 10.1086/382907

    2004 doi

  15. [23]

    M., Skrutskie, M

    Cutri, R. M., Skrutskie, M. F., van Dyk, S., et al. 2003, 2MASS All Sky Catalog of point sources

    2003

  16. [24]

    2009, Ring Particle Composition and Size Distribution, ed

    Cuzzi, J., Clark, R., Filacchione, G., et al. 2009, Ring Particle Composition and Size Distribution, ed. M. K. Dougherty, L. W. Esposito, & S. M. Krimigis (Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands), 459–509, doi: 10.1007/978-1-4020-9217-6_15

    2009 doi

  17. [25]

    Dohnanyi, J. S. 1970, J. Geophys. Res., 75, 3468, doi: 10.1029/JB075i017p03468

    1970 doi

  18. [26]

    2021, Astrophysics Source Code Library, ascl:2104.010

    Dominik, C., Min, M., & Tazaki, R. 2021, Astrophysics Source Code Library, ascl:2104.010. http://ascl.net/2104.010

    2021

  19. [27]

    L., et al

    Dong, S., Katz, B., Prieto, J. L., et al. 2014, ApJ, 788, 41, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/788/1/41

    2014 doi

  20. [28]

    1995, A&A, 300, 503

    Mutschke, H. 1995, A&A, 300, 503

    1995

  21. [29]

    Draine, B. T. 2003a, ApJ, 598, 1017, doi: 10.1086/379118 —. 2003b, ApJ, 598, 1026, doi: 10.1086/379123

    doi

  22. [30]

    T., & Lee, H

    Draine, B. T., & Lee, H. M. 1984, ApJ, 285, 89, doi: 10.1086/162480

    1984 doi

  23. [31]

    2003, A&A, 409, 205, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20031070

    Drimmel, R., Cabrera-Lavers, A., & L´ opez-Corredoira, M. 2003, A&A, 409, 205, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20031070

    2003 doi

  24. [32]

    Eggleton, P. P. 1983, ApJ, 268, 368, doi: 10.1086/160960

    1983 doi

  25. [33]

    2001, MNRAS, 327, 403, doi: 10.1046/j.1365-8711.2001.04706.x

    Elitzur, M., & Ivezi´ c,ˇZ. 2001, MNRAS, 327, 403, doi: 10.1046/j.1365-8711.2001.04706.x

    2001

  26. [34]

    A., Magnier, E

    Flewelling, H. A., Magnier, E. A., Chambers, K. C., et al. 2020, ApJS, 251, 7, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/abb82d

    2020 doi

  27. [35]

    1986, Mem

    Fujiwara, A. 1986, Mem. Soc. Astron. Italiana, 57, 47 Gaia Collaboration, Prusti, T., de Bruijne, J. H. J., et al. 2016, A&A, 595, A1, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201629272 Gaia Collaboration, Vallenari, A., Brown, A. G. A., et al. 2023, A&A, 674, A1, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202243940

    1986 doi

  28. [36]

    E., Mennickent, R

    Garrido, H. E., Mennickent, R. E., Djuraˇ sevi´ c, G., et al. 2016, MNRAS, 457, 1675, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stw082 19

    2016 doi

  29. [37]

    2011, Acta Astron., 61, 103, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.1108.0446

    Graczyk, D., Soszy´ nski, I., Poleski, R., et al. 2011, Acta Astron., 61, 103, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.1108.0446

    2011 doi arXiv

  30. [38]

    O., & Corbally, J., C

    Gray, R. O., & Corbally, J., C. 2009, Stellar Spectral Classification (Princeton University Press)

    2009

  31. [39]

    2019, ApJ, 887, 93, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab5362

    Finkbeiner, D. 2019, ApJ, 887, 93, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab5362

    2019 doi

  32. [40]

    2012, in IAU

    Grindlay, J., Tang, S., Los, E., & Servillat, M. 2012, in IAU

    2012

  33. [41]

