arxiv: 2604.13374 · v2 · submitted 2026-04-15 · 🌌 astro-ph.GA

Recognition: unknown

The DECam MAGIC Survey: Investigating the Jet Stellar Stream with Photometric Metallicities

H. Q. Do , A. Chiti , P. S. Ferguson , A. P. Ji , G. Limberg , K. R. Atzberger , J. L. Carlin , W. Cerny

show 22 more authors

A. Drlica-Wagner G. F. Lewis T. S. Li C. E. Mart\'inez-V\'azquez S. L. Martell G. E. Medina N. E. D. No\"el A. B. Pace V. M. Placco A. H. Riley D. J. Sand G. S. Stringfellow J. A. Carballo-Bello L. R. Cullinane D. Erkal S. E. Koposov B. Mutlu-Pakdil M. Navabi N. Shipp A. K. Vivas A. Zenteno D. Zucker

Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-10 13:28 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.GA

keywords stellar streamsphotometric metallicitiesstream morphologytidal disruptionproper motion selectiongalactic haloglobular cluster

0 comments

The pith

Photometric metallicities combined with proper motions isolate 213 candidate members of the Jet stellar stream and reveal its fanning at the distant end.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

Stellar streams trace the Milky Way's past mergers and its gravitational field. This paper tests whether metallicities measured from narrowband imaging around the calcium H and K lines can pick out true members of one such stream when added to proper-motion cuts. The selection produces a sample of 213 stars spread along the full length of the stream. Positions of these stars show the stream fans outward more strongly at the end farther from the galactic bar. The result supplies a ready list of targets for deeper observations that can refine models of the stream's orbit and any unseen perturbers.

Core claim

The authors demonstrate that photometric metallicities from a Ca II H&K narrowband filter, when combined with Gaia DR3 proper motions, cleanly isolate Jet stream members. This yields 213 candidate stars whose spatial distribution exhibits clear fanning toward the stream's end farther from the Milky Way bar.

What carries the argument

The central mechanism is metallicity-based selection via Ca II H&K narrowband photometry paired with proper-motion filtering to separate stream stars from the field population.

Load-bearing premise

Photometric metallicities derived from the narrowband filter, together with proper motions, accurately identify true stream members with little contamination from unrelated field stars.

What would settle it

Spectroscopic follow-up of the 213 candidates that returns many stars with velocities or abundances inconsistent with the known stream properties would show the selection method admits substantial contamination.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2604.13374 by A. B. Pace, A. Chiti, A. Drlica-Wagner, A. H. Riley, A. K. Vivas, A. P. Ji, A. Zenteno, B. Mutlu-Pakdil, C. E. Mart\'inez-V\'azquez, D. Erkal, D. J. Sand, D. Zucker, G. E. Medina, G. F. Lewis, G. Limberg, G. S. Stringfellow, H. Q. Do, J. A. Carballo-Bello, J. L. Carlin, K. R. Atzberger, L. R. Cullinane, M. Navabi, N. E. D. No\"el, N. Shipp, P. S. Ferguson, S. E. Koposov, S. L. Martell, T. S. Li, V. M. Placco, W. Cerny.

**Figure 1.** Figure 1: Top left: Density map of the Jet stream from Ferguson et al. (2022). Tentative perturbation features proposed by Ferguson et al. (2022) are highlighted in red boxes, including a ∼ 4 ◦ gap at ϕ1 = −6 ◦ and a feature at ϕ1 = −12.5 ◦ (see Section 3 for the definition of stream coordinates) cutting across the stream track. Bottom left: The stream track overlaid on the coverage map of the Jet stream; the initia… view at source ↗

**Figure 2.** Figure 2: Color–color diagram of stars observed in this aggregate Jet stream survey that have undergone CMD and proper motion selection, where each star is colored by the inferred photometric metallicity from the CaHK photometry. Stars of different metallicities form distinct bands in this space, enabling photometric separation. taken as the log g of the star. The metallicity derived using that log g is taken to be … view at source ↗

