adsabs/AstroCLIMB huggingface dataset:
Paper: Pre-peak Emission in Tidal Disruption Events
Authors: Xiaoshan Huang, 小珊 黄, Shane W. Davis, Yan-fei Jiang, 燕飞 姜
Figure caption: First row: the unbound outflow rate in RSI50Edd10 (orange lines), RSI20Edd10 (blue lines), and RSI100Edd10 (red lines). Second and third rows: kinetic luminosity L KE (Equation (10)) and mass-weighted outflow flow velocity for unbound gas. The outflow rate, kinetic luminosity, and average velocity are measured over spherical shells at radii of 100r SI, 150r SI, and 300r SI in RSI20Edd10, RSI50Edd10, and RSI100Edd10, respectively. The arrows in the third row indicate the first stream–stream collision in the corresponding simulation. The horizontal dashed line in the third row shows the escape velocity at the measuring radius.
Paper: Pre-peak Emission in Tidal Disruption Events
Authors: Xiaoshan Huang, 小珊 黄, Shane W. Davis, Yan-fei Jiang, 燕飞 姜
Figure caption: Gas density (first and second rows) and lab-frame radiation energy density (third and fourth rows) snapshots from Rsi20Edd10. The three columns correspond to t = 7.6, 10.4, and 14.7 hr, and the white text labels the time since stream–stream collision. The density ﹩\rho ^{\prime} ﹩ and radiation energy density ﹩{e}_{R}^{\prime} ﹩ are unitless, with the scaling reported in Section 2.2 to convert to physical units. The first and third rows are quantities volume averaged over Δθ ∼ 5° near the θ = π/2 plane, and the second and fourth rows show the volume average from Δϕ ∼ 5° near the ϕ inj plane. The white curve in the third row shows the shape of the estimated light curve in log scale; the blue circles label the corresponding time of the current snapshot.
Paper: Pre-peak Emission in Tidal Disruption Events
Authors: Xiaoshan Huang, 小珊 黄, Shane W. Davis, Yan-fei Jiang, 燕飞 姜
Figure caption: Snapshots of vertical stream density (top panel) and lab-frame radiation energy density (bottom panel) near pericenter. From left to right we show the stream vertical cross section for simulations with maximal refinement level from 4 to 7; the simulations reported in other sections are with level 5 refinement (second column). In the highest refinement level, the simulation domain is the same as others, i.e., θ ranges from 0 to 2π, and we only read out and plot the data near the orbital plane. The snapshot is cut at r ≈ 4.75r  s , ϕ = 0.1π, and t = 13.1 hr. The orbital plane is at z = 0. The solid gray curves label a radius of r = 4.75.
Paper: Pre-peak Emission in Tidal Disruption Events
Authors: Xiaoshan Huang, 小珊 黄, Shane W. Davis, Yan-fei Jiang, 燕飞 姜
Figure caption: Eccentricity magnitude ∣ e ∣ (Equation (8)) averaged in the θ- and ϕ-direction in RSI50Edd10. The gray dashed curve shows ∣ e ∣ for the initial stream ballistic trajectory. For the general Newtonian potential we adopt, ∣ e ∣ drops to ≈0.6 toward the pericenter. The different colors of solid curves show average ∣ e ∣ in different times (since the first collision). The vertical dotted lines label three radii: the tidal radius r  T  = r  p , the stream–stream collision radius r SI, and the radius where we inject the stream r inj.
Paper: Pre-peak Emission in Tidal Disruption Events
Authors: Xiaoshan Huang, 小珊 黄, Shane W. Davis, Yan-fei Jiang, 燕飞 姜
Figure caption: The magnitude of flow eccentricity (Equation (8)) in the orbital plane at t = 240 hr (RSI50Edd10). The dark-gray lines are flow velocity streamlines. The gas with high eccentricity ∣ e ∣ ≈ 0.6–0.8 roughly tracks the fallback stream. The circularizing gas r < 20r  s  shows lower eccentricity ∣ e ∣ ≈ 0.2. The time in the label is time since the first stream–stream collision, equivalent to the last column in Figure 2.
