pith. sign in

arxiv: 1906.10830 · v1 · pith:VO4BL37Unew · submitted 2019-06-26 · 🌌 astro-ph.SR · astro-ph.GA

Origin of α-rich young stars: clues from C, N and O

Saskia Hekker , Jennifer A. Johnson This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-25 15:37 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.SR astro-ph.GA
keywords alpha-rich young starsCNO abundancesstellar mergersmass transferred giant starsN/C ratioasteroseismologyfirst dredge-up
0
0 comments X

The pith

Some chemically old stars that appear young are merger products

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

The paper measures carbon, nitrogen and oxygen in 51 red giant stars whose masses come from asteroseismology. High-mass stars that are chemically old but show low nitrogen-to-carbon ratios have the same surface abundance patterns as low-mass stars after the first dredge-up, pointing to mergers or mass transfer happening at or after that stage. The subset with high nitrogen-to-carbon ratios follows the trend expected for single-star evolution at their measured mass, so they may be genuinely young or the product of earlier main-sequence mergers. This split accounts for the existence of alpha-rich young stars by separating binary products from possible exceptions to standard evolution.

Core claim

The alpha-rich young stars divide based on their N/C surface number density ratios: those with low N/C are interpreted as products of mergers or mass transfer during or after first dredge up because the dredge-up features are the same as for low-mass stars, while the alpha-rich young stars with high N/C follow the expected trend of N/C for their mass and could be either genuine young stars or the results of mergers on the main sequence.

What carries the argument

The N/C surface number density ratio, which separates observed abundances into those matching single-star first-dredge-up trends and those indicating binary mass transfer or merger at different evolutionary stages.

If this is right

  • High-mass alpha-rich stars include both genuine young objects and binary interaction products.
  • The unexplained high alpha-to-iron ratios apply only to the high N/C subset.
  • CNO abundances combined with asteroseismic masses can identify likely post-dredge-up merger products among red giants.
  • The timing of mass transfer or merger determines whether dredge-up signatures are reset to low-mass patterns or retained at high-mass levels.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Binary population synthesis models could be checked by predicting the fraction of stars expected in each N/C group.
  • Galactic archaeology age estimates that treat all alpha-rich stars as old may need adjustment for the merger subset.
  • Spectroscopic surveys could search for stars with intermediate N/C values to map the transition between the two populations.

Load-bearing premise

Asteroseismic masses accurately reflect true stellar masses and observed N/C ratios can be compared directly to single-star evolution trends without extra binary modeling or measurement offsets.

What would settle it

Detailed binary evolution calculations showing that post-dredge-up mass transfer cannot reproduce the low N/C ratios seen in the high-mass group, or independent mass measurements that differ from the asteroseismic values for those same stars.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 1906.10830 by Jennifer A. Johnson, Saskia Hekker.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Comparisons between [Fe/H] results (left, top), [α/Fe] results (centre, top), [α/H] (right), Teff (left, bottom) and log g (centre, bottom) obtained in this work and in the literature. Orange dots show comparisons with results presented in the APOGEE DR14 (Holtzman et al. 2018) and black points show comparisons with results obtained with the BACCHUS pipeline (Hawkins et al. 2016). The gray dashed line indi… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Comparisons between [C/H] results (left), [N/H] results (middle) and [O/H] results (right) obtained in this work and with the BACCHUS pipeline (black dots, Hawkins et al. 2016) and with the APOGEE DR14 catalogue (orange dots, Holtzman et al. 2018). The gray dashed line indicates the one-to-one relation [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: [X/Fe] vs. [Fe/H] for the stars analysed in this work. The meaning of the symbols is indicated in the legend in the top right panel. The black dashed line is a second order polynomial fit through the combined α-rich old and α-normal set of stars and the number in the right top of each panel indicates the standard deviation of the values of the α-rich young stars around the fit (σ) and the average deviation… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: N/O vs. N/C ratios for stars analysed by Luck & Heiter (2007) (open coloured circles in the left panels) and the stars analysed in this work indicated with crosses (α-rich young stars) and triangles (α-rich old and α-normal stars) in the right panels. In these right panels the stars analysed by Luck & Heiter (2007) are indicated with gray circles. The colour code indicates the stellar metallicity (top) and… view at source ↗
read the original abstract

A small set of chemically old stars that appear young by their independently derived masses has been detected. These are so-called $\alpha$-rich young stars. For a sample of 51 red-giant stars, for which spectra are available from SDSS/APOGEE and masses are available from asteroseismic measures based on \textit{Kepler} lightcurves, we derive the C, N and O abundances through an independent analysis. These stars span a wide range of N/C surface number density ratios. We interpret the high-mass stars with low N/C as being products of mergers or mass transfer during or after first dredge up, because the dredge-up features are the same as for low-mass stars. The $\alpha$-rich young stars with high N/C follow the expected trend of N/C for their mass, and could be either genuine young stars (leaving their high [$\alpha$/Fe] unexplained) or the results of mergers on the main sequence.

