Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 5 minor 103 references

S-PLUS DR5 presents a uniformly calibrated 12-band photometric survey of 4,592 square degrees and grows the known Hydra–Antlia cluster membership from 462 to 1,706 objects.

Reviewed by Pith at T0; open to challenge. T0 means a machine referee read the full paper against a public rubric. the ladder, T0–T4 →

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

T0 review · deepseek-v4-flash

2026-08-01 22:00 UTC pith:76WRTZRC

load-bearing objection Solid, useful data-release paper; the Gaia-XP-based calibration is credible but the blue end is the least independently checked, and the photo-z validation needs a clearer independent split. the 4 major comments →

arxiv 2607.15891 v1 pith:76WRTZRC submitted 2026-07-17 astro-ph.GA

The S-PLUS Fifth Data-Release: Over 4500 square degrees of the Southern Sky and a multicolor view of the Hydra and Antlia galaxy clusters

Erik Vinicius Rodrigues de Lima , Gustavo Bernhard Oliveira Schwarz , F\'abio Rafael Herpich , Felipe Almeida-Fernandes , Lilianne Nakazono , Eduardo Alberto Duarte Lacerda , Andr\'e Santos , Andr\'e Luiz Figueiredo
show 50 more authors
Luis Angel Guti\'errez-Soto Mar\'ilia Jobim Sartori Marcos Antonio Fonseca-Faria Maiara Sampaio Carvalho B\'arbara Cubillos Palma Elismar L\"osch Gissel Pardo Montaguth Jos\'e Yuri Santos Silva Liana Li Marina Izabela Natanael Magalh\~aes Cardoso Thais Santos-Silva Paulo Afr\^anio Augusto Lopes Pedro K. Humire Roberta Vassallo Bordoni Amanda Reis Lopes Anal\'ia Viviana Smith Castelli \^Angela Cristina Krabbe Augusto Damineli Carlos Eduardo Ferreira Lopes Ciria Lima-Dias Cl\'ecio Roque de Bom Daniela E. Olave-Rojas Debasish Hazarika Eduardo Telles Erick Ghuron Guilherme Limberg H\'elio Dotto Perottoni J\'ulia Thain\'a-Batista Laerte Sodr\'e Jr. Lia Doubrawa Marcelo Borges Fernandes Murillo Marinello Swayamtrupta Panda Pierre Augusto R\'e Raimundo Lopes de Oliveira Raquel Ruiz Valen\c{c}a Ricardo Demarco Roberto Cid-Fernandes Rodrigo Facundo Haack Sergio Torres-Flores Stavros Akras Timothy C. Beers Vinicius M. Placco Vitor Cernic Victor Hugo Sasse Antonio Kanaan Tiago Ribeiro William Schoennell Cl\'audia L\'ucia Mendes de Oliveira
This is my paper
classification astro-ph.GA
keywords Sky surveysBroad-band photometryNarrow-band photometryPhotometric redshiftsGalaxy clustersGalactic bulgeData releasePhotometric calibration
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved

The pith

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

This paper presents the fifth data release of the S-PLUS southern-sky survey, arguing that the release delivers a uniformly calibrated 12-band photometric map of 4,592 square degrees, with over 113 million detections and, for the first time, coverage of the Galactic bulge and disk. The load-bearing novelty is a calibration chain that uses synthetic magnitudes from Gaia DR3 XP spectra as reference for 11 of the 12 bands, with the u-band zero-point predicted by SED fitting; this makes the whole footprint internally consistent and extinction-aware. The release adds value-added catalogs (photometric redshifts, star/galaxy/quasar classification, masks, extinction coefficients, overlap flags, unique IDs) built on this calibration. As a demonstration, the paper uses the data to expand the known member galaxies of the Hydra and Antlia clusters from 462 to 1,706, reveals a bridge between the two clusters, and measures similar radial trends of Hα-excess (star-forming) galaxies, with Hydra showing a higher central fraction. A sympathetic reader would care because this turns a 12-filter system into a shared community resource for Galactic and extragalactic science, provided the Gaia-anchored calibration is trustworthy.

Core claim

The central claim is that S-PLUS DR5 is a uniformly calibrated, 12-filter survey covering 4,592 square degrees in 2,491 fields, with photometric depths reaching 21.5 mag in r (S/N≥3) and a photometric-redshift scatter of 0.0248 (σ_NMAD) with a 1.44% outlier fraction for r-band 14–21 galaxies. The release claims the first systematic coverage of fields adjacent to the Galactic bulge and disk (about 110 square degrees), enabled by a new astrometric pipeline that handles crowded fields, and a calibration anchored to synthetic magnitudes from Gaia DR3 XP spectra in 11 bands with u-band zero-points derived from SED fitting; the internal Gaia-G offset is 3.8 mmag. Applying the data to the Hydra and

What carries the argument

The 12-filter Javalambre photometric system (five broad bands—u,g,r,i,z—and seven narrowbands, e.g., J0660 for Hα) is the observing instrument, but the machinery that carries the argument is the calibration chain: synthetic magnitudes from Gaia DR3 XP spectra serve as reference for 11 bands, the u-band zero-point is predicted by fitting SEDs to those 11 calibrated bands, and the mode of the instrumental-minus-reference magnitude distribution fixes each field's zero-point. This chain is what makes the 4,592-square-degree footprint uniform and extinction-aware. On the science side, the shifting-gapper technique plus photo-z odds>0.6 defines cluster membership, and the narrowband J0660 excess (

Load-bearing premise

The entire survey's photometric scale rests on assuming the synthetic magnitudes computed from Gaia DR3 XP spectra are accurate in 11 bands and that the u-band zero-point can be predicted by fitting those 11 bands; if that reference is biased, especially in the blue, the bias flows into every magnitude, photometric redshift, extinction value, and cluster membership list.