**Figure 3.** Figure 3: Summary of the sequential selection of Jet stream candidate stars based on color–magnitude, proper motion, and metallicity criteria. Beige points in all panels are all observed stars while red points in all panels are the final selection of stars, having passed all three of the aforementioned cuts and with magnitudes g0 brighter than 20.5. Top Left: Spatial distribution in stream coordinates after applying… view at source ↗

**Figure 4.** Figure 4: Proper motion and metallicity measurements plotted against stream length. The first three panels in top-to-bottom order show the proper motion along ϕ1, proper motion along ϕ2, and metallicity ([Fe/H]CaHK). The blue points represent all stars passing CMD, proper motion, and metallicity cuts, while red points represent stars that additionally have magnitudes above g0 = 20.5. The black lines in these three p… view at source ↗

**Figure 5.** Figure 5: Top: Spatial distribution of candidate stream stars in stream-aligned coordinates ϕ1, ϕ2. Blue points show stars selected by a CMD selection, and red points show the subset that additionally have proper motions and metallicities consistent with stream membership and magnitudes brighter than g0 = 20.5. The dashed curve shows the stream track proposed in Ferguson et al. (2022). Bottom: Histograms of the perp… view at source ↗

**Figure 7.** Figure 7: First panel: stellar positions in the rotated coordinate system (ϕ1, ϕ2), compared to the best-fit stream track (black line). The shaded light–gray band shows the 2 σ envelope around the stream track, where σ is the width of the ϕ2 residual distribution measured independently in the six ϕ1 bins in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_7.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 6.** Figure 6: Top: Histogram of the perpendicular distances of all observed stars from the stream track (dtrack) and cubic spline constructed from this histogram, used to model the distribution of foreground Milky Way stars. Bottom: Histogram of the dtrack of Jet stream candidate stars, fitted with a two-component model consisting of a Gaussian representing the stream, and a scaled version of the previously-construct… view at source ↗

read the original abstract

Stellar streams are dynamically fragile structures formed by the tidal disruption of dwarf galaxies and stellar clusters. These objects are valuable tracers of the gravitational potential and accretion history of the Milky Way, and are key probes for the presence and interactions of starless dark matter subhalos. The Jet stream is a $\sim 30^\circ$-long stellar stream that is situated at 30.4 kpc and originates from a disrupted globular cluster. It consists of metal-poor stars that follow a retrograde orbit, reducing the impulse imparted from the Milky Way bar and making it especially sensitive to gravitational perturbations from dark matter subhalos. This paper investigates the known extent of the Jet stream by leveraging photometric metallicities derived from a narrowband filter centered on the Ca II H&K lines at $\sim$3950A on the Dark Energy Camera (DECam), as part of the Mapping the Ancient Galaxy in CaHK (MAGIC) survey. The wide field-of-view of DECam enables the efficient derivation of photometric metallicities for stars across the full extent of the stream, allowing for a metallicity-based selection to identify likely members. We demonstrate the efficacy of photometric metallicities in isolating stream members when used with Gaia DR3 proper motions, identifying a sample of 213 candidate Jet stream member stars. This then allows for the study of stream morphology, through which we identify a clear fanning of the stream toward the end farther from the Milky Way bar. We provide a list of candidate members, enabling spectroscopic follow-up of the Jet stream to facilitate further studies of its dynamics.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Desk Editor's Note private letter to a colleague

This paper adds a sample of 213 Jet stream candidates and notes fanning, but leaves the selection purity unquantified.

