pith. machine review for the scientific record. sign in

arxiv: 2604.26724 · v1 · submitted 2026-04-29 · 🌌 astro-ph.GA

Recognition: unknown

Radial Profiles of Binary Fraction in Elliptical Galaxies

Xiejin Li , Fenghui Zhang , Yinghe Zhao , Cheng Li , Zhanwen Han , Yunkun Han , Xiaoyu Kang
Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-07 13:19 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.GA
keywords binary fractionelliptical galaxiesradial profilesstellar populationsintegrated spectraUV upturngalaxy evolution
0
0 comments X

The pith

Binary fractions in elliptical galaxies stay nearly constant from center to one effective radius after stellar population correction.

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

The study measures radial changes in binary star fractions across a sample of elliptical galaxies using integrated light spectra. Once the effects of radially varying stellar populations are subtracted, the remaining binary fraction profile flattens substantially. Changes from the galaxy center to one effective radius stay below 5 percent in nearly every case examined. No strong connection appears between binary fraction gradients and gradients in stellar population properties. Galaxies showing UV upturns and those without exhibit similar binary fraction profiles, which may point to residual star formation in the non-upturn systems.

Core claim

After subtracting the radial variations induced by stellar populations, the median binary fraction becomes approximately flat. For nearly all galaxies in the sample the binary fraction at one effective radius differs from the central value by less than 5 percent. The binary fraction gradient shows no clear correlation with gradients in stellar population properties. Overall binary fraction profiles and stellar population properties are comparable between UV-upturn and non-UV-upturn galaxies.

What carries the argument

The stellar-population-subtracted binary fraction obtained from integrated spectral features, which isolates the binary contribution after removing radial changes in stellar populations.

If this is right

  • Binary stars maintain a uniform radial distribution in elliptical galaxies once stellar population effects are removed.
  • Dynamical evolution inside these galaxies does not generate detectable radial gradients in binary fraction.
  • Binary fraction is set independently of local stellar population age or metallicity gradients.
  • UV-upturn and non-UV-upturn galaxies share similar binary distributions, consistent with residual star formation in the non-upturn systems.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • A flat binary fraction profile suggests that binaries formed early and experienced little radial segregation during galaxy assembly.
  • The result could be checked against galaxy formation simulations that track binary dynamics explicitly.
  • Applying the same subtraction approach to spiral galaxies might reveal environment-dependent radial behaviors tied to ongoing star formation.
  • If the flatness holds, binary fractions may serve as a stable tracer of early star formation conditions rather than later dynamical processing.

Load-bearing premise

The spectral extraction method isolates binary signals accurately and stellar population models capture radial variations without residual bias that would affect the subtraction.

What would settle it

A measurement of binary fractions in a nearby elliptical galaxy, resolved into individual stars and corrected for stellar populations, that shows a radial change larger than 5 percent at one effective radius would contradict the flat profile.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2604.26724 by Cheng Li, Fenghui Zhang, Xiaoyu Kang, Xiejin Li, Yinghe Zhao, Yunkun Han, Zhanwen Han.

Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Image mosaic (top panel) and annular binned spaxels (red dots, bottom panel) of galaxy with MaNGA ID: 1-135964. The blue elliptical annuli represent that the S/N is greater than 10, while the green elliptical annulus indicates excluded external regions where the S/N of the stacked spectra is below 10. 2.1. Data and Sample Selection To derive the radial profiles of the binary fraction in elliptical galaxies… view at source ↗
Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: The BPT diagram for 9,500 galaxies that can be drawn with valid emission lines measurements from the par￾ent sample. The gray dots correspond to the AGNs that lie above the theoretical maximum starburst line (solid curve) defined by Kewley et al. (2001) and are excluded from our sample. The red dots indicate 363 elliptical galaxies selected from the remaining 5,997 galaxies (black dots). The dashed curve p… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: An example of stacked spectrum process and fitting of the first (innermost) elliptical annulus for the galaxy with MaNGA ID: 1-135964. The black line indicates the stacked observed spectrum, the orange line indicates the stacked pure continuum whose emission-line has been subtracted by the stacked emission-line model (light blue line), and the red line is the best-fitted stellar template with the pPXF. The… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: An example galaxy with MaNGA ID: 1-135964. From top to bottom: The first panel is the radial pro￾file of the derived binary fraction variation rb (green solid line), and the SP-induced binary fraction variation rb, sp (blue solid line). The second panel shows the corresponding SP-subtracted binary fraction variation rb,sub (green dashed line). The bottom two panels show the radial profiles of light￾weighte… view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: (a): The median radial profile of binary fraction variation r med b (solid line, top panel) and SP-subtracted binary fraction variation r med b, sub (dashed line, bottom panel) for all 513 elliptical galaxies. The median value at each radius bin is shown as a filled black circle with error bars indicating the range from the 16th to the 84th percentiles. (b): Distributions of binary fraction gradients (left… view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Same as view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: SP properties within 1Re derived with and without photometric fluxes. Left panel: The pure-continuum mean stellar age ⟨lg(t/yr)⟩Re against the photometry-included mean stellar age ⟨lg(t/yr)⟩Re,UVp. Right panel: The pure-continuum mean stellar metallicity ⟨[Z/H]⟩Re against the photometry-included mean stellar mtallicity ⟨[Z/H]⟩Re,UVp. (Non-) UV subsample is represented by filled magenta (black) circles, wit… view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Same as view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: (a): Two-color diagram for 29 UV (magenta dots) and 190 non-UV (black dots and circles) upturn galaxies following Yi et al. (2011) criteria (also see in Section 2.1). The vertical and horizontal dotted lines denote the criteria for RSF and UV￾weak regions, and the slanted dashed line is the demarcation for UV upturn galaxies. (b): Mean light-fractional contribution xj of pure-continuum (solid lines) and ph… view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: The gradients of binary fraction against the gradients of mean stellar age ∇⟨lg(t/yr)⟩ (left column), metallicity ∇⟨[Z/H]⟩ (middle column), and stellar velocity dispersion ∇σ⋆ (right column) for all 513 galaxies. The top panels show the distribution of corresponding SP property gradients, with vertical solid lines indicating the median values, for the UV and non-UV subsamples. Galaxies are colored by the … view at source ↗
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: The gradients of binary fraction as a function of stellar mass of galaxy for all 513 elliptical galaxies. Galaxies are colored by the corresponding mean stellar age derived from pure-continuum fitting within 1Re. The median value at each mass bin is shown as an open black square with error bars giving the corresponding dispersion. nary fraction of our sample, compared to the significant (> 10%) changes wh… view at source ↗
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: Same as view at source ↗
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: Top panel: Radial profiles of the binary frac￾tion (upper) and SP-subtracted binary fraction (lower) for subsamples using different S/N stacking methods. Bottom panel: Distribution of binary fraction gradient as a function of S/N gradient. The S/N ratio of the stacked spectra in each annulus is greater than 10 but not uniform. The inner annulus generally has a higher S/N than the outer one. To assess whet… view at source ↗
read the original abstract

The radial profile of binary fraction may vary with environment and is of significant importance for studying the formation mechanisms of binary stars and their dynamical evolution within globular clusters (GCs) and galaxies. However, existing studies remain limited to the Milky Way and its neighboring galaxies. Leveraging the method proposed by Zhang et al. for estimating the variation of binary fraction from integrated spectral features, we analyze a sample of 513 elliptical galaxies drawn from the Mapping Nearby Galaxies at Apache Point Observatory (MaNGA) survey to measure their radial binary fraction profiles. Our results show that after accounting for the effect induced by radial variations in the stellar population (SP), the median SP-subtracted binary fraction, $r_{\rm b,sub}^{\rm med}$, becomes approximately flat. For nearly all elliptical galaxies in our sample, the variation in binary fraction relative to the galaxy center at $1R_e$ is less than 5%. No clear correlation is found between the binary fraction gradient and the gradients of SP properties. Moreover, we also compare differences between ultraviolet (UV) upturn and non-UV upturn galaxies. The overall binary fraction profiles and SP properties of the non-UV upturn galaxies in our sample are comparable to those of the UV upturn galaxies. This similarity may arise from the presence of residual star formation (RSF) in the non-UV upturn systems.

