pith. machine review for the scientific record. sign in

arxiv: 2605.11087 · v1 · submitted 2026-05-11 · 🌌 astro-ph.GA · astro-ph.SR

Recognition: no theorem link

The R-Process Alliance: The R-Process Enhancement of Stars from Chemodynamically Tagged Groups in the Milky Way Halo

Jessica Merritt Agnos , Charli M. Sakari , Pedro Silva , Terese T. Hansen , Erika M. Holmbeck , Ian U. Roederer , Hal France , Truman Farr
show 4 more authors
Rana Ezzeddine Anna Frebel Vinicius M. Placco Timothy C. Beers
Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-13 03:02 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.GA astro-ph.SR
keywords r-processmetal-poor starsMilky Way haloThamnoschemodynamic groupsstellar abundancesheavy elementsdwarf galaxy accretion
0
0 comments X

The pith

High-resolution spectra confirm two stars as r-II and date their r-process material to over 10 Gyr with no actinide boost.

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

The paper measures abundances of 29 heavy elements in three previously identified r-process-enhanced metal-poor stars using high-resolution spectra. It confirms two as r-II stars and places the third just below the r-I threshold, while radioactive dating with thorium shows the enrichment occurred more than 10 billion years ago and lacks an actinide boost. Slight differences in fission-fragment abundances appear between the r-II stars and the third star. The varying compositions indicate the stars probably formed in separate environments, though each remains consistent with the Thamnos progenitor. A reader would care because these measurements trace when and where the r-process operated in the Milky Way's early building blocks.

Core claim

The authors analyze high-resolution, high signal-to-noise spectra of three metal-poor stars and derive abundances for 29 heavy elements. They confirm that 2MASS J14592981−3852558 and J15211026−0607566 qualify as r-II stars while 2MASS J19445483−4039459 falls just below the r-I threshold. Thorium-based dating shows the r-process material in the two r-II stars is older than 10 Gyr with no actinide boost; the r-II stars also display slight fission-fragment enhancement relative to the third star. The differing elemental patterns suggest the stars did not share a single birth environment, although each pattern is compatible with formation inside the Thamnos progenitor.

What carries the argument

Thorium radioactive age dating applied to detailed heavy-element abundance patterns measured from high-resolution MIKE spectra.

If this is right

  • The two r-II stars show slight fission-fragment enhancement relative to the third star.
  • Thorium dating places the r-process enrichment in the two r-II stars at more than 10 Gyr old.
  • Neither r-II star exhibits an actinide boost.
  • The three stars display distinct elemental patterns, indicating they did not form in the same environment.
  • Each star's abundance pattern remains consistent with an origin inside the Thamnos progenitor.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • These results imply that at least some r-process events occurred inside dwarf galaxies that were later accreted by the Milky Way.
  • Additional high-resolution observations of other Thamnos-associated stars could test whether a single r-process site produced the observed patterns.
  • The lack of actinide boost constrains the possible neutron-star merger or collapsar models that operated more than 10 Gyr ago.
  • If the Thamnos link holds, it supplies a concrete example of how chemodynamic tagging can connect individual stars to specific accretion events.

Load-bearing premise

The stars' tentative membership in chemodynamically tagged groups and the Thamnos structure rests on earlier snapshot data that may not survive fuller kinematic or chemical checks.

