pith. machine review for the scientific record. sign in

arxiv: 2604.22983 · v1 · submitted 2026-04-24 · 🌌 astro-ph.SR · astro-ph.EP· astro-ph.GA

Recognition: unknown

The POKEMON Speckle Survey of Nearby M dwarfs. IV. Distance-Limited Catalog (POKEMON-DLC)

Catherine A. Clark , Zafar Rustamkulov , Gerard T. van Belle , Mark E. Everett , Colin Littlefield , Sarah J. Deveny , David R. Ciardi , Kaspar von Braun
Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-08 09:42 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.SR astro-ph.EPastro-ph.GA
keywords M dwarfsstellar multiplicityspeckle imagingGaia astrometrycompanion separation distributionsolar neighborhoodultracool dwarfsvolume-limited sample
0
0 comments X

The pith

Speckle imaging of 66 additional Gaia-identified M dwarfs within 15 pc detects four new companions and revises the projected separation peak to 7.91 AU with multiplicity rate 22.7%.

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

The paper extends an existing volume-limited speckle survey by adding observations of 66 new M-dwarf primaries that Gaia astrometry placed inside 15 pc, increasing the ultracool dwarf portion of the sample by a factor of 1.6. After identifying four likely bound companions in the new data and folding in literature companions, the authors recompute the distribution of projected separations and the overall rates of stellar multiplicity and companions. A sympathetic reader would care because these numbers describe the typical architectures of the most abundant stars in the solar neighborhood, which set the context for how the Sun formed and how planets form around the majority of nearby stars.

Core claim

The POKEMON-DLC catalog supplies diffraction-limited speckle observations for the 66 supplemental M-dwarf primaries, yielding four likely bound companions. After a literature search for additional companions, the projected separation distribution peaks at 7.91 au with log-normal parameters σ_log(a) = 1.1 and SE_log(a) = 0.10. The updated M-dwarf stellar multiplicity rate is 22.7 ± 1.8% and the companion rate is 27.5 ± 2.0%. These results demonstrate the value of Gaia for completing nearby low-mass samples and point to future characterization by SPHEREx.

What carries the argument

The POKEMON-DLC supplemental catalog of 66 Gaia-selected M-dwarf primaries observed at diffraction-limited resolution to detect close companions.

If this is right

  • The refined separation distribution supplies a tighter observational prior for models of low-mass binary formation.
  • The 22.7% multiplicity rate raises the expected number of close stellar companions that must be accounted for in planet-search surveys around M dwarfs.
  • The expanded ultracool dwarf sample enables more complete demographic studies of the faintest stars in the solar neighborhood.
  • Gaia-based selection of volume-limited targets can be applied to other stellar populations to reduce incompleteness in multiplicity statistics.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The 7.91 au peak may correspond to a characteristic scale set by the typical fragmentation radius in low-mass molecular cores.
  • Higher companion rates imply that dynamical interactions in M-dwarf systems could truncate or excite protoplanetary disks more often than around solar-type stars.
  • Extending the same speckle survey to the southern sky would remove the declination bias and yield a truly all-sky multiplicity census.
  • Cross-matching the updated catalog with upcoming infrared spectroscopy from SPHEREx could directly test whether the new companions have the same metallicity and age as their primaries.

Load-bearing premise

The four newly detected sources are physically bound companions and the Gaia-selected targets are all genuine M-dwarf primaries inside 15 pc with negligible contamination or selection bias.

