pith. sign in

arxiv: 2606.12516 · v1 · pith:WJQLOIW5new · submitted 2026-06-10 · 🌌 astro-ph.GA

Bar-induced migration of ω Centauri away from Gaia Sausage-Enceladus

Adam M. Dillamore , Hanyuan Zhang , Vasily Belokurov This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-06-27 09:13 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.GA
keywords ω CentauriGaia Sausage-EnceladusGalactic barglobular clusterstellar migrationMilky Way dynamicspattern speedphase space
0
0 comments X

The pith

ω Centauri can be traced back to the Gaia Sausage-Enceladus debris through bar-induced migration, but only at a low bar pattern speed.

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

The paper tests whether the globular cluster ω Centauri originated inside the Gaia Sausage-Enceladus merger event. Its present orbit lies far from the GSE debris in phase space, prompting the authors to check if the Milky Way's bar could have driven the cluster away over time. Simulations place both ω Cen and the GSE debris inside a realistic Galactic potential that includes a bar slowing down over cosmic time. At sufficiently low present-day pattern speeds the cluster's orbit can be followed backward into the GSE region, and the chemical patterns of stars lying between the two populations give tentative support. The work concludes that a GSE origin remains possible but would force a downward revision of accepted bar speeds.

Core claim

Simulations of the GSE debris and ω Cen inside a Milky Way potential containing a decelerating bar show that the cluster's orbit reaches the GSE phase-space region when the bar's present-day pattern speed is ≲26 km s^{-1} kpc^{-1}. The [α/M] abundance distributions of stars positioned between the GSE debris and ω Cen in (Lz, E) space are consistent with this migration pathway, although not conclusive. The authors therefore state that a GSE origin for ω Cen is both dynamically and chemically plausible provided the bar pattern speed is lower than most recent estimates.

What carries the argument

Perturbations from a decelerating Galactic bar that shift stellar orbits in (Lz, E) space, allowing ω Cen to migrate away from the GSE debris region.

If this is right

  • A GSE origin for ω Cen becomes dynamically feasible when the bar rotates slowly enough.
  • The current consensus value for the bar's pattern speed would require downward revision.
  • The chemical abundance bridge between GSE debris and ω Cen is consistent with gradual migration.
  • The same bar-driven mechanism could affect the present locations of other clusters once associated with the GSE event.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • If the bar must be slow to explain ω Cen, then models of how the bar formed and slowed would need to incorporate earlier merger timing.
  • More precise measurements of bar speed from gas kinematics or stellar streams could directly test whether the migration channel remains open.
  • Similar orbital migration could reposition other globular clusters thought to have formed inside ancient mergers.

Load-bearing premise

The model assumes a specific Milky Way gravitational potential that includes a bar decelerating over time, with the present-day pattern speed treated as a free parameter.

What would settle it

A direct measurement of the bar pattern speed substantially above 26 km s^{-1} kpc^{-1} that cannot be reconciled with the required migration path in updated potentials.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2606.12516 by Adam M. Dillamore, Hanyuan Zhang, Vasily Belokurov.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Chemical maps in the (𝐿𝑧 , 𝐸) plane, following fig. 5 of Laporte & Orkney (2026) with Gaia XP abundances (Li et al. 2024). Left: mean [𝑀/𝐻], showing the metal-rich GSE cloud and the diagonal corridor towards lower energy and more retrograde 𝐿𝑧 . Middle: the same map with GSE contours from Belokurov et al. (2023), the present-day 𝜔 Cen location (red star), and the bridge coordinates used in [PITH_FULL_IMAG… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Column-normalized density in the (𝑋𝑏, [𝛼/M] ) plane for the bridge coordinate system, defined in the text and illustrated in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Evolution of a GSE-like population in (𝐿𝑧 , 𝐸) space subject to a decelerating bar. The position of 𝜔 Cen is marked with a star symbol, and the prograde CR/retrograde 1:1 resonance is marked with a dotted line. Each panel shows a different snapshot, with Ωb decreasing from left to right. GSE particles only reach the location of 𝜔 Cen when Ωb ≈ 25 km s−1 kpc−1 , at which point 𝜔 Cen lies close to the resona… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Location in (𝐿𝑧 , 𝐸) space of 𝜔 Cen in a selection of simulations. Left-hand panel: the present-day snapshot, showing samples of 𝜔 Cen’s location from observational uncertainties. The contours show the GSE debris, taken from Belokurov et al. (2023). Other panels: initial snapshots of the simulations, after the orbits have been integrated backwards from the samples in a barred potential. Each panel shows a … view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Likelihood of 𝜔 Cen’s phase space position as a function of the present-day pattern speed of a decelerating bar. The vertical dashed line is the pattern speed at which 𝜔 Cen’s frequencies satisfy Ω𝜙 −Ωb +Ω𝑟 = 0, so that it sits on the 1:1 resonance. There is only significant likelihood when Ωb,0 is lower than this value, meaning that the resonance has passed the location of 𝜔 Cen in the past. A strong over… view at source ↗
read the original abstract