What would settle it

New thorium abundance measurements that yield ages under 10 Gyr or kinematic data placing any of the three stars outside the Thamnos velocity and position range would falsify the reported ages and common-origin claim.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2605.11087 by Anna Frebel, Charli M. Sakari, Erika M. Holmbeck, Hal France, Ian U. Roederer, Jessica Merritt Agnos, Pedro Silva, Rana Ezzeddine, Terese T. Hansen, Timothy C. Beers, Truman Farr, Vinicius M. Placco.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Example syntheses of the 4050.3 ˚A Zr II line (top row), the 4086.7 ˚A La II line (middle row), and the 4129.7 ˚A Eu II line (bottom row) in J1459−3852 (left column), J1521−0607 (middle column), and J1944−4039 (right column), respectively. The black points show the spectrum, the solid lines show the best-fit syntheses, and the shaded regions show abundance uncertainties. The dashed gray lines show the synt… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Example syntheses of the Th II line in J1459−3852 (left) and J1521−0607 (right). The black points show the spectrum, the solid lines show the best-fit syntheses, and the shaded regions show abundance uncertainties. The dashed gray lines show the synthesis with zero abundance for the line of interest [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Differences between abundances mea￾sured in this portrait analysis compared to the snapshot analyses from the literature (Sakari et al. 2018a for J1521−0607; Holmbeck et al. 2020 for J1459−3852 and J1944−4039). The dashed hori￾zontal line shows equal agreement, while the light gray band shows offsets of ±0.25 dex. 5. DISCUSSION The neutron-capture abundance patterns are compared to other metal-poor stars a… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Abundance patterns of the three target stars with respect to (wrt) to various benchmark patterns for the light r-process elements (Z ≤ 47; left) and the heavy r-process elements (Z ≥ 56; right). The light r-process patterns are scaled to the same Zr abundance, while the heavy r-process patterns are scaled to the same La abundance. The top panels show the full r-process abundance patterns of the three targe… view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Ages determined from log ϵ(Th/X) abundance ratios, using the production ratios from Schatz et al. (2002) and the equations given in Placco et al. (2017). The uncertainties represent the uncertainties in the derived log ϵ(Th/X) ratios and the PRs. The horizontal dashed and dotted lines show the average ages for J1521−0607 and J1459−3852, respectively. Both stars are consis￾tent with old ages for the r-proce… view at source ↗
read the original abstract

As part of the ongoing work of the $R$-Process Alliance (RPA), detailed abundance measurements of 29 heavy elements in three metal-poor stars, 2MASS J14592981$-$3852558, 2MASS J19445483$-$4039459, and 2MASS J15211026$-$0607566, are presented based on an analysis of high-resolution ($R\sim 80,000$), high signal-to-noise ``portrait'' spectra from the Magellan Inamori Kyocera Echelle (MIKE) spectrograph on the Magellan-Clay Telescope at Las Campanas Observatory. The selected targets were identified as $r$-process-enhanced metal-poor stars in previous RPA snapshot analyses. They have also been linked to possible chemodynamically tagged groups, indicating that the stars may have formed in dwarf galaxies that were later accreted into the Milky Way halo. These stars have also been tentatively linked to the Thamnos structure. The detailed chemical abundances in this work confirm that 2MASS J14592981$-$3852558 and J15211026$-$0607566 are $r$-II stars, while 2MASS J19445483$-$4039459 is found to lie just below the threshold for $r$-I status. The $r$-II stars show signs of slight enhancement in fission fragments compared to 2MASS J19445483$-$4039459. Based on radioactive age dating with Th, the $r$-process material in the two $r$-II stars is found to be old (with ages $>10$ Gyr); neither star shows signs of an actinide boost. The varying elemental compositions suggest that these stars likely did not originate in the same environment, though each could be consistent with originating in the Thamnos progenitor.

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

1 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript reports high-resolution (R~80,000) MIKE spectra and detailed abundances for 29 heavy elements in three metal-poor stars previously flagged as r-process enhanced in RPA snapshot work. It confirms 2MASS J14592981−3852558 and J15211026−0607566 as r-II stars, places 2MASS J19445483−4039459 just below the r-I threshold, derives Th-based ages >10 Gyr with no actinide boost for the r-II stars, notes slight fission-fragment differences, and interprets the varying patterns as evidence against a shared environment while remaining consistent with a Thamnos progenitor via prior chemodynamic tagging.

Significance. If the prior group assignments hold, the work supplies precise, multi-element data that can constrain r-process yields and timing in accreted dwarf-galaxy environments, adding to the RPA catalog with falsifiable age estimates. The absence of actinide boost and the >10 Gyr ages are useful benchmarks, but the interpretive power for Thamnos is limited by the lack of new verification of membership.

