pith. sign in

arxiv: 2606.19329 · v1 · pith:E3I6HIEGnew · submitted 2026-06-17 · 🌌 astro-ph.IM · cs.LG

The Chandra-Gaia Catalog of Counterparts: Resolving ambiguous Gaia matches to X-ray sources in the Chandra Source Catalog using Machine Learning

V. Samuel P\'erez-D\'iaz , Vinay L. Kashyap , Joshua D. Ingram , David Fouhey , Juan Rafael Mart\'inez-Galarza , Pavlos Protopapas , Jeremy J. Drake , Dong-Woo Kim
show 1 more author
Cecilia Garraffo
This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-06-26 18:52 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.IM cs.LG
keywords cross-matchingChandra Source CatalogGaia DR3machine learningX-ray sourcesoptical counterpartsLightGBMNWAY
0
0 comments X

The pith

A gradient-boosted classifier identifies Chandra X-ray counterparts in Gaia using magnitudes, colors, and distances rather than positions.

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

The paper develops a machine learning framework to cross-match X-ray sources from the Chandra Source Catalog with optical sources from Gaia Data Release 3. It defines a training set of high-confidence matches with the NWAY Bayesian tool and trains a LightGBM classifier on photometric and distance features from both catalogs. The approach assigns counterparts to roughly 113,000 of 254,000 unique X-ray sources, flags multiple candidates for about 7,000 sources, and identifies 20,000 cases where separation-based matching would select a likely false positive. Validation on the Chandra Orion Ultradeep Project shows the classifier recovers 95 percent of the NWAY matches even when all positional data is removed from the input features. The work releases the resulting catalog to support population studies of sources visible to both instruments.

Core claim

We present a framework to cross-match sources from the Chandra Source Catalog (CSC v2.1) with optical sources from Gaia Data Release 3. Unlike purely spatial approaches, we use source properties such as magnitudes, colors, and distances to identify true counterparts, detect chance coincidences, and resolve ambiguities when multiple plausible candidates exist. We define a training set of high-confidence matches using NWAY, a Bayesian cross-matching framework that accounts for positional errors and source densities. We train a gradient-boosted classifier (LightGBM) on a variety of features from both catalogs. Of the ~254k unique X-ray sources, we find counterparts for ~113k sources, of which p

What carries the argument

LightGBM gradient-boosted classifier trained on Chandra and Gaia source properties with training labels supplied by NWAY high-confidence matches.

If this is right

  • Counterparts are assigned to approximately 113,000 Chandra X-ray sources.
  • Multiple plausible Gaia counterparts are identified for roughly 7,000 sources.
  • No counterpart is found for 20,000 sources that positional matching would link, with half attributed to chance coincidences.
  • The released catalog of counterparts, alternative matches, and ambiguous cases supports population studies of joint X-ray and optical sources.
  • The framework is presented as generalizable to other cross-matching scenarios between astronomical catalogs.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • The 95 percent reproduction rate on COUP without position data implies that photometric and distance features alone carry most of the information needed to distinguish true associations in this regime.
  • The method could be tested on other catalog pairs where positional errors are large or fields are crowded to see whether the same feature set remains effective.
  • If the fraction of chance coincidences holds in additional fields, earlier position-only catalogs may contain a measurable rate of false positives that affects derived source populations.
  • The catalog enables direct comparison of X-ray and optical properties for the matched sources without the ambiguities that affect separation-based lists.

Load-bearing premise

The high-confidence matches produced by NWAY constitute an unbiased and representative training set whose labels remain valid when positional information is removed from the classifier features.

