Pith.

Solar and Stellar Astrophysics · arXiv:2611.13502 v1 · submitted 10 Nov 2026 · 93 references

Thermal-pulse-resolved Binary Population Synthesis with Detailed Stellar Models: Implications for Long-period WD+MS Formation

Yanxu Shi, Hongwei Ge, Diogo Belloni, Dengkai Jiang, Hailiang Chen, Zhanwen Han

PDF · arXiv · The abstract, sentence by sentence · Cite

The paper says

“The origin of the long-orbital-period white dwarf–main-sequence (WD+MS) binaries revealed by Gaia challenges the traditional association of common-envelope evolution (CEE) with short orbital periods.”

more of the abstract

We develop a thermal-pulse-resolved binary population synthesis framework based on 51 detailed MESA evolutionary tracks with initial masses of 1–6 M⊙. Applying these tracks to 5 × 106 initially sampled binaries, we follow the time-dependent stellar radius, wind mass loss, angular momentum, and tidal interactions, while calculating the envelope binding energy directly from the donor structure at the onset of Roche-lobe overflow. We find that thermal pulses can trigger binary interaction through envelope expansion and tidal orbital shrinkage, while the weakly bound envelopes of highly evolved thermally pulsing asymptotic giant branch (TP-AGB) donors allow CE ejection with limited orbital contraction. For our standard model, with αCE = 0.3 and αth = 0.5, systems with orbital periods above 30 days constitute approximately 11.5% of the resulting TP-AGB-initiated post-CE binaries (PCEBs). Long-period PCEBs can form across a large range of CE parameters and can reach periods of several hundred days even without any internal-energy contribution when αCE = 1. Their WD masses peak near 0.6 M⊙, whereas systems containing more massive WDs are rare. Moreover, long-period PCEBs closely follow the single-star initial–final mass relation, providing a potential diagnostic of their formation channel in clusters, where progenitor masses can be independently constrained. Our results identify late TP-AGB CEE as a viable contributor to the observed long-period WD+MS population.

from the abstract

Pith says

Machine review · deepseek-v4-flash · 11 Nov 2026 · what was read was not recorded · not checked by a person

It can be wrong. Challenge this review or reply to it.

Holds up, with conditions. Late TP-AGB CEE as a wide-orbit channel is a real, defensible viability result, but the headline 11.5% fraction rests on the exact late-envelope instability physics the MESA models suppress, so the quantitative numbers are conditional rather than robust predictions. This line is wrong

5 major objections · 7 minor

How often objections from reviews like this one are right: not yet measured

Are you an author? What you can do.

Not checked: figures, code, what the 93 references say.

The paper says, at Section 2, b264-b271

The review did not quote this passage.

Pith says: Objection 1 of 5 · major

The paper's central mechanism relies on the weakly bound envelopes of late TP-AGB donors, but the MESA models used to compute E_bind employ customized treatments that damp the gravothermal energy associated with hydrogen recombination and enhance convective transport where radiation pressure dominates (Section 2).

more of objection 1

The authors state that these treatments are intended only to enable models to continue evolving, rather than accurately describing the actual dynamical evolution of the envelope (b264-b271). The test in b69 verifies negligible effects only prior to the onset of the instabilities, not in the regime that produces every wide PCEB in the sample. Since E_bind = E_grav + alpha_th E_int is a small residual of two large terms, and recombination energy in the cool outer envelope is a major positive contribution to E_int, the treatment acts directly on the reservoir that makes the envelopes weakly bound. The authors should quantify the sensitivity of the headline 11.5% fraction and the maximum orbital periods to plausible variations in the treatment of the outer envelope (e.g., by comparing with an alternative prescription that does not damp the gravothermal term, or by estimating the systematic uncertainty in E_bind from this source). Without such a test, the reader cannot assess whether the wide-orbit channel is an artifact of the numerical suppression.

The paper says, at Section 4, Eq. (23) and Fig. 2

The review did not quote this passage.

Pith says: Objection 2 of 5 · major

The representative system in Fig. 2 has a_i = 1325.66 R_sun and produces P_f = 118.35 d. From Eq. (23), a_f near a_i requires beta = 2 a_i E_bind / (alpha_CE G M_c M_a) to be small. The authors should report the numerical values of E_bind, E_grav, E_int, and beta for this system at RLOF.

more of objection 2

A factor-of-~2.7 increase in E_bind alone would move this system below the 30-day boundary (as noted in the stress-test note). Since E_bind is a small residual, the reader needs to know the fractional uncertainty in E_bind that would change the qualitative conclusion. The authors should provide an error budget or sensitivity analysis for E_bind in the regime where the numerical treatments are active.

The paper says, at Section 6, b249

The review did not quote this passage.

A classifier read this sentence of the paper as acknowledging the concern (probability 0.91):

“However, whether similarly rapid inspiral occurs for highly evolved TP-AGB donors with very low en- velope masses remains uncertain, particularly because these are the progenitors most relevant to the formation of long-period PCEBs in our models.”

Pith says: Objection 3 of 5 · major

The authors acknowledge that whether rapid inspiral occurs for highly evolved TP-AGB donors with very low envelope masses remains uncertain (b249), and that the MT process may not be adequately described by classical stable MT or CEE formalism (b270). This is a load-bearing uncertainty because the widest PCEBs in the model form precisely from such low-envelope-mass donors.

more of objection 3

The paper would be strengthened by a discussion of what alternative outcomes are possible (e.g., dynamical mass ejection without a CE phase, or a merger) and how those would affect the predicted population. As it stands, the paper assumes the energy formalism applies in this regime, but the cited 3D simulations (González-Bolívar et al. 2022) did not cover the very low envelope masses most relevant here.

The paper says, at Section 5.2, Fig. 5

The review did not quote this passage.

Pith says: Objection 4 of 5 · major

The long-period fraction varies from 0.77% to 42.89% across the 16 parameter combinations. The authors present this as evidence that the channel is 'viable' across the whole space. However, the lowest fractions (0.77% at alpha_CE=0.15, alpha_th=0) are so small that they may be dominated by numerical noise or by systems that are borderline in terms of the E_bind < 0 exclusion (b144).

more of objection 4

The authors should report the raw number of systems (not just percentages) for each cell, and discuss whether the lowest fractions are statistically significant given the Monte Carlo sampling. Additionally, the hatched regions in Fig. 5 are outside the sampled range; the authors should state whether extrapolation to even lower alpha_CE or alpha_th would eliminate the channel entirely.