major comments (1)
  1. [Abstract and Discussion] Abstract and Discussion: The central interpretive claim that the abundance patterns are 'consistent with originating in the Thamnos progenitor' and that the stars 'likely did not originate in the same environment' rests on tentative prior chemodynamic group assignments that receive no new kinematic or chemical verification in this work. The new high-resolution abundances stand independently, but the contextual anchor to an accreted structure is not load-bearing tested here and would be weakened if the earlier snapshot identifications prove spurious.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract: The statement of 'slight enhancement in fission fragments' is not quantified (no specific elements, ratios, or comparison values are given); this should be tied to explicit abundance ratios or table entries for clarity.
  2. [Abstract] Abstract: No uncertainties or error bars are mentioned for the reported ages or abundances, even though the full analysis presumably includes them; the abstract should at minimum note that uncertainties are derived and reported in the text/tables.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

1 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their careful review and recommendation for minor revision. We have revised the manuscript to address the concern by clarifying the basis of our interpretive statements.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: The central interpretive claim that the abundance patterns are 'consistent with originating in the Thamnos progenitor' and that the stars 'likely did not originate in the same environment' rests on tentative prior chemodynamic group assignments that receive no new kinematic or chemical verification in this work. The new high-resolution abundances stand independently, but the contextual anchor to an accreted structure is not load-bearing tested here and would be weakened if the earlier snapshot identifications prove spurious.

    Authors: We appreciate the referee's observation that the Thamnos association draws from prior chemodynamic tagging in snapshot analyses rather than new kinematic or membership verification here. The statement that the stars 'likely did not originate in the same environment' is grounded in the differences among the new high-resolution abundance patterns (including fission-fragment variations) reported in this work, which are independent of the group assignments. The phrasing 'consistent with originating in the Thamnos progenitor' notes compatibility with the earlier tagging but does not claim independent confirmation. We have revised the abstract and discussion to state explicitly that the Thamnos link originates from prior chemodynamic studies (cited in the manuscript) and that the present abundances and Th-based ages stand alone as new results. These changes preserve the value of the multi-element data while making the scope of the contextual interpretation clear. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity; new spectroscopic abundances and ages are independent of prior citations

full rationale

The paper derives its core results—abundances of 29 heavy elements, r-II/r-I classifications, slight fission-fragment enhancements, and Th-based ages >10 Gyr with no actinide boost—directly from new high-resolution MIKE spectra of three stars using standard abundance techniques. These measurements do not reduce to fitted parameters, self-definitions, or prior outputs. Prior RPA snapshot identifications and tentative chemodynamic/Thamnos linkages are cited only for target selection and contextual interpretation; the paper explicitly labels the linkages as tentative and does not use them to compute or force the abundance or age values. No equations, ansatzes, or uniqueness theorems are invoked that collapse back to self-citations or inputs.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The analysis depends on standard stellar spectroscopy assumptions without introducing new fitted parameters or postulated entities.

axioms (1)
  • domain assumption Standard assumptions in stellar atmosphere modeling and spectral line formation for abundance derivation from high-resolution spectra
    Invoked implicitly for converting observed spectra into elemental abundances.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5713 in / 1148 out tokens · 108292 ms · 2026-05-13T03:02:18.076657+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

105 extracted references · 105 canonical work pages · 1 internal anchor

  1. [1]

    S., Aguilar, G., et al

    Abolfathi, B., Aguado, D. S., Aguilar, G., et al.\ 2018, , 235, 42. doi:10.3847/1538-4365/aa9e8a

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4365/aa9e8a 2018

  2. [2]

    & Thielemann, F.-K.\ 2013, Journal of Physics G Nuclear Physics, 40, 013201

    Arcones, A. & Thielemann, F.-K.\ 2013, Journal of Physics G Nuclear Physics, 40, 013201. doi:10.1088/0954-3899/40/1/013201

    work page doi:10.1088/0954-3899/40/1/013201 2013

  3. [3]

    doi:10.1086/307938

    Arlandini, C., K \"a ppeler, F., Wisshak, K., et al.\ 1999, , 525, 2, 886. doi:10.1086/307938

    work page doi:10.1086/307938 1999

  4. [4]

    J., & Scott, P

    Asplund, M., Grevesse, N., Sauval, A. J., et al.\ 2009, , 47, 481. doi:10.1146/annurev.astro.46.060407.145222

    work page doi:10.1146/annurev.astro.46.060407.145222 2009

  5. [5]

