pith. sign in

arxiv: 2605.29060 · v1 · pith:5TXVO32Onew · submitted 2026-05-27 · 🌌 astro-ph.SR · astro-ph.GA

Using GALEX UV Excess to Search for Metal-poor Halo Stars

Chase L. Smith , Maxwell Moe , Megan Frank , Raven Cilley , Javier Fregoso , Alexander Gleason , Ella Morton , Grace Nelson
show 5 more authors
Mary Kate Petrykovets Daniel Reshan Kaitlyn Schultz Daniel A. Dale Nikhil Patten
This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-06-29 09:30 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.SR astro-ph.GA
keywords metal-poor halo starsGALEX NUV photometrymetallicity correlationphotometric selectionsolar-type starschromospheric variabilityGaia DR3very metal-poor stars
0
0 comments X

The pith

GALEX NUV excess shows an 8-sigma anti-correlation with metallicity, allowing photometric distinction of very metal-poor halo stars.

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

The paper shows that metal-poor solar-type stars produce extra near-ultraviolet flux because fewer metal lines absorb short-wavelength light. The authors assemble 492 halo stars with GALEX NUV, Gaia photometry, and spectroscopic metallicities, including new observations of 13 stars. They measure a clear anti-correlation between the size of the NUV excess and [Fe/H] that reaches 8 sigma significance. This relation lets observers flag very metal-poor stars ([Fe/H] < -2) from photometry alone. Significant scatter from chromospheric activity still blocks reliable separation of extremely metal-poor stars.

Core claim

Metal-poor solar-type stars display a significant reduction in metal-line blanketing at short wavelengths, leading to an excess of near-ultraviolet (NUV) flux compared to their metal-rich counterparts. For a sample of 492 solar-type halo stars, an anti-correlation between NUV excess and [Fe/H] reaches 8 sigma significance. GALEX NUV excess can distinguish very metal-poor stars ([Fe/H] < -2) from metal-rich ones, although chromospheric variability from rotation and magnetic activity creates dispersion that prevents reliable selection of extremely metal-poor stars.

What carries the argument

NUV excess produced by reduced metal-line blanketing, quantified as the difference between observed GALEX NUV magnitude and the value expected from Gaia colors for a given metallicity.

If this is right

  • Photometric pre-selection of VMP halo stars becomes feasible with existing GALEX and Gaia catalogs.
  • The relation supplies a new route to enlarge samples for high-resolution follow-up spectroscopy.
  • New KOSMOS spectra add 11 previously unmeasured halo-star metallicities spanning -2.92 to -1.97.
  • UV spectra of EMP stars are required to separate metallicity effects from activity-driven scatter.
  • The method applies only to solar-type (F5-G9) stars; cooler or hotter stars require separate calibration.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • Combining this NUV cut with Gaia proper motions could increase the yield of ancient halo stars available for chemical tagging.
  • The same blanketing mechanism may appear in other UV bands or in metal-poor stars of different ages, offering a test of atmospheric models.
  • If the dispersion can be reduced with activity indicators from TESS or ground-based photometry, the technique might extend to EMP selection.

Load-bearing premise

The NUV excess is driven primarily by reduced metal-line blanketing rather than being dominated by chromospheric variability from rotation and magnetic activity.