What would settle it

A count of disagreements between the machine-learning matches and a complete manual or spectroscopic verification of counterparts in an independent deep Chandra-Gaia field.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2606.19329 by Cecilia Garraffo, David Fouhey, Dong-Woo Kim, Jeremy J. Drake, Joshua D. Ingram, Juan Rafael Mart\'inez-Galarza, Pavlos Protopapas, Vinay L. Kashyap, V. Samuel P\'erez-D\'iaz.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Sky histogram-distribution of all CSC2.1 sources with a potential Gaia counterpart within 15′′. Each bin is colored based on the average number of potential Gaia counterparts per X-ray source (avg nmatch). The color scale is logarithmic. 0 5 BP − RP [mag] 5 10 15 20 gmag [mag] 100 101 102 log density [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Separation plotted against the p-value from the two-sample K-S test to determine after which separation the distributions of mean gmag magnitude for the most-likely and least-likely counterparts become distinguishable, which is ap￾proximately 1.3 ′′ or more. The colors of the points corre￾spond to different off-axis angles, the blue solid line is the moving average of the p-values across the different off-… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Separation of positive and negative sets. Densi￾ties of the Gaia gmag versus angular separation of putative Gaia matches are shown for the positive set (green shaded densities at left and in the inset), the intermediate negatives (blue shaded densities at right) and clear negatives (red con￾tours superposed on the intermediate negatives) are shown. The inset of the positive set zooms in to the separation r… view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Hexbin density plot of the CSC Positional Error (PE) for all CSC sources with at least one Gaia candidate as a function of the minimum mean off-axis angle. Here, PE = p errmaj2 + errmin2 , where errmaj and errmin are CSC variables representing the uncertainties along the major and minor axes of the ellipses fitted to the sources. Also shown as the solid stepped line is our adopted separation threshold rmax… view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Defining the threshold for acceptance of the ML score for matching, pML. The empirical cumulative distribu￾tion of pML for the validation set is shown as the blue curve (dashed blue curve in the inset graph). The proportion that corresponds to chance coincidence is marked as the horizon￾tal black line, and the corresponding pML score threshold is marked with a vertical green dashed line. Only cross– matche… view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) curve from the training and validation sets. We highlight the thresholds selected by the chance-coincidence percentile (blue, dashed) and maximizing the Youden Index (red, dash￾dot) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: HR diagram for the Gaia sources cross-matched to CSC. The distance-corrected gmag is shown as a function of color BP − RP for the best ML matches (left), for plausible alternate ML matches (middle), and for cases with no ML matches but with highly probable NWAY matches. In regions of low source concentration along the fringes, sources are marked as individual points; high source concentrations are represen… view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: X-ray spectral variations across the color-magnitude space for different types of cross-matches. Hexbin plots (as in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p017_10.png] view at source ↗
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Comparing ML cross-matches with separation-based NWAY. Each panel shows a hexbin plot of the cross-match separations as a function of pML, with the color of the point in each bin represented by pany (see color scale bars at right); the upper row of panels depict the maximum of pany, the middle row the median, and the bottom row the minimum. The left column panels represent the ≈ 113k best ML cross-matches… view at source ↗
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: Cross-matching the Chandra Source Catalog 2.1 and Gaia DR3. Red and blue dots represent Gaia and Chandra sources, in the upper and lower projected squares, respectively. In the first stage, a spatial crossmatch is performed using NWAY, providing a first set of candidate associations. In the second stage, each candidate pair is scored using a LightGBM classifier trained on catalog features from Chandra and… view at source ↗
read the original abstract

We present a framework to cross-match sources from the Chandra Source Catalog (CSC v2.1) with optical sources from Gaia Data Release 3. Unlike purely spatial approaches, we use source properties such as magnitudes, colors, and distances to identify true counterparts, detect chance coincidences, and resolve ambiguities when multiple plausible candidates exist. We define a training set of high-confidence matches using NWAY, a Bayesian cross-matching framework that accounts for positional errors and source densities. We train a gradient-boosted classifier (LightGBM) on a variety of features from both catalogs. Of the ~$254$k unique X-ray sources, we find counterparts for ~$113$k sources, of which plausible multiple counterparts are found for ~$7$k. We find no counterparts for ~$20$k sources for which separation-based cross-matching does find a match, and attribute half of these to chance coincidences. We validate the pipeline on the Chandra Orion Ultradeep Project (COUP), where the machine-learning matches reproduce 95% of NWAY cross-matches without using any positional information. We release a catalog of the ~$113$k Chandra-Gaia counterparts, together with ~$7$k alternative matches and ~$20$k ambiguous NWAY associations, supporting future population studies of sources detectable by both Chandra and Gaia. We discuss limitations and provide a generalization of the framework that is applicable in other cross-matching scenarios.