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

3 major / 1 minor

Summary. The manuscript analyzes C, N, and O abundances derived independently from APOGEE spectra for a sample of 51 red-giant stars with asteroseismic masses from Kepler light curves. It reports a wide range of N/C surface ratios and interprets high-mass stars with low N/C as merger or mass-transfer products during or after first dredge-up (matching low-mass single-star dredge-up features), while α-rich young stars with high N/C follow the expected single-star N/C trend for their mass and may be either genuine young stars or main-sequence merger products.

Significance. If the central interpretation holds, the work supplies a binary-evolution channel that could reconcile the apparent youth (from asteroseismic masses) of chemically old α-rich stars, offering a concrete mechanism to explain a long-standing puzzle in Galactic stellar populations.

major comments (3)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract: the statement that abundances were derived independently and that trends were examined supplies no quantitative results, error bars, sample statistics, or model comparisons, preventing verification of support for the merger interpretation.
  2. [Asteroseismic masses and N/C analysis] The interpretation that high-mass low-N/C stars are post-dredge-up merger products (and high-N/C α-rich stars are either genuine young or main-sequence mergers) rests on asteroseismic masses accurately distinguishing the ~1.5–2 M⊙ first-dredge-up boundary, yet the manuscript reports no propagation of scaling-relation systematics such as solar reference values or surface-effect corrections.
  3. [Discussion of merger scenarios] No quantitative binary evolution grids or coupled modeling of mass-transfer effects on both stellar mass and surface CNO abundances are presented to test whether such episodes reproduce the observed N/C split at the reported masses.
minor comments (1)
  1. [Abstract] The abstract could specify the exact number of stars falling into each N/C category and the mass range spanned by the sample.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

3 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their constructive comments on our manuscript. We address each major comment below and indicate where revisions will be made.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract: the statement that abundances were derived independently and that trends were examined supplies no quantitative results, error bars, sample statistics, or model comparisons, preventing verification of support for the merger interpretation.

    Authors: We agree the abstract is concise and would benefit from additional quantitative context. In the revised manuscript we will expand the abstract to report the sample size, the observed range in N/C, the fraction of stars showing the low-N/C high-mass signature, and a brief statement of the comparison to single-star expectations. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Asteroseismic masses and N/C analysis] The interpretation that high-mass low-N/C stars are post-dredge-up merger products (and high-N/C α-rich stars are either genuine young or main-sequence mergers) rests on asteroseismic masses accurately distinguishing the ~1.5–2 M⊙ first-dredge-up boundary, yet the manuscript reports no propagation of scaling-relation systematics such as solar reference values or surface-effect corrections.

    Authors: The masses are obtained from the standard asteroseismic scaling relations applied to Kepler data, which have been extensively validated. Typical uncertainties are 0.1–0.2 M⊙, sufficient to separate the regimes around the first-dredge-up boundary. We will add a paragraph discussing the possible impact of solar reference values and surface-effect corrections on the mass scale and on the robustness of the N/C split. revision: partial

  3. Referee: [Discussion of merger scenarios] No quantitative binary evolution grids or coupled modeling of mass-transfer effects on both stellar mass and surface CNO abundances are presented to test whether such episodes reproduce the observed N/C split at the reported masses.