    285, New Horizons in Time Domain Astronomy, ed

    Symposium, Vol. 285, New Horizons in Time Domain Astronomy, ed. E. Griffin, R. Hanisch, & R. Seaman, 29–34, doi: 10.1017/S1743921312000166

    doi

  34. [42]

    A., Vanderbosch, Z

    Guidry, J. A., Vanderbosch, Z. P., Hermes, J. J., et al. 2021, ApJ, 912, 125, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/abee68

    2021 doi

  35. [43]

    2008, A&A, 486, 951, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:200809724

    Gustafsson, B., Edvardsson, B., Eriksson, K., et al. 2008, A&A, 486, 951, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:200809724

    2008 doi

  36. [44]

    A., & Gesicki, K

    Hajduk, M., Zijlstra, A. A., & Gesicki, K. 2008, A&A, 490, L7, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:200810492

    2008 doi

  37. [45]

    J., Hey, D., et al

    Hart, K., Shappee, B. J., Hey, D., et al. 2023, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2304.03791, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2304.03791

    2023 doi arXiv

  38. [46]

    W., et al

    Hattori, S., Foreman-Mackey, D., Hogg, D. W., et al. 2022, AJ, 163, 284, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/ac625a

    2022 doi

  39. [47]

    J., Guidry, J

    Hermes, J. J., Guidry, J. A., Vanderbosch, Z. P., et al. 2025, ApJ, 980, 56, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ada5fd

    2025 doi

  40. [48]

    E., & Bell, K

    Higgins, M. E., & Bell, K. J. 2023, AJ, 165, 141, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/acb20c

    2023 doi

  41. [49]

    W., Howell, S

    Hoard, D. W., Howell, S. B., & Stencel, R. E. 2010, ApJ, 714, 549, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/714/1/549

    2010 doi

  42. [50]

    W., Gaidos, E., Kenworthy, M

    Hodapp, K. W., Gaidos, E., Kenworthy, M. A., et al. 2024, AJ, 167, 85, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/ad1931

    2024 doi

  43. [51]

    Z., Kochanek, C

    Jayasinghe, T., Stanek, K. Z., Kochanek, C. S., et al. 2019, The Astronomer’s Telegram, 12836, 1

    2019

  44. [52]

    D., Jackson, R

    Jeffries, R. D., Jackson, R. J., Wright, N. J., et al. 2023, MNRAS, 523, 802, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad1293

    2023 doi

  45. [53]

    M., For´ es-Toribio, R., et al

    JoHantgen, B., Rowan, D. M., For´ es-Toribio, R., et al. 2025b, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2507.19594. https://arxiv.org/abs/2507.19594

  46. [54]

    E., & Herbst, W

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

    1998 doi

  47. [55]

    2023, Nature, 622, 251, doi: 10.1038/s41586-023-06573-9

    Kenworthy, M., Lock, S., Kennedy, G., et al. 2023, Nature, 622, 251, doi: 10.1038/s41586-023-06573-9

    2023 doi

  48. [56]

    A., Lacour, S., Kraus, A., et al

    Kenworthy, M. A., Lacour, S., Kraus, A., et al. 2015, MNRAS, 446, 411, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stu2067

    2015 doi

  49. [57]

    A., Gonz´ alez Picos, D., Elizondo, E., et al

    Kenworthy, M. A., Gonz´ alez Picos, D., Elizondo, E., et al. 2022, A&A, 666, A61, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202243441

    2022 doi

  50. [58]

    E., Hillenbrand, L

    Kessler-Silacci, J. E., Hillenbrand, L. A., Blake, G. A., & Meyer, M. R. 2005, ApJ, 622, 404, doi: 10.1086/427793

    2005 doi

  51. [59]

    2016, AJ, 151, 68, doi: 10.3847/0004-6256/151/3/68

    Kirk, B., Conroy, K., Prˇ sa, A., et al. 2016, AJ, 151, 68, doi: 10.3847/0004-6256/151/3/68

