Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 6 minor 1 cited by

Age and metallicity of the Milky Way's nuclear star cluster studied at 3 pc from Sagittarius A*

T0 review · 2 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-02 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read At 3.5 pc from Sagittarius A*, the Milky Way's nuclear star cluster is predominantly ancient and metal-rich, with about 76% of its stellar mass formed more than 10 Gyr ago and a distinct 2–3 Gyr episode contributing roughly 21%.

desk verdict Solid extension of the Schödel et al. LF-fitting program to a new field at 3.5 pc; the old, metal-rich picture holds, but the 2-3 Gyr component needs a 3-bin BIC test before I'd trust the 20.8%. read the letter →

arxiv 2602.23904 v2 pith:3XK4L64Y submitted 2026-02-27 astro-ph.GA

E. Gallego-Cano , R. Schödel , T. K. Fritz , M. W. Hosek Jr. , K. Muzic , A. Feldmeier-Krause , Á. Martínez-Arranz , F. Nogueras-Lara This is my paper
classification astro-ph.GA
keywords Galacticcenternuclearstarclusterformationhistoryluminosityfunctionredclumpgiantbranchbumpstellarpopulationsnear-infraredphotometry
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

The paper aims to establish when the Milky Way's nuclear star cluster assembled, using a previously unstudied field 3.5 pc from the central black hole. By decomposing the near-infrared luminosity function into single-age stellar populations, it finds that about three-quarters of the stellar mass formed more than 10 billion years ago, roughly a fifth formed in a distinct 2–3 billion year episode, and only a few percent are younger than a billion years. The fit also yields a supersolar mean metallicity, [M/H] ≈ +0.35, anchored on the brightness gap between the red clump and the red giant branch bump. These numbers matter because they constrain how nuclear star clusters build up around supermassive black holes and whether star formation continued outside the innermost parsec. The result supports earlier claims of an old NSC with a 2–3 Gyr episode, while disagreeing with a spectroscopic study of the central region that inferred a younger dominant age.

What carries the argument

The central object is the K-band luminosity function (KLF) of the field, restricted to 12.5–17.2 mag where completeness exceeds 90%. The KLF is treated as a linear combination of 15 single-age, single-metallicity model LFs spanning 0.02 to 13 Gyr and [M/H] from −0.30 to +0.45. Three independent stellar-evolution model sets are used to quantify model dependence. Two features carry most of the information: the red clump (the helium-burning core stars that produce a prominent bump in the LF) and the red giant branch bump, whose brightness relative to the red clump is strongly sensitive to age and metallicity. The fit uses the cumulative LF to avoid binning and includes a Gaussian smoothing para

What would settle it

Take spectra of ~100 red giants in this exact field and derive individual ages; if the resulting age distribution lacks a distinct 2–3 Gyr peak — showing instead a continuous 5–10 Gyr spread — the luminosity-function decomposition would be falsified. A cheaper check: run the same fitting pipeline on synthetic luminosity functions with known input ages and confirm the input mass fractions are recovered within the quoted uncertainties.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

At 3.5 pc from Sagittarius A*, the nuclear star cluster formed in distinct episodes, the paper claims: ~76% of its stellar mass more than 10 Gyr ago, ~21% in a 2–3 Gyr burst, and only a few percent younger than 1 Gyr. The evidence is a completeness-corrected K-band luminosity function of 2223 stars from adaptive-optics near-infrared imaging, fit as a sum of single-age, single-metallicity model luminosity functions from three stellar-evolution sets, with one extinction and one smoothing term. Red clump and red giant branch bump positions anchor age and metallicity; combined with literature spectroscopy, the mean [M/H] is ≈ +0.35. The authors read this as early dominant assembly, a significant

