Pith. sign in

REVIEW 6 minor 48 references

OB associations: from stellar to galactic scales

T0 review · 0 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-11 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Gaia-redefined OB associations could trace how the Milky Way's spiral arms move.

desk verdict A solid, honest Gaia-era review of OB associations whose only original analysis is explicitly inconclusive; worth refereeing as a review, not as a research claim. read the letter →

arxiv 2412.10769 v1 pith:ATKLWTYZ submitted 2024-12-14 astro-ph.GA astro-ph.SR

Alexis L. Quintana This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.GAastro-ph.SR
keywords OBassociationsGaiaastrometrystellarkinematicsmassivestarsmultiplicityspiralarmsGalacticstructurestarformationfeedback
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 review argues that OB associations—loose, unbound groups of young massive stars—are a single class of object that connects the physics of massive stars, stellar multiplicity, cluster evolution, feedback, and the structure of the Milky Way. It claims that the Gaia astrometry revolution has made the historical lists of associations untrustworthy and has opened the way to redefine them kinematically, as expanding groups with coherent motions. The most far-reaching claim is that these redefined associations can be traced backward in time for many tens of millions of years and therefore serve as tracers of the past motions of the Galactic spiral arms. If that is right, a reliable all-sky census of OB associations would let astronomers measure the rotation pattern speed of the spiral arms and test whether the arms are long-lived density waves or transient, changing structures.

What carries the argument

The central object is the OB association, redefined as a low-density, gravitationally unbound, expanding group of young stars (typically a few pc to a few tens of pc, with masses up to roughly $10^{4}$ solar masses) that remains kinematically coherent for a few tens of Myr before dissolving into the Galactic field. The mechanism that carries the argument is dynamical traceback: using Gaia parallaxes and proper motions, one reconstructs where the members of an association were when it formed, compares this with the current and past positions of a spiral arm, and thereby reads off the arm's motion. Clustering algorithms such as HDBSCAN and SigMA act as the practical tools that turn Gaia catalogues into the reliable all-sky list of associations on which the traceback would run.

What would settle it

Measure the 3D traceback of a complete Gaia-based catalogue of OB associations with radial velocities and compare the reconstructed birth sites with the current and past positions of the spiral arms; if associations of different ages do not line up on a single rotating pattern, or if different arms yield inconsistent pattern speeds, the claim that OB associations trace spiral-arm motion over tens of Myr would be falsified.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that OB associations, once redefined with Gaia astrometry rather than by the historical overdensity of bright stars, become bridges between stellar and Galactic scales and, ultimately, probes of spiral-arm dynamics. The review gathers evidence that many classical OB associations are asterisms or poorly mixed groups, that Gaia-based clustering methods now identify kinematically coherent young groups, and that such groups live for only a few tens of millions of years—long enough, but not too long, for their stars to remain near their birth environment. Taking the Auriga region as a worked example, it shows a chain of newly identified OB associations whose ages match the motion of the Perseus spiral arm over the last roughly 20 Myr. From this the author concludes that a 3D kinematic traceback of a complete, reliable list of OB associations could determine the rotation pattern speed of the spiral arms and discriminate between the density-wave hypothesis and models of transient, independently rotating arms.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the unbound 'moving groups' identified by Gaia clustering are physically the same expanding subgroups that make up OB associations; if their overlapping positions on the sky merely reflect that both lie along the same spiral arm, the Figure 8 comparison would not support the link.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • A complete Gaia-based census of OB associations, combined with radial velocities from forthcoming surveys, would make the Milky Way's spiral arms measurable kinematic clocks rather than static map features.
  • Measurement of the spiral arms' rotation pattern speed would directly test density-wave theory (rigid, long-lived pattern) against transient-arm models in which each arm has its own speed.
  • The Auriga example implies that age gradients across an association chain can trace a spiral arm's motion over roughly 20 Myr; extending this to all arms would give a Galactic-scale picture.
  • Because many historical associations are unreliable, future catalogues will shift the inferred sites of massive-star formation and feedback, changing maps of HII regions and superbubbles.
  • The same kinematic tools will clarify the relation between open clusters, unbound moving groups, and association subgroups, sharpening the definition of an OB association itself.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If the traceback method works, it could be applied arm by arm to see whether all spiral arms share one pattern speed; individual arm speeds would favor transient-arm models, while a single speed would favor a global density wave.
  • The Figure 8 comparison is limited to 500 pc; extending the same moving-group-versus-association analysis to the full Gaia catalogue beyond the solar neighborhood would test whether unbound groups are genuinely the expanding subunits of associations or just foreground projections.
  • A cleaned all-sky census would let modelers use OB associations as calibration points for star-formation feedback prescriptions, since associations set the timescale and energy budget for superbubble formation.
  • A future near-infrared astrometric mission that sees through dust could extend the traceback to embedded groups near the Galactic centre, closing the gap between star-forming clumps and unbound associations.
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.