What would settle it

Measure NUV excess for a sample of spectroscopically confirmed stars with [Fe/H] < -3 and test whether they lie on the same linear relation as the VMP stars or show systematically larger scatter.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2605.29060 by Alexander Gleason, Chase L. Smith, Daniel A. Dale, Daniel Reshan, Ella Morton, Grace Nelson, Javier Fregoso, Kaitlyn Schultz, Mary Kate Petrykovets, Maxwell Moe, Megan Frank, Nikhil Patten, Raven Cilley.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: PHOENIX model spectra of solar-type stars at four different metallicities. Compared to SDSS u-band (dotted), the GALEX NUV passband (dashed) provides greater leverage in distinguishing VMP stars ([Fe/H] ≤ −2; green), EMP stars ([Fe/H] ≤ −3; yellow), and UMP stars ([Fe/H] ≤ −4; red). Metal-poor stars are distinguished according to their iron abundance: very metal-poor (VMP) stars have [Fe/H] < −2, extremely… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Color-color diagram of our selected bright halo stars with GALEX counterparts. We display MIST model colors for metallicities [Fe/H] = −4, −2, and 0 (red). A dust reddening vector of E(g-r) = 0.05 is shown with a black arrow. We initially select the 1,994 stars (blue) that exhibit a NUV excess, being either brighter than the [Fe/H] = −2 model and/or are within ∆(NUV−G)[Fe/H]=−4 ≤ 0.3 mag of the [Fe/H] = −4… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Normalized spectrum and error for Gaia ID 1012126502345829120. Note the deep Balmer lines (Hα & Hβ are labeled) and Ca K. Several shallow iron features are visible across the spectrum. each metal absorption line and integrate the Gaussian to compute the EW. We calculate both measurement uncertainties from the errors in the flux and systematic biases in the location of the normalized continuum. We add measu… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Photometric metallicity tracer ∆(NUV−G)o;[Fe/H]=−4 versus actual spectroscopic metallicities [Fe/H] for the 492 stars in our full sample (green), including the 13 in our KOSMOS sample (orange). Our best-fit line (solid) and error (dashed) are shown in black, theoretical MIST models are shown in red, and theoretical PHOENIX models are shown in purple. Average GALEX NUV error is shown with a light green bar.… view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Metal-poor solar-type stars display a significant reduction in metal-line blanketing at short wavelengths, leading to an excess of near-ultraviolet (NUV) flux compared to their metal-rich counterparts. We utilize GALEX NUV and $\it{Gaia}$ DR3 photometry along with ground-based spectroscopy to establish a correlation between NUV excess and [Fe/H]. We construct a sample of 492 solar-type (F5-G9) halo stars with NUV excess and measured metallicitices. We perform our own observations with the KOSMOS spectrograph at Apache Point Observatory's 3.5m telescope to measure the abundances of 13 halo stars, 11 of which did not have previous metallicity measurements. Our targeted 13 halo stars span $-$2.92 $<$ [Fe/H] $<$ $-$1.97 and are all $\alpha$ enhanced with [$\alpha$/Fe] = 0.05-0.73. For our full sample of 492 objects, we find an anti-correlation between NUV excess and [Fe/H] that is statistically significant at the 8$\sigma$ level. GALEX NUV excess can be used to distinguish very metal-poor (VMP) stars ([Fe/H] $<$ $-$2) from their metal-rich counterparts. However, there is significant dispersion in the relation due to NUV chromospheric variability caused by rotational effects and magnetic cycle activity. The NUV chromospheric variability inhibits our ability to reliably distinguish extremely metal-poor (EMP) stars ([Fe/H] $<$ $-$3) from VMP stars based on photometry alone. UV spectra of EMP halo stars are needed to better calibrate their atmospheric properties and variability.

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 constructs a sample of 492 solar-type halo stars selected for GALEX NUV excess and with measured [Fe/H], reports an 8σ anti-correlation between NUV excess and metallicity, presents new KOSMOS abundances for 13 stars (11 previously unmeasured, spanning [Fe/H] from -2.92 to -1.97 and α-enhanced), and concludes that NUV excess can distinguish VMP stars ([Fe/H] < -2) while noting that chromospheric variability produces dispersion that prevents reliable photometric selection of EMP stars.

Significance. If the correlation is robust and the selection method generalizable, the result would supply a practical photometric indicator for identifying very metal-poor halo stars from existing GALEX+Gaia data, complementing spectroscopic surveys. The new abundance measurements for 13 objects directly enlarge the known VMP sample. The empirical nature of the correlation (no free parameters or circular derivations) is a strength, but the pre-selection and dispersion limit the immediate applicability for individual-star selection.

major comments (2)
  1. [Sample construction] Sample construction (abstract and § on sample): The 492-star sample is explicitly assembled from halo stars already showing NUV excess plus measured [Fe/H]. The reported 8σ anti-correlation is therefore measured inside an NUV-excess-selected population. No test on an unbiased control sample of halo stars (with and without NUV excess) or quantification of completeness/contamination is described, which is required to support the abstract claim that 'GALEX NUV excess can be used to distinguish VMP stars' outside the pre-selected set.
  2. [Results and discussion] Dispersion and VMP distinction (abstract and results section): The text states that 'significant dispersion' from NUV chromospheric variability 'inhibits our ability to reliably distinguish' even EMP stars. No quantitative metric (e.g., overlap integral between VMP and higher-metallicity distributions after variability, false-positive rate at a chosen excess threshold, or comparison of metallicity term vs. variability amplitude) is provided to demonstrate that the metallicity signal dominates sufficiently for reliable individual VMP selection.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract: 'metallicitices' is a typographical error and should read 'metallicities'.
  2. [Abstract] Abstract: The Gaia reference is written '$\it{Gaia}$'; consistent formatting with other survey names would improve readability.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their constructive and detailed comments. We address each major point below, indicating planned revisions where appropriate.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Sample construction] Sample construction (abstract and § on sample): The 492-star sample is explicitly assembled from halo stars already showing NUV excess plus measured [Fe/H]. The reported 8σ anti-correlation is therefore measured inside an NUV-excess-selected population. No test on an unbiased control sample of halo stars (with and without NUV excess) or quantification of completeness/contamination is described, which is required to support the abstract claim that 'GALEX NUV excess can be used to distinguish VMP stars' outside the pre-selected set.

