adsabs/AstroCLIMB huggingface dataset:
Paper: DESI Emission-line Galaxies: Unveiling the Diversity of [O II] Profiles and Its Links to Star Formation and Morphology
Authors: Ting-Wen Lan, J. Xavier Prochaska, John Moustakas, Małgorzata Siudek, J. Aguilar, S. Ahlen, D. Bianchi, D. Brooks, T. Claybaugh, S. Cole, K. Dawson, A. de la Macorra, P. Doel, J. E. Forero-Romero, E. Gaztañaga, S. Gontcho A Gontcho, G. Gutierrez, J. Guy, K. Honscheid, R. Kehoe, T. Kisner, A. Lambert, M. Landriau, A. Meisner, R. Miquel, A. Muñoz-Gutiérrez, J. A. Newman, C. Poppett, F. Prada, G. Rossi, E. Sanchez, M. Schubnell, H. Seo, D. Sprayberry, G. Tarlé, B. A. Weaver, H. Zou
Figure caption: Morphological parameters as a function of Coeff1 and Coeff2. Median values of galaxy size (R80 in units of arcsecs), Gini coefficient (G), second-order moment of the brightest 20% pixels (M20), concentration (C), and asymmetry (A) are shown from left to right, respectively.
Paper: DESI Emission-line Galaxies: Unveiling the Diversity of [O II] Profiles and Its Links to Star Formation and Morphology
Authors: Ting-Wen Lan, J. Xavier Prochaska, John Moustakas, Małgorzata Siudek, J. Aguilar, S. Ahlen, D. Bianchi, D. Brooks, T. Claybaugh, S. Cole, K. Dawson, A. de la Macorra, P. Doel, J. E. Forero-Romero, E. Gaztañaga, S. Gontcho A Gontcho, G. Gutierrez, J. Guy, K. Honscheid, R. Kehoe, T. Kisner, A. Lambert, M. Landriau, A. Meisner, R. Miquel, A. Muñoz-Gutiérrez, J. A. Newman, C. Poppett, F. Prada, G. Rossi, E. Sanchez, M. Schubnell, H. Seo, D. Sprayberry, G. Tarlé, B. A. Weaver, H. Zou
Figure caption: Normalized distributions of the differences between the properties of DESI ELGs and that of the reference galaxies. The top three properties are ﹩{\mathrm{log}}_{10}\,{M}_{* }/{M}_{\odot }﹩, redshift, and galaxy sizes (R80), which are controlled parameters. The lower five properties are Gini coefficients, M20, concentration C, galaxy asymmetry A, and ﹩{\mathrm{log}}_{10}\,\mathrm{SFR}﹩. Distributions are shifted in the y-axis for clarity. The black data points indicate the median values of the distributions.
Paper: DESI Emission-line Galaxies: Unveiling the Diversity of [O II] Profiles and Its Links to Star Formation and Morphology
Authors: Ting-Wen Lan, J. Xavier Prochaska, John Moustakas, Małgorzata Siudek, J. Aguilar, S. Ahlen, D. Bianchi, D. Brooks, T. Claybaugh, S. Cole, K. Dawson, A. de la Macorra, P. Doel, J. E. Forero-Romero, E. Gaztañaga, S. Gontcho A Gontcho, G. Gutierrez, J. Guy, K. Honscheid, R. Kehoe, T. Kisner, A. Lambert, M. Landriau, A. Meisner, R. Miquel, A. Muñoz-Gutiérrez, J. A. Newman, C. Poppett, F. Prada, G. Rossi, E. Sanchez, M. Schubnell, H. Seo, D. Sprayberry, G. Tarlé, B. A. Weaver, H. Zou
Figure caption: Median ﹩{\mathrm{\Delta log}}_{10}\,\mathrm{SFR}﹩ as a function of ΔA and Coeff1. The blue, gray, and green data points show the median ﹩{\mathrm{\Delta log}}_{10}\,\mathrm{SFR}﹩ as a function of ΔA for ELGs with Coeff1 < −0.35, −0.35 < Coeff1 < 0.35, and Coeff1 > 0.35, respectively. These measurements only include the ELGs in the narrow and broad regions with uncertainties based on bootstrapping the sample 1000 times.