    & Zwicky, F.\ 1934, Physical Review, 46, 76

    Baade, W. & Zwicky, F.\ 1934, Physical Review, 46, 76. doi:10.1103/PhysRev.46.76.2

    work page doi:10.1103/physrev.46.76.2 1934

  6. [6]

    doi:10.3847/1538-4365/ad6f0f

    Bandyopadhyay, A., Ezzeddine, R., Allende Prieto, C., et al.\ 2024, , 274, 2, 39. doi:10.3847/1538-4365/ad6f0f

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4365/ad6f0f 2024

  7. [7]

    doi:10.1088/0004-637X/807/1/50

    Bechtol, K., Drlica-Wagner, A., Balbinot, E., et al.\ 2015, , 807, 50. doi:10.1088/0004-637X/807/1/50

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/807/1/50 2015

  8. [8]

    Beers, T. C. & Christlieb, N.\ 2005, , 43, 531. doi:10.1146/annurev.astro.42.053102.134057

    work page doi:10.1146/annurev.astro.42.053102.134057 2005

  9. [9]

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201832842

    Behar, E., Nilsson, H., Henri, P., et al.\ 2018, , 616, A21. doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201832842

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201832842 2018

  10. [10]

    A., Gunnels, S

    Bernstein, R., Shectman, S. A., Gunnels, S. M., et al.\ 2003, , 4841, 1694. doi:10.1117/12.461502

    work page doi:10.1117/12.461502 2003

  11. [11]

    M., Tumlinson, J., Geha, M., et al

    Brown, T. M., Tumlinson, J., Geha, M., et al.\ 2014, , 796, 91. doi:10.1088/0004-637X/796/2/91

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/796/2/91 2014

  12. [12]

    M., Burbidge, G

    Burbidge, E. M., Burbidge, G. R., Fowler, W. A., et al.\ 1957, Reviews of Modern Physics, 29, 4, 547. doi:10.1103/RevModPhys.29.547

    work page doi:10.1103/revmodphys.29.547 1957

  13. [13]

    L., Pilachowski, C

    Burris, D. L., Pilachowski, C. A., Armandroff, T. E., et al.\ 2000, , 544, 1, 302. doi:10.1086/317172

    work page doi:10.1086/317172 2000

  14. [14]

    P., et al.\ 2020, , 898, 40

    Cain, M., Frebel, A., Ji, A. P., et al.\ 2020, , 898, 40. doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ab97ba

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ab97ba 2020

  15. [15]

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202244469

    Contursi, G., de Laverny, P., Recio-Blanco, A., et al.\ 2023, , 670, A106. doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202244469

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202244469 2023

  16. [16]

    S., Berger, E., Villar, V

    Cowperthwaite, P. S., Berger, E., Villar, V. A., et al.\ 2017, , 848, L17. doi:10.3847/2041-8213/aa8fc7

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/aa8fc7 2017

  17. [17]

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stac3128

    Curtis, S., Mösta, P., Wu, Z., et al.\ 2022, , 518, 5313. doi:10.1093/mnras/stac3128

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stac3128 2022

  18. [18]

    2012, Research in Astronomy and Astrophysics, 12, 1197, doi: 10.1088/1674-4527/12/9/003

    Cui, X.-Q., Zhao, Y.-H., Chu, Y.-Q., et al.\ 2012, Research in Astronomy and Astrophysics, 12, 1197. doi:10.1088/1674-4527/12/9/003

    work page doi:10.1088/1674-4527/12/9/003 2012

  19. [19]

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202451978

    Dodd, E., Ruiz-Lara, T., Helmi, A., et al.\ 2025, , 698, A277. doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202451978

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202451978 2025

  20. [20]

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ab9d1a

    Ezzeddine, R., Rasmussen, K., Frebel, A., et al.\ 2020, , 898, 150. doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ab9d1a

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ab9d1a 2020

  21. [21]

    doi:10.1088/0004-637X/712/2/1359

    Farouqi, K., Kratz, K.-L., Pfeiffer, B., et al.\ 2010, , 712, 1359. doi:10.1088/0004-637X/712/2/1359

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/712/2/1359 2010

  22. [22]

    doi:10.26624/CETF5821

    Fitzpatrick, M., Placco, V., Bolton, A., et al.\ 2025, Astronomical Data Analysis Software and Systems XXXIII, 541, 461. doi:10.26624/CETF5821

    work page doi:10.26624/cetf5821 2025

  23. [23]

