pith. sign in

arxiv: 2607.00093 · v1 · pith:VRDCDTOInew · submitted 2026-06-30 · 🌌 astro-ph.GA

Search for Quasar Pairs with {it Gaia} Astrometric Data. III. Discovery of 9 dual and projected quasars

Qihang Chen , Zizhao He , Zhuojun Deng , Liang Jing , Xingyu Zhu , Jianghua Wu This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-07-02 18:16 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.GA
keywords quasar pairsdual quasarsprojected quasarsGaia astrometryspectroscopic confirmationphotometric redshiftsMGQPC cataloghigh-redshift quasars
0
0 comments X

The pith

Spectroscopic observations confirm 6 dual quasars and 3 projected quasars from 11 Gaia-selected candidates.

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

The paper presents low-resolution long-slit spectroscopic observations of 11 quasar pair candidates drawn from the MGQPC catalog. These observations confirm 6 as dual quasars, including one at redshift approximately 3.1, and 3 as projected quasars. The work shows that photometric redshifts help reduce contamination from projections and explains why earlier surveys missed several of these objects. It also reviews confirmation strategies for dual and lensed systems ahead of large-scale surveys.

Core claim

We report the low-resolution long-slit spectroscopic observations and confirmations of 11 quasar pair candidates selected from the MGQPC catalog. The major discoveries include 6 dual quasars and 3 projected quasars. One of the dual quasars has a high redshift of ∼3.1. The LQ hypothesis of 3 dual quasars cannot be completely ruled out. We investigated the reason why previous spectroscopic surveys missed several new quasars and discussed a projected quasar with a wide-separation lensing configuration as well as two quasar-star projections.

What carries the argument

Low-resolution long-slit spectroscopic follow-up on three telescopes to classify Gaia-selected quasar pair candidates as dual, projected, or otherwise.

If this is right

  • Photometric redshifts reduce contamination from projected quasars and quasar-star projections in candidate lists.
  • Previous spectroscopic surveys missed several new quasars for reasons that can now be addressed in selection.
  • A projected quasar with wide-separation lensing configuration and two quasar-star projections that mimic lensed systems are identified.
  • Confirmation strategies for dual and lensed quasar candidates are reviewed and outlined for future large-scale surveys.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • Applying the same Gaia-plus-photometric-redshift selection to larger samples could increase the known population of dual quasars at z greater than 3.
  • High-resolution imaging follow-up on the three dual candidates whose lensing status remains open would clarify whether any are actually lensed systems.
  • The methods used here to handle quasar-star projections offer a template for cleaning candidate lists in other wide-field pair searches.

Load-bearing premise

The photometric redshifts extracted from Paper-II are sufficiently accurate to prioritize candidates and mitigate contamination from projected quasars and quasar-star projections.

What would settle it

Higher-resolution spectra or imaging that show any of the six dual quasars to be single objects, stars, or line-of-sight projections at different redshifts would falsify the reported discoveries.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2607.00093 by Jianghua Wu, Liang Jing, Qihang Chen, Xingyu Zhu, Zhuojun Deng, Zizhao He.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Pseudo-color images of the 11 observed pairs. Except for the image of J0249+2606, which comes from a Pan-STARRS composite, the images of the remaining pairs are all from DESI-LS DR10 composites. North is up and east is to the left. The slit position during the exposure is overlaid (orange double lines) in each cutout image. For all pairs except J1601+3926, J2252+0847, and J2314+2437, the spectroscopic slit… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Spectra of the 6 confirmed DQs. Unfortunately, the slit of J0130+0725 was rotated to an incorrect angle, and the spectra of members A and B were heavily blended. The grey regions in the spectra of J0130+0725, J0242-1002, and J2252+0847 denote the splicing of spectra from two channels of DBSP and LAMOST. Each black open circle with a cross denotes telluric absorption at ∼ 7 600Å. All marked emission lines a… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Similar to [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Spectral flux ratio curves of 6 DQs. All flux ratios were obtained by dividing the spectrum of member B by that of member A, and were smoothed with appropriate Gaussian kernel parameters for visual clarity. The shaded red regions in each panel highlight the differences in the flux ratio around the emission lines. The flux ratios for J0130+0725, J0229+0320, J0428−0712, and J2252+0847 were obtained from the … view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Color features of member B of the 11 observed targets. A subset of quasars was overlaid on each diagram as a 2D histogram with a yellow￾to-blue gradient (high to low density), and the number of quasars in each diagram is equal to 4 000. The legends for targets are in the lower-left corner. All magnitudes are given in the AB system. The blue, green, and red areas in the top left panel displayed the SDSS qua… view at source ↗
read the original abstract

