Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 1 cited by

Systematic search for blue hyper-velocity stars from LAMOST survey

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-16 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read A systematic search of LAMOST survey data finds ten new unbound B- and A-type hypervelocity star candidates, tripling the number previously identified by LAMOST.

desk verdict A careful, transparent HVS search whose 'ten unbound' headline rests on a distance calibration and escape model that together leave at least four candidates within ~1σ of bound. read the letter →

arxiv 2504.14836 v1 pith:XCVJ6Y43 submitted 2025-04-21 astro-ph.GA astro-ph.SR

Yongkang Sun , Yang Huang , Jifeng Liu , Haozhu Fu , Huawei Zhang , Yinbi Li , Cuihua Du , Jianrong Shi
show 1 more author
Xiao Kong
This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.GAastro-ph.SR
keywords hypervelocitystarsearly-typeskysurveysspectroscopicradialvelocityLAMOSTDR10photometricdistanceGalactichaloA-type
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 reports ten new unbound hypervelocity star candidates found in LAMOST survey data, raising the count of such stars found by LAMOST from four to fourteen. Hypervelocity stars move fast enough to escape the Milky Way, probably because of violent ejection near the Galactic Center or dynamical encounters in young clusters, so every new candidate is a test of those mechanisms. The search processed more than eleven million low-resolution LAMOST spectra, selected 125 high-velocity candidates, and used a new calibration between hydrogen-line strength and absolute magnitude to estimate distances when parallaxes were unreliable. Most of the new candidates appear to have been ejected from the Galactic Center region or from dynamical interactions, with follow-up spectroscopy still needed to confirm their status.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing device is a two-segment linear relation between the Hδ line index (measured across a 48 Å band) and the Gaia $G$-band absolute magnitude $M_G$ for A-type stars, calibrated on thousands of low-extinction LAMOST spectra and expressed as $M_G = -0.429\,\mathrm{LineIndex48}_{Hδ}+5.943$ for small indices and $M_G = -0.131\,\mathrm{LineIndex48}_{Hδ}+3.620$ for larger ones, with a 0.60 mag scatter that translates to roughly 30 percent distance uncertainty. This relation supplies photometric distances when Gaia parallaxes are unreliable, and those distances feed the calculation of total Galactocentric velocities and backward orbit integrations against the MWPotential2014 escape-velocity curve.

What would settle it

Measure accurate parallaxes and multi-epoch high-resolution radial velocities for LAMOST-HVS11 and LAMOST-HVS14. If their distances or systemic velocities place their total velocities below the local escape curve, they are not unbound; likewise, showing that LAMOST-HVS14's ~60 km/s velocity difference comes from binary orbital motion would weaken its single-spectrum classification.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that ten new unbound B- and A-type hypervelocity star candidates, designated LAMOST-HVS5 through LAMOST-HVS14, have been identified, tripling the number of unbound HVSs previously found by LAMOST. For each candidate, the authors combine LAMOST radial velocities, space-astrometry positions and proper motions, and photometric distances (from MK spectral classification or from a newly calibrated hydrogen-line distance relation) to compute Galactocentric total velocities that exceed the escape-velocity curve of the adopted Galactic potential. The kinematics split the sample: six candidates have backward-integrated orbits whose disk crossings lie near the Galactic Center or known young massive clusters, pointing to ejection by the central black hole or few-body encounters, while four candidates move on inward or off-center orbits that make those origins less likely. The paper presents these objects as candidates pending further observation, not as confirmed hypervelocity stars.