Paper: Pre-peak Emission in Tidal Disruption Events
Authors: Xiaoshan Huang, 小珊 黄, Shane W. Davis, Yan-fei Jiang, 燕飞 姜
Figure caption: The time evolution of normalized radiative loss e loss (Equation (12)) in RSI20Edd10 (top panel) and RSI50Edd10 (bottom panel). In each panel, the time is in code units. The gray lines are e loss evaluated at the tidal radius r  T  = r  p , blue lines are at the stream–stream collision radius r SI, and the red line is the average value between r  p  and r SI.
Paper: Pre-peak Emission in Tidal Disruption Events
Authors: Xiaoshan Huang, 小珊 黄, Shane W. Davis, Yan-fei Jiang, 燕飞 姜
Figure caption: Gas density snapshots from Rsi20Edd10. The three columns correspond to t = 23.5, 35.6, and 95.8 hr, and the white text labels the time since stream–stream collision. The first row shows quantities volume averaged over Δθ ∼ 5° near the θ = π/2 plane, and the second row shows those volume averaged from Δϕ ∼ 5° near the ϕ inj plane. The white curve in the third row shows the shape of the estimated light curve in log scale; the blue circles label the corresponding time of the current snapshot.
Paper: Pre-peak Emission in Tidal Disruption Events
Authors: Xiaoshan Huang, 小珊 黄, Shane W. Davis, Yan-fei Jiang, 燕飞 姜
Figure caption: The top panel shows outflow rates (dashed lines) and accretion rates (solid lines), and the bottom panel shows radiation efficiency η for RSI20Edd10 (blue line), RSI50Edd10 (orange line), and RSI100Edd10 (red line). The time is normalized to the freefall time at r SI to show the correlation with dynamics. The top panel is equivalent to the top panel of Figure 7 except for different time normalization. The gray dashed line in the bottom panel labels 10% efficiency.
Paper: IllustrisTNG in the HSC-SSP: No Shortage of Thin Disk Galaxies in TNG50
Authors: Dewang Xu, 德望 徐, Hua Gao, 桦 高, Connor Bottrell, Hassen M. Yesuf, Jingjing Shi
Figure caption: Comparison of the overall axis ratio distributions for the HSC-SSP galaxies and the TNG50 galaxies in the stellar mass range of ﹩10\leqslant \mathrm{log}({M}_{\star }/{M}_{\odot })\leqslant 11.5﹩. From left to right, we show the comparisons in the g, i, and y bands, respectively. Solid red lines represent the distribution of the TNG50 galaxies, and dashed blue lines represent that of the real HSC-SSP galaxies after stellar mass-weighting. The shaded areas, which share the same colors of their respective lines, enclose the 1σ Poisson uncertainties calculated following Equations (2) and (3). The χ 2 statistics and their significance are also shown in the figure and in Table 1.
Paper: IllustrisTNG in the HSC-SSP: No Shortage of Thin Disk Galaxies in TNG50
Authors: Dewang Xu, 德望 徐, Hua Gao, 桦 高, Connor Bottrell, Hassen M. Yesuf, Jingjing Shi
Figure caption: Stellar mass distributions of the HSC-SSP galaxies (open blue) and the TNG50 galaxies (filled red). Left: the main sample of TNG50 galaxies and HSC-SSP galaxies in the stellar mass range of ﹩9\leqslant \mathrm{log}({M}_{\star }/{M}_{\odot })\leqslant 11.5﹩. Right: high-mass samples with ﹩10\leqslant \mathrm{log}({M}_{\star }/{M}_{\odot })\leqslant 11.5﹩.
Paper: Microphysical Prescriptions for Parameterized Water Cloud Formation on Ultra-cool Substellar Objects
Authors: James Mang, Caroline V. Morley, Tyler D. Robinson, Peter Gao
Figure caption: Left: Comparison of CARMA and EddySed water cloud optical depth profiles for a Y dwarf with T eff = 300 K, log(g) = 4.5 at 4.074 μm. Both constant (solid) and variable (dashed) f sed EddySed models are shown. The starting f sed value (α) for all the variable models with different β values is 3. The best-fitting model with β = −0.1 includes the gradual cloud base falloff detailed in Section 3.3. Right: Summary of the recommended f sed values (red) and β values (blue) for our grid of models. Darker shades represent higher values while lighter shading indicates lower values.