    2016 doi

  52. [60]

    Kochanek, C. S. 2014a, MNRAS, 444, 2043, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stu1559 —. 2014b, MNRAS, 444, 2043, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stu1559

    doi

  53. [61]

    S., Shappee, B

    Kochanek, C. S., Shappee, B. J., Stanek, K. Z., et al. 2017, PASP, 129, 104502, doi: 10.1088/1538-3873/aa80d9

    2017 doi

  54. [62]

    V., L¨ ohne, T., & Sremˇ cevi´ c, M

    Krivov, A. V., L¨ ohne, T., & Sremˇ cevi´ c, M. 2006, A&A, 455, 509, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20064907

    2006 doi

  55. [63]

    D., Nelson, R

    Larwood, J. D., Nelson, R. P., Papaloizou, J. C. B., & Terquem, C. 1996, MNRAS, 282, 597, doi: 10.1093/mnras/282.2.597

    1996 doi

  56. [64]

    2010, AJ, 140, 1062, doi: 10.1088/0004-6256/140/4/1062

    Laycock, S., Tang, S., Grindlay, J., et al. 2010, AJ, 140, 1062, doi: 10.1088/0004-6256/140/4/1062

    2010 doi

  57. [65]

    2011, ApJ, 731, 53, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/731/1/53

    Mainzer, A., Bauer, J., Grav, T., et al. 2011, ApJ, 731, 53, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/731/1/53

    2011 doi

  58. [66]

    E., Quillen, A

    Mamajek, E. E., Quillen, A. C., Pecaut, M. J., et al. 2012, AJ, 143, 72, doi: 10.1088/0004-6256/143/3/72

    2012 doi

  59. [67]

    2017, ApJ, 835, 77, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/835/1/77

    Marigo, P., Girardi, L., Bressan, A., et al. 2017, ApJ, 835, 77, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/835/1/77

    2017 doi

  60. [68]

    J., Robin, A

    Marshall, D. J., Robin, A. C., Reyl´ e, C., Schultheis, M., & Picaud, S. 2006, A&A, 453, 635, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20053842

    2006 doi

  61. [69]

    P., Ertel, S., Kemper, F., et al

    Marshall, J. P., Ertel, S., Kemper, F., et al. 2023, ApJ, 954, 140, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ace629

    2023 doi

  62. [70]

    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

  63. [71]

    S., Rumpl, W., & Nordsieck, K

    Mathis, J. S., Rumpl, W., & Nordsieck, K. H. 1977, ApJ, 217, 425, doi: 10.1086/155591

    1977 doi

  64. [72]

    2021, ApJ, 923, 90, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac2603

    Melis, C., Olofsson, J., Song, I., et al. 2021, ApJ, 923, 90, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac2603

    2021 doi

  65. [73]

    W., & de Koter, A

    Min, M., Hovenier, J. W., & de Koter, A. 2005, A&A, 432, 909, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20041920

    2005 doi

  66. [74]

    2019, in The La Silla Observatory - From the Inauguration to the Future, 18, doi: 10.5281/zenodo.3245276

    Molinari, E. 2019, in The La Silla Observatory - From the Inauguration to the Future, 18, doi: 10.5281/zenodo.3245276

    2019 doi

  67. [75]

    2023, A&A, 674, A16, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202245330

    Mowlavi, N., Holl, B., Lecoeur-Ta ¨ ıbi, I., et al. 2023, A&A, 674, A16, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202245330

    2023 doi

  68. [76]

    Murakawa, S., De, K., Ashley, M. C. B., et al. 2024, PASP, 136, 104501, doi: 10.1088/1538-3873/ad7db1

    2024 doi

  69. [77]

    Nair, V. R. B., & Denisenko, D. 2024, The Astronomer’s Telegram, 16919, 1

    2024

  70. [78]

    C., & Semkov, E

    Nordhagen, S., Herbst, W., Williams, E. C., & Semkov, E. 2006, ApJ, 646, L151, doi: 10.1086/507028