Load-bearing premise

The claim that these stars are truly unbound rests on photometric distances estimated from the strength of a single hydrogen absorption line (about 30 percent uncertainty) and on the adopted model of the Milky Way's escape speed; the slowest candidates, LAMOST-HVS11 and LAMOST-HVS14, would become bound under a small systematic shift in either.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The number of unbound hypervelocity stars known from LAMOST rises from four to fourteen, giving a much larger sample for statistical tests of ejection mechanisms.
  • Six of the ten candidates trace back toward the Galactic Center or young massive clusters, favoring Hills-type ejection or dynamical encounters over supernova runaways for those objects.
  • The hydrogen-line distance method lets A-type stars without reliable parallaxes be included in HVS searches, moving the sample beyond the B-type stars found in earlier LAMOST work.
  • Because most new candidates are A-type, follow-up abundance, pulsation, and binarity studies can separate genuine hypervelocity stars from contaminating variables and binaries.
  • Marginal candidates such as LAMOST-HVS11 and LAMOST-HVS14 sit close to the escape curve, so improved distances will directly sharpen the census of truly unbound stars.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Beyond the paper, the same two-step selection (radial-velocity cut followed by total-velocity check with photometric distances) could be applied to other large spectroscopic surveys, potentially turning up more A-type hypervelocity candidates at distances where Gaia parallaxes are poor.
  • LAMOST-HVS14's roughly 60 km/s velocity difference between two epochs is a natural test case: a few high-resolution spectra would show whether the shift is binary motion or noise, and that measurement alone could change its unbound classification.
  • The search intentionally excludes stars with total velocities between 300 and 500 km/s when their radial velocities are low, so a proper-motion-driven search would sample a complementary ejection population and may find stars that this method misses.
  • If even a fraction of these candidates are confirmed, their implied ejection rate of A-type stars could be compared with theoretical predictions of the Galactic-Center Hills mechanism, a quantitative step this paper does not attempt.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. This paper presents a systematic search for blue hyper-velocity star (HVS) candidates in the LAMOST DR10 low-resolution spectroscopic survey. From about 420,000 blue objects, the authors select 125 high-velocity candidates using either rest-frame radial velocities relative to the Galactic center exceeding 300 km/s or total velocities exceeding 500 km/s. After visual inspection, MKCLASS spectral typing, and photometric distance estimates from a newly calibrated Hδ line-index–absolute-magnitude relation for A-type stars, the paper reports ten new unbound HVS candidates (LAMOST-HVS5 through LAMOST-HVS14), which would triple the number of unbound HVSs previously identified by LAMOST. The candidates are characterized with Gaia DR3 astrometry, LAMOST radial velocities, photometric distances, and backward orbital integrations in the MWPotential2014 model. The paper discusses possible origins (Galactic center, young massive clusters, supernova ejection) and caveats including distance uncertainties and possible binarity.

Significance. If the ten candidates are indeed unbound, this is a substantial increase in the known LAMOST HVS sample and would provide new kinematic probes of ejection mechanisms and the Galactic potential. The paper's strengths include a well-documented selection pipeline, Monte Carlo propagation of statistical uncertainties, explicit variability and binary checks, and a newly derived Hδ–MG calibration that is fitted to an independent LAMOST/Gaia sample rather than to the candidates themselves, so there is no circularity in the distance calibration. The candidate list and spectra will be useful for follow-up regardless of whether every candidate is confirmed unbound. However, the headline claim of ten unbound HVSs rests on photometric distances with 0.60 mag scatter and on a single assumed escape-velocity model, and several candidates lie within about 1 sigma of the escape threshold. The significance of the result would be much stronger if the impact of systematic distance errors and potential-model choices were quantified and the marginal candidates were treated conservatively.

