Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 4 minor 163 references

Isochrone fitting of Galactic globular clusters - IX. Tip of the red-giant branch for 27 clusters and constraints on new particle physics

T0 review · 4 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-06 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read This paper derives the strongest published upper bound on the axion–electron coupling, $g_{ae}<3.8\times10^{-14}$ at 95% CL, from the red-giant-branch tips of 27 globular clusters.

desk verdict A serious, detailed TRGB-based bound on g_ae whose headline 95% CL is likely too strong because of a biased fiducial estimator and independent treatment of shared theory uncertainties. read the letter →

arxiv 2608.04801 v1 pith:H2HAOQ2L submitted 2026-08-05 hep-ph astro-ph.GA

G.A. Gontcharov , A.M. Kudashov , O.S. Ryutina , S.V. Troitsky This is my paper
classification hep-phastro-ph.GA
keywords axion-electroncouplingtipoftheredgiantbranchglobularclustersanomalousstellarenergylossaxion-likeparticlesevolutionsimulationsneutrinomagneticmomentmillicharged
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 tries to establish that the tip of the red-giant branch (TRGB)—the most luminous point reached by red giants in globular clusters—can be measured precisely enough in 27 clusters to test whether light axion-like particles carry energy out of stellar cores. Extra energy losses would delay helium ignition and make the TRGB brighter, so the observed tip brightness constrains the axion–electron coupling $g_{ae}$. Combining cluster-by-cluster isochrone fits, Monte-Carlo corrections for sparse sampling and variable-star removal, and dedicated stellar-evolution simulations, the paper finds no anomalous energy loss. Its headline result is $g_{ae}<3.8\times10^{-14}$ at 95% confidence, which it argues is the strongest published bound for axion masses below roughly 1 keV. A sympathetic reader would care because this turns ordinary old star clusters into a competitive particle-physics laboratory.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the predicted TRGB bolometric luminosity as a function of the axion–electron coupling $g_{ae}$, computed separately for each cluster with stellar-evolution simulations that include axion bremsstrahlung and Compton emission as extra energy-loss channels. The mechanism is that axion cooling delays helium ignition in the degenerate core, so the core grows more massive and the red giant shines brighter before the helium flash. Observed tip luminosities are obtained from the brightest non-variable red giant, corrected by a Monte-Carlo procedure calibrated on the upper-RGB luminosity function, and combined with theory in a Gaussian likelihood over all 27 clusters.

What would settle it

Recompute the 95% confidence limit using only clusters with a well-populated upper red-giant branch (say $N_{\rm obs}\ge 100$); if the limit weakens by much more than the quoted uncertainty, the discreteness and variable-removal corrections, rather than the stellar data, are setting the bound.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that the bolometric TRGB luminosities of 27 Galactic globular clusters, derived homogeneously and corrected for finite red-giant sampling and for the exclusion of variable stars, match standard stellar-evolution predictions with no preference for anomalous cooling. The paper therefore derives an upper limit $g_{ae}<3.8\times10^{-14}$ at 95% CL, with the likelihood peaked at $g_{ae}=0$. It also reports a median corrected TRGB bolometric absolute magnitude of $-3.53\pm0.05$ mag and, using the same data differentially, indicative limits on a neutrino magnetic moment and on millicharged particles.

Load-bearing premise

The limit stands on the assumption that, after the Monte-Carlo correction, the brightest non-variable red giant in each cluster is an unbiased estimator of the true TRGB luminosity, even in sparse clusters where the brightest sampled stars are much fainter than the tip.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If the bound holds, no non-standard energy-loss channel is active at this sensitivity in red-giant cores, sharpening the exclusion of light axions coupled to electrons.
  • The median TRGB magnitude $-3.53\pm0.05$ mag provides an updated local anchor for TRGB distance measurements if the population dependence is controlled.
  • Re-including well-sampled variable stars shifts the limit only to $g_{ae}<4.3\times10^{-14}$ at 95% CL, so the result is not driven by the variable-star veto itself.
  • The same observed sample, used differentially, yields indicative limits on the neutrino magnetic moment and on millicharged particles, extending the physics reach beyond axions.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If sparse low-mass clusters are systematically biased faint by the discreteness correction, as the paper's own comparison shows for NGC 288 and NGC 6205, the headline limit could be stronger than the data warrant; restricting the likelihood to richer clusters would test this.
  • A natural next step is to calibrate the discreteness correction empirically using clusters with complete variable-star light curves, replacing the single-track Monte-Carlo lookup with a data-driven correction.
  • The mass–metallicity–core-density trends in the corrected magnitudes suggest that universal TRGB magnitude calibrations should be replaced by population-matched calibrations, which would connect this method directly to the extragalactic distance ladder.
  • The same likelihood machinery could be applied to other weakly interacting particles, such as dark photons, provided self-consistent stellar-evolution emissivities are computed for each cluster.
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

4 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper determines TRGB bolometric magnitudes for 27 Galactic globular clusters from a homogeneous isochrone-fitting analysis of Stetson, HST, and Gaia data. The fiducial observable is the luminosity of the brightest non-variable RGB star, corrected by a Monte-Carlo procedure for discrete RGB sampling and for the removal of variable stars. These observed TRGB luminosities are compared with cluster-specific MESA stellar models that include axion-electron energy losses, and a joint likelihood yields g_ae < 3.8e-14 (95% CL), with no preference for nonzero coupling. A control analysis that includes well-sampled variable stars for ten clusters gives g_ae < 4.3e-14 (95% CL). The paper also derives indicative limits on the neutrino magnetic dipole moment and on millicharged particles, and discusses the TRGB as a distance-scale calibrator.

Significance. If the central limit is robust, this is a competitive and possibly leading constraint on the axion-electron coupling below m_a ~ 1 keV, and it demonstrates the value of combining homogeneous cluster parameters, cluster-specific stellar modeling, and a detailed theoretical error budget. Strengths of the paper include the explicit cluster-by-cluster MESA calculations, the unusually complete inventory of theoretical uncertainties (thermal neutrinos, electron conduction, radiative opacity, nuclear rates, convection, mass loss, and numerical resolution), and the inclusion of a variable-star control analysis. The paper is transparent about many of its assumptions, including the single-track calibration of the discreteness correction and the working prior on the hidden number of RGB stars. The main risk to the headline result is the accuracy of the non-variable-star TRGB estimator, which the paper's own cross-check shows to be discrepant for two of ten clusters, and, secondarily, the treatment of common-mode theoretical uncertainties in the 27-cluster likelihood.

