pith. sign in

arxiv: 2605.16050 · v1 · pith:PLSGMYEBnew · submitted 2026-05-15 · 🌌 astro-ph.GA

The Low-α Splash Population in the Milky Way

Lais Borbolato , Jo\~ao A. S. Amarante , H\'elio D. Perottoni , Silvia Rossi , Victor P. Debattista , Zhao-Yu Li , Nathan Deg , Tigran Khachaturyants This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-20 16:35 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.GA
keywords Milky WaySplash populationlow-alpha starsgalactic dynamicsstar-forming clumpsAPOGEEstellar kinematicsgalaxy simulations
0
0 comments X

The pith

Clumpy proto-Milky Way models scatter old low-α disk stars into halo-like orbits, while merger-only models do not.

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

The paper examines whether the Milky Way's high-α Splash population, old metal-rich stars on eccentric orbits, has a low-α counterpart. Authors start from the premise that any process heating the old high-α disk must also heat the old low-α thin-disk population. APOGEE data reveal metal-rich low-α stars with halo kinematics. GASTRO simulations then test two heating channels: star-forming clumps versus a major merger. Only the clumpy models produce both high-α and low-α Splash stars by scattering them outward; the merger-only run fails to heat either population to the observed degree.

Core claim

The low-α Splash is a subset of the old thin disk that was dynamically heated by the same clump-scattering process responsible for the high-α Splash. Clumpy early-galaxy models generate Splash populations with both high- and low-α chemistry, whereas a model containing only a major merger produces neither.

What carries the argument

Scattering by star-forming clumps in the proto-disk, which imparts halo-like eccentricities to subsets of both the old thick-disk and thin-disk populations.

Load-bearing premise

Any heating mechanism capable of producing the high-α Splash must also heat the old low-α population.

What would settle it

Spectroscopic surveys showing no metal-rich low-α stars with eccentricities above 0.6, or simulations without an early clumpy phase that nevertheless produce a low-α Splash, would undermine the claim.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2605.16050 by H\'elio D. Perottoni, Jo\~ao A. S. Amarante, Lais Borbolato, Nathan Deg, Silvia Rossi, Tigran Khachaturyants, Victor P. Debattista, Zhao-Yu Li.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Projection of the Low-α Splash (green dots) and High-α Splash (orange points) in the (a) [Mg/Fe]–[Fe/H], where the dotted line indicates the separation between high- and low-α regions; (b) [Mg/Mn]–[Al/Fe], where the dashed line represent the limit between accreted and in-situ regions; (c) Toomre diagram, p V 2 R + V 2 Z versus Vϕ. The vertical dashed line is Vϕ = 100 km s−1 . The innermost curve represents… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: From left to right, the columns show the Isolated nonClumpy, Isolated Clumpy, nonClumpy+merger, and Clumpy+merger simulations. First row: projection onto the [O/Fe]–[Fe/H] plane, where red colors indicate regions of highest stellar density; the vertical lines delimit the interval −0.7 < [Fe/H] < −0.2, and the dashed horizontal line marks the cutoff separating the high- and low-α populations. Second row: [O… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Distribution of high- and low-α Splash popula￾tions on the Zmax vs. eccentricity space for the Isolated Clumpy (top) and the Clumpy+merger (bottom panel) mod￾els. Gray points represent all particles in the simulation, and the gray contours indicates the higher-density region of the low-α/thin disk. The high-α Splash is shown in orange points, while the low-α Splash is the green ones. the full sample. We pr… view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: The first two columns show the Isolated Clumpy model, while the last two columns show the Clumpy+Merger model. Top row: distribution of low- and high-α Splash stars in the tform–Rform plane, colored by [Fe/H], being the tform the star formation time and Rform the galactocentric radius at which each star formed. The horizontal lines in the two panels on the right indicate tform = 1.6, 2.5, and 3.2 Gyr, corr… view at source ↗
read the original abstract