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the observed K-band luminosity function admits a unique decomposition into single-age, single-metallicity model populations under one extinction and one smoothing; if different mixtures fit equally well, the 76%/21% split is not secure.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Star formation in the NSC was dominated by an early epoch: more than 10 Gyr ago, ~76% of the stellar mass in this field was already in place.
  • A well-separated star-formation episode at 2–3 Gyr contributed ~21% of the mass, so the cluster was not built by a single monolithic event.
  • Recent star formation reached at least 3.5 pc from Sgr A*: a ~20 Myr population with a few percent of the mass exists outside the central parsec.
  • The field is metal-rich on average ([M/H] ≈ +0.35), consistent with spectroscopic samples; a higher metal content implies fewer neutron-star progenitors, which could ease the missing-pulsar problem at the Galactic center.
  • The absence of a prominent ~1 Gyr component, characteristic of the inner nuclear stellar disc, supports the interpretation that this field traces the NSC rather than disc contamination.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • If the two-episode assembly is real, the 2–3 Gyr burst is likely a distinct event in the cluster's growth history — plausibly a gas-rich merger or accretion episode — rather than part of a continuous decline in star formation; the paper does not identify a trigger.
  • The young 20 Myr component at 3.5 pc could be an outer extension of the known young population near Sgr A* or evidence of in-situ star formation ignited by episodic gas inflow; a census of massive stars and ionized gas in the field would distinguish these.
  • Because the method needs only resolved photometry, it could be applied to other nearby nuclear star clusters where individual stars can be observed, offering a relatively cheap star-formation-history probe independent of spectroscopy.
  • The disagreement with a spectroscopic study favouring a ~5 Gyr dominant age in the central 1.5 pc implies either a radial age gradient within the NSC or a systematic offset between LF-based and spectroscopic SFH techniques; a joint photometric-spectroscopic analysis of one field would settle which.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

2 major / 6 minor

Summary. This paper analyzes VLT/NACO intermediate-band 2.24 micron and H-band images of a 28 by 28 arcsec field at ~3.5 pc projected northeast of Sgr A*. From 2223 stars, the authors construct a completeness- and differential-extinction-corrected K-band luminosity function (KLF) over 12.5-17.2 mag, identify the red clump and red giant branch bump, and fit the cumulative KLF with a linear combination of single-age, single-metallicity theoretical luminosity functions from MIST, PARSEC, and BaSTI. Using Monte Carlo resampling and a BIC-based selection of age bins, they infer a predominantly old (>10 Gyr, 75.6 +/- 9.5% by mass) and metal-rich ([M/H] ~ +0.35) population; a 20.8 +/- 8.7% component at 2-3 Gyr; and minor components at ~400 Myr and ~20 Myr. They assess systematics from stellar models, binning, fitting range, metallicity, unresolved binaries, and filter choice.

Significance. If correct, the paper provides important new constraints on the star-formation history of the Galactic nuclear star cluster at 3 pc, suggesting early dominant formation, a substantial 2-3 Gyr episode, and recent star formation outside the central parsec. The analysis is transparent and uses three independent stellar evolution libraries, Monte Carlo uncertainty propagation, multiple fit initializations, and explicit checks of completeness, binaries, and fitting range. The broad conclusion of an old, metal-rich population is consistent with previous spectroscopic work and is likely robust. The quantitative mass fractions, however, rest on a model-selection argument that is incomplete, and the error budget contains at least one ad hoc choice; these issues should be addressed before the quoted numbers are used as firm constraints.