What would settle it

Radial-velocity time series or common-proper-motion follow-up showing that any of the four new companions lack orbital motion or shared motion with the primary at the observed separation.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2604.22983 by Catherine A. Clark, Colin Littlefield, David R. Ciardi, Gerard T. van Belle, Kaspar von Braun, Mark E. Everett, Sarah J. Deveny, Zafar Rustamkulov.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: The sky locations of the 66 targets in the POKEMON-DLC supplemental catalog. Targets with no known companions are marked with open black circles, targets with known companions (but without companions detected by us) are marked with filled black circles, and targets with likely bound companions detected by us are marked with larger, orange stars. thereby improving the sensitivity of the instrument to faint … view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Distance (left) and absolute G magnitude (right) distributions for the targets in the volume-limited, 15-pc POKEMON catalog. The POKEMON-DLC targets from this work are shown in orange. We use the mass-magnitude relation from T. J. Henry & W.-C. Jao (2024) to estimate the masses of these targets. (2024a). All data products (reconstructed images and contrasts) will be made publicly available on the Exoplanet… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Starting from the top left corner and moving in a clockwise direction are the companions we detected to 2MASS J01283952-1458042, PM J02024+1034 A, 2MASS J05103956+2946479, 2MASS J07171706-0501031, 2MASS J10430293-0912410, and 2MASS J19445376-2337591. These reconstructed images sometimes contain a third “ghost peak” due to low SNR result￾ing in a lack of phase information. As noted in Section 3.1, the compa… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Projected separation distribution for the 143 stellar companions to the M dwarfs in the 15-pc POKEMON catalog. The peak of the distribution is at 7.91 au (σlog(a) = 1.1, SElog(a) = 0.10), which is consistent with other studies of M dwarf multiplicity (i.e., G. Duchˆene & A. Kraus 2013; M. Janson et al. 2014; J. G. Winters et al. 2019). The multiplicity rate is simply defined as the percentage of systems th… view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: The POKEMON catalog as a function of spectral type and distance, colored by the level of saturation across the six SPHEREx bands. All stars earlier than spectral type M4.5 saturate at least one band. Points encapsulated in green circles were manually spot-checked using the IRSA SPHEREx Spectrophotometry Tool and showed few or no saturation flags in the brightest image pixels. Boxed points showed saturation… view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Publicly available SPHEREx spectrum (black circles) of the notable UCD TRAPPIST-1, overlaid with two JWST/NIRSpec-PRISM observations from 2022 (blue and purple lines). The SPHEREx data agree with both JWST spectra, but show systematic tension with the 2600 K cloudless (orange) and cloudy (pink) SPHINX models. These data demonstrate the potential for SPHEREx to inform models of UCDs. We note that none of th… view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: The estimated number of stars characterized by SPHEREx as a function of spectral type. The yellow line represents the number of stars of a given spectral type expected to achieve an SNR ≥ 5 in any of its 102 channels. The yellow-green line shows the number of stars expected to reach an SNR ≥ 50. The lines below show the same SNR threshold, but with 100-, 30-, and 15-pc distance cuts applied. SPHEREx will m… view at source ↗
read the original abstract

The Solar Neighborhood is dominated by stars smaller, colder, and fainter than the Sun: the M dwarfs. If we are to understand the context in which the Sun formed and evolved, then we must investigate the system architectures of our low-mass neighbors. We have therefore carried out the Pervasive Overview of Kompanions of Every M Dwarf in Our Neighborhood (POKEMON) speckle survey of nearby M-dwarf primaries. We created the survey with the goal of observing a volume-limited (north of -30 degrees) sample of M-dwarf primaries through M9 out to 15 pc at diffraction-limited resolution. Pre-Gaia parallax measurements yielded a catalog of 454 nearby M-dwarf primaries. However, the precise astrometry from Gaia indicated that there are additional low-mass sources within 15 pc. Here we present the POKEMON-Distance Limited Catalog (POKEMON-DLC), a supplemental catalog that consists of speckle observations for the 66 additional M-dwarf primaries identified by Gaia, increasing the number of ultracool dwarf (later than M6.5) primaries in the POKEMON catalog by a factor of 1.6. In our observations we detect four likely bound companions. After carrying out a literature search for additional companions, we update the projected separation distribution and find a peak at 7.91 au ({\sigma}log(a) = 1.1, SElog(a) = 0.10). We also update the M-dwarf stellar multiplicity and companion rates, and find values of 22.7 p/m 1.8% and 27.5 p/m 2.0%, respectively. These results emphasize the utility of Gaia for identifying low-mass, nearby sources, and we find that ensuing characterization of these sources by SPHEREx will continue to clarify the nature of the Solar Neighborhood.

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

4 major / 3 minor

Summary. The paper presents the POKEMON-Distance Limited Catalog (POKEMON-DLC) as a supplement to the original POKEMON speckle survey. It adds speckle observations of 66 additional M-dwarf primaries within 15 pc identified via Gaia astrometry (increasing the ultracool dwarf primary count by a factor of 1.6), reports four new likely bound companions, performs a literature search for additional companions, and updates the projected separation distribution (peak at 7.91 au with σ_log(a) = 1.1) along with the M-dwarf multiplicity rate (22.7 ± 1.8%) and companion rate (27.5 ± 2.0%).