The globular cluster $\omega$ Cen has been suggested to have originated in the Gaia Sausage-Enceladus (GSE) merger event, possibly as its nuclear star cluster. However, the present-day orbits of $\omega$ Cen and the GSE debris are very different. We investigate the scenario in which $\omega$ Cen originated in the GSE and migrated to its current position due to perturbations from the Galactic bar. The [$\alpha$/M] distributions of stars located between the GSE debris and $\omega$ Cen in $(L_z,E)$ space tentatively support this scenario, but are not conclusive. We run simulations of the GSE debris and $\omega$ Cen in a realistic Milky Way potential with a decelerating bar at various present-day pattern speeds. We find that $\omega$ Cen can indeed be traced back to the phase space region occupied by the GSE debris. However, this likely requires a pattern speed of $\Omega_\mathrm{b}\lesssim26$ km s$^{-1}$ kpc$^{-1}$, which is much lower than most recent estimates. We conclude that a GSE origin for $\omega$ Cen is dynamically and chemically plausible, but this would require a re-evaluation of the current consensus on the bar's pattern speed.

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 / 1 minor

Summary. The paper claims that ω Centauri originated in the Gaia Sausage-Enceladus (GSE) merger and reached its present orbit via bar-induced migration. Forward N-body simulations in a Milky Way potential containing a decelerating bar show that ω Cen can be traced back to the GSE phase-space region, but only when the present-day bar pattern speed satisfies Ω_b ≲ 26 km s^{-1} kpc^{-1}. The [α/M] abundance distributions of stars lying between the GSE debris and ω Cen in (L_z, E) space are described as providing tentative chemical support for the scenario.

Significance. If the central dynamical result holds, the work would strengthen the case for a GSE origin of ω Cen and would require revision of the current consensus on the Milky Way bar pattern speed. The forward simulations test the migration hypothesis against independent orbital and chemical data rather than fitting to them, which is a methodological strength.

major comments (2)
  1. [Simulation section (methods)] The migration pathway and the Ω_b ≲ 26 km s^{-1} kpc^{-1} threshold are obtained exclusively inside one fixed Milky Way potential that includes one specific decelerating bar whose slowing history is held constant while only the present-day pattern speed is varied. No tests of alternative bar deceleration rates, bar strengths, or different underlying potentials are reported, yet these choices are load-bearing for the claim that the observed pattern speeds are incompatible with the GSE origin.
  2. [Abstract] The abstract states that the chemical distributions 'tentatively support' the scenario and 'are not conclusive,' yet the final sentence concludes that a GSE origin is 'dynamically and chemically plausible.' This tension between the strength of the chemical evidence and the strength of the conclusion is central to how the result should be interpreted.
minor comments (1)
  1. [Abstract] The abstract does not indicate that error bars or robustness checks on the pattern-speed threshold were performed; adding a brief statement on the scope of the explored parameter space would improve clarity.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their careful reading and constructive feedback. We address each major comment below, acknowledging limitations where they exist and indicating planned revisions to improve clarity and balance.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Simulation section (methods)] The migration pathway and the Ω_b ≲ 26 km s^{-1} kpc^{-1} threshold are obtained exclusively inside one fixed Milky Way potential that includes one specific decelerating bar whose slowing history is held constant while only the present-day pattern speed is varied. No tests of alternative bar deceleration rates, bar strengths, or different underlying potentials are reported, yet these choices are load-bearing for the claim that the observed pattern speeds are incompatible with the GSE origin.