The paper says, at Section 5.3, Fig. 7(a)

The review did not quote this passage.

Pith says: Objection 5 of 5 · major

The claim that long-period PCEBs closely follow the single-star IFMR is based on visual inspection of Fig. 7(a). The authors should provide a quantitative measure (e.g., the RMS scatter around the IFMR for long-period vs. short-period systems, or a Kolmogorov-Smirnov test) to support this statement. The spread is visibly larger near 2 M_sun, which the authors attribute to TP-AGB core growth, but the quantitative comparison is needed to establish the diagnostic value.

7 minor objections

The paper says, at Abstract

Pith says: minor objection 1 of 7

The abstract states 'thermal pulses can trigger binary interaction through envelope expansion and tidal orbital shrinkage' but the tidal shrinkage mechanism is described in Section 4 as occurring only when the donor is already close to Roche-lobe filling. The abstract could be more precise about the conditions under which tidal shrinkage is significant.

The paper says, at Section 2, Eq. (4)

Pith says: minor objection 2 of 7

The fit coefficients for the MS lifetime are given to 9 significant figures, which implies a precision that is not physically meaningful. Rounding to 4-5 significant figures would be more appropriate and would not affect the results.

show 5 more

The paper says, at Section 3.2.1, Eq. (6)

Pith says: minor objection 3 of 7

The Bondi-Hoyle accretion prescription uses alpha_w = 1.5 and beta_w = 1/8. The authors should cite the justification for these specific values, as the choice affects the companion mass growth and rejuvenation, which in turn affects the companion's MS lifetime and the survival of long-period systems.

The paper says, at Section 3.2.4, b144

Pith says: minor objection 4 of 7

The paper excludes configurations where E_bind becomes positive because the alpha-formalism is no longer applicable. The number of such excluded systems should be reported, as they represent a potential population of interest (e.g., systems that might undergo a different type of interaction).

The paper says, at Figure 3

Pith says: minor objection 5 of 7

The vertical stripes in the WD mass distributions are attributed to discretization of initial primary masses onto the MESA grid. The authors should state the grid spacing (0.1 M_sun) in the caption or text, and note that this is an artifact of the method, not a physical feature.

The paper says, at Section 6, b284

Pith says: minor objection 6 of 7

The authors note that differences with Thai et al. (2026) may arise from 'lack of self-consistency in traditional BPS models.' This is a strong claim that should be supported by a more detailed comparison, or softened to a suggestion for future work.

The paper says, at General

Pith says: minor objection 7 of 7

The paper uses 'PCEB' to refer to post-CE binaries, but some of the systems discussed (e.g., those with P_orb > 30 d) may not be 'close' in the traditional sense. Consider using 'post-CE binary' or 'CE-ejected binary' to avoid confusion with the classical short-period PCEB population.

What would settle it

Using the archived MESA inlists and tracks (Zenodo 10.5281/zenodo.23916438), re-run the dominant 2.0-3.2 M_sun donor tracks with the two instability-suppression treatments (Section 2) removed, or with the damping strength varied by factors of 2-3 wherever numerically feasible; where the model cannot advance without suppression, recompute E_grav and E_int from the existing tracks with alternative envelope EOS or recombination treatments at identical pulse-maximum states. At every RLOF point that currently forms a wide PCEB, compare E_bind = E_grav + 0.5 E_int and re-evaluate Eq. (23). If the median E_bind of wide-PCEB-forming events shifts by more than ~30%, or the P > 30 d fraction moves outside 5-20%, the 11.5% headline and the several-hundred-day periods are set by the numerical treatment rather than by physical envelope structure.

from the skeptic's reading

How the review went

4 readings by deepseek-v4-flash · 11 Nov 2026

  1. Reader holds up, with conditions confidence moderate
  2. Skeptic partly agrees 2 min 42 s · 25,627 tokens read, 30,270 written
  3. Editor wrote the verdict above 19 s · 26,791 tokens read, 2,783 written
  4. Referee major revision: 5 major objections, 7 minor 20 s · 26,153 tokens read, 2,149 written

Not run on this paper: the simulated authors' defence.

Pith did not check this review's objections against the paper.

The review in full

The review in brief, machine-written

Read this one. The genuinely new thing is a BPS pipeline that resolves individual thermal pulses using 51 MESA tracks and computes E_bind from the actual donor structure at RLOF. That is a real step beyond BSE/COSMIC/COMPAS, and it lets the authors follow pulse-by-pulse changes in radius, wind, tides, and envelope energy together. The central result — late TP-AGB CEE can leave PCEBs at hundreds of days — is defensible as a viability claim, and it survives across all 16 alpha_CE/alpha_th combinations, including alpha_th = 0 at alpha_CE = 1, and under the qc = 2 mass-ratio variant. The code and MESA tracks are archived on Zenodo, which helps. The cluster IFMR prediction is the most valuable external check: long-period PCEBs should track the single-star IFMR, most distinctly near 2 Msun, where progenitor masses can be independently constrained in open clusters.

The soft spots are the two load-bearing premises, and the authors name both. First, all TP-AGB RLOF is assumed to become CEE (b255). Their qc = 2 test shows the assumption matters — the companion-mass distribution changes substantially — but the channel does not vanish, so the viability claim survives. Second, and more serious for the headline number: the late TP-AGB structures that make envelopes weakly bound come from models that suppress the hydrogen-recombination and Fe-peak instabilities (Section 2). Their verification (b69) covers evolution before the instabilities set in, not the regime that produces the wide PCEBs. Recombination energy is a major part of E_int in that cool envelope, so the suppression scheme acts directly on the reservoir that makes E_bind a small residual of two large terms. The stress-test arithmetic is right that the final period is sensitive to E_bind within a factor of a few, and the longest-period tail sits near the E_bind >= 0 exclusion boundary (b144). The paper itself concedes that real envelopes may instead pulsate and eject mass dynamically, outside the hydrostatic CE formalism (b264–b271). So I read the 11.5% and the several-hundred-day tail as conditional: physically plausible, but not yet cleanly separated from the numerical treatment. The authors are honest about this, so it enters as a condition, not a hidden flaw.

Citation pattern looks solid; self-citations are to directly relevant prior and companion work. This paper is for people working on common-envelope physics, binary population synthesis, and the Gaia WD+MS sample. It deserves a serious referee; I would send it to review with the envelope-instability caveat front and center. My own verdict would be conditional rather than accept, because the quantitative fractions still have to earn their normalization.