major comments (3)
  1. [§3.1.1, LAMOST-HVS14, Table 5] The unbound classification of LAMOST-HVS5 through HVS9 and HVS13 depends on photometric distances from the Hδ line-index–MG relation (Eqs. 3–4), which has a 0.60 mag scatter. The calibration sample is restricted to rgeo < 3.5 kpc, |b| > 15°, and E(B−V) < 0.7, i.e., nearby, low-reddening, mostly disk A-type stars. Applying this relation to distant halo A-type stars (e.g., A0III/A1IV classifications) may introduce a systematic offset because Hδ strength depends on luminosity class and halo metallicity differs from the calibration sample. A 0.3 mag offset—half the stated scatter—changes distances by about 15% and directly shifts vtot and the escape comparison. Since HVS7 (511 ± 59 km/s at 12.5 kpc), HVS8 (501.6 ± 124.2 km/s at 15.3 kpc), HVS11 (437.0 ± 4.2 km/s at 32.5 kpc), and HVS14 (438.0 ± 16.1 km/s at 22.5 kpc) are within roughly 1σ of the MWPotential2014 escape velocity, the claim of ten unbound candidates is not robust without a systematic-error analysis. The paper should estimate the MG offset required to make each candidate bound and present a conservative list of secure versus marginal unbound candidates.
  2. [§3.1.1, Figure 2] LAMOST-HVS14's unbound status hinges on the higher-SNR spectrum with vlos = 254.7 ± 16.6 km/s, while the lower-SNR spectrum gives 299.7 ± 45.2 km/s, a ~60 km/s discrepancy that the authors acknowledge but do not propagate into the final classification. Using the higher-SNR value yields vtot = 438.0 ± 16.1 km/s versus a local escape velocity of about 440 km/s, so the candidate is marginal even with this choice; using the lower-SNR value would push vtot to 480.6 ± 43.9 km/s but with much larger uncertainty. The paper should treat the radial-velocity discrepancy as a systematic uncertainty, present both classifications, and justify why one epoch is preferred over the other beyond the SNR difference.
  3. [§3.1.1, Figure 2] The unbound classification is made by comparing vtot to the MWPotential2014 escape velocity curve, but the paper provides no test of how the classification changes with a reasonable alternative Galactic potential (e.g., McMillan 2017 or a ±10% mass normalization of MWPotential2014). The escape velocity is model-dependent at the few-percent level, which is decisive for candidates such as HVS11 and HVS14 that lie within ~1σ of the boundary. Adding a robustness test that recomputes the number of unbound candidates under alternative potentials, or at least quotes the sensitivity of each candidate to the assumed mass profile, would make the headline claim much more solid.
minor comments (4)
  1. [§2.3, Eqs. (1)–(2)] Equation (1) uses Vφ,⊙ = 252.23 km/s for the solar circular motion, while Equation (2) adopts Vc(R0) = 230 km/s; the relationship between these two constants should be stated explicitly, and the paper should quantify how the candidate list changes when either convention is used rather than only stating that the results hold well.
  2. [Table 1] The table contains the typo 'Exmained' instead of 'Examined'.
  3. [§2.4] The code name 'MKCALSS' appears to be a typo for 'MKCLASS' in the text, and the same misspelling is used in 'The MKCALSS code' sentence.
  4. [Figure 5] The caption writes 'pannel' instead of 'panel' in the description of the LAMOST-HVS14 spectra.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: candidates are tested against an external escape-velocity model using distances from a separately calibrated relation.

full rationale

The paper's main claim—ten new unbound HVS candidates—rests on a chain that is not circular. Candidate selection uses either LAMOST radial velocities via |vrf| > 300 km/s or total velocities vtot > 500 km/s computed from Gaia astrometry and parallax distances. For objects without reliable parallaxes, distances are re-derived from a photometric calibration: the Hδ line index–absolute magnitude relation (Eqs. 3–4) fitted to 6,453 spectra from a separate LAMOST/Gaia sample of low-extinction, nearby A-type stars. This calibration is independent of the candidate list and of the unbound classification; applying it to individual candidates does not force any particular vtot or any particular result in the escape-velocity comparison. The unbound status is then judged by comparing each candidate's vtot to the MWPotential2014 escape velocity curve from Bovy (2015), an external model not fitted to the candidates. There is no step in which a 'prediction' is equivalent to an input by construction: the photometric relation is fitted to other stars, the velocities are direct observables, and the escape curve is external. The paper's self-citations (e.g., Huang et al. 2017, 2019; Li et al. 2018, 2023b; Wang et al. 2021; Zhou et al. 2023) supply prior discoveries, method versions, and standard solar-motion parameters, but none is load-bearing in a way that reduces the central claim to a self-citation. The acknowledged dependence of marginal candidates (e.g., LAMOST-HVS7, HVS8, HVS11, HVS14) on the 0.60 mag scatter of the Hδ-MG calibration and on the assumed Galactic potential is a systematic/correctness risk, not a circularity.

Assumptions & free parameters 5 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on standard astrometric and spectroscopic measurements plus a new photometric calibration and a model-dependent escape velocity. No exotic entities are introduced; the main free parameters are the coefficients of the Hδ absolute-magnitude calibration.