major comments (4)
  1. [Sec. 2.5 and Table 2 / Fig. 2] The Monte-Carlo correction in Sec. 2.5 assumes that the corrected brightness of the brightest non-variable RGB star is an unbiased estimator of the true TRGB luminosity. The paper's own cross-check in Table 2 and Fig. 2 shows that this assumption fails badly for NGC 288 and NGC 6205: the variable-based TRGB is brighter by 0.84 mag and 0.49 mag, respectively, far exceeding the quoted uncertainties. The paper attributes these outliers to a sparse RGB and a high 2G helium fraction, but those conditions are present in other clusters without a variable-star cross-check. Because the fiducial likelihood in Sec. 4.1 uses the non-variable estimates, a systematic faint bias would steepen the likelihood drop and make the 95% CL upper limit artificially strong. The control analysis in Sec. 4.2 is not a clean test, since it uses variable-based values for only ten clusters and non-variable values for the remaining seventeen. I request a quantitative treatment of this bias, for example by adding a bias term derived from the ten cross-check clusters, by rerunning the likelihood without NGC 288 and NGC 6205, or by demonstrating that the correction is unbiased for the clusters lacking variable-star tests.
  2. [Sec. 2.5] The discreteness correction is calibrated with a single 0.8 Msun, Z~0.001 alpha-enhanced BaSTI track, together with a uniform working prior N_tip <= 500. The text states that 'variations in the cluster parameters have much smaller effect' but provides no sensitivity study to support this claim for the range of metallicities, helium abundances, masses, and mass-loss rates present in the 27-cluster sample. Given the two large outliers in the cross-check, this is a load-bearing assumption. Please show explicitly how the MC correction changes when the input track is replaced by cluster-specific luminosity functions, when the 2G helium fraction is varied, or when the upper-RGB population is depleted by mass loss. At minimum, the correction should be validated on the ten clusters with variable-star measurements, where the variable-based TRGB can serve as an independent reference.
  3. [Sec. 4.1 and Table 8] The likelihood in Sec. 4.1 combines per-cluster observational and theoretical uncertainties in quadrature, but Table 8 explicitly labels most theoretical components as 'Common uncertainty components' (numerical resolution, convection, electron conduction, radiative opacity, nuclear rates, equation of state, atmospheric boundary, screening, and thermal-neutrino rates). Treating these common-mode systematics as independent across 27 clusters artificially reduces the effective theoretical uncertainty and can strengthen the reported limit. The Monte-Carlo propagation in Sec. 3.3.7 is per cluster category rather than a joint draw over all clusters, so it does not preserve the correlations. Please either marginalize over the common nuisance parameters (e.g., with a global shift in the theoretical TRGB scale) or demonstrate numerically that the 95% CL limit is insensitive to this choice.
  4. [Sec. 4.2 and Sec. 5.1] The control analysis is presented as demonstrating robustness because the variable-inclusive limit (g_ae < 4.3e-14) is close to the fiducial limit (g_ae < 3.8e-14). However, the two largest outliers, NGC 288 and NGC 6205, are the clusters where the non-variable and variable estimates differ most, and the control likelihood does not isolate their contribution. In addition, Sec. 5.1 acknowledges that low-mass clusters have 'biased statistics and a higher scatter' for the non-variable TRGB estimates, then states that this does not affect the conclusions because simulations are cluster-specific. That statement is not self-evident: a mass-dependent bias in the observed TRGB enters directly into the per-cluster likelihood and can bias the combined limit. Please show the limit obtained when the two discrepant clusters are excluded, and when the variable-based estimates are substituted for all ten clusters with well-defined variables.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Sec. 2.2] The sentence 'However, we have meet only a few such cases' contains a typo; it should read 'we have met only a few such cases'.
  2. [Fig. 2 caption] The phrase 'Naturally, only ten clusters with the most luminous well-defined variable TRGB star do not lie on the bisector' is confusing. It would be clearer to state that the remaining seventeen clusters lie on the bisector by construction because they have no brighter variable star.
  3. [Sec. 5.1] The symbol deltaY_{2G,1G} is used without definition in the text; it should be defined where the helium abundances Y_{1G} and Y_{2G} are introduced.
  4. [Sec. 4.3.1] The quoted limit mu_12 < 0.46 is based on a differential use of fitting formulae and is explicitly not a self-consistent MESA result. The paper is careful about this, but the discussion in Sec. 5.4 refers to it as 'the strongest among those published up to date'; please add the same caveat there for consistency.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the TRGB observations and MESA g_ae predictions are independent inputs combined in a likelihood.

full rationale

The derivation chain is self-contained. Observed TRGB bolometric magnitudes are obtained from individual-star photometry (Stetson/HST/Gaia) converted to absolute scale using isochrone-fitted distances and bolometric corrections, while the g_ae-dependent predictions come from independent MESA stellar-structure calculations in which g_ae enters only through added energy-loss rates. The likelihood combines these two independent inputs; no parameter is fitted to the data and then renamed a prediction, and the best-fit g_ae is consistent with zero. The authors' prior papers [12] and [122] supply cluster parameters and the likelihood construction, but these are observational/statistical tools that do not assume the TRGB luminosity being tested or a particular value of g_ae; reliance on them is standard use of prior work, not a circular reduction. The main caveats (the single BaSTI track used in the Monte-Carlo correction, and the two outlier clusters in Fig. 2 where the non-variable estimate is much fainter) are accuracy and systematic-uncertainty concerns, not circularity.

Assumptions & free parameters 7 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on fitted cluster parameters from prior papers, on adopted stellar-physics constants (alpha_MLT, mass loss, etc.) whose uncertainties are propagated, and on calibration priors for the discrete-sampling correction. No new particles or forces are invented; the axion is a pre-existing hypothesis being tested.

free parameters (7)
  • Cluster parameters ([Fe/H], age, distance, reddening) for 27 clusters = from isochrone fits in Ref [12]
    Adopted as inputs for both observed TRGB luminosity and MESA models; any bias propagates into the bound.
  • Initial stellar mass M_init per cluster = 0.75-0.85 Msun (cluster-dependent)
    Chosen so that the MESA model reaches the TRGB at the adopted cluster age; one-sided uncertainty up to 0.0026 dex (Table 8).
  • Mixing-length parameter alpha_MLT = 1.82
    Solar-calibrated value from MIST; uncertainty grid 1.60-2.00 in Sec. 3.3.5.
  • Convective overshoot f_ov = 0.016
    Baseline value adopted for exponential overshoot; extreme value 0.125 used in the uncertainty budget.
  • Semiconvection parameter alpha_sc = 0.01
    Baseline value; variation to 0.1 gives a negligible change in TRGB luminosity.
  • Reimers RGB mass-loss efficiency eta_R = 0.3
    Used for clusters without Tailo et al. mass-loss measurements; hot-flasher clusters dominate the wind uncertainty.
  • Working prior on hidden N_tip = N_tip <= 500 (uniform)
    Used in the Monte Carlo calibration of the discreteness correction; explicitly not a physical prior.
assumptions (6)
  • domain assumption Axion-electron emissivities (bremsstrahlung and Compton) from Raffelt-Weiss are correct in the degenerate RGB core.
    Sec. 3.2 implements these rates in MESA; they are the standard rates used in the stellar-cooling literature.
  • domain assumption The light-axion limit m_a << T applies, so finite-mass suppression is negligible.
    Sec. 3.2 and Sec. 4.2 restrict the quoted bound to m_a < 1 keV.
  • domain assumption MESA stellar evolution code reliably models the RGB core and TRGB with the chosen input physics.
    Sec. 3.1.2 lists the physical ingredients; correctness is assumed for the code used.
  • ad hoc to paper A single 0.8 Msun, Z~0.001 alpha-enhanced BaSTI track provides a representative parent RGB luminosity function for the discreteness-correction calibration.
    Sec. 2.5 uses this track for all clusters; the paper states that cluster-parameter variations have smaller effect but does not show it.
  • domain assumption The two-population helium mixture can be approximated by Y_mix to first order in the helium spread.
    Eq. (3.1)-(3.2) in Sec. 3.1.1 justify the approximation for smooth observables; the paper notes a small caveat for the observational estimator.
  • domain assumption For hot-flasher clusters, the TRGB occurs before helium ignition and strong mass loss controls the tip; the standard MESA setup applies up to the TRGB.
    Sec. 3.1.3 and Sec. 3.2.2 discuss the hot-flasher treatment; the analysis stops at the TRGB, avoiding flash-induced mixing complications.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Isochrone fitting of Galactic globular clusters - IX. Tip of the red-giant branch for 27 clusters and constraints on new particle physics." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/H2HAOQ2L

@misc{pith2026260804801,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Isochrone fitting of Galactic globular clusters - IX. Tip of the red-giant branch for 27 clusters and constraints on new particle physics},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/H2HAOQ2L}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2608.04801}
}
read the original abstract

Red-giant evolution is sensitive to non-standard channels of energy loss in stellar cores and therefore provides a probe of new physics. Such losses increase the luminosity of the tip of the red-giant branch (TRGB), the brightest point reached by a red giant in the color-magnitude diagram. Previous analyses of TRGB luminosities in globular clusters placed stringent bounds on the axion-electron coupling g_ae, but were limited by observational and theoretical uncertainties. To improve these constraints, we use a new homogeneous set of parameters for 27 globular clusters, derived from our fitting of the Stetson ground-based, Hubble Space Telescope, and Gaia data by isochrones from the Dartmouth Stellar Evolution Database and a Bag of Stellar Tracks and Isochrones together with state-of-the-art Modules for Experiments in Stellar Astrophysics models. For each cluster, we identify the most luminous non-variable red giant, infer its luminosity from the best-fit isochrones, and apply Monte-Carlo based corrections for discrete sampling of the red-giant branch and for the exclusion of variable stars. We model the TRGB luminosity as a function of g_ae, as well as its uncertainties, for each cluster individually, and combine the results in a likelihood analysis. We find no indication of anomalous energy losses and obtain g_ae<3.8*10^(-14) at 95% confidence level. The median TRGB bolometric absolute magnitude is -3.53+-0.05 mag. We briefly discuss the implications for the neutrino magnetic dipole moment, millicharged particles, and other new physics.