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 / 2 minor

Summary. The paper analyzes radial binary fraction profiles in 513 elliptical galaxies from the MaNGA survey using the integrated-spectral method of Zhang et al. After subtracting radial stellar-population (SP) variations, the median SP-subtracted binary fraction r_b,sub^med is reported to be approximately flat, with <5% variation relative to the center at 1R_e for nearly all galaxies. No correlation is found between binary-fraction gradients and SP-property gradients, and the overall profiles are similar for UV-upturn and non-UV-upturn subsamples, possibly due to residual star formation in the latter.

Significance. If the central result holds, the finding of a radially flat binary fraction after SP subtraction would constrain binary-star formation and dynamical-evolution models in dense galactic environments, indicating that environment-driven radial variations are weaker than previously expected once SP effects are removed. The large, homogeneous MaNGA sample provides statistical weight to the median-profile result and the reported lack of correlation with SP gradients offers direct empirical support for the separability assumption underlying the subtraction.

major comments (2)
  1. [Abstract and §3] Abstract and §3 (results): the claim that r_b,sub^med is 'approximately flat' with 'variation ... less than 5%' at 1R_e is presented without reported uncertainties, error propagation through the SP subtraction, or quantitative assessment of whether the residual gradient is statistically consistent with zero; these omissions are load-bearing for the central claim.
  2. [§2 and §4] §2 (method) and §4 (discussion): the SP-subtraction step relies on the Zhang et al. technique plus the assumption that SP models capture radial variations independently of binary effects; while the reported absence of correlation between binary and SP gradients is consistent with independence, no explicit validation (e.g., mock spectra, alternative SP models, or residual-correlation tests) is described to quantify possible bias introduced by the subtraction.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] Notation for the median SP-subtracted binary fraction (r_b,sub^med) should be defined explicitly on first use and cross-referenced to the Zhang et al. definition for clarity.
  2. [§2] Sample selection criteria for the 513 MaNGA ellipticals (e.g., morphological cuts, S/N thresholds, redshift range) are referenced but not tabulated or described in sufficient detail to allow reproduction or bias assessment.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their careful and constructive review of our manuscript. We address each major comment below and will revise the paper to incorporate additional statistical rigor and validation as outlined.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract and §3] Abstract and §3 (results): the claim that r_b,sub^med is 'approximately flat' with 'variation ... less than 5%' at 1R_e is presented without reported uncertainties, error propagation through the SP subtraction, or quantitative assessment of whether the residual gradient is statistically consistent with zero; these omissions are load-bearing for the central claim.

    Authors: We agree that the manuscript as submitted does not report uncertainties on the median profile, propagate errors through the SP subtraction, or include a formal statistical test for consistency with zero gradient. In the revised version we will add these elements to §3: uncertainties on r_b,sub^med derived from the sample variance and measurement errors, explicit propagation of SP-subtraction uncertainties, and a quantitative assessment (e.g., χ² goodness-of-fit to a constant model or equivalent) to evaluate whether the residual gradient is statistically consistent with zero. The abstract will be updated to reflect the revised quantitative statement. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [§2 and §4] §2 (method) and §4 (discussion): the SP-subtraction step relies on the Zhang et al. technique plus the assumption that SP models capture radial variations independently of binary effects; while the reported absence of correlation between binary and SP gradients is consistent with independence, no explicit validation (e.g., mock spectra, alternative SP models, or residual-correlation tests) is described to quantify possible bias introduced by the subtraction.

    Authors: The absence of correlation between binary-fraction gradients and SP-property gradients is presented in §4 as empirical support for the independence assumption underlying the subtraction. We acknowledge, however, that this is indirect and that explicit validation tests are not described. In the revision we will add to §2 a description of validation using mock spectra constructed with known input binary fractions and SP gradients to quantify any residual bias after subtraction; we will also report the results of these tests in §4. If feasible within the revision timeline we will additionally test an alternative SP library. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; derivation applies prior method to new data with independent checks

full rationale

The paper applies the Zhang et al. spectral method to MaNGA elliptical galaxies, subtracts modeled stellar-population radial effects, and reports the resulting median binary-fraction profile as approximately flat with <5% variation at 1 R_e and no detected correlation with SP gradients. This outcome is obtained from direct measurement on the sample rather than by construction; the subtraction step is not forced to produce flatness, and the reported lack of correlation supplies an internal consistency test for separability. Self-citation of the measurement technique exists but does not reduce the central claim to an unverified loop, as the technique is externally falsifiable and the present analysis adds new radial data plus correlation diagnostics.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim depends on the accuracy of the Zhang et al. spectral binary estimation technique and the assumption that stellar population effects can be modeled and subtracted independently of binary contributions.

