Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 6 minor 46 references

The S-PLUS 12-band photometry as a powerful tool for discovery and classification: ten cataclysmic variables in a proof-of-concept study

T0 review · 2 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-10 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Twelve-band S-PLUS photometry alone can identify cataclysmic variables, with Gemini spectroscopy confirming ten systems, five previously unknown.

desk verdict A useful proof-of-concept for SED-based CV discovery with S-PLUS, but the 85% success rate overstates the purity of the photometric selection. read the letter →

arxiv 2501.16582 v1 pith:LRLJ7W2F submitted 2025-01-27 astro-ph.SR

Raimundo Lopes de Oliveira , Amanda S. de Araujo , Angela C. Krabbe , Claudia L. Mendes de Oliveira , Koji Mukai , Luis A. Gutierrez-Soto , Antonio Kanaan , Romualdo Eleuterio
show 4 more authors
Marcelo Borges Fernandes Fredi Quispe-Huaynasi William Schoenell Tiago Ribeiro
This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.SR
keywords cataclysmicvariablesaccretingwhitedwarfsS-PLUSsurveynarrow-bandphotometryspectralenergydistributionH-alphaemissionlow-luminosityintermediatepolarsWZSge-typedwarfnovae
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 claims that a purely photometric, SED-based selection using the twelve bands of the S-PLUS survey can find cataclysmic variables (CVs) without relying on variability or X-ray detection. The authors selected 13 candidates by combining three photometric signatures of accreting white dwarfs, and Gemini South spectroscopy confirmed 11 as accreting white dwarfs, including ten CVs, five of which were previously unknown. This matters because the two discovery channels that currently dominate, time-domain outburst searches and X-ray surveys, systematically miss quiet and low-luminosity subclasses such as likely low-luminosity intermediate polars (magnetic CVs with faint X-rays) and WZ Sge-type dwarf novae (binaries with rare outbursts). A SED-based route offers a complementary way to build a more complete census of CVs and their subclasses.

What carries the argument

The machinery is a three-cut color selection applied to S-PLUS 12-band photometry, probing the three emission sites of an accreting white dwarf: the accreted material (H-alpha line excess traced by the narrow J0660 filter relative to the r/i continuum), the hot white dwarf and accretion disk (blue SED slope, J0395/J0515 < 1), and the cool donor star (red excess, r/J0515 < 1). A final visual inspection of the SEDs selected the 13 cleanest candidates for spectroscopy. The same 12-band SEDs also allow the systems to be grouped by subclass: strong He II 4686 relative to H-beta and hard X-ray spectra point to magnetic or low-luminosity intermediate polar systems, while pure Balmer emission with faint absolute magnitudes points to quiescent dwarf novae.

What would settle it

Apply the three photometric cuts to a large, complete S-PLUS field and spectroscopically follow a random sample of the candidates without visual SED selection; the central claim would fail if the confirmed CV fraction drops well below the 11-of-13 rate, or if known non-CV H-alpha emitters such as quasars, Be stars, and young stellar objects pass the cuts at a comparable rate.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that the shape of the optical spectral energy distribution alone, as sampled by S-PLUS's five broad and seven narrow bands, is enough to single out accreting white dwarfs. The paper shows that sources with an H-alpha excess (J0660 brighter than the mean of r and i by more than 0.1 mag), a blue continuum (J0395/J0515 < 1), and a red contribution from the donor star (r/J0515 < 1) form a candidate list whose spectroscopic follow-up yields at least an 85% success rate: 11 of 13 observed candidates proved to be accreting white dwarfs, and ten of them are presented here as confirmed CVs. The paper further shows that four of the systems observed with Swift have X-ray luminosities and He II emission consistent with low-luminosity intermediate polars, and two others are likely WZ Sge-type dwarf novae, subclasses that are easily missed by other survey methods.