free parameters (5)
  • Hδ line index-MG slope (segment 1) = -0.429
    Fitted to 6,453 LAMOST A-type star spectra to calibrate absolute magnitude from Hδ line index; directly used for photometric distances of A-type HVS candidates (Equation 3).
  • Hδ line index-MG intercept (segment 1) = 5.943
    Same calibration fit as above, used in Equation 3.
  • Hδ line index-MG slope (segment 2) = -0.131
    Fitted for line index > 8.0, used in Equation 4.
  • Hδ line index-MG intercept (segment 2) = 3.620
    Same calibration fit as above, used in Equation 4.
  • MG calibration scatter = 0.60 mag
    Adopted 1-sigma uncertainty from fit residuals; corresponds to about 30% distance uncertainty and dominates vtot error for photometric-distance candidates.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption Gaia DR3 astrometry and LAMOST radial velocities are accurate after quality cuts
    Used throughout to compute space velocities; any systematic offset in vlos or proper motions would bias vtot. Visual inspection only flags gross errors.
  • domain assumption MWPotential2014 (Bovy 2015) describes the Milky Way potential well enough for escape-velocity comparison and orbit integration
    The unbound classification depends on this model; a different halo mass or disk model changes the local escape velocity.
  • domain assumption The photometric distance calibration for A-type stars applies to the HVS candidates
    The Hδ-MG relation was calibrated on a general LAMOST A-type sample with low extinction; if HVS candidates have unusual metallicities or rotation, distances will be biased. This affects candidates without reliable Gaia parallaxes.
  • domain assumption Adopted solar parameters (R0=8.34 kpc, Vc=230 km/s, solar peculiar motion) are correct
    Used in Equations (1), (2) and orbit integration; the authors state results hold for other choices, but the central vtot values shift with these constants.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Systematic search for blue hyper-velocity stars from LAMOST survey." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/XCVJ6Y43

@misc{pith2026250414836,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Systematic search for blue hyper-velocity stars from LAMOST survey},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/XCVJ6Y43}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2504.14836}
}
abstract

Hypervelocity stars (HVSs) represent a unique class of objects capable of escaping the gravitational pull of the Milky Way due to extreme acceleration events, such as close encounters with the supermassive black hole at the Galactic center (GC), supernova explosions in binary systems, or multi-body dynamical interactions. Finding and studying HVSs are crucial to exploring these ejection mechanisms, characterizing central black holes, probing the GC environment, and revealing the distribution of dark matter in our galaxy. The Large Sky Area Multi-Object Fiber Spectroscopic Telescope (LAMOST) spectroscopic surveys have so far identified four B-type unbound HVSs. To expand this sample with the second-phase LAMOST survey that started in 2018, we conducted a systematic search for early-type HVSs using the LAMOST Data Release 10. We identified 125 early-type high-velocity candidates with total velocities exceeding 300 km\,s$^{-1}$. Among them, we report ten new unbound B- and A-type hypervelocity star (HVS) candidates (designated LAMOST-HVS5 through LAMOST-HVS14), tripling the number of unbound HVSs previously identified by LAMOST. Kinematic analyses suggest that these newly discovered HVS candidates likely originated either from the Galactic Center or via dynamical interactions. Future high-resolution follow-up observations promise to refine the stellar parameters, distances, and elemental abundances of these candidates, thereby providing deeper insights into their origins and broadening their potential applications across astrophysics.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2504.14836 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Gaia CMD for all LAMOST DR10 LRS sources (grey). The bluer part with SNR cut (red) represents stars (625,644 LAMOST LRS spectra in total) used to search for blue HVSs. The final HVS candidates containing 136 spectra of 124 objects are indicated as cyan stars. locities relative to the Galactic center (vrf), or with po￾tential high Galactocentric total velocities (vtot) using rgeo distances. Distances with large uncer… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. The velocities versus Galactocentric distances of the 125 high-velocity stars in our results are plotted. Blue, black, grey, and red symbols indicate the ten new unbound HVS candidates (from LAMOST-HVS5 to LAMOST-HVS14), six known HVSs, high-velocity star candidates with questionable velocities, and the remaining candidates, respectively. Solid circles indicate that vtot derived from reliable parallax distances is u… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. LAMOST spectra of the new unbound HVS candidates LAMOST-HVS5, 6, 7 and 8. The inset in each panel presents an enlarged view of the normalized blue-arm spectrum, offering a clearer view of the detected absorption lines. The vertical dashed lines mark the rest wavelengths of these lines. star exhibits a velocity component directed toward the northern Galactic pole and is positioned 4.29 ± 1.20 kpc above the Galactic p… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (8 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Similar to [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Similar to [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: The contours indicate the intersection regions in Galactic X, Y plane of the backward-integrated orbits and the Galactic disc for each star. LAMOST-HVS1 to LAMOST-HVS4 are marked by unfilled contours, while the new LAMOST HVSs are marked by filled contours. The black c…
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: The spatial distribution of the LAMOST HVS candidates and previously known HVSs is shown in Galactic coordi￾nates l and b with Aitoff projection. Blue and black star symbols represent the ten new unbound HVSs and previously known HVSs found in our results, respectively…
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: The distribution of the Galactic latitude b for 16053 LAMOST OB stars (red), 15 unbound known HVSs/HVS candidates (blue, including LAMOST-HVS1 to LAMOST-HVS14 and HIP60350), and the other high￾velocity candidates from this work (green). to LAMOST-HVS14. Unlike earlier …
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: The locations for the HVS candidates with reliable parallax or photometric distances in our results in the Galacto￾centric right-handed Cartesian coordinate are shown. The Cartesian U, V , and W velocity components are indicated by arrows and their values are indicated…
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: The A-type star sample consisting of 6,453 spectra from 5,190 objects defined to derive the Balmer line index - MG relation is represented as red circles in the Gaia CMD. Some hotsubdwarfs, low-temperature stars and other outliers represent in orange circles are exclu…
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Upper panel: The final A-type star sample consisting of 6,453 spectra (black circles) give the relation between the Hδ line index and MG. The red dashed lines show the two-segment linear fitting result, and the blue dashed line represent the segment point at line inde…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. The ejection and detectability of high- and hyper-velocity stars by compact object binaries in globular clusters

