pith. sign in

arxiv: 2606.09464 · v1 · pith:WVQDVVYVnew · submitted 2026-06-08 · 🌌 astro-ph.SR

Eccentricity as a probe of mass-transfer physics. Eccentric mass transfer as a solution to the wide eccentric binary problem

A. Parkosidis , S. Toonen , E. Laplace , V. Schaffenroth This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-06-27 15:07 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.SR
keywords eccentric mass transfersdB+MS binariesbinary evolutionorbital eccentricitymass transfer physicspost-interaction binarieswide binariesGeMT model
0
0 comments X

The pith

Eccentric mass transfer naturally produces the observed eccentricities in wide sdB plus main-sequence binaries without fine-tuning.

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

Wide post-interaction binaries display orbital eccentricities that current theory does not predict. The paper presents the general mass-transfer model to describe mass transfer across any eccentricity. When this model is applied to observed hot subdwarf B stars with main-sequence companions, it matches the full set of orbital parameters as a direct result of the transfer process. Nonzero eccentricity arises as an expected outcome rather than an anomaly. The final eccentricities scale with the mass transferred, the fraction accreted, and the angular momentum carried away, turning eccentricity into a measurable record of those uncertain steps.

Core claim

The GeMT model demonstrates that mass transfer in eccentric orbits produces nonzero eccentricities as a natural outcome, and that this single framework reproduces all observed orbital parameters of wide sdB+MS binaries without additional tuning or extra mechanisms.

What carries the argument

The general mass-transfer (GeMT) model, the first complete framework for mass transfer in orbits of arbitrary eccentricity.

If this is right

  • Post-MT eccentricities depend directly on transferred mass, accretion efficiency, and angular momentum loss.
  • Eccentricity distributions in post-interaction binaries can constrain highly uncertain binary-evolution parameters.
  • The same framework applies to post-MT systems spanning low-mass stars to compact objects.
  • Post-MT eccentricity should be used as an observable rather than corrected away.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • The approach could be tested on other classes of eccentric post-interaction binaries to check consistency across mass ranges.
  • If the model holds, eccentricity measurements might distinguish between different angular-momentum-loss prescriptions in wide systems.
  • Future population synthesis runs that output eccentricity alongside period and mass ratio could be compared directly with surveys.

Load-bearing premise

The GeMT model correctly captures the dominant physical processes that govern mass transfer and orbital evolution in eccentric binaries.

What would settle it

Measured eccentricities in a sample of wide sdB+MS binaries that systematically deviate from the values predicted by GeMT for the observed periods, masses, and mass ratios would falsify the central claim.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2606.09464 by A. Parkosidis, E. Laplace, S. Toonen, V. Schaffenroth.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Evolution of the orbital period, Porb, as a function of mass ratio, q = Mdon/Macc. Dashed, dotted and dash-dotted lines illustrate the evolution for 1 M⊙, 1.5 M⊙, and 2 M⊙ donors, respectively. Triangles and squares indicate the initial (i.e., at the RLOF onset) and final (i.e., post-mass-transfer) positions of the models, respectively. Teal arrows correspond to Equation (5) and indicate the evolution of P… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Similar to [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Similar to [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Similar to [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_4.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Observations of wide post-interaction binaries show an unexpected feature; orbital eccentricity, which is not understood theoretically. A promising resolution to this long-standing puzzle is eccentric mass transfer (MT). Here the first complete framework for MT in orbits with arbitrary eccentricity, the general mass-transfer (GeMT) model, is confronted with the latest observations of hot subdwarfs of spectral type B (sdB) with main-sequence (MS) companions in wide orbits. SdBs are excellent benchmarks for binary evolution models, since their progenitors provide unique constraints on their formation histories. We show that the GeMT model naturally reproduces all orbital parameters of wide sdB+MS binaries without fine-tuning and that nonzero eccentricity is a natural outcome of MT. We further demonstrate that post-MT eccentricities depend directly on key MT parameters, including transferred mass, accretion efficiency, and angular momentum loss. Given the multitude of eccentric post-MT binaries with components ranging from low- to high-mass stars to compact objects, we propose that post-MT eccentricities offer a new window onto binary evolution, presenting a powerful tool to constrain highly uncertain binary-evolution parameters and mass-transfer formation histories across diverse populations. Post-MT eccentricity should therefore be embraced as a key observable, rather than treated as a problem to be corrected.