Paper: Microphysical Prescriptions for Parameterized Water Cloud Formation on Ultra-cool Substellar Objects
Authors: James Mang, Caroline V. Morley, Tyler D. Robinson, Peter Gao
Figure caption: Water cloud column mass of a CARMA model and EddySed models with various S cloud values and different fractions of the cloud mass mixing ratio for a Y dwarf with T eff = 175 K, log(g) = 4.5 and f sed = 6.
Paper: Microphysical Prescriptions for Parameterized Water Cloud Formation on Ultra-cool Substellar Objects
Authors: James Mang, Caroline V. Morley, Tyler D. Robinson, Peter Gao
Figure caption: Simulated thermal emission spectra from 0.6 to 15 μm of the CARMA (black) model and EddySed model with a constant (gray) and variable (orange) f sed for a T eff = 300 K, log(g) = 4.5 Y dwarf. f sed = 3 for the constant EddySed case while the variable f sed case corresponds to the best-fit profile in Figure 8 with α = 3 and β = −0.1. In this case, the EddySed with the variable f sed almost directly overlaps the CARMA model. The inset highlights the region of interest between 3.5 and 6 μm.
Paper: Microphysical Prescriptions for Parameterized Water Cloud Formation on Ultra-cool Substellar Objects
Authors: James Mang, Caroline V. Morley, Tyler D. Robinson, Peter Gao
Figure caption: Brightness temperature as a function of wavelength for a CARMA model and corresponding EddySed model for a T eff = 300 K, log(g) = 4.5 Y dwarf with f sed = 3. We apply the cloud base falloff to the original EddySed cloud profile (yellow) and the best-fit variable f sed profile with β = −0.1 (orange) as seen in Figure 8.
Paper: Microphysical Prescriptions for Parameterized Water Cloud Formation on Ultra-cool Substellar Objects
Authors: James Mang, Caroline V. Morley, Tyler D. Robinson, Peter Gao
Figure caption: Left: Comparison of CARMA and EddySed water cloud condensate mass mixing ratios for a Y dwarf with T eff = 300 K, log(g) = 4.5. The constant EddySed models are shown (solid) along with the variable (dashed) f sed models that start with α = 3. Right: The mean particle radius of the CARMA water cloud in comparison to the different EddySed profiles.
Paper: Microphysical Prescriptions for Parameterized Water Cloud Formation on Ultra-cool Substellar Objects
Authors: James Mang, Caroline V. Morley, Tyler D. Robinson, Peter Gao
Figure caption: Simulated thermal emission spectra from 0.6 to 15 μm of a CARMA model, EddySed models with various S cloud values and different fractions of the cloud mass mixing ratio, and a cloud-free model for a Y dwarf with T eff = 175 K, log(g) = 4.5 and f sed = 6. The inset highlights the region of interest between 3.5 and 6 μm.
Paper: Microphysical Prescriptions for Parameterized Water Cloud Formation on Ultra-cool Substellar Objects
Authors: James Mang, Caroline V. Morley, Tyler D. Robinson, Peter Gao
Figure caption: Summary of the optical depth at 4.074 μm at the cloud base of the CARMA cloud model (in bold) and EddySed (in parentheses) in the red, and the percentage of the water that is condensed in the CARMA cloud model in blue, for our grid of models. Darker shades represent higher values, while lighter shading indicates lower values.
Paper: Microphysical Prescriptions for Parameterized Water Cloud Formation on Ultra-cool Substellar Objects
Authors: James Mang, Caroline V. Morley, Tyler D. Robinson, Peter Gao
Figure caption: Water-ice cloud mass growth and loss rates from the CARMA model with T eff = 200 K and log(g) = 4.5. Nucleation and condensation contribute to the total growth of cloud particle mass while evaporation is the only process contributing to the total loss in particle mass. The total growth rate curve in the dashed green overlaps the condensation rate, the dominant process for particle mass growth.