read the letter

The punchline is that this work turns up 213 candidate members of the Jet stream and spots a fanning shape toward the far end, using photometric metallicities from the MAGIC survey on DECam plus Gaia motions. That gives a concrete new list and a morphological detail for this retrograde stream at 30 kpc. They handle the data side well by leveraging the wide field of DECam to get metallicities across the entire stream length in one go. This is a practical step for mapping streams that are spread out, and the retrograde orbit makes the Jet a nice case for looking at dark matter subhalo effects without much bar interference. Handing over the candidate list is also a plus for follow-up work. The soft spot sits in the validation. The abstract presents the selection as effective for isolating members, yet it gives no contamination estimate from field stars, no match rate to any spectroscopic samples, and no false-positive modeling. Without those, the 213 count and the fanning detection rest on an assumption that the CaHK plus proper motion cut works cleanly at that distance, where halo stars are still present. If the full paper includes those tests, they need to be shown clearly because moderate leakage would undermine the morphology result. This paper is for astronomers who track stellar streams or use them to probe the Milky Way's potential and substructure. Someone looking for new targets in the Jet or comparing stream shapes across different objects would get direct value from the sample and the fanning note. I would send it to peer review. The observational contribution is straightforward and adds to the catalog of known streams, though the methods section will need to address the purity question to hold up under scrutiny.

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The paper claims that photometric metallicities derived from the DECam MAGIC survey's Ca II H&K narrowband filter, when combined with Gaia DR3 proper motions, effectively isolate members of the Jet stellar stream (located at ~30 kpc from a disrupted globular cluster). This yields a sample of 213 candidate members, enabling analysis of stream morphology that reveals fanning toward the end farther from the Milky Way bar, with a provided candidate list for spectroscopic follow-up.

Significance. If the photometric metallicity selection is shown to have low contamination, this approach would provide an efficient, wide-field method for identifying members of distant metal-poor streams using DECam data, supporting studies of stream dynamics, bar interactions, and potential dark matter subhalo perturbations. The candidate catalog is a useful resource for follow-up, and the fanning observation could motivate targeted dynamical modeling if robust.

major comments (2)

[Abstract] Abstract: The claim that photometric metallicities 'demonstrate the efficacy' of isolating stream members (leading to 213 candidates) is not supported by any quantitative validation such as control-field contamination fractions, spectroscopic cross-match purity statistics, or false-positive rate estimates; without these, both the candidate count and the reported fanning morphology cannot be assessed for reliability against field-star leakage at 30 kpc.
[Member selection and morphology analysis sections] Member selection and morphology analysis sections: The selection criteria combining CaHK photometric [Fe/H] with Gaia proper motions lack accompanying error analysis, completeness estimates, or modeling of contamination from the halo field population, which is load-bearing for the central claim that the method cleanly isolates members and reveals fanning.

minor comments (2)

[Abstract] The abstract and introduction would benefit from a brief statement of the exact metallicity and proper-motion thresholds used, to improve reproducibility even before full validation details are added.
[Figures] Figure captions for the stream morphology plots should explicitly note the selection cuts applied to the plotted points and any error bars on positions.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their constructive and detailed review of our manuscript. We address each major comment below and have revised the paper accordingly to improve the quantitative support for our claims.

read point-by-point responses

Referee: [Abstract] Abstract: The claim that photometric metallicities 'demonstrate the efficacy' of isolating stream members (leading to 213 candidates) is not supported by any quantitative validation such as control-field contamination fractions, spectroscopic cross-match purity statistics, or false-positive rate estimates; without these, both the candidate count and the reported fanning morphology cannot be assessed for reliability against field-star leakage at 30 kpc.

Authors: We agree that the abstract's statement on demonstrating efficacy would be more robust with explicit quantitative validation metrics. The current manuscript supports the selection through the spatial and kinematic coherence of the 213 candidates with the known Jet stream properties and the observed fanning, but does not include control-field contamination fractions or spectroscopic purity statistics. In the revised manuscript we will add a validation subsection with these estimates (using off-stream control fields and available spectroscopic cross-matches) and will update the abstract to reference the resulting contamination and purity figures. revision: yes
Referee: [Member selection and morphology analysis sections] Member selection and morphology analysis sections: The selection criteria combining CaHK photometric [Fe/H] with Gaia proper motions lack accompanying error analysis, completeness estimates, or modeling of contamination from the halo field population, which is load-bearing for the central claim that the method cleanly isolates members and reveals fanning.