Load-bearing premise

The three hand-picked photometric thresholds are assumed to separate accreting white dwarfs from other H-alpha-emitting objects, and the 85% confirmation rate was measured only after visually selecting the cleanest SED candidates, not on every object that passes the cuts.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Applying the same selection to the full S-PLUS DR3 footprint should yield many more CVs, since only a fraction of the available area was used in this proof of concept.
  • S-PLUS provides a third, independent discovery channel for CVs alongside optical time-domain surveys and X-ray surveys, one that is sensitive to systems with rare or absent outbursts and low X-ray luminosity.
  • The 12-band SEDs can be used to quickly characterize transients and X-ray sources found by other surveys, reducing the need for spectroscopic follow-up of every candidate.
  • If the suggested classifications hold, the recovered systems include some of the hardest-to-find CV subclasses, low-luminosity intermediate polars and WZ Sge-type dwarf novae, which would help constrain close-binary evolution and the origin of white-dwarf magnetic fields.
  • Equivalent surveys with the same narrow-band filter set can extend this approach to the Northern Hemisphere, and denser filter sets can push it further.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The reported 11/13 confirmation rate almost certainly overstates the purity of the three photometric cuts alone, because candidates were additionally filtered by visual SED inspection; a blind application of the cuts on the full catalog is a necessary next test.
  • The same three signatures could be encoded as machine-learning features on the full 12-band SEDs, replacing the visual step and producing quantitative completeness and contamination estimates for the whole survey.
  • If many of the newly found systems are indeed low-luminosity intermediate polars or WZ Sge-type stars, the true space density of these subclasses is higher than current catalogs suggest, which would affect models of CV evolution and the magnetic-field fraction of white dwarfs.
  • The method's logic is transferable to any multi-band survey with an H-alpha narrow band, so a homogeneous CV census could be assembled across hemispheres by combining several such surveys.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

2 major / 6 minor

Summary. The paper presents a proof-of-concept method for discovering accreting white dwarf (AWD) candidates, including cataclysmic variables (CVs), using the 12-band S-PLUS photometry alone as the driver of the selection. The method uses three photometric criteria: H-alpha excess via the J0660 narrow band against the r/i continuum, blue continuum via J0395 and J0515, and red excess from a possible donor star via r and J0515. After these cuts, the authors visually inspect SEDs and select 13 objects for Gemini/GMOS spectroscopy; 11 are confirmed as AWDs, 10 of which are presented here as CVs, 5 of them previously unknown. Swift/XRT observations of four objects provide X-ray luminosities of a few times 10^31 erg/s for three detections and an upper limit for one. The authors argue that SED-based selection can find CV subclasses missed by time-domain and X-ray surveys, and they suggest that several objects may be low-luminosity intermediate polars or WZ Sge-type dwarf novae.

Significance. The spectroscopic confirmation of ten CVs, including five previously unknown systems, is a solid and useful result for the CV population, and the S-PLUS 12-band SED approach is genuinely complementary to variability- and X-ray-based searches. The three selection criteria are physically motivated and, as the reader's analysis notes, are not circularly fitted to the validation sample. The main value of the paper is as a proof of concept, however, and the quantitative strength of the claim rests on a success rate that is not computed on a complete sample. If the candidate census and the role of external filters are made explicit, the paper will be a valuable contribution to S-PLUS and J-PLUS exploitation; in its current form, the abstract and title overstate what has been validated.

major comments (2)
  1. [Section 3 (validation statistics)] The reported success rate of 'at least 85% (11 out of 13)' is computed for systems with 'clear detection of the expected features' after a visual SED inspection, not for all sources passing Criteria 1-3. This makes the 85% figure a measure of a curated, human-in-the-loop selection rather than a quantitative validation that the three photometric cuts alone separate CVs from other H-alpha emitters. To support the title's claim, the paper should report the number of sources passing Criteria 1-3, the number removed by the Gaia distance and QSO-flag filters, and the number of visually rejected SEDs. Without these denominators, the false-positive rate of the photometric criteria on the full candidate population is unknown.
  2. [Abstract and Section 2.2] The abstract's statement that the method is 'entirely supported by the twelve photometric bands' is too strong, because the candidate selection also used Gaia geometric distances (Bailer-Jones et al. 2021) to reject potential QSOs and the S-PLUS QSO flag after Nakazono et al. (2021), followed by a visual SED inspection. These additional steps are reasonable and disclosed, but they mean that the validated procedure is not purely S-PLUS photometry. The wording should be revised to say that the SED-based selection is primarily driven by S-PLUS bands while also acknowledging the auxiliary Gaia/catalog filters, or the contribution of each selection step should be quantified.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Section 3 (Criterion 1)] Criterion 1 is written as '[(r-i)/2 - mag J0660]' but the surrounding text says the average of r and i is used as the continuum proxy; the formula should read (r+i)/2 rather than (r-i)/2.
  2. [Section 3 (Criteria 2 and 3)] The conditions 'magJ0395/magJ0515 < 1' and 'mag r/magJ0515 < 1' are written as ratios of magnitudes, which is confusing because magnitudes are logarithmic quantities; they should be stated as inequalities between magnitudes, e.g., J0395 < J0515 and r < J0515.
  3. [Section 4.1] The X-ray model is written 'tabs*apec' in the text but should be 'tbabs*apec' to match the model name used in XSPEC.
  4. [Section 5.2] There is a typo in 'sinergy'; it should be 'synergy'.
  5. [Table 3] The equivalent widths are all quoted as negative numbers, but the caption does not state the sign convention; the authors should specify that negative values denote emission lines.
  6. [Section 4.3 and Table 1] For S-PLUS CV3, the period from Torrealba et al. (2015) is given as 0.50867 d without an uncertainty; adding the uncertainty would be useful, especially because the period is used to discuss a possible orbital interpretation.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 2.0 of 10

