pith. sign in

arxiv: 2604.15939 · v1 · pith:RWQUVMCMnew · submitted 2026-04-17 · 🌌 astro-ph.SR · astro-ph.GA

Revisiting the Galactic age-metallicity relation from wide white dwarf-main-sequence binaries

Alberto Rebassa-Mansergas , Iset Tejero-G\'omez , Roberto Raddi This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-10 07:58 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.SR astro-ph.GA
keywords age-metallicity relationwhite dwarf binariesGalactic diskchemical evolutionGaia DR3stellar agesmetallicity dispersionradial migration
0
0 comments X

The pith

The age-metallicity relation in the Galactic disk shows large intrinsic scatter at all ages.

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

This paper constructs a sample of widely separated white dwarf plus main-sequence binaries from Gaia DR3 to measure how iron abundance changes with age in the Milky Way disk. White dwarf cooling ages are calculated from evolutionary models applied to Gaia photometry, while iron abundances come from literature values for the main-sequence companions and are combined in multiple ways. Across independent subsamples the authors recover a wide spread in iron abundance at every age, matching earlier results from both binaries and single stars. The finding indicates that disk chemical evolution cannot be reduced to a single tight trend and must incorporate overlapping processes such as radial migration and patchy enrichment.

Core claim

A sample of widely separated WD+MS binaries is assembled from Gaia DR3 photometry and parallaxes. White dwarf ages are derived by placing the stars on state-of-the-art cooling sequences using absolute G magnitude and BP-RP colour. Literature [Fe/H] values for the main-sequence companions are compiled and averaged with several statistical methods. Multiple subsamples all display large metallicity dispersion at all ages, reinforcing that the AMR of the Galactic disk contains substantial intrinsic scatter attributable to radial migration, inhomogeneous enrichment, and variations in star-formation history.

What carries the argument

Wide white dwarf-main-sequence binaries treated as coeval systems, with white dwarf cooling ages supplying the system age and main-sequence iron abundance supplying the metallicity.

Load-bearing premise

White dwarf and main-sequence stars in these wide binaries formed at the same time, so the white dwarf cooling age equals the system age, and the measured iron abundance of the main-sequence star equals the metallicity at birth.

What would settle it

A new sample of white dwarf-main-sequence binaries that shows a tight, low-scatter correlation between white dwarf cooling age and iron abundance would contradict the reported large dispersion.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2604.15939 by Alberto Rebassa-Mansergas, Iset Tejero-G\'omez, Roberto Raddi.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Left panels: the AMR (top) and the average metallicity per age bin (bottom) arising from the full sample of WD+MS with at least two available [Fe/H] measurements. Red solid dots indicate ages with relative errors below 30 percent or absolute errors lower than 1.5 Gyr. Right panels: the same but applying a higher weight to [Fe/H] values derived from better quality data (see Section 5.1 for details). wi = qi… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Left panels: the same as [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Left panels: the same as [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: The same as [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_4.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

The age-metallicity relation (AMR) is a fundamental observational constraint for understanding the chemical evolution of the Galaxy. As reliable cosmochronometers, white dwarfs in binary systems with main sequence companions (WD+MS binaries) provide excellent laboratories to study this relation, since both components are expected to be coeval. We construct a sample of widely separated WD+MS binaries using data from the third data release of the Gaia mission in order to investigate the AMR of the Galactic disk. The sample is identified using photometric measurements and parallaxes of both components. White dwarf ages are derived by interpolating their Gaia absolute G magnitudes and BP-RP colours within state-of-the art white dwarf evolutionary sequences. We compile publicly available [Fe/H] abundances for the main sequence companions from the literature and combine them using different statistical approaches to obtain representative metallicity values for each system. We derive the AMR from several sub-samples of WD+MS that use independent measurements of [Fe/H] abundances and consistently find a large dispersion in [Fe/H] at all ages. This behaviour agrees with previous determinations of the AMR based on both WD+MS binaries and samples of isolated stars. Our results reinforce the observational evidence that the AMR in the Galactic disk exhibits substantial intrinsic scatter, likely reflecting the combined effects of multiple mechanisms such as radial migration, inhomogeneous chemical enrichment, and variations in the star formation history.

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.