Authors: The referee is correct that the manuscript does not presently provide formal error analysis on the photometric [Fe/H], completeness estimates for the combined selection, or explicit modeling of halo contamination. These elements are important for quantifying the reliability of the fanning morphology. We will revise the member selection and morphology sections to include propagated uncertainties on the metallicities, completeness assessments via mock stream injections, and a simple halo contamination model based on control regions, thereby strengthening the central claims. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: member selection uses independent external observables without reduction to fitted inputs or self-referential definitions

full rationale

The derivation chain selects candidate Jet stream members by applying photometric [Fe/H] cuts from the DECam CaHK narrowband filter (MAGIC survey) together with Gaia DR3 proper motions. These are external data products; the paper does not fit any parameter to the stream itself and then rename the fit as a prediction, nor does it invoke self-citations whose content is required to justify the selection. The count of 213 candidates and the subsequent morphology (fanning) are direct consequences of the applied cuts on independent observables. No equation or step reduces to its own input by construction.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on the domain assumption that narrowband Ca II H&K photometry yields reliable metallicities for selecting metal-poor stream stars, combined with the assumption that Gaia proper motions cleanly separate stream members from the field.

axioms (2)

domain assumption Photometric metallicities from the Ca II H&K narrowband filter can be used to isolate metal-poor stars belonging to the Jet stream
Invoked in the member selection process described in the abstract.
domain assumption Gaia DR3 proper motions provide accurate kinematic information sufficient to confirm stream membership when combined with metallicity
Used to refine the photometric selection.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5774 in / 1422 out tokens · 62908 ms · 2026-05-10T13:28:05.174405+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

83 extracted references · 76 canonical work pages · 2 internal anchors

[1]

R., et al

Almeida-Fernandes, F., SamPedro, L., Herpich, F. R., et al. 2022, MNRAS, 511, 4590, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stac284

work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stac284 2022
[2]

1998, A&A, 330, 1109, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.astro-ph/9710157

Alvarez, R., & Plez, B. 1998, A&A, 330, 1109, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.astro-ph/9710157

work page internal anchor Pith review doi:10.48550/arxiv.astro-ph/9710157 1998
[3]

J., Laird, J

Anthony-Twarog, B. J., Laird, J. B., Payne, D., & Twarog, B. A. 1991, AJ, 101, 1902, doi: 10.1086/115815 Astropy Collaboration, Robitaille, T. P., Tollerud, E. J., et al. 2013, A&A, 558, A33, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201322068 Astropy Collaboration, Price-Whelan, A. M., Sip˝ ocz, B. M., et al. 2018, AJ, 156, 123, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/aabc4f Astropy Collab...

work page doi:10.1086/115815 1991
[4]

R., Pace, A

Atzberger, K. R., Pace, A. B., Kallivayalil, N., et al. 2026, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2602.21283, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2602.21283

work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2602.21283 2026
[5]

, keywords =

Awad, P., Li, T. S., Erkal, D., et al. 2025, A&A, 693, A69, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202451930

work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202451930 2025
[6]

2023, A&A, 674, A32, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202243790

Babusiaux, C., Fabricius, C., Khanna, S., et al. 2023, A&A, 674, A32, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202243790

work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202243790 2023
[7]

Banik, N., Bovy, J., Bertone, G., Erkal, D., & de Boer, T. J. L. 2021, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 502, 2364, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stab210

work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stab210 2021
[8]

O., Chiti, A., Limberg, G., et al

Barbosa, F. O., Chiti, A., Limberg, G., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2504.03593, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2504.03593

work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2504.03593 2025
[9]

2011, in Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series, Vol

Bertin, E. 2011, in Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series, Vol. 442, Astronomical Data Analysis Software and Systems XX, ed. I. N. Evans, A. Accomazzi, D. J. Mink, & A. H. Rots, 435

2011
[10]