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 presents a machine-learning framework (LightGBM) to cross-match Chandra Source Catalog v2.1 X-ray sources with Gaia DR3, trained on high-confidence NWAY Bayesian labels using non-positional features (magnitudes, colors, distances). It reports counterparts for ~113k of ~254k X-ray sources (with ~7k multiples), no counterparts for ~20k sources, 95% reproduction of NWAY matches on the COUP validation field without positional information, and releases the resulting catalog plus alternative matches.

Significance. If the central validation holds, the work would offer a practical method for resolving positional ambiguities in X-ray/optical cross-matches using photometric and distance information alone, with direct utility for population studies. The public release of the ~113k counterparts, ~7k alternatives, and ~20k ambiguous cases is a clear strength supporting reproducibility.

major comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract: the 95% reproduction rate on COUP without positional features is obtained by training and validating on high-confidence NWAY outputs; this measures how well non-positional features recover NWAY's positional decisions rather than testing independent correctness of the classifier when positional information is withheld.
  2. [Abstract] Abstract: the manuscript provides no information on feature-importance rankings, class-imbalance handling in the NWAY-derived training set, or quantification of label noise propagated from NWAY, all of which are required to evaluate whether the reported performance is robust.
minor comments (1)
  1. The generalization paragraph would be strengthened by a concrete example of applying the same non-positional pipeline to a different pair of catalogs.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the thoughtful and constructive report. The comments highlight important aspects of how the validation should be interpreted and the need for greater methodological transparency. We address each major comment below and will make revisions to the manuscript to improve clarity and completeness.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract: the 95% reproduction rate on COUP without positional features is obtained by training and validating on high-confidence NWAY outputs; this measures how well non-positional features recover NWAY's positional decisions rather than testing independent correctness of the classifier when positional information is withheld.

    Authors: We agree that the COUP validation quantifies how effectively the non-positional features recover the high-confidence labels produced by NWAY (which itself incorporates positional information and source densities). The 95% figure therefore reflects agreement with NWAY rather than an external, independent test of counterpart correctness. We will revise the abstract and the validation section to state this distinction more explicitly, while noting that NWAY provides the most reliable available labels for training and that the result still demonstrates the value of photometric and distance information for resolving ambiguities. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract: the manuscript provides no information on feature-importance rankings, class-imbalance handling in the NWAY-derived training set, or quantification of label noise propagated from NWAY, all of which are required to evaluate whether the reported performance is robust.

    Authors: We acknowledge that these details are currently absent. In the revised manuscript we will add: (i) LightGBM feature-importance rankings (both gain and split-based) to identify the most influential non-positional features; (ii) a description of class-imbalance handling, including any use of class weights or sampling strategies applied to the NWAY-derived training set; and (iii) a discussion of potential label noise inherited from NWAY, supported by any sensitivity tests performed. These additions will allow readers to assess the robustness of the reported performance more thoroughly. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity detected

full rationale

The paper defines training labels via the external NWAY Bayesian matcher and reports 95% agreement on the separate COUP field when the LightGBM classifier is run without positional features. This agreement is an empirical measurement of feature correlation, not a quantity forced by construction, self-definition, or a self-citation chain. No equation or step reduces the reported matches or performance metric to the inputs by definition; NWAY is treated as an independent source of labels, and the central output is the resulting catalog rather than a tautological reproduction.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The framework rests on the domain assumption that NWAY Bayesian matches supply reliable training labels and that photometric and distance features alone suffice to separate true counterparts from chance alignments. No free parameters or invented entities are described in the abstract.