No circular derivation: the photometric selection criteria are fixed a priori and physically motivated, and the claimed validation rests on independent Gemini spectroscopy and Swift X-ray data; the few self-citations are contextual and non-load-bearing.

full rationale

The paper's central claim is that fixed, physically motivated S-PLUS color criteria can select accreting white dwarf candidates. Criterion 1 (H-alpha excess), Criterion 2 (blue continuum), and Criterion 3 (red donor excess) are stated as thresholds in Section 3 and are not fitted to the Gemini results; the validation sample is then spectroscopically confirmed by independent GMOS/Gemini data and, for four systems, Swift/XRT data. No equation in the paper defines the predicted CV classification in terms of the same photometric cuts that are used as the discovery input, and no fitted parameter is renamed as a prediction. The self-citations to Lopes de Oliveira et al. (2020) and Mukai & Pretorius (2023) concern population context and a speculative LLIP interpretation, not the selection method itself, so they are not load-bearing. The main defensible caveat is external validity rather than circularity: the 11/13 success rate applies to 13 candidates that survived visual SED inspection after Gaia-based QSO rejection, so it does not quantify the criteria's false-positive rate on the full candidate catalog; the paper itself acknowledges that the conservative approach compromises completeness. That limitation affects the strength of the efficiency claim, but the derivation of the ten CV identifications is not circular.

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The method rests on physical assumptions about CV spectral energy distributions and standard data products (Gaia distances, X-ray spectral models). No new physical entities are introduced. The three color thresholds are hand-chosen and not validated against a control sample.

free parameters (3)
  • H-alpha excess threshold = 0.1 mag (J0660 vs (r+i)/2)
    Hand-chosen cutoff to flag H-alpha emitters; not derived from data or a physical model.
  • Blue color threshold = J0395/J0515 < 1
    Hand-chosen criterion for blue SED indicative of WD/disk emission.
  • Red excess threshold = r/J0515 < 1
    Hand-chosen criterion for red contribution from donor star.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption CVs exhibit H-alpha emission, blue white-dwarf continuum, and red donor contribution detectable in S-PLUS bands
    Physical basis of the three selection criteria; if some CV subclasses lack these features, the method misses them.
  • domain assumption Gemini/GMOS spectra reliably identify CVs via Balmer, He I, and He II emission lines
    Used as ground truth for validation; assumes no misclassification of other emission-line objects.
  • domain assumption Gaia geometric distances from Bailer-Jones et al. (2021) are reliable for these targets
    Distances enter absolute magnitudes and X-ray luminosities; large uncertainties affect classification.
  • domain assumption The tbabs*apec model adequately describes the Swift/XRT X-ray spectra
    Standard model for optically thin thermal plasma; limited counts make constraints weak.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of The S-PLUS 12-band photometry as a powerful tool for discovery and classification: ten cataclysmic variables in a proof-of-concept study." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/LRLJ7W2F

@misc{pith2026250116582,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: The S-PLUS 12-band photometry as a powerful tool for discovery and classification: ten cataclysmic variables in a proof-of-concept study},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/LRLJ7W2F}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2501.16582}
}
read the original abstract