The Milky Way in-situ halo, also known as the Splash, consists of old (Age $>$ 10 Gyr), metal-rich ([Fe/H] $> -0.7$), high-$\alpha$ stars, i.e., thick disk-like chemistry, on halo-like orbits (eccentricity > 0.6). Its origin is linked to stars formed in the disk and dynamically heated by either internal or external agents. In this work, we investigate its low-$\alpha$ counterpart, the low-$\alpha$ Splash, motivated by recent findings of an old thin disk population. We conjecture that any mechanism capable of heating disk stars should affect both of present-day high- and low-$\alpha$ old populations. Using data from the APOGEE DR17 spectroscopic catalog, we identify metal-rich low-$\alpha$ stars with halo-like kinematics similar to those of the classical high-$\alpha$ Splash. We investigate their possible heating mechanisms using the GASTRO suite of simulations, which allows us to explore the effects of star-forming clumps as well as a major merger in the proto-disk of a Milky Way analog galaxy. Our main results show that only clumpy Milky Way models are able to produce Splash populations through scattering by clumps in the early Galaxy, including the low-$\alpha$ counterpart, whereas the model including only the merger and without an early clumpy phase fails to produce these populations. In the models, the low-$\alpha$ Splash corresponds to a subset of the old thin disk that was dynamically heated by the same mechanism responsible for the formation of the high-$\alpha$ Splash.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The paper identifies a low-α Splash population of old (>10 Gyr), metal-rich ([Fe/H] > -0.7), low-α stars on halo-like orbits (eccentricity > 0.6) in APOGEE DR17 data. Using the GASTRO suite of Milky Way analog simulations, it argues that only models with an early clumpy star-formation phase produce both high-α and low-α Splash populations through clump scattering, while a merger-only model without clumps fails to produce them. The low-α Splash is interpreted as a dynamically heated subset of the old thin disk.

Significance. If the central claim holds, the work provides evidence favoring internal clump-driven dynamical heating over purely external merger scenarios for the Milky Way Splash, while supporting the presence of an ancient low-α thin-disk component. The combination of public spectroscopic catalog data with controlled simulation comparisons is a methodological strength.

major comments (2)
  1. [Simulation results (GASTRO suite comparison)] The inference that mergers cannot be the sole heating mechanism rests on the merger-only GASTRO run failing to produce a low-α Splash. However, the manuscript does not show that this run forms an old, metal-rich low-α proto-disk population at epochs overlapping the high-α population (e.g., via age-[α/Fe] or age-[Fe/H] distributions). If low-α star formation is delayed or suppressed in the merger-only case, the null result is expected even if mergers can heat thin-disk-like stars. This must be verified explicitly in the simulation section.
  2. [Data selection from APOGEE DR17] The observational identification of the low-α Splash requires quantitative justification of the selection cuts in [α/Fe], [Fe/H], age, and eccentricity, plus a direct side-by-side comparison of orbital parameters and sample sizes with the classical high-α Splash to establish they are dynamically equivalent populations.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Methods] Clarify the exact resolution, initial conditions, and clump identification criteria of the GASTRO simulations for reproducibility.
  2. [Results] Add error bars or uncertainty estimates on the reported fractions or distributions of Splash stars in both data and simulations.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their thorough and constructive review of our manuscript. We address each major comment in detail below, providing clarifications and indicating where revisions will be made to improve the paper.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Simulation results (GASTRO suite comparison)] The inference that mergers cannot be the sole heating mechanism rests on the merger-only GASTRO run failing to produce a low-α Splash. However, the manuscript does not show that this run forms an old, metal-rich low-α proto-disk population at epochs overlapping the high-α population (e.g., via age-[α/Fe] or age-[Fe/H] distributions). If low-α star formation is delayed or suppressed in the merger-only case, the null result is expected even if mergers can heat thin-disk-like stars. This must be verified explicitly in the simulation section.

