J/ApJ/921/118       Abundances of Gaia EDR3 comoving pairs       (Nelson+, 2021)

Distant relatives: the chemical homogeneity of comoving pairs identified in Gaia. Nelson T., Ting Y.-S., Hawkins K., Ji A., Kamdar H., El-Badry K. <Astrophys. J., 921, 118 (2021)> =2021ApJ...921..118N 2021ApJ...921..118N
ADC_Keywords: Abundances; Stars, double and multiple; Spectra, optical; Radial velocities Keywords: Wide binary stars ; Chemical abundances ; Stellar kinematics ; Late-type stars Abstract: Comoving pairs, even at the separations of O(106)au, are a predicted reservoir of conatal stars. We present detailed chemical abundances of 62 stars in 31 comoving pairs with separations of 102-107 au and 3D velocity differences <2km/s. This sample includes both bound comoving pairs/wide binaries and unbound comoving pairs. Observations were taken using the Magellan Inamori Kyocera Echelle (MIKE) spectrograph on board the Magellan/Clay Telescope at high resolution (R∼45000) with a typical signal-to-noise ratio of 150pixel-1. With these spectra, we measure surface abundances for 24 elements, including Li, C, Na, Mg, Al, Si, Ca, Sc, Ti, V, Cr, Mn, Fe, Co, Ni, Cu, Zn, Sr, Y, Zr, Ba, La, Nd, and Eu. Taking iron as the representative element, our sample of wide binaries is chemically homogeneous at the level of 0.05dex, which agrees with prior studies on wide binaries. Importantly, even systems at separations 2x105-107au are homogeneous to 0.09dex, as opposed to the random pairs, which have a dispersion of 0.23dex. Assuming a mixture model of the wide binaries and random pairs, we find that 73±22% of the comoving pairs at separations 2x105-107au are conatal. Our results imply that a much larger parameter space of phase space may be used to find conatal stars, to study M-dwarfs, star cluster evolution, exoplanets, chemical tagging, and beyond. Description: We observed 33 pairs of comoving stars using the MIKE spectrograph on board the Magellan/Clay telescope from 2019 June 13-16. These 33 pairs constitute our main sample. We also observe two additional pairs with Δv3D>2km/s as a control sample. The instrument employs a blue and red spectrograph to cover 3350-5000Å (R∼50000) and 4900-9500Å (R∼40000) respectively. File Summary: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- FileName Lrecl Records Explanations -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ReadMe 80 . This file table1.dat 218 66 Target list for the 33 comoving pairs investigated in this study table2.dat 99 33 The 3D separations and velocity differences between comoving pairs table3.dat 79 21934 The line list selection table4.dat 1616 33 Stellar parameters and elemental abundances derived from BACCHUS refs.dat 212 66 References (from Table 7) -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- See also: VI/10 : Semiempirical gf Values (Kurucz + 1975) I/345 : Gaia DR2 (Gaia Collaboration, 2018) I/350 : Gaia EDR3 (Gaia Collaboration, 2020) J/A+AS/102/435 : Transitions of SI in visible and infra-red (Biemont+ 1993) J/A+AS/130/541 : Co II oscillator strengths (Raassen+ 1998) J/A+A/340/300 : Fe II oscillator strengths (Raassen+ 