Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 6 minor 96 references

Atmospheric parameters and chemical abundances of young stars with APOGEE. I. Orion star-forming region

T0 review · 3 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-15 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Orion's young G, K, and M stars show uniform sub-solar C, Mg, Si, K, Ti, and Fe abundances, and a median [α/Fe] about 0.10 dex below nearby main-sequence stars, matching Galactic chemical evolution models.

desk verdict A careful, useful abundance catalog for 340 Orion PMS stars, but the headline [alpha/Fe] offset is not yet bulletproof because the comparison sample is not matched in log g. read the letter →

arxiv 2508.20313 v1 pith:JBAPXZ7Z submitted 2025-08-27 astro-ph.SR astro-ph.GA

Ricardo López-Valdivia , Lucía Adame , Carlos G. Román-Zúñiga , Jesús Hernández , Edilberto Sánchez , Itzarel Herrnández-Aburto , José G. Fernández-Trincado , Eduardo Zagala Lagunas
show 14 more authors
Leticia Carigi J. E. Méndez-Delgado Marina Kounkel Javier Serna Richard R. Lane Keivan G. Stassun Sandro Villanova Jinyoung Serena Kim S. J. Wolk Guy S. Stringfellow Jonathan C. Tan A. Roman-Lopes Bárbara Rojas-Ayala Rakesh Pandey
This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.SRastro-ph.GA
keywords youngstellarobjectsAPOGEEOrionstar-formingregionabundancesatmosphericparametersalpha-elementsGalacticchemicalevolutioninfraredspectroscopy
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 analyzes near-infrared APOGEE spectra of 548 young stars in the Orion star-forming region, deriving atmospheric parameters with the TONALLI code and chemical abundances of C, Mg, Si, K, Ti, and Fe for 340 slow rotators using MARCS model atmospheres and BACCHUS. After excluding stars with infrared excess to avoid continuum veiling, it finds sub-solar [X/H] ratios that are consistent across the four groups (Orion A, B, OB1, and λ Ori), implying a chemically homogeneous Orion complex. The median [α/Fe] from Mg, Si, and Ti is −0.14 ± 0.04, about 0.10 dex below nearby main-sequence stars at similar [Fe/H], which agrees with predictions from Galactic chemical evolution models. The paper also reports that the median stellar [C/H] matches the recombination-line carbon abundance of the Orion Nebula. These results matter because they connect the composition of currently forming stars to the chemical history of the interstellar medium and to ongoing Galactic enrichment.

What carries the argument

The analysis is carried by two codes and a sample-cleaning step. TONALLI, a genetic-algorithm spectral fitting code, determines effective temperature, surface gravity, overall metallicity, α-enhancement, and projected rotational velocity by matching MARCS-based synthetic spectra to APOGEE spectra, with a photometric surface-gravity prior from PARSEC pre-main-sequence models. BACCHUS then derives line-by-line abundances for 19 atomic lines of C, Mg, Si, K, Ti, and Fe, and the paper keeps only lines whose abundances show weak Spearman correlation (|r| ≤ 0.35) with effective temperature and surface gravity, to suppress model- and line-list-induced trends. Stars with infrared excess are removed using 2MASS and WISE photometry, because continuum veiling from disks would bias the abundance measurements. The solar reference scale is set by analyzing the Vesta asteroid spectrum in the same way.

What would settle it

Measure the same six elements in Orion stars and in field stars matched in effective temperature, [Fe/H], and surface gravity (for example, using asteroseismic gravities for field stars). If the [α/Fe] offset between Orion and the matched sample disappears, the claimed chemical-evolution signature would be an artifact of the gravity mismatch. A complementary test is to recompute the abundances with non-LTE corrections for K and Fe and with a different model atmosphere grid and see whether the sub-solar, homogeneous pattern survives.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that the Orion complex is chemically homogeneous and slightly metal-poor: young stars in all four subgroups show sub-solar [C/H], [Mg/H], [Si/H], [K/H], [Ti/H], and [Fe/H], with median [α/Fe] = −0.14 ± 0.04, about 0.10 dex lower than local main-sequence stars of similar [Fe/H] measured with the same method. The low [α/Fe] is consistent with the idea that the interstellar gas forming today's Orion stars has already been enriched by previous stellar generations. In addition, the stellar carbon abundance agrees with the ionized-gas carbon abundance of the Orion Nebula derived from recombination lines, supporting the reliability of recombination-line nebular abundances over collisionally excited lines.

Load-bearing premise

The 0.10 dex [α/Fe] offset between Orion and the main-sequence sample assumes that the abundance difference is real chemistry rather than a systematic artifact of the large difference in surface gravity between the two samples, which is not matched.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If the composition is genuinely homogeneous, the earlier debate over self-enrichment in Orion's subgroups is resolved in favor of a well-mixed gas reservoir shared across the complex.
  • The sub-solar, low-α abundances imply that the current Orion ISM has already incorporated the ejecta of earlier stellar generations, so young-star abundances can serve as a tracer of ongoing Galactic chemical enrichment.
  • The agreement between stellar carbon and recombination-line nebular carbon supports recombination lines as reliable abundance tracers in H ii regions, with implications for the long-standing conflict between recombination-line and collisionally-excited-line abundances.
  • The same line-selection and homogeneous-methodology approach can be applied to other APOGEE star-forming regions to map radial and vertical metallicity gradients across the Galactic disk.
  • Extending the analysis to stars with higher rotation and with infrared excess, once deblending techniques improve, will test whether the chemistry of disk-bearing and fast-rotating young stars matches that of the clean sample studied here.

