adsabs/AstroCLIMB huggingface dataset:
Paper: Petrogenesis of Chang’e-6 Basalts and Implication for the Young Volcanism on the Lunar Farside
Authors: Chengxiang Yin, Jian Chen, Xiaohui Fu, Haijun Cao, Xuejin Lu, Yiheng Liu, Jin Li, Siyue Chi, Xiaojia Zeng, Zongcheng Ling
Figure caption: Mineral chemistry of pyroxenes in CE-6 basalt. (a) Fe# vs. Ti# plots for pyroxenes in CE-6 basalt, compared with Apollo very low-Ti, low-Ti, and high-Ti fields (T. Arai et al. 1996; K. L. Robinson et al. 2012). (b) Fe# vs. Ti/Al plots. Apollo and Luna pyroxene data (J. J. Papike et al. 2019) are also shown for comparison. (c) Mg# vs. Ti contents (ppm). The “bin” represents the average Ti contents within a certain Mg# interval, with the interval size being 5. Fe# = molar [Fe/(Mg + Fe)] × 100; Ti# = molar [Ti/(Ti + Cr)] × 100.
Paper: Petrogenesis of Chang’e-6 Basalts and Implication for the Young Volcanism on the Lunar Farside
Authors: Chengxiang Yin, Jian Chen, Xiaohui Fu, Haijun Cao, Xuejin Lu, Yiheng Liu, Jin Li, Siyue Chi, Xiaojia Zeng, Zongcheng Ling
Figure caption: MgO-TiO2 plots of Apollo/CE-5/CE-6 basalts. The data of CE-6 soil/subophitic basalt are derived from C. Li et al. (2024). The chemical compositions of CE-5 basalt and soil are sourced from H.-C. Tian et al. (2021), C. Li et al. (2022), and K. Zong et al. (2022), respectively. The chemical compositions of Apollo 12/15 basalts are obtained from the Apollo Basalt DB_V2 compiled by Kim Cone (K. Cone 2021).
Paper: Petrogenesis of Chang’e-6 Basalts and Implication for the Young Volcanism on the Lunar Farside
Authors: Chengxiang Yin, Jian Chen, Xiaohui Fu, Haijun Cao, Xuejin Lu, Yiheng Liu, Jin Li, Siyue Chi, Xiaojia Zeng, Zongcheng Ling
Figure caption: Comparison of modal mineralogy of CE-6 basalt with Apollo and CE-5 basalts. The mineral abundance of CE-5 basalt is sourced from H.-C. Tian et al. (2021), whereas that of CE-5/CE-6 soil is derived from C. Li et al. (2022) and C. Li et al. (2024), respectively. The data of Apollo 12/15 basalts are obtained from C. R. Neal et al. (1994) and S. K. Vetter et al. (1988).
Paper: Identification of a Turnover in the Initial Mass Function of a Young Stellar Cluster Down to 0.5 MJ
Authors: Matthew De Furio, Michael R. Meyer, Thomas Greene, Klaus Hodapp, Doug Johnstone, Jarron Leisenring, Marcia Rieke, Massimo Robberto, Thomas Roellig, Gabriele Cugno, Eleonora Fiorellino, Carlo F. Manara, Roberta Raileanu, Sierk van Terwisga
Figure caption: Top left: Corner plot for the single power-law model over 0.0005–0.062 M⊙ and AV = 0–100 mag. Number is the number of expected sources over the mass and extinction range after accounting for incompleteness of our sensitivity, and α is the power-law index. Right: Corner plot for the double power-law model where α1 is the power-law index from 0.0005 M⊙ to the breakpoint mass and α2 is the power-law index from the breakpoint mass to 0.062 M⊙. The breakpoint mass is the mass at which the two power laws diverge in units of MJ. Bottom far left: Histogram with the estimated masses of the 28 likely cluster members detected and unsaturated in the F182M and F430M filters. Masses are derived from the 1 Myr ATMO2020 evolutionary model and their F182M − F430M color and F430M magnitude. The red dashed line is the breakpoint mass from the fit, and the black dashed line is sensitivity limit of our analysis. Bottom left: median values for the single (blue dotted–dashed line) and double (black solid line) power-law cases from our mass function fitting with the median value of the breakpoint mass (red dashed line) and the mass sensitivity limit of our analysis (black dashed line), 0.0005 M⊙. The best-fit single power-law model predicts many Jupiter-mass objects while the best-fit double power-law model reflects a lack of objects down to 0.0005 M⊙, as shown in our results.
