Speckle observations and orbits of multiple stars

Andrei Tokovinin; David W. Latham; Elliott P. Horch; Guillermo Torres; Mark E. Everett

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 43 references

Speckle observations and orbits of multiple stars

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-14 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Two nearby low-mass multiple-star systems, HIP 65026 and HIP 85209, have inner and outer orbits that are nearly coplanar, with mutual inclinations of 11.3±1.0 degrees and 12.0±3.0 degrees.

desk verdict A workmanlike speckle orbit catalog with two genuinely new mutual inclinations; the HIP 65026 value is plausible but rests on an under-fit RV amplitude and should stay flagged as provisional. read the letter →

arxiv 1908.11445 v1 pith:7UDIFHWA submitted 2019-08-29 astro-ph.SR

Andrei Tokovinin , Mark E. Everett , Elliott P. Horch , Guillermo Torres , David W. Latham This is my paper · ORCID

classification astro-ph.SR

keywords speckleinterferometrymultiplestarsystemsvisualorbitsmutualorbitinclinationradialvelocitieshierarchicaltriplesHIP6502685209

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

This paper reports a year of speckle-interferometry monitoring that resolved 129 stellar subsystems and, with archival data, yielded 36 visual orbits, 27 of them new. Its central result concerns two nearby low-mass hierarchies, HIP 65026 and HIP 85209: combining astrometry and radial velocities determines both the inner and outer orbits and measures the angle between their orbital planes as 11.3±1.0 degrees and 12.0±3.0 degrees, respectively. If correct, both systems are quasi-coplanar, meaning their inner and outer orbits nearly share one plane, as expected if components formed and migrated within a common disk rather than being scrambled by dynamical encounters. The paper also finds that compact hierarchies with outer separations below 100 au tend to have less eccentric inner orbits, and it identifies several previously announced subsystems as spurious.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing tool is the combined spectro-interferometric orbit fit: speckle and adaptive-optics positions fix the shape and orientation of each orbit in the plane of the sky, while radial velocities fix the line-of-sight scale and the nodal angles. A simultaneous least-squares fit using the paper's orbit3.pro code links the inner and outer orbits and yields the relative inclination from the two nodes and inclinations. The period ratio of about 40 in HIP 65026 is noted as a possible weak mean-motion resonance. The inner-pair wobble factor, the ratio of the wobble amplitude to the inner semimajor axis, adds an independent constraint on masses and the three-dimensional architecture.

What would settle it

Take high-resolution, high-signal-to-noise spectra of HIP 65026 that separate the lines of Aa, Ab, and B, and re-fit the outer orbit with the inner wobble included. If the line-of-sight node of the outer orbit shifts by more than about one degree from the value used here, the measured 11.3-degree mutual inclination and the associated claim of quasi-coplanarity would not survive.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central discovery is that in the hierarchical triple HIP 65026 and the 3+1 quadruple HIP 85209, the orbital planes of the inner and outer pairs are nearly aligned: the angle between their orbital angular momenta is 11.3±1.0 degrees and 12.0±3.0 degrees, respectively. The paper determines both orbits in each system by fitting positional measurements and radial velocities simultaneously, obtaining periods of 49 yr and 1.23 yr for HIP 65026 and 34 yr and 1.23 yr for HIP 85209. These are rare cases where the full three-dimensional geometry of a stellar hierarchy is measured. The near-coplanarity, together with modest eccentricities, supports formation through disk migration rather than through dynamical interactions that would randomize orbit planes. A secondary result is the statistical trend that inner orbits in compact hierarchies with outer separations below 100 au are less eccentric, again pointing toward dissipative formation processes.