What would settle it

Obtain independent photometric zero-points for the u band and at least one blue narrowband (e.g., J0378) in a handful of DR5 fields using standard-star observations; if the differences from DR5 values correlate with stellar color or extinction and exceed the stated few-mmag internal scatter, the Gaia-XP-anchored calibration chain is falsified and the photo-z and cluster-membership results built on it are biased.

Watch this falsifier — get emailed when new claim-graph text bears on it.

If this is right

  • If the calibration is sound, all 113 million detections share a single homogeneous photometric scale, so fields can be combined for Galactic-structure and large-scale-structure studies without region-dependent corrections.
  • The first bulge/disk coverage opens S-PLUS to studies of crowded stellar populations, metal-poor star searches, Cepheid period-luminosity relations, and variable stars in the Galactic plane.
  • The value-added catalogs (photo-zs, SQG, masks, extinction coefficients, overlap flags, unique IDs) make the release directly usable; photo-z scatter of 0.0248 and outlier fraction 1.44% support cluster and large-scale structure analyses.
  • For Hydra and Antlia, the data imply both clusters contain roughly 9% Hα-excess galaxies, with an increasing fraction toward larger radius and Hydra's core hosting about twice Antlia's core fraction, pointing to environmental quenching differences.
  • The 'bridge' between the clusters appears in both photometric and spectroscopic member maps, supporting the existence of a Hydra–Antlia wall/filament in the local Universe.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • The Gaia-anchored calibration decouples S-PLUS from external photometric catalogs; if it holds, future releases and the planned full 9,300-square-degree footprint can be added without re-deriving zero-points, making DR5 a template for survey calibration.
  • The same calibration chain means any wavelength-dependent error in Gaia XP spectra—especially in the blue where u and J0378–J0430 live—would propagate into photo-zs, extinction coefficients, and the Hα-excess fractions; this is testable by comparing DR5 blue zero-points against independent standard-star observations.
  • The cluster-member expansion (1,706 members, mostly photo-z selected) likely includes interlopers at the 5×R200 outskirts despite the gapper; spectroscopic follow-up of a random subset of the 1,244 new members would quantify the contamination and harden the bridge detection.
  • The Hα-excess comparison could be sharpened by continuum subtraction (three-filter method or SED fitting); applying the same J0660-excess measurement to other S-PLUS clusters would show whether the Hydra/Antlia radial trends are generic in low-richness environments.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

4 major / 5 minor

Summary. This paper presents the fifth data release (DR5) of the Southern Photometric Local Universe Survey (S-PLUS): 4592 square degrees, 2491 fields, and over 113 million detections in the 12-filter Javalambre system. It introduces the MAR reduction pipeline for 2200 fields, a Gaia DR3 XP-spectra-based calibration, and several value-added catalogs (star/galaxy/QSO classification, photometric redshifts, bright-star masks, extinction coefficients, overlap-region flags, unique IDs). It is the first S-PLUS release covering the Galactic bulge/disk region, and it presents a representative science application to the Hydra and Antlia clusters, reporting 1706 cluster members (up from 462) and a comparative analysis of H-alpha-excess galaxies. The paper argues that DR5 provides a uniformly calibrated, publicly accessible multicolor survey suitable for stellar and extragalactic science.

Significance. If the calibration and photo-z validation concerns are resolved, DR5 would be a major community resource. The area increase, the first bulge/disk coverage, the public TAP access, the new masks with quantified false-positive/false-negative rates, and the overlap flags and unique IDs are concrete contributions that will benefit many science cases. The paper also makes reproducible data products available and cites the separately published MAR pipeline. The cluster application is illustrative but potentially valuable for nearby-cluster studies. However, the release's central promise of a uniform 12-band photometric scale rests on the Gaia XP anchoring, and the photo-z and cluster-membership claims need stronger independent validation.

major comments (4)
  1. [Section 4.2.2] The calibration anchor is a potential common-mode bias. Synthetic Gaia XP magnitudes are used as references for 11 of the 12 S-PLUS bands, and the quoted 3.8 mmag check between predicted and observed Gaia G/BP/RP magnitudes validates internal consistency with XP, not the absolute accuracy of XP. Any wavelength-dependent error in the XP blue end, where u and the blue narrowbands lie, would propagate into all zero-points, photo-zs, extinction coefficients, and the cluster analysis. The u band is additionally inferred by SED fitting outside XP coverage. Please add an independent validation: compare S-PLUS blue and u-band photometry against external spectrophotometric standards or against other surveys not anchored to XP, and quantify how a plausible blue systematic (e.g., 1-3%) would affect the value-added products.
  2. [Section 5.1] The photometric-redshift performance metrics are quoted for the 'entire sample' (sigma_NMAD = 0.0248, bias = -5.03e-4, outlier fraction = 1.44%) and for five magnitude bins, but the paper does not state whether these metrics are computed on a held-out test set or on the training sample. Since the BMDN is trained on 867,636 galaxies, metrics evaluated on the training sample would be optimistically biased. Please specify the train/validation/test split and report the same metrics, including bin-wise outlier fractions, on an independent spectroscopic sample.
  3. [Section 5.1] The cluster photo-z bias correction is circular as presented. Gaussian fits are made to the spec-z and photo-z histograms of the same Antlia and Hydra clusters, and the measured shifts (0.0022 and 0.0027) are then applied as global corrections to the photo-zs used for membership selection. Because the same clusters define both the correction and the subsequent member sample, the reported member counts and radial H-alpha fractions are not independently calibrated. The method is also referenced as 'Mendes de Oliveira et al., in prep.' Please validate the shift with an out-of-sample procedure (e.g., leave-one-cluster-out or a spec-z subset not used in the fit), report the uncertainty on the shift, and quantify how the membership catalog changes if the shift is varied by its uncertainty.
  4. The photometric membership selection uses a broad window: z = 0.0111 +0.015/-0.005, odds >= 0.6, and a 'broadened' shifting-gapper envelope tuned to contain at least 90% of the spectroscopic members. At z ~ 0.01, +-0.015 in redshift corresponds to roughly +-4500 km/s, which is very wide for cluster membership and likely admits substantial foreground/background contamination. Please quantify the expected interloper fraction (e.g., using background counts in the same photo-z window, or the spec-z galaxies that are not cluster members) and state its effect on the 1706-member total and on the H-alpha radial fractions in Figure 10.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Section 4.2.5] The ORF description is clear, but Figure 6 would benefit from a caption explicitly stating that panel (a) shows raw number density before applying the flag and panel (b) after; this is implied but not stated.
  2. [Section 4.2.3] The bright-star mask availability is given as a placeholder ('[will be added after the report process.]'). In a data-release paper, all URL/DOI links should be finalized before publication, not deferred.
  3. [References] The two Gutiérrez-Soto et al. entries (2025a and 2025b) appear to be the same paper (A&A 695, A104) but are cited as distinct works; please merge or clearly differentiate them.
  4. [Section 2.3.2] Minor wording: the paper says the calibration 'naturally accounts for interstellar extinction' in the reference magnitudes, but later the extinction coefficients VAC is provided separately. A brief clarification that the calibration is extinction-inclusive at the reference-star level while per-source extinction corrections are still necessary would avoid confusion.
  5. [Various] The phrase 'We are grateful to the referee that provided useful comments...' in the acknowledgments is inappropriate for a submitted manuscript and should be removed.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity: DR5 calibration is anchored to external Gaia XP data and photo-zs are trained on an external spec-z compilation; cluster bias correction is a transparent calibration, not a forced prediction.