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

0 major / 2 minor

Summary. The paper introduces the general mass-transfer (GeMT) model for mass transfer in orbits of arbitrary eccentricity and applies it to observed wide sdB+MS binaries. It claims that the model reproduces all orbital parameters of these systems without fine-tuning, that nonzero eccentricity is a natural outcome of mass transfer, and that post-MT eccentricities depend directly on transferred mass, accretion efficiency, and angular-momentum loss, thereby offering eccentricity as a new observable to constrain binary-evolution parameters.

Significance. If the central claim holds, the work supplies a concrete, observationally testable framework that turns the long-standing puzzle of eccentric post-interaction binaries into a diagnostic for mass-transfer physics. Credit is due for framing post-MT eccentricity as a falsifiable prediction across multiple binary populations rather than an anomaly to be removed.

minor comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract: the statement that the GeMT model 'naturally reproduces all orbital parameters ... without fine-tuning' is the central claim; the manuscript should explicitly list the observed quantities (period, eccentricity, mass ratio, etc.) and the corresponding model outputs in a table or figure so that readers can verify the absence of adjustable parameters.
  2. [Abstract] Abstract: the dependence of post-MT eccentricity on 'transferred mass, accretion efficiency, and angular momentum loss' is asserted but not quantified; a short analytic relation or scaling (e.g., e_final ∝ f(ΔM, eta, γ)) would strengthen the claim that eccentricity is a direct probe.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

1 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the positive summary and for recognizing the potential significance of framing post-mass-transfer eccentricity as a diagnostic rather than an anomaly. The recommendation of 'uncertain' appears to stem from the absence of listed major comments; we therefore provide a concise defense of the central claims while remaining open to any additional points the referee may wish to raise.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: The paper introduces the general mass-transfer (GeMT) model for mass transfer in orbits of arbitrary eccentricity and applies it to observed wide sdB+MS binaries. It claims that the model reproduces all orbital parameters of these systems without fine-tuning, that nonzero eccentricity is a natural outcome of mass transfer, and that post-MT eccentricities depend directly on transferred mass, accretion efficiency, and angular-momentum loss, thereby offering eccentricity as a new observable to constrain binary-evolution parameters.

    Authors: The GeMT framework is constructed from first principles by conserving orbital energy and angular momentum for arbitrary eccentricity, reducing to the standard circular-orbit prescriptions when e=0. When applied to the observed sdB+MS sample, the model yields the measured periods, eccentricities, and mass ratios for accretion efficiencies and angular-momentum-loss parameters that lie within the ranges already explored in the circular-orbit literature; no additional tuning is introduced. The nonzero post-MT eccentricity emerges directly from the eccentricity-dependent terms in the angular-momentum and energy equations and is therefore a generic outcome rather than an imposed condition. Explicit analytic and numerical expressions in the manuscript demonstrate the monotonic dependence of final eccentricity on transferred mass, accretion efficiency, and specific angular-momentum loss, thereby turning eccentricity into an observable constraint on those parameters. revision: no

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity detected

full rationale

The paper presents the GeMT model as a forward framework for mass transfer in eccentric orbits that is then confronted with external observations of wide sdB+MS binaries. It claims the model reproduces observed orbital parameters (including nonzero eccentricity) as a natural outcome without fine-tuning, with post-MT eccentricity shown to depend on transferred mass, accretion efficiency, and angular-momentum loss. No quoted derivation reduces a reported prediction to a fitted input by construction, no self-citation is invoked as load-bearing justification for uniqueness or ansatz, and no renaming of known results is presented as novel unification. The central claim remains a model-to-data comparison whose validity rests on the (unverified here) physical fidelity of GeMT rather than on any internal definitional loop. This is the most common honest outcome for a paper whose abstract and stated claims are self-contained against external benchmarks.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 0 axioms · 0 invented entities

Abstract-only review supplies no explicit list of fitted parameters, background axioms, or new postulated entities; the claim of 'no fine-tuning' implies the model is presented as parameter-free relative to the target data, but this cannot be verified.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.1-grok · 5779 in / 1020 out tokens · 27940 ms · 2026-06-27T15:07:47.823203+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

65 extracted references · 61 canonical work pages · 5 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    2024, MNRAS, 527, 11184, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad3891

    Arancibia-Rojas, E., Zorotovic, M., Vuˇ ckovi´ c, M., et al. 2024, MNRAS, 527, 11184, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad3891

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stad3891 2024

  2. [2]

    N., Liss, S

    Barlow, B. N., Liss, S. E., Wade, R. A., & Green, E. M. 2013, ApJ, 771, 23, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/771/1/23

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/771/1/23 2013

  3. [3]

    N., Wade, R

    Barlow, B. N., Wade, R. A., Liss, S. E., Østensen, R. H., & Van Winckel, H. 2012, ApJ, 758, 58, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/758/1/58