Paper: A Series of (Net) Spin-down Glitches in PSR J1522–5735: Insights from the Vortex Creep and Vortex Bending Models
Authors: S. Q. Zhou, W. T. Ye, M. Y. Ge, E. Gügercinoğlu, S. J. Zheng, C. Yu, J. P. Yuan, J. Zhang
Figure caption: Panel (a) presents frequency residuals Δν relative to the inter-glitch G2–G3 evolution trend. Panel (b) shows the time-dependent evolution of ﹩\dot{\nu }﹩. Panel (c) displays the fit of the vortex bending model (Equation (4)) to the interglitch oscillatory ﹩\dot{\nu }﹩, while panel (d) highlights discrepancies between the fitted model and and the observations. Measurements of ν and ﹩\dot{\nu }﹩ were obtained through a partially phase-coherent analysis after dividing the 15.4 yr data set into 200 days subsets. In these measurements, the overlap of data used in panel (c) is significantly greater than that in panel (b), thereby enhancing the visibility of ﹩\dot{\nu }﹩ oscillations. Panels (a) and (b) present the values at the mid-epoch, whereas panel (c) displays the values at the left epoch for each subset. Red lines in panels (a) and (b) represent rotational evolution based on an analytical glitch model (Equation (2)), and purple lines in panel (c) are derived from the vortex bending model (Equation (4)); vertical lines across all panels mark the epochs of glitches.
Paper: A Series of (Net) Spin-down Glitches in PSR J1522–5735: Insights from the Vortex Creep and Vortex Bending Models
Authors: S. Q. Zhou, W. T. Ye, M. Y. Ge, E. Gügercinoğlu, S. J. Zheng, C. Yu, J. P. Yuan, J. Zhang
Figure caption: Panels (a) and (b) present timing residuals after fitting for the pulsar parameters and a second frequency derivative ﹩\ddot{\nu }﹩ over the span of the data; however, panel (b) additionally includes the glitch model (Equation (2)) in the fitting. Panels (c) and (d) show timing residuals relative to a preglitch, spin-down model (including ν, ﹩\dot{\nu }﹩) for antiglitch G3 (similar to G2, G4, and G6) and overrecovery glitch G5 (similar to G1), respectively. In panels (a), (c), and (d), residuals in black correspond to Fermi-LAT observations, while those in cyan indicate simulated observations generated using the TEMPO2 fake plugin with parameters in Table 1. Red lines in panels (c) and (d) represent the polynomial detrending of the residuals based on an analytical glitch model (Equation (2)), and vertical lines across all panels mark the epochs of glitches.
Paper: A Series of (Net) Spin-down Glitches in PSR J1522–5735: Insights from the Vortex Creep and Vortex Bending Models
Authors: S. Q. Zhou, W. T. Ye, M. Y. Ge, E. Gügercinoğlu, S. J. Zheng, C. Yu, J. P. Yuan, J. Zhang
Figure caption: Exponential decay timescale predicted for PSR J1522–5735 by the vortex creep model (Model 3 in E. Gügercinoğlu 2017) vs. the distance from the stellar center normalized to the radius.
Paper: The Milky Way’s Rowdy Neighbors: The Effects of the Large Magellanic Cloud and Sagittarius Dwarf on the Milky Way Disk
Authors: Ioana A. Stelea, Jason A. S. Hunt, Kathryn V. Johnston
Figure caption: Density maps of the stellar disk in the x–y plane at the present day for all four models. Overall, the disk presents a noticeable bar and spiral structure. Sgr is visible in models [MW + Sgr] and [MW + Sgr + LMC] in the right-hand part of the figure.
Paper: The Milky Way’s Rowdy Neighbors: The Effects of the Large Magellanic Cloud and Sagittarius Dwarf on the Milky Way Disk
Authors: Ioana A. Stelea, Jason A. S. Hunt, Kathryn V. Johnston
Figure caption: Orbits of Sgr (top panel) and the LMC (bottom panel), for the simulations [MW + Sgr] and [MW + LMC] containing Sgr and the LMC alone (solid lines), and the combined simulation [MW + Sgr + LMC] containing both (dashed lines).
Paper: The Milky Way’s Rowdy Neighbors: The Effects of the Large Magellanic Cloud and Sagittarius Dwarf on the Milky Way Disk
Authors: Ioana A. Stelea, Jason A. S. Hunt, Kathryn V. Johnston
Figure caption: Face-on view of the MW’s stellar disk in the x–y plane, at the present day for all four models, colored by mean height, ﹩\bar{z}﹩ (units of kpc).