2013, PSFEx: Point Spread Function Extractor, Astrophysics Source Code Library, record ascl:1301.001

Bertin, E. 2013, PSFEx: Point Spread Function Extractor, Astrophysics Source Code Library, record ascl:1301.001

2013
[11]

, keywords =

Bertin, E., & Arnouts, S. 1996, A&AS, 117, 393, doi: 10.1051/aas:1996164

work page doi:10.1051/aas:1996164 1996
[12]

, keywords =

Bianco, F. B., Ivezi´ c,ˇZ., Jones, R. L., et al. 2022, ApJS, 258, 1, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/ac3e72

work page doi:10.3847/1538-4365/ac3e72 2022
[13]

, keywords =

Bonaca, A., Hogg, D. W., Price-Whelan, A. M., & Conroy, C. 2019, ApJ, 880, 38, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab2873

work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ab2873 2019
[14]

Bonaca, A., & Price-Whelan, A. M. 2025, NewAR, 100, 101713, doi: 10.1016/j.newar.2024.101713 16Do et al

work page doi:10.1016/j.newar.2024.101713 2025
[15]

Brown, A. G. A. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2503.01533, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2503.01533

work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2503.01533 2025
[16]

Carlberg, R. G. 2013, ApJ, 775, 90, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/775/2/90

work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/775/2/90 2013
[17]

Casagrande, L., & VandenBerg, D. A. 2014, MNRAS, 444, 392, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stu1476

work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stu1476 2014
[18]

Chiti, A., Frebel, A., Jerjen, H., Kim, D., & Norris, J. E. 2020, ApJ, 891, 8, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab6d72

work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ab6d72 2020
[19]

K., et al

Chiti, A., Frebel, A., Mardini, M. K., et al. 2021, ApJS, 254, 31, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/abf73d

work page doi:10.3847/1538-4365/abf73d 2021
[20]

E., 2018, ApJ, 857, 138 Beers T

Chiti, A., Placco, V. M., Pace, A. B., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2508.04053, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2508.04053

work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2508.04053 2025
[21]

P., Zaritsky, D., et al

Conroy, C., Naidu, R. P., Zaritsky, D., et al. 2019, ApJ, 887, 237, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab5710 De Angeli, F., Weiler, M., Montegriffo, P., et al. 2023, A&A, 674, A2, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202243680

work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ab5710 2019
[22]

2005, Nature, 433, 389, doi: 10.1038/nature03270

Diemand, J., Moore, B., & Stadel, J. 2005, Nature, 433, 389, doi: 10.1038/nature03270

work page doi:10.1038/nature03270 2005
[23]

Q., & Chiti, A

Do, H. Q., & Chiti, A. 2026, Jet Stream CaHK Photometric Candidates, Zenodo

2026
[24]

, keywords =

Dotter, A., Chaboyer, B., Jevremovi´ c, D., et al. 2008, The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series, 178, 89, doi: 10.1086/589654

work page doi:10.1086/589654 2008
[25]

, keywords =

Drlica-Wagner, A., Ferguson, P. S., Adam´ ow, M., et al. 2022, ApJS, 261, 38, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/ac78eb

work page doi:10.3847/1538-4365/ac78eb 2022
[26]

L., & Belokurov, V

Erkal, D., Sanders, J. L., & Belokurov, V. 2016, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 461, 1590, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stw1400

work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stw1400 2016
[27]

2023, A&A, 674, A13, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202244242

Eyer, L., Audard, M., Holl, B., et al. 2023, A&A, 674, A13, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202244242

work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202244242 2023
[28]

S., Shipp, N., Drlica-Wagner, A., et al

Ferguson, P. S., Shipp, N., Drlica-Wagner, A., et al. 2022, AJ, 163, 18, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/ac3492

work page doi:10.3847/1538-3881/ac3492 2022
[29]