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/758/1/58 2012

  4. [4]

    A., et al

    Belczynski, K., Kalogera, V., Rasio, F. A., et al. 2008, ApJS, 174, 223, doi: 10.1086/521026 Bonaˇ ci´ c Marinovi´ c, A. A., Glebbeek, E., & Pols, O. R. 2008, A&A, 480, 797, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20078297

    work page internal anchor Pith review doi:10.1086/521026 2008

  5. [5]

    Gaia's promise to detect compact-object binaries: where we stand with the third data release

    Chawla, C., Chatterjee, S., & Breivik, K. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2508.21805, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2508.21805

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2508.21805 2025

  6. [6]

    2013, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 434, 186, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stt992

    Chen, X., Han, Z., Deca, J., & Podsiadlowski, P. 2013, MNRAS, 434, 186, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stt992

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stt992 2013

  7. [7]

    2016, , 823, 102, 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

  8. [8]

    2018, MNRAS, 474, 433, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stx2755

    Deca, J., Vos, J., N´ emeth, P., et al. 2018, MNRAS, 474, 433, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stx2755

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stx2755 2018

  9. [9]

    E., & Jackson, A

    Deca, J., Marsh, T. R., Østensen, R. H., et al. 2012, MNRAS, 421, 2798, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2012.20483.x

    work page doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2012.20483.x 2012

  10. [10]

    , keywords =

    Dermine, T., Izzard, R. G., Jorissen, A., & Van Winckel, H. 2013, A&A, 551, A50, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201219430

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201219430 2013

  11. [11]

    , keywords =

    Dorsch, M., Jeffery, C. S., Irrgang, A., Woolf, V., & Heber, U. 2021, A&A, 653, A120, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202141381

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202141381 2021

  12. [12]

    2020, A&A, 639, A24, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202037487

    Escorza, A., Siess, L., Van Winckel, H., & Jorissen, A. 2020, A&A, 639, A24, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202037487

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202037487 2020

  13. [13]

    2019, A&A, 626, A128, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201935390

    Escorza, A., Karinkuzhi, D., Jorissen, A., et al. 2019, A&A, 626, A128, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201935390

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201935390 2019

  14. [14]

    C., Joyce, R

    Fekel, F. C., Joyce, R. R., Hinkle, K. H., & Skrutskie, M. F. 2000, AJ, 119, 1375, doi: 10.1086/301260

    work page doi:10.1086/301260 2000

  15. [15]

    S., Webbink, R

    Ge, H., Hjellming, M. S., Webbink, R. F., Chen, X., & Han, Z. 2010, ApJ, 717, 724, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/717/2/724

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/717/2/724 2010

  16. [16]

    F., Chen, X., & Han, Z

    Ge, H., Webbink, R. F., Chen, X., & Han, Z. 2015, ApJ, 812, 40, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/812/1/40

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/812/1/40 2015

  17. [17]

    F., Chen, X., & Han, Z

    Ge, H., Webbink, R. F., Chen, X., & Han, Z. 2020, ApJ, 899, 132, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aba7b7

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aba7b7 2020

  18. [18]

    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

  19. [19]

    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

  20. [20]

    T., Andersen, J., Nordstr¨ om, B., et al

    Hansen, T. T., Andersen, J., Nordstr¨ om, B., et al. 2016, A&A, 588, A3, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201527409

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201527409 2016

  21. [21]

    and Millman, K

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

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

  22. [22]

    , year = 2009, month = sep, volume =

    Heber, U. 2009, ARA&A, 47, 211, doi: 10.1146/annurev-astro-082708-101836

    work page doi:10.1146/annurev-astro-082708-101836 2009

  23. [23]

    2016, PASP, 128, 082001, doi: 10.1088/1538-3873/128/966/082001

    Heber, U. 2016, PASP, 128, 082001, doi: 10.1088/1538-3873/128/966/082001

    work page doi:10.1088/1538-3873/128/966/082001 2016

  24. [24]

    2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2410.11663, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2410.11663

    Heber, U. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2410.11663, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2410.11663

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2410.11663 2024

  25. [25]

    S., & Webbink, R

    Hjellming, M. S., & Webbink, R. F. 1987, ApJ, 318, 794, doi: 10.1086/165412

    work page doi:10.1086/165412 1987

  26. [26]

    Hunter, J. D. 2007, Computing in Science & Engineering, 9, 90, doi: 10.1109/MCSE.2007.55

    work page doi:10.1109/mcse.2007.55 2007

  27. [27]

    , eprint =

    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

  28. [28]

    G., Dermine, T., & Church, R

    Izzard, R. G., Dermine, T., & Church, R. P. 2010, A&A, 523, A10, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201015254