Paper: Microphysical Prescriptions for Parameterized Water Cloud Formation on Ultra-cool Substellar Objects
Authors: James Mang, Caroline V. Morley, Tyler D. Robinson, Peter Gao
Figure caption: Summary of the maximum (EddySed) cloud column mass in units of g cm−2 in red and the percentage difference with the CARMA cloud column mass (Equation (12)) in blue, for our grid of models with f sed = 6. Darker shades represent higher values, while lighter shading indicates lower values.
Paper: J-PLUS: Beyond Spectroscopy. III. Stellar Parameters and Elemental-abundance Ratios for Five Million Stars from DR3
Authors: Yang Huang, 样 黄, Timothy C. Beers, Kai Xiao, 凯 肖, Haibo Yuan, 海波 苑, Young Sun Lee, Hongrui Gu, 弘睿 顾, Jihye Hong, Jifeng Liu, 继峰 刘, Zhou Fan, 舟 范, Paula Coelho, Patricia Cruz, F. J. Galindo-Guil, Simone Daflon, Fran Jiménez-Esteban, Javier Cenarro, David Cristóbal-Hornillos, Carlos Hernández-Monteagudo, Carlos López-Sanjuan, Antonio Marín-Franch, Mariano Moles, Jesús Varela, Héctor Vázquez Ramió, Jailson Alcaniz, Renato Dupke, Alessandro Ederoclite, Laerte Sodré, Raul E. Angulo
Figure caption: Uncertainties in the photometric estimates for [Fe/H] (top left), [C/Fe] (top right), [Mg/Fe] (bottom left), and [α/Fe] (bottom right), as functions of the photometric estimates, obtained using the training sets shown in Figures 3 and 4. The red and blue dots represent the results for dwarf and giant stars, respectively. The red and blue lines are second- and third-order polynomial fits to these data points, respectively.
Paper: J-PLUS: Beyond Spectroscopy. III. Stellar Parameters and Elemental-abundance Ratios for Five Million Stars from DR3
Authors: Yang Huang, 样 黄, Timothy C. Beers, Kai Xiao, 凯 肖, Haibo Yuan, 海波 苑, Young Sun Lee, Hongrui Gu, 弘睿 顾, Jihye Hong, Jifeng Liu, 继峰 刘, Zhou Fan, 舟 范, Paula Coelho, Patricia Cruz, F. J. Galindo-Guil, Simone Daflon, Fran Jiménez-Esteban, Javier Cenarro, David Cristóbal-Hornillos, Carlos Hernández-Monteagudo, Carlos López-Sanjuan, Antonio Marín-Franch, Mariano Moles, Jesús Varela, Héctor Vázquez Ramió, Jailson Alcaniz, Renato Dupke, Alessandro Ederoclite, Laerte Sodré, Raul E. Angulo
Figure caption: Comparisons between the photometric and spectroscopic metallicities (top panels) and the photometric and spectroscopic [C/Fe] (bottom panels) for the dwarf stars (left column) and giant stars (right column) in the training sample. The photometric results are estimated from the multiple colors formed with the combination of the J-PLUS DR3 and Gaia EDR3 magnitudes using a KPCA technique (see text). The lower part of each panel shows the parameter differences (photometric minus spectroscopic) as a function of the spectroscopic determinations. The blue dots and error bars in each panel represent the median and dispersion of the parameter differences in the individual parameter bins. The blue dashed lines are the one-to-one lines. A color bar representing the numbers of stars is provided at the top of each set of panels.