Load-bearing premise

The measurement rests on the assumption that the factor-of-three shortfall in the measured outer radial-velocity amplitude of HIP 65026 is only a harmless scaling error from blended spectral lines, not a distortion of the velocity curve's phase or shape; if the phase is biased, the derived tilt direction of the orbit, and with it the 11.3-degree mutual inclination, could shift by more than the quoted error.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

HIP 65026 and HIP 85209 join a small set of stellar hierarchies with fully known three-dimensional orbital geometry, becoming reference cases for formation models.
The mutual inclinations of 11.3±1.0 degrees and 12.0±3.0 degrees imply nearly coplanar, aligned orbits, supporting disk-driven migration over dynamical scattering for these systems.
The eccentricity trend, where inner orbits are less eccentric when the outer separation is below 100 au, adds a quantitative constraint on where dissipative formation dominates over dynamical interactions.
Recognition of several spurious subsystems cleans the multiplicity statistics used to compare observed architectures with formation theory.
The under-fitted outer radial-velocity amplitude in HIP 65026 warns that blended spectral lines can underestimate orbital amplitudes, motivating future multi-component spectral fitting.

Reading between the lines

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

Beyond the paper, the near 40:1 period ratio in HIP 65026 invites a dynamical study: if it is a true mean-motion resonance, the system could be monitored for secular changes that would test disk-migration predictions.
The same combined astrometry-plus-radial-velocity method could be applied to the thousands of astrometric accelerations reported by Gaia, yielding mutual inclinations for whole populations of compact hierarchies rather than single objects.
If compact low-mass hierarchies are generally quasi-coplanar, circumbinary planets around such systems should also tend to be coplanar; this is a testable link between stellar multiplicity and exoplanet architectures.
The reported eccentricity trend below 100 au suggests a formation boundary near the typical size of protoplanetary disks; with more orbits, one could test whether the boundary is sharp or gradual.

Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Desk Editor's Note

read the letter

Bottom line: this is a solid observational paper that earns its place in the stellar-multiplicity literature. The new NESSI data, 36 orbits (27 new), the first-time resolutions, and the cleanup of spurious pairs are all useful, and the reduction is presented transparently. The two measured mutual inclinations, 11.3±1.0 for HIP 65026 and 12.0±3.0 for HIP 85209, are the items that will get cited.

The HIP 85209 result is the more trustworthy of the two. There is a mild RV-blending mismatch there too, but the outer amplitude discrepancy is nowhere near as large. The HIP 65026 value is the one to look at carefully. Section 3.5 is honest: the free fit gives K1=1.07 km/s against an expected 3.6 km/s, and the authors say the amplitude is suppressed by line blending. That means the node used in the mutual-inclination calculation comes from an RV model whose amplitude is off by a factor of three. The formal 1.0-degree error does not include phase bias from blending. The stress-test note's extreme scenario, a 180-degree node flip, I do not buy. The outer astrometric arc spans 2.3 revolutions, the wobble of the inner pair is fitted at 0.425±0.025 and compared to an independent mass-based estimate, and an inverted outer RV curve would leave residuals far larger than the quoted 0.72 km/s. A more realistic risk is a phase bias of a few degrees, which, with the system nearly edge-on, shifts the mutual inclination by a comparable amount, enough to weaken the measurement but not to erase the quasi-coplanarity. The right fix is exactly the one the authors recommend: higher-resolution, longer-wavelength spectroscopy that resolves all three stars.

Other soft spots are minor. A handful of astrometric points in the HIP 65026 fit were re-weighted or dropped, and the rule is qualitative; the paper says the separate and joint solutions agree, so this is not load-bearing. The eccentricity trend in compact hierarchies is presented as emerging, and the authors explicitly say the catalog was not filtered, so no one should over-read it. Some preliminary orbits have fixed eccentricities or periods chosen to produce reasonable masses; that is stated in the text.

Verdict: send it to peer review. The catalog data and calibration are reproducible, the caveats are in the paper, and the community working on hierarchical multiplicity will use these orbits. The only thing I would insist on is that the abstract or conclusions carry a clear "provisional" marker on the HIP 65026 mutual inclination until the RV amplitudes are checked.