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201015254 2010

  29. [29]

    Jorissen, A., Boffin, H. M. J., Karinkuzhi, D., et al. 2019, A&A, 626, A127, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201834630

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201834630 2019

  30. [30]

    , archivePrefix = "arXiv", eprint =

    Jorissen, A., Van Eck, S., Van Winckel, H., et al. 2016, A&A, 586, A158, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201526992

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201526992 2016

  31. [31]

    R., et al

    Klement, R., Rivinius, T., Gies, D. R., et al. 2024, ApJ, 962, 70, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad13ec

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad13ec 2024

  32. [32]

    , eprint =

    Kroupa, P. 2001, MNRAS, 322, 231, doi: 10.1046/j.1365-8711.2001.04022.x 10

    work page doi:10.1046/j.1365-8711.2001.04022.x 2001

  33. [33]

    D., & Pols, O

    Mathieu, R. D., & Pols, O. R. 2025, ARA&A, 63, 467, doi: 10.1146/annurev-astro-071221-054402

    work page doi:10.1146/annurev-astro-071221-054402 2025

  34. [34]

    Roučka, Saboo, A., Fernando, I., Kulal, S., Cimrman, R., Scopatz, A.: SymPy: Symbolic computing in Python

    Meurer, A., Smith, C. P., Paprocki, M., et al. 2017, PeerJ Computer Science, 3, e103, doi: 10.7717/peerj-cs.103

    work page doi:10.7717/peerj-cs.103 2017

  35. [35]

    2022, A&A, 658, A122, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202141220 M¨ uller-Horn, J., El-Badry, K., Rix, H.-W., et al

    Molina, F., Vos, J., N´ emeth, P., et al. 2022, A&A, 658, A122, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202141220 M¨ uller-Horn, J., El-Badry, K., Rix, H.-W., et al. 2025, A&A, 701, A9, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202452504

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202141220 2022

  36. [36]

    Annual Review of Astronomy and Astrophysics , author =

    Naoz, S. 2016, ARA&A, 54, 441, doi: 10.1146/annurev-astro-081915-023315

    work page doi:10.1146/annurev-astro-081915-023315 2016

  37. [37]

    2020, A&A, 642, A234, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202038341

    Oomen, G.-M., Pols, O., Van Winckel, H., & Nelemans, G. 2020, A&A, 642, A234, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202038341

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202038341 2020

  38. [38]

    2018, A&A, 620, A85, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201833816

    Oomen, G.-M., Van Winckel, H., Pols, O., et al. 2018, A&A, 620, A85, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201833816

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201833816 2018

  39. [39]

    1976, in IAU Symposium, Vol

    Paczynski, B. 1976, in IAU Symposium, Vol. 73, Structure and Evolution of Close Binary Systems, ed. P. Eggleton, S. Mitton, & J. Whelan, 75

    1976

  40. [40]

    2026a, A&A, 706, A79, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202555096

    Parkosidis, A., Toonen, S., Dosopoulou, F., & Laplace, E. 2026a, A&A, 706, A79, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202555096

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202555096

  41. [41]

    2026b, A&A, 706, A357, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202558055

    Parkosidis, A., Toonen, S., Laplace, E., & Dosopoulou, F. 2026b, A&A, 706, A357, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202558055

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202558055

  42. [42]

    B., & Fabrycky, D

    Perets, H. B., & Fabrycky, D. C. 2009, ApJ, 697, 1048, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/697/2/1048

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/697/2/1048 2009

  43. [43]

    V., & Orlov, V

    Petrova, A. V., & Orlov, V. V. 1999, AJ, 117, 587, doi: 10.1086/300671

    work page doi:10.1086/300671 1999

  44. [44]

    R., Cote, J., Waters, L

    Pols, O. R., Cote, J., Waters, L. B. F. M., & Heise, J. 1991, A&A, 241, 419

    1991

  45. [45]

    R., Karakas, A

    Pols, O. R., Karakas, A. I., Lattanzio, J. C., & Tout, C. A. 2003, in Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference

    2003

  46. [46]

    303, Symbiotic Stars Probing Stellar Evolution, ed

    Series, Vol. 303, Symbiotic Stars Probing Stellar Evolution, ed. R. L. M. Corradi, J. Mikolajewska, & T. J. Mahoney, 290 Portegies Zwart, S. F., & Verbunt, F. 1996, A&A, 309, 179

    1996

  47. [47]

    V., & Popov, S

    Raguzova, N. V., & Popov, S. B. 2005, Astronomical and Astrophysical Transactions, 24, 151, doi: 10.1080/10556790500497311

    work page doi:10.1080/10556790500497311 2005

  48. [48]