    Authors: We agree that the 492-star sample is assembled from halo stars pre-selected for NUV excess, and the reported anti-correlation is measured within this population. The manuscript's claim is intended to apply to the use of NUV excess as a photometric indicator among halo stars that exhibit such excess, rather than as a blind selector from the full halo population. A fully unbiased control sample with both GALEX NUV photometry and [Fe/H] measurements is not available in existing catalogs, precluding a direct test of completeness and contamination. We will revise the abstract, sample section, and discussion to explicitly state the pre-selection and to include a quantitative discussion of selection biases, estimated contamination rates within the current sample, and the method's applicability limits. revision: partial

  2. Referee: [Results and discussion] Dispersion and VMP distinction (abstract and results section): The text states that 'significant dispersion' from NUV chromospheric variability 'inhibits our ability to reliably distinguish' even EMP stars. No quantitative metric (e.g., overlap integral between VMP and higher-metallicity distributions after variability, false-positive rate at a chosen excess threshold, or comparison of metallicity term vs. variability amplitude) is provided to demonstrate that the metallicity signal dominates sufficiently for reliable individual VMP selection.

    Authors: We acknowledge that the manuscript discusses the dispersion qualitatively but does not supply quantitative metrics such as distribution overlap or false-positive rates. Using the existing 492-star sample, we will compute the overlap between NUV-excess distributions for VMP ([Fe/H] < -2) and higher-metallicity stars, along with false-positive rates at representative excess thresholds. These metrics will be added to the results section to better quantify the reliability of photometric VMP selection and the impact of variability. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity; empirical anti-correlation measured directly from independent photometry and spectroscopy

full rationale

The paper constructs a sample of 492 halo stars already showing NUV excess (from GALEX and Gaia) and obtains [Fe/H] via spectroscopy (literature plus new KOSMOS observations). It then reports a measured anti-correlation at 8σ significance. This is a direct empirical result with no equations, fitted parameters, or derivations that reduce the claimed relation to its inputs by construction. No self-citations of uniqueness theorems, ansatzes, or prior results are invoked as load-bearing. The acknowledged dispersion from chromospheric variability is noted but does not create a circular reduction. The central claim rests on observable data rather than tautological re-expression of the sample selection.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

Abstract-only review; no equations or methods section available to enumerate fitted parameters or unstated assumptions beyond the stated physical premise.

axioms (1)
  • domain assumption Metal-poor solar-type stars exhibit reduced metal-line blanketing at short wavelengths producing NUV excess
    Invoked in the first sentence of the abstract as the physical basis for the search method.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.1-grok · 5886 in / 1336 out tokens · 37828 ms · 2026-06-29T09:30:59.509903+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

63 extracted references · 62 canonical work pages · 6 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    2022, , 259, 35, 10.3847/1538-4365/ac4414

    Abdurro’uf, Accetta, K., Aerts, C., et al. 2022, ApJS, 259, 35, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/ac4414

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4365/ac4414 2022

  2. [2]

    2018, , 238, 36, 10.3847/1538-4365/aadfe9

    Abohalima, A., & Frebel, A. 2018, ApJS, 238, 36, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/aadfe9

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4365/aadfe9 2018

  3. [3]

    S., Youakim, K., Gonz´ alez Hern´ andez, J

    Aguado, D. S., Youakim, K., Gonz´ alez Hern´ andez, J. I., et al. 2019, MNRAS, 490, 2241, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stz2643

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stz2643 2019

  4. [4]

    M., Nissen, P

    Amarsi, A. M., Nissen, P. E., & Sk´ ulad´ ottir,´A. 2019, A&A, 630, A104, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201936265

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201936265 2019

  5. [5]