Paper: The Milky Way’s Rowdy Neighbors: The Effects of the Large Magellanic Cloud and Sagittarius Dwarf on the Milky Way Disk
Authors: Ioana A. Stelea, Jason A. S. Hunt, Kathryn V. Johnston
Figure caption: Amplitude of the first four Fourier components of the decomposition of the mean radial velocity field around an annulus of R = 8 kpc as a function of time, smoothed with a one-dimensional Gaussian filter with standard deviation σ = 2. The vertical lines mark the disk crossings of Sgr, with the radius of each crossing labeled.
Paper: The Milky Way’s Rowdy Neighbors: The Effects of the Large Magellanic Cloud and Sagittarius Dwarf on the Milky Way Disk
Authors: Ioana A. Stelea, Jason A. S. Hunt, Kathryn V. Johnston
Figure caption: Face-on view of the MW’s stellar disk in the x–y plane, at the present day for all four models, colored by mean radial velocity. We notice the presence of a quadrupole in radial velocity in all models.
Paper: The Milky Way’s Rowdy Neighbors: The Effects of the Large Magellanic Cloud and Sagittarius Dwarf on the Milky Way Disk
Authors: Ioana A. Stelea, Jason A. S. Hunt, Kathryn V. Johnston
Figure caption: Amplitude, A, of the m = 1 (upper left), 2 (upper right), 3 (lower left), and 4 (lower right) modes from the Fourier decomposition of the radial velocity field as a function of Galactocentric radius.
Paper: The Milky Way’s Rowdy Neighbors: The Effects of the Large Magellanic Cloud and Sagittarius Dwarf on the Milky Way Disk
Authors: Ioana A. Stelea, Jason A. S. Hunt, Kathryn V. Johnston
Figure caption: Density maps of the stellar disk, Sgr stream, and the LMC (in a separate color map) in the x–z plane at the present day for all four models. The z = 0 plane is marked by a dotted cyan line. In the case of models including the LMC, [MW + LMC] and [MW + Sgr + LMC], we can observe a warp of the disk, most strongly at –x. The Sgr stream is present in the corresponding models [MW + Sgr] and [MW + Sgr + LMC].
Paper: The Milky Way’s Rowdy Neighbors: The Effects of the Large Magellanic Cloud and Sagittarius Dwarf on the Milky Way Disk
Authors: Ioana A. Stelea, Jason A. S. Hunt, Kathryn V. Johnston
Figure caption: Amplitude of the first two Fourier components of the decomposition of the mean vertical velocity field around an annulus of R = 8 kpc as a function of time, smoothed with a one-dimensional Gaussian filter with standard deviation σ = 2. Note that A 3 and A 4 were indistinguishable from noise at R = 8 kpc and have thus been omitted.
Paper: The Milky Way’s Rowdy Neighbors: The Effects of the Large Magellanic Cloud and Sagittarius Dwarf on the Milky Way Disk
Authors: Ioana A. Stelea, Jason A. S. Hunt, Kathryn V. Johnston
Figure caption: Face-on view of the MW’s stellar disk in the x–y plane, at the present day for all four models, colored by mean vertical velocity, ﹩{\bar{v}}_{z}﹩ (units of km s−1).
Paper: The Milky Way’s Rowdy Neighbors: The Effects of the Large Magellanic Cloud and Sagittarius Dwarf on the Milky Way Disk
Authors: Ioana A. Stelea, Jason A. S. Hunt, Kathryn V. Johnston
Figure caption: Amplitude, A, of the m = 1 (upper left), 2 (upper right), 3 (lower left), and 4 (lower right) modes from the Fourier decomposition of the mean vertical velocity field as a function of Galactocentric radius.
Paper: The Milky Way’s Rowdy Neighbors: The Effects of the Large Magellanic Cloud and Sagittarius Dwarf on the Milky Way Disk
Authors: Ioana A. Stelea, Jason A. S. Hunt, Kathryn V. Johnston
Figure caption: Amplitude of the m = 2 (left) and m = 4 (right) modes from the Fourier decomposition of the radial velocity field as a function of Galactocentric radius for the three merger models after subtracting the power from the isolated host model.