We report the low-resolution long-slit spectroscopic observations and confirmations of 11 quasar pair candidates, which are selected from the MGQPC catalog presented in the first paper of our series work (hereafter, Paper-I) and the early version of this catalog. The spectroscopic follow-up was carried out with 5 spectrographs equipped on 3 telescopes, and the major discoveries include 6 dual quasars and 3 projected quasars. One of the dual quasars has a high redshift of $\sim$ 3.1. The LQ hypothesis of 3 dual quasars cannot be completely ruled out. We investigated the reason why previous spectroscopic surveys missed several new quasars. We discussed a projected quasar with a wide-separation lensing configuration, as well as two quasar-star projections that mimic the configuration of lensed quasars. The photometric redshifts for the 11 observed candidates were extracted from the second paper of our series work (hereafter, Paper-II) to illustrate their positive role in mitigating contamination from projected quasars and quasar-star projections. We also reviewed and discussed the confirmation strategies for dual and lensed quasar candidates, and outlined future confirmation strategies for them in the context of the era dominated by large-scale spectroscopic and imaging surveys.

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

0 major / 3 minor

Summary. The paper reports low-resolution long-slit spectroscopic observations confirming 11 quasar pair candidates selected from the MGQPC catalog (Paper I), using five spectrographs on three telescopes. This yields six dual quasars (one at z ≈ 3.1) and three projected quasars; the LQ hypothesis cannot be fully ruled out for three of the duals. The work examines why prior surveys missed several objects, discusses a wide-separation lensing configuration and two quasar-star projections, illustrates the utility of photometric redshifts from Paper II for reducing contamination, and reviews confirmation strategies for dual/lensed quasars in the context of large surveys.

Significance. If the spectroscopic classifications hold, the addition of six dual quasars (including a high-redshift example) enlarges the sample available for studies of supermassive black hole pairs and merger-driven evolution. The explicit discussion of selection biases, contamination mitigation via photometric redshifts, and future confirmation strategies in the era of large spectroscopic surveys provides practical guidance beyond the specific discoveries.

minor comments (3)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract: the claim of 'confirmations' would be strengthened by explicit reference to the figures or tables that display the spectra, line identifications, and redshift measurements for the 11 candidates.
  2. [Spectroscopic observations section] The description of the five spectrographs and three telescopes would benefit from a compact table listing instrument, telescope, resolution, wavelength coverage, and typical exposure times to allow readers to assess data quality at a glance.
  3. [Discussion of photometric redshifts] The statement that photometric redshifts from Paper II 'illustrate their positive role' is useful, but a short quantitative comparison (e.g., fraction of candidates rejected by photo-z cuts) would make the mitigation claim more concrete.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

0 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their positive and constructive report, which recommends minor revision. The assessment accurately captures the scope of our spectroscopic follow-up and the broader context we provide on selection biases and confirmation strategies. No major comments requiring point-by-point rebuttal were raised in the report.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity

full rationale

This is an observational discovery paper whose central claims consist of direct low-resolution long-slit spectroscopic confirmations of 11 candidates, yielding 6 dual quasars and 3 projected quasars. These rest on the new spectra themselves rather than on any derivation, fit, or prediction. Photometric redshifts extracted from Paper II are invoked only illustratively to discuss selection and contamination mitigation; they do not enter the reported redshifts or classifications. No equations, fitted parameters, or self-citation chains reduce the confirmation results to prior inputs by construction. The work is therefore self-contained against external spectroscopic benchmarks.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 0 axioms · 0 invented entities