1998) J/ApJS/167/292 : Laboratory transition prob. for Gd II (Den Hartog+, 2006) J/ApJS/162/227 : Transition probabilities for SmII (Lawler+, 2006) J/ApJS/169/120 : Transition probabilities for HfII and Hf (Lawler+, 2007) J/AJ/133/889 : Faint companions of Hipparcos stars (Lepine+, 2007) J/ApJ/667/1267 : CrI transition probabilities (Sobeck+, 2007) J/ApJS/182/51 : Transition prob. of rare earth elements (Lawler+, 2009) J/A+A/511/A68 : Transitions of CrII (Gurell+, 2010) J/ApJS/194/35 : Atomic transition probabilities of Mn (Den Hartog+, 2011) J/ApJ/737/L32 : Abundances of 16 Cyg A and B (Schuler+, 2011) J/ApJ/756/46 : Lithium abundances in HIP stars (Ramirez+, 2012) J/ApJ/758/133 : Metallicity profile of M31 HII reg. and PNe (Sanders+, 2012) J/MNRAS/429/126 : Atmospheric parameters from Fe lines (Ruchti+, 2013) J/ApJS/208/27 : Sun and HD 84937 TiII log(gf) and abundances (Wood+, 2013) J/A+A/566/A98 : The Gaia Benchmark Stars - Library (Blanco-Cuaresma+, 2014) J/ApJS/215/23 : FeI radiative lifetimes (Den Hartog+, 2014) J/A+A/564/A133 : Gaia FGK benchmark stars: metallicity (Jofre+, 2014) J/A+A/571/A47 : Extensive linelist of CH in stellar atm. (Masseron+, 2014) J/MNRAS/441/3127 : FeI oscillator strengths for Gaia-ESO (Ruffoni+, 2014) J/ApJS/211/20 : NiI transition probability measurements (Wood+, 2014) J/ApJ/815/63 : SDSS wide double white dwarfs spectroscopy (Andrews+, 2015) J/AJ/151/144 : ASPCAP weights for APOGEE chemical elements (Garcia+, 2016) J/A+A/588/A81 : Line list & abundances of the binary zet2 Ret (Saffe+, 2016) J/ApJ/819/19 : Equivalent widths of WASP-94A and WASP-94B (Teske+, 2016) J/MNRAS/472/675 : Wide binaries in Tycho-Gaia: search method (Andrews+, 2017) J/AJ/153/257 : Comoving stars in Gaia DR1 (Oh+, 2017) J/A+A/604/L4 : HAT-P-4 & TYC 2569-744-1 abundances & spectra (Saffe+, 2017) J/MNRAS/479/1332 : Binaries with F, G or K primaries & M dwarfs (Montes+, 2018) J/AJ/158/122 : Star formation history of the MW (Kounkel+, 2019) J/A+A/633/A99 : Gaia DR2 open clusters in the MW. II (Cantat-Gaudin+, 2020) J/MNRAS/496/2422 : Abund. of 42 Pisces-Eridanus stream stars (Hawkins+, 2020) J/MNRAS/492/1164 : Abundances of Gaia DR2 wide binaries (Hawkins+, 2020) J/A+A/645/A106 : Atomic data for the Gaia-ESO Survey (Heiter+, 2021) Byte-by-byte Description of file: table1.dat -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Bytes Format Units Label Explanations -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1- 19 I19 --- Gaia Gaia EDR3 identifier 21- 28 F8.4 deg RAdeg [189.8/356.1] Gaia EDR3 Right Ascension (ICRS) at Ep=2016.0 30- 37 F8.4 deg DEdeg [-81/-1.6] Gaia EDR3 Declination (ICRS) at Ep=2016.0 39- 44 F6.3 mas Plx [4/25.2] Gaia EDR3 parallax 46- 50 F5.3 mas e_Plx [0.01/0.2] Uncertainty in Plx 52- 55 F4.2 mag Gmag [2/6] Gaia EDR3 G band magnitude 57- 60 F4.2 mag Bp-Rp [0.5/1.1] Gaia EDR3 (blue-red) passband color index 62- 67 F6.2 km/s RVel [-67/44.3] Radial velocity 69- 72 F4.2 km/s e_RVel [0.02/0.3] Uncertainty in RVel 74- 78 F5.1 --- SNR-B [73/235] MIKE blue spectrograph SNR 80- 84 F5.1 --- SNR-R [92/403] MIKE red spectrograph SNR 86- 91 F6.4 arcsec e_RAdeg [0.007/0.07] Uncertainty in RAdeg 93- 98 F6.4 arcsec e_DEdeg [0.007/0.1] Uncertainty in DEdeg 100- 108 F9.4 mas/yr pmRA [-256/207] Gaia EDR3 proper motion along RA 110- 115 F6.4 mas/yr e_pmRA [0.009/0.1] Uncertainty in pmRA 117- 125 F9.4 mas/yr pmDE [-253/25] Gaia EDR3 proper motion along DE 127- 132 F6.4 mas/yr e_pmDE [0.009/0.2] Uncertainty in pmDE 134- 140 F7.4 --- RADEcor [-0.6/0.5] RA and DE correlation 142- 148 F7.4 --- RAPlxcor [-0.5/0.4] Right Ascension and parallax correlation 150- 156 F7.4 --- RApmRAcor [-0.5/0.4] Right Ascension and RA proper motion correlation 158- 164 F7.4 --- RApmDEcor [-0.5/0.4] Right Ascension and DE proper motion correlation 166- 172 F7.4 --- DEPlxcor [-0.6/0.2] Declination and parallax correlation 174- 180 F7.4 --- DEpmRAcor [-0.6/0.5] Declination and RA proper motion correlation 182- 188 F7.4 --- DEpmDEcor [-0.8/0.7] Declination and DE proper motion correlation 190- 196 F7.4 --- PlxpmRAcor [-0.5/0.4] Parallax and RA proper motion correlation 198- 204 F7.4 --- PlxpmDEcor [-0.4/0.5] Parallax and DE proper motion correlation 206- 212 F7.4 --- pmRApmDEcor [-0.6/0.4] RA proper motion and DE proper motion correlation 214- 217 A4 --- ID Short identifier 218 A1 --- m_ID ID component -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Byte-by-byte Description of file: table2.dat -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Bytes Format Units Label Explanations -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1- 19 I19 --- CompA Gaia EDR3 identifier for component A 21- 39 I19 --- CompB Gaia EDR3 identifier for component B 41- 44 A4 --- ID Short identifier 46- 53 E8.2 AU Sep [1220/18700000] The 3D separation (1) 55- 62 E8.2 AU e_Sep [7670/178000] Uncertainty in Sep 64- 67 F4.2 km/s DelV3D [0.26/3.8] Component's 3D velocity difference 69- 72 F4.2 km/s e_DelV3D [0.02/0.2] Uncertainty in DelV3D 74- 81 E8.2 AU Sgeo [277/28200]? Geometric separation (2) 83- 90 E8.2 AU b_Sgeo [27.2/2770]? Lower 16 percentile boundary on Sgeo 92- 99 E8.2 AU B_Sgeo [121/12300]? Upper 84 percentile boundary on Sgeo -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Note (1): Calculated solely from Gaia eDR3 astrometry and the spectroscopic RV. As discussed in Section 2.1, the separations calculated this way may overestimate the true separation between the close comoving components. Note (2): For the subset of comoving pairs suspected to be wide binaries, we invoke a geometric prior based to infer the 3D separations based on the better measured 2D projected separations (Appendix A). We only perform this correction for the close comoving pairs. The results in this paper assumes Sgeo for close comoving pairs (i.e., S<2e5AU) and S for for the far comoving pairs. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Byte-by-byte Description of file: table3.dat -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Bytes Format Units Label Explanations -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1- 4 A4 --- ID Short identifier 5 A1 --- m_ID ID component 7- 11 A5 --- Ion Identifier 13- 19 F7.2 0.1nm lambda [4205/8933] Wavelength; Angstroms 21- 26 F6.3 [-] loggf [-10/0.57] log oscillator strength 28- 66 A39 --- Ref Reference(s) (see refs.dat file) 68- 73 F6.3 eV ExPot [0/14.8] Excitation potential 75- 79 F5.3 [-] logA [0.36/8.76] log absolute abundance (1) -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Note (1): Before subtracting the Solar abundances) derived for this line. The solar abundances adopted are from Grevesse+ (2007SSRv..130..105G 2007SSRv..130..105G) except where described otherwise in Section 3. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Byte-by-byte Description of file: table4.dat -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Bytes Format Units Label Explanations -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1- 19 I19 --- CompA Component A Gaia EDR3 identifier 21- 39 I19 --- CompB Component B Gaia EDR3 identifier 41- 44 I4 K TeffA [5157/6787] Component A effective temperature 46- 47 I2 K e_TeffA [0/70] Uncertainty in TeffA 49- 52 F4.2 [cm/s2] loggA [3.9/4.7] Component A log surface gravity 54- 57 F4.2 [cm/s2] e_loggA [0.02/0.4] Uncertainty in log(g)A 59- 62 F4.2 km/s xiA [0.65/1.73] Component A microturbulence 64- 67 F4.2 km/s e_xiA [0.03/0.08] Uncertainty in xiA 69- 72 I4 K TeffB [5052/6701] Component B effective temperature 74- 75 I2 K e_TeffB [1/65] Uncertainty in TeffB 77- 80 F4.2 [cm/s2] loggB [3.8/4.8] Component B log surface gravity 82- 85 F4.2 [cm/s2] e_loggB [0.05/0.5] Uncertainty in log(g)B 87- 90 F4.2 km/s xiB [0.42/1.71] Component B microturbulence 92- 95 F4.2 km/s e_xiB [0.03/0.08] Uncertainty in xiB 97- 101 F5.2 [Sun] del[Fe/H] [-0.17/0.15] Differential method [Fe/H] (1) 103- 106 F4.2 [Sun] del[Fe/H]l [0/0.01] Statistical line-to-line scatter in [Fe/H] 108- 111 F4.2 [Sun] del[Fe/H]t [0.01/0.12] Error from differential stellar parameters in [Fe/H] 113- 116 F4.2 [Sun] e_del[Fe/H] [0.02/0.12] Uncertainty in del[Fe/H] (2) 118- 122 F5.2 [Sun] [Fe/H]A [-0.35/0.38] Component A nLBL method [Fe/H]A 124- 127 F4.2 [Sun] [Fe/H]Al [0.01] Statistical line-to-line scatter in [Fe/H]A 129- 132 F4.2 [Sun] [Fe/H]At [0.01/0.15] Error from differential stellar parameters in [Fe/H]A 134- 137 F4.2 [Sun] e_[Fe/H]A [0.01/0.15] Uncertainty in [Fe/H]A 139- 143 F5.2 [Sun] [Fe/H]B [-0.3/0.34] Component B nLBL method [Fe/H]B 145- 148 F4.2 [Sun] [Fe/H]Bl [0.01] Statistical line-to-line scatter in [Fe/H]B 150- 153 F4.2 [Sun] [Fe/H]Bt [0.01/0.04] Error from differential stellar parameters in [Fe/H]B 155- 158 F4.2 [Sun] e_[Fe/H]B [0.02/0.05] Uncertainty in [Fe/H]B 160- 164 F5.2 [Sun] del[Na/H] [-0.2/0.2] Differential method [Na/H] (1) 166- 169 F4.2 [Sun] del[Na/H]l [0/0.03] Statistical line-to-line scatter in [Na/H] 171- 174 F4.2 [Sun] del[Na/H]t [0.02/0.05] Error from differential stellar parameters in [Na/H] 176- 179 F4.2 [Sun] e_del[Na/H] [0.02/0.05] Uncertainty in del[Na/H] (2) 181- 185 F5.2 [Sun] [Na/H]A [-0.25/0.57] Component A nLBL method [Na/H]A 187- 190 F4.2 [Sun] [Na/H]Al [0.01/0.06] Statistical line-to-line scatter in [Na/H]A 192- 195 F4.2 [Sun] [Na/H]At [0.01/0.07] Error from differential stellar parameters in [Na/H]A 197- 200 F4.2 [Sun] e_[Na/H]A [0.02/0.07] Uncertainty in [Na/H]A 202- 206 F5.2 [Sun] [Na/H]B [-0.18/0.53] Component B nLBL method [Na/H]B 208- 211 F4.2 [Sun] [Na/H]Bl [0.01/0.05] Statistical line-to-line scatter in [Na/H]B 213- 216 F4.2 [Sun] [Na/H]Bt [0.01/0.05] Error from differential stellar parameters in [Na/H]B 218- 221 F4.2 [Sun] e_[Na/H]B [0.02/0.06] Uncertainty in [Na/H]B 223- 227 F5.2 [Sun] del[Mg/H] [-0.13/0.14] Differential method [Mg/H] (1) 229- 232 F4.2 [Sun] del[Mg/H]l [0/0.1] Statistical line-to-line scatter in [Mg/H] 234- 237 F4.2 [Sun] del[Mg/H]t [0.01/0.05] Error from differential stellar parameters in [Mg/H] 239- 242 F4.2 [Sun] e_del[Mg/H] [0.01/0.1] Uncertainty in del[Mg/H] (2) 244- 248 F5.2 [Sun] [Mg/H]A [-0.17/0.56] Component A nLBL method [Mg/H]A 250- 253 F4.2 [Sun] [Mg/H]Al [0.03/0.09] Statistical line-to-line scatter in [Mg/H]A 255- 258 F4.2 [Sun] [Mg/H]At [0.01/0.07] Error from differential stellar parameters in [Mg/H]A 260- 263 F4.2 [Sun] e_[Mg/H]A [0.03/0.11] Uncertainty in [Mg/H]A 265- 269 F5.2 [Sun] [Mg/H]B [-0.15/0.52] Component B nLBL method [Mg/H]B 271- 274 F4.2 [Sun] [Mg/H]Bl [0.04/0.09] Statistical line-to-line scatter in [Mg/H]B 276- 279 F4.2 [Sun] [Mg/H]Bt [0.01/0.05] Error from differential stellar parameters in [Mg/H]B 281- 284 F4.2 [Sun] e_[Mg/H]B [0.04/0.09] Uncertainty in [Mg/H]B 286- 290 F5.2 [Sun] del[Al/H] [-0.15/0.15] Differential method [Al/H] (1) 292- 295 F4.2 [Sun] del[Al/H]l [0/0.1] Statistical line-to-line scatter in [Al/H] 297- 300 F4.2 [Sun] del[Al/H]t [0.01/0.02] Error from differential stellar parameters in [Al/H] 302- 305 F4.2 [Sun] e_del[Al/H] [0.01/0.1] Uncertainty in del[Al/H] (2) 307- 311 F5.2 [Sun] [Al/H]A [-0.16/0.5] Component A nLBL method [Al/H]A 313- 316 F4.2 [Sun] [Al/H]Al [0/0.03] Statistical line-to-line scatter in [Al/H]A 318- 321 F4.2 [Sun] [Al/H]At [0/0.03] Error from differential stellar parameters in [Al/H]A 323- 326 F4.2 [Sun] e_[Al/H]A [0.01/0.03] Uncertainty in [Al/H]A 328- 332 F5.2 [Sun] [Al/H]B [-0.13/0.45] Component B nLBL method [Al/H]B 334- 337 F4.2 [Sun] [Al/H]Bl [0/0.1] Statistical line-to-line scatter in [Al/H]B 339- 342 F4.2 [Sun] [Al/H]Bt [0/0.03] Error from differential stellar parameters in [Al/H]B 344- 347 F4.2 [Sun] e_[Al/H]B [0.01/0.1] Uncertainty in [Al/H]B 349- 353 F5.2 [Sun] del[Si/H] [-0.13/0.15] Differential method [Si/H] (1) 355- 358 F4.2 [Sun] del[Si/H]l [0/0.03] Statistical line-to-line scatter in [Si/H] 360- 363 F4.2 [Sun] del[Si/H]t [0.01/0.05] Error from differential stellar parameters in [Si/H] 365- 368 F4.2 [Sun] e_del[Si/H] [0.01/0.05] Uncertainty in del[Si/H] (2) 370- 374 F5.2 [Sun] [Si/H]A [-0.28/0.43] Component A nLBL method [Si/H]A 376- 379 F4.2 [Sun] [Si/H]Al [0.02/0.03] Statistical line-to-line scatter in [Si/H]A 381- 384 F4.2 [Sun] [Si/H]At [0.01/0.06] Error from differential stellar parameters in [Si/H]A 386- 389 F4.2 [Sun] e_[Si/H]A [0.02/0.06] Uncertainty in [Si/H]A 391- 395 F5.2 [Sun] [Si/H]B [-0.23/0.43] Component B nLBL method [Si/H]B 397- 400 F4.2 [Sun] [Si/H]Bl [0.02/0.03] Statistical line-to-line scatter in [Si/H]B 402- 405 F4.2 [Sun] [Si/H]Bt [0.01/0.08] Error from differential stellar parameters in [Si/H]B 407- 410 F4.2 [Sun] e_[Si/H]B [0.02/0.09] Uncertainty in [Si/H]B 412- 416 F5.2 [Sun] del[Ca/H] [-0.17/0.13] Differential method [Ca/H] (1) 418- 421 F4.2 [Sun] del[Ca/H]l [0/0.03] Statistical line-to-line scatter in [Ca/H] 423- 426 F4.2 [Sun] del[Ca/H]t [0.02/0.15] Error from differential stellar parameters in [Ca/H] 428- 431 F4.2 [Sun] e_del[Ca/H] [0.03/0.15] Uncertainty in del[Ca/H] (2) 433- 437 F5.2 [Sun] [Ca/H]A [-0.23/0.4] Component A nLBL method [Ca/H]A 439- 442 F4.2 [Sun] [Ca/H]Al [0.01/0.03] Statistical line-to-line scatter in [Ca/H]A 444- 447 F4.2 [Sun] [Ca/H]At [0.02/0.16] Error from differential stellar parameters in [Ca/H]A 449- 452 F4.2 [Sun] e_[Ca/H]A [0.03/0.16] Uncertainty in [Ca/H]A 454- 458 F5.2 [Sun] [Ca/H]B [-0.21/0.34] Component B nLBL method [Ca/H]B 460- 463 F4.2 [Sun] [Ca/H]Bl [0.01/0.03] Statistical line-to-line scatter in [Ca/H]B 465- 468 F4.2 [Sun] [Ca/H]Bt [0.03/0.09] Error from differential stellar parameters in [Ca/H]B 470- 473 F4.2 [Sun] e_[Ca/H]B [0.04/0.09] Uncertainty in [Ca/H]B 475- 479 F5.2 [Sun] del[Sc/H] [-0.21/0.19] Differential method [Sc/H] (1) 481- 484 F4.2 [Sun] del[Sc/H]l [0/0.06] Statistical line-to-line scatter in [Sc/H] 486- 489 F4.2 [Sun] del[Sc/H]t [0.04/0.1] Error from differential stellar parameters in [Sc/H] 491- 494 F4.2 [Sun] e_del[Sc/H] [0.05/0.11] Uncertainty in del[Sc/H] (2) 496- 500 F5.2 [Sun] [Sc/H]A [-0.15/0.57] Component A nLBL method [Sc/H]A 502- 505 F4.2 [Sun] [Sc/H]Al [0.02/0.04] Statistical line-to-line scatter in [Sc/H]A 507- 510 F4.2 [Sun] [Sc/H]At [0.01/0.14] Error from differential stellar parameters in [Sc/H]A 512- 515 F4.2 [Sun] e_[Sc/H]A [0.03/0.14] Uncertainty in [Sc/H]A 517- 521 F5.2 [Sun] [Sc/H]B [-0.09/0.51] Component B nLBL method [Sc/H]B 523- 526 F4.2 [Sun] [Sc/H]Bl [0.02/0.05] Statistical line-to-line scatter in [Sc/H]B 528- 531 F4.2 [Sun] [Sc/H]Bt [0.01/0.11] Error from differential stellar parameters in [Sc/H]B 533- 536 F4.2 [Sun] e_[Sc/H]B [0.03/0.12] Uncertainty in [Sc/H]B 538- 542 F5.2 [Sun] del[Ti/H] [-0.14/0.18] Differential method [Ti/H] (1) 544- 547 F4.2 [Sun] del[Ti/H]l [0/0.02] Statistical line-to-line scatter in [Ti/H] 549- 552 F4.2 [Sun] del[Ti/H]t [0.02/0.06] Error from differential stellar parameters in [Ti/H] 554- 557 F4.2 [Sun] e_del[Ti/H] [0.03/0.06] Uncertainty in del[Ti/H] (2) 559- 563 F5.2 [Sun] [Ti/H]A [-0.31/0.39] Component A nLBL method [Ti/H]A 565- 568 F4.2 [Sun] [Ti/H]Al [0.01/0.03] Statistical line-to-line scatter in [Ti/H]A 570- 573 F4.2 [Sun] [Ti/H]At [0.01/0.09] Error from differential stellar parameters in [Ti/H]A 575- 578 F4.2 [Sun] e_[Ti/H]A [0.02/0.09] Uncertainty in [Ti/H]A 580- 584 F5.2 [Sun] [Ti/H]B [-0.22/0.31] Component Bdifferential method [Ti/H] 586- 589 F4.2 [Sun] [Ti/H]Bl [0.01/0.03] Statistical line-to-line scatter in [Ti/H]B 591- 594 F4.2 [Sun] [Ti/H]Bt [0.02/0.07] Error from differential stellar parameters in [Ti/H]B 596- 599 F4.2 [Sun] e_[Ti/H]B [0.02/0.08] Uncertainty in [Ti/H]B 601- 605 F5.2 [Sun] del[V/H] [-0.17/0.22] Differential method [V/H] (1) 607- 610 F4.2 [Sun] del[V/H]l [0/0.06] Statistical line-to-line scatter in [V/H] 612- 615 F4.2 [Sun] del[V/H]t [0.02/0.04] Error from differential stellar