Paper: The Milky Way’s Rowdy Neighbors: The Effects of the Large Magellanic Cloud and Sagittarius Dwarf on the Milky Way Disk
Authors: Ioana A. Stelea, Jason A. S. Hunt, Kathryn V. Johnston
Figure caption: Surface density (upper left), mean radial velocity (upper right), mean height (lower left), and mean vertical velocity (lower right) for the [cMW + Sgr + LMC] model, which has the same satellite perturbers as the [MW + Sgr + LMC] model, but the host has a colder disk, which is more susceptible to secular structure formation.
Paper: The Milky Way’s Rowdy Neighbors: The Effects of the Large Magellanic Cloud and Sagittarius Dwarf on the Milky Way Disk
Authors: Ioana A. Stelea, Jason A. S. Hunt, Kathryn V. Johnston
Figure caption: Same as Figure 10 but comparing model [MW + Sgr + LMC] with the colder host disk in model [cMW + Sgr + LMC].
Paper: The Milky Way’s Rowdy Neighbors: The Effects of the Large Magellanic Cloud and Sagittarius Dwarf on the Milky Way Disk
Authors: Ioana A. Stelea, Jason A. S. Hunt, Kathryn V. Johnston
Figure caption: Same as Figure 5 but comparing model [MW + Sgr + LMC] with the colder host disk in model [cMW + Sgr + LMC].
Paper: The Milky Way’s Rowdy Neighbors: The Effects of the Large Magellanic Cloud and Sagittarius Dwarf on the Milky Way Disk
Authors: Ioana A. Stelea, Jason A. S. Hunt, Kathryn V. Johnston
Figure caption: Same as Figure 11 but comparing model [MW + Sgr + LMC] with the colder host disk in model [cMW + Sgr + LMC].
Paper: Signatures of Massive Black Hole Merger Host Galaxies from Cosmological Simulations. II. Unique Stellar Kinematics in Integral Field Unit Spectroscopy
Authors: Jaeden Bardati, John J. Ruan, Daryl Haggard, Michael Tremmel, Patrick Horlaville
Figure caption: Normalized histograms of the kinematic parameters of the subsample of MBH merger host galaxies (red) with high mass ratios (M 2/M 1 ≥ 0.5) and high chirp masses (M chirp ≥ 108.2  M ⊙), in comparison to a corresponding mass- and redshift-matched control sample (blue). We only include kinematic parameters that pass a two-sample Kolmogorov–Smirnov test with a >3σ significance. Although these histograms show significant differences between the MBH merger host galaxies and the control sample, a higher accuracy of discrimination between the two classes can be obtained by combining multiple kinematic parameters, thus motivating our use of LDA in Section 4.2.
Paper: Signatures of Massive Black Hole Merger Host Galaxies from Cosmological Simulations. II. Unique Stellar Kinematics in Integral Field Unit Spectroscopy
Authors: Jaeden Bardati, John J. Ruan, Daryl Haggard, Michael Tremmel, Patrick Horlaville
Figure caption: Our fitting of the line-of-sight velocity v los map (left) and stellar velocity dispersion σ ⋆ map (right) to extract stellar kinematic properties for the example MBH merger host galaxy from Figure 1. The bottom-left panel shows the v los map produced by ppXF, along with the kinematic position angle fitted using the v los map (black dashed line), as well as the photometric position angle fitted using the synthetic r-band image (green dashed line). The difference between these two position angles is used to calculate the ΔPA parameter. The bottom-right panel shows the σ ⋆ map produced by ppXF, along with the kinematic center fitted using the σ ⋆ map (black star) and morphological center fitted using the synthetic r-band image (green star). The top-left and top-right panels show histograms of the distributions of v los and σ ⋆ values in the kinematic maps, respectively, which are used to compute the statistical moments μ  v  and μ  σ  described in Section 4.1.
Paper: Signatures of Massive Black Hole Merger Host Galaxies from Cosmological Simulations. II. Unique Stellar Kinematics in Integral Field Unit Spectroscopy
Authors: Jaeden Bardati, John J. Ruan, Daryl Haggard, Michael Tremmel, Patrick Horlaville
Figure caption: The accuracy of the LDA predictor as a function of time delay since numerical merger in the simulation, for a high-mass-ratio (M 2/M 1 ≥ 0.5) and high-chirp-mass (M chirp > 108  M ⊙) MBH merger subsample and corresponding control sample. The LDA accuracy remains high for at least ∼1 Gyr, suggesting that the unique stellar kinematic signatures of MBH merger host galaxies are likely to be permanent. Thus, the accuracy of the stellar kinematic approach to identifying MBH merger host galaxies will likely be high at the time of gravitational-wave detection.