full rationale

The derivation chain is not circular. The photometric scale is anchored to Gaia DR3 XP spectra (Section 2.3.2): synthetic magnitudes from XP are external references for 11 S-PLUS bands, and the u-band zero-point is obtained by SED-fitting those calibrated bands. This is a calibration against an external catalog, not a self-defined prediction; the same section's 3.8 mmag Gaia G/BP/RP check is an internal consistency check between XP-based synthetic magnitudes and Gaia observed photometry, not an independent validation of S-PLUS, so any XP blue-end systematics are a correctness risk rather than circularity. The photo-z VAC is trained on 867,636 galaxies with spectroscopic redshifts from an external Southern-Hemisphere compilation (Section 4.2.2) and is evaluated with standard metrics, providing independent content. The cluster analysis in Section 5.1 does apply a Gaussian shift to align the photo-z and spec-z distributions of the same clusters, but the fitted offsets (0.0022, 0.0027) only recenter the photo-zs; the membership count (1244 new photo-z members), the bridge, and the Hα fractions are outputs of the subsequent selection and color-color analysis, not values fixed by the fitted shift. The 'broadened shifting-gapper envelope' is calibrated to contain 90% of spec-z members, but again the resulting sample and scientific trends are data-dependent. Self-citations (MAR pipeline, photo-z method, bias-correction note) are either described in the text or supported by code/data, and no load-bearing argument reduces to an unverified self-citation. Therefore no circular step meets the quoted-evidence bar.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

5 free parameters · 8 axioms · 0 invented entities

Core survey products rest on Gaia XP calibration, standard cosmology, and the assumed homogeneity of two reduction pipelines. The cluster science application adds hand-chosen thresholds and locally fitted photo-z shifts. No new physical entities are posited. The most fragile inputs are the unpublished photo-z bias corrections and the unquantified cross-pipeline homogeneity.

free parameters (5)
  • Photo-z cluster bias offsets (Antlia, Hydra) = 0.0022, 0.0027
    Fitted Gaussian shifts aligning photo-z and spec-z histograms in Section 5.1; applied globally to select photometric members, affecting membership and H-alpha fractions.
  • Photo-z BMDN model weights = not enumerated (trained on 867,636 galaxies)
    Photometric redshifts rely on a neural-network fit to a spectroscopic training sample (Section 4.2.2); the fitted weights are not provided in the paper.
  • H-alpha excess color threshold = r - J0660 >= 0.5
    Hand-chosen threshold in Section 5.2 separates 'H-alpha excess' galaxies; both clusters' fractions depend on it.
  • Photo-z membership selection window = z = 0.0111 +0.015/-0.005; odds >= 0.6
    Hand-defined selection criteria for adding 1244 photometric members in Section 5.1.
  • Shifting-gapper algorithm parameters = initial bin 0.42 h^-1 Mpc; min 15 galaxies/bin; facgap min(300, |v_low-v_high|/10)
    Adopted to identify spectroscopic members; the membership, velocity dispersion, and M200 estimates depend on these choices (Section 5.1).
axioms (8)
  • domain assumption Gaia DR3 XP spectra convolved with S-PLUS filter curves yield accurate synthetic reference magnitudes in 11 bands.
    The new calibration in Section 2.3.2 assumes this, replacing external photometric catalogs as zero-point references.
  • domain assumption u-band zero-points can be predicted from SED fits to the other 11 calibrated bands.
    u is outside Gaia XP coverage (Section 2.3.2); if the SED model is wrong, u photometry and photo-zs shift.
  • domain assumption The MAR and legacy jype pipelines produce sufficiently homogeneous calibrated photometry to merge all fields.
    2200 MAR fields and 291 legacy fields are combined in one release (Section 2.3); no cross-pipeline systematic is quantified.
  • domain assumption The Southern Hemisphere Spectroscopic Redshift Compilation (Lima 2025) is accurate and representative for training photo-zs and defining cluster members.
    Used in Sections 4.2.2 and 5.1; incomplete or biased spec-zs propagate into photo-z metrics and membership.
  • domain assumption The shifting-gapper technique removes interlopers and provides unbiased cluster membership.
    Used in Section 5.1; its velocity-gap thresholds are empirical and not validated against simulations in this paper.
  • domain assumption Adopted flat LCDM cosmology with H0 = 70 km/s/Mpc, Omega_m = 0.3, Omega_Lambda = 0.7.
    Used to convert redshifts and velocities to R200, M200, and clustercentric distances (Section 5).
  • domain assumption RV = 3.1 with the Fitzpatrick (1999) extinction law and SFD/SFLY/GAIA3 maps provide correct extinction coefficients.
    Required for extinction-corrected magnitudes and photo-z inputs (Section 4.2.4).
  • domain assumption BMDN photo-z PDFs are well-calibrated and generalize to the cluster fields.
    Cluster photo-z selection uses odds and PDFs from a model trained on other fields (Sections 4.2.2 and 5.1).