Significance. If the new primaries are confirmed as genuine nearby M dwarfs and the four detections are bound, the work provides a concrete observational update to the solar-neighborhood M-dwarf binary statistics by enlarging the volume-limited sample and refining the separation distribution. This strengthens the empirical foundation for low-mass star formation studies and highlights Gaia's utility for completing the nearby stellar census, with potential follow-up value for missions such as SPHEREx.

major comments (4)
  1. [Section 2] Section 2 (Sample Selection): The 66 Gaia-identified sources are treated as clean M-dwarf primaries, but the manuscript provides no quantitative contamination estimate, no explicit parallax-error threshold, no color-magnitude verification procedure, and no assessment of possible background or non-M-dwarf interlopers. With the total sample size only ~520 stars, even modest contamination would shift the reported rates by amounts comparable to the quoted uncertainties.
  2. [Section 3] Section 3 (Observations and Companion Detection): The four detected sources are labeled 'likely bound companions' without supporting calculations such as chance-alignment probabilities, common-proper-motion checks, RUWE values, or multi-epoch astrometric follow-up. This assumption is load-bearing for the updated companion rate of 27.5 ± 2.0%.
  3. [Section 5] Section 5 (Statistical Updates): The multiplicity rate (22.7 ± 1.8%) and companion rate are presented after adding the new primaries and companions, yet the error-propagation method, sample-completeness corrections, and handling of selection biases in the supplemental Gaia sample are not detailed. It is therefore unclear whether the quoted uncertainties fully reflect the impact of the 66 new objects.
  4. [Section 4] Section 4 (Separation Distribution): The reported peak at 7.91 au (σ_log(a) = 1.1, SE_log(a) = 0.10) is derived after a literature search, but the fitting method (e.g., maximum-likelihood, kernel density, or binned histogram) and robustness tests against the four new companions are not specified, making it difficult to assess whether the peak is stable.
minor comments (3)
  1. [References] Ensure consistent citation of the Gaia data release version used for the 66 sources and provide a reference for the original POKEMON catalog construction.
  2. [Figure 3] The separation-distribution figure would benefit from explicit error bars or bootstrap confidence intervals on the peak location.
  3. [Section 5] Clarify the definition of SE_log(a) in the text and table captions.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

4 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their careful reading and valuable comments on our manuscript. We have carefully considered each point and made revisions to the manuscript to address the concerns raised. Our point-by-point responses are provided below.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Section 2] Section 2 (Sample Selection): The 66 Gaia-identified sources are treated as clean M-dwarf primaries, but the manuscript provides no quantitative contamination estimate, no explicit parallax-error threshold, no color-magnitude verification procedure, and no assessment of possible background or non-M-dwarf interlopers. With the total sample size only ~520 stars, even modest contamination would shift the reported rates by amounts comparable to the quoted uncertainties.

    Authors: We agree that a more detailed discussion of the sample selection and potential contamination is warranted. In the original manuscript, the selection was based on Gaia DR3 astrometry with a parallax threshold corresponding to distances <15 pc and photometric criteria to identify M dwarfs. However, we did not quantify the contamination rate. In the revised version, we will include an estimate of contamination using the expected number of background stars from Gaia source density and a color-magnitude diagram verification procedure. We will also specify the parallax_over_error threshold used (typically >5 or 10 for reliable distances). This will be added to Section 2. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Section 3] Section 3 (Observations and Companion Detection): The four detected sources are labeled 'likely bound companions' without supporting calculations such as chance-alignment probabilities, common-proper-motion checks, RUWE values, or multi-epoch astrometric follow-up. This assumption is load-bearing for the updated companion rate of 27.5 ± 2.0%.

    Authors: The labeling as 'likely bound' is based on their small angular separations (well within the expected binary separation distribution) and the low surface density of stars in the solar neighborhood, making chance alignment improbable. However, we acknowledge the lack of explicit calculations. In revision, we will add chance-alignment probability estimates calculated using the formula P = 1 - exp(-π θ^2 Σ), where Σ is the local stellar density from Gaia. For common proper motion, since these are new Gaia sources, we note that follow-up is planned but not available yet; we will qualify the companions as candidates pending confirmation. RUWE values for the primaries are typically low (<1.4), indicating no significant astrometric perturbation, but we will report them. This addresses the concern without overclaiming. revision: partial

  3. Referee: [Section 5] Section 5 (Statistical Updates): The multiplicity rate (22.7 ± 1.8%) and companion rate are presented after adding the new primaries and companions, yet the error-propagation method, sample-completeness corrections, and handling of selection biases in the supplemental Gaia sample are not detailed. It is therefore unclear whether the quoted uncertainties fully reflect the impact of the 66 new objects.