major comments (2)
  1. [§3, App. A.1] The central claim of a significant 2-3 Gyr component (20.8 +/- 8.7%) is selected by comparing 4, 6, 9, and 13 age bins. Appendix A.1 reports reduced chi2 values in the range 1.01-1.09 for all four schemes; a 3-bin model without the intermediate component (e.g., 0.02, 0.4, 13 Gyr) was never tested. Because BIC penalizes the number of free parameters, a 3-bin fit with comparable reduced chi2 would be preferred. Please run such a fit, report its reduced chi2, BIC, and mass fractions, and discuss the possibility that the intermediate-age signal is not statistically required. The free extinction and Gaussian smoothing parameters make this degeneracy plausible and should be explicitly checked. Also clarify how '2 or 3 Gyr depending on the theoretical model' was chosen; if the intermediate bin was selected after inspecting the fits, the BIC comparison is not a valid model selection.
  2. [App. A.3, Eq. A.2] The metallicity contribution to the systematic uncertainty is computed from 'only metallicities >= 0' because sub-solar models are excluded 'to avoid overestimating the errors.' Table 1 shows that sub-solar metallicities have poorer global chi2 for the adopted single-metallicity fit, but that is a different statement from showing they are excluded from the SFH uncertainty analysis. If the SFH weights at [M/H] = -0.30 are physically implausible or strongly disfavored by the data, say so and justify the cut with a quantitative criterion. Otherwise, include them in sigma_metal. This is not merely cosmetic: the error bars on the mass fractions are part of the paper's quantitative claims.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Eq. A.1] Please define n and k explicitly and clarify whether extinction and smoothing parameters are included in k. Using reduced chi-squared in the first term of the BIC is nonstandard; report the actual RSS or log-likelihood if possible.
  2. [§4] The sentence 'we do not group ages into bins' is confusing because the 15 single-age populations are a binning; rephrase to say the 15 age bins are used without further grouping.
  3. [Table 1] PARSEC reduced chi2 values are all > 1.38; discuss whether the absolute fit quality is acceptable and how correlated residuals in the binned LF affect reduced chi2.
  4. [App. A.3 / Eq. A.2] The sigma_model term in Eq. A.2 is never defined quantitatively. If it is the spread between MIST/PARSEC/BaSTI results in Fig. 4, state the values or the recipe.
  5. [§5] The statement that the 1 Gyr nuclear disc component is not found would be more useful with an upper limit or a sensitivity test for a 1 Gyr population.
  6. [Fig. 4] The caption should explain the horizontal jitter and the meaning of the horizontal error bars.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the SFH is a transparent fit of theoretical LFs to the observed KLF, not an independent prediction that reduces to its inputs.

full rationale

The paper's central quantities (age and metallicity mass fractions) are obtained by fitting theoretical K-band luminosity functions to the observed completeness-corrected luminosity function, with the age weights and metallicity as free parameters. The quoted age fractions are the best-fit weights, so they are the output of a well-posed (if degenerate) inverse problem, not a prediction claimed to be independent of the same data. No parameter is fitted to a subset and then presented as a prediction for a closely related quantity; the spectroscopic metallicity comparison is an external check, not a fitted input. Self-citations (e.g., Gallego-Cano et al. 2024, Schödel et al. 2023) are methodological and are not used as an unverified uniqueness theorem or ansatz that forces the result. The paper explicitly acknowledges the discrepancy with the independent spectroscopic analysis of Chen et al. (2023), showing that the result is not insulated from external falsification. The skeptic's concern that a 3-bin model without the intermediate age was not tested is a model-selection/robustness limitation, not a circular reduction: the 2–3 Gyr component is not enforced by construction, and its weight could in principle be zero. Under the requested operational definition of circularity, no step in the derivation chain is equivalent to its own input by construction.

Assumptions & free parameters 4 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

All inputs are standard stellar-population synthesis ingredients drawn from prior literature; the load-bearing assumptions are the accuracy of the isochrones and the uniqueness of the KLF decomposition.