Paper: Signatures of Massive Black Hole Merger Host Galaxies from Cosmological Simulations. II. Unique Stellar Kinematics in Integral Field Unit Spectroscopy
Authors: Jaeden Bardati, John J. Ruan, Daryl Haggard, Michael Tremmel, Patrick Horlaville
Figure caption: The accuracy of the LDA predictor as a function of halo mass (upper left), chirp mass (upper right), MBH mass ratio (lower left), and redshift (lower right) of the MBH merger in the Romulus25 simulation. For visual clarity, the halo mass, chirp mass, and redshift plots only contain MBH mergers with high mass ratios (M 2/M 1 ≥ 0.5), while the mass ratio plot only contains MBH merger with high chirp masses of M chirp ≥ 107.5  M ⊙. The error bars are the 1σ spread from cross-validation. The accuracy of our stellar-kinematics-based approach increases as a function of halo mass, chirp mass, and mass ratio, and does not have a significant trend with redshift.
Paper: Signatures of Massive Black Hole Merger Host Galaxies from Cosmological Simulations. II. Unique Stellar Kinematics in Integral Field Unit Spectroscopy
Authors: Jaeden Bardati, John J. Ruan, Daryl Haggard, Michael Tremmel, Patrick Horlaville
Figure caption: Histogram of the LDA predictor (left) for MBH merger hosts (red) and control galaxies (blue), for the same high-mass and high-mass-ratio subsample as shown in Figure 3. The LDA predictor finds a linear combination of stellar kinematic parameters (Equation (1)) that maximally discriminates between these two classes. The decision boundary is indicated by the dashed black line, with positive LDA predictor value indicating a MBH merger host, and negative LDA predictor value indicating a control galaxy. The confusion matrix (right) shows that for this subsample the LDA predictor can classify galaxies with an accuracy of 86.0% and a precision of 94.3%.
Paper: Signatures of Massive Black Hole Merger Host Galaxies from Cosmological Simulations. II. Unique Stellar Kinematics in Integral Field Unit Spectroscopy
Authors: Jaeden Bardati, John J. Ruan, Daryl Haggard, Michael Tremmel, Patrick Horlaville
Figure caption: Stellar kinematic maps of a representative simulated galaxy from our MBH merger hosts sample (top panels), as well as from our control sample (bottom). The top-left panel for each of the two galaxies displays the stellar line-of-sight velocity (v los) and the top-right panel shows the stellar velocity dispersion (σ ⋆). The bottom panels show an example synthetic spectrum from the indicated spaxel in the data cube (black line) as well as the fitted model from ppXF (red line). It is difficult to visually classify these galaxies from these kinematic maps, and thus we extract a variety of kinematic parameters in Section 4.1 to input into an LDA predictor.
Paper: COSMOS2020: Disentangling the Role of Mass and Environment in Star Formation Activity of Galaxies at 0.4 < z < 4
Authors: Sina Taamoli, Negin Nezhad, Bahram Mobasher, Faezeh Manesh, Nima Chartab, John R. Weaver, Peter L. Capak, Caitlin M. Casey, Ghassem Gozaliasl, Kasper E. Heintz, Olivier Ilbert, Jeyhan S. Kartaltepe, Henry J. McCracken, David B. Sanders, Nicholas Scoville, Sune Toft, Darach Watson
Figure caption: Median of log(sSFR) in bins of stellar mass and environmental density, ﹩\mathrm{log}(1+\delta )﹩, in the overall sample of galaxies (panel (a)), and for star-forming galaxies (panel (b)) in six redshift intervals spanning 0.4 < z < 4. Vertical lines show the 55%, 75%, and 95% mass completeness limits. Circles show the standard deviation of SFR in each bin.
Paper: COSMOS2020: Disentangling the Role of Mass and Environment in Star Formation Activity of Galaxies at 0.4 < z < 4
Authors: Sina Taamoli, Negin Nezhad, Bahram Mobasher, Faezeh Manesh, Nima Chartab, John R. Weaver, Peter L. Capak, Caitlin M. Casey, Ghassem Gozaliasl, Kasper E. Heintz, Olivier Ilbert, Jeyhan S. Kartaltepe, Henry J. McCracken, David B. Sanders, Nicholas Scoville, Sune Toft, Darach Watson
Figure caption: Median of log(SFR) in bins of SM and environmental density, ﹩\mathrm{log}(1+\delta )﹩, in the overall sample of galaxies (panel (a)), and for star-forming galaxies (panel (b)) in six redshift intervals spanning 0.4 < z < 4. Vertical lines show the 55%, 75%, and 95% mass completeness limits. Circles show the standard deviation of SFR in each bin.