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

163 extracted references · 29 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Peccei and H.R

    R.D. Peccei and H.R. Quinn,CP conservation in the presence of instantons,Phys. Rev. Lett. 38(1977) 1440

    1977

  2. [2]

    Peccei and H.R

    R.D. Peccei and H.R. Quinn,Constraints imposed by CP conservation in the presence of instantons,Phys. Rev. D16(1977) 1791

    1977

  3. [3]

    Weinberg,A new light boson?,Phys

    S. Weinberg,A new light boson?,Phys. Rev. Lett.40(1978) 223

    1978

  4. [4]

    Wilczek,Problem of strongpandtinvariance in the presence of instantons,Phys

    F. Wilczek,Problem of strongpandtinvariance in the presence of instantons,Phys. Rev. Lett.40(1978) 279

    1978

  5. [5]

    Jaeckel and A

    J. Jaeckel and A. Ringwald,The low-energy frontier of particle physics,Ann. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci.60(2010) 405 [1002.0329]

    arXiv 2010

  6. [6]

    Raffelt,Stars as Laboratories for Fundamental Physics: The Astrophysics of Neutrinos, Axions, and Other Weakly Interacting Particles, University of Chicago Press, Chicago (1996)

    G.G. Raffelt,Stars as Laboratories for Fundamental Physics: The Astrophysics of Neutrinos, Axions, and Other Weakly Interacting Particles, University of Chicago Press, Chicago (1996)

    1996

  7. [7]

    Raffelt,Particle physics from stars,Ann

    G.G. Raffelt,Particle physics from stars,Ann. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci.49(1999) 163 [hep-ph/9903472]

    arXiv 1999

  8. [8]

    Caputo and G

    A. Caputo and G. Raffelt,Astrophysical axion bounds: The 2024 edition,PoS COSMICWISPers(2024) 041 [2401.13728]. – 38 –

    arXiv 2024

Show all 163 references
  1. [9]

    Raffelt,Astrophysical methods to constrain axions and other novel particle phenomena, Phys

    G.G. Raffelt,Astrophysical methods to constrain axions and other novel particle phenomena, Phys. Rept.198(1990) 1

    1990

  2. [10]

    Viaux, M

    N. Viaux, M. Catelan, P.B. Stetson, G. Raffelt, J. Redondo, A.A.R. Valcarce et al.,Neutrino and axion bounds from the globular cluster M5 (NGC 5904),Phys. Rev. Lett.111(2013) 231301 [1311.1669]

    2013 arXiv

  3. [11]

    Giannotti, I

    M. Giannotti, I. Irastorza, J. Redondo and A. Ringwald,Cool WISPs for stellar cooling excesses,JCAP05(2016) 057 [1512.08108]

    2016 arXiv

  4. [12]

    Gontcharov, O.S

    G.A. Gontcharov, O.S. Ryutina, C.J. Bonatto, S.S. Savchenko and S.V. Troitsky,Isochrone Fitting of Galactic Globular Clusters – VIII. Homogeneous estimates of parameters for 27 clusters,Research in Astron. and Astrophys.(2026) in press [2605.28505]

    2026 arXiv

  5. [13]

    Paxton, L

    B. Paxton, L. Bildsten, A. Dotter, F. Herwig, P. Lesaffre and F.X. Timmes,Modules for Experiments in Stellar Astrophysics (MESA),Astrophys. J. Suppl.192(2011) 3 [1009.1622]

    2011 arXiv

  6. [14]

    Paxton, M

    B. Paxton, M. Cantiello, P. Arras, L. Bildsten, E.F. Brown, A. Dotter et al.,Modules for Experiments in Stellar Astrophysics (MESA): Planets, Oscillations, Rotation, and Massive Stars,Astrophys. J. Suppl.208(2013) 4 [1301.0319]

    2013 arXiv

  7. [15]

    Paxton, P

    B. Paxton, P. Marchant, J. Schwab, E.B. Bauer, L. Bildsten, M. Cantiello et al.,Modules for Experiments in Stellar Astrophysics (MESA): Binaries, Pulsations, and Explosions, Astrophys. J. Suppl.220(2015) 15 [1506.03146]

    2015 arXiv

  8. [16]

    Paxton, J

    B. Paxton, J. Schwab, E.B. Bauer, L. Bildsten, S. Blinnikov, P. Duffell et al.,Modules for Experiments in Stellar Astrophysics (MESA): Convective Boundaries, Element Diffusion, and Massive Star Explosions,Astrophys. J. Suppl.234(2018) 34 [1710.08424]

    2018 arXiv

  9. [17]

    Paxton, R

    B. Paxton, R. Smolec, J. Schwab, A. Gautschy, L. Bildsten, M. Cantiello et al.,Modules for Experiments in Stellar Astrophysics (MESA): Pulsating Variable Stars, Rotation, Convective Boundaries, and Energy Conservation,Astrophys. J. Suppl.243(2019) 10 [1903.01426]

    2019 arXiv

  10. [18]

    Jermyn, E.B

    A.S. Jermyn, E.B. Bauer, J. Schwab, R. Farmer, W.H. Ball, E.P. Bellinger et al.,Modules for Experiments in Stellar Astrophysics (MESA): Time-Dependent Convection, Energy Conservation, Automatic Differentiation, and Infrastructure,Astrophys. J. Suppl.265(2023) 15 [2208.03651]

    2023 arXiv

  11. [19]

    Dotter, B

    A. Dotter, B. Chaboyer, D. Jevremovi´ c, V. Kostov, E. Baron and J.W. Ferguson,The Dartmouth Stellar Evolution Database,Astrophys. J. Suppl.178(2008) 89 [0804.4473]

    2008 arXiv

  12. [20]

    Pietrinferni, S

    A. Pietrinferni, S. Hidalgo, S. Cassisi, M. Salaris, A. Savino, A. Mucciarelli et al.,Updated BaSTI stellar evolution models and isochrones. II.α-enhanced calculations,Astrophys. J.908 (2021) 102 [2012.10085]

    2021

  13. [21]

    Milone, A.F

    A.P. Milone, A.F. Marino, A. Renzini, F. D’Antona, J. Anderson, B. Barbuy et al.,The Hubble Space Telescope UV legacy survey of Galactic globular clusters - XVI. The helium abundance of multiple populations,Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.481(2018) 5098 [1809.05006]

    2018 arXiv

  14. [22]

    Nardiello, M

    D. Nardiello, M. Libralato, G. Piotto, J. Anderson, A. Bellini, A. Aparicio et al.,The Hubble Space Telescope UV Legacy Survey of Galactic Globular Clusters - XVII. Public Catalogue Release,Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.481(2018) 3382 [1809.04300]

    2018 arXiv

  15. [23]

    Vallenari, A.G.A

    Gaia Collaboration, A. Vallenari, A.G.A. Brown, T. Prusti, J.H.J. de Bruijne, F. Arenou et al.,Gaia Data Release 3. Summary of the content and survey properties,Astron. Astrophys.674(2023) A1 [2208.00211]