The strongest objection

The central claim (b8) rests on weakly bound late TP-AGB envelopes allowing CE ejection with limited orbital contraction (b3, b5). From Eq. (23), a_f near a_i requires beta = 2 a_i E_bind/(alpha_CE G M_c M_a) to be small; the Fig. 2 system, with a_i = 1325.66 R_sun and P_f = 118.35 d, implies E_bind ~ 3x10^44 erg at RLOF and beta ~ 10. A factor-of-~2.7 increase in E_bind alone would move this system below the 30-day boundary, so the headline threshold is controlled by E_bind to within a factor of a few. But E_bind = E_grav + alpha_th E_int (Eq. 24) is a small residual of two large terms, computed from the donor structure at the very end of the TP-AGB, after the code has (i) damped the gravothermal energy associated with hydrogen recombination in the cool outer envelope and (ii) enhanced convective transport where radiation pressure dominates (Section 2). Recombination energy in that same cool envelope is a major positive contribution to E_int, so the treatment acts directly on the reservoir that makes the envelopes weakly bound. The authors' own test (b69) verifies the treatments only prior to the onset of the instabilities, not in the regime that produces every wide PCEB in the sample, and Section 6 concedes that real envelopes may instead undergo large-amplitude pulsations and dynamic mass ejection (b264-b271), a regime the CE energy formalism does not describe (b270). The longest-period tail also sits adjacent to the E_bind = 0 exclusion boundary (b144), so treatment-induced shifts both redistribute periods and remove systems from the sample. This is an honestly acknowledged limitation, not a hidden flaw; what remains unresolved is whether the quantitative headline (11.5%; several-hundred-day periods) is physical envelope structure or an artifact of the suppression scheme.

The reader's CONDITIONAL verdict turns on whether late TP-AGB donor structures produced by the instability-suppression treatments are physical enough for E_bind at RLOF. My pass lands on the same premise but sharpens it: the wide-orbit outcomes do not merely use these structures, they require E_grav and alpha_th E_int to nearly cancel, so the headline numbers are a small difference of large, treatment-sensitive terms. Directly from Eq. (23), the Fig. 2 system implies E_bind ~ 3x10^44 erg with beta ~ 10, and a factor-of-~2.7 shift in E_bind crosses the 30-day threshold. Since the suppression acts on hydrogen recombination in the cool outer envelope, the same reservoir that contributes strongly to E_int there, such a shift is a live risk. The E_bind = 0 exclusion (b144) makes the longest-period tail adjacent to a discontinuous cut, amplifying sensitivity. All of this is acknowledged by the authors (Section 2; b264-b271), and their own test (b69) covers only the pre-instability phase, so the affected regime is genuinely untested. I nonetheless keep the verdict unchanged. Credit where due: code and tracks are archived (Zenodo 10.5281/zenodo.23916438), the CE grid spans 16 parameter combinations, the q_c = 2 stability variant preserves long-period formation, the cluster IFMR diagnostic (Section 5.3, Section 6) is a genuine falsifiable prediction, and the limitation statements are explicit. The proposed test is cheap and decisive: recompute E_bind under varied suppression strength or alternative recombination/EOS treatments and propagate through Eq. (23). If the median E_bind shifts by less than ~30% and the >30 d fraction stays within 5-20%, the CONDITIONAL verdict can move toward ACCEPT; if not, the mechanism may remain qualitatively viable but the quantitative population claim is not yet supported. Secondary checks worth running in the same pass: the tidal coefficient in Eq. (14) prints as 221, whereas the cited Hurley et al. (2002) convective-envelope prescription is 2/21, a factor of ~2300; and the X_H = 0.1 core-boundary convention shifts E_bind through the integration limits of Eqs. (1)-(2). Neither carries the central claim alone. Agreement with the reader is partial: same root premise, different emphasis (near-cancellation regime, fragility of the a_f ~ a_i tail, and a cheaper code-based test rather than a 3D hydrodynamic campaign).

The referee's report

If the central claim holds, this work provides a physically motivated explanation for the recently discovered population of long-period WD+MS binaries that does not require stable mass transfer. The framework is a methodological advance: it is the first BPS model to resolve individual thermal pulses using detailed stellar structures, capturing the coupled evolution of radius, tides, wind mass loss, and binding energy across pulses. The paper makes testable predictions (e.g., the IFMR agreement for long-period PCEBs in open clusters) and provides open-source code and data. The main limitation, which the authors acknowledge, is that the late TP-AGB MESA models employ numerical treatments to suppress instabilities (hydrogen recombination and Fe-peak) that may instead manifest as dynamical pulsations and mass ejection in real stars; the CE energy formalism may not apply in that regime. The paper's significance is therefore conditional on the realism of these suppressed structures, but the work is a clear step forward in connecting detailed stellar evolution to population-level outcomes.

Pith's reading of the paper (a machine's summary, not the authors')

The paper seeks to show that common-envelope evolution (CEE) involving highly evolved thermally pulsing asymptotic giant branch (TP-AGB) donors can leave white dwarf plus main-sequence (WD+MS) binaries with orbital periods of hundreds of days, contrary to the traditional idea that CEE always shrinks orbits to short periods. Using a population synthesis framework that resolves individual thermal pulses and computes envelope binding energy from detailed stellar structure at the moment of Roche-lobe overflow, the authors find that the weakly bound envelopes of late TP-AGB stars allow envelope ejection with limited orbital contraction. If this is right, long-period WD+MS binaries like those seen in recent astrometric surveys do not need stable mass transfer; late TP-AGB CEE can contribute to them. The claim matters because orbital period has long been used as a formation-channel indicator, and this result would blur that distinction.

What carries the argument. The central object is a thermal-pulse-resolved binary population synthesis framework. It attaches each sampled binary to a detailed stellar evolution track and follows the time-dependent radius, wind mass loss, angular momentum, and tidal interactions through every thermal pulse, then applies the energy formalism for common-envelope ejection using envelope binding energy integrated directly from the donor structure at the onset of Roche-lobe overflow. The decisive effect is that by the late TP-AGB phase the envelope has become weakly bound, so the orbital energy released during inspiral is sufficient to eject it with only limited contraction.

Core claim. The central claim is that thermal pulses can trigger binary interaction through envelope expansion combined with tidal orbital shrinkage, and that the weakly bound envelopes of late TP-AGB donors make it possible to eject the envelope during common-envelope evolution without drastic orbital contraction. In the standard model with a common-envelope efficiency of 0.3 and an internal-energy contribution of 0.5, about 11.5 percent of TP-AGB-initiated post-common-envelope binaries end with periods above 30 days, and some reach several hundred days even when internal energy contributes nothing if envelope ejection is efficient. The long-period systems have white dwarf masses concentrated near 0.6 solar masses and follow the single-star initial-final mass relation, which the paper proposes as a diagnostic for identifying this formation channel in star clusters.