No mathematical derivations, free parameters, or invented entities. The work is purely observational confirmation relying on standard assumptions of quasar spectral identification and photometric redshift utility.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.1-grok · 5785 in / 1112 out tokens · 20457 ms · 2026-07-02T18:16:36.314959+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

118 extracted references · 118 canonical work pages · 2 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    2022, ApJS, 259, 35

    Abdurro’uf, Accetta, K., Aerts, C., et al. 2022, ApJS, 259, 35

    work page 2022

  2. [2]

    2017, MNRAS, 471, 2013

    Agnello, A. 2017, MNRAS, 471, 2013

    work page 2017

  3. [3]

    & Spiniello, C

    Agnello, A. & Spiniello, C. 2019, MNRAS, 489, 2525

    work page 2019

  4. [4]

    2020, AJ, 159, 122

    Altamura, E., Brennan, S., Le´sniewska, A., et al. 2020, AJ, 159, 122

    work page 2020

  5. [5]

    T., Jahnke, K., van der Wel, A., et al

    Andika, I. T., Jahnke, K., van der Wel, A., et al. 2023, ApJ, 943, 150

    work page 2023

  6. [6]

    L., Kuropatkin, N., et al

    Anguita, T., Schechter, P. L., Kuropatkin, N., et al. 2018, MNRAS, 480, 5017

    work page 2018

  7. [7]

    J., Stern, D., Noirot, G., et al

    Assef, R. J., Stern, D., Noirot, G., et al. 2018, ApJS, 234, 23 Astropy Collaboration, Price-Whelan, A. M., Lim, P. L., et al. 2022, ApJ, 935, 167 Astropy Collaboration, Price-Whelan, A. M., Sip˝ocz, B. M., et al. 2018, AJ, 156, 123 Astropy Collaboration, Robitaille, T. P., Tollerud, E. J., et al. 2013, A&A, 558, A33

    work page 2018

  8. [8]

    Barone, T. M., G. C., K. V ., Tran, K.-V ., et al. 2026, AJ, 171, 57

    work page 2026

  9. [9]

    2025, A&A, 698, A29

    Bazzanini, L., Angora, G., Scialpi, M., et al. 2025, A&A, 698, A29

    work page 2025

  10. [10]

    H., Agnello, A., & Hjorth, J

    Bruun, S. H., Agnello, A., & Hjorth, J. 2023, A&A, 676, A111

    work page 2023

  11. [11]

    Butler, N. R. & Bloom, J. S. 2011, AJ, 141, 93

    work page 2011

  12. [12]

    2025, Science China Physics, Mechanics, and Astronomy, 68, 280403

    Cai, Z., Huang, S., Liu, Y ., Zhao, C., & Huang, L. 2025, Science China Physics, Mechanics, and Astronomy, 68, 280403

    work page 2025

  13. [13]

    The Pan-STARRS1 Surveys

    Chambers, K. C., Magnier, E. A., Metcalfe, N., et al. 2016, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:1612.05560

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  14. [14]

    Chan, J. H. H., Wong, K. C., Ding, X., et al. 2024, MNRAS, 527, 6253

    work page 2024

  15. [15]

    2023, ApJ, 944, 107

    Chaussidon, E., Yèche, C., Palanque-Delabrouille, N., et al. 2023, ApJ, 944, 107

    work page 2023

  16. [16]

    2025a, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2512.16844

    Chen, N., Zhou, Y ., Dadiani, E., et al. 2025a, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2512.16844

    work page arXiv

  17. [17]

    2026, A&A, 707, A30

    Chen, Q., Jing, L., Zhu, X., et al. 2026, A&A, 707, A30

    work page 2026

  18. [18]

    2020, ApJ, 897, 86

    Chen, Y ., Yu, Q., & Lu, Y . 2020, ApJ, 897, 86

    work page 2020

  19. [19]

    2021, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2109.06881

    Chen, Y .-C. 2021, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2109.06881

    work page arXiv 2021

  20. [20]

    2022, ApJ, 925, 162

    Chen, Y .-C., Hwang, H.-C., Shen, Y ., et al. 2022, ApJ, 925, 162

    work page 2022

  21. [21]