Referee Report

0 major / 6 minor

Summary. The manuscript is a review of OB associations, tracing their definition and study from the pre-Hipparcos era through the current Gaia-based revolution. The author argues that OB associations, when redefined with modern astrometry, connect diverse areas of astrophysics: the formation and properties of massive stars, stellar multiplicity, the origin of open clusters and subgroups, feedback to the interstellar medium, and the structure and evolution of the Milky Way. The review includes one original analysis (Figure 8, Section 4.3.3) comparing young open clusters and moving groups within 500 pc, and a forward-looking proposal (Section 4.5) that OB associations could serve as tracers of the past motion of Galactic spiral arms, potentially distinguishing between density-wave and transient-arm models.

Significance. The review provides a useful and up-to-date synthesis of a rapidly evolving field, with a clear narrative connecting stellar-scale, cluster-scale, and Galactic-scale phenomena. Its main value is synthetic rather than discovery-driven; the only original analysis, the Figure 8 comparison, is explicitly presented as inconclusive by the author. The forward-looking claim about spiral-arm traceback is appropriately framed as a possibility that depends on future all-sky membership catalogs and radial velocities, which do not yet exist. The manuscript is well-grounded in the literature, includes clear figures with reproduction credits, and candidly notes several limitations (e.g., the 500 pc limit in Section 4.3.3 and the lack of RVs for OB stars in Section 5). Because the central claims are conditional and the review does not overreach, the work is significant as a reference and roadmap for the field.

minor comments (6)
  1. [Sec. 4.3.3, Figure 8] The visual comparison of KDE contours for 38 open clusters and 23 moving groups is used to suggest physical associations with known OB associations, but no statistical significance test is performed. Given the small samples and the 500 pc limit, the overlaps could be coincidental. The author states that a definitive conclusion is hard to draw, but the text and figure caption should more explicitly warn that this is a qualitative, not statistical, comparison.
  2. [Abstract] The phrase 'ofGaia' appears without a space; please correct to 'of Gaia'.
  3. [Sec. 4.3.2] In the sentence 'Further details on this will be provided in Section 4.3..', there is an extra period after '4.3'. Please fix.
  4. [Sec. 4.3.3] The notation '√ X 2 + Y 2 < 500 pc' is ambiguous; please write 'sqrt(X^2 + Y^2) < 500 pc' or define the variables, since it is not immediately clear whether X and Y are Galactocentric or heliocentric coordinates.
  5. [Sec. 5] The statement that GaiaNIR is 'yet to be approved by ESA' is fine, but the projected launch year 'around 2045' is a specific detail that may become outdated quickly; consider softening to 'if approved'.
  6. [References] There are minor inconsistencies in the rendering of some author names, such as 'Mel’Nik' vs 'Melnik' in the reference list and in-text citations; please ensure consistent transliteration.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the review’s synthesis is grounded in independent published catalogs, and the forward-looking spiral-arm traceback claim is explicitly conditional rather than a derived prediction.