Paper: Identification of a Turnover in the Initial Mass Function of a Young Stellar Cluster Down to 0.5 MJ
Authors: Matthew De Furio, Michael R. Meyer, Thomas Greene, Klaus Hodapp, Doug Johnstone, Jarron Leisenring, Marcia Rieke, Massimo Robberto, Thomas Roellig, Gabriele Cugno, Eleonora Fiorellino, Carlo F. Manara, Roberta Raileanu, Sierk van Terwisga
Figure caption: F430M vs. F182M − F430M diagram for the TRILEGAL (left) and JADES mock catalog (right) without any extinction applied. For all point-source detections, we applied the corresponding extinction from the HGBS to both of these distributions, calculated the number of expected contaminants given the observed color–magnitude of our targets, and normalized to the ratio of the areas of these catalogs to our field of view. All sources where the expected number of contaminants was <0.01 were classified as candidate cluster members.
Paper: Identification of a Turnover in the Initial Mass Function of a Young Stellar Cluster Down to 0.5 MJ
Authors: Matthew De Furio, Michael R. Meyer, Thomas Greene, Klaus Hodapp, Doug Johnstone, Jarron Leisenring, Marcia Rieke, Massimo Robberto, Thomas Roellig, Gabriele Cugno, Eleonora Fiorellino, Carlo F. Manara, Roberta Raileanu, Sierk van Terwisga
Figure caption: F430M vs. F182M − F430M before and after background rejection. Green lines are the saturation limits of the data with SHALLOW2 readout pattern. Black lines are extinction vectors (S. Wang & X. Chen 2019). Red line is ATMO2020 chemical equilibrium 1 Myr isochrone within various masses labeled in the green squares. Left: black circles are point sources identified within the data. Right: black circles are point sources within the data that have color–magnitude values that would indicate <0.01 background contaminants in our field of view, assuming the extinction from the HGBS.
Paper: Identification of a Turnover in the Initial Mass Function of a Young Stellar Cluster Down to 0.5 MJ
Authors: Matthew De Furio, Michael R. Meyer, Thomas Greene, Klaus Hodapp, Doug Johnstone, Jarron Leisenring, Marcia Rieke, Massimo Robberto, Thomas Roellig, Gabriele Cugno, Eleonora Fiorellino, Carlo F. Manara, Roberta Raileanu, Sierk van Terwisga
Figure caption: Sensitivity across the field of view of our NIRCam data in the F182M and F430M filters. Color bar shows the fractional area where we are sensitive to the specific color–magnitude combination. The purple background indicates no sensitivity, either due to saturation or being below our 5σ limit.
Paper: A Novel q-PED Method: Precise Physical Properties of a Merger-origin Binary Cepheid OGLE-LMC-CEP-1347
Authors: Felipe Espinoza-Arancibia, Bogumił Pilecki
Figure caption: Color–magnitude diagram showing RSP models that exhibit 1O- and 2O-mode pulsations with periods within 5% from measured P1O = 0.690 days and P2O = 0.556 days, considering three values of metallicity. These models were calculated along the evolutionary tracks with metallicity Z = 0.006 (dashed lines), 0.008 (solid lines), and 0.009 (dotted lines). Blue solid lines are the empirical IS edges for 1O Cepheids (F. Espinoza-Arancibia et al. 2024). The black solid line shows the contours of RSP models that exhibit 1O- and 2O-mode pulsations within 20% from the measured periods.
Paper: A Novel q-PED Method: Precise Physical Properties of a Merger-origin Binary Cepheid OGLE-LMC-CEP-1347
Authors: Felipe Espinoza-Arancibia, Bogumił Pilecki
Figure caption: Color–magnitude diagrams with the evolutionary tracks of the Cepheid (blue), the companion (red), and the entire CEP-1347 system (green). Valid positions for the Cepheid, the companion, and the entire system are shown as blue, green, and red points, respectively.
Paper: A Novel q-PED Method: Precise Physical Properties of a Merger-origin Binary Cepheid OGLE-LMC-CEP-1347
Authors: Felipe Espinoza-Arancibia, Bogumił Pilecki
Figure caption: Multiband fit with the highest R-squared parameter of the reddened distance moduli in the VIJHK bands as a function of the selective absorption Rλ.