axioms (2)
  • domain assumption Binary fraction can be reliably estimated from integrated spectral features using the method proposed by Zhang et al.
    This is the core tool used to derive the binary fraction at different radii.
  • domain assumption Stellar population models accurately represent radial variations and can be subtracted without residual coupling to binary signals.
    Invoked to produce the SP-subtracted binary fraction that is reported as flat.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5562 in / 1476 out tokens · 114445 ms · 2026-05-07T13:19:39.358366+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

89 extracted references · 88 canonical work pages · 2 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    Albrow, M. D. 2024, MNRAS, 528, 6211, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stae425

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stae425 2024

  2. [2]

    1981 , month = feb, journal =

    Baldwin, J. A., Phillips, M. M., & Terlevich, R. 1981, PASP, 93, 5, doi: 10.1086/130766

    work page doi:10.1086/130766 1981

  3. [3]

    1994, A&AS, 106, 275

    Bertelli, G., Bressan, A., Chiosi, C., Fagotto, F., & Nasi, E. 1994, A&AS, 106, 275

    1994

  4. [4]

    Bertone, E., Buzzoni, A., Ch´ avez, M., & Rodr´ ıguez-Merino, L. H. 2008, A&A, 485, 823, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20078923

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20078923 2008

  5. [5]

    2011, AJ, 142, 31, doi: 10.1088/0004-6256/142/1/31

    Price-Whelan, A. 2011, AJ, 142, 31, doi: 10.1088/0004-6256/142/1/31

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-6256/142/1/31 2011

  6. [6]

    2003, MNRAS, 339, 937, doi: 10.1046/j.1365-8711.2003.06241.x G¨ otberg, Y., de Mink, S

    Bruzual, G., & Charlot, S. 2003, MNRAS, 344, 1000, doi: 10.1046/j.1365-8711.2003.06897.x

    work page doi:10.1046/j.1365-8711.2003.06897.x 2003

  7. [7]

    Overview of the SDSS-IV MaNGA Survey: Mapping Nearby Galaxies at Apache Point Observatory

    Bundy, K., Bershady, M. A., Law, D. R., et al. 2015, ApJ, 798, 7, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/798/1/7

    work page Pith review doi:10.1088/0004-637x/798/1/7 2015

  8. [8]

    M., Stanway, E

    Byrne, C. M., Stanway, E. R., Eldridge, J. J., McSwiney, L., & Townsend, O. T. 2022, MNRAS, 512, 5329, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stac807

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stac807 2022

  9. [9]

    2021, Research in Astronomy and Astrophysics, 21, 204, doi: 10.1088/1674-4527/21/8/204

    Cai, W., Zhao, Y.-H., & Bai, J.-M. 2021, Research in Astronomy and Astrophysics, 21, 204, doi: 10.1088/1674-4527/21/8/204

    work page doi:10.1088/1674-4527/21/8/204 2021

  10. [10]

    Improving the Full Spectrum Fitting Method: Accurate Convolution with

    Cappellari, M. 2017, MNRAS, 466, 798, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stw3020 —. 2023, MNRAS, 526, 3273, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad2597

    work page internal anchor Pith review doi:10.1093/mnras/stw3020 2017

  11. [11]

    Parametric

    Cappellari, M., & Emsellem, E. 2004, PASP, 116, 138, doi: 10.1086/381875

    work page doi:10.1086/381875 2004

  12. [12]

    A., Clayton, G

    Cardelli, J. A., Clayton, G. C., & Mathis, J. S. 1989, ApJ, 345, 245, doi: 10.1086/167900

    work page doi:10.1086/167900 1989

  13. [13]

    Galactic

    Chabrier, G. 2003, PASP, 115, 763, doi: 10.1086/376392

    work page Pith review doi:10.1086/376392 2003

  14. [14]