pith-pipeline@v1.3.0-alltime-deepseek · 30588 in / 15018 out tokens · 148557 ms · 2026-08-01T22:00:58.224466+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

We present the 5th data release (DR5) of the Southern Photometric Local Universe Survey (S-PLUS), covering 4592 square degrees across 2491 fields. Observations were conducted with the T80-South, a Brazilian robotic telescope equipped with the Javalambre 12-filter system, containing five broad- and seven narrowband filters. Data products feature FITS images and extensive catalogs containing fluxes, magnitudes, and shape parameters for over 113 million detections. In addition, several value-added catalogs are provided, offering photometric redshifts (photo-zs), object classifications, masks, and extinction coefficients. For the first time, this release includes coverage of 110 square degrees along the Galactic disk, facilitating new research into Galactic structure and stellar populations. The release also provides full coverage of the Hydra Supercluster and numerous other nearby clusters with improved data reduction and calibration, enhancing photo-z accuracy, which is vital for large-scale structure studies. A preliminary analysis of the Hydra and Antlia galaxy clusters up to $5 \times R_{200}$ yields an updated catalog of 1706 cluster members based on both spectroscopic and high-quality photo-zs. Our photometric data shows that both clusters have a similar proportion of galaxies with an H$\alpha$ excess relative to their clustercentric distance, though Hydra has a higher fraction near its center. Additionally, the spatial distribution of all objects in our sample highlights a bridge connecting both clusters. We verify that S-PLUS DR5 provides a solid foundation for future scientific investigations, ranging from Solar System studies to Cosmology.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2607.15891 by Amanda Reis Lopes, Anal\'ia Viviana Smith Castelli, Andr\'e Luiz Figueiredo, Andr\'e Santos, \^Angela Cristina Krabbe, Antonio Kanaan, Augusto Damineli, B\'arbara Cubillos Palma, Carlos Eduardo Ferreira Lopes, Ciria Lima-Dias, Cl\'audia L\'ucia Mendes de Oliveira, Cl\'ecio Roque de Bom, Daniela E. Olave-Rojas, Debasish Hazarika, Eduardo Alberto Duarte Lacerda, Eduardo Telles, Elismar L\"osch, Erick Ghuron, Erik Vinicius Rodrigues de Lima, F\'abio Rafael Herpich, Felipe Almeida-Fernandes, Gissel Pardo Montaguth, Guilherme Limberg, Gustavo Bernhard Oliveira Schwarz, H\'elio Dotto Perottoni, Jos\'e Yuri Santos Silva, J\'ulia Thain\'a-Batista, Laerte Sodr\'e Jr., Lia Doubrawa, Liana Li, Lilianne Nakazono, Luis Angel Guti\'errez-Soto, Maiara Sampaio Carvalho, Marcelo Borges Fernandes, Marcos Antonio Fonseca-Faria, Mar\'ilia Jobim Sartori, Marina Izabela, Murillo Marinello, Natanael Magalh\~aes Cardoso, Paulo Afr\^anio Augusto Lopes, Pedro K. Humire, Pierre Augusto R\'e, Raimundo Lopes de Oliveira, Raquel Ruiz Valen\c{c}a, Ricardo Demarco, Roberta Vassallo Bordoni, Roberto Cid-Fernandes, Rodrigo Facundo Haack, Sergio Torres-Flores, Stavros Akras, Swayamtrupta Panda, Thais Santos-Silva, Tiago Ribeiro, Timothy C. Beers, Victor Hugo Sasse, Vinicius M. Placco, Vitor Cernic, William Schoennell.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Comparison of several multiband surveys for both hemispheres in the optical (blue shapes) and NIR (red circles). The y-axis on either side indicate their depth in AB magnitudes. The number inside the shapes represent the number of photometric filters of the survey. pressure stripping (RPS; J. E. Gunn & J. R. Gott 1972; Y. L. Jaff´e et al. 2015), and mergers (A. Toomre & J. Toomre 1972; S. Kaviraj 2025), of… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: The footprint of S-PLUS with squares representing the tiles. Grey squares represent those not yet observed, while the fuchsia ones represent the tiles available in DR5. The insets show examples of S-PLUS images of different objects as indicated on the map. From left to right: The Southern Ring Nebula (NGC 3132), the 30 Doradus Region, the NGC 1365 galaxy in the Fornax Cluster, the M2 globular cluster, and … view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Comparison between S-PLUS magnitudes and Gaia DR3 XP spectra of the source 2642100160642247424. The top panel shows a Gaia spectrum in flux (black solid line) with the S-PLUS fluxes overlaid. The bottom panel shows the convoluted Gaia magnitudes compared to S-PLUS instrumental magnitudes, where the offset in magnitudes is shown in the text boxes. The vertical gray areas represent the wavelength ranges of S… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Completeness of source detection in different filters relative to the r-band, the deepest of the twelve S-PLUS filters, at S/N> 5. Completeness represents the fraction of sources detected in r that are also detected in each one of the other filters. Each panel shows the completeness for PSF, single, and dual-mode photometry as a function of r magnitude in the PETRO aperture. (W1 MAG, W2 MAG, Gmag, Plx, E(B… view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Illustration of the overlap flagging process. nitude (m0) can be obtained using Equation (2): m0 = m − Aλ (2) 4.2.5. Overlapping Region Flags (ORF) The S-PLUS observation strategy generates a certain overlap between adjacent tiles. Although this is not an issue when analyzing individual fields, it can induce systematic biases when combining adjacent fields or studying large contiguous regions, particularly… view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Comparison of the field “SPLUS-n01s20” and surrounding fields before (a) and after (b) applying the overlap flag condition. (ADQL) on the stored data tables and apply geometri￾cal constraints. Furthermore, the Python splusdata10 package pro￾vides an interface for accessing S-PLUS data program￾matically. This package enhances usability, enabling in￾tegration into different workflows. A detailed guide for ac… view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Redshift distribution of member galaxies (both spectroscopic and photometric) as a function of distance to the cluster center, within 5 × R200. The left panels shows 745 members of Antlia (z = 0.00976), and the right panels shows 961 members of Hydra (z = 0.01252). Black triangles represent the photo-z objects selected using our approach, shifted by 0.0022 for Antlia and 0.0027 for Hydra to align with the … view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Density contour plot for the galaxies in the region of Antlia and Hydra. The left panel shows the new photometrically determined members exclusively with photo-zs, the central panel shows members determined with spec-zs, and the right panel shows both simultaneously. The red solid and dashed circles represent the R500 and R200 of the clusters, respectively. In both panels, we observe a bridge between the c… view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Color-color diagram of (r − i) versus (r − J0660) for all galaxies within 5 × R200 from the center of Antlia (left) and Hydra (right). The points are colored according to the density of objects. The inset numbers quantify both the total number of galaxies and the fraction of objects above the adopted (r − J0660) = 0.5 threshold, highlighting the relative contribution of star-forming systems in each cluster… view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Comparison of the fraction of Hα-excess galaxies between Antlia and Hydra up to 5 × R200. Both have similar increasing trends for higher distances, whereas Hydra has a larger fraction of galaxies with excess Hα at its center. tion, and the unique IDs allow crossmatching the new data with previous and future releases. To showcase the capability of S-PLUS observations, we presented a science case based on t… view at source ↗