Multi-band photometric surveys provide a straightforward way to discover and classify astrophysical objects systematically, enabling the study of a large number of targets at relatively low cost. Here we introduce an alternative approach to select Accreting White Dwarf (AWD) candidates following their spectral energy distribution, entirely supported by the twelve photometric bands of the Southern Photometric Local Universe Survey (S-PLUS). The method was validated with optical spectroscopic follow-up with the Gemini South telescope which unambiguously established ten systems as cataclysmic variables (CVs), alongside Swift X-ray observations of four of them. Among the ten CVs presented here are those that may be low-luminosity intermediate polars or WZ Sge-type dwarf novae with rare outbursts, two subclasses that can be easily missed in time-domain and X-ray surveys, the two methods currently dominating the discovery of new CVs. Our approach based on S-PLUS provides an important, complementary tool to uncover the total population of CVs and the complete set of its subclasses, which is an important step towards a full understanding of close binary evolution, including the origin of magnetic fields in white dwarfs and the physics of accretion. Finally, we highlight the potential of S-PLUS beyond AWDs, serving other surveys in the characterization of their sources.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2501.16582 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Spectral energy distribution from the S-PLUS photometry region, leading to a significant continuum that increases towards the blue end – which is the most crucial feature for identifying white dwarfs in general. If an accretion disk is present, a fraction of the blue continuum emerges from its hot inner regions as well. Another component, if present, is that from emission lines below 5,000 ˚A – especially ones alrea… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Optical spectra from GMOS/Gemini. of 13 systems). However, the two “outliers”, with op￾tical spectra distinct from what is expected for AWDs, have S-PLUS SEDs that are still consistent with those of CVs; we suspect they were observed in a low activ￾ity state and plan to obtain new optical spectroscopy of them. Here we present ten out of the eleven proven AWDs ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. X-ray spectra from Swift/XRT: red circles for S-PLUS CV1, green diamonds for S-PLUS CV4, and blue squares for S-PLUS CV6. accumulated for S-PLUS CV4 was good enough for a satisfactory spectral fit ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_3.png] view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

46 extracted references · 18 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    2020, MNRAS, 492, L40, doi: 10.1093/mnrasl/slz181

    Abril, J., Schmidtobreick, L., Ederoclite, A., & L´ opez-Sanjuan, C. 2020, MNRAS, 492, L40, doi: 10.1093/mnrasl/slz181

    doi:10.1093/mnrasl/slz181 2020

  2. [2]

    Arnaud, K. A. 1996, in Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series, Vol. 101, Astronomical Data Analysis Software and Systems V, ed. G. H. Jacoby & J. Barnes, 17

    1996

  3. [3]

    J., & Scott, P

    Asplund, M., Grevesse, N., Sauval, A. J., & Scott, P. 2009, ARA&A, 47, 481, doi: 10.1146/annurev.astro.46.060407.145222 Astropy Collaboration, Robitaille, T. P., Tollerud, E. J., et al. 2013, A&A, 558, A33, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201322068 Astropy Collaboration, Price-Whelan, A. M., Sip˝ ocz, B. M., et al. 2018, AJ, 156, 123, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/aabc4f 10

    work page arXiv 2009

  4. [4]

    2021, AJ, 161, 147, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/abd806

    Demleitner, M., & Andrae, R. 2021, AJ, 161, 147, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/abd806

    doi:10.3847/1538-3881/abd806 2021

  5. [5]

    C., Kulkarni, S

    Bellm, E. C., Kulkarni, S. R., Graham, M. J., et al. 2019, PASP, 131, 018002, doi: 10.1088/1538-3873/aaecbe

    doi:10.1088/1538-3873/aaecbe 2019

  6. [6]

    2014, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:1403.5237, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.1403.5237

    Benitez, N., Dupke, R., Moles, M., et al. 2014, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:1403.5237, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.1403.5237

    arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.1403.5237 2014

  7. [7]

    J., Bazzano, A., Malizia, A., et al

    Bird, A. J., Bazzano, A., Malizia, A., et al. 2016, The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series, 223, 15

    work page 2016

  8. [8]

    J., Moles, M., Crist´ obal-Hornillos, D., et al

    Cenarro, A. J., Moles, M., Crist´ obal-Hornillos, D., et al. 2019, A&A, 622, A176, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201833036

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201833036 2019

Show all 46 references
  1. [9]

    2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2403.03127, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2403.03127