Referee Report

2 major / 1 minor

Summary. The manuscript constructs a sample of wide white dwarf-main sequence (WD+MS) binaries from Gaia DR3 photometry and parallaxes. White dwarf cooling ages are obtained by interpolating Gaia absolute G magnitudes and BP-RP colors in state-of-the-art WD evolutionary sequences. Literature [Fe/H] values for the MS companions are compiled and combined via multiple statistical approaches to derive representative metallicities. The age-metallicity relation (AMR) is then constructed from several sub-samples, revealing a large dispersion in [Fe/H] at all ages that is consistent with prior WD+MS and isolated-star studies and attributed to radial migration, inhomogeneous enrichment, and star-formation variations.

Significance. If robust, the result supplies an independent confirmation, using coeval binary systems, that the Galactic disk AMR exhibits substantial intrinsic scatter rather than a tight relation. This strengthens constraints on chemical-evolution models and highlights the combined effects of radial migration and inhomogeneous enrichment. The work usefully leverages public Gaia data, published evolutionary sequences, and existing [Fe/H] compilations to cross-check earlier AMR determinations.

major comments (2)
  1. [Abstract / age derivation] Abstract and methods description of age derivation: ages are obtained solely by interpolating Gaia photometry in white-dwarf cooling sequences. No progenitor main-sequence lifetimes (via initial-final mass relation followed by integration of the progenitor's MS lifetime) are added. For lower-mass WDs this systematically underestimates total system age by up to ~1 Gyr, which can misplace systems along the age axis and either inflate or mask the reported [Fe/H] dispersion at all ages, directly affecting the central claim of substantial intrinsic scatter.
  2. [Results / statistical methods] Dispersion quantification and error analysis: the manuscript does not detail how the observed [Fe/H] dispersion is separated from measurement uncertainties, how errors are propagated through the statistical averaging of literature abundances, or the precise photometric/parallax cuts used to define the sample. These omissions are load-bearing for the assertion that the scatter is intrinsic rather than observational.
minor comments (1)
  1. [Abstract] The abstract refers to 'several sub-samples' and 'different statistical approaches' without naming them; a brief enumeration would improve clarity.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We are grateful to the referee for their detailed and insightful comments, which have helped us improve the clarity and robustness of our analysis. Below, we provide point-by-point responses to the major comments and indicate the revisions we plan to implement.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract / age derivation] Abstract and methods description of age derivation: ages are obtained solely by interpolating Gaia photometry in white-dwarf cooling sequences. No progenitor main-sequence lifetimes (via initial-final mass relation followed by integration of the progenitor's MS lifetime) are added. For lower-mass WDs this systematically underestimates total system age by up to ~1 Gyr, which can misplace systems along the age axis and either inflate or mask the reported [Fe/H] dispersion at all ages, directly affecting the central claim of substantial intrinsic scatter.

    Authors: The referee correctly identifies that our current age estimates are based solely on white dwarf cooling ages derived from Gaia photometry. To obtain the total age of the binary system, the main-sequence lifetime of the white dwarf's progenitor must be added. We agree that this omission could affect the placement of systems on the age axis, particularly for lower-mass white dwarfs where progenitor lifetimes can be significant. In the revised manuscript, we will incorporate progenitor lifetimes using an appropriate initial-final mass relation and stellar evolution models to compute the total ages. We will then re-derive the age-metallicity relation and reassess the intrinsic scatter to ensure our conclusions remain robust. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Results / statistical methods] Dispersion quantification and error analysis: the manuscript does not detail how the observed [Fe/H] dispersion is separated from measurement uncertainties, how errors are propagated through the statistical averaging of literature abundances, or the precise photometric/parallax cuts used to define the sample. These omissions are load-bearing for the assertion that the scatter is intrinsic rather than observational.

    Authors: We thank the referee for highlighting these important methodological details. In the revised version of the manuscript, we will expand the methods section to explicitly describe the photometric and parallax selection criteria used to construct the sample. Furthermore, we will provide a detailed account of our statistical approaches for combining literature [Fe/H] values, including how uncertainties are propagated. To quantify the intrinsic dispersion, we will include an analysis that compares the observed [Fe/H] scatter to the expected contributions from measurement errors, using techniques such as error propagation formulas or bootstrap resampling to demonstrate that the dispersion is largely intrinsic. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; derivation relies on external data and sequences

full rationale

The paper constructs its AMR by selecting wide WD+MS binaries from Gaia DR3 photometry and parallaxes, deriving cooling ages via interpolation in publicly available white dwarf evolutionary sequences, and compiling independent [Fe/H] values from the literature for the MS companions. The reported large dispersion at all ages is measured directly from these compiled data points across multiple sub-samples; no parameters are fitted within the paper and then re-used as a 'prediction' of the scatter. No self-definitional relations, ansatz smuggling, or load-bearing self-citations appear in the derivation chain. The result is an observational compilation against external benchmarks and is therefore self-contained.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