    Authors: The manuscript is an observational study that identifies an empirical N/C dichotomy and proposes a binary channel as a plausible explanation. We do not present new binary-evolution calculations because that lies outside the scope of the present work; the interpretation rests on the mismatch between the observed N/C values and single-star predictions at the measured masses. We will expand the discussion to cite existing binary population-synthesis results that demonstrate mass transfer and mergers can alter both mass and surface abundances in the relevant regime. revision: no

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: interpretation rests on external trends and independent data

full rationale

The paper's central claim is an interpretive classification of α-rich stars as merger products or genuine young stars, based on comparing observed N/C ratios (derived independently from APOGEE spectra) against expected single-star evolutionary trends at asteroseismic masses. No equations, fitted parameters, predictions, or ansatzes are presented that reduce to the inputs by construction. The analysis draws on external benchmarks (prior literature trends for N/C vs. mass) rather than self-citations, self-definitions, or internal fits, rendering the derivation self-contained.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The interpretation depends on the domain assumption that N/C ratios reliably trace first dredge-up and that asteroseismic masses are independent of the chemical analysis.

axioms (1)
  • domain assumption N/C surface ratios after first dredge-up follow a predictable trend with stellar mass for single stars
    Invoked to classify low N/C high-mass stars as merger products and high N/C stars as following the expected trend.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5701 in / 1228 out tokens · 29951 ms · 2026-05-25T15:37:21.650346+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

52 extracted references · 52 canonical work pages · 2 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    write newline

    " write newline "" before.all 'output.state := FUNCTION fin.entry write newline FUNCTION new.block output.state before.all = 'skip after.block 'output.state := if FUNCTION new.sentence output.state after.block = 'skip output.state before.all = 'skip after.sentence 'output.state := if if FUNCTION not #0 #1 if FUNCTION and 'skip pop #0 if FUNCTION or pop #1...

    work page

  2. [2]

    H., Greenstein J

    Aller L. H., Greenstein J. L., 1960, @doi [ ] 10.1086/190054 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1960ApJS....5..139A 5, 139

    work page doi:10.1086/190054 1960

  3. [3]

    Alvarez R., Plez B., 1998, , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1998A

    work page 1998

  4. [4]

    Anders F., et al., 2017, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201629363 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017A

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201629363 2017

  5. [5]

    Asplund M., Grevesse N., Jacques Sauval A., 2006, @doi [Nuclear Physics A] 10.1016/j.nuclphysa.2005.06.010 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2006NuPhA.777....1A 777, 1

    work page doi:10.1016/j.nuclphysa.2005.06.010 2006

  6. [6]

    Bensby T., Feltzing S., Lundstr \"o m I., 2003, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361:20031213 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2003A

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20031213 2003

  7. [7]

    R., Bershady M

    Blanton M. R., Bershady M. A., Abolfathi B., Albareti F. D., Allende Prieto C., et al. 2017, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-3881/aa7567 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017AJ....154...28B 154, 28

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-3881/aa7567 2017

  8. [8]

    Brooke J. S. A., Bernath P. F., Western C. M., Sneden C., Af s ar M., Li G., Gordon I. E., 2016, @doi [ ] 10.1016/j.jqsrt.2015.07.021 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2016JQSRT.168..142B 168, 142

    work page doi:10.1016/j.jqsrt.2015.07.021 2016

  9. [9]

    L., 2003, in Piskunov N., Weiss W

    Castelli F., Kurucz R. L., 2003, in Piskunov N., Weiss W. W., Gray D. F., eds, IAU Symposium Vol. 210, Modelling of Stellar Atmospheres. p. A20

    work page 2003

  10. [10]

    L., 2004, arXiv Astrophysics e-prints, http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2004astro.ph..5087C

    Castelli F., Kurucz R. L., 2004, arXiv Astrophysics e-prints, http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2004astro.ph..5087C

    work page 2004

  11. [11]

    W., Aller L

    Chamberlain J. W., Aller L. H., 1951, @doi [ ] 10.1086/145451 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1951ApJ...114...52C 114, 52

    work page doi:10.1086/145451 1951

  12. [12]

    S., Miglio A., Montalb \'a n J., et al

    Chiappini C., Anders F., Rodrigues T. S., Miglio A., Montalb \'a n J., et al. 2015, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201525865 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015A

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201525865 2015

  13. [13]

    Delgado Mena E., et al., 2019, arXiv e-prints, http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019arXiv190202127D

    work page 2019

  14. [14]

    L., Nissen P

    Edvardsson B., Andersen J., Gustafsson B., Lambert D. L., Nissen P. E., Tomkin J., 1993, , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1993A

    work page 1993

  15. [15]

    K., et al., 2018, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/sty779 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018MNRAS.477.2326F 477, 2326

    Feuillet D. K., et al., 2018, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/sty779 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018MNRAS.477.2326F 477, 2326