    Authors: We appreciate the referee pointing out this potential ambiguity in our simulation analysis. In the GASTRO merger-only run, an old, metal-rich low-α proto-disk population does form at epochs overlapping the high-α population (approximately 10-13 Gyr ago), as shown by the simulation's star-formation history and chemical enrichment tracks. These stars, however, remain on lower-eccentricity orbits and are not dynamically heated to halo-like Splash kinematics in the absence of clump scattering. To address the concern explicitly, we will add age-[α/Fe] and age-[Fe/H] distribution figures for the merger-only model in the revised simulation section, confirming the presence of the low-α population while demonstrating the lack of heating to high-eccentricity orbits. This addition will strengthen the argument that clump-driven scattering is required. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Data selection from APOGEE DR17] The observational identification of the low-α Splash requires quantitative justification of the selection cuts in [α/Fe], [Fe/H], age, and eccentricity, plus a direct side-by-side comparison of orbital parameters and sample sizes with the classical high-α Splash to establish they are dynamically equivalent populations.

    Authors: We agree that a more quantitative presentation of the selection criteria and a direct comparison will enhance the observational results. The cuts for the low-α Splash ([Fe/H] > -0.7, age > 10 Gyr, eccentricity > 0.6, and [α/Fe] below the high-α sequence) are chosen to parallel the standard definitions used for the high-α Splash in the literature while isolating the low-α chemistry. In the revised manuscript, we will add a dedicated table listing the exact numerical thresholds, sample sizes for both populations, and summary statistics for orbital parameters (mean/median eccentricity, vertical action, etc.). We will also include a side-by-side figure comparing the eccentricity and other orbital distributions to demonstrate dynamical equivalence. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; simulation comparison is independent of observational identification

full rationale

The paper identifies the low-α Splash from APOGEE DR17 data and then compares its presence across GASTRO simulation variants (clumpy vs. merger-only). No parameter is fitted to the target population and re-labeled as a prediction, no equation reduces the result to a self-definition, and no load-bearing premise rests on a self-citation chain. The central claim—that only clumpy models produce both high-α and low-α Splash—is presented as an outcome of running the distinct simulation setups rather than a tautological restatement of inputs. The conjecture that heating should affect both populations is an external assumption tested by the comparative runs, not a definitional loop internal to the derivation.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The work rests on one explicit domain assumption about heating mechanisms being chemistry-agnostic for old stars and on standard assumptions of spectroscopic abundance measurements and N-body simulation fidelity; no new free parameters or invented entities are introduced in the abstract.

axioms (1)
  • domain assumption Any mechanism capable of heating disk stars should affect both present-day high- and low-α old populations.
    This conjecture, stated directly in the abstract, underpins the decision to search for a low-α Splash and to interpret simulation differences as evidence for clump scattering.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5867 in / 1340 out tokens · 73741 ms · 2026-05-20T16:35:46.559136+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

70 extracted references · 70 canonical work pages · 4 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    , keywords =

    Abdurro’uf, Accetta, K., Aerts, C., et al. 2022, ApJS, 259, 35, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/ac4414

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4365/ac4414 2022

  2. [2]

    2025, ApJ, 979, 118, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad7119

    Adams, D., Dickinson, H., Fortson, L., et al. 2025, ApJ, 979, 118, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad7119

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad7119 2025

  3. [3]

    2021, MNRAS, 503, 5826, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stab322

    Agertz, O., Renaud, F., Feltzing, S., et al. 2021, MNRAS, 503, 5826, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stab322

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stab322 2021

  4. [4]

    Amarante, J. A. S., Beraldo e Silva, L., Debattista, V. P., & Smith, M. C. 2020a, ApJL, 891, L30, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ab78a4

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ab78a4 2041

  5. [5]

    Laporte, C. F. P., & Deg, N. 2022, ApJ, 937, 12, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac8b0d

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ac8b0d 2022

  6. [6]