axioms (2)
  • domain assumption NWAY produces high-confidence matches suitable as training labels for a supervised classifier
    Abstract states that NWAY is used to define the training set of high-confidence matches.
  • domain assumption Source properties such as magnitudes, colors, and distances are sufficient to distinguish true counterparts when positional information is withheld
    Validation on COUP is performed without positional information.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.1-grok · 5845 in / 1382 out tokens · 28084 ms · 2026-06-26T18:52:32.203912+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

72 extracted references · 49 canonical work pages · 3 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    Journal of Machine Learning Research , author =

    Scikit-learn:. Journal of Machine Learning Research , author =. 2011 , pages =

    2011

  2. [2]

    The Astropy Project: Sustaining and Growing a Community-oriented Open-source Project and the Latest Major Release (v5.0) of the Core Package

    The. The Astrophysical Journal , author =. 2022 , pages =. doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ac7c74 , abstract =

    work page internal anchor Pith review doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ac7c74 2022

  3. [3]

    The Astrophysical Journal , author =

    The. The Astrophysical Journal , author =. 2008 , note =. doi:10.1086/523619 , abstract =

    work page doi:10.1086/523619 2008

  4. [4]

    2011 , note =

    The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series , author =. 2011 , note =. doi:10.1088/0067-0049/194/1/1 , abstract =

    work page doi:10.1088/0067-0049/194/1/1 2011

  5. [6]

    Solar Physics , author =

    Benchmark. Solar Physics , author =. 2015 , keywords =. doi:10.1007/s11207-015-0790-0 , abstract =

    work page doi:10.1007/s11207-015-0790-0 2015

  6. [7]

    Nature , year =

    Accurate predictions on small data with a tabular foundation model , volume =. Nature , author =. 2025 , note =. doi:10.1038/s41586-024-08328-6 , abstract =

    work page doi:10.1038/s41586-024-08328-6 2025

  7. [8]

    2025 , url =

    Chandra. 2025 , url =

    2025

  8. [9]

    The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series , author =

    A. The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series , author =. 2011 , note =. doi:10.1088/0067-0049/194/1/2 , abstract =

    work page doi:10.1088/0067-0049/194/1/2 2011

  9. [10]

    2011 , pages =

    VizieR Online Data Catalog , author =. 2011 , pages =. doi:10.26093/cds/vizier.21940002 , abstract =

    work page doi:10.26093/cds/vizier.21940002 2011

  10. [11]

    The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series , author =

    Chandra. The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series , author =. 2005 , pages =. doi:10.1086/432092 , abstract =

    work page doi:10.1086/432092 2005

  11. [12]

    Advances in

    Ke, Guolin and Meng, Qi and Finley, Thomas and Wang, Taifeng and Chen, Wei and Ma, Weidong and Ye, Qiwei and Liu, Tie-Yan , year =. Advances in

  12. [13]

    Why do tree-based models still outperform deep learning on tabular data? , url =

    Grinsztajn, Léo and Oyallon, Edouard and Varoquaux, Gaël , month = jul, year =. Why do tree-based models still outperform deep learning on tabular data? , url =. doi:10.48550/arXiv.2207.08815 , abstract =

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2207.08815

  13. [14]

    and Pfister, Tomas , month = dec, year =

    Arik, Sercan O. and Pfister, Tomas , month = dec, year =. doi:10.48550/arXiv.1908.07442 , abstract =

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.1908.07442 1908

  14. [15]

    Xgboost: A scalable tree boosting system,

    Chen, Tianqi and Guestrin, Carlos , month = aug, year =. Proceedings of the 22nd. doi:10.1145/2939672.2939785 , abstract =

    work page doi:10.1145/2939672.2939785

  15. [16]