    2016, ApJ, 823, 102, doi: 10.3847/0004-637X/823/2/102

    Choi, J., Dotter, A., Conroy, C., et al. 2016, ApJ, 823, 102, doi: 10.3847/0004-637X/823/2/102

    work page internal anchor Pith review doi:10.3847/0004-637x/823/2/102 2016

  15. [15]

    2013, ApJS, 204, 3, doi: 10.1088/0067-0049/204/1/3

    Chung, C., Yoon, S.-J., Lee, S.-Y., & Lee, Y.-W. 2013, ApJS, 204, 3, doi: 10.1088/0067-0049/204/1/3

    work page doi:10.1088/0067-0049/204/1/3 2013

  16. [16]

    2017, ApJ, 842, 91, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aa6f19

    Chung, C., Yoon, S.-J., & Lee, Y.-W. 2017, ApJ, 842, 91, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aa6f19

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aa6f19 2017

  17. [17]

    , keywords =

    Conroy, C., Villaume, A., van Dokkum, P. G., & Lind, K. 2018, ApJ, 854, 139, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aaab49

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aaab49 2018

  18. [18]

    Dantas, M. L. L., Coelho, P. R. T., & S´ anchez-Bl´ azquez, P. 2021, MNRAS, 500, 1870, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staa3447 de Grijs, R., Li, C., Zheng, Y., et al. 2013, ApJ, 765, 4, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/765/1/4

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/staa3447 2021

  19. [19]

    Dib, S., Schmeja, S., & Parker, R. J. 2018, MNRAS, 473, 849, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stx2413

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stx2413 2018

  20. [20]

    A., et al

    Drory, N., MacDonald, N., Bershady, M. A., et al. 2015, AJ, 149, 77, doi: 10.1088/0004-6256/149/2/77 Duchˆ ene, G., & Kraus, A. 2013, ARA&A, 51, 269, doi: 10.1146/annurev-astro-081710-102602

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-6256/149/2/77 2015

  21. [21]

    Eggleton, P. P. 1971, MNRAS, 151, 351, doi: 10.1093/mnras/151.3.351

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/151.3.351 1971

  22. [22]

    P., Fitchett, M

    Eggleton, P. P., Fitchett, M. J., & Tout, C. A. 1989, ApJ, 347, 998, doi: 10.1086/168190

    work page doi:10.1086/168190 1989

  23. [23]

    2007, MNRAS, 378, 910, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2007.11817.x

    Eldridge, J. J., Izzard, R. G., & Tout, C. A. 2008, MNRAS, 384, 1109, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2007.12738.x Falc´ on-Barroso, J., S´ anchez-Bl´ azquez, P., Vazdekis, A., et al. 2011, A&A, 532, A95, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201116842

    work page doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2007.12738.x 2008

  24. [24]

    M., Ivanova, N., & Rasio, F

    Fregeau, J. M., Ivanova, N., & Rasio, F. A. 2009, ApJ, 707, 1533, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/707/2/1533

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/707/2/1533 2009

  25. [25]

    , archivePrefix = "arXiv", eprint =

    Gao, S., Liu, C., Zhang, X., et al. 2014, ApJL, 788, L37, doi: 10.1088/2041-8205/788/2/L37

    work page doi:10.1088/2041-8205/788/2/l37 2014

  26. [26]

    K., Do, T., Ghez, A

    Gautam, A. K., Do, T., Ghez, A. M., et al. 2024, ApJ, 964, 164, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad26e6

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad26e6 2024

  27. [27]

    M., de Grijs, R., Li, C., & Hurley, J

    Geller, A. M., de Grijs, R., Li, C., & Hurley, J. R. 2015, ApJ, 805, 11, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/805/1/11 21

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/805/1/11 2015

  28. [28]

    M., Hurley, J

    Geller, A. M., Hurley, J. R., & Mathieu, R. D. 2013, AJ, 145, 8, doi: 10.1088/0004-6256/145/1/8

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-6256/145/1/8 2013

  29. [29]

    M., & Mathieu, R

    Geller, A. M., & Mathieu, R. D. 2012, AJ, 144, 54, doi: 10.1088/0004-6256/144/2/54