    E., 2015, @doi [ ] 10.1146/annurev-astro-082214-122423 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015ARA&A..53..631F 53, 631

    Frebel, A. & Norris, J. E.\ 2015, , 53, 631. doi:10.1146/annurev-astro-082214-122423

    work page doi:10.1146/annurev-astro-082214-122423 2015

  24. [24]

    doi:10.1016/j.aop.2019.167909

    Frebel, A.\ 2019, Annals of Physics, 410, 167909. doi:10.1016/j.aop.2019.167909

    work page doi:10.1016/j.aop.2019.167909 2019

  25. [25]

    doi:10.1146/annurev-nucl-101917-021141

    Frebel, A.\ 2018, Annual Review of Nuclear and Particle Science, 68, 237. doi:10.1146/annurev-nucl-101917-021141

    work page doi:10.1146/annurev-nucl-101917-021141 2018

  26. [26]

    Gaia Collaboration, Prusti, T., de Bruijne, J. H. J., et al.\ 2016, , 595, A1. doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201629272

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201629272 2016

  27. [27]

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201832865

    Gaia Collaboration, Katz, D., Antoja, T., et al.\ 2018, , 616, A11. doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201832865

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201832865 2018

  28. [28]

    Gaia Collaboration, Vallenari, A., Brown, A. G. A., et al.\ 2023, , 674, A1. doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202243940

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202243940 2023

  29. [29]

    & Arnould, M.\ 2001, , 379, 1113

    Goriely, S. & Arnould, M.\ 2001, , 379, 1113. doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20011368

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20011368 2001

  30. [30]

    C., et al.\ 2021, , 908, 79

    Gudin, D., Shank, D., Beers, T. C., et al.\ 2021, , 908, 79. doi:10.3847/1538-4357/abd7ed

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/abd7ed 2021

  31. [31]

    T., Holmbeck, E

    Hansen, T. T., Holmbeck, E. M., Beers, T. C., et al.\ 2018, , 858, 92. doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aabacc

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

  32. [32]

    U.\ 2023, , 946, 48

    Hattori, K., Okuno, A., & Roederer, I. U.\ 2023, , 946, 48. doi:10.3847/1538-4357/acb93b

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/acb93b 2023

  33. [33]

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20020434

    Hill, V., Plez, B., Cayrel, R., et al.\ 2002, , 387, 560. doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20020434

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20020434 2002

  34. [34]

    C., et al.\ 2017, , 607, A91

    Hill, V., Christlieb, N., Beers, T. C., et al.\ 2017, , 607, A91. doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201629092

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201629092 2017

  35. [35]

    Holden, N.E.\ 1990, Pure Appl. Chem. , 62, 941

    work page 1990

  36. [36]

    M., Sprouse, T

    Holmbeck, E. M., Sprouse, T. M., Mumpower, M. R., et al.\ 2019, , 870, 23. doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aaefef

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

  37. [37]

    M., Beers, T

    Holmbeck, E. M., Beers, T. C., Roederer, I. U., et al.\ 2018, , 859, L24. doi:10.3847/2041-8213/aac722

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/aac722 2018

  38. [38]

    M., Frebel, A., McLaughlin, G

    Holmbeck, E. M., Frebel, A., McLaughlin, G. C., et al.\ 2021, , 909, 21. doi:10.3847/1538-4357/abd720

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/abd720 2021

  39. [39]

    M., Hansen, T

    Holmbeck, E. M., Hansen, T. T., Beers, T. C., et al.\ 2020, , 249, 30. doi:10.3847/1538-4365/ab9c19

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4365/ab9c19 2020

  40. [40]

    Holmbeck, E. M. & Andrews, J. J.\ 2024, , 963, 110. doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad1e52

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad1e52 2024

  41. [41]

    doi:10.1086/313278

    Iwamoto, K., Brachwitz, F., Nomoto, K., et al.\ 1999, , 125, 439. doi:10.1086/313278

    work page doi:10.1086/313278 1999

  42. [42]

    Ji, A. P. & Frebel, A.\ 2018, , 856, 138. doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aab14a

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aab14a 2018

  43. [43]