Based solely on the abstract; the work rests on standard domain assumptions about binary coevality and white dwarf models rather than introducing new free parameters or entities.

axioms (2)
  • domain assumption White dwarf and main-sequence stars in wide binaries are coeval
    Invoked to justify using white dwarf cooling ages as the system age.
  • domain assumption White dwarf ages are reliably obtained by interpolating Gaia absolute G magnitudes and BP-RP colours in state-of-the-art evolutionary sequences
    Central step for deriving ages from photometry.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5561 in / 1495 out tokens · 50731 ms · 2026-05-10T07:58:53.620483+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

56 extracted references · 56 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    G., Camisassa, M

    Althaus, L. G., Camisassa, M. E., Miller Bertolami, M. M., Córsico, A. H., & García-Berro, E. 2015, A&A, 576, A9

    work page 2015

  2. [2]

    2023, A&A, 678, A158

    Anders, F., Gispert, P., Ratcliffe, B., et al. 2023, A&A, 678, A158

    work page 2023

  3. [3]

    & Chanamé, J

    Barrientos, M. & Chanamé, J. 2021, ApJ, 923, 181

    work page 2021

  4. [4]

    E., Althaus, L

    Camisassa, M. E., Althaus, L. G., Córsico, A. H., et al. 2019, A&A, 625, A87

    work page 2019

  5. [5]

    E., Althaus, L

    Camisassa, M. E., Althaus, L. G., Córsico, A. H., et al. 2016, ApJ, 823, 158

    work page 2016

  6. [6]

    2011, A&A, 530, A138

    Casagrande, L., Schönrich, R., Asplund, M., et al. 2011, A&A, 530, A138

    work page 2011

  7. [7]

    R., Lebreton, Y ., et al

    Casamiquela, L., Reese, D. R., Lebreton, Y ., et al. 2024, A&A, 692, A243 Catalán, S., Isern, J., García-Berro, E., & Ribas, I. 2008, MNRAS, 387, 1693

    work page 2024

  8. [8]

    2012, Research in Astronomy and Astrophysics, 12, 1197

    Cui, X.-Q., Zhao, Y .-H., Chu, Y .-Q., et al. 2012, Research in Astronomy and Astrophysics, 12, 1197

    work page 2012

  9. [9]

    D., Kalirai, J

    Cummings, J. D., Kalirai, J. S., Tremblay, P. E., Ramirez-Ruiz, E., & Choi, J. 2018, ApJ, 866, 21

    work page 2018

  10. [10]

    O’Brien, M

    Cunningham, T., Tremblay, P.-E., & W. O’Brien, M. 2024, MNRAS, 527, 3602

    work page 2024

  11. [11]

    L., Agüeros, M

    Curtis, J. L., Agüeros, M. A., Matt, S. P., et al. 2020, ApJ, 904, 140

    work page 2020

  12. [12]

    B., Zucker, D

    Das, P. B., Zucker, D. B., De Silva, G. M., et al. 2025, MNRAS, 538, 605 de Jong, R. S., Bellido-Tirado, O., Brynnel, J. G., et al. 2022, in Society of Photo- Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, V ol. 12184, Ground-based and Airborne Instrumentation for Astronomy IX, ed. C. J

    work page 2025

  13. [13]

    1993, A&A, 275, 101

    Edvardsson, B., Andersen, J., Gustafsson, B., et al. 1993, A&A, 275, 101

    work page 1993

  14. [14]

    Fallows, C. P. & Sanders, J. L. 2024, MNRAS, 531, 2126

    work page 2024

  15. [15]

    K., Frankel, N., Lind, K., et al

    Feuillet, D. K., Frankel, N., Lind, K., et al. 2019, MNRAS, 489, 1742

    work page 2019

  16. [16]

    L., Massa, D., Gordon, K

    Fitzpatrick, E. L., Massa, D., Gordon, K. D., Bohlin, R., & Clayton, G. C. 2019, ApJ, 886, 108

    work page 2019

  17. [17]