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

103 extracted references · 15 canonical work pages · 2 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    F., Argudo-Fern´ andez, M., et al

    Almeida, A., Anderson, S. F., Argudo-Fern´ andez, M., et al. 2023, ApJS, 267, 44, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/acda98

    doi:10.3847/1538-4365/acda98 2023

  2. [2]

    R., et al

    Almeida-Fernandes, F., SamPedro, L., Herpich, F. R., et al. 2022, MNRAS, 511, 4590, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stac284

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stac284 2022

  3. [3]

    M., Rocha-Pinto, H

    Almeida-Fernandes, F., Placco, V. M., Rocha-Pinto, H. J., et al. 2023, MNRAS, 523, 2934, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad1561

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stad1561 2023

  4. [4]

    C., Flynn, K., & Gebhardt, K

    Beers, T. C., Flynn, K., & Gebhardt, K. 1990, AJ, 100, 32, doi: 10.1086/115487

    doi:10.1086/115487 1990

  5. [5]

    2014, in The Third Hot-wiring the Transient Universe Workshop, ed

    Bellm, E. 2014, in The Third Hot-wiring the Transient Universe Workshop, ed. P. R. Wozniak, M. J. Graham, A. A. Mahabal, & R. Seaman, 27–33, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.1410.8185

    Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.1410.8185 2014

  6. [6]

    B., Evans, N

    Belokurov, V., Zucker, D. B., Evans, N. W., et al. 2006, ApJL, 642, L137, doi: 10.1086/504797

    doi:10.1086/504797 2006

  7. [7]

    2000, The Astrophysical Journal, 536, 571, doi: 10.1086/308947

    Benitez, N. 2000, The Astrophysical Journal, 536, 571, doi: 10.1086/308947

    doi:10.1086/308947 2000

  8. [8]

    1996, A&AS, 117, 393, doi: 10.1051/aas:1996164

    Bertin, E., & Arnouts, S. 1996, A&AS, 117, 393, doi: 10.1051/aas:1996164

    doi:10.1051/aas:1996164 1996

  9. [9]

    1994, Mixture density networks, Workingpaper, Aston University

    Bishop, C. 1994, Mixture density networks, Workingpaper, Aston University

    1994

  10. [10]

    M., & Pell´ o, R

    Bolzonella, M., Miralles, J. M., & Pell´ o, R. 2000, A&A, 363, 476, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.astro-ph/0003380

    Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.astro-ph/0003380 2000

  11. [11]

    B., van Dokkum, P

    Brammer, G. B., van Dokkum, P. G., & Coppi, P. 2008, The Astrophysical Journal, 686, 1503, doi: 10.1086/591786 19

    doi:10.1086/591786 2008

  12. [12]

    2025, A&A, 694, A276, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202452915 Calder´ on, J

    Buttitta, C., Iodice, E., Doll, G., et al. 2025, A&A, 694, A276, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202452915 Calder´ on, J. P., Bassino, L. P., Cellone, S. A., G´ omez, M., & Caso, J. P. 2020, MNRAS, 497, 1791, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staa2043 Calder´ on, J. P., Bassino, L. P., Cellone, S. A., et al. 2015, MNRAS, 451, 791, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stv926

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202452915 2025

  13. [13]

    A., Clayton, G

    Cardelli, J. A., Clayton, G. C., & Mathis, J. S. 1989, ApJ, 345, 245, doi: 10.1086/167900

    doi:10.1086/167900 1989

  14. [14]

    2010, A&A, 512, A54, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/200913204

    Asplund, M. 2010, A&A, 512, A54, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/200913204

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/200913204 2010

  15. [15]

    P., & Richtler, T

    Caso, J. P., & Richtler, T. 2015, A&A, 584, A125, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201527136

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201527136 2015

  16. [16]