    Authors: We agree this is a genuine limitation: the reported threshold is specific to the adopted potential and fixed bar deceleration history. Varying only the present-day pattern speed isolates its effect but does not explore how changes in bar strength or slowing rate would shift the migration boundary. The model follows recent literature on a decelerating bar, yet the incompatibility with higher observed speeds remains model-dependent. In revision we will add explicit discussion of this caveat in the methods and conclusions sections, stating that the result holds within the chosen framework. We will also attempt a limited set of additional runs with altered deceleration rates, resulting in a partial revision. revision: partial

  2. Referee: [Abstract] The abstract states that the chemical distributions 'tentatively support' the scenario and 'are not conclusive,' yet the final sentence concludes that a GSE origin is 'dynamically and chemically plausible.' This tension between the strength of the chemical evidence and the strength of the conclusion is central to how the result should be interpreted.

    Authors: The referee correctly notes an inconsistency in wording. The chemical evidence is described as tentative and inconclusive, yet the conclusion treats it as supporting plausibility on equal footing with the dynamical result. We will revise the abstract's final sentence to read 'dynamically plausible, with tentative chemical support' (or equivalent phrasing) so that the strength of each piece of evidence is stated consistently. This change will be implemented in the revised manuscript. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity; forward simulations output parameter threshold from independent orbital evolution

full rationale

The paper's central result—that ω Cen can reach GSE phase space only for Ω_b ≲26 km s^{-1} kpc^{-1}—arises from forward simulations in which the present-day pattern speed is an explicit free parameter that is varied while the bar deceleration history and potential are held fixed. The threshold is therefore an output of the orbital integration, not a fitted input renamed as a prediction, nor a quantity defined in terms of itself. No load-bearing self-citation, uniqueness theorem, or ansatz imported from prior author work is used to justify the model or forbid alternatives; the chemical distributions are presented as tentative supporting evidence independent of the dynamical runs. The derivation chain is therefore self-contained against external benchmarks.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

1 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

Central claim rests on the validity of the adopted Milky Way potential, the assumption that GSE debris and ω Cen started in the same phase-space region, and the bar deceleration model; no new entities are introduced.

free parameters (1)
  • present-day bar pattern speed
    Varied across runs; migration to GSE region occurs only for values ≲26 km s^{-1} kpc^{-1}.
axioms (1)
  • domain assumption The Milky Way potential includes a decelerating bar whose effect on orbits can be modeled by standard galactic dynamics codes.
    Invoked when setting up the simulation potential.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.1-grok · 5757 in / 1309 out tokens · 18547 ms · 2026-06-27T09:13:53.762697+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 · 62 canonical work pages · 5 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    A., Mucciarelli A., Bellazzini M., Lardo C., Ventura P., 2024, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/202347834 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024A&A...681A..54A 681, A54

    Alvarez Garay D. A., Mucciarelli A., Bellazzini M., Lardo C., Ventura P., 2024, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/202347834 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024A&A...681A..54A 681, A54

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202347834 2024

  2. [2]

    Astropy Collaboration et al., 2013, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201322068 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2013A

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201322068 2013

  3. [3]

    Astropy Collaboration et al., 2018, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-3881/aabc4f , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018AJ....156..123A 156, 123

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-3881/aabc4f 2018

  4. [4]

    Athanassoula E., 2003, @doi [ ] 10.1046/j.1365-8711.2003.06473.x , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2003MNRAS.341.1179A 341, 1179

    work page doi:10.1046/j.1365-8711.2003.06473.x 2003

  5. [5]

    Baumgardt H., Vasiliev E., 2021, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stab1474 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2021MNRAS.505.5957B 505, 5957

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stab1474 2021

  6. [6]

    Baumgardt H., Hilker M., Sollima A., Bellini A., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/sty2997 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019MNRAS.482.5138B 482, 5138

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/sty2997 2019

  7. [7]

    , keywords =

    Bekki K., Freeman K. C., 2003, @doi [ ] 10.1046/j.1365-2966.2003.07275.x , 346, L11

    work page doi:10.1046/j.1365-2966.2003.07275.x 2003

  8. [8]