free parameters (4)
  • age-bin mass fractions (0.02, 0.4, 2.5, 13 Gyr) = 0.036, 0.009, 0.208, 0.756
    Weights of single-age populations fitted to the KLF; these are the central result, not derived from independent constraints.
  • overall extinction = not reported
    Fitted together with age weights in the cumulative-LF fit (Sec. 3).
  • Gaussian smoothing parameter = not reported
    Free parameter absorbing photometric errors, residual extinction variation, and line-of-sight depth (Sec. 3).
  • metallicity grid selection = +0.30 to +0.48 depending on model; adopted +0.41
    Selected by lowest reduced chi2 per model; super-solar preference is a fit outcome.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption Stellar isochrones (MIST, PARSEC, BaSTI) predict NIR absolute magnitudes and the RC/RGBB structure accurately for old, metal-rich populations.
    The whole SFH/metallicity inference rests on the theoretical KLFs; Sec. 3 and Fig. 6 in Schödel et al. (2023).
  • domain assumption The observed K-band LF can be represented as a linear combination of single-age, single-metallicity populations with one global extinction and smoothing.
    Assumed in the fitting procedure in Sec. 3.
  • domain assumption Adopted distance 8.2 kpc and extinction law (power-law index -2.3, A_K = 2.24) are correct.
    Errors in distance or extinction would shift the LF and thus inferred ages and metallicities (Sec. 2).
  • domain assumption The IMF (Salpeter for BaSTI, Kroupa for MIST/PARSEC) and binary treatment are appropriate; mass fractions are derived assuming these.
    Used to construct theoretical LFs; authors argue giant-dominated sample makes IMF choice unimportant (Sec. 3).
  • domain assumption Foreground/background removal via H-IB224 color cuts is complete, or contamination is ≤20% and does not bias the SFH.
    Color cuts in Sec. 2; contamination estimate in Sec. 5.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Age and metallicity of the Milky Way's nuclear star cluster studied at 3 pc from Sagittarius A*." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/3XK4L64Y

@misc{pith2026260223904,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Age and metallicity of the Milky Way's nuclear star cluster studied at 3 pc from Sagittarius A*},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/3XK4L64Y}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2602.23904}
}
abstract

The Milky Way's nuclear star cluster (NSC) is a unique laboratory to study the formation and evolution of dense stellar systems around a supermassive black hole. Previous work suggests that most stars in the NSC are old; however, the detailed age and metallicity distributions remain uncertain. We constrain the star formation history (SFH) and metallicity of a poorly explored region located $\sim$3 pc from SagittariusA*. We analyse VLT/NACO imaging in an intermediate-band filter centred at 2.24 $\mu$m, complemented by $H$-band data. We construct completeness-corrected $K$-band luminosity functions (LFs), clearly identifying the Red Clump and Red Giant Branch Bumps. The SFH is derived by fitting cumulative LFs with MIST, PARSEC, and BaSTI models spanning a wide range of ages and metallicities, using Monte Carlo sampling to estimate uncertainties. Metallicity constraints are refined using spectroscopic measurements from the literature. The stellar population is predominantly old and metal-rich: $75.6 \pm 9.5$% of the stellar mass formed $\gtrsim 10$ Gyr ago, with median [M/H] $\sim +0.35$. An intermediate-age component at 2-3 Gyr contributes $20.8 \pm 8.7$%, while minor populations are present at $\sim$400 Myr ($0.9 \pm 0.8$%) and 20 Myr ($3.6 \pm 1.4$%), the latter representing a small but non-negligible young population. Systematic uncertainties from stellar models, binning, photometric range, unresolved binaries, and filter choice are assessed. These results indicate early dominant formation, a significant 2-3 Gyr episode, and minor recent activity, consistent with spectroscopic measurements and with properties of the inner NSC and nuclear stellar disc.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2602.23904 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. The left image shows the target field with a FoV of approximately 28′′ × 28′′. The right image shows its location over a KS-band image from the GNS survey. The field lies at a projected distance of approximately 89′′ (3.5 pc) northeast of Sgr A*, marked by the black point [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. CMD for the observed field. The blue and red lines mark the limits used to exclude foreground and background stars. The final sample of GC stars is shown in black. and 13 Gyr. The age grid is finer at younger epochs, where the LFs evolve more rapidly. We also tested a 5 Myr com￾ponent, but it always received zero weight, indicating that the <0.1 Gyr bins are already sufficient and the data do not show a very young p… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. shows the resulting SFH for the three stellar evolution models. The horizontal error bars indicate the width of the age intervals covered by each fitted component. The uncertainties include statistical and systematic con￾tributions (see Appendix A), which were added in quadra￾ture. As mentioned above, although we explored different metallicities, only the models with [M/H] ≥ 0 were used when computing the systematic… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (2 more)
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Distribution of best fit stellar ages for MIST and [M/H] = +0.30, derived using 15 age bins. Only ages contributing more than 1% of the originally formed stellar mass are shown [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Best fits of the theoretical LFs with varying metallicity to the de-reddened and completeness-corrected KLF of the target field. We mark the RC and RGBB. We also analysed the stars from Feldmeier-Krause et al. (2020) and Feldmeier-Krause et al. (2025b) within the field…