    2006 doi

  71. [79]

    2020, Icarus, 344, 113346, doi: 10.1016/j.icarus.2019.06.007

    Ohtsuki, K., Kawamura, H., Hirata, N., Daisaka, H., & Kimura, H. 2020, Icarus, 344, 113346, doi: 10.1016/j.icarus.2019.06.007

    2020 doi

  72. [80]

    A., Wolf, C., Bessell, M

    Onken, C. A., Wolf, C., Bessell, M. S., et al. 2024, PASA, 41, e061, doi: 10.1017/pasa.2024.53

    2024 doi

  73. [81]

    P., Rodriguez, J

    Osborn, H. P., Rodriguez, J. E., Kenworthy, M. A., et al. 2017, MNRAS, 471, 740, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stx1249

    2017 doi

  74. [82]

    2019, MNRAS, 485, 5666, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stz725 —

    Pastorelli, G., Marigo, P., Girardi, L., et al. 2019, MNRAS, 485, 5666, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stz725 —. 2020, MNRAS, 498, 3283, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staa2565

    2019 doi

  75. [83]

    Petz, S., & Kochanek, C. S. 2025, MNRAS, 539, 1065, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staf587

    2025 doi

  76. [84]

    M., Contreras, C., Hsiao, E

    Phillips, M. M., Contreras, C., Hsiao, E. Y., et al. 2019, PASP, 131, 014001, doi: 10.1088/1538-3873/aae8bd Pie´ nkowski, D., Ga lan, C., Tomov, T., et al. 2020, A&A, 639, A23, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201937181

    2019 doi

  77. [85]

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

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

    2008 doi

  78. [86]

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

    2013 doi

  79. [87]

    W., Atwood, B., Brewer, D

    Pogge, R. W., Atwood, B., Brewer, D. F., et al. 2010, in Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference

    2010

  80. [88]

    7735, Ground-based and Airborne Instrumentation for Astronomy III, ed

    Series, Vol. 7735, Ground-based and Airborne Instrumentation for Astronomy III, ed. I. S. McLean, S. K. Ramsay, & H. Takami, 77350A, doi: 10.1117/12.857215

    doi

  81. [89]

    1997, Acta Astron., 47, 467, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.astro-ph/9712146

    Pojmanski, G. 1997, Acta Astron., 47, 467, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.astro-ph/9712146

    1997 doi arXiv

  82. [90]

    J., & Zhu, W

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

    2021 doi

  83. [91]

    P., Kostov, V

    Powell, B. P., Kostov, V. B., Rappaport, S. A., et al. 2021, AJ, 162, 299, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/ac2c81

    2021 doi

  84. [92]

    H., Kenworthy, M

    Pramono, T. H., Kenworthy, M. A., & van Boekel, R. 2024, A&A, 688, L11, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202450288

    2024 doi

  85. [93]

    2003, A&A, 412, L43, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20034606

    Przygodda, F., van Boekel, R., `Abrah` am, P., et al. 2003, A&A, 412, L43, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20034606

    2003 doi

  86. [94]

    Rafikov, R. R. 2023, MNRAS, 519, 5607, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stac3411

    2023 doi

  87. [95]

    J., Wyrzykowski, L., Kostrzewa-Rutkowska, Z., et al

    Rattenbury, N. J., Wyrzykowski, L., Kostrzewa-Rutkowska, Z., et al. 2015, MNRAS, 447, L31, doi: 10.1093/mnrasl/slu176

    2015 doi

  88. [96]

    T., Toomey, D

    Rayner, J. T., Toomey, D. W., Onaka, P. M., et al. 2003, PASP, 115, 362, doi: 10.1086/367745

    2003 doi

  89. [97]

    R., Winn, J

    Ricker, G. R., Winn, J. N., Vanderspek, R., et al. 2015, Journal of Astronomical Telescopes, Instruments, and Systems, 1, 014003, doi: 10.1117/1.JATIS.1.1.014003 Rizzo Smith, M., Jayasinghe, T., Stanek, K. Z., et al. 2021, The Astronomer’s Telegram, 14879, 1 Rizzo Smith, M., R...