    Bellazzini M., et al., 2008, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-6256/136/3/1147 , 136, 1147

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-6256/136/3/1147 2008

  9. [9]

    W., Koposov S

    Belokurov V., Erkal D., Evans N. W., Koposov S. E., Deason A. J., 2018, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/sty982 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018MNRAS.478..611B 478, 611

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/sty982 2018

  10. [10]

    J., Koposov S

    Belokurov V., Vasiliev E., Deason A. J., Koposov S. E., Fattahi A., Dillamore A. M., Davies E. Y., Grand R. J. J., 2023, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stac3436 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023MNRAS.518.6200B 518, 6200

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stac3436 2023

  11. [11]

    Bennett M., Bovy J., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/sty2813 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019MNRAS.482.1417B 482, 1417

    work page internal anchor Pith review doi:10.1093/mnras/sty2813 2019

  12. [12]

    Binney J., 2020, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/staa1103 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020MNRAS.495..895B 495, 895

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/staa1103 2020

  13. [13]

    Binney J., Tremaine S., 2008, Galactic Dynamics: Second Edition

    2008

  14. [14]

    Bland-Hawthorn J., Gerhard O., 2016, @doi [ ] 10.1146/annurev-astro-081915-023441 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2016ARA&A..54..529B 54, 529

    work page internal anchor Pith review doi:10.1146/annurev-astro-081915-023441 2016

  15. [15]

    W., Hunt J

    Bovy J., Leung H. W., Hunt J. A. S., Mackereth J. T., Garc \' a-Hern \'a ndez D. A., Roman-Lopes A., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stz2891 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019MNRAS.490.4740B 490, 4740

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stz2891 2019

  16. [16]

    Chiba R., Sch \"o nrich R., 2021, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stab1094 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2021MNRAS.505.2412C 505, 2412

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stab1094 2021

  17. [17]

    Chiba R., Friske J. K. S., Sch \"o nrich R., 2021, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/staa3585 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2021MNRAS.500.4710C 500, 4710

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/staa3585 2021

  18. [18]

    P., Gerhard O., 2022, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stac603 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2022MNRAS.512.2171C 512, 2171

    Clarke J. P., Gerhard O., 2022, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stac603 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2022MNRAS.512.2171C 512, 2171

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stac603 2022

  19. [19]

    De Leo M., Massari D., Bellazzini M., Mucciarelli A., Acosta-Tripailao B., Nipoti C., 2026, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/202556723 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2026A&A...707A.310D 707, A310

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202556723 2026

  20. [20]

    , keywords =

    Deason A. J., Belokurov V., 2024, @doi [ ] 10.1016/j.newar.2024.101706 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024NewAR..9901706D 99, 101706

    work page doi:10.1016/j.newar.2024.101706 2024

  21. [21]

    , keywords =

    Dillamore A. M., Sanders J. L., 2025, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/staf1264 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2025MNRAS.542.1331D 542, 1331

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/staf1264 2025

  22. [22]

    M., Belokurov V., Evans N

    Dillamore A. M., Belokurov V., Evans N. W., Davies E. Y., 2023, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stad2136 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023MNRAS.524.3596D 524, 3596

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stad2136 2023

  23. [23]

    , keywords =

    Dillamore A. M., Belokurov V., Evans N. W., 2024a, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stae1789 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024MNRAS.532.4389D 532, 4389

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stae1789

  24. [24]

    M., Monty S., Belokurov V., Evans N

    Dillamore A. M., Monty S., Belokurov V., Evans N. W., 2024b, @doi [ ] 10.3847/2041-8213/ad60c8 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024ApJ...971L...4D 971, L4

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ad60c8 2041

  25. [25]

    M., Sanders J

    Dillamore A. M., Sanders J. L., Belokurov V., Zhang H., 2025, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/staf965 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2025MNRAS.541..214D 541, 214

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/staf965 2025

  26. [26]

    GRAVITY Collaboration et al., 2018, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201833718 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018A&A...615L..15G 615, L15

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201833718 2018

  27. [27]

    Gaia Collaboration et al., 2021, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/202039657 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2021A&A...649A...1G 649, A1

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202039657 2021

  28. [28]