Reading between the lines

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

  • A natural testable extension is to compare Orion's [α/Fe] offset with other young clusters and star-forming regions along the Radcliffe Wave to see whether the low α pattern traces a local ISM history rather than a universal young-star signature.
  • If the low [α/Fe] is real, it may carry information about the timescale of gas processing: a place on the Tinsley–Wallerstein diagram below the thin-disk locus could indicate a higher contribution of Type Ia supernovae to the local ISM, a claim that can be checked with age-dated stellar populations.
  • The line-selection procedure itself may bias the comparison: by discarding lines with trends in Teff and log g, the surviving 19 lines are the ones least sensitive to parameter errors, so a systematic gravity error might still be hidden; testing with another line set would clarify this.
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 / 6 minor

Summary. The paper determines atmospheric parameters for 548 young stars in the Orion complex (Orion A, B, OB1, and λ Ori) from APOGEE-2 DR17 spectra using the TONALLI code with a photometric log g prior, and derives C, Mg, Si, K, Ti, and Fe abundances for 340 slow rotators (v sin i ≤ 30 km/s) with BACCHUS, MARCS 1D LTE models, and 19 selected atomic lines, after excluding stars with infrared excess. The authors report sub-solar [X/H] ratios consistent across the four Orion groups, a median [α/Fe] = -0.14 ± 0.04 that is about 0.10 dex below their re-derived values for nearby main-sequence stars (from the same group's López-Valdivia et al. 2024 sample), an interpretation in terms of Galactic chemical evolution, and agreement between the median [C/H] of Orion A and the Orion Nebula recombination-line value. The paper is the first in a planned series and includes extensive validation: Monte Carlo error propagation over atmospheric parameter uncertainties, a Vesta-based solar reference, comparisons with ASPCAP DR17, ANet III, and Gaia DR3, non-LTE correction checks, and bootstrap Kolmogorov–Smirnov tests.

Significance. If the results hold, the paper is a strong contribution: a homogeneous chemical characterization of a benchmark star-forming complex, with the differential [α/Fe] measurement and the gas-star carbon comparison directly relevant to Galactic chemical evolution and the nebular CEL/RL discrepancy debate. The pipeline is described with unusual transparency (TONALLI settings, BACCHUS configuration, Monte Carlo propagation, external cross-checks, Vesta solar anchor, non-LTE checks), and the paper is explicit about its own limitations. The central differential claim, however, rests on a comparison in which the Orion sample and the main-sequence reference differ by roughly 0.6–0.9 dex in median log g, with no explicit test for residual gravity-dependent systematics in the 19-line, 1D LTE MARCS/BACCHUS analysis; the paper itself concedes this possibility in Section 5. Because the abstract and conclusions adopt the 0.10 dex offset as a chemical-evolution signature, this evaluation requires a dedicated gravity-control test and tighter [Fe/H] matching before the claim can be regarded as established.