The premise it rests on. The load-bearing premise is that the late TP-AGB envelope structures obtained after the numerical instability-suppression treatments are realistic enough to compute binding energies at the onset of Roche-lobe overflow, even though the paper acknowledges those treatments are meant to let the models evolve rather than to describe the actual dynamical state of the envelope.

If the paper is right (Pith's inferences, not the authors')

Orbital period would no longer be a reliable discriminator between CEE and stable mass transfer, because CEE can now yield periods of hundreds of days.

Long-period WD+MS binaries can form without requiring stable mass transfer, expanding the set of plausible progenitors for the systems revealed by astrometric surveys.

Long-period post-common-envelope binaries should closely follow the single-star initial-final mass relation, offering a testable prediction for open clusters with known progenitor masses.

Internal energy is not a necessary ingredient for wide post-common-envelope binaries; efficient envelope ejection alone can suffice for late TP-AGB donors.

Population synthesis that averages over thermal pulses risks underestimating wide post-common-envelope binaries, so pulse-resolved donor structure is needed for accurate predictions.

If this channel is common, the classical period gap between short-period CEE products and wider stable-mass-transfer products may be much less pronounced than previously assumed, so classifications based solely on orbital period should be revisited.

A natural next test is to simulate in three dimensions the common-envelope phase for very low-mass late TP-AGB envelopes, since the energy-formalism treatment used here has not yet been checked for exactly those progenitors.

The same weakly bound late-AGB envelope mechanism might extend to other binary populations whose donors approach the end of the AGB, provided their mass transfer and ejection physics follow the same energetics.

Combining this channel with stable mass transfer in one unified population model could quantify the relative contribution of each route to the observed long-period WD+MS sample.

Check this review

Pith stored no record of this review's passes and took no fingerprint of it. Reviews made by code from 13 Nov 2026 on carry both.

How often reviews like this one are right

Reviews like this one: written by deepseek-v4-flash, where what was read was not recorded.

How often objections from reviews like this one are right: not yet measured

Every value above, in the review's public record (JSON)

Reviews by people

This review was written by a machine. No person has reviewed this paper on Pith yet. A scientist listed on Pith can review it for a fee, and their review is published here whatever it concludes.

Request a human review

How Pith checks papers · The full audit of this paper

The paper

Abstract

The origin of the long-orbital-period white dwarf–main-sequence (WD+MS) binaries revealed by Gaia challenges the traditional association of common-envelope evolution (CEE) with short orbital periods. We develop a thermal-pulse-resolved binary population synthesis framework based on 51 detailed MESA evolutionary tracks with initial masses of 1–6 M⊙. Applying these tracks to 5 × 106 initially sampled binaries, we follow the time-dependent stellar radius, wind mass loss, angular momentum, and tidal interactions, while calculating the envelope binding energy directly from the donor structure at the onset of Roche-lobe overflow. We find that thermal pulses can trigger binary interaction through envelope expansion and tidal orbital shrinkage, while the weakly bound envelopes of highly evolved thermally pulsing asymptotic giant branch (TP-AGB) donors allow CE ejection with limited orbital contraction. For our standard model, with αCE = 0.3 and αth = 0.5, systems with orbital periods above 30 days constitute approximately 11.5% of the resulting TP-AGB-initiated post-CE binaries (PCEBs). Long-period PCEBs can form across a large range of CE parameters and can reach periods of several hundred days even without any internal-energy contribution when αCE = 1. Their WD masses peak near 0.6 M⊙, whereas systems containing more massive WDs are rare. Moreover, long-period PCEBs closely follow the single-star initial–final mass relation, providing a potential diagnostic of their formation channel in clusters, where progenitor masses can be independently constrained. Our results identify late TP-AGB CEE as a viable contributor to the observed long-period WD+MS population.

The paper's own sentences, arranged, kept beside the review and separate from it. Each label is drawn from a closed vocabulary; the number beside it is the probability the classifier gave that label. No sentence in this record was written by a model.

abstract compiled · 2026-11-11

The authors' main claim, as the classifier picked it out 1.00

“Our results identify late TP-AGB CEE as a viable contributor to the observed long-period WD+MS population.”

How the main claim is stated: asserted 0.65

What the abstract itself states, as probabilities: claims first 0.05 · states limitation 0.16 · human participants 0.01 · controlled comparison 0.14 · randomized assignment 0.01 · states quantitative result 0.99 · compares with prior results 0.36 · mentions code or data availability 0.02

The abstract, sentence by sentence

This table labels the abstract only (arXiv listing abstract v1). The number is the probability the classifier gave the label.

SentenceRoleThe authors' own workStates the main conclusionStrength
The origin of the long-orbital-period white dwarf--main-sequence (WD+MS) binaries revealed by Gaia challenges the traditional association of common-envelope evolution (CEE) with short orbital periods. background 0.92 0.08 0.12 asserted 0.99
We develop a thermal-pulse-resolved binary population synthesis framework based on 51 detailed MESA evolutionary tracks with initial masses of 1--6 $M_{\odot}$. method 0.88 0.97 0.03 asserted 0.99
Applying these tracks to $5\times10^6$ initially sampled binaries, we follow the time-dependent stellar radius, wind mass loss, angular momentum, and tidal interactions, while calculating the envelope binding energy directly from the donor structure at the onset of Roche-lobe overflow. method 1.00 0.96 0.03 asserted 0.90
We find that thermal pulses can trigger binary interaction through envelope expansion and tidal orbital shrinkage, while the weakly bound envelopes of highly evolved thermally pulsing asymptotic giant branch (TP-AGB) donors allow CE ejection with limited orbital contraction. result 0.95 0.96 0.37 asserted 1.00
For our standard model, with $\alpha_{\mathrm{CE}}$ = 0.3 and $\alpha_{\mathrm{th}}$ = 0.5, systems with orbital periods above 30 days constitute approximately 11.5\% of the resulting TP-AGB-initiated post-CE binaries (PCEBs). result 1.00 0.96 0.11 asserted 1.00
Long-period PCEBs can form across a large range of CE parameters and can reach periods of several hundred days even without any internal-energy contribution when $\alpha_{\mathrm{CE}}$ = 1. result 0.99 0.92 0.11 asserted 0.89
Their WD masses peak near 0.6 $M_\odot$, whereas systems containing more massive WDs are rare. result 1.00 0.92 0.05 asserted 1.00
Moreover, long-period PCEBs closely follow the single-star initial--final mass relation, providing a potential diagnostic of their formation channel in clusters, where progenitor masses can be independently constrained. interpretation 0.87 0.86 0.10 hedged possibility 0.65
Our results identify late TP-AGB CEE as a viable contributor to the observed long-period WD+MS population. interpretation 0.68 0.95 0.80 asserted 0.65