    2023 arXiv

  16. [24]

    Stetson, E

    P.B. Stetson, E. Pancino, A. Zocchi, N. Sanna and M. Monelli,Homogeneous photometry - VII. Globular clusters in the Gaia era,Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.485(2019) 3042 [1902.09925]. – 39 –

    2019 arXiv

  17. [25]

    Libralato, A

    M. Libralato, A. Bellini, E. Vesperini, G. Piotto, A.P. Milone, R.P. van der Marel et al.,The Hubble Space Telescope UV Legacy Survey of Galactic Globular Clusters. XXIII. Proper-motion Catalogs and Internal Kinematics,Astrophys. J.934(2022) 150 [2206.09924]

    2022 arXiv

  18. [26]

    Bonatto, F

    C. Bonatto, F. Campos and S.O. Kepler,Mapping the differential reddening in globular clusters,Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.435(2013) 263 [1307.3935]

    2013 arXiv

  19. [27]

    Gontcharov, A.V

    G.A. Gontcharov, A.V. Mosenkov and M.Y. Khovritchev,Isochrone fitting of Galactic globular clusters - I. NGC 5904,Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.483(2019) 4949 [1812.06433]

    2019 arXiv

  20. [28]

    Gontcharov, M.Y

    G.A. Gontcharov, M.Y. Khovritchev and A.V. Mosenkov,Isochrone fitting of Galactic globular clusters - II. NGC 6205 (M13),Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.497(2020) 3674 [2008.10200]

    2020 arXiv

  21. [29]

    Gontcharov, M.Y

    G.A. Gontcharov, M.Y. Khovritchev, A.V. Mosenkov, V.B. Il’in, A.A. Marchuk, S.S. Savchenko et al.,Isochrone fitting of Galactic globular clusters - III. NGC 288, NGC 362, and NGC 6218 (M12),Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.508(2021) 2688 [2109.13115]

    2021 arXiv

  22. [30]

    Gontcharov, M.Y

    G.A. Gontcharov, M.Y. Khovritchev, A.V. Mosenkov, V.B. Il’in, A.A. Marchuk, D.M. Poliakov et al.,Isochrone fitting of Galactic globular clusters - IV. NGC 6362 and NGC 6723,Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.518(2023) 3036 [2211.12684]

    2023 arXiv

  23. [31]

    Gontcharov, C.J

    G.A. Gontcharov, C.J. Bonatto, O.S. Ryutina, S.S. Savchenko, A.V. Mosenkov, V.B. Il’in et al.,Isochrone fitting of Galactic globular clusters - V. NGC 6397 and NGC 6809 (M55), Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.526(2023) 5628 [2402.06524]

    2023 arXiv

  24. [32]

    Gontcharov, S.S

    G.A. Gontcharov, S.S. Savchenko, A.A. Marchuk, C.J. Bonatto, O.S. Ryutina, M.Y. Khovritchev et al.,Isochrone Fitting of Galactic Globular Clusters—VI. High-latitude Clusters NGC 5024 (M53), NGC 5053, NGC 5272 (M3), NGC 5466, and NGC 7099 (M30), Research in Astron. and Astrophy...

    2024 arXiv

  25. [33]

    Gontcharov, S.S

    G.A. Gontcharov, S.S. Savchenko, O.S. Ryutina, C. Bonatto, J.-W. Lee, V.B. Il’in et al., Isochrone fitting of Galactic globular clusters – VII. NGC 1904 (M79), NGC 4372, and revision of NGC 288, NGC 362, NGC 5904 (M5), NGC 6205 (M13), and NGC 6218 (M12), Publ. Astron. Soc. Aus...

    2026

  26. [34]

    Callingham, M

    T.M. Callingham, M. Cautun, A.J. Deason, C.S. Frenk, R.J.J. Grand and F. Marinacci,The chemo-dynamical groups of Galactic globular clusters,Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.513 (2022) 4107 [2202.00591]

    2022 arXiv

  27. [35]

    Belokurov and A

    V. Belokurov and A. Kravtsov,In-situ versus accreted Milky Way globular clusters: a new classification method and implications for cluster formation,Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.528 (2024) 3198 [2309.15902]

    2024 arXiv

  28. [36]

    Boldrini, P

    P. Boldrini, P. Di Matteo, C. Laporte, O. Agertz, S. Khoperskov and G. Pagnini,A new classification of ex situ and in situ Galactic globular clusters based on a method trained on Milky Way analogues in the TNG50 cosmological simulations,Astron. Astrophys.704(2025) A81 [2506.13254]

    2025

  29. [37]

    Massari,Origin of the System of Globular Clusters in the Milky Way—Gaia eDR3 Edition, Research Notes of the American Astronomical Society9(2025) 64 [2503.14657]

    D. Massari,Origin of the System of Globular Clusters in the Milky Way—Gaia eDR3 Edition, Research Notes of the American Astronomical Society9(2025) 64 [2503.14657]

    2025 arXiv

  30. [38]

    Clement,Catalogue of variable stars in Milky Way globular clusters, inEuropean Physical Journal Web of Conferences, vol

    C. Clement,Catalogue of variable stars in Milky Way globular clusters, inEuropean Physical Journal Web of Conferences, vol. 152 ofEuropean Physical Journal Web of Conferences, p. 01021, Sept., 2017, DOI

    2017

  31. [39]

    Ita, J.W

    Y. Ita, J.W. Menzies, P.A. Whitelock, N. Matsunaga, M. Takayama, Y. Nakada et al.,Light and colour variations of Mira variables in the Small Magellanic Cloud,Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.500(2021) 82 [2010.08171]

    2021 arXiv

  32. [40]

    Nicholls, P.R

    C.P. Nicholls, P.R. Wood, M.-R.L. Cioni and I. Soszy´ nski,Long secondary periods in variable red giants,Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.399(2009) 2063. – 40 –

    2009

  33. [41]

    Lebzelter, W

    T. Lebzelter, W. Nowotny, K.H. Hinkle, S. H¨ ofner and B. Aringer,Abundance analysis for long-period variables. II. RGB and AGB stars in the globular cluster 47 Tucanae,Astron. Astrophys.567(2014) A143 [1406.6564]

    2014 arXiv

  34. [42]

    Capozzi and G

    F. Capozzi and G. Raffelt,Axion and neutrino bounds improved with new calibrations of the tip of the red-giant branch using geometric distance determinations,Phys. Rev. D102(2020) 083007 [2007.03694]

    2020 arXiv

  35. [43]

    Anderson, N.W

    R.I. Anderson, N.W. Koblischke and L. Eyer,Small-amplitude red giants elucidate the nature of the tip of the red giant branch as a standard candle,Astrophys. J. Lett.963(2024) L43 [2303.04790]

    2024 arXiv

  36. [44]

    Montegriffo, M

    Gaia Collaboration, P. Montegriffo, M. Bellazzini, F. De Angeli, R. Andrae, M.A. Barstow et al.,Gaia Data Release 3: The Galaxy in your preferred colours. Synthetic photometry from Gaia low-resolution spectra,Astron. Astrophys.674(2023) A33 [2206.06215]

    2023 arXiv

  37. [45]

    Skrutskie, R.M

    M.F. Skrutskie, R.M. Cutri, R. Stiening, M.D. Weinberg, S. Schneider, J.M. Carpenter et al., The Two Micron All Sky Survey (2MASS),Astron. J.131(2006) 1163

    2006

  38. [46]

    Cohen, M

    R.E. Cohen, M. Hempel, F. Mauro, D. Geisler, J. Alonso-Garc ´ ıa and K. Kinemuchi,Wide field near-infrared photometry of 12 Galactic globular clusters: Observations versus models on the red giant branch,Astron. J.150(2015) 176 [1509.01470]

    2015 arXiv

  39. [47]

    CMD 3.6: a web interface to PARSEC/COLIBRI isochrones and bolometric corrections

    P. Marigo, L. Girardi, A. Bressan et al., “CMD 3.6: a web interface to PARSEC/COLIBRI isochrones and bolometric corrections.”https://stev.oapd.inaf.it/cgi-bin/cmd_3.6, 2026