    Authors: The rates were calculated using binomial statistics for the multiplicity fraction, with uncertainties from the standard error formula sqrt(p(1-p)/N). For the supplemental sample, we assumed similar completeness to the original POKEMON sample since the observations were conducted with the same instrument and strategy. However, we did not explicitly detail bias corrections for the Gaia selection. In the revised manuscript, we will expand Section 5 to include the error propagation method (using Monte Carlo simulations to account for uncertainties in companion detections), discuss completeness (estimated at >90% for separations >0.1 arcsec), and address potential biases by comparing the new sample's properties to the original. We will also provide the updated rates with and without the new objects to show the impact. revision: yes

  4. Referee: [Section 4] Section 4 (Separation Distribution): The reported peak at 7.91 au (σ_log(a) = 1.1, SE_log(a) = 0.10) is derived after a literature search, but the fitting method (e.g., maximum-likelihood, kernel density, or binned histogram) and robustness tests against the four new companions are not specified, making it difficult to assess whether the peak is stable.

    Authors: The projected separation distribution was modeled as a log-normal distribution, with parameters estimated via maximum likelihood estimation on the combined sample of companions from literature and new detections. The peak at 7.91 au corresponds to the mode of the fitted distribution. To address robustness, we will add in the revision a description of the fitting procedure and results from jackknife tests or fits excluding the four new companions, which show the peak remains stable around 7-8 au. We will also specify the use of the emcee or scipy.optimize for the fit and provide the likelihood function used. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: purely observational catalog compilation and literature update with no self-referential derivations or fitted predictions.

full rationale

The paper reports new speckle observations of 66 Gaia-identified M-dwarf primaries, detects four companions, performs a literature search for known companions, and tabulates updated empirical statistics (separation peak, multiplicity rate 22.7±1.8%, companion rate 27.5±2.0%). These are direct counts and histogram summaries from the combined sample; no equations, model fits, or ansatzes are introduced that reduce the reported quantities to prior results by construction. The separation distribution and rates are computed from the observed and literature-compiled data without any self-citation chain or uniqueness theorem invoked to force the outcome. The analysis is self-contained against external benchmarks (Gaia astrometry, speckle imaging, published companion lists) and does not rename known results or smuggle assumptions via citation. Minor self-citations to prior POKEMON papers exist for survey context but are not load-bearing for the new catalog statistics.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The work rests on standard domain assumptions in stellar astronomy rather than new postulates or fitted parameters. No free parameters or invented entities are introduced.

axioms (2)
  • domain assumption Gaia DR3 astrometry reliably identifies additional M-dwarf primaries within the 15 pc volume limit north of -30 degrees
    The supplemental catalog of 66 sources is defined directly from Gaia data as stated in the abstract.
  • domain assumption Speckle detections at small projected separations correspond to likely bound companions
    Four sources are classified as likely bound without further orbital confirmation details in the abstract.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5699 in / 1462 out tokens · 47921 ms · 2026-05-08T09:42:19.522941+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

149 extracted references · 121 canonical work pages · 3 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    1200, The HIPPARCOS and TYCHO catalogues

    1997, ESA Special Publication, Vol. 1200, The HIPPARCOS and TYCHO catalogues. Astrometric and photometric star catalogues derived from the ESA HIPPARCOS Space Astrometry Mission

    1997

  2. [2]

    Aitken, R. G. 1899, Astronomische Nachrichten, 150, 113, doi: 10.1002/asna.18991500802

    work page doi:10.1002/asna.18991500802

  3. [3]

    Exploring the Formation and Evolution of Planetary Systems , year = 2014, editor =

    Allard, F. 2014, in IAU Symposium, Vol. 299, Exploring the Formation and Evolution of Planetary Systems, ed. M. Booth, B. C. Matthews, & J. R. Graham, 271–272, doi: 10.1017/S1743921313008545 Astropy Collaboration, Robitaille, T. P., Tollerud, E. J., et al. 2013, A&A, 558, A33, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201322068

    work page doi:10.1017/s1743921313008545 2014

  4. [4]

    I., Balega, Y

    Balega, I. I., Balega, Y. Y., Maksimov, A. F., et al. 1999, A&AS, 140, 287, doi: 10.1051/aas:1999422

    work page doi:10.1051/aas:1999422 1999

  5. [5]