    Doroshenko, V. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2403.03127, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2403.03127

    2024 doi arXiv

  2. [10]

    J., Djorgovski, S

    Drake, A. J., Djorgovski, S. G., Mahabal, A., et al. 2009, The Astrophysical Journal, 696, 870, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/696/1/870

    2009 doi

  3. [11]

    J., G¨ ansicke, B

    Drake, A. J., G¨ ansicke, B. T., Djorgovski, S. G., et al. 2014, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 441, 1186, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stu639 F¨ orster, F., Cabrera-Vives, G., Castillo-Navarrete, E., et al. 2021, AJ, 161, 242, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/abe9bc Gaia Coll...

    2014

  4. [12]

    J., Groote, D., Engels, D., & Reimers, D

    Hagen, H. J., Groote, D., Engels, D., & Reimers, D. 1995, A&AS, 111, 195

    1995

  5. [13]

    Hoare, M. G. 1994, MNRAS, 267, 153, doi: 10.1093/mnras/267.1.153

    1994 doi

  6. [14]

    2022, Frontiers in Astronomy and Space Sciences, 9, 6, doi: 10.3389/fspas.2022.815517 Ivezi´ c,ˇZ., Kahn, S

    Isern, J., Torres, S., & Rebassa-Mansergas, A. 2022, Frontiers in Astronomy and Space Sciences, 9, 6, doi: 10.3389/fspas.2022.815517 Ivezi´ c,ˇZ., Kahn, S. M., Tyson, J. A., et al. 2019, ApJ, 873, 111, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab042c

    2022

  7. [15]

    2021, ApJ, 910, 120, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/abe53d

    Kawash, A., Chomiuk, L., Strader, J., et al. 2021, ApJ, 910, 120, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/abe53d

    2021 doi

  8. [16]

    2023, Research Notes of the American Astronomical Society, 7, 214, doi: 10.3847/2515-5172/ad0044

    Labrie, K., Simpson, C., Cardenes, R., et al. 2023, Research Notes of the American Astronomical Society, 7, 214, doi: 10.3847/2515-5172/ad0044

    2023 doi

  9. [17]

    J., Prince, T

    Levitan, D., Groot, P. J., Prince, T. A., et al. 2014, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 446, 391, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stu2105 Lopes de Oliveira, R., Bruch, A., Rodrigues, C. V.,

    2014 doi

  10. [18]

    S., & Mukai, K

    Oliveira, A. S., & Mukai, K. 2020, ApJL, 898, L40, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/aba618

    2020 doi

  11. [19]

    1986, in Structure and Evolution of Active Galactic Nuclei, ed

    Maehara, H., Noguchi, T., Kondo, M., Miyauchi-Isobe, N., & Takase, B. 1986, in Structure and Evolution of Active Galactic Nuclei, ed. G. Giuricin, M. Mezzetti, M. Ramella, & F. Mardirossian, Vol. 121, 619, doi: 10.1007/978-90-277-2155-6 61

    1986 doi

  12. [20]

    A., Hallinan, G., & PTF Collaboration

    Margon, B., Levitan, D., Prince, T. A., Hallinan, G., & PTF Collaboration. 2014, in Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series, Vol. 490, Stellar Novae: Past and Future Decades, ed. P. A. Woudt & V. A. R. M. Ribeiro, 389, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.1304.4585 Mendes de Oliv...

    2014 doi arXiv

  13. [21]

    2024, A&A, 682, A34, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202347165 Mr´ oz, P., Pietrukowicz, P., Poleski, R., et al

    Merloni, A., Lamer, G., Liu, T., et al. 2024, A&A, 682, A34, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202347165 Mr´ oz, P., Pietrukowicz, P., Poleski, R., et al. 2013, AcA, 63, 135, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.1307.1238

    2024 doi arXiv

  14. [22]

    Mukai, K., & Pretorius, M. L. 2023, MNRAS, 523, 3192, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad1603

    2023 doi

  15. [23]

    Nakazono, L., Mendes de Oliveira, C., Hirata, N. S. T., et al. 2021, MNRAS, 507, 5847, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stab1835

    2021 doi

  16. [24]

    2024, MNRAS, 531, 327, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stae971

    Nakazono, L., R Valen¸ ca, R., Soares, G., et al. 2024, MNRAS, 531, 327, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stae971