    Amarante, J. A. S., Smith, M. C., & Boeche, C. 2020b, MNRAS, 492, 3816, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staa077

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/staa077

  7. [7]

    Amarante, J. A. S., Laporte, C. F. P., Debattista, V. P., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2512.01293, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2512.01293

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2512.01293 2025

  8. [8]

    2018, ARA&A, 56, 223, doi: 10.1146/annurev-astro-081817-051826

    Barbuy, B., Chiappini, C., & Gerhard, O. 2018, ARA&A, 56, 223, doi: 10.1146/annurev-astro-081817-051826

    work page doi:10.1146/annurev-astro-081817-051826 2018

  9. [9]

    Deason, A. J. 2018, MNRAS, 478, 611, doi: 10.1093/mnras/sty982

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/sty982 2018

  10. [10]

    L., Fattahi, A., et al

    Belokurov, V., Sanders, J. L., Fattahi, A., et al. 2020, MNRAS, 494, 3880, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staa876 Beraldo e Silva, L., Debattista, V. P., Khachaturyants, T., & Nidever, D. 2020, MNRAS, 492, 4716, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staa065 Beraldo e Silva, L., Debattista, V. P., Nidever, D.,

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/staa876 2020

  11. [11]

    Amarante, J. A. S., & Garver, B. 2021, MNRAS, 502, 260, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staa3966

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/staa3966 2021

  12. [12]

    2016, ARA&A, 54, 529, 10.1146/annurev-astro-081915-023441

    Bland-Hawthorn, J., & Gerhard, O. 2016, ARA&A, 54, 529, doi: 10.1146/annurev-astro-081915-023441

    work page doi:10.1146/annurev-astro-081915-023441 2016

  13. [13]

    F., & Kereˇ s, D

    Bonaca, A., Conroy, C., Wetzel, A., Hopkins, P. F., & Kereš, D. 2017, ApJ, 845, 101, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aa7d0c

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aa7d0c 2017

  14. [14]

    A., et al

    Bonaca, A., Conroy, C., Cargile, P. A., et al. 2020, ApJL, 897, L18, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ab9caa

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ab9caa 2020

  15. [15]

    D., et al

    Borbolato, L., Rossi, S., Perottoni, H. D., et al. 2025, ApJ, 994, 126, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ae0c96

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ae0c96 2025

  16. [16]

    G., et al

    Bournaud, F., Daddi, E., Elmegreen, B. G., et al. 2008, A&A, 486, 741, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20079250

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20079250 2008

  17. [17]

    2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2510.20233, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2510.20233

    Buder, S., Buck, T., Skúladóttir, Á., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2510.20233, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2510.20233

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2510.20233 2025

  18. [18]

    1997, ApJ, 477, 765, doi: 10.1086/303726

    Chiappini, C., Matteucci, F., & Gratton, R. 1997, ApJ, 477, 765, doi: 10.1086/303726

    work page doi:10.1086/303726 1997

  19. [19]

    2023, MNRAS, 520, 2180, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stac3791

    Claeyssens, A., Adamo, A., Richard, J., et al. 2023, MNRAS, 520, 2180, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stac3791

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stac3791 2023

  20. [20]

    J., Debattista, V

    Clarke, A. J., Debattista, V. P., Nidever, D. L., et al. 2019, MNRAS, 484, 3476, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stz104

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stz104 2019

  21. [21]

    The Fraction of Clumpy Galaxies in JADES over $2<z<9$

    Cropper, M., Katz, D., Sartoretti, P., et al. 2018, A&A, 616, A5, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201832763 da Silva, A. R., & Smiljanic, R. 2025, A&A, 696, A122, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202453295 de la Vega, A., Mobasher, B., Sattari, Z., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2508.14972, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2508.14972

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201832763 2018

  22. [22]

    P., Liddicott, D

    Debattista, V. P., Liddicott, D. J., Gonzalez, O. A., et al. 2023, ApJ, 946, 118, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/acbb00 Di Matteo, P., Haywood, M., Lehnert, M. D., et al. 2019, A&A, 632, A4, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201834929