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/sty779 2018

  16. [16]

    Fuhrmann K., 1998, , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1998A

    work page 1998

  17. [17]

    E., et al., 2016, @doi [ ] 10.3847/0004-6256/151/6/144 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2016AJ....151..144G 151, 144

    Garc \' a P \'e rez A. E., et al., 2016, @doi [ ] 10.3847/0004-6256/151/6/144 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2016AJ....151..144G 151, 144

    work page doi:10.3847/0004-6256/151/6/144 2016

  18. [18]

    E., Siegmund W

    Gunn J. E., Siegmund W. A., Mannery E. J., Owen R. E., Hull C. L., et al. 2006, @doi [ ] 10.1086/500975 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2006AJ....131.2332G 131, 2332

    work page doi:10.1086/500975 2006

  19. [19]

    G., Nordlund ., Plez B., 2008, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361:200809724 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2008A

    Gustafsson B., Edvardsson B., Eriksson K., J rgensen U. G., Nordlund ., Plez B., 2008, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361:200809724 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2008A

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361:200809724 2008

  20. [20]

    Hawkins K., Masseron T., Jofr \'e P., Gilmore G., Elsworth Y., Hekker S., 2016, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201628812 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2016A

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201628812 2016

  21. [21]

    A., Shetrone M., Johnson J

    Holtzman J. A., Shetrone M., Johnson J. A., et al. 2015, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-6256/150/5/148 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015AJ....150..148H 150, 148

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-6256/150/5/148 2015

  22. [22]

    A., et al., 2018, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-3881/aad4f9 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018AJ....156..125H 156, 125

    Holtzman J. A., et al., 2018, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-3881/aad4f9 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018AJ....156..125H 156, 125

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-3881/aad4f9 2018

  23. [23]

    New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold Company

    Huber K., Herzberg G., 1979, Volume IV: Constants of Diatomic Molecules . New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold Company

    work page 1979

  24. [24]

    G., Preece H., Jofre P., Halabi G

    Izzard R. G., Preece H., Jofre P., Halabi G. M., Masseron T., Tout C. A., 2018, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stx2355 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018MNRAS.473.2984I 473, 2984

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stx2355 2018

  25. [25]

    Jofr \'e P., et al., 2016, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201629356 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2016A

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201629356 2016

  26. [26]

    I., Lattanzio J

    Karakas A. I., Lattanzio J. C., 2014, @doi [ ] 10.1017/pasa.2014.21 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014PASA...31...30K 31, e030

    work page doi:10.1017/pasa.2014.21 2014

  27. [27]

    Technical Report 91-001, July 1991

    Livingston W., Wallace L., 1991, An atlas of the solar spectrum in the infrared from 1850 to 9000 cm-1 (1.1 to 5.4 m), N.S.O. Technical Report 91-001, July 1991. . Tucson: National Solar Observatory, National Optical Astronomy Observatory

    work page 1991

  28. [28]

    E., Heiter U., 2007, @doi [ ] 10.1086/513194 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2007AJ....133.2464L 133, 2464

    Luck R. E., Heiter U., 2007, @doi [ ] 10.1086/513194 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2007AJ....133.2464L 133, 2464

    work page doi:10.1086/513194 2007

  29. [29]

    R., et al., 2017, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-3881/aa784d , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017AJ....154...94M 154, 94

    Majewski S. R., et al., 2017, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-3881/aa784d , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017AJ....154...94M 154, 94

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

  30. [30]

    2015, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stv1071 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015MNRAS.451.2230M 451, 2230

    Martig M., Rix H.-W., Silva Aguirre V., Hekker S., et al. 2015, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stv1071 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015MNRAS.451.2230M 451, 2230

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stv1071 2015

  31. [31]

    Martig M., et al., 2016, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stv2830 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2016MNRAS.456.3655M 456, 3655

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stv2830 2016

  32. [32]

    N., 2018, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/aac019 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018ApJ...860...49M 860, 49

    Matsuno T., Yong D., Aoki W., Ishigaki M. N., 2018, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/aac019 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018ApJ...860...49M 860, 49

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aac019 2018

  33. [33]

    Mel \'e ndez J., Barbuy B., 1999, @doi [ ] 10.1086/313261 , http://cdsads.u-strasbg.fr/abs/1999ApJS..124..527M 124, 527

    work page doi:10.1086/313261 1999

  34. [34]