    2026

  40. [48]

    Y. Chen, L. Girardi, X. Fu, A. Bressan, P. Marigo, M. Barbieri et al.,YBC: a stellar bolometric corrections database with variable extinction coefficients. Application to PARSEC isochrones,Astron. Astrophys.632(2019) A105 [1910.09037]

    2019 arXiv

  41. [49]

    Cardelli, G.C

    J.A. Cardelli, G.C. Clayton and J.S. Mathis,The relationship between infrared, optical, and ultraviolet extinction,Astrophys. J.345(1989) 245

    1989

  42. [50]

    O’Donnell,R V -dependent optical and near-ultraviolet extinction,Astrophys

    J.E. O’Donnell,R V -dependent optical and near-ultraviolet extinction,Astrophys. J.422 (1994) 158

    1994

  43. [51]

    Legnardi, A.P

    M.V. Legnardi, A.P. Milone, G. Cordoni, E.P. Lagioia, E. Dondoglio, A.F. Marino et al., Differential reddening in the direction of 56 Galactic globular clusters,Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.522(2023) 367 [2304.05076]

    2023 arXiv

  44. [52]

    Baumgardt and E

    H. Baumgardt and E. Vasiliev,Accurate distances to Galactic globular clusters through a combination of Gaia EDR3, HST, and literature data,Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.505 (2021) 5957 [2105.09526]

    2021 arXiv

  45. [53]

    Carretta, A

    E. Carretta, A. Bragaglia, R.G. Gratton, V. D’Orazi and S. Lucatello,Intrinsic iron spread and a new metallicity scale for globular clusters,Astron. Astrophys.508(2009) 695 [0910.0675]

    2009 arXiv

  46. [54]

    Wagner-Kaiser, A

    R. Wagner-Kaiser, A. Sarajedini, T. von Hippel, D.C. Stenning, D.A. van Dyk, E. Jeffery et al.,The ACS survey of Galactic globular clusters – XIV. Bayesian single-population analysis of 69 globular clusters,Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.468(2017) 1038 [1702.08856]

    2017 arXiv

  47. [55]

    Valcin, R

    D. Valcin, R. Jimenez, U. Seljak and L. Verde,The Age of the Universe with Globular Clusters III: Gaia distances and hierarchical modeling,JCAP2025(2025) 030 [2503.19481]

    2025 arXiv

  48. [56]

    Straniero, C

    O. Straniero, C. Pallanca, E. Dalessandro, I. Dominguez, F.R. Ferraro, M. Giannotti et al., The RGB tip of galactic globular clusters and the revision of the bound of the axion-electron coupling,Astron. Astrophys.644(2020) A166 [2010.03833]

    2020 arXiv

  49. [57]

    BaSTI: A Bag of Stellar Tracks and Isochrones

    BaSTI, “BaSTI: A Bag of Stellar Tracks and Isochrones.” https://basti-iac.oa-abruzzo.inaf.it/, 2026. – 41 –

    2026

  50. [58]

    J. Choi, A. Dotter, C. Conroy, M. Cantiello, B. Paxton and B.D. Johnson,MESA isochrones and stellar tracks (MIST). I: Solar-scaled models,The Astrophysical Journal823(2016) 102 [1604.08592]

    2016 arXiv

  51. [59]

    Valcin, R

    D. Valcin, R. Jimenez, L. Verde, J.L. Bernal and B.D. Wandelt,The age of the universe with globular clusters: Reducing systematic uncertainties,Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics2021(2021) 017 [2102.04486]

    2021 arXiv

  52. [60]

    Tailo, A.P

    M. Tailo, A.P. Milone, E.P. Lagioia, F. D’Antona, A.F. Marino, E. Vesperini et al.,Mass-loss along the red giant branch in 46 globular clusters and their multiple populations,Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.498(2020) 5745 [2009.01080]

    2020 arXiv

  53. [61]

    Reimers,Circumstellar absorption lines and mass loss from red giants, inProblems in Stellar Atmospheres and Envelopes, B

    D. Reimers,Circumstellar absorption lines and mass loss from red giants, inProblems in Stellar Atmospheres and Envelopes, B. Baschek, W.H. Kegel and G. Traving, eds., (Berlin), p. 229, Springer, 1975

    1975

  54. [62]

    Grevesse and A.J

    N. Grevesse and A.J. Sauval,Standard solar composition,Space Science Reviews85(1998) 161

    1998

  55. [63]

    Jermyn, J

    A.S. Jermyn, J. Schwab, E. Bauer, F.X. Timmes and A.Y. Potekhin,Skye: A differentiable equation of state,Astrophys. J.913(2021) 72 [2104.00691]

    2021 arXiv

  56. [64]

    Potekhin and G

    A.Y. Potekhin and G. Chabrier,Thermodynamic functions of dense plasmas: Analytic approximations for astrophysical applications,Contributions to Plasma Physics50(2010) 82 [1001.0690]

    2010 arXiv

  57. [65]

    Irwin,The FreeEOS code for calculating the equation of state for stellar interiors, 2004

    A.W. Irwin,The FreeEOS code for calculating the equation of state for stellar interiors, 2004

    2004

  58. [66]

    Iglesias and F.J

    C.A. Iglesias and F.J. Rogers,Radiative opacities for carbon- and oxygen-rich mixtures,The Astrophysical Journal412(1993) 752

    1993

  59. [67]

    Iglesias and F.J

    C.A. Iglesias and F.J. Rogers,Updated OPAL Opacities,Astrophys. J.464(1996) 943

    1996

  60. [68]

    Ferguson, D.R

    J.W. Ferguson, D.R. Alexander, F. Allard, T. Barman, J.G. Bodnarik, P.H. Hauschildt et al., Low-temperature opacities,The Astrophysical Journal623(2005) 585 [astro-ph/0502045]

    2005 arXiv

  61. [69]

    Cox and R.T

    J.P. Cox and R.T. Giuli,Principles of Stellar Structure, Gordon and Breach, New York (1968)

    1968

  62. [70]

    Langer, K.J

    N. Langer, K.J. Fricke and D. Sugimoto,Semiconvective Diffusion and Energy Transport, Astron. Astrophys.126(1983) 207

    1983

  63. [71]

    Cyburt, A.M

    R.H. Cyburt, A.M. Amthor, R. Ferguson et al.,The JINA REACLIB database: Its recent updates and impact on Type-I X-Ray bursts,The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series 189(2010) 240

    2010

  64. [72]

    Imbriani, H

    G. Imbriani, H. Costantini, A. Formicola, A. Vomiero, C. Angulo, D. Bemmerer et al., S-factor of 14N(p, γ)15Oat astrophysical energies,Eur. Phys. J. A25(2005) 455 [nucl-ex/0509005]

    2005 arXiv

  65. [73]

    Fynbo, C.A

    H.O.U. Fynbo, C.A. Diget, U.C. Bergmann, M.J.G. Borge, J. Cederk¨ all et al.,Revised Rates for the Stellar Triple-Alpha Process from Measurement of C-12 Nuclear Resonances,Nature 433(2005) 136

    2005

  66. [74]

    Chugunov, H.E

    A.I. Chugunov, H.E. DeWitt and D.G. Yakovlev,Coulomb tunneling for fusion reactions in dense matter: Path integral Monte Carlo versus mean field,Phys. Rev. D76(2007) 025028 [0707.3500]

    2007 arXiv

  67. [75]

    N. Itoh, H. Hayashi, A. Nishikawa and Y. Kohyama,Neutrino Energy Loss in Stellar Interiors. VII. Pair, Photo-, Plasma, Bremsstrahlung, and Recombination Neutrino Processes, Astrophys. J. Suppl.102(1996) 411. – 42 –

    1996

  68. [76]