    2015 doi

  90. [98]

    E., Pepper, J., Stassun, K

    Rodriguez, J. E., Pepper, J., Stassun, K. G., et al. 2015, AJ, 150, 32, doi: 10.1088/0004-6256/150/1/32

    2015 doi

  91. [99]

    E., Stassun, K

    Rodriguez, J. E., Stassun, K. G., Lund, M. B., et al. 2016, AJ, 151, 123, doi: 10.3847/0004-6256/151/5/123 Rodr ´ ıguez-Ledesma, M. V., Mundt, R., Ibrahimov, M., et al. 2012, A&A, 544, A112, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201118649

    2016 doi

  92. [100]

    M., Stanek, K

    Rowan, D. M., Stanek, K. Z., Way, Z., et al. 2021, Research Notes of the American Astronomical Society, 5, 147, doi: 10.3847/2515-5172/ac0c83

    2021 doi

  93. [101]

    M., Jayasinghe, T., Stanek, K

    Rowan, D. M., Jayasinghe, T., Stanek, K. Z., et al. 2022, MNRAS, 517, 2190, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stac2520

    2022 doi

  94. [102]

    K., Minniti, D., Ivanov, V

    Saito, R. K., Minniti, D., Ivanov, V. D., et al. 2019, MNRAS, 482, 5000, doi: 10.1093/mnras/sty3004

    2019 doi

  95. [103]

    F., Barenfeld, S

    Scaringi, S., Manara, C. F., Barenfeld, S. A., et al. 2016, MNRAS, 463, 2265, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stw2155

    2016 doi

  96. [104]

    D., Elston, R., & Lupie, O

    Schmidt, G. D., Elston, R., & Lupie, O. L. 1992, AJ, 104, 1563, doi: 10.1086/116341

    1992 doi

  97. [105]

    J., Prieto, J

    Shappee, B. J., Prieto, J. L., Grupe, D., et al. 2014, ApJ, 788, 48, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/788/1/48

    2014 doi

  98. [106]

    W., Young, D

    Shingles, L., Smith, K. W., Young, D. R., et al. 2021, Transient Name Server AstroNote, 7, 1

    2021

  99. [107]

    Y., Kassis, M., Morris, M., Smith, N., & Bally, J

    Shuping, R. Y., Kassis, M., Morris, M., Smith, N., & Bally, J. 2006, ApJ, 644, L71, doi: 10.1086/505425

    2006 doi

  100. [108]

    D., Shappee, B

    Simon, J. D., Shappee, B. J., Pojma´ nski, G., et al. 2018, ApJ, 853, 77, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aaa0c1

    2018 doi

  101. [109]

    W., Smartt, S

    Smith, K. W., Smartt, S. J., Young, D. R., et al. 2020, PASP, 132, 085002, doi: 10.1088/1538-3873/ab936e

    2020 doi

  102. [110]

    C., Koposov, S

    Smith, L. C., Koposov, S. E., Lucas, P. W., et al. 2021, MNRAS, 505, 1992, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stab1211

    2021 doi

  103. [111]

    P., Torres, G., Lovegrove, J., et al

    Stefanik, R. P., Torres, G., Lovegrove, J., et al. 2010, AJ, 139, 1254, doi: 10.1088/0004-6256/139/3/1254

    2010 doi

  104. [112]

    2014, MNRAS, 445, 4287, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stu2029 20

    Tang, J., Bressan, A., Rosenfield, P., et al. 2014, MNRAS, 445, 4287, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stu2029 20

    2014 doi

  105. [113]

    2013, PASP, 125, 857, doi: 10.1086/671760

    Tang, S., Grindlay, J., Los, E., & Servillat, M. 2013, PASP, 125, 857, doi: 10.1086/671760