    1996, ApJL, 461, L51, doi: 10.1086/309988

    Baraffe, I., & Chabrier, G. 1996, ApJL, 461, L51, doi: 10.1086/309988

    work page doi:10.1086/309988 1996

  6. [6]

    C., Ribas, I., et al

    Baroch, D., Morales, J. C., Ribas, I., et al. 2018, A&A, 619, A32, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201833440

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201833440 2018

  7. [7]

    H., & Henry, T

    Wasserman, L. H., & Henry, T. J. 2000, AJ, 120, 1106, doi: 10.1086/301495

    work page doi:10.1086/301495 2000

  8. [8]

    L., S´ egransan, D., Forveille, T., et al

    Beuzit, J. L., S´ egransan, D., Forveille, T., et al. 2004, A&A, 425, 997, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20048006

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20048006 2004

  9. [9]

    1987, A&AS, 71, 57

    Blazit, A., Bonneau, D., & Foy, R. 1987, A&AS, 71, 57

    1987

  10. [10]

    J., Aboobaker, A

    Bock, J. J., Aboobaker, A. M., Adamo, J., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2511.02985, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2511.02985

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2511.02985 2025

  11. [11]

    P., Liu, M

    Bowler, B. P., Liu, M. C., Shkolnik, E. L., & Tamura, M. 2015, ApJS, 216, 7, doi: 10.1088/0067-0049/216/1/7

    work page doi:10.1088/0067-0049/216/1/7 2015

  12. [12]

    D., et al

    Brooks, H., Caselden, D., Kirkpatrick, J. D., et al. 2024, AJ, 168, 211, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/ad77d2

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-3881/ad77d2 2024

  13. [13]

    Burnham, S. W. 1891b, Astronomische Nachrichten, 127, 369, doi: 10.1002/asna.18911272301

    work page doi:10.1002/asna.18911272301

  14. [14]

    Burnham, S. W. 1913, Measures of proper motion stars made with the 40-inch refractor of the Yerkes observatory in the years 1907 to 1912

    1913

  15. [15]

    R., Beichman, C

    Ciardi, D. R., Beichman, C. A., Horch, E. P., & Howell, S. B. 2015, ApJ, 805, 16, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/805/1/16

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/805/1/16 2015

  16. [16]

    A., Horch, E

    Clark, C. A., Horch, E. P., & Davidson, J. W. 2023, Research Notes of the American Astronomical Society, 7, 206, doi: 10.3847/2515-5172/acfee1

    work page doi:10.3847/2515-5172/acfee1 2023

  17. [17]

    A., van Belle, G

    Clark, C. A., van Belle, G. T., Ciardi, D. R., et al. 2022a, AJ, 163, 232, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/ac6101

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-3881/ac6101

  18. [18]

    A., van Belle, G

    Clark, C. A., van Belle, G. T., Horch, E. P., et al. 2022b, AJ, 164, 33, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/ac739c

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-3881/ac739c

  19. [19]

    A., van Belle , G

    Clark, C. A., van Belle, G. T., Horch, E. P., et al. 2024a, AJ, 167, 56, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/ad0bfd

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-3881/ad0bfd

  20. [20]

    A., van Belle, G

    Clark, C. A., van Belle, G. T., Horch, E. P., et al. 2024b, AJ, 167, 174, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/ad267d

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-3881/ad267d

  21. [21]

    A., van Belle, G

    Clark, C. A., van Belle, G. T., Horch, E. P., et al. 2024c, AJ, 168, 228, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/ad81fa

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-3881/ad81fa

  22. [22]

    A., van Belle, G

    Clark, C. A., van Belle, G. T., Horch, E. P., et al. 2024d, AJ, 168, 229, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/ad7eb3

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-3881/ad7eb3

  23. [23]

    , keywords =

    Condon, S. S., Padin, S., Bock, J., et al. 2024, ApOpt, 63, 3453, doi: 10.1364/AO.514784 Cort´ es-Contreras, M., B´ ejar, V. J. S., Caballero, J. A., et al. 2017, A&A, 597, A47, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201629056

    work page doi:10.1364/ao.514784 2024

  24. [24]

    C., Harrington, R

    Dahn, C. C., Harrington, R. S., Riepe, B. Y., et al. 1976, Publications of the U.S. Naval Observatory Second Series, 24, 1

    1976

  25. [25]

    L., et al

    Delfosse, X., Forveille, T., Beuzit, J. L., et al. 1999a, A&A, 344, 897, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.astro-ph/9812008

    work page internal anchor Pith review doi:10.48550/arxiv.astro-ph/9812008

  26. [26]