    J., Moles, M., Crist´ obal-Hornillos, D., et al

    Cenarro, A. J., Moles, M., Crist´ obal-Hornillos, D., et al. 2019, A&A, 622, A176, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201833036

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201833036 2019

  17. [17]

    C., O’Mill, A

    Cerdosino, M. C., O’Mill, A. L., Rodriguez, F., et al. 2024, MNRAS, 528, 4993, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stae334

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stae334 2024

  18. [18]

    2025, ApJ, 979, 164, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad8eba

    Cerny, W., Chiti, A., Geha, M., et al. 2025, ApJ, 979, 164, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad8eba

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad8eba 2025

  19. [19]

    2023, ApJ, 958, 118, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/acf4a1

    Chiang, Y.-K. 2023, ApJ, 958, 118, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/acf4a1

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/acf4a1 2023

  20. [20]

    C., Hunt, J

    Cunningham, E. C., Hunt, J. A. S., Price-Whelan, A. M., et al. 2024, ApJ, 963, 95, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad187b De Angeli, F., Weiler, M., Montegriffo, P., et al. 2023, A&A, 674, A2, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202243680 de Jong, R. S., Agertz, O., Berbel, A. A., et al. 2019, The Messenger, 175, 3, doi: 10.18727/0722-6691/5117

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad187b 2024

  21. [21]

    J., & Belokurov, V

    Deason, A. J., & Belokurov, V. 2024, NewAR, 99, 101706, doi: 10.1016/j.newar.2024.101706 DESI Collaboration, Abareshi, B., Aguilar, J., et al. 2022, AJ, 164, 207, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/ac882b Dias dos Santos, D., Rodr ´ ıguez-Ardila, A., Panda, S., &

    arXiv 2024

  22. [22]

    2023, ApJL, 953, L3, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ace974

    Marinello, M. 2023, ApJL, 953, L3, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ace974

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ace974 2023

  23. [23]

    S., et al

    Drlica-Wagner, A., Bechtol, K., Rykoff, E. S., et al. 2015, ApJ, 813, 109, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/813/2/109

    doi:10.1088/0004-637x/813/2/109 2015

  24. [24]

    2014, A&A, 570, A119, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201424259

    Eckert, D., Molendi, S., Owers, M., et al. 2014, A&A, 570, A119, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201424259

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201424259 2014

  25. [25]

    Ester, M., Kriegel, H.-P., Sander, J., & Xu, X. 1996, in Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining, KDD’96 (AAAI Press), 226–231 Euclid Collaboration, Scaramella, R., Amiaux, J., et al. 2022, A&A, 662, A112, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202141938

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202141938 1996

  26. [26]

    1996, ApJ, 473, 670, doi: 10.1086/178180 Fern´ andez-Soto, A., Lanzetta, K

    Mezzetti, M. 1996, ApJ, 473, 670, doi: 10.1086/178180 Fern´ andez-Soto, A., Lanzetta, K. M., Chen, H. W., Levine, B., & Yahata, N. 2002, MNRAS, 330, 889, doi: 10.1046/j.1365-8711.2002.05131.x Ferreira Lopes, C. E., Guti´ errez-Soto, L. A., Ferreira

    arXiv 1996

  27. [27]

    S., et al

    Alberice, V. S., et al. 2025, A&A, 693, A306, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202451491

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202451491 2025

  28. [28]

    Fitzpatrick, E. L. 1999, PASP, 111, 63, doi: 10.1086/316293 Gaia Collaboration, Prusti, T., de Bruijne, J. H. J., et al. 2016, A&A, 595, A1, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201629272 Gaia Collaboration, Brown, A. G. A., Vallenari, A., et al. 2021, A&A, 649, A1, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202039657 Gaia Collaboration, Vallenari, A., Brown, A. G. A., et al. 2023, A&A, 6...

    doi:10.1086/316293 1999

  29. [29]

    S., & Ostriker, J

    Gallagher, III, J. S., & Ostriker, J. P. 1972, AJ, 77, 288, doi: 10.1086/111280

    doi:10.1086/111280 1972

  30. [30]

    L., de Souza, R

    Gondhalekar, Y., Chies-Santos, A. L., de Souza, R. S., et al. 2024, MNRAS, 532, 270, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stae1410

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stae1410 2024

  31. [31]

    E., & Gott, III, J

    Gunn, J. E., & Gott, III, J. R. 1972, ApJ, 176, 1, doi: 10.1086/151605 Guti´ errez-Soto, L. A., Lopes de Oliveira, R., Akras, S., et al. 2025a, A&A, 695, A104, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202453167 Guti´ errez-Soto, L. A., Lopes de Oliveira, R., Akras, S., et al. 2025b, A&A, 695, A104, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202453167

    doi:10.1086/151605 1972

  32. [32]

    The S-PLUS Fornax Project (S+FP): An extragalactic catalog covering $\sim$ 5 virial radii around NGC 1399 with galaxy properties

    Haack, R. F., Smith Castelli, A. V., Sodr´ e, Jr., L., et al. 2026, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2602.10244, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2602.10244

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2602.10244 2026

  33. [33]

    2023, The Messenger, 190, 31, doi: 10.18727/0722-6691/5308

    Haines, C., Jaff´ e, Y., Tejos, N., et al. 2023, The Messenger, 190, 31, doi: 10.18727/0722-6691/5308

    doi:10.18727/0722-6691/5308 2023

  34. [34]

    P., Pereira, M

    Haines, C. P., Pereira, M. J., Smith, G. P., et al. 2015, ApJ, 806, 101, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/806/1/101

    doi:10.1088/0004-637x/806/1/101 2015

  35. [35]

    J., & Biemesderfer, C

    Hanisch, R. J., & Biemesderfer, C. D. 1989, in BAAS, 780

    1989

  36. [36]