major comments (3)
  1. [Section 5; Tables 4–5; Fig. 9] The headline result — median [α/Fe] = -0.14 ± 0.04 for Orion versus -0.04 ± 0.04 for nearby main-sequence stars — is built on samples separated by about 0.92 dex in median log g for M-type stars (3.86 ± 0.17 versus 4.78 ± 0.05) and about 0.62 dex for K-type stars (4.06 ± 0.13 versus 4.68 ± 0.04). The line-selection procedure of Section 4.1 removes lines with abundance–Teff or abundance–log g trends only inside Orion's own gravity range; it does not calibrate residual gravity sensitivity across the gap separating the two samples. The 19-line, 1D LTE MARCS/BACCHUS analysis therefore has no validation at the low-gravity end, and the paper itself states in Section 5 that the observed differences 'might be, at least partially, attributed to differences in log g.' The stress-test concern that the 0.10 dex offset could be a gravity artifact is, on my reading of the manuscript, valid and load-bearing. I ask for an explicit control: for example, a synthetic-spectrum differential test in which the 19 lines are measured with the identical pipeline on model spectra at fixed Teff and [Fe/H] for log g = 3.8 versus 4.8, quantifying any model-induced [α/Fe] shift; alternatively, a re-derivation of the reference sample restricted to log g ≤ 4.3, or a comparison against a young, higher-gravity sample. Without such a test, the claimed Galactic chemical evolution signature is not yet distinguished from a gravity-dependent model systematic.
  2. [Table 5; Abstract] The comparison is advertised as being made 'at similar [Fe/H]' (abstract) and both samples are confined to |[Fe/H]| ≤ 0.5, but in the M-type bin — the bin carrying the headline 0.10 dex difference — the median [Fe/H] values are -0.04 for Orion and -0.18 for the main-sequence sample, a 0.14 dex offset in the matching quantity itself; the K-type bin is reasonably matched (-0.04 versus -0.05). The difference in [α/Fe] is, numerically, mostly a consequence of this [Fe/H] offset: the median [Mg/H], [Si/H], and [Ti/H] are actually slightly higher in Orion than in the main-sequence sample, while [Fe/H] is higher by 0.14 dex. Since [α/Fe] varies systematically with [Fe/H] in the solar neighborhood, the authors should present the [α/Fe] comparison in narrower [Fe/H] bins (e.g., 0.2 dex wide) or as a function of [Fe/H], and should temper the abstract's 'similar [Fe/H]' wording to reflect the actual distributions.
  3. [Section 4.1 and 4.1.1] The final abundance set depends on two ad hoc selection steps: the Spearman threshold |r ± σ_r| < 0.35 for line retention (explicitly acknowledged in the text as arbitrary) and the post hoc [X/H] reporting window between -0.75 and +0.5 dex. The paper does not state how many individual measurements were excluded by the reporting window, nor does it test the sensitivity of the median [X/H] and [α/Fe] values to the correlation threshold. Please report the number of clipped measurements and a threshold scan (e.g., |r| ≤ 0.25, 0.35, 0.45) showing how the median [X/H] per group and the median [α/Fe] change. This is needed to confirm that the homogeneity result and the α-deficit are not artifacts of a single, arbitrary cut.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Section 3.2] The sentence about ASPCAP DR17 log g values clustering near 4.5 dex appears twice in the same paragraph ('which appears slightly too high' and then 'which would be too high for pre-main sequence stars'); the duplicated wording should be merged.
  2. [Table 2; Section 6; Section 5] Small editorial issues: 'Right Ascencion' should be 'Right Ascension'; the Section 6 heading 'SUMMARY AND REMARK CONCLUSIONS' should be 'SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS'; and 'the most objects with v sin i between 45 and 50 km/s' should be 'most objects'.
  3. [Figure 1; Section 3.2] Figure 1 states that 559 young stars are analyzed, while the abstract and Section 6 quote 548 after quality cuts; the caption should state that this is the number before the parameter-quality filtering described in Section 3.2.
  4. [Section 5; Section 6] The M42 comparison quotes three solar scales (Grevesse, Asplund & Sauval 2007; Asplund et al. 2021; Lodders et al. 2025) in Section 5, but Section 6 says the agreement holds 'when the logarithmic abundance in M42 is referenced to the solar value from Lodders (2003)'; please make the solar reference consistent across abstract, Section 5, and Section 6.
  5. [Figure 7] The caption refers to 'the red star and dashed line' marking the solar abundance for each line, but the marker is not clearly visible in the printed figure; please enlarge or annotate it.
  6. [Author list; Section 5] The author name appears as 'Itzarel Herrnández-Aburto' in the author list but as 'I. Hernández-Aburto' in the text; the spelling should be consistent.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the abundance and [alpha/Fe] claims are derived from spectra via an independent pipeline and compared with external references.

full rationale

The paper's derivation chain is self-contained in the relevant sense. Atmospheric parameters are fitted from APOGEE spectra with TONALLI and validated against three independent sources (ASPCAP DR17, ANet III, and Gaia DR3). Abundances are computed line-by-line with BACCHUS and MARCS models relative to a Vesta solar reference, so the [X/H] zero-point is tied to an external standard rather than to the Orion sample itself. The comparison sample from Lopez-Valdivia et al. (2024) is re-analyzed in this work with the same abundance methodology, not taken as a pre-fitted result, and the central [alpha/Fe] offset is therefore a measured difference between two independently processed samples. The paper's own caveat that the offset 'might be, at least partially, attributed to differences in log g' is an explicit systematic-error limitation, not a circular reduction: no target quantity is defined in terms of a fitted parameter, and no prediction is equivalent to an input by construction. Self-citations to TONALLI, TEPITZIN, and the 2024 comparison sample are methodological or sample-defining, and they are not used to forbid alternatives or to import a uniqueness theorem. The nebular C/H comparison and the agreement with Galactic chemical evolution models are external checks. Overall, no circular step can be exhibited from the text.

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

The analysis rests on standard 1D LTE MARCS modeling, the TONALLI/TEPITZIN fitting framework, and the published membership catalog; no new physical entities are introduced. Free parameters are the hand-chosen line-selection threshold, the post-hoc abundance clip, the photospheric color polynomial used for sample selection, and the width of the log g prior.

free parameters (4)
  • Teff/log g correlation threshold for line selection = 0.35
    Lines with Spearman correlation r +/- sigma beyond +/- 0.35 in abundance versus Teff or log g were excluded; the paper explicitly says this threshold is arbitrary and affects which 19 lines survive.
  • [X/H] reporting window = -0.75 to +0.5 dex
    Abundance ratios outside this range were considered incompatible with the young Orion population and were not reported, a post-hoc clipping that can bias median estimates.
  • (K-W3) photospheric polynomial coefficients a-e = a=0.5138, b=-0.2258, c=0.0713, d=-0.0091, e=0.0004
    Used to identify infrared excess and exclude stars with circumstellar disks; fitted to main-sequence photometry and hence defines the working sample.
  • log g prior width in TONALLI = 1.0 dex
    A flat prior of 1 dex total width was adopted for the TEPITZIN photometric log g; the choice affects the fitted surface gravity and therefore abundances. The code is unpublished.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption MARCS 1D LTE model atmospheres and the Jonsson et al. (2020) synthetic grid accurately represent the H-band spectra of pre-main-sequence GKM stars down to about 3100 K.
    Used in both TONALLI and BACCHUS; departures from LTE, spots, or veiling would bias abundances at the 0.1 dex level. Non-LTE corrections are cited as small from external services.
  • domain assumption The clustering-based membership catalog of Roman-Zuniga et al. (2023) correctly identifies bona fide Orion members and is free of significant field contamination.
    Defines the sample in Section 2; contamination would dilute or bias abundance medians.
  • domain assumption TEPITZIN, after dereddening with massage, provides accurate photometric log g priors despite variable extinction in Orion.
    Section 3.1; the code is cited as in preparation and cannot be independently checked.
  • domain assumption The adopted solar reference composition (Grevesse, Asplund and Sauval 2007) and the Vesta-based solar abundances are the correct zero points for [X/H].
    Section 4.1.1; comparisons with nebular abundances are sensitive to the solar scale.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Atmospheric parameters and chemical abundances of young stars with APOGEE. I. Orion star-forming region." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/JBAPXZ7Z