    2023d, ApJS, 265, 46 CSST Collaboration, Gong, Y ., Miao, H., et al

    Chen, Z.-F., Qin, H.-C., Cai, J.-T., et al. 2023d, ApJS, 265, 46 CSST Collaboration, Gong, Y ., Miao, H., et al. 2026, Science China Physics, Mechanics, and Astronomy, 69, 239501

    work page 2026

  22. [22]

    2012, Research in Astronomy and Astrophysics, 12, 1197

    Cui, X.-Q., Zhao, Y .-H., Chu, Y .-Q., et al. 2012, Research in Astronomy and Astrophysics, 12, 1197

    work page 2012

  23. [23]

    D., Sharon, K., et al

    Dahle, H., Gladders, M. D., Sharon, K., et al. 2013, ApJ, 773, 146

    work page 2013

  24. [24]

    2023, ApJS, 269, 61 de Jong, R

    Dawes, C., Storfer, C., Huang, X., et al. 2023, ApJS, 269, 61 de Jong, R. S., Agertz, O., Berbel, A. A., et al. 2019, The Messenger, 175, 3 De Rosa, A., Vignali, C., Bogdanovi´c, T., et al. 2019, New A Rev., 86, 101525 De Rosa, A., Vignali, C., Severgnini, P., et al. 2023, MNRAS, 519, 5149

    work page 2023

  25. [25]

    Data Release 1 of the Dark Energy Spectroscopic Instrument

    Deng, Z., Xiang, C., Chen, Q., et al. 2026, ApJS, 283, 70 DESI Collaboration, Karim, M. A., Adame, A. G., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2503.14745

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  26. [26]

    J., Lang, D., et al

    Dey, A., Schlegel, D. J., Lang, D., et al. 2019, AJ, 157, 168

    work page 2019

  27. [27]

    J., Harvey, T., et al

    Duan, Q., Conselice, C. J., Harvey, T., et al. 2026, MNRAS, 546, stag008

    work page 2026

  28. [28]

    H., et al

    Ducourant, C., Teixeira, R., Vale-Cunha, P. H., et al. 2026, A&A, 707, A345

    work page 2026

  29. [29]

    2025, The Open Journal of Astro- physics, 8, 12

    Ellison, S., Ferreira, L., Bickley, R., et al. 2025, The Open Journal of Astro- physics, 8, 12

    work page 2025

  30. [30]

    L., Patton, D

    Ellison, S. L., Patton, D. R., & Hickox, R. C. 2015, MNRAS, 451, L35

    work page 2015

  31. [31]

    L., Patton, D

    Ellison, S. L., Patton, D. R., Mendel, J. T., & Scudder, J. M. 2011, MNRAS, 418, 2043

    work page 2011

  32. [32]

    2000, ApJ, 545, 63 Euclid Collaboration, Mellier, Y ., Abdurro’uf, et al

    Elvis, M. 2000, ApJ, 545, 63 Euclid Collaboration, Mellier, Y ., Abdurro’uf, et al. 2025, A&A, 697, A1

    work page 2000

  33. [33]

    Fan, X., Bañados, E., & Simcoe, R. A. 2023, ARA&A, 61, 373

    work page 2023

  34. [34]

    2016, PASP, 128, 115005

    Fan, Z., Wang, H., Jiang, X., et al. 2016, PASP, 128, 115005

    work page 2016

  35. [35]

    P., Falomo, R., Scarpa, R., et al

    Farina, E. P., Falomo, R., Scarpa, R., et al. 2014, MNRAS, 441, 886

    work page 2014

  36. [36]

    P., Falomo, R., & Treves, A

    Farina, E. P., Falomo, R., & Treves, A. 2011, MNRAS, 415, 3163

    work page 2011

  37. [37]

    2021, A&A, 653, A109

    Fian, C., Mediavilla, E., Motta, V ., et al. 2021, A&A, 653, A109

    work page 2021

  38. [38]

    2023, ApJ, 942, 64

    Fu, X.-D., Wang, J., Xu, X., & Zhang, Z.-X. 2023, ApJ, 942, 64

    work page 2023

  39. [39]