    2020, ARA&A, 58, 205, doi: 10.1146/annurev-astro-032620-021917

    Helmi, A. 2020, ARA&A, 58, 205, doi: 10.1146/annurev-astro-032620-021917

    doi:10.1146/annurev-astro-032620-021917 2020

  37. [37]

    A., & Krabbe, A

    Hernandez-Jimenez, J. A., & Krabbe, A. C. 2022, Astromorphlib: Python scripts to analyze the morphology of isolated and interacting galaxies, 0.2 Zenodo, doi: 10.5281/zenodo.6940848

    doi:10.5281/zenodo.6940848 2022

  38. [38]

    R., Almeida-Fernandes, F., Oliveira Schwarz, G

    Herpich, F. R., Almeida-Fernandes, F., Oliveira Schwarz, G. B., et al. 2024, A&A, 689, A249, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202449725

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202449725 2024

  39. [39]

    M., Miller, C

    Hopkins, A. M., Miller, C. J., Nichol, R. C., et al. 2003, ApJ, 599, 971, doi: 10.1086/379608

    doi:10.1086/379608 2003

  40. [40]

    K., Dey, S., Ronconi, T., et al

    Humire, P. K., Dey, S., Ronconi, T., et al. 2025, A&A, 699, A183, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202553897

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202553897 2025

  41. [41]

    J., et al

    Ilbert, O., Arnouts, S., McCracken, H. J., et al. 2006, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 457, 841, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20065138 20

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20065138 2006

  42. [42]

    2023, A&A, 679, A69, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202347129 Ivezi´ c,ˇZ., Sesar, B., Juri´ c, M., et al

    Iodice, E., Hilker, M., Doll, G., et al. 2023, A&A, 679, A69, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202347129 Ivezi´ c,ˇZ., Sesar, B., Juri´ c, M., et al. 2008, ApJ, 684, 287, doi: 10.1086/589678 Ivezi´ c,ˇZ., Kahn, S. M., Tyson, J. A., et al. 2019, ApJ, 873, 111, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab042c Jaff´ e, Y. L., Smith, R., Candlish, G. N., et al. 2015, MNRAS, 448, 1715, do...

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202347129 2023

  43. [43]

    D., Conroy, C., Naidu, R

    Johnson, B. D., Conroy, C., Naidu, R. P., et al. 2020, ApJ, 900, 103, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/abab08 Juri´ c, M., Ivezi´ c,ˇZ., Brooks, A., et al. 2008, ApJ, 673, 864, doi: 10.1086/523619

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/abab08 2020

  44. [44]

    2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2506.09136, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2506.09136

    Kaviraj, S. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2506.09136, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2506.09136

    Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2506.09136 2025

  45. [45]

    Kraan-Korteweg, R. C. 2000, A&AS, 141, 123, doi: 10.1051/aas:2000314

    work page doi:10.1051/aas:2000314 2000

  46. [47]

    Extragalactic Large-Scale Structures behind the Southern Milky Way. - I. Redshifts Obtained at the SAAO in the Hydra/Antlia Extension

    Kraan-Korteweg, R. C., Fairall, A. P., & Balkowski, C. 1995b, A&A, 297, 617, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.astro-ph/9411089

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.astro-ph/9411089

  47. [48]

    2024, MNRAS, 528, 1125, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad3881

    Oliveira, C., et al. 2024, MNRAS, 528, 1125, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad3881

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stad3881 2024

  48. [49]

    G., Rosdahl, J., Blaizot, J., et al

    Kramarenko, I. G., Rosdahl, J., Blaizot, J., et al. 2026, A&A, 707, A184, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202557114

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202557114 2026

  49. [50]

    L., & Nicolet, B

    Kunzli, M., North, P., Kurucz, R. L., & Nicolet, B. 1997, A&AS, 122, 51, doi: 10.1051/aas:1997291

    doi:10.1051/aas:1997291 1997

  50. [51]

    2014, AJ, 147, 108, doi: 10.1088/0004-6256/147/5/108

    Lang, D. 2014, AJ, 147, 108, doi: 10.1088/0004-6256/147/5/108

    doi:10.1088/0004-6256/147/5/108 2014

  51. [52]

    2025, ApJS, 277, 26, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/adaf27

    Li, X., Xiao, K., Huang, Y., et al. 2025, ApJS, 277, 26, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/adaf27

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4365/adaf27 2025

  52. [53]

    Lima, E. V. R. 2025, The Southern Hemisphere Spectrocopic Redshift Compilation, Zenodo, doi: 10.5281/zenodo.15114194

    work page doi:10.5281/zenodo.15114194 2025

  53. [54]

    Lima, E. V. R., Sodr´ e, L., Bom, C. R., et al. 2022, Astronomy and Computing, 38, 100510, doi: 10.1016/j.ascom.2021.100510

    arXiv 2022

  54. [55]

    2021, MNRAS, 500, 1323, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staa3326

    Lima-Dias, C., Monachesi, A., Torres-Flores, S., et al. 2021, MNRAS, 500, 1323, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staa3326

    doi:10.1093/mnras/staa3326 2021

  55. [56]

    2024, MNRAS, 527, 5792, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad3571

    Lima-Dias, C., Monachesi, A., Torres-Flores, S., et al. 2024, MNRAS, 527, 5792, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad3571

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stad3571 2024

  56. [57]

    M., Ji, A

    Limberg, G., Placco, V. M., Ji, A. P., et al. 2025, ApJL, 989, L18, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/adf196

    doi:10.3847/2041-8213/adf196 2025

  57. [58]

    R., Smith Castelli, A

    Lopes, A. R., Smith Castelli, A. V., Krabbe, A. C., et al. 2025, A&A, 699, A331, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202554159

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202554159 2025

  58. [60]

    Lopes, P. A. A., Ribeiro, A. L. B., & Brambila, D. 2024, MNRAS, 527, L19, doi: 10.1093/mnrasl/slad134

    doi:10.1093/mnrasl/slad134 2024

  59. [61]