    Learned, uncertainty-driven adaptive acquisition for photon-efficient scanning microscopy , url =

  16. [17]

    Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society , author =

    Unsupervised machine learning for the classification of astrophysical. Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society , author =. 2024 , pages =. doi:10.1093/mnras/stae260 , abstract =

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stae260 2024

  17. [18]

    2015 , note =

    The Astrophysical Journal , author =. 2015 , note =. doi:10.1088/0004-637X/807/2/143 , abstract =

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/807/2/143 2015

  18. [19]

    Astronomy & Astrophysics , author =

    Gaia data release 3-summary of the content and survey properties , volume =. Astronomy & Astrophysics , author =. 2023 , note =

    2023

  19. [20]

    The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series , author =

    The. The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series , author =. 2024 , pages =. doi:10.3847/1538-4365/ad6319 , abstract =

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4365/ad6319 2024

  20. [21]

    and Salvato, M

    Collaboration, Euclid and Roster, W. and Salvato, M. and Buchner, J. and Shirley, R. and Lusso, E. and Landt, H. and Zamorani, G. and Siudek, M. and Laloux, B. and Zatarain, T. Matamoro and Ricci, F. and Fotopoulou, S. and Ferré-Mateu, A. and Lopez, X. Lopez and Aghanim, N. and Altieri, B. and Amara, A. and Andreon, S. and Auricchio, N. and Aussel, H. and...

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2503.15316

  21. [22]

    970(2):168, doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad41e3

    The Astrophysical Journal , author =. 2024 , note =. doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad41e3 , abstract =

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad41e3 2024

  22. [23]

    and Czesla, S

    Freund, S. and Czesla, S. and Predehl, P. and Robrade, J. and Salvato, M. and Schneider, P. C. and Starck, H. and Wolf, J. and Schmitt, J. H. M. M. , month = jan, year =. The. doi:10.48550/arXiv.2401.17282 , abstract =

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2401.17282

  23. [24]

    doi:10.48550/arXiv.2312.14132 , abstract =

    Wang, Shuzhe and Leroy, Vincent and Cabon, Yohann and Chidlovskii, Boris and Revaud, Jerome , month = dec, year =. doi:10.48550/arXiv.2312.14132 , abstract =

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2312.14132

  24. [25]

    doi:10.48550/arXiv.2105.01601 , abstract =

    Tolstikhin, Ilya and Houlsby, Neil and Kolesnikov, Alexander and Beyer, Lucas and Zhai, Xiaohua and Unterthiner, Thomas and Yung, Jessica and Steiner, Andreas and Keysers, Daniel and Uszkoreit, Jakob and Lucic, Mario and Dosovitskiy, Alexey , month = jun, year =. doi:10.48550/arXiv.2105.01601 , abstract =

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2105.01601

  25. [26]

    Wilson, Andrew Gordon , month = mar, year =. Deep. doi:10.48550/arXiv.2503.02113 , abstract =

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2503.02113

  26. [27]

    Astronomy & Astrophysics , author =

    Gaia. Astronomy & Astrophysics , author =. 2023 , note =. doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202245591 , abstract =

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202245591 2023

  27. [28]

    Rots, A. H. and Burke, D. and Hain, R. M. and Nguyen, D. T. and Tibbetts, M. S. and Evans, I. N. and Primini, F. A. and Miller, J. B. and Evans, J. D. and Allen, C. E. and Anderson, C. S. and Becker, G. and Budynkiewicz, J. A. and Chen, J. C. and Civano, F. and D'Abrusco, R. and Doe, S. M. and Fabbiano, G. and Martinez Galarza, R. and Gibbs, II, D. G. and...