Referee Report

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper reports NESSI speckle-interferometric monitoring of 129 resolved subsystems, yielding 390 measurements, and combines these with archival astrometry and radial velocities to compute or revise 36 visual orbits, including seven combined spectro-interferometric orbits. For the compact hierarchical systems HIP 65026 and HIP 85209, it derives mutual orbital inclinations of 11.3±1.0 deg and 12.0±3.0 deg, respectively, and interprets them as evidence for quasi-coplanar, disk-like architectures. The paper also resolves four previously unresolved bright stars, identifies two new triple systems, argues that several cataloged subsystems are spurious, and reports a trend of lower inner eccentricities for outer separations below 100 au.

Significance. If the mutual-inclination measurements are correct, the paper adds two important data points to the small sample of compact stellar hierarchies with measured three-dimensional architectures, directly informing the debate between disk-driven formation and dynamical interactions. It is also a genuine service contribution: the NESSI calibration is carefully validated (mean angular offset -0.15 deg with 0.17 deg rms, scale agreement within 0.3%), the astrometric errors are checked against simultaneous two-channel measurements, and the combined astrometric-RV fits follow standard least-squares practice with publicly referenced codes (ORBIT, orbit3.pro). The wobble-factor checks for HIP 63253 and HIP 65026 provide an independent, mass-based consistency test. However, the headline coplanarity claim for HIP 65026 rests on a nodal angle derived from an outer RV solution whose amplitude is under-fitted by a factor of about 3.4, and the quoted 1 deg uncertainty does not account for the suspected line-blending systematic. The paper itself calls for higher-resolution spectroscopy to obtain unbiased RV amplitudes, which is an internal acknowledgment that the current RV model may be biased.

major comments (3)

[Section 3.5, Table 6]
[Section 3.6, Table 6]
[Section 4, Figure 15]

minor comments (4)

[Section 2.3] The word 'adaptated' should be 'adapted'.
[Section 3.3] In the HIP 11253 paragraph, 'approcaches' is a typo for 'approaches'.
[Section 3.5, Figure 11] The figure caption says the dotted line in the lower panel shows the expected RV curve of component B; the text elsewhere gives the expected B amplitude as 5.1 km/s. Please clarify in the caption what template and assumptions the expected curve uses.
[Section 3.5] The sentence 'The nodes of both orbits are known from the RVs' is not fully precise: for the inner orbit, astrometry also constrains the orbital plane, and the RV data resolve the ascending/descending node ambiguity. Please state explicitly which data set determines each node.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the mutual inclinations are fitted quantities derived from independent astrometry and radial velocities, and the RV-amplitude discrepancy is an externally checked accuracy issue, not a circular input.

full rationale

The central derived claims are the mutual inclinations of HIP 65026 (11.3±1.0 deg) and HIP 85209 (12.0±3.0 deg). These are obtained by least-squares fits of combined astrometric and radial-velocity data using standard orbit-fitting codes (ORBIT, orbit3.pro), not by assuming the answer. The relative inclination is computed from the fitted orbital elements (inclinations and ascending nodes), and the nodes are determined from the data rather than imposed. The under-fitted outer RV amplitude in HIP 65026 (K1=1.07 km/s vs. the mass-based estimate of 3.6 km/s) is explicitly flagged by the authors and treated as an external consistency check; it is not used as an input that would force the mutual inclination. Likewise, the wobble-factor comparison (measured f=0.42 versus the mass/magnitude estimate f=0.44) is an independent cross-check. Self-citations (e.g., orbit3.pro from Tokovinin & Latham 2017, and references to Tokovinin 2017/2018 for contextual statistics) provide software and literature context, but the orbit solutions and mutual-inclination measurements are not justified by those citations. No fitted parameter is renamed as a prediction, and no quoted load-bearing step reduces to its own input by construction. Concerns about blending biasing the RV phases or amplitudes are legitimate accuracy risks, but they are not circularity under the standard definitions used here.