@misc{pith2026250820313,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Atmospheric parameters and chemical abundances of young stars with APOGEE. I. Orion star-forming region},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/JBAPXZ7Z}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2508.20313}
}
abstract

We derive atmospheric parameters and chemical abundances in young G-, K-, and M-type stars (temperatures between 6500 and 3100 K) using infrared APOGEE-2 spectra. Atmospheric parameters were determined for 548 young stars in the Orion complex (Orion A, B, OB1, and $\lambda$ Ori) using the TONALLI code. For 340 slow rotators v sini $\leq$ 30 km s$^{-1}$), we derived C, Mg, Si, K, Ti, and Fe abundances using 19 atomic lines, MARCS model atmospheres, and BACCHUS. To mitigate the impact of circumstellar material, we excluded stars with infrared excess identified via 2MASS and WISE photometry. We find sub-solar [X/H] abundance ratios, consistent across elements and among all four groups, suggesting a chemically homogeneous Orion complex. We computed [$\alpha$/Fe] from [Mg/Fe], [Si/Fe], and [Ti/Fe], obtaining a median of $-0.14 \pm 0.04$, about 0.10 dex lower than the value for nearby main-sequence stars ($-0.04 \pm 0.04$) at similar [Fe/H]. This result aligns with predictions from Galactic chemical evolution models. Furthermore, the median [C/H] abundance we derived for Orion agrees with previous estimations based on the analysis of the ionized gas of the Orion nebula. This work sets the stage for extending the analysis to stars with circumstellar material and higher rotational velocities, which will not only improve our understanding of Orion, but also provide critical insight into the formation and evolution of young stars, as well as the chemical evolution of the Milky Way.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2508.20313 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Spatial distribution of the 559 young stars located in the Orion star-forming region analyzed in this work. photometry may be affected by an image artifact. We found that 559 sources had reliable (qph equal to A, B, or C) and unaffected (ccf = 0) WISE photometry and (𝐾 −𝑊3) consistent, within 1.5 times their respective error, with their corresponding photospheric value. These stars comprised our final working sample… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Kiel diagrams obtained with TONALLI for the 548 stars of Orion split into the four groups analyzed. As a reference, we include, as color lines, evolutionary models of Marigo et al. (2017) for solar metallicity at log(Age) = 6.0, 6.4, 6.8, and 7.2, corresponding roughly to 1, 2.5, 6.3, and 15 Myr, respectively. The numbers enclosed in the parentheses are the sources included in each stellar group. up to 1.0 dex. This… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Small spectral window of three different observed spectra (gray crosses). In each panel, we overplot the synthetic spectra corresponding to the best-fit atmospheric parameters derived with TONALLI. The upper and middle panels show good-quality fits, while in the bottom panel the fit quality deteriorates as TONALLI approaches the upper 𝑣 sin 𝑖 limit of the grid. stars span Teff and log g ranges consistent with expect… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (6 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Comparison of the TONALLI Teff with the calibrated estimates of ASPCAP DR17 (Abdurro’uf et al. 2022), ANet III (Sizemore et al. 2024) and Gaia DR3 (Gaia Collaboration et al. 2023). The number within the parenthesis is the stars included in each comparison. The lower pa…
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: The same as [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: The same as [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Logarithmic abundance values found with BACCHUS for three dif￾ferent carbon lines (C3, C4, C5) are shown as a function of Teff (left) and log g (right). The number in parentheses indicates the wavelength of each line, while 𝑟 represents the mean Spearman correlation co…
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Boxplot of the [X/H] abundance ratios derived in this work for each Orion group. The box encloses data between the inter-quartile range (IQR) while the whiskers extend from the box to 1.5×IQR. The orange horizontal line is the median value. The total number of stars fo…
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Tinsley-Wallerstein diagram for the Orion members (black crosses) and the main-sequence stars (gray points) of López-Valdivia et al. (2024) using the abundances determined in this study for M-type stars (upper panel) and K-type stars (bottom panel). The [𝛼/Fe] ratio co…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

96 extracted references · 12 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Abdurro'uf et al., 2022, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4365/ac4414 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2022ApJS..259...35A 259, 35

    doi:10.3847/1538-4365/ac4414 2022

  2. [2]

    Adame L., Rom \'a n-Z \'u \ n iga C., Hern \'a ndez J., L \'o pez-Valdivia R., S \'a nchez E., 2024, @doi [RAS Techniques and Instruments] 10.1093/rasti/rzae052 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024RASTI...3..771A 3, 771

    work page doi:10.1093/rasti/rzae052 2024

  3. [3]