    P., Frebel, A., Chiti, A., et al.\ 2016, , 531, 610

    Ji, A. P., Frebel, A., Chiti, A., et al.\ 2016, , 531, 610. doi:10.1038/nature17425

    work page doi:10.1038/nature17425 2016

  44. [44]

    P., Frebel, A., Simon, J

    Ji, A. P., Frebel, A., Simon, J. D., et al.\ 2016, , 830, 93. doi:10.3847/0004-637X/830/2/93

    work page doi:10.3847/0004-637x/830/2/93 2016

  45. [45]

    D., Illingworth, G

    Kelson, D. D., Illingworth, G. D., van Dokkum, P. G., et al.\ 2000, , 531, 1, 184. doi:10.1086/308440

    work page doi:10.1086/308440 2000

  46. [46]

    D.\ 2003, , 115, 808, 688

    Kelson, D. D.\ 2003, , 115, 808, 688. doi:10.1086/375502

    work page doi:10.1086/375502 2003

  47. [47]

    E., Casey, A

    Koposov, S. E., Casey, A. R., Belokurov, V., et al.\ 2015, , 811, 62. doi:10.1088/0004-637X/811/1/62

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/811/1/62 2015

  48. [48]

    , keywords =

    Koppelman, H. H., Helmi, A., Massari, D., et al.\ 2019, , 631, L9. doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201936738

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201936738 2019

  49. [49]

    H., Helmi, A., Massari, D., et al.\ 2019, , 625, A5

    Koppelman, H. H., Helmi, A., Massari, D., et al.\ 2019, , 625, A5. doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201834769

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201834769 2019

  50. [50]

    doi:10.1088/0004-6256/146/5/134

    Kordopatis, G., Gilmore, G., Steinmetz, M., et al.\ 2013, , 146, 134. doi:10.1088/0004-6256/146/5/134

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-6256/146/5/134 2013

  51. [51]

    2017, , 153, 75

    Kunder, A., Kordopatis, G., Steinmetz, M., et al. 2017, , 153, 75. doi:10.3847/1538-3881/153/2/75

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-3881/153/2/75 2017

  52. [52]

    Lattimer, J. M. & Schramm, D. N.\ 1974, , 192, L145. doi:10.1086/181612

    work page doi:10.1086/181612 1974

  53. [53]

    C., et al.\ 2021, , 907, 10

    Limberg, G., Rossi, S., Beers, T. C., et al.\ 2021, , 907, 10. doi:10.3847/1538-4357/abcb87

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/abcb87 2021

  54. [54]

    & Ramirez-Ruiz, E.\ 2018, , 860, 89

    Macias, P. & Ramirez-Ruiz, E.\ 2018, , 860, 89. doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aac3e0

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aac3e0 2018

  55. [55]

    A., Sharma, S., et al.\ 2022, , 926, 107

    Malhan, K., Ibata, R. A., Sharma, S., et al.\ 2022, , 926, 107. doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ac4d2a

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ac4d2a 2022

  56. [56]

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201424017

    Mashonkina, L., Christlieb, N., & Eriksson, K.\ 2014, , 569, A43. doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201424017

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201424017 2014

  57. [57]

    doi:10.1146/annurev.astro.41.071601.170033

    Massey, P.\ 2003, , 41, 15. doi:10.1146/annurev.astro.41.071601.170033

    work page doi:10.1146/annurev.astro.41.071601.170033 2003

  58. [58]

    K., et al.\ 2017, , 603, A19

    Matijevi c , G., Chiappini, C., Grebel, E. K., et al.\ 2017, , 603, A19. doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201730417

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201730417 2017

  59. [59]

    Metzger, B. D. & Berger, E.\ 2012, , 746, 48. doi:10.1088/0004-637X/746/1/48

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/746/1/48 2012

  60. [60]

    doi:10.1088/0004-637X/810/2/109

    Nishimura, N., Takiwaki, T., & Thielemann, F.-K.\ 2015, , 810, 109. doi:10.1088/0004-637X/810/2/109

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/810/2/109 2015

  61. [61]

    & Aloy, M

    Obergaulinger, M. & Aloy, M. \'A .\ 2022, , 512, 2489. doi:10.1093/mnras/stac613

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stac613 2022

  62. [62]

    arXiv e-prints , keywords =

    Obergaulinger, M. & Reichert, M.\ 2023, arXiv:2303.12458. doi:10.48550/arXiv.2303.12458