Paper: J-PLUS: Beyond Spectroscopy. III. Stellar Parameters and Elemental-abundance Ratios for Five Million Stars from DR3
Authors: Yang Huang, 样 黄, Timothy C. Beers, Kai Xiao, 凯 肖, Haibo Yuan, 海波 苑, Young Sun Lee, Hongrui Gu, 弘睿 顾, Jihye Hong, Jifeng Liu, 继峰 刘, Zhou Fan, 舟 范, Paula Coelho, Patricia Cruz, F. J. Galindo-Guil, Simone Daflon, Fran Jiménez-Esteban, Javier Cenarro, David Cristóbal-Hornillos, Carlos Hernández-Monteagudo, Carlos López-Sanjuan, Antonio Marín-Franch, Mariano Moles, Jesús Varela, Héctor Vázquez Ramió, Jailson Alcaniz, Renato Dupke, Alessandro Ederoclite, Laerte Sodré, Raul E. Angulo
Figure caption: Distributions of stars in the training sample for [C/Fe] in the [C/Fe] vs. [Fe/H] space (top panels), for [Mg/Fe] in the [Mg/Fe] vs. [Fe/H] space (middle panels), and for [α/Fe] in the [α/Fe] vs. [Fe/H] space (bottom panels). The left column is for dwarf stars and the right column is for giant stars. The red dashed lines in the top panels mark the [C/Fe] value of +0.7, the criterion often used to define CEMP stars. Note that for our present purpose, we report the measured estimate of [C/Fe], without applying evolutionary corrections. The blue dashed lines in each panel indicate the solar ratios.
Paper: J-PLUS: Beyond Spectroscopy. III. Stellar Parameters and Elemental-abundance Ratios for Five Million Stars from DR3
Authors: Yang Huang, 样 黄, Timothy C. Beers, Kai Xiao, 凯 肖, Haibo Yuan, 海波 苑, Young Sun Lee, Hongrui Gu, 弘睿 顾, Jihye Hong, Jifeng Liu, 继峰 刘, Zhou Fan, 舟 范, Paula Coelho, Patricia Cruz, F. J. Galindo-Guil, Simone Daflon, Fran Jiménez-Esteban, Javier Cenarro, David Cristóbal-Hornillos, Carlos Hernández-Monteagudo, Carlos López-Sanjuan, Antonio Marín-Franch, Mariano Moles, Jesús Varela, Héctor Vázquez Ramió, Jailson Alcaniz, Renato Dupke, Alessandro Ederoclite, Laerte Sodré, Raul E. Angulo
Figure caption: Left panel: density distribution of the [Fe/H] quality flag flg [Fe/H] as a function of r-band magnitude. A color bar representing the numbers of stars is provided at the top of the panel. Right panel: comparisons of the photometric metallicity and the SDSS/SEGUE spectroscopic metallicity for different ranges of the [Fe/H] quality flag (as marked in the top left corner of each subpanel). The SDSS/SEGUE spectroscopic metallicity is corrected for the systematic offsets described in Appendix A. The blue dashed lines are the one-to-one lines. The total number of stars used in the comparison is marked in the bottom right corner of each subpanel.
Paper: J-PLUS: Beyond Spectroscopy. III. Stellar Parameters and Elemental-abundance Ratios for Five Million Stars from DR3
Authors: Yang Huang, 样 黄, Timothy C. Beers, Kai Xiao, 凯 肖, Haibo Yuan, 海波 苑, Young Sun Lee, Hongrui Gu, 弘睿 顾, Jihye Hong, Jifeng Liu, 继峰 刘, Zhou Fan, 舟 范, Paula Coelho, Patricia Cruz, F. J. Galindo-Guil, Simone Daflon, Fran Jiménez-Esteban, Javier Cenarro, David Cristóbal-Hornillos, Carlos Hernández-Monteagudo, Carlos López-Sanjuan, Antonio Marín-Franch, Mariano Moles, Jesús Varela, Héctor Vázquez Ramió, Jailson Alcaniz, Renato Dupke, Alessandro Ederoclite, Laerte Sodré, Raul E. Angulo
Figure caption: Density distributions of the metallicity and elemental-abundance differences (APOGEE estimates minus photometric estimates) as a function of the quality flag for [Fe/H] (first row), [C/Fe] (second row), [Mg/Fe] (third row), and [α/Fe] (bottom row). The left column is for dwarf stars and the right column is for giant stars. The blue dots and error bars in each panel represent the median and dispersion of the parameter differences in the individual bins of the parameter quality flag. Magenta dashed lines indicate zero residuals in each panel. A color bar representing the numbers of stars is provided at the top of each row of panels.