full rationale

The paper is a review, not a derivation, and I find no load-bearing step in which an output reduces to its own input. Its central claim that OB associations connect massive-star physics, stellar multiplicity, cluster evolution, feedback, and Galactic structure is supported by external literature and third-party catalogs (Blaauw 1964; Lada and Lada 2003; de Zeeuw et al. 1999; Wright 2020; Hunt and Reffert 2024; Zucker et al. 2020). The only original analysis, the Figure 8 comparison of open clusters and moving groups, overlays data from Hunt and Reffert (2024) onto known associations and star-forming regions; the author explicitly concedes that “it is hard to draw a definitive conclusion from this picture, as it is limited to 500 pc from the Sun” (Section 4.3.3), so no fitted input is being relabeled as a prediction. The author’s own prior papers (Quintana and Wright 2021; Quintana and Wright 2022; Quintana et al. 2023; Quintana et al. 2024) are cited as published observational sources rather than as definitions of the review’s conclusions. The Section 4.5 proposal that OB associations “could therefore serve as tracers of the past motions of the Galactic spiral arms” is explicitly a conditional future prospect, and its supporting Auriga age gradient was obtained in Quintana et al. (2023) from independent techniques—HR-diagram positions of members and ages of related open clusters—against the Perseus-arm model from Reid et al. (2019), so it is externally falsifiable evidence rather than a self-citation chain. No equation or derived quantity reduces by construction to its own input, and no parameter fitted to a subset of data is later presented as a prediction. Therefore the score is 0, with no circular steps identified.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 2 assumptions · 0 invented entities

No free parameters are fitted and no new entities are postulated. The review relies on standard domain assumptions about the nature and age of OB associations and on the reliability of the external catalogs it uses for its one illustrative analysis.

assumptions (2)
  • domain assumption OB associations are young (a few to a few tens of Myr), unbound, low-density groups that expand and dissolve into the field population.
    Used throughout Sections 2 and 4.5 as the basis for the claim that they can be traced back in time; this is the standard definition from Blaauw (1964) and Wright (2020).
  • domain assumption The quality cuts and cluster/moving-group classification of Hunt and Reffert (2024) are reliable for identifying bound and unbound clusters.
    The Figure 8 analysis relies on this catalog to compare OCs and MGs with OB associations; any misclassification would change the overlap interpretation.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of OB associations: from stellar to galactic scales." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/ATKLWTYZ

@misc{pith2026241210769,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: OB associations: from stellar to galactic scales},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/ATKLWTYZ}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2412.10769}
}
read the original abstract

Low-density and unbound stellar groups, OB associations have been historically delineated through their bright and massive members. They have been analysed for decades, but the arrival of Hipparcos, and more recently of Gaia led to a change of paradigm by allowing the identification of more reliable members using parallaxes and proper motions. This renewed interest offers an opportunity to emphasize the role of OB associations across many areas of astronomy. In this review, I highlight their importance across multiple scales: how OB associations constitute suitable sites to study massive stars and stellar multiplicity, their relation with star clusters, their interactions with the interstellar medium through the feedback of their massive members, and how they shape the structure and evolution of the Milky Way and beyond.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2412.10769 by the authors.

Figure 7
Figure 7. Members of the subgroups of Cep OB2 identified by HDBSCAN in Szilágyi et al. (2023), colour-coded by distance, whose vectors correspond to the tangential velocities, and whose massive stars (> 10 M⊙ here) have been displayed as white dots. 16 Cent. Eur. Astrophys. Bull. (2024) 48:7, 1–34 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_7.png] view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

48 extracted references · 47 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    A.: 1947,The evolution of stars and astrophysics, Arme- nian SSR Academy of Sciences Press

    Ambartsumian, V. A.: 1947,The evolution of stars and astrophysics, Arme- nian SSR Academy of Sciences Press. Ambartsumian, V. A.: 1949,Astronomicheskii Zhurnal26,

    work page 1947

  2. [3]