    C., Chen, Y .-C., Oguri, M., et al

    Gross, A. C., Chen, Y .-C., Oguri, M., et al. 2025, ApJ, 989, 112

    work page 2025

  40. [40]

    B., Hewitt, J

    Haarsma, D. B., Hewitt, J. N., Lehár, J., & Burke, B. F. 1997, ApJ, 479, 102

    work page 1997

  41. [41]

    R., Millman, K

    Harris, C. R., Millman, K. J., van der Walt, S. J., et al. 2020, Nature, 585, 357

    work page 2020

  42. [42]

    Hawkins, M. R. S. 2021, MNRAS, 503, 3848

    work page 2021

  43. [43]

    2023, A&A, 672, A123

    He, Z., Li, N., Cao, X., et al. 2023, A&A, 672, A123

    work page 2023

  44. [44]

    E., Fynbo, J

    Heintz, K. E., Fynbo, J. P. U., Krogager, J.-K., et al. 2016, AJ, 152, 13

    work page 2016

  45. [45]

    F., Myers, A

    Hennawi, J. F., Myers, A. D., Shen, Y ., et al. 2010, ApJ, 719, 1672

    work page 2010

  46. [46]

    Hennawi, J. F. & Prochaska, J. X. 2013, ApJ, 766, 58

    work page 2013

  47. [47]

    Hogg, D. W. 1999, arXiv e-prints, astro

    work page 1999

  48. [48]

    F., Hernquist, L., Cox, T

    Hopkins, P. F., Hernquist, L., Cox, T. J., et al. 2005, ApJ, 630, 705

    work page 2005

  49. [49]

    F., Hernquist, L., Cox, T

    Hopkins, P. F., Hernquist, L., Cox, T. J., et al. 2006, ApJS, 163, 1

    work page 2006

  50. [50]

    F., Hernquist, L., Cox, T

    Hopkins, P. F., Hernquist, L., Cox, T. J., & Kereš, D. 2008, ApJS, 175, 356

    work page 2008

  51. [51]

    2020, ApJ, 900, 79

    Hou, M., Li, Z., & Liu, X. 2020, ApJ, 900, 79

    work page 2020

  52. [52]

    Hunter, J. D. 2007, Computing in Science and Engineering, 9, 90 Hutsemékers, D., Sluse, D., Savi´c, Ð., & Richards, G. T. 2023, A&A, 672, A45

    work page 2007

  53. [53]

    2006, ApJ, 653, L97

    Inada, N., Oguri, M., Morokuma, T., et al. 2006, ApJ, 653, L97

    work page 2006

  54. [54]

    2003, Nature, 426, 810 Ivezi´c, Ž., Kahn, S

    Inada, N., Oguri, M., Pindor, B., et al. 2003, Nature, 426, 810 Ivezi´c, Ž., Kahn, S. M., Tyson, J. A., et al. 2019, ApJ, 873, 111

    work page 2003

  55. [55]

    2018, in Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, V ol

    Jiang, H., Hu, Z., Xu, M., et al. 2018, in Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, V ol. 10702, Ground-based and Airborne Instrumentation for Astronomy VII, ed. C. J. Evans, L. Simard, & H. Takami, 107022L

    work page 2018

  56. [56]

    2026, ApJ, 998, 80 Article number, page 12 Qihang Chen (陈启航) et al.: Search for Quasar Pairs withGaiaAstrometric Data

    Jiang, Y ., Shen, Y ., Liu, X., et al. 2026, ApJ, 998, 80 Article number, page 12 Qihang Chen (陈启航) et al.: Search for Quasar Pairs withGaiaAstrometric Data. III

    work page 2026

  57. [57]

    2026, ApJ, 1000, 311

    Jing, L., Chen, Q., Zhu, X., et al. 2026, ApJ, 1000, 311

    work page 2026

  58. [58]

    D., Oliphant, T

    Jones, E. D., Oliphant, T. E., & Peterson, P. 2001, in SciPy: Open Source Scien- tific Tools for Python

    work page 2001

  59. [59]