    Cassisi, A.Y

    S. Cassisi, A.Y. Potekhin, A. Pietrinferni, M. Catelan and M. Salaris,Updated Electron-Conduction Opacities: The Impact on Low-Mass Stellar Models,Astrophys. J.661 (2007) 1094 [astro-ph/0703011]

    2007 arXiv

  69. [77]

    Blouin, N.R

    S. Blouin, N.R. Shaffer, D. Saumon and C.E. Starrett,New Conductive Opacities for White Dwarf Envelopes,Astrophys. J.899(2020) 46 [2006.16390]

    2020 arXiv

  70. [78]

    Cassisi, A.Y

    S. Cassisi, A.Y. Potekhin, M. Salaris and A. Pietrinferni,Electron conduction opacities at the transition between moderate and strong degeneracy: Uncertainties and impact on stellar models,Astron. Astrophys.654(2021) A149 [2108.11653]

    2021

  71. [79]

    Cassisi, H

    S. Cassisi, H. Schlattl, M. Salaris and A. Weiss,First full evolutionary computation of the He-flash-induced mixing in Population II stars,The Astrophysical Journal582(2003) L43 [astro-ph/0211498]

    2003 arXiv

  72. [80]

    Di Luzio, M

    L. Di Luzio, M. Giannotti, E. Nardi and L. Visinelli,The landscape of QCD axion models, Phys. Rept.870(2020) 1 [2003.01100]

    2020 arXiv

  73. [81]

    Raffelt and A

    G. Raffelt and A. Weiss,Red giant bound on the axion–electron coupling reexamined,Physical Review D51(1995) 1495 [hep-ph/9410205]

    1995 arXiv

  74. [82]

    Pantziris and K

    A. Pantziris and K. Kang,Axion emission rates in stars and constraints on its mass,Physical Review D33(1986) 3509

    1986

  75. [83]

    Kippenhahn, A

    R. Kippenhahn, A. Weigert and A. Weiss,Stellar Structure and Evolution, Astronomy and Astrophysics Library, Springer Berlin, Heidelberg, 2 ed. (2012), 10.1007/978-3-642-30304-3

    2012 doi

  76. [84]

    Saltas and E

    I.D. Saltas and E. Tognelli,New calibrated models for the tip of the red giant branch luminosity and a thorough analysis of theoretical uncertainties,Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 514(2022) 3058 [2203.02499]

    2022 arXiv

  77. [85]

    Kantor and M.E

    E.M. Kantor and M.E. Gusakov,The neutrino emission due to plasmon decay and neutrino luminosity of white dwarfs,Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.381(2007) 1702 [0708.2093]

    2007 arXiv

  78. [86]

    Valle, M

    G. Valle, M. Dell’Omodarme, P.G. Prada Moroni and S. Degl’Innocenti,Cumulative physical uncertainty in modern stellar models. II. The dependence on the chemical composition, Astron. Astrophys.554(2013) A68 [1304.7658]

    2013 arXiv

  79. [87]

    Serenelli, A

    A. Serenelli, A. Weiss, S. Cassisi, M. Salaris and A. Pietrinferni,The brightness of the red giant branch tip. Theoretical framework, a set of reference models, and predicted observables, Astron. Astrophys.606(2017) A33 [1706.09910]

    2017 arXiv

  80. [88]

    Salaris, A

    M. Salaris, A. Chieffi and O. Straniero,Theα-enhanced isochrones and their impact on the fits to the Galactic globular cluster system,Astrophys. J.414(1993) 580

    1993

  81. [89]

    Badnell, M.A

    N.R. Badnell, M.A. Bautista, K. Butler, F. Delahaye, C. Mendoza, P. Palmeri et al.,Updated opacities from the Opacity Project,Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.360(2005) 458

    2005

  82. [90]

    Colgan, D.P

    J. Colgan, D.P. Kilcrease, N.H. Magee, M.E. Sherrill, J. Abdallah, J., P. Hakel et al.,A New Generation of Los Alamos Opacity Tables,Astrophys. J.817(2016) 116

    2016

  83. [91]

    Acharya et al.,Solar fusion III: New data and theory for hydrogen-burning stars,Reviews of Modern Physics97(2025) 035002 [2405.06470]

    B. Acharya et al.,Solar fusion III: New data and theory for hydrogen-burning stars,Reviews of Modern Physics97(2025) 035002 [2405.06470]

    2025

  84. [92]

    Eriksen, T

    T.K. Eriksen, T. Kib´ edi, M.W. Reed, A.E. Stuchbery, K.J. Cook et al.,Improved Precision on the Experimental E0 Decay Branching Ratio of the Hoyle State,Phys. Rev. C102(2020) 024320

    2020

  85. [93]

    Chernykh, H

    M. Chernykh, H. Feldmeier, T. Neff, P. von Neumann-Cosel and A. Richter,Pair Decay Width of the Hoyle State and Its Role for Stellar Carbon Production,Phys. Rev. Lett.105 (2010) 022501

    2010

  86. [94]

    Alburger,Gamma-Ray Decay of the 7.66-MeV Level of C-12,Phys

    D.E. Alburger,Gamma-Ray Decay of the 7.66-MeV Level of C-12,Phys. Rev.124(1961) 193. – 43 –

    1961

  87. [95]

    Tsumura, T

    M. Tsumura, T. Kawabata, Y. Takahashi, S. Adachi, H. Akimune et al.,First Experimental Determination of the Radiative-Decay Probability of the 3-1 State in C-12 for Estimating the Triple-Alpha Reaction Rate in High-Temperature Environments,Phys. Lett. B817(2021) 136283

    2021

  88. [96]

    Hall and N.W

    I. Hall and N.W. Tanner,The Radiative Decay of the 7.66 MeV Level of C-12,Nucl. Phys.53 (1964) 673

    1964

  89. [97]

    Z. Luo, M. Barbui, J. Bishop, G. Chubarian, V.Z. Goldberg et al.,Radiative Decay Branching Ratio of the Hoyle State,Phys. Rev. C109(2024) 025801

    2024

  90. [98]

    Chamberlin, D

    D. Chamberlin, D. Bodansky, W.W. Jacobs and D.L. Oberg,Electromagnetic Decay of the 7.65-MeV State of C-12,Phys. Rev. C9(1974) 69

    1974

  91. [99]

    Dell’Aquila, I

    D. Dell’Aquila, I. Lombardo, L. Redigolo, M. Vigilante, F. Angelini et al.,Clarifying the Radiative Decay of the Hoyle State with Charged-Particle Spectroscopy,Sci. Rep.14(2024) 18958

    2024

  92. [100]

    Davids, R.C

    C.N. Davids, R.C. Pardo and A.W. Obst,Radiative Deexcitation of the 7.655-MeV State of C-12,Phys. Rev. C11(1975) 2063

    1975

  93. [101]

    T.K. Rana, D. Pandit, S. Manna, S. Kundu, K. Banerjee et al.,New Measurement of the Hoyle State Radiative Transition Width,Phys. Lett. B859(2024) 139083

    2024

  94. [102]

    Mak, H.C

    H.B. Mak, H.C. Evans, G.T. Ewan, A.B. McDonald and T.K. Alexander,Radiative Decay of the Second Excited State of C-12,Phys. Rev. C12(1975) 1158

    1975

  95. [103]

    Paulsen, K.C.W

    W. Paulsen, K.C.W. Li, S. Siem, V.W. Ingeberg, A.C. Larsen et al.,Remeasuring the Gamma-Decay Branching Ratio of the Hoyle State,Phys. Rev. C112(2025) 015803

    2025

  96. [104]

    Obst and W.J

    A.W. Obst and W.J. Braithwaite,Measurement of the Radiative Branching Ratio for the 7.65-MeV State in C-12 Using the Cascade Gamma Decays,Phys. Rev. C13(1976) 2033

    1976

  97. [105]