What kind of paper the classifier reports this is: simulation study 0.99 · evidence from simulation or computation 1.00

What was examined, and what was not

Sources read

  • arXiv listing abstract v1

Not examined

  • full text
  • figures and tables
  • references and citing sentences
  • relations to other papers

Levels run

  • P abstract

Not run

  • S sections
  • T body sentences
  • C citations
  • R cross-paper relations

How the labels were made

Compiled by classifier-1.13.0 via TypeSafe API, question bank abstract-p1-20260923, 2026-11-11: 1 request, 7,290 input tokens.

Every quoted sentence on this record is the authors'. Every label is from Pith's closed vocabulary, with the probability shown beside it. This record as JSON

Figures (8)
Figure 1 of the paper
Figure 1. Single-star models and fitting relations. (a) Hertzsprung–Russell diagram for six representative MESA tracks. (b) MS lifetimes for all 52 tracks and a fifth-order polynomial fit to the logarithmic lifetime as a function of initial mass. (c) ZAMS radii for stars with initial masses below 0.9 M⊙ and a linear fit as a function of initial mass. For stars with initial masses below 0.9 M⊙, we use a linear fit for their ZAMS radii (
Figure 2 of the paper
Figure 2. Evolutionary history of a representative binary with initial parameters M1i = 2.4 M⊙, M2i = 0.9852 M⊙, and ai = 1325.66 R⊙. The panels show (a) the donor radius and its Roche-lobe radius, (b) the donor and companion masses, (c) the orbital separation and orbital period, (d) the Hertzsprung–Russell diagram, (e) the envelope gravitational energy, internal energy, and binding energy, (f) the donor wind mass-loss rate, and (g) the donor’s total moment of inertia. For clarity, only the TP-AGB phase is shown in panels other than (d). Black crosses mark the onset of CEE, while open circles…
Figure 3 of the paper
Figure 3. Distributions of the synthetic PCEB population obtained with αCE = 0.3 and αth = 0.5. Blue points show the full synthetic population, while pink points represent long-period systems with Porb > 30 days. Observed long-period WD+MS systems are taken from H. Kawahara et al. (2018) and N. Yamaguchi et al. (2024a). For KOI-3278, discovered by E. Kruse & E. Agol (2014), we adopt the updated parameters from D. A. Yahalomi et al. (2019). 5.2. Dependence of Long-period PCEB Formation on CE Parameters To investigate whether the formation of long-period PCEBs is general or depends on the…
Figure 4 of the paper
Figure 4. Normalized orbital-period distributions of synthetic PCEBs with MWD > 0.8 M⊙ (blue) and 0.56 ≤ MWD/M⊙ ≤ 0.62 (orangered), selected from the pop￾ulation shown in
Figure 5 of the paper
Figure 5. Fraction of long-period systems (Porb > 30 days) among all synthetic PCEBs for different combinations of αCE and αth. The percentage in each cell is calculated from the corresponding BPS model and assigned to the nearest-neigh￾bor region in parameter space. Pink crosses indicate the sampled parameter combinations, while hatched regions lie outside the sampled range. An important result is that long-period PCEBs with periods of several hundred days can form even with￾out any contribution from internal energy ((αCE, αth) = (1, 0),
Figure 7 of the paper
Figure 7. (a) Initial primary mass versus final WD mass and (b) initial primary mass versus initial orbital separation for the synthetic PCEB population obtained with αCE = 0.3 and αth = 0.5. Pink points represent long-period systems (Porb > 30 days), while blue points indicate shorter-period systems (Porb ≤ 30 days). The black dashed line in panel (a) shows the single-star initial–final mass relation derived from the same MESA stellar evolution grid. 6. DISCUSSION In our models, CEE is predominantly triggered dur￾ing thermal pulses, raising the question of whether the donor might contract be
Figure 8 of the paper
Figure 8. Distributions of the long-period synthetic PCEBs (Porb > 30 days) obtained with αCE = 0.3, αth = 0.5, and an additional critical mass-ratio criterion of qc = 2, such that CEE occurs only for Md/Ma > 2 at the onset of RLOF. The panel arrangement, color coding, and observational compar￾ison are the same as in

Showing 7 of the paper's 8 figures. Figures are the authors', reproduced from the paper.