    Almeida A., et al., 2023, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4365/acda98 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023ApJS..267...44A 267, 44

    doi:10.3847/1538-4365/acda98 2023

  4. [4]

    Alves J., et al., 2020, @doi [ ] 10.1038/s41586-019-1874-z , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020Natur.578..237A 578, 237

    doi:10.1038/s41586-019-1874-z 2020

  5. [5]

    M., Grevesse N., 2021, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/202140445 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2021A&A...653A.141A 653, A141

    Asplund M., Amarsi A. M., Grevesse N., 2021, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/202140445 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2021A&A...653A.141A 653, A141

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202140445 2021

  6. [6]

    Bergemann M., Kudritzki R.-P., Plez B., Davies B., Lind K., Gazak Z., 2012, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/751/2/156 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2012ApJ...751..156B 751, 156

    doi:10.1088/0004-637x/751/2/156 2012

  7. [7]

    Bergemann M., Kudritzki R.-P., W \"u rl M., Plez B., Davies B., Gazak Z., 2013, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/764/2/115 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2013ApJ...764..115B 764, 115

    doi:10.1088/0004-637x/764/2/115 2013

  8. [8]

    Bergemann M., Kudritzki R.-P., Gazak Z., Davies B., Plez B., 2015, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/804/2/113 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015ApJ...804..113B 804, 113

    doi:10.1088/0004-637x/804/2/113 2015

Show all 96 references
  1. [9]

    Biazzo K., Randich S., Palla F., Brice \ n o C., 2011, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201116621 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2011A&A...530A..19B 530, A19

    2011 doi

  2. [10]

    M., Covino E., Sterzik M

    Biazzo K., Alcal \'a J. M., Covino E., Sterzik M. F., Guillout P., Chavarr \' a-K. C., Frasca A., Raddi R., 2012, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201118379 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2012A&A...542A.115B 542, A115

    2012 doi

  3. [11]

    Blaauw A., 1964, @doi [ ] 10.1146/annurev.aa.02.090164.001241 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1964ARA&A...2..213B 2, 213

    1964

  4. [12]

    R., et al., 2017, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-3881/aa7567 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017AJ....154...28B 154, 28

    Blanton M. R., et al., 2017, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-3881/aa7567 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017AJ....154...28B 154, 28

    2017 doi

  5. [13]

    A., Gieren W., Ho I

    Bresolin F., Kudritzki R.-P., Urbaneja M. A., Gieren W., Ho I. T., Pietrzy \'n ski G., 2016, @doi [ ] 10.3847/0004-637X/830/2/64 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2016ApJ...830...64B 830, 64

    2016 doi

  6. [14]

    Brooke J. S. A., Bernath P. F., Western C. M., Sneden C., Af s ar M., Li G., Gordon I. E., 2016, @doi [ ] 10.1016/j.jqsrt.2015.07.021 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2016JQSRT.168..142B 168, 142

    2016 doi

  7. [15]

    Brown A. G. A., Hartmann D., Burton W. B., 1995, @doi [ ] 10.48550/arXiv.astro-ph/9503016 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1995A&A...300..903B 300, 903

    1995 doi arXiv

  8. [16]

    Cant \'o J., Curiel S., Mart \' nez-G \'o mez E., 2009, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/200911740 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2009A&A...501.1259C 501, 1259

    2009 doi

  9. [17]

    Chen Y., Bressan A., Girardi L., Marigo P., Kong X., Lanza A., 2015, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stv1281 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015MNRAS.452.1068C 452, 1068

    2015 doi

  10. [18]

    Chen Y., et al., 2023, @doi [Nature Astronomy] 10.1038/s41550-023-01953-7 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023NatAs...7..771C 7, 771

    2023 doi

  11. [19]

    Cottaar M., et al., 2014, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/794/2/125 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014ApJ...794..125C 794, 125

    2014 doi

  12. [20]

    Cottaar M., et al., 2015, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/807/1/27 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015ApJ...807...27C 807, 27

    2015 doi

  13. [21]

    Cui X.-Q., et al., 2012, @doi [Research in Astronomy and Astrophysics] 10.1088/1674-4527/12/9/003 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2012RAA....12.1197C 12, 1197

    2012 doi

  14. [22]

    L., 1994, @doi [ ] 10.1086/174053 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1994ApJ...426..170C 426, 170

    Cunha K., Lambert D. L., 1994, @doi [ ] 10.1086/174053 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1994ApJ...426..170C 426, 170

    1994 doi

  15. [23]

    V., Lambert D

    Cunha K., Smith V. V., Lambert D. L., 1998, @doi [ ] 10.1086/305118 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1998ApJ...493..195C 493, 195

    1998 doi

  16. [24]

    arXiv:2504.08933

    Curti M., 2025, @doi [arXiv e-prints] 10.48550/arXiv.2504.08933 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2025arXiv250408933C p. arXiv:2504.08933

    2025 doi arXiv

  17. [25]

    M., et al., 2003, VizieR Online Data Catalog, https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2003yCat.2246....0C p

    Cutri R. M., et al., 2003, VizieR Online Data Catalog, https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2003yCat.2246....0C p. II/246

    2003

  18. [26]

    M., et al., 2013, Explanatory Supplement to the AllWISE Data Release Products , Explanatory Supplement to the AllWISE Data Release Products, by R

    Cutri R. M., et al., 2013, Explanatory Supplement to the AllWISE Data Release Products , Explanatory Supplement to the AllWISE Data Release Products, by R. M. Cutri et al