    astro-ph.GA 2025-06 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    Star plus compact-object binary encounters in globular clusters likely ejected about 6,300 Milky Way stars in the last 500 Myr, including roughly 840 stars faster than 500 km/s, almost none of which are detectable in ...

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

75 extracted references · 11 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    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

  2. [2]

    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

  3. [3]

    W., & Izzard, R

    Boubert, D., Erkal, D., Evans, N. W., & Izzard, R. G. 2017, MNRAS, 469, 2151, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stx848

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stx848 2017

  4. [4]

    Boubert, D., & Evans, N. W. 2016, ApJL, 825, L6, doi: 10.3847/2041-8205/825/1/L6

    doi:10.3847/2041-8205/825/1/l6 2016

  5. [5]

    2015, ApJS, 216, 29, doi: 10.1088/0067-0049/216/2/29

    Bovy, J. 2015, ApJS, 216, 29, doi: 10.1088/0067-0049/216/2/29

    doi:10.1088/0067-0049/216/2/29 2015

  6. [6]

    F., Crestani, J., Fabrizio, M., et al

    Braga, V. F., Crestani, J., Fabrizio, M., et al. 2021, ApJ, 919, 85, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac1074

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ac1074 2021

  7. [7]

    1979, PASP, 91, 5, doi: 10.1086/130433

    Breger, M. 1979, PASP, 91, 5, doi: 10.1086/130433

    doi:10.1086/130433 1979

  8. [8]

    Breger, M., Hutchins, J., & Kuhi, L. V. 1976, ApJ, 210, 163, doi: 10.1086/154814

    doi:10.1086/154814 1976

Show all 75 references
  1. [9]

    C., Kenyon, S

    Bromley, B. C., Kenyon, S. J., Geller, M. J., et al. 2006, ApJ, 653, 1194, doi: 10.1086/508419

    2006 doi

  2. [10]

    Brown, W. R. 2015, ARA&A, 53, 15, doi: 10.1146/annurev-astro-082214-122230

    2015 doi

  3. [11]

    R., Geller, M

    Brown, W. R., Geller, M. J., & Kenyon, S. J. 2009a, The Astrophysical Journal, 690, 1639–1647, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/690/2/1639

    doi

  4. [12]

    R., Geller, M

    Brown, W. R., Geller, M. J., & Kenyon, S. J. 2012, ApJ, 751, 55, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/751/1/55 —. 2014, ApJ, 787, 89, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/787/1/89

    2012 doi

  5. [13]

    R., Geller, M

    Brown, W. R., Geller, M. J., Kenyon, S. J., & Bromley, B. C. 2009b, The Astrophysical Journal, 690, L69–L71, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/690/1/L69

    doi

  6. [14]

    R., Geller, M

    Brown, W. R., Geller, M. J., Kenyon, S. J., & Kurtz, M. J. 2005, ApJL, 622, L33, doi: 10.1086/429378 —. 2006a, ApJL, 640, L35, doi: 10.1086/503279 —. 2006b, ApJ, 647, 303, doi: 10.1086/505165

    2005 doi

  7. [15]

    Bromley, B. C. 2007a, ApJ, 660, 311, doi: 10.1086/513595 —. 2007b, ApJ, 671, 1708, doi: 10.1086/523642

    doi

  8. [16]