    Sakanashi, T

    K. Sakanashi, T. Kawabata, S. Adachi, H. Akimune, S. Aogaki et al.,Precise Measurement of the Gamma-Decay Probability of the Hoyle State with a New Triple Coincidence-Detection Method,Phys. Lett. B870(2025) 139893

    2025

  98. [106]

    Markham, S.M

    R.G. Markham, S.M. Austin and M.A.M. Shahabuddin,A Measurement of Gamma(rad)/Gamma for the 7.654 MeV State of C-12 and the Rate of the Stellar Triple-Alpha Reaction,Nucl. Phys. A270(1976) 489

    1976

  99. [107]

    Kib´ edi, B

    T. Kib´ edi, B. Alshahrani, A.E. Stuchbery, A.C. Larsen, A. G¨ orgen et al.,Radiative Width of the Hoyle State from Gamma-Ray Spectroscopy,Phys. Rev. Lett.125(2020) 182701

    2020

  100. [108]

    Seeger and R.W

    P.A. Seeger and R.W. Kavanagh,Electromagnetic Decay of the Second Excited State of C-12, Nucl. Phys.46(1963) 577

    1963

  101. [109]

    Martin,Guidelines for Nuclear Structure Evaluators, Tech

    M.J. Martin,Guidelines for Nuclear Structure Evaluators, Tech. Rep. ORNL/TM-2022/1835, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, TN (2022)

    2022

  102. [110]

    Rajput and T.D

    M.U. Rajput and T.D. MacMahon,Techniques for Evaluating Discrepant Data,Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A312(1992) 289

    1992

  103. [111]

    James, R.W

    M.F. James, R.W. Mills and D.R. Weaver,The Use of the Normalized Residual in Averaging Experimental Data and in Treating Outliers,Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A313(1992) 277

    1992

  104. [112]

    Birch,Visual Averaging Library (V.AveLib) User Manual

    M. Birch,Visual Averaging Library (V.AveLib) User Manual. International Atomic Energy Agency, Nuclear Data Section, 2015

    2015

  105. [113]

    Angulo, M

    C. Angulo, M. Arnould, M. Rayet, P. Descouvemont, D. Baye et al.,A Compilation of Charged-Particle Induced Thermonuclear Reaction Rates,Nucl. Phys. A656(1999) 3

    1999

  106. [114]

    Graboske, H.E

    H.C. Graboske, H.E. DeWitt, A.S. Grossman and M.S. Cooper,Screening factors for nuclear reactions. II. Intermediate screening and astrophysical applications,Astrophys. J.181(1973) 457. – 44 –

    1973

  107. [115]

    Alastuey and B

    A. Alastuey and B. Jancovici,Nuclear reaction rate enhancement in dense stellar matter, Astrophys. J.226(1978) 1034

    1978

  108. [116]

    N. Itoh, H. Totsuji, S. Ichimaru and H.E. DeWitt,Enhancement of thermonuclear reaction rate due to strong screening. II. Ionic mixtures,Astrophys. J.234(1979) 1079

    1979

  109. [117]

    Salpeter,Electron screening and thermonuclear reactions,Austral

    E.E. Salpeter,Electron screening and thermonuclear reactions,Austral. J. Phys.7(1954) 373

    1954

  110. [118]

    Dotter, E.B

    A. Dotter, E.B. Bauer, M. Park, C. Conroy, A.P. Milone, M. Joyce et al.,MESA isochrones and stellar tracks (MIST). II. Models withα-enhanced chemical composition,Astrophys. J. Suppl.283(2026) 64 [2602.22012]

    2026

  111. [119]

    Rogers and A

    F.J. Rogers and A. Nayfonov,Updated and expanded OPAL equation-of-state tables: Implications for helioseismology,Astrophys. J.576(2002) 1064

    2002

  112. [120]

    Saumon, G

    D. Saumon, G. Chabrier and H.M. van Horn,An equation of state for low-mass stars and giant planets,Astrophys. J. Suppl.99(1995) 713

    1995

  113. [121]

    Timmes and F.D

    F.X. Timmes and F.D. Swesty,The accuracy, consistency, and speed of an electron–positron equation of state based on table interpolation of the Helmholtz free energy,Astrophys. J. Suppl.126(2000) 501

    2000

  114. [122]

    Troitsky,Stellar evolution and axion-like particles: new constraints and hints from globular clusters in the Gaia DR3 data,JETP Lett.121(2025) 159 [2410.02266]

    S.V. Troitsky,Stellar evolution and axion-like particles: new constraints and hints from globular clusters in the Gaia DR3 data,JETP Lett.121(2025) 159 [2410.02266]

    2025 arXiv

  115. [123]

    Carenza and G

    P. Carenza and G. Lucente,Revisiting axion-electron bremsstrahlung emission rates in astrophysical environments,Phys. Rev. D103(2021) 123024 [2104.09524]

    2021 arXiv

  116. [124]

    Bernstein, M

    J. Bernstein, M. Ruderman and G. Feinberg,Electromagnetic properties of the neutrino, Phys. Rev.132(1963) 1227

    1963

  117. [125]

    Raffelt,New bound on neutrino dipole moments from globular-cluster stars,Phys

    G.G. Raffelt,New bound on neutrino dipole moments from globular-cluster stars,Phys. Rev. Lett.64(1990) 2856

    1990

  118. [126]

    Fujikawa and R.E

    K. Fujikawa and R.E. Shrock,The magnetic moment of a massive neutrino and neutrino-spin rotation,Phys. Rev. Lett.45(1980) 963

    1980

  119. [127]

    Lindner, B

    M. Lindner, B. Radovˇ ci´ c and J. Welter,Revisiting Large Neutrino Magnetic Moments,JHEP 07(2017) 139 [1706.02555]

    2017 arXiv

  120. [128]

    K.S. Babu, S. Jana and M. Lindner,Large Neutrino Magnetic Moments in the Light of Recent Experiments,JHEP10(2020) 040 [2007.04291]

    2020 arXiv

  121. [129]

    X. Lu, C. Zhu, G. L¨ u, S. Guo, Z. Li and G. Zhao,Impact of neutrino magnetic moments on the evolution of the helium flash and lithium-rich red clump stars,Phys. Rev. D111(2025) 103004 [2504.05671]

    2025

  122. [130]

    Viaux, M

    N. Viaux, M. Catelan, P.B. Stetson, G. Raffelt, J. Redondo, A.A.R. Valcarce et al., Particle-physics constraints from the globular cluster M5: Neutrino Dipole Moments,Astron. Astrophys.558(2013) A12 [1308.4627]

    2013 arXiv

  123. [131]

    D ´ ıaz, K.-P

    S.A. D ´ ıaz, K.-P. Schr¨ oder, K. Zuber, D. Jack and E.E.B. Barrios,Constraint on the axion-electron coupling constant and the neutrino magnetic dipole moment by using the tip-RGB luminosity of fifty globular clusters,1910.10568

    1910 arXiv

  124. [132]

    Raffelt and A

    G. Raffelt and A. Weiss,Nonstandard neutrino interactions and the evolution of red giants, Astron. Astrophys.264(1992) 536

    1992

  125. [133]

    Holdom,Twou(1)’s and epsilon charge shifts,Phys

    B. Holdom,Twou(1)’s and epsilon charge shifts,Phys. Lett. B166(1986) 196

    1986

  126. [134]

    Davidson, S

    S. Davidson, S. Hannestad and G.G. Raffelt,Updated bounds on milli-charged particles,JHEP 05(2000) 003 [hep-ph/0001179]. – 45 –

    2000 arXiv

  127. [135]

    A. Fung, S. Heeba, Q. Liu, V. Muralidharan, K. Schutz and A.C. Vincent,New bounds on light millicharged particles from the tip of the red-giant branch,Phys. Rev. D109(2024) 083011 [2309.06465]

    2024 arXiv

  128. [136]

    Vinyoles and H

    N. Vinyoles and H. Vogel,Minicharged particles from the Sun: A cutting-edge bound,JCAP 03(2016) 002 [1511.01122]

    2016 arXiv

  129. [137]