    2013

  19. [27]

    G., Pallavicini R., 2009, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/200811241 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2009A&A...501..973D 501, 973

    D'Orazi V., Randich S., Flaccomio E., Palla F., Sacco G. G., Pallavicini R., 2009, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/200811241 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2009A&A...501..973D 501, 973

    2009 doi

  20. [28]

    Da Rio N., et al., 2016, @doi [ ] 10.3847/0004-637X/818/1/59 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2016ApJ...818...59D 818, 59

    2016 doi

  21. [29]

    Da Rio N., et al., 2017, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/aa7a5b , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017ApJ...845..105D 845, 105

    2017 doi

  22. [30]

    M., et al., 2015, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stv327 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015MNRAS.449.2604D 449, 2604

    De Silva G. M., et al., 2015, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stv327 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015MNRAS.449.2604D 449, 2604

    2015 doi

  23. [31]

    T., Peimbert A., Rodr \' guez M., 2004, @doi [ ] 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2004.08313.x , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2004MNRAS.355..229E 355, 229

    Esteban C., Peimbert M., Garc \' a-Rojas J., Ruiz M. T., Peimbert A., Rodr \' guez M., 2004, @doi [ ] 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2004.08313.x , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2004MNRAS.355..229E 355, 229

    2004

  24. [32]

    E., Garc \' a-Rojas J., Arellano-C \'o rdova K

    Esteban C., M \'e ndez-Delgado J. E., Garc \' a-Rojas J., Arellano-C \'o rdova K. Z., 2022, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/ac6b38 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2022ApJ...931...92E 931, 92

    2022 doi

  25. [33]

    A., et al., 2017, @doi [ ] 10.1088/1538-3873/aa77e0 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017PASP..129h4201F 129, 084201

    Fernandez M. A., et al., 2017, @doi [ ] 10.1088/1538-3873/aa77e0 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017PASP..129h4201F 129, 084201

    2017 doi

  26. [34]

    Fischer W., Edwards S., Hillenbrand L., Kwan J., 2011, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/730/2/73 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2011ApJ...730...73F 730, 73

    2011 doi

  27. [35]

    B., et al., 2015, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/799/2/136 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015ApJ...799..136F 799, 136

    Foster J. B., et al., 2015, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/799/2/136 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015ApJ...799..136F 799, 136

    2015 doi

  28. [36]

    Gaia Collaboration et al., 2023, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/202243940 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023A&A...674A...1G 674, A1

    2023 doi

  29. [37]

    Gilmore G., et al., 2012, The Messenger, https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2012Msngr.147...25G 147, 25

    2012

  30. [38]

    F., 2008, The Observation and Analysis of Stellar Photospheres

    Gray D. F., 2008, The Observation and Analysis of Stellar Photospheres . Cambridge University Press

    2008

  31. [39]

    J., 2007, @doi [ ] 10.1007/s11214-007-9173-7 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2007SSRv..130..105G 130, 105

    Grevesse N., Asplund M., Sauval A. J., 2007, @doi [ ] 10.1007/s11214-007-9173-7 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2007SSRv..130..105G 130, 105

    2007 doi

  32. [40]

    Grilo V., et al., 2024, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stae2209 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024MNRAS.534.3005G 534, 3005

    2024 doi

  33. [41]

    E., Alves J., Meingast S., Herbst-Kiss G., 2021, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/202038913 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2021A&A...647A..91G 647, A91

    Gro schedl J. E., Alves J., Meingast S., Herbst-Kiss G., 2021, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/202038913 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2021A&A...647A..91G 647, A91

    2021 doi

  34. [42]

    Guiglion G., et al., 2020, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/202038271 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020A&A...644A.168G 644, A168

    2020 doi

  35. [43]

    G., Nordlund A ., Plez B., 2008, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361:200809724 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2008A&A...486..951G 486, 951

    Gustafsson B., Edvardsson B., Eriksson K., J rgensen U. G., Nordlund A ., Plez B., 2008, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361:200809724 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2008A&A...486..951G 486, 951

    2008 doi

  36. [44]

    Hackshaw Z., Hawkins K., Filion C., Horta D., Laporte C. F. P., Carr C., Price-Whelan A. M., 2024, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/ad900e , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024ApJ...977..143H 977, 143

    2024 doi

  37. [45]

    Hawkins K., 2023, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stad1244 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023MNRAS.525.3318H 525, 3318

    2023 doi

  38. [46]

    J., Hillenbrand L

    Herczeg G. J., Hillenbrand L. A., 2014, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/786/2/97 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014ApJ...786...97H 786, 97

    2014 doi

  39. [47]

    Hern \'a ndez J., et al., 2023, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-3881/acc467 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023AJ....165..205H 165, 205

    2023 doi

  40. [48]

    R., Timmes F

    Hinkel N. R., Timmes F. X., Young P. A., Pagano M. D., Turnbull M. C., 2014, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-6256/148/3/54 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014AJ....148...54H 148, 54

    2014 doi

  41. [49]

    J \"o nsson H., et al., 2020, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-3881/aba592 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020AJ....160..120J 160, 120

    2020 doi

  42. [50]

    H., 1949, @doi [ ] 10.1086/145217 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1949ApJ...110..424J 110, 424