    2020, ApJS, 249, 18, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/ab9cae

    Chen, X., Wang, S., Deng, L., et al. 2020, ApJS, 249, 18, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/ab9cae

    2020 doi

  9. [17]

    D., & M´ enard, B

    Cheng, S., Cummings, J. D., & M´ enard, B. 2019, ApJ, 886, 100, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab4989 20 Sun et al

    2019 doi

  10. [18]

    2012, Research in Astronomy and Astrophysics, 12, 1197, doi: 10.1088/1674-4527/12/9/003

    Cui, X.-Q., Zhao, Y.-H., Chu, Y.-Q., et al. 2012, Research in Astronomy and Astrophysics, 12, 1197, doi: 10.1088/1674-4527/12/9/003

    2012 doi

  11. [19]

    P., et al

    Czesla, S., Schr¨ oter, S., Schneider, C. P., et al. 2019, PyA: Python astronomy-related packages. http://ascl.net/1906.010

    2019

  12. [20]

    2019, ApJS, 244, 4, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/ab328c

    Du, C., Li, H., Yan, Y., et al. 2019, ApJS, 244, 4, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/ab328c

    2019 doi

  13. [21]

    2005, ApJL, 634, L181, doi: 10.1086/498940

    Reimers, D. 2005, ApJL, 634, L181, doi: 10.1086/498940

    2005 doi

  14. [22]

    J., Chandra, V., et al

    El-Badry, K., Shen, K. J., Chandra, V., et al. 2023, The Open Journal of Astrophysics, 6, 28, doi: 10.21105/astro.2306.03914

    2023 arXiv

  15. [23]

    2019, MNRAS, 483, 2007, doi: 10.1093/mnras/sty2674 Gaia Collaboration, Prusti, T., de Bruijne, J

    Antonini, F. 2019, MNRAS, 483, 2007, doi: 10.1093/mnras/sty2674 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: 10.1051/0004-63...

    2019 doi

  16. [24]

    2015, Science, 347, 1126, doi: 10.1126/science.1259063

    Geier, S., F¨ urst, F., Ziegerer, E., et al. 2015, Science, 347, 1126, doi: 10.1126/science.1259063

    2015 doi

  17. [26]

    Y., Gould, A., Miralda-Escud´ e, J., & Zentner, A

    Gnedin, O. Y., Gould, A., Miralda-Escud´ e, J., & Zentner, A. R. 2005, ApJ, 634, 344, doi: 10.1086/496958

    2005 doi

  18. [27]

    O., & Corbally, C

    Gray, R. O., & Corbally, C. J. 2014, AJ, 147, 80, doi: 10.1088/0004-6256/147/4/80

    2014 doi

  19. [28]

    2019, ApJ, 887, 93, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab5362

    Finkbeiner, D. 2019, ApJ, 887, 93, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab5362

    2019 doi

  20. [29]

    V., Gualandris, A., & Portegies Zwart, S

    Gvaramadze, V. V., Gualandris, A., & Portegies Zwart, S. 2009, MNRAS, 396, 570, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2009.14809.x

    2009

  21. [30]

    2019, ApJ, 873, 116, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab05c8

    Hattori, K., Valluri, M., Castro, N., et al. 2019, ApJ, 873, 116, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab05c8

    2019 doi

  22. [31]

    2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2503.03378, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2503.03378

    He, S., Huang, Y., Li, X., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2503.03378, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2503.03378

    2025 doi arXiv

  23. [32]

    Hills, J. G. 1988, Nature, 331, 687, doi: 10.1038/331687a0

    1988 doi

  24. [33]

    A., Heber, U., O’Toole, S

    Hirsch, H. A., Heber, U., O’Toole, S. J., & Bresolin, F. 2005, A&A, 444, L61, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:200500212

    2005 doi

  25. [34]

    2024, National Science Review, nwae347, doi: 10.1093/nsr/nwae347

    Huang, Y., Li, Q., Liu, J., et al. 2024, National Science Review, nwae347, doi: 10.1093/nsr/nwae347

    2024 doi

  26. [35]

    2021, ApJL, 907, L42, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/abd413

    Huang, Y., Li, Q., Zhang, H., et al. 2021, ApJL, 907, L42, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/abd413

    2021 doi

  27. [36]