    K., & Frebel, A

    Mardini, M. K., & Frebel, A. 2024, MNRAS, 530, 4712, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stae670

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stae670 2024

  6. [6]

    2023, , 267, 8, 10.3847/1538-4365/acd53e

    Andrae, R., Rix, H.-W., & Chandra, V. 2023a, ApJS, 267, 8, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/acd53e

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4365/acd53e

  7. [7]

    2023b, A&A, 674, A27, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202243462

    Andrae, R., Fouesneau, M., Sordo, R., et al. 2023b, A&A, 674, A27, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202243462

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202243462

  8. [8]

    S., Christlieb, N., Beers, T

    Barklem, P. S., Christlieb, N., Beers, T. C., et al. 2005, A&A, 439, 129, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20052967

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20052967 2005

  9. [9]

    C., & Christlieb , N

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

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

  10. [10]

    C., Preston, G

    Beers, T. C., Preston, G. W., & Shectman, S. A. 1992, AJ, 103, 1987, doi: 10.1086/116207

    work page doi:10.1086/116207 1992

  11. [11]

    C., Placco, V

    Beers, T. C., Placco, V. M., Carollo, D., et al. 2017, ApJ, 835, 81, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/835/1/81

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/835/1/81 2017

  12. [12]

    2011, Ap&SS, 335, 161, doi: 10.1007/s10509-010-0581-x

    Bianchi, L., Herald, J., Efremova, B., et al. 2011, Ap&SS, 335, 161, doi: 10.1007/s10509-010-0581-x

    work page doi:10.1007/s10509-010-0581-x 2011

  13. [13]

    2017, ApJS, 230, 24, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/aa7053

    Bianchi, L., Shiao, B., & Thilker, D. 2017, ApJS, 230, 24, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/aa7053

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4365/aa7053 2017

  14. [14]

    M., Rich, J

    Boesgaard, A. M., Rich, J. A., Levesque, E. M., & Bowler, B. P. 2011, ApJ, 743, 140, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/743/2/140

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/743/2/140 2011

  15. [15]

    2019, MNRAS, 487, 3797, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stz1378

    Bonifacio, P., Caffau, E., Sestito, F., et al. 2019, MNRAS, 487, 3797, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stz1378

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stz1378 2019

  16. [16]

    2024, A&A, 684, A91, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202347865

    Bonifacio, P., Caffau, E., Monaco, L., et al. 2024, A&A, 684, A91, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202347865

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202347865 2024

  17. [17]

    2021, MNRAS, 506, 150, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stab1242

    Buder, S., Sharma, S., Kos, J., et al. 2021, MNRAS, 506, 150, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stab1242

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stab1242 2021

  18. [18]

    2020, MNRAS, 493, 4677, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staa589

    Caffau, E., Bonifacio, P., Sbordone, L., et al. 2020, MNRAS, 493, 4677, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staa589

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/staa589 2020

  19. [19]

    Camarota, L., & Holberg, J. B. 2014, MNRAS, 438, 3111, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stt2422

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stt2422 2014

  20. [20]

    2024, A&A, 684, A37, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202348332

    Ceccarelli, E., Massari, D., Mucciarelli, A., et al. 2024, A&A, 684, A37, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202348332

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202348332 2024

  21. [21]

    2020, ApJ, 899, 62, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab9f35

    Chen, Y.-P., Yan, R., Maraston, C., et al. 2020, ApJ, 899, 62, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab9f35

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ab9f35 2020

  22. [22]

    2016, The Astrophysical Journal, 823, 102, doi: 10.3847/0004-637X/823/2/102 Chru´ sli´ nska, M

    Choi, J., Dotter, A., Conroy, C., et al. 2016, ApJ, 823, 102, doi: 10.3847/0004-637X/823/2/102 de Laverny, P., Recio-Blanco, A., Worley, C. C., & Plez, B. 2012, A&A, 544, A126, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201219330

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

  23. [23]

    T., & Cebula, R

    Deland, M. T., & Cebula, R. P. 2012, Journal of Atmospheric and Solar-Terrestrial Physics, 77, 225, doi: 10.1016/j.jastp.2012.01.007

    work page doi:10.1016/j.jastp.2012.01.007 2012

  24. [24]

    E., Yoon, J., Beers, T

    Dietz, S. E., Yoon, J., Beers, T. C., & Placco, V. M. 2020, ApJ, 894, 34, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab7fa4 Gaia Collaboration, Vallenari, A., Brown, A. G. A., et al. 2023, A&A, 674, A1, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202243940