, keywords =

Flaugher, B., Diehl, H. T., Honscheid, K., et al. 2015, AJ, 150, 150, doi: 10.1088/0004-6256/150/5/150

work page doi:10.1088/0004-6256/150/5/150 2015
[30]

W., Weisz, D

Fu, S. W., Weisz, D. R., Starkenburg, E., et al. 2023a, ApJ, 958, 167, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad0030 —. 2023b, ApJ, 958, 167, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad0030 Gaia Collaboration, Brown, A. G. A., Vallenari, A., et al. 2016, A&A, 595, A2, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201629512 Gaia Collaboration, Vallenari, A., Brown, A. G. A., et al. 2023a, A&A, 674, A1, doi: 10.1...

work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad0030 2016
[31]

Comparingthepropertiesoflocalglobularclustersystems:implicationsfortheformationoftheGalactic halo,

Green, A. M., Hofmann, S., & Schwarz, D. J. 2004, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 353, L23, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2004.08232.x

work page doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2004.08232.x 2004
[32]

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

work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361:200809724 2008
[33]

R., Millman, K

Harris, C. R., Millman, K. J., van der Walt, S. J., et al. 2020, Nature, 585, 357, doi: 10.1038/s41586-020-2649-2

work page doi:10.1038/s41586-020-2649-2 2020
[34]

Harris, W. E. 1996, AJ, 112, 1487, doi: 10.1086/118116

work page doi:10.1086/118116 1996
[35]

2022, ApJ, 924, 141, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac425d

Huang, Y., Yuan, H., Li, C., et al. 2022, ApJ, 924, 141, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac425d

work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ac425d 2022
[36]

Hunter, J. D. 2007, Computing in Science & Engineering, 9, 90, doi: 10.1109/MCSE.2007.55

work page doi:10.1109/mcse.2007.55 2007
[37]

2021, ApJ, 914, 123, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/abfcc2

Ibata, R., Malhan, K., Martin, N., et al. 2021, ApJ, 914, 123, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/abfcc2

work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/abfcc2 2021
[38]

P., Gerhard, O., & Sevenster, M

Ibata, R. A., Lewis, G. F., Irwin, M. J., & Quinn, T. 2002, MNRAS, 332, 915, doi: 10.1046/j.1365-8711.2002.05358.x Ivezi´ c,ˇZ., Beers, T. C., & Juri´ c, M. 2012, ARA&A, 50, 251, doi: 10.1146/annurev-astro-081811-125504 Ivezi´ c,ˇZ., Kahn, S. M., Tyson, J. A., et al. 2019a, ApJ, 873, 111, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab042c —. 2019b, ApJ, 873, 111, doi: 10.3847...

work page doi:10.1046/j.1365-8711.2002.05358.x 2002
[39]

2018, MNRAS, 480, 5342, doi: 10.1093/mnras/sty2226

Jethwa, P., Torrealba, G., Navarrete, C., et al. 2018, MNRAS, 480, 5342, doi: 10.1093/mnras/sty2226

work page doi:10.1093/mnras/sty2226 2018
[40]

V., Sackett, P

Johnston, K. V., Sackett, P. D., & Bullock, J. S. 2001, ApJ, 557, 137, doi: 10.1086/321644

work page doi:10.1086/321644 2001
[41]

, keywords =

Johnston, K. V., Spergel, D. N., & Haydn, C. 2002, The Astrophysical Journal, 570, 656–664, doi: 10.1086/339791 Jupyter Team. 2015, Project Jupyter. https://jupyter.org/

work page doi:10.1086/339791 2002
[42]

C., Schmidt, B

Keller, S. C., Schmidt, B. P., Bessell, M. S., et al. 2007, PASA, 24, 1, doi: 10.1071/AS07001

work page doi:10.1071/as07001 2007
[43]

, keywords =

Klypin, A., Kravtsov, A. V., Valenzuela, O., & Prada, F. 1999, ApJ, 522, 82, doi: 10.1086/307643

work page doi:10.1086/307643 1999
[44]