Paper: J-PLUS: Beyond Spectroscopy. III. Stellar Parameters and Elemental-abundance Ratios for Five Million Stars from DR3
Authors: Yang Huang, 样 黄, Timothy C. Beers, Kai Xiao, 凯 肖, Haibo Yuan, 海波 苑, Young Sun Lee, Hongrui Gu, 弘睿 顾, Jihye Hong, Jifeng Liu, 继峰 刘, Zhou Fan, 舟 范, Paula Coelho, Patricia Cruz, F. J. Galindo-Guil, Simone Daflon, Fran Jiménez-Esteban, Javier Cenarro, David Cristóbal-Hornillos, Carlos Hernández-Monteagudo, Carlos López-Sanjuan, Antonio Marín-Franch, Mariano Moles, Jesús Varela, Héctor Vázquez Ramió, Jailson Alcaniz, Renato Dupke, Alessandro Ederoclite, Laerte Sodré, Raul E. Angulo
Figure caption: Uncertainties of photometric estimates for [Fe/H] and [C/Fe] (left panel), and [Mg/Fe] and [α/Fe] (right panel), derived from comparison with the APOGEE–J-PLUS stars in common, as a function of the photometric quality flags, flg  x . Red and blue symbols represent the results for dwarf and giant stars, respectively. The dashed lines represent third-order polynomial fits to these data points.
Paper: J-PLUS: Beyond Spectroscopy. III. Stellar Parameters and Elemental-abundance Ratios for Five Million Stars from DR3
Authors: Yang Huang, 样 黄, Timothy C. Beers, Kai Xiao, 凯 肖, Haibo Yuan, 海波 苑, Young Sun Lee, Hongrui Gu, 弘睿 顾, Jihye Hong, Jifeng Liu, 继峰 刘, Zhou Fan, 舟 范, Paula Coelho, Patricia Cruz, F. J. Galindo-Guil, Simone Daflon, Fran Jiménez-Esteban, Javier Cenarro, David Cristóbal-Hornillos, Carlos Hernández-Monteagudo, Carlos López-Sanjuan, Antonio Marín-Franch, Mariano Moles, Jesús Varela, Héctor Vázquez Ramió, Jailson Alcaniz, Renato Dupke, Alessandro Ederoclite, Laerte Sodré, Raul E. Angulo
Figure caption: Comparisons of the photometric estimates of [Fe/H] (top panels), [Mg/Fe] (middle panels), and [α/Fe] (bottom panels) with spectroscopic estimates from GALAH DR3. The left column applies to dwarf stars and the right column to giant stars. The blue dashed lines are the one-to-one lines. The overall median offset and standard deviation are marked in the bottom right corner of each panel.
Paper: J-PLUS: Beyond Spectroscopy. III. Stellar Parameters and Elemental-abundance Ratios for Five Million Stars from DR3
Authors: Yang Huang, 样 黄, Timothy C. Beers, Kai Xiao, 凯 肖, Haibo Yuan, 海波 苑, Young Sun Lee, Hongrui Gu, 弘睿 顾, Jihye Hong, Jifeng Liu, 继峰 刘, Zhou Fan, 舟 范, Paula Coelho, Patricia Cruz, F. J. Galindo-Guil, Simone Daflon, Fran Jiménez-Esteban, Javier Cenarro, David Cristóbal-Hornillos, Carlos Hernández-Monteagudo, Carlos López-Sanjuan, Antonio Marín-Franch, Mariano Moles, Jesús Varela, Héctor Vázquez Ramió, Jailson Alcaniz, Renato Dupke, Alessandro Ederoclite, Laerte Sodré, Raul E. Angulo
Figure caption: Comparisons of the photometric estimates with those from Li et al. (2023) for dwarf stars (left panel) and giant stars (right). The blue dashed lines are the one-to-one lines. The overall median offset and standard deviation are marked in the top left corner of each panel. Color bars representing the numbers of stars are provided at the top of each panel.