Assumptions & free parameters 6 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claims rest on the calibration stability of NESSI, the correctness of the power-spectrum binary model, the RV zero-point consistency, and the representativeness of the MSC sample for the eccentricity trend. The HIP 65026 inclination additionally depends on RV nodal angles despite a known blending problem in the outer amplitude.

free parameters (6)

Adopted parallax of HIP 65026 = 101 mas
Chosen so the components fall on the main sequence; disagrees with Gaia DR2 at 109.98 +/- 0.83 mas (Section 3.5).
Fixed inclination of HIP 17126 B,C = 70 deg
Set to bring RV amplitudes into agreement with estimated masses and parallax (Section 3.3).
Fixed eccentricity of A 843 A,B = 0.80
Chosen to yield a reasonable mass sum; the first orbit is not sufficiently constrained (Section 3.2).
Fixed period and eccentricity of JNN 55 B,C = P=13.97 yr, e=0.78
Fixed to match the expected mass sum of 0.5 solar masses; orbit computed from five epochs (Section 3.2).
Quadrant flips in YSC 3 Aa,Ab
Quadrants were changed in two instances to match the adopted circular orbit (Section 3.2).
Orbital elements of 36 orbits = various
All orbital elements are least-squares fits to measurements; the central inclinations depend on the elements of HIP 65026 and HIP 85209 (Table 6).

assumptions (5)

domain assumption The NESSI pixel scale and angle calibration remained stable over the year, and the corrections derived from 24 binaries apply to all targets.
Section 2.3 states: 'We assume here that the calibration of angle and pixel scale of NESSI remained stable throughout the whole year.'
standard math The speckle power spectrum model (reference spectrum times binary fringes) with sinc-squared dispersion damping correctly recovers binary parameters.
Section 2.3 models the observed power spectrum as a product of the reference spectrum and binary fringes, following Tokovinin, Mason, and Hartkopf (2010).
domain assumption The RV zero-points of the CfA digital speedometers and TRES are consistent after the +0.14 km/s correction.
Section 2.4 describes the correction to put both sets on the same zero point.
domain assumption The Multiple-Star Catalog visual orbit sample, despite selection effects, is adequate for the eccentricity versus separation trend.
Section 4: 'We made no attempt to filter the quality of 397 visual orbits ... and caution that the MSC is burdened by numerous selection effects.'
domain assumption Unresolved reference stars are single, or their binary signature can be removed by the pipeline.
Section 3.7 notes that four reference stars were resolved as binaries and that the binary signature is automatically removed from the reference power spectrum.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Speckle observations and orbits of multiple stars." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/7UDIFHWA

@misc{pith2026190811445,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Speckle observations and orbits of multiple stars},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/7UDIFHWA}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:1908.11445}
}

read the original abstract

We report results of speckle-interferometric monitoring of visual hierarchical systems using the newly commissioned instrument NESSI at the 3.5-m WIYN telescope. During one year, 390 measurements of 129 resolved subsystems were made, while some targets were unresolved. Using our astrometry and archival data, we computed 36 orbits (27 for the first time). Spectro-interferometric orbits of seven pairs are determined by combining positional measurements with radial velocities measured, mostly, with the Center for Astrophysics digital speedometers. For the hierarchical systems HIP 65026 (periods 49 and 1.23 years) and HIP 85209 (periods 34 and 1.23 years) we determined both the inner and the outer orbits using astrometry and radial velocities and measured the mutual orbit inclinations of 11.3+-1.0 deg and 12.0+-3.0 deg, respectively. Four bright stars are resolved for the first time; two of those are triple systems. Several visual subsystems announced in the literature are shown to be spurious. We note that subsystems in compact hierarchies with outer separations less than 100 au tend to have less eccentric orbits compared to wider hierarchies.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 1908.11445 by the authors.