    1999b, A&A, 350, L39, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.astro-ph/9909409

    Delfosse, X., Forveille, T., Udry, S., et al. 1999b, A&A, 350, L39, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.astro-ph/9909409

    work page internal anchor Pith review doi:10.48550/arxiv.astro-ph/9909409

  27. [27]

    H., Bender, C

    Deshpande, R., Blake, C. H., Bender, C. F., et al. 2013, AJ, 146, 156, doi: 10.1088/0004-6256/146/6/156

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-6256/146/6/156 2013

  28. [28]

    B., Henry , T

    Dieterich, S. B., Henry, T. J., Jao, W.-C., et al. 2014, AJ, 147, 94, doi: 10.1088/0004-6256/147/5/94 Duchˆ ene, G., & Kraus, A. 2013, ARA&A, 51, 269, doi: 10.1146/annurev-astro-081710-102602

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-6256/147/5/94 2014

  29. [29]

    J., & Liu, M

    Dupuy, T. J., & Liu, M. C. 2012, ApJS, 201, 19, doi: 10.1088/0067-0049/201/2/19

    work page doi:10.1088/0067-0049/201/2/19 2012

  30. [30]

    1988, A&A, 200, 135

    Duquennoy, A., & Mayor, M. 1988, A&A, 200, 135

    1988

  31. [31]

    El-Badry, K., Rix, H.-W., & Heintz, T. M. 2021, MNRAS, 506, 2269, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stab323

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stab323 2021

  32. [32]

    Espin, T. E. 1920, MNRAS, 80, 329, doi: 10.1093/mnras/80.3.329

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/80.3.329 1920

  33. [33]

    E., & Milburn, W

    Espin, T. E., & Milburn, W. 1926, MNRAS, 86, 131, doi: 10.1093/mnras/86.3.131

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/86.3.131 1926

  34. [34]

    J., Skrutskie, M

    Forrest, W. J., Skrutskie, M. F., & Shure, M. 1988, ApJL, 330, L119, doi: 10.1086/185218

    work page doi:10.1086/185218 1988

  35. [35]

    L., Delorme, P., et al

    Forveille, T., Beuzit, J. L., Delorme, P., et al. 2005, A&A, 435, L5, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:200500101 Fouqu´ e, P., Moutou, C., Malo, L., et al. 2018, MNRAS, 475, 1960, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stx3246

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361:200500101 2005

  36. [36]

    G., Henry, T

    Franz, O. G., Henry, T. J., Wasserman, L. H., et al. 1998, AJ, 116, 1432, doi: 10.1086/300500 Gaia Collaboration, Prusti, T., de Bruijne, J. H. J., et al. 2016, A&A, 595, A1, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201629272 Gaia Collaboration, Smart, R. L., Sarro, L. M., et al. 2021, A&A, 649, A6, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202039498 20 Gaia Collaboration, Vallenari, A., Bro...

    work page doi:10.1086/300500 1998

  37. [37]

    L., Burnham, R., & Thomas, N

    Giclas, H. L., Burnham, R., & Thomas, N. G. 1971, Lowell proper motion survey Northern Hemisphere. The G numbered stars. 8991 stars fainter than magnitude 8 with motions>0”.26/year

    1971

  38. [38]

    2022, Astronomische Nachrichten, 343, e20224008, doi: 10.1002/asna.20224008

    Gili, R., Prieur, J.-L., Rivet, J.-P., et al. 2022, Astronomische Nachrichten, 343, e20224008, doi: 10.1002/asna.20224008

    work page doi:10.1002/asna.20224008 2022

  39. [39]

    P., Rackham, B

    Gillon, M., Pedersen, P. P., Rackham, B. V., et al. 2024, Nature Astronomy, 8, 865, doi: 10.1038/s41550-024-02271-2

    work page doi:10.1038/s41550-024-02271-2 2024

  40. [40]

    E., & Reid, N

    Gizis, J. E., & Reid, N. I. 1996, AJ, 111, 365, doi: 10.1086/117789

    work page doi:10.1086/117789 1996

  41. [41]

    1991, Preliminary Version of the Third Catalogue of Nearby Stars,, On: The Astronomical Data Center CD-ROM: Selected Astronomical Catalogs, Vol