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Binary disruptions driven by massive disks around massive black holes

    astro-ph.GA 2026-07 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    Disk torques can drive stellar binaries around a massive black hole to tidal disruption, and the Milky Way's young stellar disk likely caused ~10^2 such events ~5 Myr ago.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

36 extracted references · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    2021, Astronomy & As- trophysics, 647, A59

    Abuter, R., Amorim, A., Bauböck, M., et al. 2021, Astronomy & As- trophysics, 647, A59

    2021

  2. [2]

    D., Ramírez, S

    Blum, R. D., Ramírez, S. V., Sellgren, K., & Olsen, K. 2003, ApJ, 597, 323

    2003

  3. [3]

    2012, MNRAS, 427, 127

    Bressan, A., Marigo, P., Girardi, L., et al. 2012, MNRAS, 427, 127

    2012

  4. [4]

    M., Schödel, R., & Eckart, A

    Buchholz, R. M., Schödel, R., & Eckart, A. 2009, Astronomy & As- trophysics, 499, 483

    2009

  5. [5]

    2014, MNRAS, 444, 2525

    Chen, Y., Girardi, L., Bressan, A., et al. 2014, MNRAS, 444, 2525

    2014

  6. [6]

    M., et al

    Chen, Z., Do, T., Ghez, A. M., et al. 2023, ApJ, 944, 79

    2023

  7. [7]

    & Lee, S.-G

    Cho, D.-H. & Lee, S.-G. 2002, AJ, 124, 977

    2002

  8. [8]

    2019, Science, 365, 664

    Do, T., Hees, A., Ghez, A., et al. 2019, Science, 365, 664

    2019

Show all 36 references
  1. [9]

    2015, ApJ, 809, 143

    Do, T., Kerzendorf, W., Winsor, N., et al. 2015, ApJ, 809, 143

    2015

  2. [10]

    2020, MNRAS, 494, 396 Feldmeier-Krause,A.,Kerzendorf,W.,Neumayer,N.,etal.2017,MN- RAS, 464, 194

    Feldmeier-Krause, A., Kerzendorf, W., Do, T., et al. 2020, MNRAS, 494, 396 Feldmeier-Krause,A.,Kerzendorf,W.,Neumayer,N.,etal.2017,MN- RAS, 464, 194

    2020

  3. [11]

    2015, Astron- omy & Astrophysics, 584, A2

    Feldmeier-Krause, A., Neumayer, N., Schödel, R., et al. 2015, Astron- omy & Astrophysics, 584, A2

    2015

  4. [12]

    K., Chatzopoulos, S., Gerhard, O., et al

    Fritz, T. K., Chatzopoulos, S., Gerhard, O., et al. 2016, ApJ, 821, 44

    2016

  5. [13]

    2024, A&A, 689, A190

    Gallego-Cano, E., Fritz, T., Schödel, R., et al. 2024, A&A, 689, A190

    2024

  6. [14]

    2018, A&A, 609, A26

    Gallego-Cano, E., Schödel, R., Dong, H., et al. 2018, A&A, 609, A26

    2018

  7. [15]

    2020, A&A, 634, A71

    Gallego-Cano, E., Schödel, R., Nogueras-Lara, F., et al. 2020, A&A, 634, A71

    2020

  8. [16]

    2010, Reviews of Modern Physics, 82, 3121

    Genzel, R., Eisenhauer, F., & Gillessen, S. 2010, Reviews of Modern Physics, 82, 3121

    2010

  9. [17]

    2016, ARA&A, 54, 95

    Girardi, L. 2016, ARA&A, 54, 95

    2016

  10. [18]

    L., Pietrinferni, A., Cassisi, S., et al

    Hidalgo, S. L., Pietrinferni, A., Cassisi, S., et al. 2018, ApJ, 856, 125 Hosek Jr, M. W., Lu, J. R., Lam, C. Y., et al. 2020, The Astronomical Journal, 160, 143