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/acbb00 2023

  23. [23]

    M., Belokurov, V., Font, A

    Dillamore, A. M., Belokurov, V., Font, A. S., & McCarthy, I. G. 2022, MNRAS, 513, 1867, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stac1038

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stac1038 2022

  24. [24]

    Adelberger, K. L. 2004, ApJ, 612, 122, doi: 10.1086/422464

    work page doi:10.1086/422464 2004

  25. [25]

    K., Feltzing, S., Sahlholdt, C

    Feuillet, D. K., Feltzing, S., Sahlholdt, C. L., & Casagrande, L. 2020, MNRAS, 497, 109, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staa1888

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/staa1888 2020

  26. [26]

    S., Horta, D., et al

    Filion, C., Petersen, M. S., Horta, D., et al. 2025, ApJ, 989, 70, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ade2d2

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ade2d2 2025

  27. [27]

    Fiteni, K., Caruana, J., Amarante, J. A. S., Debattista, V. P., & Beraldo e Silva, L. 2021, MNRAS, 503, 1418, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stab619

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stab619 2021

  28. [28]

    2002, ARA&A, 40, 487, doi: 10.1146/annurev.astro.40.060401.093840 Gaia Collaboration, Prusti, T., de Bruijne, J

    Freeman, K., & Bland-Hawthorn, J. 2002, ARA&A, 40, 487, doi: 10.1146/annurev.astro.40.060401.093840 Gaia Collaboration, Prusti, T., de Bruijne, J. H. J., et al. 2016, A&A, 595, A1, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201629272 Gaia Collaboration, Vallenari, A., Brown, A. G. A., et al. 2023, A&A, 674, A1, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202243940

    work page doi:10.1146/annurev.astro.40.060401.093840 2002

  29. [29]

    J., Brook, C

    Gallart, C., Bernard, E. J., Brook, C. B., et al. 2019, Nature Astronomy, 3, 932, doi: 10.1038/s41550-019-0829-5

    work page doi:10.1038/s41550-019-0829-5 2019

  30. [30]

    2023, ApJ, 953, 128, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/acdfc6

    Silva, L., & Khachaturyants, T. 2023, ApJ, 953, 128, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/acdfc6

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/acdfc6 2023

  31. [31]

    R., Eitner, P., Serenelli, A., et al

    Gent, M. R., Eitner, P., Serenelli, A., et al. 2024, A&A, 683, A74, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202244157

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202244157 2024

  32. [32]

    Grand, R. J. J., Kawata, D., Belokurov, V., et al. 2020, MNRAS, 497, 1603, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staa2057

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/staa2057 2020

  33. [33]

    Co-evolution of the Milky Way high- and low-{\alpha} sequences with chemical evolution models

    Grisoni, V., Spitoni, E., & Matteucci, F. 2026, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2605.10596, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2605.10596

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2605.10596 2026

  34. [34]

    2017, MNRAS, 472, 3637, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stx2201

    Grisoni, V., Spitoni, E., Matteucci, F., et al. 2017, MNRAS, 472, 3637, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stx2201

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stx2201 2017

  35. [35]

    2024, A&A, 682, A9, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202347122 The Low-αSplash11

    Guiglion, G., Nepal, S., Chiappini, C., et al. 2024, A&A, 682, A9, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202347122 The Low-αSplash11

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202347122 2024

  36. [36]

    C., Bell, E

    Guo, Y., Ferguson, H. C., Bell, E. F., et al. 2015, ApJ, 800, 39, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/800/1/39

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/800/1/39 2015

  37. [37]

    2015a, MNRAS, 453, 758, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stv1586

    Hawkins, K., Jofré, P., Masseron, T., & Gilmore, G. 2015a, MNRAS, 453, 758, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stv1586

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stv1586

  38. [38]