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-6256/144/2/54 2012

  30. [30]

    Astronomy and Astrophysics , author =

    Giesers, B., Kamann, S., Dreizler, S., et al. 2019, A&A, 632, A3, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201936203 Gonz´ alez Delgado, R. M., Garc´ ıa-Benito, R., P´ erez, E., et al. 2015, A&A, 581, A103, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201525938

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201936203 2019

  31. [31]

    Grishin, E., & Perets, H. B. 2022, MNRAS, 512, 4993, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stac706

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stac706 2022

  32. [32]

    Han, Z., Podsiadlowski, P., & Lynas-Gray, A. E. 2007, MNRAS, 380, 1098, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2007.12151.x

    work page doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2007.12151.x 2007

  33. [33]

    Han, Z., Podsiadlowski, P., Maxted, P. F. L., & Marsh, T. R. 2003, MNRAS, 341, 669, doi: 10.1046/j.1365-8711.2003.06451.x

    work page doi:10.1046/j.1365-8711.2003.06451.x 2003

  34. [34]

    Han, Z., Podsiadlowski, P., Maxted, P. F. L., Marsh, T. R., & Ivanova, N. 2002, MNRAS, 336, 449, doi: 10.1046/j.1365-8711.2002.05752.x

    work page doi:10.1046/j.1365-8711.2002.05752.x 2002

  35. [35]

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

    work page doi:10.1086/118116 1996

  36. [36]

    R., Aarseth, S

    Hurley, J. R., Aarseth, S. J., & Shara, M. M. 2007, ApJ, 665, 707, doi: 10.1086/517879

    work page doi:10.1086/517879 2007

  37. [37]

    R., Pols, O

    Hurley, J. R., Pols, O. R., & Tout, C. A. 2000, MNRAS, 315, 543, doi: 10.1046/j.1365-8711.2000.03426.x

    work page doi:10.1046/j.1365-8711.2000.03426.x 2000

  38. [38]

    L., Crittenden, R., Melchiorri, A., Hobson, M

    Hurley, J. R., Tout, C. A., & Pols, O. R. 2002, MNRAS, 329, 897, doi: 10.1046/j.1365-8711.2002.05038.x

    work page doi:10.1046/j.1365-8711.2002.05038.x 2002

  39. [39]

    2022, MNRAS, 513, 754, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stac650

    Hwang, H.-C., Ting, Y.-S., Conroy, C., et al. 2022, MNRAS, 513, 754, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stac650

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stac650 2022

  40. [40]

    Ji, J., & Bregman, J. N. 2015, ApJ, 807, 32, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/807/1/32

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/807/1/32 2015

  41. [41]

    L., & Haiman, Z

    Jiang, Y.-F., & Tremaine, S. 2010, MNRAS, 401, 977, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2009.15744.x

    work page doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2009.15744.x 2010

  42. [42]

    2025, MNRAS, 540, 3770, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staf923

    Jiang, Z., Li, C., Zhang, F., & Zhou, S. 2025, MNRAS, 540, 3770, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staf923

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/staf923 2025

  43. [43]

    T., Byrne, C

    Jones, G. T., Byrne, C. M., & Stanway, E. R. 2025, MNRAS, 543, 167, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staf1462

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/staf1462 2025

  44. [44]

    2017, MNRAS, 469, 1636, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stx1001

    Kang, X., Zhang, F., & Chang, R. 2017, MNRAS, 469, 1636, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stx1001

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stx1001 2017

  45. [45]

    M., Tremonti, C., et al

    Kauffmann, G., Heckman, T. M., Tremonti, C., et al. 2003, MNRAS, 346, 1055, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2003.07154.x

    work page doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2003.07154.x 2003

  46. [46]

    Kaviraj, S., Schawinski, K., Devriendt, J. E. G., et al. 2007, ApJS, 173, 619, doi: 10.1086/516633

    work page doi:10.1086/516633 2007

  47. [47]

    J., Dopita, M

    Kewley, L. J., Dopita, M. A., Sutherland, R. S., Heisler, C. A., & Trevena, J. 2001, The Astrophysical Journal, 556, 121, doi: 10.1086/321545

    work page Pith review doi:10.1086/321545 2001

  48. [48]