    2001, PASP, 113, 409

    Fontaine, G., Brassard, P., & Bergeron, P. 2001, PASP, 113, 409

    work page 2001

  18. [18]

    W., & Tian, H

    Fouesneau, M., Rix, H.-W., von Hippel, T., Hogg, D. W., & Tian, H. 2019, ApJ, 870, 9

    work page 2019

  19. [19]

    Frankel, N., Rix, H.-W., Ting, Y .-S., Ness, M., & Hogg, D. W. 2018, ApJ, 865, 96 Gaia Collaboration, Brown, A. G. A., Vallenari, A., et al. 2018, A&A, 616, A1 Gaia Collaboration, Vallenari, A., Brown, A. G. A., et al. 2023, A&A, 674, A1

    work page 2018

  20. [20]

    1988, Nature, 333, 642 García-Zamora, E

    Garcia-Berro, E., Hernanz, M., Isern, J., & Mochkovitch, R. 1988, Nature, 333, 642 García-Zamora, E. M., Torres, S., & Rebassa-Mansergas, A. 2023, A&A, 679, A127 García-Zamora, E. M., Torres, S., Rebassa-Mansergas, A., & Ferrer-Burjachs, A. 2025, A&A, 699, A3 Gentile Fusillo, N. P., Tremblay, P.-E., Cukanovaite, E., et al. 2021, MNRAS, 508, 3877 Gentile F...

    work page 1988

  21. [21]

    2025, ApJ, 980, 90

    Hattori, K. 2025, ApJ, 980, 90

    work page 2025

  22. [22]

    2008, MNRAS, 388, 1175

    Haywood, M. 2008, MNRAS, 388, 1175

    work page 2008

  23. [23]

    D., Katz, D., & Gómez, A

    Haywood, M., Di Matteo, P., Lehnert, M. D., Katz, D., & Gómez, A. 2013, A&A, 560, A109

    work page 2013

  24. [24]

    M., Hermes, J

    Heintz, T. M., Hermes, J. J., El-Badry, K., et al. 2022, ApJ, 934, 148

    work page 2022

  25. [25]

    2009, A&A, 501, 941

    Holmberg, J., Nordström, B., & Andersen, J. 2009, A&A, 501, 941

    work page 2009

  26. [26]

    2025, ApJS, 277, 7

    Huang, B., Yuan, H., Xu, S., et al. 2025, ApJS, 277, 7

    work page 2025

  27. [27]

    C., Wolf, C., et al

    Huang, Y ., Beers, T. C., Wolf, C., et al. 2022, ApJ, 925, 164

    work page 2022

  28. [28]

    2025, ApJ, 982, 20 Ivezi´c, Ž., Kahn, S

    Ironi, O., Ben-Ami, S., Hallakoun, N., & Shahaf, S. 2025, ApJ, 982, 20 Ivezi´c, Ž., Kahn, S. M., Tyson, J. A., et al. 2019, ApJ, 873, 111 Jiménez-Esteban, F. M., Torres, S., Rebassa-Mansergas, A., et al. 2023, MN- RAS, 518, 5106 Jørgensen, B. R. & Lindegren, L. 2005, A&A, 436, 127

    work page 2025

  29. [29]

    2025, ApJ, 979, 157

    Kilic, M., Bergeron, P., Blouin, S., et al. 2025, ApJ, 979, 157

    work page 2025

  30. [30]

    L., Valette, B., et al

    Lallement, R., Vergely, J. L., Valette, B., et al. 2014, A&A, 561, A91

    work page 2014

  31. [31]

    R., Schiavon, R

    Majewski, S. R., Schiavon, R. P., Frinchaboy, P. M., et al. 2017, AJ, 154, 94

    work page 2017

  32. [32]

    D., Curtis, J

    Marigo, P., Cummings, J. D., Curtis, J. L., et al. 2020, Nature Astronomy, 4, 1102

    work page 2020

  33. [33]

    L., Sharma, S., Buder, S., et al

    Martell, S. L., Sharma, S., Buder, S., et al. 2017, MNRAS, 465, 3203

    work page 2017

  34. [34]

    P., et al

    McCleery, J., Tremblay, P.-E., Gentile Fusillo, N. P., et al. 2020, MNRAS, 499, 1890 Miller Bertolami, M. M. 2016, A&A, 588, A25

    work page 2020

  35. [35]