Paper: Identification of a Turnover in the Initial Mass Function of a Young Stellar Cluster Down to 0.5 MJ
Authors: Matthew De Furio, Michael R. Meyer, Thomas Greene, Klaus Hodapp, Doug Johnstone, Jarron Leisenring, Marcia Rieke, Massimo Robberto, Thomas Roellig, Gabriele Cugno, Eleonora Fiorellino, Carlo F. Manara, Roberta Raileanu, Sierk van Terwisga
Figure caption: Color image of NGC 2024. Filters F115W and F140M are blue, F182M is green, F360M is orange, and F430M is red. Gaps in shortwave channel data are filled in using VISTA\VIRCAM data for reference. The F430M filter serves as the luminosity filter for the VISTA image, where the blue colors come from VISTA but the resolution comes from the F430M data. Shifting colors and balance adjustments are then made to fill in the gaps from the shortwave data. Credit: Alyssa Pagan, STScI.
Paper: Petrogenesis of Chang’e-6 Basalts and Implication for the Young Volcanism on the Lunar Farside
Authors: Chengxiang Yin, Jian Chen, Xiaohui Fu, Haijun Cao, Xuejin Lu, Yiheng Liu, Jin Li, Siyue Chi, Xiaojia Zeng, Zongcheng Ling
Figure caption: Mineral chemistry of CE-6 basalt. (a) Pyroxene and (b) plagioclase compositions of CE-6 basalt. The CE-5 compositional fields were established based on the data from X. Che et al. (2021), S. Hu et al. (2021), H.-C. Tian et al. (2021), Q. He et al. (2022), and Y. Jiang et al. (2022). The CE-5 K-feldspar data are sourced from H.-C. Tian et al. (2021). The pyroxene and plagioclase composition for Apollo basalts are from J. J. Papike et al. (1976), J. W. Shervais et al. (1990), and S. K. Vetter et al. (1988). (c) and (d) CI-normalized (E. Anders & N. Grevesse 1989) REE abundance of pyroxene and plagioclase in CE-6 basalt. CE-5 REE fields were established based on the data from H.-C. Tian et al. (2021).
Paper: Petrogenesis of Chang’e-6 Basalts and Implication for the Young Volcanism on the Lunar Farside
Authors: Chengxiang Yin, Jian Chen, Xiaohui Fu, Haijun Cao, Xuejin Lu, Yiheng Liu, Jin Li, Siyue Chi, Xiaojia Zeng, Zongcheng Ling
Figure caption: Schematic diagram illustrating the generation, ascent, and eruption of CE-6 basalt. CE-6 basalt may derive from the partial melting of a depleted lunar mantle source containing ∼10%–20% CPX and Ilm. The magma generated by ∼3%–7% batch melting of this mantle source rose to the shallow magma chamber, where it underwent fractional crystallization dominated by Ol and CPX (∼21%–59% fractional crystallization). The residual magma then erupted onto the lunar surface, forming the observed lava flow. The presence of late-stage cumulates resulted in a readily fusible lunar mantle. Deformation at the CMB caused by large-scale impacts, along with accompanying mantle convection, facilitated mantle melting. The high-alumina basalt reported by Q. W. L. Zhang et al. (2024), as well as the floor-fractured crater (Oppenheimer, Y. Qian et al. 2024b), were also shown to reveal the complexity of magmatic activity within the SPA. The age of CE-6 basalt is from Z. Cui et al. (2024) and Q. W. L. Zhang et al. (2024). The ages of Apollo basin, SPA, and low-Ti basalt are obtained from M. A. Ivanov et al. (2018), K. H. Joy et al. (2024), and Y. Qian et al. (2024b), respectively. (Ilm = ilmenite, CPX = clinopyroxene, Ol = olivine, Pig = pigeonite, CMB = crust-mantle boundary).
Paper: Petrogenesis of Chang’e-6 Basalts and Implication for the Young Volcanism on the Lunar Farside
Authors: Chengxiang Yin, Jian Chen, Xiaohui Fu, Haijun Cao, Xuejin Lu, Yiheng Liu, Jin Li, Siyue Chi, Xiaojia Zeng, Zongcheng Ling
Figure caption: Fractional crystallization trend of CE-6 basalt. The composition of CE-6 basalt primitive magma is defined by the intersection of our reversed fractional crystallization trend line and lunar mantle melting path (lunar mantle partial melt) proposed by B. Su et al. (2022; Figure A11). At a changed pressure from 1 kbar to 1 bar, the fractional crystallization trend of the primitive magma, obtained by adding olivine after incorporating 20% CPX (i.e., 20% CPX + Ol), is most closely consistent with the composition of CE-6 basalt. The data of CE-6 basalt originate from C. Li et al. (2024) and this study, while the chemical composition of CE-5 basalt is derived from B. Su et al. (2022). Data for Apollo 12/15 basalts are obtained from the Apollo Basalt DB_V2 compiled by Kim Cone (K. Cone 2021).