    Joy A. H., 1949, @doi [ ] 10.1086/145217 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1949ApJ...110..424J 110, 424

    1949 doi

  43. [51]

    A., et al., 2017, @doi [arXiv e-prints] 10.48550/arXiv.1711.03234 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017arXiv171103234K p

    Kollmeier J. A., et al., 2017, @doi [arXiv e-prints] 10.48550/arXiv.1711.03234 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017arXiv171103234K p. arXiv:1711.03234

    2017 doi arXiv

  44. [52]

    Kos J., et al., 2021, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stab1767 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2021MNRAS.506.4232K 506, 4232

    2021 doi

  45. [53]

    arXiv:2501.06140

    Kos J., et al., 2025, @doi [arXiv e-prints] 10.48550/arXiv.2501.06140 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2025arXiv250106140K p. arXiv:2501.06140

    2025 doi

  46. [54]

    Kounkel M., et al., 2018, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-3881/aad1f1 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018AJ....156...84K 156, 84

    2018 doi

  47. [55]

    E., Rothman L

    Li G., Gordon I. E., Rothman L. S., Tan Y., Hu S.-M., Kassi S., Campargue A., Medvedev E. S., 2015, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0067-0049/216/1/15 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015ApJS..216...15L 216, 15

    2015 doi

  48. [56]

    Lodders K., 2003, @doi [ ] 10.1086/375492 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2003ApJ...591.1220L 591, 1220

    2003 doi

  49. [57]

    Lodders K., Bergemann M., Palme H., 2025, @doi [ ] 10.1007/s11214-025-01146-w , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2025SSRv..221...23L 221, 23

    2025 doi

  50. [58]

    L \'o pez-Valdivia R., et al., 2024, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stae1809 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024MNRAS.533..395L 533, 395

    2024 doi

  51. [59]

    R., et al., 2017, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-3881/aa784d , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017AJ....154...94M 154, 94

    Majewski S. R., et al., 2017, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-3881/aa784d , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017AJ....154...94M 154, 94

    2017 doi

  52. [60]

    Marigo P., et al., 2017, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/835/1/77 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017ApJ...835...77M 835, 77

    2017 doi

  53. [61]

    L., et al., 2017, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stw2835 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017MNRAS.465.3203M 465, 3203

    Martell S. L., et al., 2017, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stw2835 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017MNRAS.465.3203M 465, 3203

    2017 doi

  54. [62]

    Martinez-Medina L., Poggio E., Moreno-Hilario E., 2025, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnrasl/slaf075 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2025MNRAS.542L..94M 542, L94

    2025 doi

  55. [63]

    Masseron T., Merle T., Hawkins K., 2016, BACCHUS: Brussels Automatic Code for Characterizing High accUracy Spectra , Astrophysics Source Code Library, record ascl:1605.004 ( @eprint ascl 1605.004 )

    2016

  56. [64]

    E., Amayo A., Arellano-C \'o rdova K

    M \'e ndez-Delgado J. E., Amayo A., Arellano-C \'o rdova K. Z., Esteban C., Garc \' a-Rojas J., Carigi L., Delgado-Inglada G., 2022, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stab3782 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2022MNRAS.510.4436M 510, 4436

    2022 doi

  57. [65]

    E., Esteban C., Garc \' a-Rojas J., Kreckel K., Peimbert M., 2023, @doi [ ] 10.1038/s41586-023-05956-2 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023Natur.618..249M 618, 249

    M \'e ndez-Delgado J. E., Esteban C., Garc \' a-Rojas J., Kreckel K., Peimbert M., 2023, @doi [ ] 10.1038/s41586-023-05956-2 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023Natur.618..249M 618, 249

    2023 doi

  58. [66]

    M \'e ndez-Delgado J. E., Esteban C., Garc \' a-Rojas J., Kreckel K., Peimbert M., 2024a, @doi [Nature Astronomy] 10.1038/s41550-024-02198-8 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024NatAs...8..275M 8, 275

    doi

  59. [67]

    E., et al., 2024b, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/202450928 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024A&A...690A.248M 690, A248

    M \'e ndez-Delgado J. E., et al., 2024b, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/202450928 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024A&A...690A.248M 690, A248

    doi

  60. [68]

    Muzerolle J., Calvet N., Hartmann L., D'Alessio P., 2003, @doi [ ] 10.1086/379921 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2003ApJ...597L.149M 597, L149

    2003 doi

  61. [69]

    P., Mannings V., 2001, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361:20010334 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2001A&A...371..186N 371, 186

    Natta A., Prusti T., Neri R., Wooden D., Grinin V. P., Mannings V., 2001, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361:20010334 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2001A&A...371..186N 371, 186

    2001 doi

  62. [70]

    C., Sousa S

    Neves V., Santos N. C., Sousa S. G., Correia A. C. M., Israelian G., 2009, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/200811328 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2009A&A...497..563N 497, 563

    2009 doi

  63. [71]

    Olander T., Heiter U., Kochukhov O., 2021, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/202039747 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2021A&A...649A.103O 649, A103

    2021 doi

  64. [72]

    Olney R., et al., 2020, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-3881/ab7a97 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020AJ....159..182O 159, 182

    2020 doi

  65. [73]

    Osorio Y., Allende Prieto C., Hubeny I., M \'e sz \'a ros S., Shetrone M., 2020, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201937054 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020A&A...637A..80O 637, A80