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2303.12458 2023

  63. [63]

    M., Frebel, A., Beers, T

    Placco, V. M., Frebel, A., Beers, T. C., et al.\ 2014, , 797, 1, 21. doi:10.1088/0004-637X/797/1/21

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/797/1/21 2014

  64. [64]

    M., Beers, T

    Placco, V. M., Beers, T. C., Santucci, R. M., et al.\ 2018, , 155, 256. doi:10.3847/1538-3881/aac20c

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-3881/aac20c 2018

  65. [65]

    M., Santucci, R

    Placco, V. M., Santucci, R. M., Beers, T. C., et al.\ 2019, , 870, 2, 122. doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aaf3b9

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aaf3b9 2019

  66. [66]

    M., Sneden, C., Roederer, I

    Placco, V. M., Sneden, C., Roederer, I. U., et al.\ 2021, Research Notes of the American Astronomical Society, 5, 4, 92. doi:10.3847/2515-5172/abf651

    work page doi:10.3847/2515-5172/abf651 2021

  67. [67]

    M., Sneden, C., Roederer, I

    Placco, V. M., Sneden, C., Roederer, I. U., et al.\ 2021, Astrophysics Source Code Library. ascl:2104.027

    work page 2021

  68. [68]

    M., Holmbeck, E

    Placco, V. M., Holmbeck, E. M., Frebel, A., et al.\ 2017, , 844, 18. doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aa78ef

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aa78ef 2017

  69. [69]

    M., Almeida-Fernandes, F., Holmbeck, E

    Placco, V. M., Almeida-Fernandes, F., Holmbeck, E. M., et al.\ 2023, , 959, 1, 60. doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad077e

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad077e 2023

  70. [70]

    J.\ 1998, , 506, 868

    Qian, Y.-Z., Vogel, P., & Wasserburg, G. J.\ 1998, , 506, 868. doi:10.1086/306285

    work page doi:10.1086/306285 1998

  71. [71]

    T., Roederer, I

    Racca, M., Hansen, T. T., Roederer, I. U., et al.\ 2025, , 704, A282. doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202556947

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202556947 2025

  72. [72]

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202346556

    Roberti, L., Pignatari, M., Psaltis, A., et al.\ 2023, , 677, A22. doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202346556

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202346556 2023

  73. [73]

    U., Cowan, J

    Roederer, I. U., Cowan, J. J., Karakas, A. I., et al.\ 2010, , 724, 2, 975. doi:10.1088/0004-637X/724/2/975

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/724/2/975 2010

  74. [74]

    U., Hattori, K., & Valluri, M.\ 2018a, , 156, 179

    Roederer, I. U., Hattori, K., & Valluri, M.\ 2018a, , 156, 179. doi:10.3847/1538-3881/aadd9c

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-3881/aadd9c

  75. [75]

    U., Sakari, C

    Roederer, I. U., Sakari, C. M., Placco, V. M., et al.\ 2018b, , 865, 2, 129. doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aadd92

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aadd92

  76. [76]

    U., Cowan, J

    Roederer, I. U., Cowan, J. J., Pignatari, M., et al.\ 2022, , 936, 1, 84. doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ac85bc

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ac85bc 2022

  77. [77]

    U., Vassh, N., Holmbeck, E

    Roederer, I. U., Vassh, N., Holmbeck, E. M., et al.\ 2023, Science, 382, 6675, 1177. doi:10.1126/science.adf1341

    work page doi:10.1126/science.adf1341 2023

  78. [78]

    U., Beers, T

    Roederer, I. U., Beers, T. C., Hattori, K., et al.\ 2024, , 971, 2, 158. doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad57bf

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad57bf 2024

  79. [79]

    U.\ 2009, , 137, 272

    Roederer, I. U.\ 2009, , 137, 272. doi:10.1088/0004-6256/137/1/272

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-6256/137/1/272 2009

  80. [80]

    M., Roederer, I

    Sakari, C. M., Roederer, I. U., Placco, V. M., et al.\ 2019, , 874, 148. doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ab0c02

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ab0c02 2019

Showing first 80 references.