References (93)
  1. [1] Stellar Multiplicity. , keywords =. doi:10.1146/annurev-astro-081710-102602 , archivePrefix =. 1303.3028 , primaryClass = on PithPith's reviewarXiv
  2. [2] Mind Your Ps and Qs: The Interrelation between Period (P) and Mass-ratio (Q) Distributions of Binary Stars. , keywords =. doi:10.3847/1538-4365/aa6fb6 , archivePrefix =. 1606.05347 , primaryClass = on PithPith's reviewarXiv
  3. [3] Binary stars in the new millennium. Progress in Particle and Nuclear Physics , keywords =. doi:10.1016/j.ppnp.2023.104083 , archivePrefix =. 2311.11454 , primaryClass = on PithPith's reviewarXiv
  4. [4] Double white dwarfs as progenitors of R Coronae Borealis stars and type I supernovae. , keywords =. doi:10.1086/161701 , adsurl = on Pithdoi:10.1086/161701
  5. [5] The single-degenerate channel for the progenitors of Type Ia supernovae. , keywords =. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2004.07713.x , archivePrefix =. astro-ph/0309618 , primaryClass = on PithPith's reviewarXiv
  6. [6] The Nature of the Recurrent Novae. , keywords =. doi:10.1086/165095 , adsurl = on Pithdoi:10.1086/165095
  7. [7] The age, life expectancy, and space density of Post Common Envelope Binaries. , keywords =. doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20030801 , archivePrefix =. astro-ph/0305531 , primaryClass = on PithPith's reviewarXiv
  8. [8] A Model for the Galactic Population of Symbiotic Stars with White Dwarf Accretors. , keywords =. doi:10.1086/175908 , adsurl = on Pithdoi:10.1086/175908
  9. [9] The formation of the magnetic symbiotic star FN Sgr. , keywords =. doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202449602 , archivePrefix =. 2402.08647 , primaryClass = on PithPith's reviewarXiv
  10. [10] Cataclysmic variables with evolved secondaries and the progenitors of AM CVn stars. , keywords =. doi:10.1046/j.1365-8711.2003.06380.x , adsurl = on Pithdoi:10.1046/j.1365-8711.2003.06380.x
  11. [11] The gravitational wave signal from the Galactic disk population of binaries containing two compact objects. , keywords =. doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20010683 , archivePrefix =. astro-ph/0105221 , primaryClass = on PithPith's reviewarXiv
  12. [12] Detached white dwarf main-sequence star binaries. , keywords =. doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20040085 , archivePrefix =. astro-ph/0403090 , primaryClass = on PithPith's reviewarXiv
  13. [13] Common Envelope Binaries. Structure and Evolution of Close Binary Systems , year = 1976, editor = on Pith
  14. [14] The evolution of low-mass close binary systems on Pith
  15. [15] Monte Carlo simulations of post-common-envelope white dwarf + main sequence binaries: comparison with the SDSS DR7 observed sample. , keywords =. doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201323052 , archivePrefix =. 1404.5464 , primaryClass = on PithPith's reviewarXiv
  16. [16] Influence of Mass-transfer Stability on the Formation of Post-common-envelope Binaries. , keywords =. doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ae876a , archivePrefix =. 2606.22927 , primaryClass = on PithPith's reviewarXiv
  17. [17] The relation between white dwarf mass and orbital period in wide binary radio pulsars. , keywords =. doi:10.1093/mnras/273.3.731 , adsurl = on Pithdoi:10.1093/mnras/273.3.731
  18. [18] Formation of millisecond pulsars. I. Evolution of low-mass X-ray binaries with P\_orb> 2 days. , keywords =. doi:10.48550/arXiv.astro-ph/9909147 , archivePrefix =. astro-ph/9909147 , primaryClass = on PithPith's reviewarXivdoi:10.48550/arxiv.astro-ph/9909147
  19. [19] The nature of millisecond pulsars with helium white dwarf companions. , keywords =. doi:10.1093/mnras/stt2030 , archivePrefix =. 1310.8356 , primaryClass = on PithPith's reviewarXiv
  20. [20] The Relation between Helium White Dwarf Mass and Orbital Period under Two Types of Opacity. , keywords =. doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ae23d1 , archivePrefix =. 2511.20147 , primaryClass = on PitharXiv
show 73 more
  1. [21] Mass-Orbital Period Distribution of Massive White Dwarfs Formed through Stable Mass Transfer. , keywords =. doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ae9d74 , archivePrefix =. 2606.06141 , primaryClass = on PithPith's reviewarXiv
  2. [22] Evidence for bimodal orbital separations of white dwarf-red dwarf binary stars. , keywords =. doi:10.1093/mnras/stz298 , archivePrefix =. 1901.09139 , primaryClass = on PithPith's reviewarXiv
  3. [23] The white dwarf binary pathways survey - VII. Evidence for a bi-modal distribution of post-mass transfer systems?. , keywords =. doi:10.1093/mnras/stac673 , archivePrefix =. 2203.08846 , primaryClass = on PithPith's reviewarXiv
  4. [24] Triage of the Gaia DR3 astrometric orbits. II. A census of white dwarfs. , keywords =. doi:10.1093/mnras/stae773 , archivePrefix =. 2309.15143 , primaryClass = on PithPith's reviewarXiv
  5. [25] Wide post-common envelope binaries containing ultramassive white dwarfs: evidence for efficient envelope ejection in massive asymptotic giant branch stars. , keywords =. doi:10.1093/mnras/stad4005 , archivePrefix =. 2309.15905 , primaryClass = on PithPith's reviewarXiv
  6. [26] Wide Post-common Envelope Binaries from Gaia: Orbit Validation and Formation Models. , keywords =. doi:10.1088/1538-3873/ad6809 , archivePrefix =. 2405.06020 , primaryClass = on PithPith's reviewarXiv
  7. [27] Calibration of binary population synthesis models using white dwarf binaries from APOGEE, GALEX, and Gaia. , keywords =. doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202555600 , archivePrefix =. 2505.15893 , primaryClass = on PitharXiv
  8. [28] Ongoing and Post-mass-transfer Binaries: A Living Catalog and Unified Review of Binary Mass-transfer Products. , keywords =. doi:10.3847/1538-4365/ae8d04 , archivePrefix =. 2605.31290 , primaryClass = on PithPith's reviewarXiv
  9. [29] Common envelope binary interaction simulations between a thermally pulsating AGB star and a low mass companion. , keywords =. doi:10.1093/mnras/stac2301 , archivePrefix =. 2205.09749 , primaryClass = on PithPith's reviewarXiv
  10. [30] Dust formation in common envelope binary interaction - I: 3D simulations using the Bowen approximation. , keywords =. doi:10.1093/mnras/stad3748 , archivePrefix =. 2306.16609 , primaryClass = on PithPith's reviewarXiv