  28. [29]

    and Allen, Christopher E

    Rots, Arnold H. and Allen, Christopher E. and Anderson, Craig S. and Budynkiewicz, Jamie A. and Burke, Douglas and Chen, Judy C. and Civano, Francesca Maria and D'Abrusco, Raffaele and Doe, Stephen M. and Evans, Ian N. and Evans, Janet D. and Fabbiano, Giuseppina and Gibbs, II, Danny G. and Glotfelty, Kenny J. and Graessle, Dale E. and Grier, John D. and ...

  29. [30]

    Evans, I. N. and Primini, F. A. and Miller, J. B. and Evans, J. D. and Allen, C. E. and Anderson, C. S. and Becker, G. and Budynkiewicz, J. A. and Burke, D. and Chen, J. C. and Civano, F. and D'Abrusco, R. and Doe, S. M. and Fabbiano, G. and Martinez Galarza, J. and Gibbs, II, D. G. and Glotfelty, K. J. and Graessle, D. E. and Grier, Jr., J. D. and Hain, ...

  30. [31]

    The Astrophysical Journal , author =

    The. The Astrophysical Journal , author =. 2018 , note =. doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aace5d , abstract =

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aace5d 2018

  31. [32]

    Astronomy and Astrophysics , author =

    The stellar population of the. Astronomy and Astrophysics , author =. 2007 , note =. doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20066146 , abstract =

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20066146 2007

  32. [33]

    The Astrophysical Journal , author =

    Stellar. The Astrophysical Journal , author =. 2016 , note =. doi:10.3847/2041-8205/826/1/L2 , abstract =

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8205/826/1/l2 2016

  33. [34]

    2016 , bdsk-url-1 =

    Weakened magnetic braking as the origin of anomalously rapid rotation in old field stars , volume =. Nature , author =. 2016 , note =. doi:10.1038/nature16168 , abstract =

    work page doi:10.1038/nature16168 2016

  34. [35]

    Astronomy and Astrophysics , author =

    The stellar content of the. Astronomy and Astrophysics , author =. 2007 , note =. doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20065696 , abstract =

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20065696 2007

  35. [36]

    The Astrophysical Journal , author =

    The. The Astrophysical Journal , author =. 2004 , pages =. doi:10.1086/422248 , abstract =

    work page doi:10.1086/422248 2004

  36. [37]

    Astronomy & Astrophysics , author =

    The stellar content of the. Astronomy & Astrophysics , author =. 2022 , note =. doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202142573 , abstract =

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202142573 2022

  37. [38]

    Astronomy and Astrophysics , author =

    The. Astronomy and Astrophysics , author =. 2024 , note =. doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202347165 , abstract =

    work page internal anchor Pith review doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202347165 2024

  38. [39]

    Astronomy & Astrophysics , author =

    Likelihood of the sky:. Astronomy & Astrophysics , author =. 2023 , pages =. doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202244195 , abstract =

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202244195 2023

  39. [40]

    The Astrophysical Journal , author =

    Classifying. The Astrophysical Journal , author =. 2022 , note =. doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ac952b , abstract =

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ac952b 2022

  40. [41]

    Astronomy & Astrophysics , author =

    The. Astronomy & Astrophysics , author =. 2022 , pages =. doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202141631 , abstract =

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202141631 2022

  41. [42]

    Likelihood of the sky -

  42. [43]

    The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series , author =

    The. The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series , author =. 2023 , note =. doi:10.3847/1538-4365/ace4cc , abstract =

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4365/ace4cc 2023

  43. [44]

    Annual Review of Statistics and Its Application , author =

    Probabilistic record linkage in astronomy:. Annual Review of Statistics and Its Application , author =. 2015 , note =. doi:10.1146/annurev-statistics-010814-020231 , abstract =

    work page doi:10.1146/annurev-statistics-010814-020231 2015

  44. [45]

    Astronomy and Astrophysics , author =

    The. Astronomy and Astrophysics , author =. 2022 , pages =

    2022

  45. [46]