    Anderson, L. D. et al.: 2009,Astrophys. J., Suppl. Ser.181(1), 255–271. Armstrong, J. J., Wright, N. J., Jeffries, R. D., and Jackson, R. J.: 2020, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc.494(4), 4794–4801. Armstrong, J. J., Wright, N. J., Jeffries, R. D., Jackson, R. J., and Cantat- Gaudin, T.: 2022,Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc.517(4), 5704–5720. Barbá, R. H. et al.: 2020,...

    work page 2009

  3. [4]

    Kiminki, D. C. et al.: 2007,Astrophys. J.664(2), 1102–1120. Kounkel, M. et al.: 2018,Astron. J.156(3),

    work page 2007

  4. [10]

    Kouwenhoven, M. B. N., Brown, A. G. A., Portegies Zwart, S. F., and Kaper, L.: 2007,Astron. Astrophys.474(1), 77–104. Kraus, A. L., White, R. J., and Hillenbrand, L. A.: 2005,Astrophys. J. 633(1), 452–459. Krause, M. G. H., Burkert, A., Diehl, R., Fierlinger, K., Gaczkowski, B., Kroell, D., Ngoumou, J., Roccatagliata, V., Siegert, T., and Preibisch, T.: 2...

    work page 2024

  5. [18]

    Brown, A. G. A., Blaauw, A., Hoogerwerf, R., de Bruijne, J. H. J., and de Zeeuw, P. T.: 1999,in C. J. Lada, and N. D. Kylafis (eds),The Origin of Stars and Planetary Systems, Vol. 540 ofNATO Advanced Study Institute (ASI) Series C, p

    work page 1999

  6. [22]

    V., Kniazev, A

    Gvaramadze, V. V., Kniazev, A. Y., Castro, N., and Katkov, I. Y.: 2020, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc.492(2), 2383–2392. Herrero, A. et al.: 2022,Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc.511(3), 3113–3124. Heyer, M. H., Carpenter, J. M., and Snell, R. L.: 2001, Astrophys. J. 551(2), 852–866. Higdon, J. C., and Lingenfelter, R. E.: 2005,Astrophys. J.628(2), 738–749. Higdon, J....

    work page 2020

  7. [23]

    Astrophys.595, A1

    Gaia Collaboration et al.: 2016,Astron. Astrophys.595, A1. Gaia Collaboration et al.: 2023,Astron. Astrophys.674, A1. Garmany, C. D.: 1973,Astron. J.78, 185–191. Garmany, C. D.: 1994,Publ. Astron. Soc. Pac.106,

    work page 2016

  8. [24]

    et al.: 2014,Astrophys

    Sota, A. et al.: 2014,Astrophys. J., Suppl. Ser.211(1),

    work page 2014

Show all 48 references
  1. [25]

    D., and Stencel, R

    Garmany, C. D., and Stencel, R. E.: 1992,Astron. Astrophys., Suppl. Ser. 94, 211–244. Gaudi, B. S.: 2022,Bulletin of the American Astronomical Society, Vol. 54, p. 102.146. Gouliermis, D. A.: 2018,Publ. Astron. Soc. Pac.130(989), 072001. Gratton, R. et al.: 2023,Astron. Astrop...

    1992

  2. [26]

    Jeffries, R. D. et al.: 2014,Astron. Astrophys.563, A94. Jin, S. et al.: 2024,Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc.530(3), 2688–2730. Kapteyn, J. C.: 1914,Astrophys. J.40, 43–126. Katz, D. et al.: 2023,Astron. Astrophys.674, A5. Kiminki, D. C., and Kobulnicky, H. A.: 2012,Astrophys. J.751(1),

    2014

  3. [29]

    J., Margulis, M., and Dearborn, D.: 1984,Astrophys

    Lada, C. J., Margulis, M., and Dearborn, D.: 1984,Astrophys. J.285, 141–

    1984

  4. [33]

    A., and White, R

    Ruprecht, J., Balazs, B. A., and White, R. E.: 1981,Catalogue of star clus- ters and associations. Supplement

    1981

  5. [41]

    Russeil, D.: 2003,Astron

    Part B1: New data for open clusters; Part B2: New data for associations, globular clusters and extragalactic objects, Akademiai Kiado. Russeil, D.: 2003,Astron. Astrophys.397, 133–146. Saltovets, K., and McSwain, M. V.: 2024,Research Notes of the American 32 Cent. Eur. Astroph...