    2025, in Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series, V ol

    Juneau, S., Jacques, A., Pothier, S., et al. 2025, in Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series, V ol. 541, Astronomical Data Analysis Software and Systems XXXIII, ed. A. Jacques, R. Seaman, N. Gandilo, & T. Linder, 77 JUST Team, Liu, C., Zu, Y ., et al. 2024, Astronomical Techniques and Instru- ments, 1, 16

    work page 2025

  60. [60]

    & Haehnelt, M

    Kauffmann, G. & Haehnelt, M. 2000, MNRAS, 311, 576

    work page 2000

  61. [61]

    J., Treister, E., Kakkad, D., et al

    Koss, M. J., Treister, E., Kakkad, D., et al. 2023, ApJ, 942, L24

    work page 2023

  62. [62]

    J., D’Onghia, E., et al

    Krishnarao, D., Fox, A. J., D’Onghia, E., et al. 2022, Nature, 609, 915

    work page 2022

  63. [63]

    Lau, M. W. 2017, PhD thesis, University of California, Santa Cruz

    work page 2017

  64. [64]

    W., Prochaska, J

    Lau, M. W., Prochaska, J. X., & Hennawi, J. F. 2018, ApJ, 857, 126

    work page 2018

  65. [65]

    2019, PhD thesis, University of Cambridge, UK

    Lemon, C. 2019, PhD thesis, University of Cambridge, UK

    work page 2019

  66. [66]

    W., et al

    Lemon, C., Anguita, T., Auger-Williams, M. W., et al. 2023, MNRAS, 520, 3305

    work page 2023

  67. [67]

    W., McMahon, R., et al

    Lemon, C., Auger, M. W., McMahon, R., et al. 2020, MNRAS, 494, 3491

    work page 2020

  68. [68]

    2024, Space Sci

    Lemon, C., Courbin, F., More, A., et al. 2024, Space Sci. Rev., 220, 23

    work page 2024

  69. [69]

    A., Auger, M

    Lemon, C. A., Auger, M. W., McMahon, R. G., & Ostrovski, F. 2018, MNRAS, 479, 5060

    work page 2018

  70. [70]

    H., Mannerkoski, M., et al

    Liao, S., Johansson, P. H., Mannerkoski, M., et al. 2023, MNRAS, 520, 4463

    work page 2023

  71. [71]

    Liu, X., Shen, Y ., & Strauss, M. A. 2012, ApJ, 745, 94

    work page 2012

  72. [72]

    A., & Hao, L

    Liu, X., Shen, Y ., Strauss, M. A., & Hao, L. 2011, ApJ, 737, 101

    work page 2011

  73. [73]

    2015, HumVI: Hu- man Viewable Image creation, Astrophysics Source Code Library, record ascl:1511.014

    Marshall, P., Sandford, C., More, A., & Buddelmeijerr, H. 2015, HumVI: Hu- man Viewable Image creation, Astrophysics Source Code Library, record ascl:1511.014

    work page 2015

  74. [74]

    J., Verma, A., More, A., et al

    Marshall, P. J., Verma, A., More, A., et al. 2016, MNRAS, 455, 1171

    work page 2016

  75. [75]

    N., Napier, K

    Martinez, M. N., Napier, K. A., Cloonan, A. P., et al. 2023, ApJ, 946, 63

    work page 2023

  76. [76]

    J., et al

    Mateos, S., Alonso-Herrero, A., Carrera, F. J., et al. 2012, MNRAS, 426, 3271

    work page 2012

  77. [77]

    2024, ApJ, 965, L4

    Matsuoka, Y ., Izumi, T., Onoue, M., et al. 2024, ApJ, 965, L4

    work page 2024

  78. [78]

    2018, astropy/astroscrappy: v1.0.5 Zenodo Release

    McCully, C., Crawford, S., Kovacs, G., et al. 2018, astropy/astroscrappy: v1.0.5 Zenodo Release

    work page 2018

  79. [79]

    H., Martinez-Aldama, M

    Naddaf, M. H., Martinez-Aldama, M. L., Marziani, P., et al. 2023, A&A, 675, A43

    work page 2023

  80. [80]

    J., Graham, M

    Nakoneczny, S. J., Graham, M. J., Stern, D., et al. 2025, ApJ, 992, 153

    work page 2025

Showing first 80 references.