    Gliese, W., & Jahreiß, H. 1991, Preliminary Version of the Third Catalogue of Nearby Stars,, On: The Astronomical Data Center CD-ROM: Selected Astronomical Catalogs, Vol. I; L.E. Brotzmann, S.E. Gesser (eds.), NASA/Astronomical Data Center, Goddard Space Flight

    1991

  42. [42]

    R., Millman, K

    Harris, C. R., Millman, K. J., van der Walt, S. J., et al. 2020, Nature, 585, 357–362, doi: 10.1038/s41586-020-2649-2

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

  43. [43]

    I., Mason, B

    Hartkopf, W. I., Mason, B. D., & Worley, C. E. 2001, AJ, 122, 3472, doi: 10.1086/323921

    work page doi:10.1086/323921 2001

  44. [44]

    I., McAlister, H

    Hartkopf, W. I., McAlister, H. A., Mason, B. D., et al. 1994, AJ, 108, 2299, doi: 10.1086/117242

    work page doi:10.1086/117242 1994

  45. [45]

    Heintz, W. D. 1987, ApJS, 65, 161, doi: 10.1086/191221

    work page doi:10.1086/191221 1987

  46. [46]

    Heintz, W. D. 1993, AJ, 105, 1188, doi: 10.1086/116503

    work page doi:10.1086/116503 1993

  47. [47]

    , keywords =

    Henry, T. J., Franz, O. G., Wasserman, L. H., et al. 1999, ApJ, 512, 864, doi: 10.1086/306793

    work page doi:10.1086/306793 1999

  48. [48]

    J., Ianna, P

    Henry, T. J., Ianna, P. A., Kirkpatrick, J. D., & Jahreiss, H. 1997, AJ, 114, 388, doi: 10.1086/118482

    work page doi:10.1086/118482 1997

  49. [49]

    J., & Jao, W.-C

    Henry, T. J., & Jao, W.-C. 2024, ARA&A, 62, 593, doi: 10.1146/annurev-astro-052722-102740

    work page doi:10.1146/annurev-astro-052722-102740 2024

  50. [50]

    doi:10.1086/508233 , eprint =

    Henry, T. J., Jao, W.-C., Subasavage, J. P., et al. 2006, AJ, 132, 2360, doi: 10.1086/508233

    work page doi:10.1086/508233 2006

  51. [51]

    J., Jao, W.-C., Winters, J

    Henry, T. J., Jao, W.-C., Winters, J. G., et al. 2018, AJ, 155, 265, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/aac262

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-3881/aac262 2018

  52. [52]

    H., & Moorhead, J

    Herbig, G. H., & Moorhead, J. M. 1965, ApJ, 141, 649, doi: 10.1086/148150

    work page doi:10.1086/148150 1965

  53. [53]

    1909, Astronomische Nachrichten, 180, 39, doi: 10.1002/asna.19091800203

    Hertzsprung, E. 1909, Astronomische Nachrichten, 180, 39, doi: 10.1002/asna.19091800203

    work page doi:10.1002/asna.19091800203 1909

  54. [54]

    A., Rosenthal, L., Fulton, B

    Hirsch, L. A., Rosenthal, L., Fulton, B. J., et al. 2021, AJ, 161, 134, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/abd639

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-3881/abd639 2021

  55. [55]

    1982, The Bright Star Catalogue

    Hoffleit, D., & Jaschek, C. 1982, The Bright Star Catalogue. Fourth revised edition. (Containing data compiled through 1979)

    1982

  56. [56]

    P., Bahi, L

    Horch, E. P., Bahi, L. A. P., Gaulin, J. R., et al. 2012, AJ, 143, 10, doi: 10.1088/0004-6256/143/1/10

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-6256/143/1/10 2012

  57. [57]

    P., Falta, D., Anderson, L

    Horch, E. P., Falta, D., Anderson, L. M., et al. 2010, AJ, 139, 205, doi: 10.1088/0004-6256/139/1/205

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-6256/139/1/205 2010

  58. [58]

    P., Gomez, S

    Horch, E. P., Gomez, S. C., Sherry, W. H., et al. 2011a, AJ, 141, 45, doi: 10.1088/0004-6256/141/2/45

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-6256/141/2/45

  59. [59]

    P., Meyer, R

    Horch, E. P., Meyer, R. D., & van Altena, W. F. 2004, AJ, 127, 1727, doi: 10.1086/381956

    work page doi:10.1086/381956 2004

  60. [60]

    P., van Altena, W

    Horch, E. P., van Altena, W. F., Howell, S. B., Sherry, W. H., & Ciardi, D. R. 2011b, AJ, 141, 180, doi: 10.1088/0004-6256/141/6/180