    2024

  6. [43]

    Zari, E., Brown, A. G. A., and de Zeeuw, P. T.: 2019,Astron. Astrophys. 628, A123. Zari, E., Hashemi, H., Brown, A. G. A., Jardine, K., and de Zeeuw, P. T.: 2018, Astron. Astrophys.620, A172. Zari, E., Rix, H. W., Frankel, N., Xiang, M., Poggio, E., Drimmel, R., and Tkachenko,...

    2019

  7. [44]

    S., and Gallagher, John S., I.: 2000,Galaxies in the universe : an introduction

    Sparke, L. S., and Gallagher, John S., I.: 2000,Galaxies in the universe : an introduction. Squicciarini, V., Gratton, R., Bonavita, M., and Mesa, D.: 2021, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc.507(1), 1381–1400. Swiggum, C., Alves, J., Benjamin, R., Ratzenböck, S., Miret-Roig, N., Großsc...

    2000

  8. [45]

    Walborn, N. R. et al.: 2002,Astron. J.123(5), 2754–2771. Ward, J. L., and Kruijssen, J. M. D.: 2018,Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 475(4), 5659–5676. Wright, N. J.: 2020,New Astron. Rev.90, 101549. Wright, N. J., Drew, J. E., and Mohr-Smith, M.: 2015,Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc.449(1)...

    2024

  9. [61]

    E., Malo, L., Riedel, A., Rodriguez, D., Lafrenière, D., Faherty, J

    Gagné, J., Mamajek, E. E., Malo, L., Riedel, A., Rodriguez, D., Lafrenière, D., Faherty, J. K., Roy-Loubier, O., Pueyo, L., Robin, A. C., and Doyon, R.: 2018,Astrophys. J.856(1),

    2018

  10. [70]

    D., Kirk, J

    Fleming, G. D., Kirk, J. M., and Ward-Thompson, D.: 2023,Mon. Not. R. Cent. Eur. Astrophys. Bull. (2024) 48:7, 1–34 27 RODOLFO BARBÁ MEETING Astron. Soc.523(4), 5306–5314. Fuller, C. A., Kaaret, P., Bluem, J., Kuntz, K. D., Hodges-Kluck, E., and Jahoda, K. M.: 2023,Astrophys. ...

    2024

  11. [73]

    Sánchez-Sanjuán, S., Hernández, J., Pérez-Villegas, Á., Román-Zúñiga, C., Aguilar, L., Ballesteros-Paredes, J., and Bonilla-Barroso, A.: 2024,Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc.534(3), 2566–2584. Santos-Silva, T., Gregorio-Hetem, J., Montmerle, T., Fernandes, B., and Stelzer, B.: 2018,A...

    2024

  12. [80]

    A., Alves, J., Bialy, S., Foley, M., Speagle, J

    Zucker, C., Goodman, A. A., Alves, J., Bialy, S., Foley, M., Speagle, J. S., Großschedl, J., Finkbeiner, D. P., Burkert, A., Khimey, D., and Swiggum, C.: 2022,Nature601(7893), 334–337. Zucker, C., Speagle, J. S., Schlafly, E. F., Green, G. M., Finkbeiner, D. P., Goodman, A., a...