**Figure 2.** Reconstructed images of two triple systems in the red channel. Left: WDS J05253+6511 (HDS 711 A,Ba and BAG 17 Ba,Bb) observed in 2018.1. Right: WDS J09120+4531 (YSC 91 A,Ba and Ba,Bb) observed in 2019.1. Separations of the wide and close pairs are indicated. A more detailed study of the calibration would require repeated measurements of a larger number of wide calibration pairs, not available in this data set. We n… view at source ↗

**Figure 1.** Example of the power spectra in the blue (top) and red (bottom) channels of NESSI. The object (on the left) is a 0. ′′91 binary BU 403 (WDS J04257−0214), evidenced by the finely spaced horizontal fringes. Power spectra of the reference star are shown on the right. The zero spatial frequency is at the center of each frame, the power spectra are rendered in negative logarithmic scale. The atmospheric dispersion of 4.… view at source ↗

**Figure 3.** Preliminary (grade 5) orbits of two long-period subsystems. In these and following plots, the primary component is placed at the coordinate origin. The axis scale is in arcseconds, North is directed up and East to the left. Squares denote the measurements (less accurate measurements are plotted as crosses); short dotted lines connect them to the corresponding positions on the orbit (ellipse). Dates of some measurem… view at source ↗

Figures from the paper (10 more)

**Figure 4.** Figure 4: Visual orbits of grades 3 and 4 (see the legend to [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_4.png]

**Figure 5.** Figure 5: Combined spectro-interferometric orbits of HIP 4239 (top) and HIP 11253 (bottom). In this and following plots, the left panel shows the RV curve (green line and squares for the primary component, blue line and triangles for the secondary component). The right-hand pane…

**Figure 7.** Figure 7: Combined spectro-interferometric orbits of HIP 27246 (top) and HIP 63253 (bottom). Phase 6.1 yr HIP 86642 RV [km/s] 2015 2018 2014 17422+3804 Aa,Ab [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_7.png]

**Figure 8.** Figure 8: Combined spectro-interferometric orbit of HIP 86642 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_8.png]

**Figure 9.** Figure 9: Orbits of the inner and outer pairs in HIP 62556 (GJ 487). CHR 193 Aa,Ab 1.23yr, 0.11" 2018 2019 HU 644 A,B 49yr, 1.55" N E [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_9.png]

**Figure 10.** Figure 10: Orbits of HIP 65026 (WDS J13198+4747) computed independently. The upper panel shows the outer system HU 644 A,B; the lower panel shows the inner subsystem CHR 193 Aa,Ab. ner subsystem is not resolved and does not cause wobble in the outer orbit because Aa and Ab are n…

**Figure 12.** Figure 12: Fragment of the outer and inner orbits of HIP 65026 and the reconstructed images of the triple star recorded with the red NESSI camera in 2018 (separations 0. ′′24 and 0. ′′10) and in 2019 (separations 0. ′′09 and 0. ′′08), when the previously unobserved part of the o…

**Figure 13.** Figure 13: Visual orbits of HIP 85209 (WDS J17247+3802). Fragment of the outer orbit and the inner orbit are plotted to scale. The insert shows the reconstructed speckle image in 2018.65 in the red channel with components Ac and B (the inner pair Aa,Ab is unresolved). of Aa,B an…

**Figure 14.** Figure 14: RV curves of the inner (top) and outer (bottom) orbits of HIP 85209 from the combined solution. In each curve, the contribution of other orbit is subtracted. Roberts & Mason (2018) does not agree with the latest observations that cover now 17 years and suggest a quas…

**Figure 15.** Figure 15: Eccentricity of inner visual orbits in hierarchical systems vs. projected separation s of their outer components. The red squares with error bars plot mean eccentricities and their errors in the separation bins of one dex. coplanar and more eccentric orbits. However,…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

43 extracted references · 41 canonical work pages

[1]

J., Caballero, J

Alonso-Floriano, F. J., Caballero, J. A. Cort´ es-Contreras, M et al. 2015, A&A, 583, 85

work page 2015
[2]

Beuzit, J.-L., S´ egransan, D., Forveille, T. et al. 2004, A& A, 425, 997

work page 2004
[3]

P., Liu, M

Bowler, B. P., Liu, M. C., Shkolnik, E. L., & Tamura, M. 2015, ApJS, 216, 7

work page 2015
[4]

2018, ApJS, 239, 31

Brandt, T.D. 2018, ApJS, 239, 31

work page 2018
[5]