    R., Yan, R., Bershady, M

    Law, D. R., Yan, R., Bershady, M. A., et al. 2015, AJ, 150, 19, doi: 10.1088/0004-6256/150/1/19

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-6256/150/1/19 2015

  49. [49]

    2005, ApJL, 621, L57, doi: 10.1086/428944

    Lee, Y.-W., Joo, S.-J., Han, S.-I., et al. 2005, ApJL, 621, L57, doi: 10.1086/428944

    work page doi:10.1086/428944 2005

  50. [50]

    1997, A&AS, 125, 229, doi: 10.1051/aas:1997373

    Lejeune, T., Cuisinier, F., & Buser, R. 1997, A&AS, 125, 229, doi: 10.1051/aas:1997373 —. 1998, A&AS, 130, 65, doi: 10.1051/aas:1998405

    work page doi:10.1051/aas:1997373 1997

  51. [51]

    2013, MNRAS, 436, 1497, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stt1669

    Li, C., de Grijs, R., & Deng, L. 2013, MNRAS, 436, 1497, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stt1669

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stt1669 2013

  52. [52]

    2015, ApJ, 804, 125, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/804/2/125

    Li, C., Wang, E., Lin, L., et al. 2015, ApJ, 804, 125, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/804/2/125

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/804/2/125 2015

  53. [53]

    2023, Chinese Physics B, 32, 039801, doi: 10.1088/1674-1056/acb0ba

    Li, N., & Li, C. 2023, Chinese Physics B, 32, 039801, doi: 10.1088/1674-1056/acb0ba

    work page doi:10.1088/1674-1056/acb0ba 2023

  54. [54]

    2018, ApJ, 859, 36, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aabc09

    Li, Z., & Mao, C. 2018, ApJ, 859, 36, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aabc09

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aabc09 2018

  55. [55]

    2019, MNRAS, 490, 550, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stz2274

    Liu, C. 2019, MNRAS, 490, 550, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stz2274

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stz2274 2019

  56. [56]

    2012, MNRAS, 423, 600, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2012.20901.x

    Liu, C., & van de Ven, G. 2012, MNRAS, 425, 2144, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2012.21551.x Mart´ ın-Navarro, I., La Barbera, F., Vazdekis, A., Falc´ on-Barroso, J., & Ferreras, I. 2015, MNRAS, 447, 1033, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stu2480

    work page doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2012.21551.x 2012

  57. [57]

    E., & Scalo, J

    Miller, G. E., & Scalo, J. M. 1979, ApJS, 41, 513, doi: 10.1086/190629

    work page doi:10.1086/190629 1979

  58. [58]

    P., Piotto, G., Bedin, L

    Milone, A. P., Piotto, G., Bedin, L. R., et al. 2012, A&A, 540, A16, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201016384

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201016384 2012

  59. [59]

    2017, ApJS, 230, 15, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/aa6fb6

    Moe, M., & Di Stefano, R. 2017, ApJS, 230, 15, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/aa6fb6

    work page Pith review doi:10.3847/1538-4365/aa6fb6 2017

  60. [60]

    M., & Badenes, C

    Moe, M., Kratter, K. M., & Badenes, C. 2019, ApJ, 875, 61, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab0d88 O’Connell, R. W. 1999, ARA&A, 37, 603, doi: 10.1146/annurev.astro.37.1.603 O’Donnell, J. E. 1994, ApJ, 422, 158, doi: 10.1086/173713

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ab0d88 2019

  61. [61]

    , keywords =

    Pacifici, C., Iyer, K. G., Mobasher, B., et al. 2023, ApJ, 944, 141, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/acacff

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

  62. [62]

    , keywords =

    Parikh, T., Thomas, D., Maraston, C., et al. 2018, MNRAS, 477, 3954, doi: 10.1093/mnras/sty785 Pe˜ narrubia, J. 2021, MNRAS, 501, 3670, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staa3700

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/sty785 2018

  63. [63]

    S., Bremer, M

    Phillipps, S., Ali, S. S., Bremer, M. N., et al. 2020, MNRAS, 492, 2128, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stz3552

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stz3552 2020

  64. [64]