    2024

  13. [84]

    et al.: 2023,Astrophys

    Kounkel, M. et al.: 2023,Astrophys. J., Suppl. Ser.266(1),

    2023

  14. [91]

    J.: 1934,Harvard College Observatory Circular384, 1–41

    Bok, B. J.: 1934,Harvard College Observatory Circular384, 1–41. Bonnell, I. A., Bate, M. R., Clarke, C. J., and Pringle, J. E.: 2001,Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc.323(4), 785–794. Bouy, H., and Alves, J.: 2015,Astron. Astrophys.584, A26. Brown, A. G. A.: 2019,The Gaia Universe, p

    1934

  15. [93]

    Reipurth (ed.),Handbook of Star Forming Regions, Volume II, Vol

    Gregorio-Hetem, J.: 2008, The Canis Major Star Forming Region, in B. Reipurth (ed.),Handbook of Star Forming Regions, Volume II, Vol. 5, The Southern Sky ASP Monograph Publications, p

    2008

  16. [110]

    G.: 1980,Astrophys

    Hills, J. G.: 1980,Astrophys. J.235, 986–991. Hobbs, D.: 2024,EAS2024, p

    1980

  17. [111]

    Cantat-Gaudin, T., and Casamiquela, L.: 2024, New Astron. Rev. 99, 101696. Cantat-Gaudin, T. et al.: 2019a,Astron. Astrophys.621, A115. Cantat-Gaudin, T. et al.: 2019b,Astron. Astrophys.626, A17. Cash, W., Charles, P., Bowyer, S., Walter, F., Garmire, G., and Riegler, G.: 1980...

    2024

  18. [115]

    Cantat-Gaudin, T.: 2022,Universe 8(2),

    2022

  19. [125]

    M.: 1989,Astron

    Blaha, C., and Humphreys, R. M.: 1989,Astron. J.98,

    1989

  20. [129]

    J., and Mamajek, E

    Wright, N. J., and Mamajek, E. E.: 2018, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 476(1), 381–398. Wright, N. J., Parker, R. J., Goodwin, S. P., and Drake, J. J.: 2014,Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc.438(1), 639–646. Wright, N. J. et al.: 2016,Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc.460(3), 2593–2610. Yalyalieva,...

    2018

  21. [131]

    J., and Ogden, P

    Reynolds, R. J., and Ogden, P. M.: 1979,Astrophys. J.229, 942–953. Rizzuto, A. C. et al.: 2013,Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc.436(2), 1694–1707. Ruprecht, J.: 1966,Bulletin of the Astronomical Institutes of Czechoslovakia 17,

    1979

  22. [152]

    Langer, N.: 2012,Ann. Rev. Astron. Astrophys.50, 107–164. Levato, H., Malaroda, S., Morrell, N., and Solivella, G.: 1987,Astrophys. J., Suppl. Ser.64,

    2012

  23. [154]

    Perryman, M. A. C. et al.: 1997,Astron. Astrophys.323, L49–L52. Peter, D., Feldt, M., Henning, T., and Hormuth, F.: 2012,Astron. Astro- phys. 538, A74. Poelarends, A. J. T., Herwig, F., Langer, N., and Heger, A.: 2008,Astro- phys. J.675(1), 614–625. Posch, L., Alves, J., Mirét...

    2024 arXiv

  24. [170]

    26 Cent. Eur. Astrophys. Bull. (2024) 48:7, 1–34 RODOLFO BARBÁ MEETING Dale, J. E.: 2015,New Astron. Rev.68, 1–33. Damiani, F., Prisinzano, L., Pillitteri, I., Micela, G., and Sciortino, S.: 2019, Astron. Astrophys.623, A112. De Becker, M., Rauw, G., and Manfroid, J.: 2004, As...

    2024

  25. [205]

    M., and Dambis, A

    Mel’Nik, A. M., and Dambis, A. K.: 2009, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 400(1), 518–523. Mel’nik, A. M., and Dambis, A. K.: 2017, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 472(4), 3887–3904. Melnik, A. M., and Dambis, A. K.: 2020, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 493(2), 2339–2351. Mel’Nik, A. M., and Ef...

    2009

  26. [213]

    Cent. Eur. Astrophys. Bull. (2024) 48:7, 1–34 25 RODOLFO BARBÁ MEETING Blaauw, A.: 1991,in C. J. Lada, and N. D. Kylafis (eds),The Physics of Star Formation and Early Stellar Evolution, Vol. 342 ofNATO Advanced Study Institute (ASI) Series C, p

    2024

  27. [235]

    R., Hodgkin, S., Irwin, M., Lewis, J

    Preibisch, T., Ratzka, T., Kuderna, B., Ohlendorf, H., King, R. R., Hodgkin, S., Irwin, M., Lewis, J. R., McCaughrean, M. J., and Zinnecker, H.: 2011, Astron. Astrophys.530, A34. Quillen, A. C., Dougherty, J., Bagley, M. B., Minchev, I., and Comparetta, J.: 2011,Mon. Not. R. A...