& Babel, J

Carrier, F., North, P., Udry, S. & Babel, J. 2001, A&A, 394, 15 1

work page 2001
[6]

Delfosse, X., Forveille, T., Beuzit, J.-L. et al. 1999, A&A, 344, 897 Fabrycky D. & Tremaine S., 2007, ApJ, 669, 1298

work page 1999
[7]

C., Lissauer, J

Fabrycky, D. C., Lissauer, J. J., Ragozzine, D. et al. 2014, A pJ, 790, 146

work page 2014
[8]

C., Willmarth, D

Fekel, F. C., Willmarth, D. W., Abt, H. A. & Pourbaix, D. 2018, AJ, 156, 117 Gaia Collaboration, Brown, A. G. A., Vallenari, A., Prusti, T. et al. 2018, A&A, in preparation (Vizier Catalog I/345/gaia2)

work page 2018

Show all 43 references

[9]

Goldberg, D., Mazeh, T., Latham, D. W. et al. 2002, AJ, 124, 1132 F˝ ur´ esz, G. 2008, PhD thesis, University of Szeged, Hungary

2002
[10]

Guillout, P., Klutsch, A., Frasca, A., Freire Ferrero, R. et al. 2009, A&A, 504, 829

2009
[11]

Hartkopf, W.I., McAlister,H.A., Mason, B.D. et al. 1994, AJ 108, 2299

1994
[12]

I., Mason, B

Hartkopf, W. I., Mason, B. D. & W orley, C. E. 2001, AJ, 122, 3472

2001
[13]

N., Franz, O

Heasley, J. N., Franz, O. G., W asserman, L. H., & Horch, E. P. 2002, BAAS, 34, 1095

2002
[14]

Heintz, W. D. 1969, AJ, 74, 768

1969
[15]

Heintz, W. D. 1990, AJ, 99, 420

1990
[16]

Heintz, W. D. 1993, AJ, 105, 1188

1993
[17]

P., Franz, O

Horch, E. P., Franz, O. G., W asserman, L. H., & Heasley, J. N. 2006, AJ, 132, 836

2006
[18]

P., Bahi, L

Horch, E. P., Bahi, L. A. P., Gaulin, J. R. et al. 2012, AJ, 143, 10

2012
[19]

P., van Belle, G

Horch, E. P., van Belle, G. T., Davidson, J. W., Jr. et al. 2015 b, AJ, 150, 151

2015
[20]

I., Tokovinin, A., W eiss, S

Horch, E. I., Tokovinin, A., W eiss, S. A. et al. 2019, AJ, 157, 56

2019
[21]

2012, ApJ, 754, 44

Janson, M., Hormuth, F., Bergfors, C., et al. 2012, ApJ, 754, 44

2012
[22]

B., Orosz, J

Kostov, V. B., Orosz, J. A., W elsh, W. F. et al. 2016, ApJ, 827, 86 2016ApJ...827...86K Kepler-1647 1100 d arounf 11-d SB

2016
[23]

Latham, D. W. 1992, in IAU Coll. 135, Complementary Approaches to Double and Multiple Star Research, ASP Conf. Ser. 32, eds. H. A. McAlister & W. I. Hartkopf (San Francisco: ASP), 110

1992
[24]

W., Stefanik, R

Latham, D. W., Stefanik, R. P., Torres, G. et al. 2001, AJ, 124 , 1144

2001
[25]

2012, IAU Inf

Ling, J. 2012, IAU Inf. Circ. 176, 1

2012
[26]

2000, IAU Inf

Mante, R. 2000, IAU Inf. Circ., 140, 1

2000
[27]

D., Wycoﬀ, G

Mason, B. D., Wycoﬀ, G. L., Hartkopf, W. I. et al. 2001, AJ, 122 , 3466 (WDS)

2001
[28]

& Kratter, K

Moe, M. & Kratter, K. M. 2018, ApJ, 854, 44

2018
[29]