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-6256/141/6/180

  61. [61]

    P., van Belle, G

    Horch, E. P., van Belle, G. T., Davidson, Jr., J. W., et al. 2015, AJ, 150, 151, doi: 10.1088/0004-6256/150/5/151

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-6256/150/5/151 2015

  62. [62]

    P., Veillette, D

    Horch, E. P., Veillette, D. R., Baena Gall´ e, R., et al. 2009, AJ, 137, 5057, doi: 10.1088/0004-6256/137/6/5057

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-6256/137/6/5057 2009

  63. [63]

    P., van Belle, G

    Horch, E. P., van Belle, G. T., Davidson, Jr., J. W., et al. 2020, AJ, 159, 233, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/ab87a6

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-3881/ab87a6 2020

  64. [64]

    P., Broderick , K

    Horch, E. P., Broderick, K. G., Casetti-Dinescu, D. I., et al. 2021, AJ, 161, 295, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/abf9a8

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-3881/abf9a8 2021

  65. [65]

    Hough, G. W. 1899, Astronomische Nachrichten, 149, 65, doi: 10.1002/asna.18991490502

    work page doi:10.1002/asna.18991490502

  66. [66]

    Hunter, J. D. 2007, Computing in science & engineering, 9, 90

    2007

  67. [67]

    Hussey, W. J. 1904, Lick Observatory Bulletin, 57, 180, doi: 10.5479/ADS/bib/1904LicOB.2.180H

    work page doi:10.5479/ads/bib/1904licob.2.180h 1904

  68. [68]

    Faherty, J. K. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2512.02269, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2512.02269

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2512.02269 2025

  69. [69]

    R., Line M

    Gharib-Nezhad, E. 2023, ApJ, 944, 41, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/acabc2

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/acabc2 2023

  70. [70]

    2014, ApJ, 789, 102, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/789/2/102

    Janson, M., Bergfors, C., Brandner, W., et al. 2014, ApJ, 789, 102, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/789/2/102

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/789/2/102 2014

  71. [71]

    2012, title The AstraLux Large M-dwarf Multiplicity Survey , , 754, 44, 10.1088/0004-637X/754/1/44

    Janson, M., Hormuth, F., Bergfors, C., et al. 2012, ApJ, 754, 44, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/754/1/44

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/754/1/44 2012

  72. [72]

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201629599 , keywords =

    Jeffers, S. V., Sch¨ ofer, P., Lamert, A., et al. 2018, A&A, 614, A76, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201629599 J´ odar, E., P´ erez-Garrido, A., D´ ıaz-S´ anchez, A., et al. 2013, MNRAS, 429, 859, doi: 10.1093/mnras/sts382

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201629599 2018

  73. [73]

    Joy, A. H. 1942, PASP, 54, 33, doi: 10.1086/125392

    work page doi:10.1086/125392 1942

  74. [74]

    Joy, A. H. 1947, ApJ, 105, 96, doi: 10.1086/144886

    work page doi:10.1086/144886 1947

  75. [75]

    2025, A&A, 695, A195, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202452011

    Karpov, S., Malkov, O., & Avdeeva, A. 2025, A&A, 695, A195, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202452011

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202452011 2025

  76. [76]

    F., Steinz, J

    Kessler, M. F., Steinz, J. A., Anderegg, M. E., et al. 1996, A&A, 315, L27

    1996

  77. [77]

    D., Henry, T

    Kirkpatrick, J. D., Henry, T. J., & Irwin, M. J. 1997, AJ, 113, 1421, doi: 10.1086/118357

    work page doi:10.1086/118357 1997

  78. [78]

    D., Reid, I

    Kirkpatrick, J. D., Reid, I. N., Liebert, J., et al. 2000, AJ, 120, 447, doi: 10.1086/301427

    work page doi:10.1086/301427 2000

  79. [79]

    D., Schneider, A., Fajardo-Acosta, S., et al

    Kirkpatrick, J. D., Schneider, A., Fajardo-Acosta, S., et al. 2014, ApJ, 783, 122, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/783/2/122 21

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/783/2/122 2014

  80. [80]

    D., Marocco, F., Gelino, C

    Kirkpatrick, J. D., Marocco, F., Gelino, C. R., et al. 2024, ApJS, 271, 55, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/ad24e2

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4365/ad24e2 2024

Showing first 80 references.