    W., Yuan, H

    Huang, Y., Liu, X. W., Yuan, H. B., et al. 2015, MNRAS, 449, 162, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stv204 —. 2016, MNRAS, 463, 2623, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stw2096

    2015 doi

  28. [37]

    W., Zhang, H

    Huang, Y., Liu, X. W., Zhang, H. W., et al. 2017, ApJL, 847, L9, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/aa894b

    2017 doi

  29. [38]

    W., Wang, C., et al

    Huang, Y., Zhang, H. W., Wang, C., et al. 2019, ApJL, 884, L7, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ab430b

    2019 doi

  30. [39]

    P., Perets, H., & Hallakoun, N

    Igoshev, A. P., Perets, H., & Hallakoun, N. 2023, MNRAS, 518, 6223, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stac3488

    2023 doi

  31. [40]

    2010, ApJ, 711, 138, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/711/1/138

    Schuh, S. 2010, ApJ, 711, 138, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/711/1/138

    2010 doi

  32. [41]

    Rossum, D. R. 2012, ApJL, 761, L23, doi: 10.1088/2041-8205/761/2/L23

    2012 doi

  33. [42]

    E., Boubert, D., Li, T

    Koposov, S. E., Boubert, D., Li, T. S., et al. 2020, MNRAS, 491, 2465, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stz3081

    2020 doi

  34. [43]

    Leonard, P. J. T. 1991, AJ, 101, 562, doi: 10.1086/115704

    1991 doi

  35. [44]

    2022, The Astrophysical Journal Letters, 933, L13, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ac786d

    Li, H., Du, C., Ma, J., et al. 2022, The Astrophysical Journal Letters, 933, L13, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ac786d

    2022 doi

  36. [45]

    Li, Q.-Z., Huang, Y., Dong, X.-B., Chen, J.-J., & Luo, A. L. 2023a, Research in Astronomy and Astrophysics, 23, 115026, doi: 10.1088/1674-4527/acf1e5

    doi

  37. [46]

    2023b, AJ, 166, 12, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/acd1dc

    Li, Q.-Z., Huang, Y., Dong, X.-B., et al. 2023b, AJ, 166, 12, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/acd1dc

    doi

  38. [47]

    2012, ApJL, 744, L24, doi: 10.1088/2041-8205/744/2/L24

    Li, Y., Luo, A., Zhao, G., et al. 2012, ApJL, 744, L24, doi: 10.1088/2041-8205/744/2/L24

    2012 doi

  39. [48]

    L., Zhao, G., et al

    Li, Y.-B., Luo, A. L., Zhao, G., et al. 2015, Research in Astronomy and Astrophysics, 15, 1364, doi: 10.1088/1674-4527/15/8/018 —. 2018, AJ, 156, 87, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/aad09a

    2015 doi

  40. [49]

    L., Lu, Y.-J., et al

    Li, Y.-B., Luo, A. L., Lu, Y.-J., et al. 2021, ApJS, 252, 3, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/abc16e

    2021 doi

  41. [50]

    2019, ApJS, 241, 32, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/ab0a0d

    Liu, Z., Cui, W., Liu, C., et al. 2019, ApJS, 241, 32, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/ab0a0d

    2019 doi

  42. [51]

    M., Paunzen, E., Pressberger, R., Slettebak, A., & Wagner, R

    Maitzen, H. M., Paunzen, E., Pressberger, R., Slettebak, A., & Wagner, R. M. 1998, A&A, 339, 782

    1998

  43. [52]

    W., Keenan, P

    Morgan, W. W., Keenan, P. C., & Kellman, E. 1943, An atlas of stellar spectra, with an outline of spectral classification

    1943

  44. [53]

    B., & ˇSubr, L

    Perets, H. B., & ˇSubr, L. 2012, ApJ, 751, 133, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/751/2/133

    2012 doi

  45. [54]

    B., Wu, X., Zhao, H

    Perets, H. B., Wu, X., Zhao, H. S., et al. 2009, ApJ, 697, 2096, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/697/2/2096

    2009 doi

  46. [55]

    M., & Maunsell, C

    Petrie, R. M., & Maunsell, C. D. 1949, AJ, 54, 193, doi: 10.1086/106259 Portegies Zwart, S. F. 2000, ApJ, 544, 437, doi: 10.1086/317190 Portegies Zwart, S. F., McMillan, S. L. W., & Gieles, M. 2010, ARA&A, 48, 431, doi: 10.1146/annurev-astro-081309-130834