  11. [31] Formation of long-period post-common envelope binaries. I. No extra energy is needed to explain oxygen-neon white dwarfs paired with AFGK-type main-sequence stars. , keywords =. doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202449235 , archivePrefix =. 2401.07692 , primaryClass = on PithPith's reviewarXiv
  12. [32] Formation of long-period post-common-envelope binaries. II. Explaining the self-lensing binary KOI 3278. , keywords =. doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202449320 , archivePrefix =. 2401.17510 , primaryClass = on PithPith's reviewarXiv
  13. [33] Comprehensive analytic formulae for stellar evolution as a function of mass and metallicity. , keywords =. doi:10.1046/j.1365-8711.2000.03426.x , archivePrefix =. astro-ph/0001295 , primaryClass = on PithPith's reviewarXiv
  14. [34] Evolution of binary stars and the effect of tides on binary populations. , keywords =. doi:10.1046/j.1365-8711.2002.05038.x , archivePrefix =. astro-ph/0201220 , primaryClass = on PithPith's reviewarXiv
  15. [35] COSMIC Variance in Binary Population Synthesis. , keywords =. doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ab9d85 , archivePrefix =. 1911.00903 , primaryClass = on PithPith's reviewarXiv
  16. [36] Rapid Stellar and Binary Population Synthesis with COMPAS. , keywords =. doi:10.3847/1538-4365/ac416c , archivePrefix =. 2109.10352 , primaryClass = on PithPith's reviewarXiv
  17. [37] A new synthetic model for asymptotic giant branch stars. , keywords =. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2004.07446.x , archivePrefix =. astro-ph/0402403 , primaryClass = on PithPith's reviewarXiv
  18. [38] Modules for Experiments in Stellar Astrophysics (MESA). , keywords =. doi:10.1088/0067-0049/192/1/3 , archivePrefix =. 1009.1622 , primaryClass = on PithPith's reviewarXiv
  19. [39] Modules for Experiments in Stellar Astrophysics (MESA): Planets, Oscillations, Rotation, and Massive Stars. , keywords =. doi:10.1088/0067-0049/208/1/4 , archivePrefix =. 1301.0319 , primaryClass = on PithPith's reviewarXiv
  20. [40] Modules for Experiments in Stellar Astrophysics (MESA): Binaries, Pulsations, and Explosions. , keywords =. doi:10.1088/0067-0049/220/1/15 , archivePrefix =. 1506.03146 , primaryClass = on PithPith's reviewarXiv
  21. [41] Modules for Experiments in Stellar Astrophysics (MESA): Convective Boundaries, Element Diffusion, and Massive Star Explosions. , keywords =. doi:10.3847/1538-4365/aaa5a8 , archivePrefix =. 1710.08424 , primaryClass = on PithPith's reviewarXiv
  22. [42] Modules for Experiments in Stellar Astrophysics (MESA): Pulsating Variable Stars, Rotation, Convective Boundaries, and Energy Conservation. , keywords =. doi:10.3847/1538-4365/ab2241 , archivePrefix =. 1903.01426 , primaryClass = on PithPith's reviewarXiv
  23. [43] Modules for Experiments in Stellar Astrophysics (MESA): Time-dependent Convection, Energy Conservation, Automatic Differentiation, and Infrastructure. , keywords =. doi:10.3847/1538-4365/acae8d , archivePrefix =. 2208.03651 , primaryClass = on PithPith's reviewarXiv
  24. [44] Updated Opal Opacities. , keywords =. doi:10.1086/177381 , adsurl = on Pithdoi:10.1086/177381
  25. [45] Low-Temperature Opacities. , keywords =. doi:10.1086/428642 , archivePrefix =. astro-ph/0502045 , primaryClass = on PithPith's reviewarXiv
  26. [46] Standard Solar Composition. , keywords =. doi:10.1023/A:1005161325181 , adsurl = on Pithdoi:10.1023/a:1005161325181
  27. [47] The JINA REACLIB Database: Its Recent Updates and Impact on Type-I X-ray Bursts. , keywords =. doi:10.1088/0067-0049/189/1/240 , adsurl = on Pithdoi:10.1088/0067-0049/189/1/240
  28. [48] Mesa Isochrones and Stellar Tracks (MIST). I. Solar-scaled Models. , keywords =. doi:10.3847/0004-637X/823/2/102 , archivePrefix =. 1604.08592 , primaryClass = on PithPith's reviewarXiv
  29. [49] The evolution of AGB stars with convective overshoot. , year = 2000, volume =. astro-ph/0007139 , adsurl = on PithPith's reviewarXiv
  30. [50] AGB star models. Results from 1D stellar evolution and multi-dimensional hydrodynamics simulations. The Art of Modeling Stars in the 21st Century , year = 2008, editor =. doi:10.1017/S1743921308022795 , adsurl = on Pithdoi:10.1017/s1743921308022795
  31. [51] Circumstellar absorption lines and mass loss from red giants. Memoires of the Societe Royale des Sciences de Liege , keywords = on Pith
  32. [52] On the absolute scale of mass-loss in red giants. I. Circumstellar absorption lines in the spectrum of the visual companion of alpha ^ 1 Her. , keywords = on Pith
  33. [53] Stellar evolution of low and intermediate-mass stars. I. Mass loss on the AGB and its consequences for stellar evolution. , keywords = on Pith
  34. [54] The Core Mass Growth and Stellar Lifetime of Thermally Pulsing Asymptotic Giant Branch Stars. , keywords =. doi:10.1088/0004-637X/782/1/17 , archivePrefix =. 1312.4544 , primaryClass = on PithPith's reviewarXiv
  35. [55] The end of super AGB and massive AGB stars. I. The instabilities that determine the final mass of AGB stars. , keywords =. doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201218826 , archivePrefix =. 1204.3931 , primaryClass = on PithPith's reviewarXiv
  36. [56] Evolving past instabilities on the thermally pulsing-(super)asymptotic giant branch. , year = 2024, month = jul, volume =. doi:10.1093/mnras/stae1387 , adsurl = on Pithdoi:10.1093/mnras/stae1387
  37. [57] The Initial Mass Function and Stellar Birthrate in the Solar Neighborhood. , keywords =. doi:10.1086/190629 , adsurl = on Pithdoi:10.1086/190629
  38. [58] Binary Population Synthesis. Research in Astronomy and Astrophysics , keywords =. doi:10.1088/1674-4527/20/10/161 , archivePrefix =. 2009.08611 , primaryClass = on PithPith's reviewarXiv
  39. [59] On the mechanism of accretion by stars. , year = 1944, month = jan, volume =. doi:10.1093/mnras/104.5.273 , adsurl = on Pithdoi:10.1093/mnras/104.5.273
  40. [60] Can a barium star be produced by wind accretion in a detached binary ?. , keywords = on Pith
  41. [61] Rapid binary star evolution for N-body simulations and population synthesis. , keywords =. doi:10.1093/mnras/291.4.732 , adsurl = on Pithdoi:10.1093/mnras/291.4.732
  42. [62] On rejuvenation in massive binary systems. , keywords =. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2007.11431.x , archivePrefix =. astro-ph/0612539 , primaryClass = on PithPith's reviewarXiv
  43. [63] Astrophysical Data I. Planets and Stars on Pith
  44. [64] Tidal evolution in close binary systems. , keywords = on Pith
  45. [65] The dynamical tide in close binaries. , keywords = on Pith
  46. [66] Tidal friction in close binary systems. , keywords = on Pith