    Gherghinescu P., Fragkoudi F., Deason A., 2026, arXiv e-prints

    2026

  29. [29]

    G., Johnson C

    Gratton R. G., Johnson C. I., Lucatello S., D'Orazi V., Pilachowski C., 2011, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201117093 , 534, A72

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201117093 2011

  30. [30]

    A New Catalog of Globular Clusters in the Milky Way

    Harris W. E., 2010, @doi [arXiv e-prints] 10.48550/arXiv.1012.3224 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2010arXiv1012.3224H p. arXiv:1012.3224

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.1012.3224 2010

  31. [31]

    H., et al

    Helmi A., Babusiaux C., Koppelman H. H., Massari D., Veljanoski J., Brown A. G. A., 2018, @doi [ ] 10.1038/s41586-018-0625-x , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018Natur.563...85H 563, 85

    work page doi:10.1038/s41586-018-0625-x 2018

  32. [32]

    Hilker M., Richtler T., 2000, , 362, 895

    2000

  33. [33]

    Hilmi T., et al., 2020, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/staa1934 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020MNRAS.497..933H 497, 933

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/staa1934 2020

  34. [34]

    S., Pe \ n arrubia J., 2024, @doi [arXiv e-prints] 10.48550/arXiv.2402.07986 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024arXiv240207986H p

    Horta D., Petersen M. S., Pe \ n arrubia J., 2024, @doi [arXiv e-prints] 10.48550/arXiv.2402.07986 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024arXiv240207986H p. arXiv:2402.07986

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2402.07986 2024

  35. [35]

    Hunt J. A. S., Vasiliev E., 2025, @doi [ ] 10.1016/j.newar.2024.101721 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2025NewAR.10001721H 100, 101721

    work page doi:10.1016/j.newar.2024.101721 2025

  36. [36]

    , keywords =

    Hunter G. H., et al., 2024, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/202450000 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024A&A...692A.216H 692, A216

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202450000 2024

  37. [37]

    A., Gilmore G., Irwin M

    Ibata R. A., Gilmore G., Irwin M. J., 1994, @doi [ ] 10.1038/370194a0 , 370, 194

    work page doi:10.1038/370194a0 1994

  38. [38]

    I., Pilachowski C

    Johnson C. I., Pilachowski C. A., 2010, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/722/2/1373 , 722, 1373

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/722/2/1373 2010

  39. [39]

    Kruijssen J. M. D., Pfeffer J. L., Reina-Campos M., Crain R. A., Bastian N., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/sty1609 , 486, 3180

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/sty1609 2019

  40. [40]

    Lane J. M. M., Bovy J., 2025, @doi [arXiv e-prints] 10.48550/arXiv.2509.04557 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2025arXiv250904557L p. arXiv:2509.04557

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2509.04557 2025

  41. [41]

    Laporte C. F. P., Orkney M. D. A., 2026, @doi [arXiv e-prints] 10.48550/arXiv.2604.14502 , p. arXiv:2604.14502

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2604.14502 2026

  42. [42]

    , keywords =

    Leung H. W., Bovy J., Mackereth J. T., Hunt J. A. S., Lane R. R., Wilson J. C., 2023, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stac3529 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023MNRAS.519..948L 519, 948

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stac3529 2023

  43. [43]

    P., 2022, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/ac3823 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2022ApJ...925...71L 925, 71

    Li Z., Shen J., Gerhard O., Clarke J. P., 2022, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/ac3823 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2022ApJ...925...71L 925, 71

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ac3823 2022

  44. [44]

    Li J., Wong K. W. K., Hogg D. W., Rix H.-W., Chandra V., 2024, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4365/ad2b4d , 272, 2

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4365/ad2b4d 2024

  45. [45]

    O., P \'e rez-Villegas , A., et al

    Limberg G., Souza S. O., P \'e rez-Villegas A., Rossi S., Perottoni H. D., Santucci R. M., 2022, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/ac8159 , 935, 109

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ac8159 2022

  46. [46]

    T., et al., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/sty2955 , 482, 3426

    Mackereth J. T., et al., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/sty2955 , 482, 3426

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/sty2955 2019

  47. [47]

    H., Helmi A., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201936135 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019A&A...630L...4M 630, L4