Paper: Signatures of Massive Black Hole Merger Host Galaxies from Cosmological Simulations. II. Unique Stellar Kinematics in Integral Field Unit Spectroscopy
Authors: Jaeden Bardati, John J. Ruan, Daryl Haggard, Michael Tremmel, Patrick Horlaville
Figure caption: Right panel: a comparison of the spin parameter ﹩{\lambda }_{{R}_{e}}﹩ and morphological ellipticity ε, for MBH merger host galaxies and the control sample. MBH merger host galaxies have systematically slower rotation (smaller ﹩{\lambda }_{{R}_{e}}﹩) and are more round (smaller ε). Left panel: a comparison of the difference between kinematic and photometric position angles ΔPA and morphological ellipticity ε, for the same MBH merger host galaxies and control sample. MBH merger host galaxies are systematically more kinematically misaligned (larger ΔPA). Galaxies with all of these kinematic properties are thought to have undergone major mergers, which cause kinematic misalignments and slower rotation. For visual clarity, both panels show the subsample of high-mass-ratio MBH merger host galaxies(M 2/M 1 ≥ 0.5) with high chirp masses (M chirp ≥ 108.2  M ⊙, red contours), with a corresponding mass- and redshift-matched control sample (blue contours). The contours enclose 15.9% and 50% of each sample. The dashed black line is the slow rotator discriminant from M. Cappellari (2016), in which galaxies with small values of ﹩{\lambda }_{{R}_{e}}﹩ and ε below the line are classified as slow rotator galaxies.
Paper: COSMOS2020: Disentangling the Role of Mass and Environment in Star Formation Activity of Galaxies at 0.4 < z < 4
Authors: Sina Taamoli, Negin Nezhad, Bahram Mobasher, Faezeh Manesh, Nima Chartab, John R. Weaver, Peter L. Capak, Caitlin M. Casey, Ghassem Gozaliasl, Kasper E. Heintz, Olivier Ilbert, Jeyhan S. Kartaltepe, Henry J. McCracken, David B. Sanders, Nicholas Scoville, Sune Toft, Darach Watson
Figure caption: First two columns: SFR as a function of stellar mass for the overall (column 1) and star-forming (column 2) samples. The last two columns depict sSFR as a function of stellar mass for the overall (column 3) and star-forming (column 4) samples. The green and red curves represent the median and mean values of SFR and sSFR in bins of stellar mass, respectively. Error bars represent the standard deviation of the mean value. Vertical dashed lines show the 95% completeness limit in each redshift interval.
Paper: COSMOS2020: Disentangling the Role of Mass and Environment in Star Formation Activity of Galaxies at 0.4 < z < 4
Authors: Sina Taamoli, Negin Nezhad, Bahram Mobasher, Faezeh Manesh, Nima Chartab, John R. Weaver, Peter L. Capak, Caitlin M. Casey, Ghassem Gozaliasl, Kasper E. Heintz, Olivier Ilbert, Jeyhan S. Kartaltepe, Henry J. McCracken, David B. Sanders, Nicholas Scoville, Sune Toft, Darach Watson
Figure caption: Quenching efficiencies at different redshifts, illustrating the trends in mass and environmental quenching efficiency across stellar mass bins. The shaded regions represent uncertainties associated with Poisson statistics for the number of quiescent and star-forming galaxies. The Y-axis is limited to −0.1 to 0.75 in both figures.
Paper: Icarus Revisited: An Ancient, Metal-poor Accreted Stellar Stream in the Disk of the Milky Way
Authors: Paola Re Fiorentin, Alessandro Spagna, Mario G. Lattanzi, Michele Cignoni, Sara Vitali
Figure caption: Top panels: chemical distribution, [Mg/Mn]–[Al/Fe] (left) and [Mg/Fe]–[Fe/H] (right), for the 149,826 Gaia-APOGEE stars within 3 kpc of the Sun. The solid lines represent the locus of accreted/unevolved stars (above/below the lines in the left/right panel, respectively), separated from in situ populations of thick/thin-disk stars. Bottom panels: same distribution as top panels for the 237,979 Gaia–GALAH stars.