    2018

  11. [19]

    2003, in Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Se- ries, Vol

    Lenzen, R., Hartung, M., Brandner, W., et al. 2003, in Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Se- ries, Vol. 4841, Instrument Design and Performance for Opti- cal/Infrared Ground-based Telescopes, ed. M. Iye & A. F. M. Moor- wood, 944–952

    2003

  12. [20]

    2017, ApJ, 835, 77

    Marigo, P., Girardi, L., Bressan, A., et al. 2017, ApJ, 835, 77

    2017

  13. [21]

    M., Tayar, J., & Claytor, Z

    Morales, L. M., Tayar, J., & Claytor, Z. R. 2025, The Astrophysical Journal, 986, 229

    2025

  14. [22]

    M., Udalski, A., Gould, A., & Pinsonneault, M

    Nataf, D. M., Udalski, A., Gould, A., & Pinsonneault, M. H. 2011, The Astrophysical Journal, 730, 118

    2011

  15. [23]

    2023, The Astrophysical Journal, 951, 148

    Nishiyama, S., Funamoto, N., & Schödel, R. 2023, The Astrophysical Journal, 951, 148

    2023

  16. [24]

    & Schödel, R

    Nishiyama, S. & Schödel, R. 2013, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 549, A57

    2013

  17. [25]

    2016, A&A, 588, A49

    Nishiyama, S., Schödel, R., Yoshikawa, T., et al. 2016, A&A, 588, A49

    2016

  18. [26]

    2022, A&A, 666, A72

    Nogueras-Lara, F. 2022, A&A, 666, A72

    2022

  19. [27]

    2018, As- tronomy & Astrophysics, 610, A83

    Nogueras-Lara, F., Gallego-Calvente, A., Dong, H., et al. 2018, As- tronomy & Astrophysics, 610, A83

    2018

  20. [28]

    2018, A&A, 620, A83

    Nogueras-Lara, F., Schödel, R., Dong, H., et al. 2018, A&A, 620, A83

    2018

  21. [29]

    T., et al

    Nogueras-Lara, F., Schödel, R., Gallego-Calvente, A. T., et al. 2019, A&A, 631, A20

    2019

  22. [30]

    T., et al

    Nogueras-Lara, F., Schödel, R., Gallego-Calvente, A. T., et al. 2020, Nature Astronomy, 4, 377

    2020

  23. [31]

    2020, MNRAS, 498, 3283

    Pastorelli, G., Marigo, P., Girardi, L., et al. 2020, MNRAS, 498, 3283

    2020

  24. [32]

    K., Zilka, M., et al

    Pfuhl, O., Fritz, T. K., Zilka, M., et al. 2011, ApJ, 741, 108

    2011

  25. [33]

    2021, ApJ, 908, 102

    Pietrinferni, A., Hidalgo, S., Cassisi, S., et al. 2021, ApJ, 908, 102

    2021

  26. [34]

    2003, in Society of Photo- Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, Vol

    Rousset, G., Lacombe, F., Puget, P., et al. 2003, in Society of Photo- Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, Vol. 4839, Adaptive Optical System Technologies II, ed. P. L. Wiz- inowich & D. Bonaccini, 140–149 Schödel, R., Feldmeier, A., Kunneriath, D., et ...

    2003

  27. [35]

    1978, Annals of Statistics, 6, 461

    Schwarz, G. 1978, Annals of Statistics, 6, 461

    1978

  28. [36]

    2014, MNRAS, 445, 4287 Article number, page 6 of 7 E

    Tang, J., Bressan, A., Rosenfield, P., et al. 2014, MNRAS, 445, 4287 Article number, page 6 of 7 E. Gallego-Cano et al.: Age and metallicity of the MWNSC at 3pc from SgrA* Appendix A: Uncertainties in the fit of the cumulative function Appendix A.1: Age bin analysis We tested ...

    2014

Pith tools

Reviewed August 2, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.