    2013, A&A, 558, A9

    Minchev, I., Chiappini, C., & Martig, M. 2013, A&A, 558, A9

    work page 2013

  36. [36]

    2022, ApJ, 929, 26

    Moss, A., von Hippel, T., Robinson, E., et al. 2022, ApJ, 929, 26

    work page 2022

  37. [37]

    W., Rix, H.-W., Ho, A

    Ness, M., Hogg, D. W., Rix, H.-W., Ho, A. Y . Q., & Zasowski, G. 2015, ApJ, 808, 16 Nordström, B., Mayor, M., Andersen, J., et al. 2004, A&A, 418, 989

    work page 2015

  38. [38]

    A., Wolf, C., Bessell, M

    Onken, C. A., Wolf, C., Bessell, M. S., et al. 2019, PASA, 36, e033

    work page 2019

  39. [39]

    A., Bovy, J., Jaimungal, S., Frankel, N., & Leung, H

    Patil, A. A., Bovy, J., Jaimungal, S., Frankel, N., & Leung, H. W. 2023, MNRAS, 526, 1997

    work page 2023

  40. [40]

    Queiroz, A. B. A., Anders, F., Chiappini, C., et al. 2020, A&A, 638, A76

    work page 2020

  41. [41]

    2016, MNRAS, 463, 1137

    Rebassa-Mansergas, A., Anguiano, B., García-Berro, E., et al. 2016, MNRAS, 463, 1137

    work page 2016

  42. [42]

    2023, MNRAS, 526, 4787

    Rebassa-Mansergas, A., Maldonado, J., Raddi, R., et al. 2023, MNRAS, 526, 4787

    work page 2023

  43. [43]

    F., et al

    Rebassa-Mansergas, A., Raddi, R., Pala, A. F., et al. 2025, ESO white paper, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2512.14769

    work page arXiv 2025

  44. [44]

    W., Han, Z., & García-Berro, E

    Rebassa-Mansergas, A., Rybicka, M., Liu, X. W., Han, Z., & García-Berro, E. 2015, MNRAS, 452, 1637

    work page 2015

  45. [45]

    G., Miller Bertolami, M

    Renedo, I., Althaus, L. G., Miller Bertolami, M. M., et al. 2010, ApJ, 717, 183

    work page 2010

  46. [46]

    J., Maciel, W

    Rocha-Pinto, H. J., Maciel, W. J., Scalo, J., & Flynn, C. 2000, A&A, 358, 850

    work page 2000

  47. [47]

    L., Feltzing, S., & Feuillet, D

    Sahlholdt, C. L., Feltzing, S., & Feuillet, D. K. 2022, MNRAS, 510, 4669 Schönrich, R. & Binney, J. 2009, MNRAS, 399, 1145

    work page 2022

  48. [48]

    Soderblom, D. R. 2010, ARA&A, 48, 581

    work page 2010

  49. [49]

    & Joyce, M

    Tayar, J. & Joyce, M. 2025, ApJ, 984, L56

    work page 2025

  50. [50]

    & Rix, H.-W

    Ting, Y .-S. & Rix, H.-W. 2019, ApJ, 878, 21

    work page 2019

  51. [51]

    2023, The Messenger, 190, 4

    Toloza, O., Rebassa-Mansergas, A., Raddi, R., et al. 2023, The Messenger, 190, 4

    work page 2023

  52. [52]

    2023, A&A, 677, A159

    Torres, S., Cruz, P., Murillo-Ojeda, R., et al. 2023, A&A, 677, A159

    work page 2023

  53. [53]

    Twarog, B. A. 1980, ApJ, 242, 242

    work page 1980

  54. [54]

    & Rix, H.-W

    Xiang, M. & Rix, H.-W. 2022, Nature, 603, 599

    work page 2022

  55. [55]

    2025, A&A, 695, A75

    Ye, X., Wu, W., Allende Prieto, C., et al. 2025, A&A, 695, A75

    work page 2025

  56. [56]

    K., Oswalt, T

    Zhao, J. K., Oswalt, T. D., Rudkin, M., Zhao, G., & Chen, Y . Q. 2011, AJ, 141, 107 Article number, page 7 of 8 A&A proofs:manuscript no. wdms Appendix A: [Fe/H] abundance comparison We provide in this Appendix figures displaying the comparison between the [Fe/H] values measured from the different studies considered in this work, as detailed in Section 5....

    work page 2011