  47. [67] The Common Envelope Phase in the Evolution of Binary Stars. , keywords =. doi:10.1086/166419 , adsurl = on Pithdoi:10.1086/166419
  48. [68] On the Binding Energy Parameter of Common Envelope Evolution. , keywords =. doi:10.1088/0004-637X/716/1/114 , archivePrefix =. 1004.4957 , primaryClass = on PithPith's reviewarXiv
  49. [69] Erratum: ``On the Binding Energy Parameter of Common Envelope Evolution'' (2010, ApJ, 716, 114). , year = 2010, month = oct, volume =. doi:10.1088/0004-637X/722/2/1985 , adsurl = on Pithdoi:10.1088/0004-637x/722/2/1985
  50. [70] Analytical Expressions for the Envelope Binding Energy of Giants as a Function of Basic Stellar Parameters. , keywords =. doi:10.1088/0004-637X/743/1/49 , archivePrefix =. 1009.5400 , primaryClass = on PithPith's reviewarXiv
  51. [71] The binding energy parameter for common envelope evolution. Research in Astronomy and Astrophysics , keywords =. doi:10.1088/1674-4527/16/8/126 , archivePrefix =. 1605.03668 , primaryClass = on PithPith's reviewarXiv
  52. [72] The effect of tides on the population of PN from interacting binaries. , keywords =. doi:10.1093/mnras/stw2025 , archivePrefix =. 1608.03041 , primaryClass = on PithPith's reviewarXiv
  53. [73] Monte Carlo simulations of post-common-envelope white dwarf + main sequence binaries: The effects of including recombination energy. , keywords =. doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201323039 , archivePrefix =. 1407.3301 , primaryClass = on PithPith's reviewarXiv
  54. [74] Evidence for saturated and disrupted magnetic braking from samples of detached close binaries with M and K dwarfs. , keywords =. doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202347931 , archivePrefix =. 2311.04309 , primaryClass = on PithPith's reviewarXiv
  55. [75] The Companion Mass Distribution of Post Common Envelope Hot Subdwarf Binaries: Evidence for Boosted and Disrupted Magnetic Braking?. , keywords =. doi:10.1088/1538-3873/ad94a2 , archivePrefix =. 2408.15334 , primaryClass = on PithPith's reviewarXiv
  56. [76] A Deficit of Massive White Dwarfs in Gaia Astrometric Binaries. , keywords =. doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ad5e63 , archivePrefix =. 2311.17145 , primaryClass = on PithPith's reviewarXiv
  57. [77] The Best Guess: Testing New and Old Formalisms for the Common Envelope against Observations. , keywords =. doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ae9c3c , adsurl = on Pithdoi:10.3847/1538-4357/ae9c3c
  58. [78] The Thermal Equilibrium Mass-loss Model and Its Applications in Binary Evolution. , keywords =. doi:10.3847/1538-4365/ab98f6 , archivePrefix =. 2006.00774 , primaryClass = on PithPith's reviewarXiv
  59. [79] Dynamical mass loss at the end of thermally pulsating asymptotic giant branch stars. , keywords =. doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202556962 , archivePrefix =. 2601.18194 , primaryClass = on PitharXiv
  60. [80] Evolution of Massive Stars with Pulsation-driven Superwinds During the Red Supergiant Phase. , keywords =. doi:10.1088/2041-8205/717/1/L62 , archivePrefix =. 1005.4925 , primaryClass = on PithPith's reviewarXiv
  61. [81] Post-common-envelope binaries from SDSS. IX: Constraining the common-envelope efficiency. , keywords =. doi:10.1051/0004-6361/200913658 , archivePrefix =. 1006.1621 , primaryClass = on PithPith's reviewarXiv
  62. [82] The effect of common-envelope evolution on the visible population of post-common-envelope binaries. , keywords =. doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201321753 , archivePrefix =. 1309.0327 , primaryClass = on PithPith's reviewarXiv
  63. [83] The population of white dwarf-main sequence binaries in the SDSS DR 12. , keywords =. doi:10.1093/mnras/stx1326 , archivePrefix =. 1705.05888 , primaryClass = on PithPith's reviewarXiv
  64. [84] The Common Envelope Evolution Outcome-A Case Study on Hot Subdwarf B Stars. , keywords =. doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ac75d3 , archivePrefix =. 2205.14256 , primaryClass = on PithPith's reviewarXiv
  65. [85] The Common Envelope Evolution Outcome. II. Short-orbital-period Hot Subdwarf B Binaries Reveal a Clear Picture. , keywords =. doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad158e , archivePrefix =. 2311.17304 , primaryClass = on PithPith's reviewarXiv
  66. [86] A population synthesis study of the Gaia 100 pc unresolved white dwarf-main-sequence binary population. , keywords =. doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202452989 , archivePrefix =. 2502.11593 , primaryClass = on PithPith's reviewarXiv
  67. [87] The limited role of recombination energy in common envelope removal. , keywords =. doi:10.1093/mnras/sty1178 , archivePrefix =. 1803.05864 , primaryClass = on PithPith's reviewarXiv
  68. [88] Common envelopes in massive stars II: The distinct roles of hydrogen and helium recombination. , keywords =. doi:10.1093/mnras/stac2490 , archivePrefix =. 2206.06411 , primaryClass = on PithPith's reviewarXiv
  69. [89] How negative feedback and the ambient environment limit the influence of recombination in common envelope evolution. , keywords =. doi:10.1093/mnras/stae036 , archivePrefix =. 2304.14840 , primaryClass = on PithPith's reviewarXiv
  70. [90] A Framework for Linking Pre- and Post-Common Envelope Binary Properties with Star Clusters: The First Demonstration with a Massive White Dwarf+M Dwarf Binary in Alessi 12. arXiv e-prints , keywords =. doi:10.48550/arXiv.2607.20611 , archivePrefix =. 2607.20611 , primaryClass = on PithPith's reviewarXivdoi:10.48550/arxiv.2607.20611
  71. [91] The Mass of the White Dwarf Companion in the Self-lensing Binary KOI-3278: Einstein versus Newton. , year = 2019, month = jul, volume =. doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ab2649 , archivePrefix =. 1904.11063 , primaryClass = on PithPith's reviewarXiv
  72. [92] KOI-3278: A Self-Lensing Binary Star System. Science , year = 2014, month = apr, volume =. doi:10.1126/science.1251999 , adsurl = on Pithdoi:10.1126/science.1251999
  73. [93] Discovery of Three Self-lensing Binaries from Kepler. , year = 2018, month = mar, volume =. doi:10.3847/1538-3881/aaaaaf , archivePrefix =. 1801.07874 , primaryClass = on PithPith's reviewarXiv

Challenges and discussion

Disagree with the review, or know something it missed? Leave a comment, or challenge this review formally: a challenge becomes a permanent entry in this paper's record, and its decision is published here.

No comments yet.

Sign in to comment