    Raffelt,Core mass at the helium flash from observations and a new bound on neutrino electromagnetic properties,Astrophys

    G.G. Raffelt,Core mass at the helium flash from observations and a new bound on neutrino electromagnetic properties,Astrophys. J.365(1990) 559

    1990

  130. [138]

    Fiorillo, G

    D.F.G. Fiorillo, G. Lucente, J. Sakstein and E. Vitagliano,Millicharged particle constraints from asymptotic giant branch stars,2605.30422

    arXiv

  131. [139]

    Okun,LIMITS OF ELECTRODYNAMICS: PARAPHOTONS?,Sov

    L.B. Okun,LIMITS OF ELECTRODYNAMICS: PARAPHOTONS?,Sov. Phys. JETP56 (1982) 502

    1982

  132. [140]

    Dolan, F.J

    M.J. Dolan, F.J. Hiskens and R.R. Volkas,Constraining dark photons with self-consistent simulations of globular cluster stars,JCAP05(2024) 099 [2306.13335]

    2024 arXiv

  133. [141]

    Hardy and R

    E. Hardy and R. Lasenby,Stellar cooling bounds on new light particles: plasma mixing effects, JHEP02(2017) 033 [1611.05852]

    2017 arXiv

  134. [142]

    Dondoglio, A.P

    E. Dondoglio, A.P. Milone, E.P. Lagioia, A.F. Marino, M. Tailo, G. Cordoni et al.,Multiple Stellar Populations along the Red Horizontal Branch and Red Clump of Globular Clusters, Astrophys. J.906(2021) 76 [2011.03283]

    2021 arXiv

  135. [143]

    Jang, A.P

    S. Jang, A.P. Milone, A.F. Marino, M. Tailo, E. Dondoglio, M.V. Legnardi et al.,New Perspective on the Multiple-population Phenomenon in Galactic Globular Clusters from a Wide-field Photometric Survey,Astrophys. J.981(2025) 57 [2502.02585]

    2025 arXiv

  136. [144]

    Bajkova and V.V

    A.T. Bajkova and V.V. Bobylev,Comparison of the Orbital Properties of the Milky Way Globular Clusters from the Data of the Gaia DR2 and EDR3 Catalogs,Astronomy Reports65 (2021) 737 [2108.08507]

    2021 arXiv

  137. [145]

    Nitschai, N

    M.S. Nitschai, N. Neumayer, M. H”aberle, C. Clontz, A.C. Seth, A.P. Milone et al., oMEGACat III: Multiband photometry and metallicities reveal spatially well-mixed populations withinωCentauri’s half-light radius,Astrophys. J.970(2024) 152 [2406.01688]

    2024 arXiv

  138. [146]

    Clontz, A.C

    C. Clontz, A.C. Seth et al.,oMEGACat IV: Constraining ages ofωCentauri sub-populations with precise Hubble Space Telescope photometry,Astrophys. J.977(2024) 14 [2409.13855]

    2024 arXiv

  139. [147]

    Milone, G

    A.P. Milone, G. Piotto, A. Renzini, A.F. Marino, L.R. Bedin, E. Vesperini et al.,The Hubble Space Telescope UV legacy survey of Galactic globular clusters. IX. The atlas of multiple stellar populations,Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.469(2017) 800 [1704.00418]

    2017 arXiv

  140. [148]

    Dennis and J

    M.T. Dennis and J. Sakstein,Impact of simultaneous stellar modeling uncertainties on the tip of the red giant branch for axion-electron coupling,Phys. Dark Univ.50(2025) 102168 [2305.03113]

    2025

  141. [149]

    Arza et al.,The COSMIC WISPers White Paper: The physics case for Weakly Interacting Slim Particles,2603.03433

    A. Arza et al.,The COSMIC WISPers White Paper: The physics case for Weakly Interacting Slim Particles,2603.03433

  142. [150]

    Terrano, E.G

    W.A. Terrano, E.G. Adelberger, J.G. Lee and B.R. Heckel,Short-range, spin-dependent interactions of electrons: a probe for exotic pseudo-Goldstone bosons,Phys. Rev. Lett.115 (2015) 201801 [1508.02463]. [151]XENONcollaboration,Search for new physics in electronic recoil data fr...

    2015 arXiv

  143. [152]

    Blinnikov and M.I

    S.I. Blinnikov and M.I. Vysotsky,Astrophysical bounds on light scalar particle couplings with electron and nucleons,Sov. J. Nucl. Phys.52(1990) 348

    1990

  144. [153]

    Miller Bertolami, B.E

    M.M. Miller Bertolami, B.E. Melendez, L.G. Althaus and J. Isern,Revisiting the axion bounds from the Galactic white dwarf luminosity function,JCAP10(2014) 069 [1406.7712]. – 46 –

    2014 arXiv

  145. [154]

    Alberino, M.M

    M.L. Alberino, M.M. Miller Bertolami, M.E. Camisassa, A. Caputo and S. Torres,New axion bounds derived from the 100-parsec Gaia DR3 white dwarf luminosity function,2603.00901

  146. [155]

    Dessert, A.J

    C. Dessert, A.J. Long and B.R. Safdi,No evidence for axions from Chandra observation of the magnetic white dwarf RE J0317–853,Phys. Rev. Lett.128(2022) 071102 [2104.12772]

    2022 arXiv

  147. [156]

    Franz, M

    N. Franz, M. Dennis and J. Sakstein,Tip of the Red Giant Branch Bounds on the Neutrino Magnetic Dipole Moment Revisited,2307.13050

    arXiv

  148. [157]

    Beda, V.B

    A.G. Beda, V.B. Brudanin, V.G. Egorov, D.V. Medvedev, V.S. Pogosov, M.V. Shirchenko et al.,The results of search for the neutrino magnetic moment in GEMMA experiment,Adv. High Energy Phys.2012(2012) 350150. [158]Borexinocollaboration,Limiting neutrino magnetic moments with Bor...

    2012 arXiv

  149. [159]

    Li and X.-J

    S.-P. Li and X.-J. Xu,Neutrino magnetic moments meet precisionn eff measurements,JHEP 02(2023) 085 [2211.04669]

    2023 arXiv

  150. [160]

    Giunti, K

    C. Giunti, K. Kouzakov, Y.-F. Li and A. Studenikin,Neutrino electromagnetic properties, Ann. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci.75(2025) [2411.03122]

    2025 arXiv

  151. [161]

    Ternes and M

    C.A. Ternes and M. T´ ortola,Neutrino magnetic moments: effective versus fundamental parameters,Nucl. Phys. B1019(2025) 117107 [2505.02633]

    2025 arXiv

  152. [162]

    Rizzi, R.B

    L. Rizzi, R.B. Tully, D. Makarov, L. Makarova, A.E. Dolphin, S. Sakai et al.,Tip of the Red Giant Branch Distances. 2. Zero-Point Calibration,Astrophys. J.661(2007) 815 [astro-ph/0701518]

    2007 arXiv

  153. [163]

    Newman, K.B.W

    M.J.B. Newman, K.B.W. McQuinn, E.D. Skillman, M.L. Boyer, R.E. Cohen, A.E. Dolphin et al.,An Empirical Calibration of the Tip of the Red Giant Branch Distance Method in the Near Infrared. II. JWST NIRCam Wide Filters,2406.03532

    arXiv

  154. [164]

    Li and R.L

    S. Li and R.L. Beaton,The Tip of the Red Giant Branch Distance Ladder and the Hubble Constant,2403.17048

    arXiv

  155. [165]

    S. Li, G.S. Anand, A.G. Riess, S. Casertano, W. Yuan, L. Breuval et al.,Tip of the Red Giant Branch Distances with JWST. II. I-band Measurements in a Sample of Hosts of 10 Type Ia Supernova Match HST Cepheids,Astrophys. J.976(2024) 177 [2408.00065]. – 47 –

    2024 arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 6, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.