    Monthly Notices of The Royal Astronomical Society , author =

    Finding counterparts for all-sky. Monthly Notices of The Royal Astronomical Society , author =. 2018 , pages =

    2018

  46. [47]

    Astronomy & Astrophysics , author =

    Gaia early data release 3-building the gaia. Astronomy & Astrophysics , author =. 2021 , note =

    2021

  47. [48]

    Astronomy & Astrophysics , author =

    Gaia data release 2-cross-match with external catalogues: algorithms and results , volume =. Astronomy & Astrophysics , author =. 2019 , note =

    2019

  48. [49]

    The gaia mission , journal =

  49. [50]

    Monthly Notices of The Royal Astronomical Society , author =

    On the likelihood ratio for source identification , volume =. Monthly Notices of The Royal Astronomical Society , author =. 1992 , pages =

    1992

  50. [51]

    Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems , author =

    Revisiting deep learning models for tabular data , volume =. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems , author =. 2021 , pages =

    2021

  51. [52]

    Vogt, Frédéric P. A. and Dopita, Michael A. and Kewley, Lisa J. and Sutherland, Ralph S. and Scharwächter, Julia and Basurah, Hassan M. and Ali, Alaa and Amer, Morsi A. , month = oct, year =. Galaxy emission line classification using three-dimensional line ratio diagrams , volume =. doi:10.1088/0004-637X/793/2/127 , number =

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/793/2/127

  52. [53]

    J., Ness, J.-U., Osborne, J

    Schwarz, Greg J. and Ness, Jan-Uwe and Osborne, J. P. and Page, K. L. and Evans, P. A. and Beardmore, A. P. and Walter, Frederick M. and Helton, L. Andrew and Woodward, Charles E. and Bode, Mike and Starrfield, Sumner and Drake, Jeremy J. , month = dec, year =. Swift x-ray observations of classical novae. doi:10.1088/0067-0049/197/2/31 , number =

    work page doi:10.1088/0067-0049/197/2/31

  53. [54]

    Astrophysical Journal , author =

    Probabilistic cross-identification of astronomical sources , volume =. Astrophysical Journal , author =. 2008 , pages =

    2008

  54. [55]

    doi:10.3847/0004-6256/152/2/41 , adsurl =

    Prša, Andrej and Harmanec, Petr and Torres, Guillermo and Mamajek, Eric and Asplund, Martin and Capitaine, Nicole and Christensen-Dalsgaard, Jørgen and Depagne, Éric and Haberreiter, Margit and Hekker, Saskia , month = aug, year =. Nominal values for selected solar and planetary quantities:. doi:10.3847/0004-6256/152/2/41 , number =

    work page doi:10.3847/0004-6256/152/2/41

  55. [56]

    Ferland, G. J. and Porter, R. L. and van Hoof, P. A. M. and Williams, R. J. R. and Abel, N. P. and Lykins, M. L. and Shaw, G. and Henney, W. J. and Stancil, P. C. , month = apr, year =. The 2013 release of cloudy , volume =

    2013

  56. [57]

    X-ray scattering echoes and ghost halos from the intergalactic medium:

    Corrales, Lia , month = may, year =. X-ray scattering echoes and ghost halos from the intergalactic medium:. doi:10.1088/0004-637X/805/1/23 , number =

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/805/1/23

  57. [58]

    , keywords =

    1996 , note =. doi:10.1051/aas:1996164 , author =

    work page doi:10.1051/aas:1996164 1996

  58. [59]

    Quasi-periodic fast propagating magnetoacoustic waves during the magnetic reconnection between solar coronal loops , volume =

    Li, Leping and Zhang, Jun and Peter, Hardi and Chitta, Lakshmi Pradeep and Su, Jiangtao and Song, Hongqiang and Xia, Chun and Hou, Yijun , month = dec, year =. Quasi-periodic fast propagating magnetoacoustic waves during the magnetic reconnection between solar coronal loops , volume =. doi:10.3847/2041-8213/aaf167 , number =