    2017, Observation Data Model Core Components, its Implementation in the Table Access Protocol Version 1.1,, IVOA Recommendation 09 May 2017 doi: 10.5479/ADS/bib/2017ivoa.spec.0509L

    Louys, M., Tody, D., Dowler, P., et al. 2017, Observation Data Model Core Components, its Implementation in the Table Access Protocol Version 1.1,, IVOA Recommendation 09 May 2017 doi: 10.5479/ADS/bib/2017ivoa.spec.0509L

    doi:10.5479/ads/bib/2017ivoa.spec.0509l 2017

  60. [62]

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

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

    doi:10.1086/426387 2005

  61. [63]

    G., Banerji, M., Gonzalez, E., et al

    McMahon, R. G., Banerji, M., Gonzalez, E., et al. 2021, VizieR Online Data Catalog: The VISTA Hemisphere Survey (VHS) catalog DR5 (McMahon+, 2020),, VizieR On-line Data Catalog: II/367. Originally published in: 2013Msngr.154...35M Mej ´ ıa-Narv´ aez, A., Bruzual, G., Magris, C. G., et al. 2017, MNRAS, 471, 4722, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stx1758 Mendes de Olivei...

    doi:10.48550/arxiv.2510.19958 2021

  62. [64]

    W., Emerson, J

    Minniti, D., Lucas, P. W., Emerson, J. P., et al. 2010, NewA, 15, 433, doi: 10.1016/j.newast.2009.12.002

    doi:10.1016/j.newast.2009.12.002 2010

  63. [65]

    2008, A&A, 486, 697, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:200810014

    Misgeld, I., Mieske, S., & Hilker, M. 2008, A&A, 486, 697, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:200810014

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361:200810014 2008

  64. [66]

    2024, A&A, 691, A144, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202451059

    Molina-Jorquera, F., Damke, G., Fern´ andez-Olivares, D., et al. 2024, A&A, 691, A144, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202451059

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202451059 2024

  65. [67]

    P., Monachesi, A., Torres-Flores, S., et al

    Montaguth, G. P., Monachesi, A., Torres-Flores, S., et al. 2025, A&A, 696, A240, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202451198

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202451198 2025

  66. [68]

    P., Mendes de Oliveira, C., Lima-Dias, C., et al

    Montaguth, G. P., Mendes de Oliveira, C., Lima-Dias, C., et al. 2026a, ApJ, 999, 160, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ae42ca

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ae42ca

  67. [69]

    P., O’Mill, A

    Montaguth, G. P., O’Mill, A. L., Mendes de Oliveira, C., et al. 2026b, ApJ, 998, 91, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ae2bdd

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ae2bdd

  68. [70]

    1996, Nature, 379, 613, doi: 10.1038/379613a0

    Moore, B., Katz, N., Lake, G., Dressler, A., & Oemler, A. 1996, Nature, 379, 613, doi: 10.1038/379613a0

    doi:10.1038/379613a0 1996

  69. [71]

    2001, AJ, 121, 1752, doi: 10.1086/319383

    Lasker, B. 2001, AJ, 121, 1752, doi: 10.1086/319383

    work page doi:10.1086/319383 2001

  70. [72]

    Nakazono, L., Mendes de Oliveira, C., Hirata, N. S. T., et al. 2021, MNRAS, 507, 5847, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stab1835

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stab1835 2021

  71. [73]

    R., & Prieto, E

    Navarro, R., Cunningham, C. R., & Prieto, E. 2012, in Proc. of SPIE Vol, Vol. 8450, 845001–1 21

    2012

  72. [74]

    Olave-Rojas, D. A. 2023, MNRAS, 519, 4171, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stac3762 Oliveira Schwarz, G. B. 2022, Southern Photometric Local Universe Survey Cloud, Zenodo, doi: 10.5281/zenodo.10980447 Oliveira Schwarz, G. B., Herpich, F., Almeida-Fernandes, F., et al. 2025, Astronomy and Computing, 51, 100899, doi: 10.1016/j.ascom.2024.100899

    arXiv 2023

  73. [75]

    A., Wolf, C., Bessell, M

    Onken, C. A., Wolf, C., Bessell, M. S., et al. 2024, PASA, 41, e061, doi: 10.1017/pasa.2024.53

    doi:10.1017/pasa.2024.53 2024

  74. [76]

    2023, ApJ, 954, 98, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ace71f

    Park, S.-M., Chun, K., Shin, J., et al. 2023, ApJ, 954, 98, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ace71f

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ace71f 2023

  75. [77]

    2011, Journal of Machine Learning Research, 12, 2825

    Pedregosa, F., Varoquaux, G., Gramfort, A., et al. 2011, Journal of Machine Learning Research, 12, 2825

    2011

  76. [78]

    2023, in Anais Estendidos da XXXVI Conference on Graphics, Patterns and Images (Porto Alegre, RS, Brasil: SBC), 160–163, doi: 10.5753/sibgrapi.est.2023.27472

    Perin, G., Nakazono, L., Oliveira, C., & Hirata, N. 2023, in Anais Estendidos da XXXVI Conference on Graphics, Patterns and Images (Porto Alegre, RS, Brasil: SBC), 160–163, doi: 10.5753/sibgrapi.est.2023.27472

    arXiv 2023

  77. [79]

    D., Placco, V

    Perottoni, H. D., Placco, V. M., Almeida-Fernandes, F., et al. 2024, A&A, 691, A138, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202348801

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202348801 2024

  78. [80]

    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

    doi:10.3847/1538-4365/ac7ab0 2022

  79. [81]

    M., Roederer, I

    Placco, V. M., Roederer, I. U., Lee, Y. S., et al. 2021, ApJL, 912, L32, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/abf93d

    doi:10.3847/2041-8213/abf93d 2021

  80. [82]

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

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

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad077e 2023

Showing first 80 references.