    L., & Haiman, Z

    Pipino, A., Kaviraj, S., Bildfell, C., et al. 2009, MNRAS, 395, 462, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2009.14534.x

    work page doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2009.14534.x 2009

  65. [65]

    A Survey of Stellar Families: Multiplicity of Solar-Type Stars

    Raghavan, D., McAlister, H. A., Henry, T. J., et al. 2010, ApJS, 190, 1, doi: 10.1088/0067-0049/190/1/1

    work page Pith review doi:10.1088/0067-0049/190/1/1 2010

  66. [66]

    Salim, S., & Rich, R. M. 2010, ApJL, 714, L290, doi: 10.1088/2041-8205/714/2/L290 S´ anchez, S. F. 2020, ARA&A, 58, 99, doi: 10.1146/annurev-astro-012120-013326 S´ anchez-Bl´ azquez, P., Peletier, R. F., Jim´ enez-Vicente, J., et al. 2006, MNRAS, 371, 703, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2006.10699.x 22

    work page doi:10.1088/2041-8205/714/2/l290 2010

  67. [67]

    2007, ApJS, 173, 512, doi: 10.1086/516631

    Schawinski, K., Kaviraj, S., Khochfar, S., et al. 2007, ApJS, 173, 512, doi: 10.1086/516631

    work page doi:10.1086/516631 2007

  68. [68]

    J., Finkbeiner, D

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

    work page Pith review doi:10.1086/305772 1998

  69. [69]

    L., Crittenden, R., Melchiorri, A., Hobson, M

    Sellwood, J. A., & Binney, J. J. 2002, MNRAS, 336, 785, doi: 10.1046/j.1365-8711.2002.05806.x

    work page doi:10.1046/j.1365-8711.2002.05806.x 2002

  70. [70]

    2012, MNRAS, 423, 600, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2012.20901.x

    Smith, R. J., Lucey, J. R., & Carter, D. 2012, MNRAS, 421, 2982, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2012.20524.x

    work page doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2012.20524.x 2012

  71. [71]

    2007, MNRAS, 378, 910, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2007.11817.x

    Sarajedini, A. 2007, MNRAS, 380, 781, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2007.12116.x

    work page doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2007.12116.x 2007

  72. [72]

    C., Worthey, G., Faber, S

    Trager, S. C., Worthey, G., Faber, S. M., Burstein, D., & Gonz´ alez, J. J. 1998, ApJS, 116, 1, doi: 10.1086/313099 van Dokkum, P., Conroy, C., Villaume, A., Brodie, J., &

    work page doi:10.1086/313099 1998

  73. [73]

    Romanowsky, A. J. 2017, ApJ, 841, 68, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aa7135 V´ azquez-Mata, J. A., Hern´ andez-Toledo, H. M.,

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aa7135 2017

  74. [74]

    2022, MNRAS, 512, 2222, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stac635

    Avila-Reese, V., et al. 2022, MNRAS, 512, 2222, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stac635

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stac635 2022

  75. [75]

    Veilleux, S., & Osterbrock, D. E. 1987, ApJS, 63, 295, doi: 10.1086/191166

    work page doi:10.1086/191166 1987

  76. [76]

    A., Bundy, K., Diamond-Stanic, A

    Wake, D. A., Bundy, K., Diamond-Stanic, A. M., et al. 2017, AJ, 154, 86, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/aa7ecc

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-3881/aa7ecc 2017

  77. [77]

    M., Ellison S

    Woo, J., Walters, D., Archinuk, F., et al. 2024, MNRAS, 530, 4260, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stae1114

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stae1114 2024

  78. [78]

    , keywords =

    Worthey, G. 1994, ApJS, 95, 107, doi: 10.1086/192096

    work page doi:10.1086/192096 1994

  79. [79]

    M., Gonzalez J

    Worthey, G., Faber, S. M., Gonzalez, J. J., & Burstein, D. 1994, ApJS, 94, 687, doi: 10.1086/192087

    work page doi:10.1086/192087 1994

  80. [80]

    R., et al

    Yan, R., Bundy, K., Law, D. R., et al. 2016, AJ, 152, 197, doi: 10.3847/0004-6256/152/6/197

    work page doi:10.3847/0004-6256/152/6/197 2016

Showing first 80 references.