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/aaf167 2041

  59. [60]

    Quantifying the observational effort required for the radial velocity characterization of

    Cloutier, Ryan and Doyon, René and Bouchy, Francois and Hébrard, Guillaume , month = aug, year =. Quantifying the observational effort required for the radial velocity characterization of. doi:10.3847/1538-3881/aacea9 , number =

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-3881/aacea9

  60. [61]

    , archiveprefix = "arXiv", eprint =

    Astropy:. 2013 , note =. doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201322068 , author =

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

  61. [62]

    , archivePrefix = "arXiv", eprint =

    The astropy project:. 2018 , note =. doi:10.3847/1538-3881/aabc4f , number =

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

  62. [63]

    Astronomy & Astrophysics , author =

    The. Astronomy & Astrophysics , author =. 2022 , pages =. doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202141133 , abstract =

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202141133 2022

  63. [64]

    , keywords =

    Six Maxims of Statistical Acumen for Astronomical Data Analysis. , keywords =. doi:10.3847/1538-4365/ad8440 , archivePrefix =. 2408.16179 , primaryClass =

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4365/ad8440

  64. [65]

    The Annals of Mathematical Statistics , author =

    Table for. The Annals of Mathematical Statistics , author =. 1948 , note =. doi:10.1214/aoms/1177730256 , language =

    work page doi:10.1214/aoms/1177730256 1948

  65. [66]

    AAS High Energy Astrophysics Division meeting \#21, id

    Chandra. AAS High Energy Astrophysics Division meeting \#21, id. 105.25. Bulletin of the American Astronomical Society, Vol. 56, No. 5 , author =. 2024 , pages =

    2024

  66. [67]

    Bulletin of the Astronomical Society of India , keywords =

    PINTofALE : Package for the interactive analysis of line emission. Bulletin of the Astronomical Society of India , keywords =

  67. [68]

    and Protopapas, Pavlos and Drake, Jeremy and Kim, Dong-Woo and Garraffo, Cecilia , year = 2026, date =

    Pérez-Díaz, Víctor Samuel and Kashyap, Vinay and Ingram, Joshua and Fouhey, David and Martinez-Galarza, Juan R. and Protopapas, Pavlos and Drake, Jeremy and Kim, Dong-Woo and Garraffo, Cecilia , year = 2026, date =. The Chandra-Gaia Catalog of Counterparts:. doi:10.5281/zenodo.18652667 , url =

    work page doi:10.5281/zenodo.18652667 2026

  68. [69]

    , keywords =

    Change-point Detection and Image Segmentation for Time Series of Astrophysical Images. , keywords =. doi:10.3847/1538-3881/abe0b6 , archivePrefix =. 2101.11202 , primaryClass =

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-3881/abe0b6

  69. [70]

    and Greiff, Victor , title =

    Ursu, Eugen and Minnegalieva, Aygul and Rawat, Puneet and Chernigovskaya, Maria and Tacutu, Robi and Sandve, Geir Kjetil and Robert, Philippe A. and Greiff, Victor , title =. 2025 , doi =. https://www.biorxiv.org/content/early/2025/04/05/2024.06.17.599333.full.pdf , archivePrefix =

    2025

  70. [71]

    Astronomical Data Analysis Software and Systems XXVI , year = 2019, editor =

    Cross-matching Within the Chandra Source Catalog. Astronomical Data Analysis Software and Systems XXVI , year = 2019, editor =

    2019

  71. [72]

    Membership of the Orion Nebula Population from the Chandra Orion Ultradeep Project

    Membership of the Orion Nebula Population from the Chandra Orion Ultradeep Project. The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series , keywords =. doi:10.1086/432097 , archivePrefix =. astro-ph/0504370 , primaryClass =

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1086/432097

  72. [73]

    , title =

    Rots, Arnold H. , title =. 2025 , month =

    2025