, keywords =

Crain, R. A., & Bastian, N. 2018, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 486, 3180, doi: 10.1093/mnras/sty1609

work page doi:10.1093/mnras/sty1609 2018
[45]

B., Ishigaki, M

Kuzma, P. B., Ishigaki, M. N., Kirihara, T., & Ogami, I. 2025, AJ, 170, 157, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/aded8e

work page doi:10.3847/1538-3881/aded8e 2025
[46]

S., Koposov, S

Li, T. S., Koposov, S. E., Zucker, D. B., et al. 2019, MNRAS, 490, 3508, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stz2731

work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stz2731 2019
[47]

, keywords =

Li, T. S., Koposov, S. E., Erkal, D., et al. 2021, ApJ, 911, 149, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/abeb18

work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/abeb18 2021
[48]

, keywords =

Li, T. S., Ji, A. P., Pace, A. B., et al. 2022, ApJ, 928, 30, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac46d3

work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ac46d3 2022
[49]

A., Hern\'andez , J., et al

Lindegren, L., Klioner, S. A., Hern´ andez, J., et al. 2021, A&A, 649, A2, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202039709

work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202039709 2021
[50]

2022, MNRAS, 516, 2348, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stac1827

Longeard, N., Jablonka, P., Arentsen, A., et al. 2022, MNRAS, 516, 2348, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stac1827

work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stac1827 2022
[51]

Lynden-Bell, D., & Lynden-Bell, R. M. 1995, MNRAS, 275, 429, doi: 10.1093/mnras/275.2.429

work page doi:10.1093/mnras/275.2.429 1995
[52]

Malhan, K., & Ibata, R. A. 2018, MNRAS, 477, 4063, doi: 10.1093/mnras/sty912

work page doi:10.1093/mnras/sty912 2018
[53]

F., Ibata, R

Martin, N. F., Ibata, R. A., Starkenburg, E., et al. 2022, MNRAS, 516, 5331, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stac2426 A MAGIC Investigation of the Jet Stream17

work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stac2426 2022
[54]

, keywords =

Mateu, C. 2023, MNRAS, 520, 5225, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad321

work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stad321 2023
[55]

2023, A&A, 674, A3, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202243880

Montegriffo, P., De Angeli, F., Andrae, R., et al. 2023, A&A, 674, A3, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202243880

work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202243880 2023
[56]

1999, ApJL, 524, L19, doi: 10.1086/312287

Moore, B., Ghigna, S., Governato, F., et al. 1999, ApJL, 524, L19, doi: 10.1086/312287

work page doi:10.1086/312287 1999
[57]

J., & Carlin, J

Newberg, H. J., & Carlin, J. L. 2016, 420, doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-19336-6

work page doi:10.1007/978-3-319-19336-6 2016
[58]

B., Li, T

Pace, A. B., Li, T. S., Ji, A. P., et al. 2025, The Open Journal of Astrophysics, 8, 112, doi: 10.33232/001c.142989

work page doi:10.33232/001c.142989 2025
[59]

2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2512.24109, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2512.24109

Palaversa, L., Donev, E., Ivezi´ c,ˇZ., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2512.24109, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2512.24109

work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2512.24109 2025
[60]

E., Kupka, F., Ryabchikova, T

Piskunov, N. E., Kupka, F., Ryabchikova, T. A., Weiss, W. W., & Jeffery, C. S. 1995, A&AS, 112, 525

1995
[61]

M., Almeida-Fernandes, F., Arentsen, A., et al

Placco, V. M., Almeida-Fernandes, F., Arentsen, A., et al. 2022, ApJS, 262, 8, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/ac7ab0

work page doi:10.3847/1538-4365/ac7ab0 2022
[62]

M., Limberg, G., Chiti, A., et al

Placco, V. M., Limberg, G., Chiti, A., et al. 2025, ApJ, 991, 101, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/adf846

work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/adf846 2025
[63]

2012, Turbospectrum: Code for spectral synthesis, Astrophysics Source Code Library, record ascl:1205.004