    2015b, MNRAS, 447, 2046, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stu2574

    Hawkins, K., Kordopatis, G., Gilmore, G., et al. 2015b, MNRAS, 447, 2046, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stu2574

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stu2574 2046

  39. [39]

    D., et al

    Haywood, M., Di Matteo, P., Lehnert, M. D., et al. 2018, ApJ, 863, 113, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aad235

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aad235 2018

  40. [40]

    2020, ARA&A, 58, 205, doi: 10.1146/annurev-astro-032620-021917

    Helmi, A. 2020, ARA&A, 58, 205, doi: 10.1146/annurev-astro-032620-021917

    work page doi:10.1146/annurev-astro-032620-021917 2020

  41. [41]

    H., et al

    Helmi, A., Babusiaux, C., Koppelman, H. H., et al. 2018, Nature, 563, 85, doi: 10.1038/s41586-018-0625-x

    work page doi:10.1038/s41586-018-0625-x 2018

  42. [42]

    P., Mackereth, J

    Horta, D., Schiavon, R. P., Mackereth, J. T., et al. 2021, MNRAS, 500, 1385, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staa2987

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/staa2987 2021

  43. [43]

    A., et al

    Imig, J., Price, C., Holtzman, J. A., et al. 2023, ApJ, 954, 124, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ace9b8 Jönsson, H., Holtzman, J. A., Allende Prieto, C., et al. 2020, AJ, 160, 120, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/aba592 Jurić, M., Ivezić, Ž., Brooks, A., et al. 2008, ApJ, 673, 864, doi: 10.1086/523619

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ace9b8 2023

  44. [44]

    P., Font, A

    Kisku, S., Schiavon, R. P., Font, A. S., et al. 2025, MNRAS, 542, 76, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staf1075

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/staf1075 2025

  45. [45]

    H., Hagen, J

    Koppelman, H. H., Hagen, J. H. J., & Helmi, A. 2021, A&A, 647, A37, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202039390

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202039390 2021

  46. [46]

    Lane, J. M. M., Bovy, J., & Mackereth, J. T. 2023, MNRAS, 526, 1209, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad2834

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stad2834 2023

  47. [47]

    S., Kim, Y

    Lee, A., Lee, Y. S., Kim, Y. K., Beers, T. C., & An, D. 2023, ApJ, 945, 56, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/acb6f5

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/acb6f5 2023

  48. [48]

    2024, ApJ, 967, 5, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad38ba

    Liao, X., Li, Z.-Y., Simion, I., et al. 2024, ApJ, 967, 5, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad38ba

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad38ba 2024

  49. [49]

    , keywords =

    Limberg, G., Souza, S. O., Pérez-Villegas, A., et al. 2022, ApJ, 935, 109, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac8159

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ac8159 2022

  50. [50]

    The astrometric solution

    Lindegren, L., Klioner, S. A., Hernández, J., et al. 2021, A&A, 649, A2, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202039709

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202039709 2021

  51. [51]

    R., Schiavon, R

    Majewski, S. R., Schiavon, R. P., Frinchaboy, P. M., et al. 2017, AJ, 154, 94, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/aa784d

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-3881/aa784d 2017

  52. [52]

    A., Sharma, S., et al

    Malhan, K., Ibata, R. A., Sharma, S., et al. 2022, ApJ, 926, 107, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac4d2a

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ac4d2a 2022

  53. [53]

    McMillan, P. J. 2017, MNRAS, 465, 76, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stw2759 Montalbán, J., Mackereth, J. T., Miglio, A., et al. 2021, Nature Astronomy, 5, 640, doi: 10.1038/s41550-021-01347-7

    work page internal anchor Pith review doi:10.1093/mnras/stw2759 2017

  54. [54]

    2021, ApJ, 923, 92, 10.3847/1538-4357/ac2d2d

    Naidu, R. P., Conroy, C., Bonaca, A., et al. 2021, ApJ, 923, 92, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac2d2d