Paper: J-PLUS: Beyond Spectroscopy. III. Stellar Parameters and Elemental-abundance Ratios for Five Million Stars from DR3
Authors: Yang Huang, 样 黄, Timothy C. Beers, Kai Xiao, 凯 肖, Haibo Yuan, 海波 苑, Young Sun Lee, Hongrui Gu, 弘睿 顾, Jihye Hong, Jifeng Liu, 继峰 刘, Zhou Fan, 舟 范, Paula Coelho, Patricia Cruz, F. J. Galindo-Guil, Simone Daflon, Fran Jiménez-Esteban, Javier Cenarro, David Cristóbal-Hornillos, Carlos Hernández-Monteagudo, Carlos López-Sanjuan, Antonio Marín-Franch, Mariano Moles, Jesús Varela, Héctor Vázquez Ramió, Jailson Alcaniz, Renato Dupke, Alessandro Ederoclite, Laerte Sodré, Raul E. Angulo
Figure caption: Similar to Figure 3, but for [Mg/Fe] (top panels) and [α/Fe] (bottom panels).
Paper: J-PLUS: Beyond Spectroscopy. III. Stellar Parameters and Elemental-abundance Ratios for Five Million Stars from DR3
Authors: Yang Huang, 样 黄, Timothy C. Beers, Kai Xiao, 凯 肖, Haibo Yuan, 海波 苑, Young Sun Lee, Hongrui Gu, 弘睿 顾, Jihye Hong, Jifeng Liu, 继峰 刘, Zhou Fan, 舟 范, Paula Coelho, Patricia Cruz, F. J. Galindo-Guil, Simone Daflon, Fran Jiménez-Esteban, Javier Cenarro, David Cristóbal-Hornillos, Carlos Hernández-Monteagudo, Carlos López-Sanjuan, Antonio Marín-Franch, Mariano Moles, Jesús Varela, Héctor Vázquez Ramió, Jailson Alcaniz, Renato Dupke, Alessandro Ederoclite, Laerte Sodré, Raul E. Angulo
Figure caption: Comparisons of the photometric estimates of [Fe/H] (left panel), [C/Fe] (middle panel), and [Mg/Fe] or [α/Fe] (right panel) with those from the Best & Brightest Survey (green dots; Schlaufman & Casey 2014) and the HRS samples. The CEMP stars are from Placco et al. (2014, red dots), the R-Process Alliance sample (blue dots; Hansen et al. 2018; Sakari et al. 2018; Ezzeddine et al. 2020; Holmbeck et al. 2020), and the Subaru follow-up observations of LAMOST VMP candidates (magenta dots; Aoki et al. 2022; Li et al. 2022). In the left panel, the plus symbols mark the CEMP stars with [C/Fe] > +0.7. The blue dashed lines are the one-to-one lines.
Paper: J-PLUS: Beyond Spectroscopy. III. Stellar Parameters and Elemental-abundance Ratios for Five Million Stars from DR3
Authors: Yang Huang, 样 黄, Timothy C. Beers, Kai Xiao, 凯 肖, Haibo Yuan, 海波 苑, Young Sun Lee, Hongrui Gu, 弘睿 顾, Jihye Hong, Jifeng Liu, 继峰 刘, Zhou Fan, 舟 范, Paula Coelho, Patricia Cruz, F. J. Galindo-Guil, Simone Daflon, Fran Jiménez-Esteban, Javier Cenarro, David Cristóbal-Hornillos, Carlos Hernández-Monteagudo, Carlos López-Sanjuan, Antonio Marín-Franch, Mariano Moles, Jesús Varela, Héctor Vázquez Ramió, Jailson Alcaniz, Renato Dupke, Alessandro Ederoclite, Laerte Sodré, Raul E. Angulo
Figure caption: Left panel: density distribution of [C/Fe] vs. [Fe/H] for dwarf stars with flg[Fe/H] ≥ 0.85, flg[C/Fe] ≥ 0.85, and RUWE ≤ 1.4, with a color bar shown on the right side. The black dashed and blue dashed lines represent [C/Fe] = 0 and [C/Fe] = +0.7, respectively. Stars with [Fe/H] ≤ −1.0 and [C/Fe] > +0.7 are CEMP stars. The top subpanel plots the fraction of CEMP stars as a function of [Fe/H]. The red dots are the results taken from Placco et al. (2014). Right panel: similar to the left panel, but for giant stars. Note that, at present, we have not applied evolutionary corrections to the measured [C/Fe] in our sample.