    2011

  28. [239]

    Caballero-Nieves, S. M. et al.: 2020,Astron. J.160(3),

    2020

  29. [266]

    C., and Shu, F

    Lin, C. C., and Shu, F. H.: 1964,Astrophys. J.140,

    1964

  30. [310]

    Astrophys.248,

    Duquennoy, A., and Mayor, M.: 1991,Astron. Astrophys.248,

    1991

  31. [408]

    Blaauw, A.: 1964,Ann. Rev. Astron. Astrophys.2,

    1964

  32. [411]

    Brown, A. G. A., de Geus, E. J., and de Zeeuw, P. T.: 1994,Astron. Astro- phys. 289, 101–120. Brown, A. G. A. et al.: 2000,in F. Favata, A. Kaas, and A. Wilson (eds), Star Formation from the Small to the Large Scale, Vol. 445 ofESA Special Publication, p

    1994

  33. [485]

    J.132(3),1052–

    Elias,F.,Alfaro,E.J.,andCabrera-Caño,J.:2006, Astron. J.132(3),1052–

    2006

  34. [487]

    J.163(6),

    Lim, B., Nazé, Y., Hong, J., Yoon, S.-y., Lee, J., Hwang, N., Park, B.-G., and Lee, J.-E.: 2022,Astron. J.163(6),

    2022

  35. [646]

    J., Lett.560(1), L83–L86

    Maíz-Apellániz, J.: 2001,Astrophys. J., Lett.560(1), L83–L86. Maíz Apellániz, J.: 2010,Astron. Astrophys.518, A1. Maíz Apellániz, J.: 2019,Astron. Astrophys.630, A119. Maíz Apellániz, J., Barbá, R. H., Fernández Aranda, R., Pantaleoni González,M.,CrespoBellido,P.,Sota,A.,andAl...

    2024 arXiv

  36. [901]

    McInnes, L., Healy, J., and Astels, S.: 2017,The Journal of Open Source Software2(11),

    2017

  37. [1060]

    G.: 2008,Astrophys

    Elmegreen, B. G.: 2008,Astrophys. J.672(2), 1006–1012. Elmegreen, B. G.: 2011a,in C. Charbonnel, and T. Montmerle (eds),EAS Publications Series, Vol. 51 ofEAS Publications Series, pp. 19–30. Elmegreen, B. G.: 2011b,in C. Charbonnel, and T. Montmerle (eds),EAS Publications Seri...

    2008

  38. [1598]

    et al.: 2020,Astrophys

    Bluem, J. et al.: 2020,Astrophys. J.905(2),

    2020

  39. [2024]

    Rasmuson, N

    submitted. Rasmuson, N. H.: 1921,Meddelanden fran Lunds Astronomiska Observato- rium Serie II26, 3–74. Rate, G., and Crowther, P. A.: 2020, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 493(1), 1512–1529. Ratzenböck, S. et al.: 2023,Astron. Astrophys.678, A71. Reed, B. C.: 2003,Astron. J.125(5), ...

    1921

  40. [2394]

    Recio-Blanco, P

    Hobbs, D., and Høg, E.: 2018,in A. Recio-Blanco, P. de Laverny, A. G. A. Brown, and T. Prusti (eds), Astrometry and Astrophysics in the Gaia Sky, Vol. 330 ofIAU Symposium, pp. 67–70. 28 Cent. Eur. Astrophys. Bull. (2024) 48:7, 1–34 RODOLFO BARBÁ MEETING Hodge, P. W.: 1981,Atla...

    2024

Pith tools

Reviewed August 11, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.