Perryman, M. A. C., Lindegren, L., Kovalevsky, J. et al. 1997 , A&A, 323L, 49 (Vizier Catalog I/239/hip main)

1997
[30]

C., Jr., Tokovinin, A., Mason, B

Roberts, L. C., Jr., Tokovinin, A., Mason, B. D. et al. 2015, A J, 150, 130

2015
[31]

Roberts, L. C., Jr. & Mason, B. D. 2018 MNRAS, 473, 4497

2018
[32]

J., Howell, S

Scott, N. J., Howell, S. B., Horch, E. P., & Everett, M. E. PASP , 2018, 130, 054502 Sperauskas et al. 2019, A&A, accepted (preprint arXiv:1904.06544)

2018 arXiv
[33]

H., & F˝ ur´ esz, G

Szentgyorgyi, A. H., & F˝ ur´ esz, G. 2007,Precision Radial Velocities for the Kepler Era , in The 3rd Mexico-Korea Conference on Astrophysics: Telescopes of the Future and Sa n Pedro M´ artir, ed. S. Kurtz, RMxAC, 28, 129

2007
[34]

2016, ORBIT: IDL software for visual, spectroscopic, and combined orbits

Tokovinin, A. 2016, ORBIT: IDL software for visual, spectroscopic, and combined orbits. Zenodo, doi:10.2581/zenodo.61119

2016 doi
[35]

2017, ApJ, 844, 103

Tokovinin, A. 2017, ApJ, 844, 103

2017
[36]

2018, AJ, 155, 160

Tokovinin, A. 2018, AJ, 155, 160

2018
[37]

Tokovinin, A. A. & Smekhov, M. G. 2002, A&A, 382, 118

2002
[38]

D., & Hartkopf, W

Tokovinin, A., Mason, B. D., & Hartkopf, W. I. 2010, AJ, 139, 7 43

2010
[39]

W., & Mason, B

Tokovinin, A., Latham, D. W., & Mason, B. D. 2015, AJ, 149, 195

2015
[40]

& Latham, D

Tokovinin, A. & Latham, D. W. 2017, ApJ, 838, 54

2017
[41]

Horch, E. P. 2018, AJ, 155, 235

2018
[42]

1994, ApJ, 420, 806

Zucker, S., & Mazeh, T. 1994, ApJ, 420, 806

1994
[43]

1995, ApJ, 452, 863

Zucker, S., Torres, G., & Mazeh, T. 1995, ApJ, 452, 863

1995

Pith tools

Reviewed August 14, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[1] [1]

J., Caballero, J

Alonso-Floriano, F. J., Caballero, J. A. Cort´ es-Contreras, M et al. 2015, A&A, 583, 85

work page 2015

[2] [2]

Beuzit, J.-L., S´ egransan, D., Forveille, T. et al. 2004, A& A, 425, 997

work page 2004

[3] [3]

P., Liu, M

Bowler, B. P., Liu, M. C., Shkolnik, E. L., & Tamura, M. 2015, ApJS, 216, 7

work page 2015

[4] [4]

2018, ApJS, 239, 31

Brandt, T.D. 2018, ApJS, 239, 31

work page 2018

[5] [5]

& Babel, J

Carrier, F., North, P., Udry, S. & Babel, J. 2001, A&A, 394, 15 1

work page 2001

[6] [6]

Delfosse, X., Forveille, T., Beuzit, J.-L. et al. 1999, A&A, 344, 897 Fabrycky D. & Tremaine S., 2007, ApJ, 669, 1298

work page 1999

[7] [7]

C., Lissauer, J

Fabrycky, D. C., Lissauer, J. J., Ragozzine, D. et al. 2014, A pJ, 790, 146

work page 2014

[8] [8]

C., Willmarth, D

Fekel, F. C., Willmarth, D. W., Abt, H. A. & Pourbaix, D. 2018, AJ, 156, 117 Gaia Collaboration, Brown, A. G. A., Vallenari, A., Prusti, T. et al. 2018, A&A, in preparation (Vizier Catalog I/345/gaia2)

work page 2018