Paper: Petrogenesis of Chang’e-6 Basalts and Implication for the Young Volcanism on the Lunar Farside
Authors: Chengxiang Yin, Jian Chen, Xiaohui Fu, Haijun Cao, Xuejin Lu, Yiheng Liu, Jin Li, Siyue Chi, Xiaojia Zeng, Zongcheng Ling
Figure caption: Relationship between the distribution of mare basalts and crustal thickness. (a) Lunar crust thickness distribution map with Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter Camera Wide Angle Camera image as the base map (M. S. Robinson et al. 2010). The Model 1 crust thickness reported by M. A. Wieczorek et al. (2013) was employed here. The basin rings of major large basins (cyan rings; J. Liu et al. 2022) and mare boundaries (black line; Z. Zhao et al. 2023) were marked. The CE-6 landing site (white arrow) and floor-fractured craters associated with the farside large basins (white triangle, enlarged view shown in Figure A13) were also labeled. (b) The statistical analysis of crustal thickness of basalt units. The “μ” of normal distribution means average lunar crust thickness. (c) Accumulated basalt area across different crustal thickness intervals.
Paper: Petrogenesis of Chang’e-6 Basalts and Implication for the Young Volcanism on the Lunar Farside
Authors: Chengxiang Yin, Jian Chen, Xiaohui Fu, Haijun Cao, Xuejin Lu, Yiheng Liu, Jin Li, Siyue Chi, Xiaojia Zeng, Zongcheng Ling
Figure caption: Batch partial melting and fractional crystallization calculation. The initial composition of the lunar mantle source was assumed to be 86PCS (86% crystallized solid) and 2% TIRL (trapped instantaneous residual liquid), with mineral abundance containing 48% olivine, 20% orthopyroxene, 20% pigeonite, 8% augite, 2% plagioclase, and 2% ilmenite. The mineral assemblages of fractional crystallization are 52% olivine, 41% augite, and 7% pigeonite based on the calculation results of Petrolog software. The lunar mantle source underwent 3%–7% batch melting, followed by 21%–59% fractional crystallization, which can match the REE abundances of CE-6 basalt primary parent melt. The REE pattern of “86PCS + 2% TIRL” is sourced from H.-C. Tian et al. (2021), which has been digitized from G. A. Snyder et al. (1992).
Paper: Petrogenesis of Chang’e-6 Basalts and Implication for the Young Volcanism on the Lunar Farside
Authors: Chengxiang Yin, Jian Chen, Xiaohui Fu, Haijun Cao, Xuejin Lu, Yiheng Liu, Jin Li, Siyue Chi, Xiaojia Zeng, Zongcheng Ling
Figure caption: BSE images of representative mesostasis pockets in CE-6 basalt. Py = pyroxene, Pl = Plagioclase, Ilm = Ilmenite, Tro = troilite, Qz = quartz, Cri = cristobalite.
Paper: Petrogenesis of Chang’e-6 Basalts and Implication for the Young Volcanism on the Lunar Farside
Authors: Chengxiang Yin, Jian Chen, Xiaohui Fu, Haijun Cao, Xuejin Lu, Yiheng Liu, Jin Li, Siyue Chi, Xiaojia Zeng, Zongcheng Ling
Figure caption: BSE images of CE-6 basalt clasts analyzed in this study. Major mineral phases were labeled (Py = pyroxene, Pl = Plagioclase, Ilm = Ilmenite). The white boxes denote representative regions of mesostasis pockets (Mes = mesostasis pocket).
Paper: Petrogenesis of Chang’e-6 Basalts and Implication for the Young Volcanism on the Lunar Farside
Authors: Chengxiang Yin, Jian Chen, Xiaohui Fu, Haijun Cao, Xuejin Lu, Yiheng Liu, Jin Li, Siyue Chi, Xiaojia Zeng, Zongcheng Ling
Figure caption: Representative baseline-corrected Raman spectra of mesostasis pockets in CE-6 basalt. The Raman peaks of quartz (Qz), plagioclase (Pl), and cristobalite (Cri) were marked with gray dashed lines.