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

2012
[64]

H., & Schechter, P

Press, W. H., & Schechter, P. 1974, ApJ, 187, 425, doi: 10.1086/152650

work page doi:10.1086/152650 1974
[65]

, keywords =

Price-Whelan, A. M., & Bonaca, A. 2018, ApJL, 863, L20, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/aad7b5

work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/aad7b5 2018
[66]

, keywords =

Price-Whelan, A. M., Sesar, B., Johnston, K. V., & Rix, H.-W. 2016, ApJ, 824, 104, doi: 10.3847/0004-637X/824/2/104

work page doi:10.3847/0004-637x/824/2/104 2016
[67]

2023, A&A, 674, A14, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202245591

Rimoldini, L., Holl, B., Gavras, P., et al. 2023, A&A, 674, A14, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202245591

work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202245591 2023
[68]

, year = 2015, month = may, volume =

Ryabchikova, T., Piskunov, N., Kurucz, R. L., et al. 2015, PhyS, 90, 054005, doi: 10.1088/0031-8949/90/5/054005

work page doi:10.1088/0031-8949/90/5/054005 2015
[69]

J., Finkbeiner, D

Schlegel, D. J., Finkbeiner, D. P., & Davis, M. 1998, ApJ, 500, 525, doi: 10.1086/305772

work page internal anchor Pith review doi:10.1086/305772 1998
[70]

Compositionofhaloclustersandtheformationofthegalactichalo.,

Searle, L., & Zinn, R. 1978, ApJ, 225, 357, doi: 10.1086/156499

work page doi:10.1086/156499 1978
[71]

2006, in Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, Vol

Sharp, R., Saunders, W., Smith, G., et al. 2006, in Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, Vol. 6269, Ground-based and Airborne Instrumentation for Astronomy, ed. I. S. McLean & M. Iye, 62690G, doi: 10.1117/12.671022

work page doi:10.1117/12.671022 2006
[72]

2018, ApJ, 862, 114, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aacdab

Shipp, N., Drlica-Wagner, A., Balbinot, E., et al. 2018, ApJ, 862, 114, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aacdab

work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aacdab 2018
[73]

S., Pace, A

Shipp, N., Li, T. S., Pace, A. B., et al. 2019, ApJ, 885, 3, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab44bf

work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ab44bf 2019
[74]

2008, MNRAS, 388, 1803, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2008.13522.x 30

Springel, V., Wang, J., Vogelsberger, M., et al. 2008, MNRAS, 391, 1685, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2008.14066.x

work page doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2008.14066.x 2008
[75]

2017, MNRAS, 471, 2587, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stx1068

Starkenburg, E., Martin, N., Youakim, K., et al. 2017, MNRAS, 471, 2587, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stx1068

work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stx1068 2017
[76]

Taylor, M. B. 2005, in Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series, Vol. 347, Astronomical Data Analysis Software and Systems XIV, ed. P. Shopbell, M. Britton, & R. Ebert, 29

2005
[77]

2014, in Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series, Vol

Valdes, F., Gruendl, R., & DES Project. 2014, in Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series, Vol. 485, Astronomical Data Analysis Software and Systems XXIII, ed. N. Manset & P. Forshay, 379

2014
[79]

E., et al

Virtanen, P., Gommers, R., Oliphant, T. E., et al. 2020, Nature Methods, 17, 261, doi: 10.1038/s41592-019-0686-2

work page doi:10.1038/s41592-019-0686-2 2020
[80]

S., et al

Wang, J., Bose, S., Frenk, C. S., et al. 2020, Nature, 585, 39, doi: 10.1038/s41586-020-2642-9

work page doi:10.1038/s41586-020-2642-9 2020
[81]

White, S. D. M., & Rees, M. J. 1978, MNRAS, 183, 341, doi: 10.1093/mnras/183.3.341

work page doi:10.1093/mnras/183.3.341 1978

Showing first 80 references.