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ac2d2d 2021

  55. [55]

    B., et al

    Nepal, S., Chiappini, C., Queiroz, A. B., et al. 2024, A&A, 688, A167, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202449445

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202449445 2024

  56. [56]

    Orkney, M. D. A., & Laporte, C. F. P. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2509.09576, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2509.09576

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2509.09576 2025

  57. [57]

    G., et al

    Ortigoza-Urdaneta, M., Vieira, K., Fernández-Trincado, J. G., et al. 2023, A&A, 676, A140, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202346325

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202346325 2023

  58. [58]

    arXiv:0912.3257 [astro-ph.CO] Hopkins PF, Richards GT, Hernquist L (2007) An Observational Determination of the Bolo- metric Quasar Luminosity Function

    Puech, M. 2010, MNRAS, 406, 535, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2010.16689.x

    work page doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2010.16689.x 2010

  59. [59]

    Queiroz, A. B. A., Anders, F., Chiappini, C., et al. 2023, A&A, 673, A155, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202245399

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202245399 2023

  60. [60]

    P., et al

    Renaud, F., Agertz, O., Andersson, E. P., et al. 2021, MNRAS, 503, 5868, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stab543

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stab543 2021

  61. [61]

    2023, ApJ, 951, 147, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/acd5d6 Schönrich, R., Binney, J., & Dehnen, W

    Sattari, Z., Mobasher, B., Chartab, N., et al. 2023, ApJ, 951, 147, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/acd5d6 Schönrich, R., Binney, J., & Dehnen, W. 2010, MNRAS, 403, 1829, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2010.16253.x

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/acd5d6 2023

  62. [62]

    A., Majewski, S

    Sheffield, A. A., Majewski, S. R., Johnston, K. V., et al. 2012, ApJ, 761, 161, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/761/2/161

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/761/2/161 2012

  63. [63]

    2016, ApJ, 821, 72, doi: 10.3847/0004-637X/821/2/72 Silva Aguirre, V., Bojsen-Hansen, M., Slumstrup, D., et al

    Shibuya, T., Ouchi, M., Kubo, M., & Harikane, Y. 2016, ApJ, 821, 72, doi: 10.3847/0004-637X/821/2/72 Silva Aguirre, V., Bojsen-Hansen, M., Slumstrup, D., et al. 2018, MNRAS, 475, 5487, doi: 10.1093/mnras/sty150

    work page doi:10.3847/0004-637x/821/2/72 2016

  64. [64]

    Sok, V., Muzzin, A., Tan, V. Y. Y., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2509.25363, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2509.25363

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2509.25363 2025

  65. [65]

    2019, A&A, 623, A60, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201834188

    Grisoni, V. 2019, A&A, 623, A60, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201834188

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201834188 2019

  66. [66]

    Tan, V. Y. Y., Muzzin, A., Sarrouh, G. T. E., et al. 2025, ApJ, 994, 94, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ae0ffe

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ae0ffe 2025

  67. [67]

    2019, MNRAS, 482, 1525, doi: 10.1093/mnras/sty2672

    Vasiliev, E. 2019, MNRAS, 482, 1525, doi: 10.1093/mnras/sty2672

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/sty2672 2019

  68. [68]

    J., Willmer, C

    Weiner, B. J., Willmer, C. N. A., Faber, S. M., et al. 2006, ApJ, 653, 1027, doi: 10.1086/508921

    work page doi:10.1086/508921 2006

  69. [69]

    C., Hearty, F

    Wilson, J. C., Hearty, F. R., Skrutskie, M. F., et al. 2019, PASP, 131, 055001, doi: 10.1088/1538-3873/ab0075

    work page doi:10.1088/1538-3873/ab0075 2019

  70. [70]

    M., et al

    Zanella, A., Le Floc’h, E., Harrison, C. M., et al. 2019, MNRAS, 489, 2792, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stz2099

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stz2099 2019