    M \'e sz \'a ros S., et al., 2012, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-6256/144/4/120 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2012AJ....144..120M 144, 120

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-6256/144/4/120 2012

  35. [35]

    K., 1964, @doi [ ] 10.1364/AO.3.001337 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1964ApOpt...3.1337P 3, 1337

    Pierce A. K., 1964, @doi [ ] 10.1364/AO.3.001337 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1964ApOpt...3.1337P 3, 1337

    work page doi:10.1364/ao.3.001337 1964

  36. [36]

    H., Elsworth Y., Epstein C., Hekker S., M \'e sz \'a ros S., Chaplin W

    Pinsonneault M. H., Elsworth Y., Epstein C., Hekker S., M \'e sz \'a ros S., Chaplin W. J., Johnson J. A., et al. 2014, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0067-0049/215/2/19 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014ApJS..215...19P 215, 19

    work page doi:10.1088/0067-0049/215/2/19 2014

  37. [37]

    The Second APOKASC Catalog: The Empirical Approach

    Pinsonneault M. H., Elsworth Y. P., Tayar J., Serenelli A., et al. 2018, preprint, http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018arXiv180409983P ( @eprint arXiv 1804.09983 )

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  38. [38]

    Plez B., 2012, Turbospectrum: Code for spectral synthesis , Astrophysics Source Code Library ( @eprint ascl 1205.004 )

    work page 2012

  39. [39]

    Reddy A. B. S., Lambert D. L., 2015, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stv1876 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015MNRAS.454.1976R 454, 1976

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stv1876 2015

  40. [40]

    M., Cassisi S., 2015, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201526951 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015A

    Salaris M., Pietrinferni A., Piersimoni A. M., Cassisi S., 2015, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201526951 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015A

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201526951 2015

  41. [41]

    2018, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/sty150 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018MNRAS.475.5487S 475, 5487

    Silva Aguirre V., Bojsen-Hansen M., Slumstrup D., Casagrande L., et al. 2018, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/sty150 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018MNRAS.475.5487S 475, 5487

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/sty150 2018

  42. [42]

    V., Cunha K., Shetrone M

    Smith V. V., Cunha K., Shetrone M. D., Meszaros S., et al. 2013, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/765/1/16 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2013ApJ...765...16S 765, 16

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/765/1/16 2013

  43. [43]

    A., 1973, PhD thesis, THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT AUSTIN

    Sneden C. A., 1973, PhD thesis, THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT AUSTIN

    work page 1973

  44. [44]

    S., Brooke J

    Sneden C., Lucatello S., Ram R. S., Brooke J. S. A., Bernath P., 2014, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0067-0049/214/2/26 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014ApJS..214...26S 214, 26

    work page doi:10.1088/0067-0049/214/2/26 2014

  45. [45]

    Talbot J. R. J., Arnett D. W., 1974, @doi [ ] 10.1086/152918 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1974ApJ...190..605T 190, 605

    work page doi:10.1086/152918 1974

  46. [46]

    Tayar J., et al., 2015, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/807/1/82 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015ApJ...807...82T 807, 82

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/807/1/82 2015

  47. [47]

    M., 1979, @doi [ ] 10.1086/157039 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1979ApJ...229.1046T 229, 1046

    Tinsley B. M., 1979, @doi [ ] 10.1086/157039 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1979ApJ...229.1046T 229, 1046

    work page doi:10.1086/157039 1979

  48. [48]

    A., Richard , O., Michaud , G., and Richer , J

    VandenBerg D. A., Richard O., Michaud G., Richer J., 2002, @doi [ ] 10.1086/339895 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2002ApJ...571..487V 571, 487

    work page doi:10.1086/339895 2002

  49. [49]

    Wallerstein G., 1962, @doi [ ] 10.1086/190067 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1962ApJS....6..407W 6, 407

    work page doi:10.1086/190067 1962

  50. [50]

    The Apache Point Observatory Galactic Evolution Experiment (APOGEE) Spectrographs

    Wilson J. C., et al., 2019, arXiv e-prints: 1902.00928, http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019arXiv190200928W

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  51. [51]

    Yong D., et al., 2016, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stw676 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2016MNRAS.459..487Y 459, 487

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stw676 2016

  52. [52]

    Zamora O., et al., 2015, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-6256/149/6/181 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015AJ....149..181Z 149, 181

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-6256/149/6/181 2015