Paper: Petrogenesis of Chang’e-6 Basalts and Implication for the Young Volcanism on the Lunar Farside
Authors: Chengxiang Yin, Jian Chen, Xiaohui Fu, Haijun Cao, Xuejin Lu, Yiheng Liu, Jin Li, Siyue Chi, Xiaojia Zeng, Zongcheng Ling
Figure caption: Mg# vs. ΣREE (the sum of REE in ppm) plots of pyroxenes in CE-6 basalt. The gray dashed line in (a) denotes the range shown in (b). The filled red diamonds in (b) represent the Mg-rich augites used for estimating the primary parental melt composition of CE-6 basalt as shown in Figure A6.
Paper: Petrogenesis of Chang’e-6 Basalts and Implication for the Young Volcanism on the Lunar Farside
Authors: Chengxiang Yin, Jian Chen, Xiaohui Fu, Haijun Cao, Xuejin Lu, Yiheng Liu, Jin Li, Siyue Chi, Xiaojia Zeng, Zongcheng Ling
Figure caption: Chemical zoning of pyroxene in CE-6 basalt. Mg# = molar [Mg/(Mg + Fe)] × 100.
Paper: Newest Measurements of Cosmic Curvature with BOSS/eBOSS and DESI DR1 Baryon Acoustic Oscillation Observations
Authors: Tonghua Liu, Shengjia Wang, Hengyu Wu, Shuo Cao, Jieci Wang
Figure caption: Left: the reconstructions of [H(z)]CC from CC data by using the GP method. The blue region and the blue solid line denote the 1σ confidence level uncertainty and the best-fit values of reconstruction. The gray points with error bars represent the observed CC data. Right: the comoving distance ﹩{[{D}_{C}(z)]}^{\mathrm{CC}}﹩ from the reconstructed [H(z)]CC by using integrating. The red dotted line is the fiducial flat ΛCDM model with Ωm = 0.30 and H0 = 70.0 km s−1 Mpc−1.
Paper: Newest Measurements of Cosmic Curvature with BOSS/eBOSS and DESI DR1 Baryon Acoustic Oscillation Observations
Authors: Tonghua Liu, Shengjia Wang, Hengyu Wu, Shuo Cao, Jieci Wang
Figure caption: The reconstruction of ﹩{[{D}_{A}(z)]}^{\mathrm{BAO}+\mathrm{CC}}﹩ by using the GP method, based on DESI and BOSS/eBOSS BAO measurements (with and without the z = 0.51, 0.71 LRG sample). The red dotted line denotes the fiducial flat ΛCDM model (with H0 = 70 km s−1 Mpc−1 and Ωm = 0.30).
Paper: Newest Measurements of Cosmic Curvature with BOSS/eBOSS and DESI DR1 Baryon Acoustic Oscillation Observations
Authors: Tonghua Liu, Shengjia Wang, Hengyu Wu, Shuo Cao, Jieci Wang
Figure caption: Left panel: the measurements on ΩK using the GP method. Right panel: the measurements on ΩK using the ANN method. For simplicity, we denote BOSS/eBOSS BAO sample as eBOSS.
Paper: Newest Measurements of Cosmic Curvature with BOSS/eBOSS and DESI DR1 Baryon Acoustic Oscillation Observations
Authors: Tonghua Liu, Shengjia Wang, Hengyu Wu, Shuo Cao, Jieci Wang
Figure caption: The same as Figure 1 but using the ANN method.