    1949 doi

  47. [56]

    2008, ApJL, 684, L103, doi: 10.1086/592245

    Przybilla, N., Fernanda Nieva, M., Heber, U., & Butler, K. 2008, ApJL, 684, L103, doi: 10.1086/592245

    2008 doi

  48. [57]

    B., Li, L

    Qian, S. B., Li, L. J., He, J. J., et al. 2018, MNRAS, 475, 478, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stx3185 New HVSs from LAMOST 21

    2018 doi

  49. [58]

    A., G¨ ansicke, B

    Raddi, R., Hollands, M. A., G¨ ansicke, B. T., et al. 2018, MNRAS, 479, L96, doi: 10.1093/mnrasl/sly103

    2018 doi

  50. [59]

    A., Koester, D., et al

    Raddi, R., Hollands, M. A., Koester, D., et al. 2019, MNRAS, 489, 1489, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stz1618

    2019 doi

  51. [60]

    2022, A&A, 658, A22, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202141837

    Raddi, R., Torres, S., Rebassa-Mansergas, A., et al. 2022, A&A, 658, A22, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202141837

    2022 doi

  52. [61]

    J., & Brunthaler, A

    Reid, M. J., & Brunthaler, A. 2004, ApJ, 616, 872, doi: 10.1086/424960

    2004 doi

  53. [62]

    J., Menten, K

    Reid, M. J., Menten, K. M., Brunthaler, A., et al. 2014, ApJ, 783, 130, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/783/2/130 Sch¨ onrich, R., Binney, J., & Dehnen, W. 2010, MNRAS, 403, 1829, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2010.16253.x

    2014

  54. [63]

    S., et al

    Sesar, B., Ivezi´ c,ˇZ., Stuart, J. S., et al. 2013, AJ, 146, 21, doi: 10.1088/0004-6256/146/2/21

    2013 doi

  55. [64]

    J., Kasen, D., Miles, B

    Shen, K. J., Kasen, D., Miles, B. J., & Townsley, D. M. 2018a, ApJ, 854, 52, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aaa8de

    doi

  56. [65]

    J., Boubert, D., G¨ ansicke, B

    Shen, K. J., Boubert, D., G¨ ansicke, B. T., et al. 2018b, ApJ, 865, 15, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aad55b

    doi

  57. [66]

    D., & Heber, U

    Tillich, A., Przybilla, N., Scholz, R. D., & Heber, U. 2009, A&A, 507, L37, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/200913173

    2009 doi

  58. [67]

    2017, Science, 357, 680, doi: 10.1126/science.aam8378

    Vennes, S., Nemeth, P., Kawka, A., et al. 2017, Science, 357, 680, doi: 10.1126/science.aam8378

    2017 doi

  59. [68]

    2009, A&A, 508, L27, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/200913326

    Wang, B., & Han, Z. 2009, A&A, 508, L27, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/200913326

    2009 doi

  60. [69]

    2013, A&A, 559, A94, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201322298

    Wang, B., Justham, S., & Han, Z. 2013, A&A, 559, A94, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201322298

    2013 doi

  61. [70]

    W., Huang, Y., et al

    Wang, F., Zhang, H. W., Huang, Y., et al. 2021, MNRAS, 504, 199, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stab848

    2021 doi

  62. [71]

    2007, MNRAS, 379, 1293, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2007.12034.x

    Yu, Q., & Madau, P. 2007, MNRAS, 379, 1293, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2007.12034.x

    2007

  63. [72]

    2003, ApJ, 599, 1129, doi: 10.1086/379546

    Yu, Q., & Tremaine, S. 2003, ApJ, 599, 1129, doi: 10.1086/379546

    2003 doi

  64. [73]

    2023, ApJS, 264, 14, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/ac9dfa

    Zhang, R., & Yuan, H. 2023, ApJS, 264, 14, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/ac9dfa

    2023 doi

  65. [74]

    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

  66. [75]

    L., Beers, T

    Zheng, Z., Carlin, J. L., Beers, T. C., et al. 2014, ApJL, 785, L23, doi: 10.1088/2041-8205/785/2/L23

    2014 doi

  67. [76]

    2023, ApJ, 946, 73, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/acadd9

    Zhou, Y., Li, X., Huang, Y., & Zhang, H. 2023, ApJ, 946, 73, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/acadd9

    2023 doi

Pith tools

Reviewed August 16, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.