    2013 doi

  106. [114]

    2014, in Protostars and Planets VI, ed

    Testi, L., Birnstiel, T., Ricci, L., et al. 2014, in Protostars and Planets VI, ed. H. Beuther, R. S. Klessen, C. P. Dullemond, & T. Henning, 339–361, doi: 10.2458/azu_uapress_9780816531240-ch015

    2014 doi

  107. [115]

    L., Denneau, L., Flewelling, H., et al

    Tonry, J. L., Denneau, L., Flewelling, H., et al. 2018, ApJ, 867, 105, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aae386

    2018 doi

  108. [116]

    2022, MNRAS, 516, 2514, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stac2322

    Torres, G., & Sakano, K. 2022, MNRAS, 516, 2514, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stac2322

    2022 doi

  109. [117]

    Tu, Y., Li, Z.-Y., & Lam, K. H. 2022, MNRAS, 515, 4780, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stac2030

    2022 doi

  110. [118]

    Tzanidakis, A., Davenport, J. R. A., Bellm, E. C., & Wang, Y. 2023, ApJ, 955, 69, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aceda7 van Werkhoven, T. I. M., Kenworthy, M. A., & Mamajek, E. E. 2014, MNRAS, 441, 2845, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stu725

    2023 doi

  111. [119]

    J., Dennihy, E., et al

    Vanderbosch, Z., Hermes, J. J., Dennihy, E., et al. 2020, ApJ, 897, 171, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab9649

    2020 doi

  112. [120]

    Warren, S. G. 1986, Appl. Opt., 25, 2650, doi: 10.1364/AO.25.002650

    1986 doi

  113. [121]

    G., & Brandt, R

    Warren, S. G., & Brandt, R. E. 2008, Journal of Geophysical Research (Atmospheres), 113, D14220, doi: 10.1029/2007JD009744

    2008 doi

  114. [122]

    Z., Kochanek, C

    Way, Z., Stanek, K. Z., Kochanek, C. S., et al. 2019, The Astronomer’s Telegram, 13346, 1 —. 2021, The Astronomer’s Telegram, 14436, 1

    2019

  115. [123]

    N., Hamilton, C

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

    2006 doi

  116. [124]

    2016, A&A, 586, A103, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201526538

    Woitke, P., Min, M., Pinte, C., et al. 2016, A&A, 586, A103, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201526538

    2016 doi

  117. [125]

    G., Duchˆ ene, G., Stapelfeldt, K

    Wolff, S. G., Duchˆ ene, G., Stapelfeldt, K. R., et al. 2021, AJ, 161, 238, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/abeb1d

    2021 doi

  118. [126]

    L., Eisenhardt, P

    Wright, E. L., Eisenhardt, P. R. M., Mainzer, A. K., et al. 2010, AJ, 140, 1868, doi: 10.1088/0004-6256/140/6/1868

    2010 doi

  119. [127]

    L., Adamane Pallathadka, G., Bizyaev, D., et al

    Zakamska, N. L., Adamane Pallathadka, G., Bizyaev, D., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2507.05367, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2507.05367

    2025 doi

  120. [128]

    M., Chincarini, G., Ghisellini, G., et al

    Zerbi, R. M., Chincarini, G., Ghisellini, G., et al. 2001, Astronomische Nachrichten, 322, 275, doi: 10.1002/1521-3994(200112)322:5/6<275:: AID-ASNA275>3.0.CO;2-N

    2001 doi

  121. [129]

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

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

    2022 doi

  122. [130]

    G., Mennella, V., Colangeli, L., & Bussoletti, E

    Zubko, V. G., Mennella, V., Colangeli, L., & Bussoletti, E. 1996, MNRAS, 282, 1321, doi: 10.1093/mnras/282.4.1321 This paper was built using the Open Journal of As- trophysics LATEX template. The OJA is a journal which provides fast and easy peer review for new papers in the a...

    1996 doi

Pith tools

Reviewed August 6, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.