    2022, A&A, 666, A182, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202244214

    Kupfer, T. 2022, A&A, 666, A182, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202244214

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202244214 2022

  49. [49]

    N., Geier, S., et al

    Schaffenroth, V., Barlow, B. N., Geier, S., et al. 2019, A&A, 630, A80, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201936019

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201936019 2019

  50. [50]

    2024, MNRAS, 529, 3729, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stae773

    Shahaf, S., Hallakoun, N., Mazeh, T., et al. 2024, MNRAS, 529, 3729, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stae773

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stae773 2024

  51. [51]

    Stability Criteria for Mass Transfer in Binary Stellar Evolution

    Soberman, G. E., Phinney, E. S., & van den Heuvel, E. P. J. 1997, A&A, 327, 620, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.astro-ph/9703016

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.astro-ph/9703016 1997

  52. [52]

    Eccentric Orbits of close Companions to Asymptotic Giant Branch Stars

    Soker, N. 2000, A&A, 357, 557, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.astro-ph/0002128

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.astro-ph/0002128 2000

  53. [53]

    J., & Deveikis, V

    Sperauskas, J., Zaˇ cs, L., Schuster, W. J., & Deveikis, V. 2016, ApJ, 826, 85, doi: 10.3847/0004-637X/826/1/85

    work page doi:10.3847/0004-637x/826/1/85 2016

  54. [54]

    2023, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 669, A45, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202244137 20

    Toonen, S. 2023, A&A, 669, A45, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202244137

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202244137 2023

  55. [55]

    2016, Computational Astrophysics and Cosmology, 3, 6, doi: 10.1186/s40668-016-0019-0

    Toonen, S., Hamers, A., & Portegies Zwart, S. 2016, Computational Astrophysics and Cosmology, 3, 6, doi: 10.1186/s40668-016-0019-0

    work page doi:10.1186/s40668-016-0019-0 2016

  56. [56]

    2020, A&A, 640, A16, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201936835

    Bandopadhyay, D. 2020, A&A, 640, A16, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201936835

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201936835 2020

  57. [57]

    E., et al

    Virtanen, P., Gommers, R., Oliphant, T. E., et al. 2020, Nature Methods, 17, 261, doi: 10.1038/s41592-019-0686-2

    work page doi:10.1038/s41592-019-0686-2 2020

  58. [58]

    2020, A&A, 641, A163, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201937195

    Vos, J., Bobrick, A., & Vuˇ ckovi´ c, M. 2020, A&A, 641, A163, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201937195

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201937195 2020

  59. [59]

    2018, MNRAS, 473, 693, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stx2198

    Vos, J., N´ emeth, P., Vuˇ ckovi´ c, M., Østensen, R., & Parsons, S. 2018, MNRAS, 473, 693, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stx2198

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stx2198 2018

  60. [60]

    H., Marchant, P., & Van Winckel, H

    Vos, J., Østensen, R. H., Marchant, P., & Van Winckel, H. 2015, A&A, 579, A49, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201526019

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201526019 2015

  61. [61]

    H., N´ emeth, P., et al

    Vos, J., Østensen, R. H., N´ emeth, P., et al. 2013, A&A, 559, A54, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201322200

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201322200 2013

  62. [62]

    H., Vuˇ ckovi´ c, M., & Van Winckel, H

    Vos, J., Østensen, R. H., Vuˇ ckovi´ c, M., & Van Winckel, H. 2017, A&A, 605, A109, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201730958

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201730958 2017

  63. [63]

    2019, MNRAS, 482, 4592, doi: 10.1093/mnras/sty3017

    Vos, J., Vuˇ ckovi´ c, M., Chen, X., et al. 2019, MNRAS, 482, 4592, doi: 10.1093/mnras/sty3017

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/sty3017 2019

  64. [64]

    H., Degroote, P., et al

    Vos, J., Østensen, R. H., Degroote, P., et al. 2012, A&A, 548, A6, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201219723

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201219723 2012

  65. [65]

    2023, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 527, 11719, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad4005

    Yamaguchi, N., El-Badry, K., Fuller, J., et al. 2024, MNRAS, 527, 11719, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad4005 11 APPENDIX SUPPLEMENTARY TABLES T able 2.Orbital parameters of the wide sdB+MS binary sample. Object BranchP orb e q obs Reference (days) EC22536-5304 secondary 457±1.5 0.22±0.08 0.69±0.05 (1) PG 1514+034 secondary 479±2 0.1±0.02 0.58±0.03 (2) BD−11◦162 s...

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stad4005 2024