    Massari D., Koppelman H. H., Helmi A., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201936135 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019A&A...630L...4M 630, L4

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201936135 2019

  48. [48]

    G., P \'e rez-Villegas A., Chaves-Velasquez L., Schuster W

    Moreno E., Fern \'a ndez-Trincado J. G., P \'e rez-Villegas A., Chaves-Velasquez L., Schuster W. J., 2022, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stab3724 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2022MNRAS.510.5945M 510, 5945

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stab3724 2022

  49. [49]

    C., Evans N

    Myeong G. C., Evans N. W., Belokurov V., Sanders J. L., Koposov S. E., 2018, @doi [ ] 10.3847/2041-8213/aad7f7 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018ApJ...863L..28M 863, L28

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/aad7f7 2018

  50. [50]

    C., Vasiliev E., Iorio G., Evans N

    Myeong G. C., Vasiliev E., Iorio G., Evans N. W., Belokurov V., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stz1770 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019MNRAS.488.1235M 488, 1235

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stz1770 2019

  51. [51]

    P., Conroy C., Bonaca A., Johnson B

    Naidu R. P., Conroy C., Bonaca A., Johnson B. D., Ting Y.-S., Caldwell N., Zaritsky D., Cargile P. A., 2020, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/abaef4 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020ApJ...901...48N 901, 48

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/abaef4 2020

  52. [52]

    Neumayer N., Seth A., B \"o ker T., 2020, @doi [ ] 10.1007/s00159-020-00125-0 , 28, 4

    work page doi:10.1007/s00159-020-00125-0 2020

  53. [53]

    S., et al., 2024, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/ad5289 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024ApJ...970..152N 970, 152

    Nitschai M. S., et al., 2024, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/ad5289 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024ApJ...970..152N 970, 152

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad5289 2024

  54. [54]

    E., 2004, @doi [ ] 10.1086/423986 , 612, L25

    Norris J. E., 2004, @doi [ ] 10.1086/423986 , 612, L25

    work page doi:10.1086/423986 2004

  55. [55]

    Pfeffer J., Lardo C., Bastian N., Saracino S., Kamann S., 2021, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/staa3407 , 500, 2514

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/staa3407 2021

  56. [56]

    Portail M., Gerhard O., Wegg C., Ness M., 2017, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stw2819 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017MNRAS.465.1621P 465, 1621

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stw2819 2017

  57. [57]

    L., Smith L., Evans N

    Sanders J. L., Smith L., Evans N. W., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stz1827 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019MNRAS.488.4552S 488, 4552

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stz1827 2019

  58. [58]

    , keywords =

    Sanders J. L., Kawata D., Matsunaga N., Sormani M. C., Smith L. C., Minniti D., Gerhard O., 2024, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stae711 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024MNRAS.530.2972S 530, 2972

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stae711 2024

  59. [59]

    Sch \"o nrich R., Binney J., Dehnen W., 2010, @doi [ ] 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2010.16253.x , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2010MNRAS.403.1829S 403, 1829

    work page doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2010.16253.x 2010

  60. [60]

    Tomlinson T., et al., 2026, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stag841 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2026MNRAS.tmp..794T

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stag841 2026

  61. [61]

    D., 1984, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/209.4.729 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1984MNRAS.209..729T 209, 729

    Tremaine S., Weinberg M. D., 1984, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/209.4.729 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1984MNRAS.209..729T 209, 729

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/209.4.729 1984

  62. [62]

    Vasiliev E., Baumgardt H., 2021, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stab1475 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2021MNRAS.505.5978V 505, 5978

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stab1475 2021

  63. [63]

    G., Cassisi S., 2014, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/791/2/107 , 791, 107

    Villanova S., Geisler D., Gratton R. G., Cassisi S., 2014, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/791/2/107 , 791, 107

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/791/2/107 2014

  64. [64]

    , keywords =

    Zhang H., Belokurov V., Evans N. W., Kane S. G., Sanders J. L., 2024, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stae2023 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024MNRAS.533.3395Z 533, 3395

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stae2023 2024

  65. [65]

    Zhang H., et al., 2025, @doi [ ] 10.3847/2041-8213/adc261 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2025ApJ...983L..10Z 983, L10

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/adc261 2025