Paper: Using Detailed Single-star and Binary-evolution Models to Probe the Large Observed Luminosity Spread of Red Supergiants in Young Open Star Clusters
Authors: Chen Wang, Lee Patrick, Abel Schootemeijer, Selma E. de Mink, Norbert Langer, Nikolay Britavskiy, Xiao-Tian Xu, Julia Bodensteiner, Eva Laplace, Ruggero Valli, Alejandro Vigna-Gómez, Jakub Klencki, Stephen Justham, Cole Johnston, Jing-ze Ma
Figure caption: Panel (a): the luminosity extension ﹩{\rm{\Delta }}\mathrm{log}L=\mathrm{log}L-\mathrm{log}{L}_{0}﹩ for RSGs originating from MS mergers in our simulations as a function of age, where L is the luminosity of RSGs and L0 is the baseline luminosity (see Appendix C). Each track represents the luminosity variation for one RSG, with color indicating the initial mass ratio qi (defined as the ratio of the secondary star’s mass to the primary star’s mass) of its binary progenitor (see the color bar on the right side of the figure). Thin gray lines along the tracks indicate periods when the corresponding MS merger model is in the BSG or YSG phase. The thick dark gray curve represents results from the semianalytical approach, where we assume that mergers happen between two MS turnoff stars (see Appendix D). Light and dark gray shaded areas indicate the range of ﹩{\rm{\Delta }}\mathrm{log}L﹩ predicted by single-star evolution and stable mass transfer, respectively. These ranges are determined to encompass 95% of the RSGs produced in these two scenarios. Open markers illustrate the luminosity difference for each observed RSG relative to the least luminous RSG in its cluster, with cluster ages determined by comparing this least luminous RSG with our single-star models (see Figure C1). The red error bar in the lower right corner of this panel represents the observational uncertainty (±0.1 dex). Panel (b): the number distribution of RSGs in clusters with a total initial mass of 1.3 × 105 M⊙ originating from MS mergers as a function of age. Models are categorized into three groups based on the initial mass ratios of the merger progenitors. The bars are stacked. The black dashed steps indicate the predicted number distribution for the helium-burning stars, i.e., including RSGs, BSGs, and YSGs. Panel (c): ﹩{\rm{\Delta }}\mathrm{log}L﹩ distribution for the observed RSGs in clusters NGC 2004 (light orange bars) and NGC 2100 (orange bars). The bars are stacked. The green dashed steps depict the predicted ﹩{\rm{\Delta }}\mathrm{log}L﹩ distribution for our MS merger models between 20 and 30 Myr, normalized to match the total number of observed RSGs in these two clusters. Panel (d): same as panel (c) but for observed RSGs in clusters NGC 1818 (light red bars) and NGC 330 (dark red bars). And the green dashed steps represent the predicted ﹩{\rm{\Delta }}\mathrm{log}L﹩ distribution for our models between 40 and 50 Myr.
Paper: Using Detailed Single-star and Binary-evolution Models to Probe the Large Observed Luminosity Spread of Red Supergiants in Young Open Star Clusters
Authors: Chen Wang, Lee Patrick, Abel Schootemeijer, Selma E. de Mink, Norbert Langer, Nikolay Britavskiy, Xiao-Tian Xu, Julia Bodensteiner, Eva Laplace, Ruggero Valli, Alejandro Vigna-Gómez, Jakub Klencki, Stephen Justham, Cole Johnston, Jing-ze Ma
Figure caption: Number of RSGs in clusters with an initial total mass of 1.3 × 105 M⊙ from different evolutionary scenarios predicted by our detailed binary models. Orange-red bars represent RSGs originating from MS mergers. Yellow bars depict RSGs resulting from stable mass transfer without taking into account SN kicks. Dark blue and medium blue bars represent RSGs that have not interacted with their companions or will never interact, respectively. Light blue bars correspond to RSGs from ZAMS mergers. The bars are stacked to provide a cumulative representation. Purple dots with error bars indicate the standard deviation of the total number of RSGs predicted in our simulations. Open pentagrams show the observed number of RSGs in clusters NGC 2004, NGC 2100, NGC 330, and NGC 1818, displayed from left to right. The endpoints of the black arrows show the predicted number of RSGs for each cluster, adjusted according to their total masses (see the text for details). The brown dashed steps illustrate the fraction of RSGs from MS mergers relative to the total number of RSGs in our simulation (i.e., the value predicted by the orange-red bars divided by the sum of all five populations). The corresponding values are shown on the right y-axis.
Paper: Using Detailed Single-star and Binary-evolution Models to Probe the Large Observed Luminosity Spread of Red Supergiants in Young Open Star Clusters
Authors: Chen Wang, Lee Patrick, Abel Schootemeijer, Selma E. de Mink, Norbert Langer, Nikolay Britavskiy, Xiao-Tian Xu, Julia Bodensteiner, Eva Laplace, Ruggero Valli, Alejandro Vigna-Gómez, Jakub Klencki, Stephen Justham, Cole Johnston, Jing-ze Ma
Figure caption: Comparison of observed RSGs (cyan dots with error bars) in the SMC cluster NGC 330 (L. R. Patrick et al. 2020) with the evolution of our nonrotating single-star models (gray lines) in the HRD. Initial stellar masses are indicated along the tracks. The lower and upper thick tracks represent the best fits for the least luminous and most luminous RSGs observed in NGC 330, respectively. Solid gray lines denote the helium-burning stages of the stellar models, while dotted lines indicate the stages before helium ignition. Here we define the helium-burning phase as the period during which the central helium mass fraction ranges from 0.98 and 0.001. The red circles indicate the positions of the stellar models at 14 Myr for each mass.