    2020 doi

  66. [74]

    L., 1996, @doi [ ] 10.1086/178012 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1996ApJ...471..847P 471, 847

    Padgett D. L., 1996, @doi [ ] 10.1086/178012 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1996ApJ...471..847P 471, 847

    1996 doi

  67. [75]

    Pastorelli G., et al., 2020, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/staa2565 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020MNRAS.498.3283P 498, 3283

    2020 doi

  68. [76]

    Peimbert M., 1967, @doi [ ] 10.1086/149385 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1967ApJ...150..825P 150, 825

    1967 doi

  69. [77]

    Plez B., 2012, Turbospectrum: Code for spectral synthesis , Astrophysics Source Code Library, record ascl:1205.004 ( @eprint ascl 1205.004 )

    2012

  70. [78]

    Poggio E., et al., 2022, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/202244361 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2022A&A...666L...4P 666, L4

    2022 doi

  71. [79]

    M., Jenkins E

    Ritchey A. M., Jenkins E. B., Shull J. M., Savage B. D., Federman S. R., Lambert D. L., 2023, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/acda25 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023ApJ...952...57R 952, 57

    2023 doi

  72. [80]

    Roman-Lopes A., et al., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/ab0305 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019ApJ...873...66R 873, 66

    2019 doi

  73. [81]

    G., et al., 2023, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-3881/aca3a4 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023AJ....165...51R 165, 51

    Rom \'a n-Z \'u \ n iga C. G., et al., 2023, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-3881/aca3a4 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023AJ....165...51R 165, 51

    2023 doi

  74. [82]

    C., Melo C., James D

    Santos N. C., Melo C., James D. J., Gameiro J. F., Bouvier J., Gomes J. I., 2008, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361:20079083 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2008A&A...480..889S 480, 889

    2008 doi

  75. [83]

    Sim \'o n-D \' az S., 2010, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/200913120 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2010A&A...510A..22S 510, A22

    2010 doi

  76. [84]

    Sizemore L., Llanes D., Kounkel M., Hutchinson B., Stassun K., Chandra V., 2024, Outputs from APOGEE Net and BOSS Net for LAMOST and legacy SDSS I-IV optical and NIR spectra , @doi 10.5281/zenodo.10456416 , https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.10456416

    2024 doi

  77. [85]

    V., et al., 2021, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-3881/abefdc , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2021AJ....161..254S 161, 254

    Smith V. V., et al., 2021, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-3881/abefdc , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2021AJ....161..254S 161, 254

    2021 doi

  78. [86]

    S., Brooke J

    Sneden C., Lucatello S., Ram R. S., Brooke J. S. A., Bernath P., 2014, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0067-0049/214/2/26 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014ApJS..214...26S 214, 26

    2014 doi

  79. [87]

    Sprague D., et al., 2022, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-3881/ac4de7 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2022AJ....163..152S 163, 152

    2022 doi

  80. [88]

    G., Mathieu R

    Stassun K. G., Mathieu R. D., Mazeh T., Vrba F. J., 1999, @doi [ ] 10.1086/300881 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1999AJ....117.2941S 117, 2941

    1999 doi

  81. [89]

    298, GAIA Spectroscopy: Science and Technology

    Steinmetz M., 2003, in Munari U., ed., Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series Vol. 298, GAIA Spectroscopy: Science and Technology. p. 381 ( @eprint arXiv astro-ph/0211417 ), @doi 10.48550/arXiv.astro-ph/0211417

    2003 doi arXiv

  82. [90]

    Tang J., Bressan A., Rosenfield P., Slemer A., Marigo P., Girardi L., Bianchi L., 2014, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stu2029 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014MNRAS.445.4287T 445, 4287

    2014 doi

  83. [91]

    C., Melo C., Ammler-von Eiff M., Torres C

    Viana Almeida P., Santos N. C., Melo C., Ammler-von Eiff M., Torres C. A. O., Quast G. R., Gameiro J. F., Sterzik M., 2009, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/200811194 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2009A&A...501..965V 501, 965

    2009 doi

  84. [92]

    K., Dufour R

    Walter D. K., Dufour R. J., Hester J. J., 1992, @doi [ ] 10.1086/171779 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1992ApJ...397..196W 397, 196

    1992 doi

  85. [93]

    L., et al., 2010, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-6256/140/6/1868 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2010AJ....140.1868W 140, 1868

    Wright E. L., et al., 2010, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-6256/140/6/1868 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2010AJ....140.1868W 140, 1868

    2010 doi

  86. [94]

    Zhao G., Zhao Y.-H., Chu Y.-Q., Jing Y.-P., Deng L.-C., 2012, @doi [Research in Astronomy and Astrophysics] 10.1088/1674-4527/12/7/002 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2012RAA....12..723Z 12, 723

    2012 doi

  87. [95]

    S., Schlafly E

    Zucker C., Speagle J. S., Schlafly E. F., Green G. M., Finkbeiner D. P., Goodman A., Alves J., 2020, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201936145 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020A&A...633A..51Z 633, A51

    2020 doi

  88. [96]

    write newline

    " write newline "" before.all 'output.state := FUNCTION fin.entry write newline FUNCTION new.block output.state before.all = 'skip after.block 'output.state := if FUNCTION new.sentence output.state after.block = 'skip output.state before.all = 'skip after.sentence 'output.stat...

Pith tools

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