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ab7fa4 2020

  25. [25]

    2019, ApJ, 887, 93, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab5362

    Finkbeiner, D. 2019, ApJ, 887, 93, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab5362

    work page internal anchor Pith review doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ab5362 2019

  26. [26]

    2015, MNRAS, 452, 3092, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stv1529

    Gu, J., Du, C., Jia, Y., et al. 2015, MNRAS, 452, 3092, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stv1529

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stv1529 2015

  27. [27]

    C., et al

    Hourihane, A., Fran¸ cois, P., Worley, C. C., et al. 2023, A&A, 676, A129, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202345910

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202345910 2023

  28. [28]

    O., Wende-von Berg, S., Dreizler, S., et al

    Husser, T. O., Wende-von Berg, S., Dreizler, S., et al. 2013, A&A, 553, A6, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201219058

    work page internal anchor Pith review doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201219058 2013

  29. [29]

    N., Aoki, W., & Chiba, M

    Ishigaki, M. N., Aoki, W., & Chiba, M. 2013, ApJ, 771, 67, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/771/1/67 Ivezi´ c,ˇZ., Sesar, B., Juri´ c, M., et al. 2008, ApJ, 684, 287, doi: 10.1086/589678 J¨ onsson, H., Holtzman, J. A., Allende Prieto, C., et al. 2020, AJ, 160, 120, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/aba592

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/771/1/67 2013

  30. [30]

    Kurucz, R. L. 1993, SYNTHE spectrum synthesis programs and line data

    1993

  31. [31]

    K., Bolte, M., Johnson, J

    Lai, D. K., Bolte, M., Johnson, J. A., et al. 2008, ApJ, 681, 1524, doi: 10.1086/588811

    work page doi:10.1086/588811 2008

  32. [32]

    2022, ApJ, 931, 147, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac6514

    Li, H., Aoki, W., Matsuno, T., et al. 2022, ApJ, 931, 147, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac6514

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ac6514 2022

  33. [33]

    C., et al

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

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

  34. [34]

    2022, MNRAS, 511, 1004, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stab3721

    Lucchesi, R., Lardo, C., Jablonka, P., et al. 2022, MNRAS, 511, 1004, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stab3721

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stab3721 2022

  35. [35]

    K., Frebel, A., Betre, L., et al

    Mardini, M. K., Frebel, A., Betre, L., et al. 2024, MNRAS, 528, 2912, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad3925

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stad3925 2024

  36. [36]

    C., Fanson, J., Schiminovich, D., et al

    Martin, D. C., Fanson, J., Schiminovich, D., et al. 2005, ApJL, 619, L1, doi: 10.1086/426387

    work page internal anchor Pith review doi:10.1086/426387 2005

  37. [37]

    2021, A&A Rv, 29, 5, doi: 10.1007/s00159-021-00133-8

    Matteucci, F. 2021, A&A Rv, 29, 5, doi: 10.1007/s00159-021-00133-8

    work page doi:10.1007/s00159-021-00133-8 2021

  38. [38]

    M., & Badenes, C

    Moe, M., Kratter, K. M., & Badenes, C. 2019, ApJ, 875, 61, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab0d88

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

  39. [39]

    2019, ApJ, 872, 95, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aaf236

    Mohammed, S., Schiminovich, D., Hawkins, K., et al. 2019, ApJ, 872, 95, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aaf236

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aaf236 2019

  40. [40]

    A., et al

    Morrissey, P., Conrow, T., Barlow, T. A., et al. 2007, ApJS, 173, 682, doi: 10.1086/520512

    work page doi:10.1086/520512 2007

  41. [41]

    2010, A&A, 516, A13, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/200913932 12

    Palacios, A., Gebran, M., Josselin, E., et al. 2010, A&A, 516, A13, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/200913932 12

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/200913932 2010

  42. [42]

    Intrinsic Colors, Temperatures, and Bolometric Corrections of Pre-Main Sequence Stars

    Pecaut, M. J., & Mamajek, E. E. 2013, ApJS, 208, 9, doi: 10.1088/0067-0049/208/1/9

    work page internal anchor Pith review doi:10.1088/0067-0049/208/1/9 2013

  43. [43]

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

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

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4365/ac7ab0 2022

  44. [44]

    M., Kennedy, C

    Placco, V. M., Kennedy, C. R., Rossi, S., et al. 2010, AJ, 139, 1051, doi: 10.1088/0004-6256/139/3/1051