    2024 doi

  17. [25]

    B., et al

    Oh, K., Koss, M., Markwardt, C. B., et al. 2018, The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series, 235, 4

    2018

  18. [26]

    2002, AcA, 52, 397, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.astro-ph/0210283

    Pojmanski, G. 2002, AcA, 52, 397, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.astro-ph/0210283

    2002 doi arXiv

  19. [27]

    2021, A&A, 647, A1, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202039313

    Predehl, P., Andritschke, R., Arefiev, V., et al. 2021, A&A, 647, A1, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202039313

    2021 doi

  20. [28]

    C., Wheatley, P

    Reis, R. C., Wheatley, P. J., G¨ ansicke, B. T., & Osborne, J. P. 2013, MNRAS, 430, 1994, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stt025

    2013 doi

  21. [29]

    Ringwald, F. A. 1993, PASP, 105, 805, doi: 10.1086/133235

    1993 doi

  22. [30]

    C., El-Badry, K., Suleimanov, V., et al

    Rodriguez, A. C., El-Badry, K., Suleimanov, V., et al. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2408.16053, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2408.16053

    2024 doi arXiv

  23. [31]

    D., Read, A

    Saxton, R. D., Read, A. M., Esquej, P., et al. 2008, A&A, 480, 611, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20079193

    2008 doi

  24. [32]

    2024, A&A, 686, A110, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202348426

    Schwope, A., Kurpas, J., Baecke, P., et al. 2024, A&A, 686, A110, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202348426

    2024 doi

  25. [33]

    J., Prieto, J

    Shappee, B. J., Prieto, J. L., Grupe, D., et al. 2014, ApJ, 788, 48, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/788/1/48

    2014 doi

  26. [34]

    Wagner, R. M. 1982, PASP, 94, 682, doi: 10.1086/131044

    1982 doi

  27. [35]

    Silber, A. D. 1992, PhD thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology

    1992

  28. [36]

    S., Schmidt, G

    Stockman, H. S., Schmidt, G. D., Angel, J. R. P., et al. 1977, ApJ, 217, 815, doi: 10.1086/155629

    1977 doi

  29. [37]

    F., Ag¨ ueros, M., et al

    Szkody, P., Anderson, S. F., Ag¨ ueros, M., et al. 2002, AJ, 123, 430, doi: 10.1086/324734 11

    2002 doi

  30. [38]

    Szkody, P., Dicenzo, B., Ho, A. Y. Q., et al. 2020, AJ, 159, 198, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/ab7cce

    2020 doi

  31. [39]

    J., et al

    Torrealba, G., Catelan, M., Drake, A. J., et al. 2015, MNRAS, 446, 2251, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stu2274

    2015 doi

  32. [40]

    1999, A&A, 349, 389, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.astro-ph/9909315

    Voges, W., Aschenbach, B., Boller, T., et al. 1999, A&A, 349, 389, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.astro-ph/9909315

    1999 doi arXiv

  33. [41]

    1987, MNRAS, 227, 23, doi: 10.1093/mnras/227.1.23

    Warner, B. 1987, MNRAS, 227, 23, doi: 10.1093/mnras/227.1.23

    1987 doi

  34. [42]

    Webb, N. A. 2023, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2303.10055, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2303.10055

    2023 doi arXiv

  35. [43]

    D., Placco, V

    Whitten, D. D., Placco, V. M., Beers, T. C., et al. 2021, ApJ, 912, 147, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/abee7e

    2021 doi

  36. [44]

    2015, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:1506.07735, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.1506.07735

    Yuan, W., Zhang, C., Feng, H., et al. 2015, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:1506.07735, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.1506.07735

    2015 doi arXiv

  37. [45]

    2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2501.07362

    Yuan, W., Dai, L., Feng, H., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2501.07362. https://arxiv.org/abs/2501.07362

    2025 arXiv

  38. [46]

    2012, Research in Astronomy and Astrophysics, 12, 723, doi: 10.1088/1674-4527/12/7/002

    Zhao, G., Zhao, Y.-H., Chu, Y.-Q., Jing, Y.-P., & Deng, L.-C. 2012, Research in Astronomy and Astrophysics, 12, 723, doi: 10.1088/1674-4527/12/7/002

    2012 doi

Pith tools

Reviewed August 10, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.