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-6256/139/3/1051 2010

  45. [45]

    ( year 2014 ), month May

    Roederer, I. U., Preston, G. W., Thompson, I. B., et al. 2014, AJ, 147, 136, doi: 10.1088/0004-6256/147/6/136

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-6256/147/6/136 2014

  46. [46]

    G., & Norris, J

    Ryan, S. G., & Norris, J. E. 1991, AJ, 101, 1835, doi: 10.1086/115811

    work page doi:10.1086/115811 1991

  47. [47]

    A., Kirk J

    Schlafly, E. F., & Finkbeiner, D. P. 2011, ApJ, 737, 103, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/737/2/103

    work page internal anchor Pith review doi:10.1088/0004-637x/737/2/103 2011

  48. [48]

    F., Starkenburg, E., et al

    Sestito, F., Martin, N. F., Starkenburg, E., et al. 2020, MNRAS, 497, L7, doi: 10.1093/mnrasl/slaa022

    work page doi:10.1093/mnrasl/slaa022 2020

  49. [49]

    2022, ApJS, 261, 19, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/ac680c

    Huang, Y. 2022, ApJS, 261, 19, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/ac680c

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4365/ac680c 2022

  50. [50]

    A., Zhao, G., et al

    Shen, Y.-F., Alexeeva, S. A., Zhao, G., et al. 2023, Research in Astronomy and Astrophysics, 23, 075019, doi: 10.1088/1674-4527/accdc3

    work page doi:10.1088/1674-4527/accdc3 2023

  51. [51]

    I., & Hauschildt, P

    Short, C. I., & Hauschildt, P. H. 2005, ApJ, 618, 926, doi: 10.1086/426128

    work page doi:10.1086/426128 2005

  52. [52]

    , keywords =

    Skrutskie, M. F., Cutri, R. M., Stiening, R., et al. 2006, AJ, 131, 1163, doi: 10.1086/498708

    work page doi:10.1086/498708 2006

  53. [53]

    J., Bruhweiler, F

    Sofia, U. J., Bruhweiler, F. C., & Sofia, S. 1989, J. Geophys. Res., 94, 9117, doi: 10.1029/JA094iA07p09117

    work page doi:10.1029/ja094ia07p09117 1989

  54. [54]

    2022, A&A, 663, A4, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202142409

    Soubiran, C., Brouillet, N., & Casamiquela, L. 2022, A&A, 663, A4, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202142409

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202142409 2022

  55. [55]

    2016, A&A, 591, A118, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201628497

    Soubiran, C., Le Campion, J.-F., Brouillet, N., & Chemin, L. 2016, A&A, 591, A118, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201628497

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201628497 2016

  56. [56]

    2020, A&A, 644, A67, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202039167

    Ambily, S. 2020, A&A, 644, A67, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202039167

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202039167 2020

  57. [57]

    2021, Research in Astronomy and Astrophysics, 21, 292, doi: 10.1088/1674-4527/21/11/292

    Wang, S., Zhang, H.-T., Bai, Z.-R., et al. 2021, Research in Astronomy and Astrophysics, 21, 292, doi: 10.1088/1674-4527/21/11/292

    work page doi:10.1088/1674-4527/21/11/292 2021

  58. [58]

    Xin, C., Renzo, M., & Metzger, B. D. 2022, MNRAS, 516, 5816, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stac2551

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stac2551 2022

  59. [59]

    E., Bessell , M

    Yong, D., Norris, J. E., Bessell, M. S., et al. 2013, ApJ, 762, 26, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/762/1/26

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/762/1/26 2013

  60. [60]

    S., Bessell, M

    Yong, D., Da Costa, G. S., Bessell, M. S., et al. 2021, MNRAS, 507, 4102, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stab2001

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stab2001 2021

  61. [61]

    2023, ApJS, 264, 17, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/ac9b28

    Zhang, L.-y., Su, T., Misra, P., et al. 2023, ApJS, 264, 17, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/ac9b28

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4365/ac9b28 2023

  62. [62]

    2019, ApJ, 873, 8, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab0205

    Zhu, W. 2019, ApJ, 873, 8, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab0205

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ab0205 2019

  63. [63]

    2020, ApJS, 251, 15, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/abbb2d

    Zong, W., Fu, J.-N., De Cat, P., et al. 2020, ApJS, 251, 15, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/abbb2d

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4365/abbb2d 2020