parameters in [V/H] 617- 620 F4.2 [Sun] e_del[V/H] [0.03/0.06] Uncertainty in del[V/H] (2) 622- 626 F5.2 [Sun] [V/H]A [-0.47/0.36] Component A nLBL method [V/H]A 628- 631 F4.2 [Sun] [V/H]Al [0.02/0.06] Statistical line-to-line scatter in [V/H]A 633- 636 F4.2 [Sun] [V/H]At [0.01/0.23] Error from differential stellar parameters in [V/H]A 638- 641 F4.2 [Sun] e_[V/H]A [0.02/0.24] Uncertainty in [V/H]A 643- 647 F5.2 [Sun] [V/H]B [-0.4/0.27] Component B nLBL method [V/H]B 649- 652 F4.2 [Sun] [V/H]Bl [0.01/0.05] Statistical line-to-line scatter in [V/H]B 654- 657 F4.2 [Sun] [V/H]Bt [0.01/0.15] Error from differential stellar parameters in [V/H]B 659- 662 F4.2 [Sun] e_[V/H]B [0.02/0.16] Uncertainty in [V/H]B 664- 668 F5.2 [Sun] del[Cr/H] [-0.14/0.14] Differential method [Cr/H] (1) 670- 673 F4.2 [Sun] del[Cr/H]l [0.01/0.05] Statistical line-to-line scatter in [Cr/H] 675- 678 F4.2 [Sun] del[Cr/H]t [0.02/0.04] Error from differential stellar parameters in [Cr/H] 680- 683 F4.2 [Sun] e_del[Cr/H] [0.03/0.06] Uncertainty in del[Cr/H] (2) 685- 689 F5.2 [Sun] [Cr/H]A [-0.39/0.29] Component A nLBL method [Cr/H]A 691- 694 F4.2 [Sun] [Cr/H]Al [0.01/0.05] Statistical line-to-line scatter in [Cr/H]A 696- 699 F4.2 [Sun] [Cr/H]At [0.01/0.11] Error from differential stellar parameters in [Cr/H]A 701- 704 F4.2 [Sun] e_[Cr/H]A [0.02/0.11] Uncertainty in [Cr/H]A 706- 710 F5.2 [Sun] [Cr/H]B [-0.37/0.25] Component B nLBL method [Cr/H]B 712- 715 F4.2 [Sun] [Cr/H]Bl [0.01/0.05] Statistical line-to-line scatter in [Cr/H]B 717- 720 F4.2 [Sun] [Cr/H]Bt [0.01/0.06] Error from differential stellar parameters in [Cr/H]B 722- 725 F4.2 [Sun] e_[Cr/H]B [0.02/0.08] Uncertainty in [Cr/H]B 727- 731 F5.2 [Sun] del[Mn/H] [-0.24/0.22] Differential method [Mn/H] (1) 733- 736 F4.2 [Sun] del[Mn/H]l [0/0.05] Statistical line-to-line scatter in [Mn/H] 738- 741 F4.2 [Sun] del[Mn/H]t [0.03/0.04] Error from differential stellar parameters in [Mn/H] 743- 746 F4.2 [Sun] e_del[Mn/H] [0.03/0.06] Uncertainty in del[Mn/H] (2) 748- 752 F5.2 [Sun] [Mn/H]A [-0.51/0.37] Component A nLBL method [Mn/H]A 754- 757 F4.2 [Sun] [Mn/H]Al [0.01/0.03] Statistical line-to-line scatter in [Mn/H]A 759- 762 F4.2 [Sun] [Mn/H]At [0.01/0.08] Error from differential stellar parameters in [Mn/H]A 764- 767 F4.2 [Sun] e_[Mn/H]A [0.02/0.08] Uncertainty in [Mn/H]A 769- 773 F5.2 [Sun] [Mn/H]B [-0.46/0.27] Component B nLBL method [Mn/H]B 775- 778 F4.2 [Sun] [Mn/H]Bl [0.01/0.04] Statistical line-to-line scatter in [Mn/H]B 780- 783 F4.2 [Sun] [Mn/H]Bt [0.01/0.06] Error from differential stellar parameters in [Mn/H]B 785- 788 F4.2 [Sun] e_[Mn/H]B [0.03/0.07] Uncertainty in [Mn/H]B 790- 794 F5.2 [Sun] del[Co/H] [-0.29/0.22] Differential method [Co/H] (1) 796- 799 F4.2 [Sun] del[Co/H]l [0.01/0.17] Statistical line-to-line scatter in [Co/H] 801- 804 F4.2 [Sun] del[Co/H]t [0.02/0.03] Error from differential stellar parameters in [Co/H] 806- 809 F4.2 [Sun] e_del[Co/H] [0.03/0.17] Uncertainty in del[Co/H] (2) 811- 815 F5.2 [Sun] [Co/H]A [-0.33/0.31] Component A nLBL method [Co/H]A 817- 820 F4.2 [Sun] [Co/H]Al [0.02/0.11] Statistical line-to-line scatter in [Co/H]A 822- 825 F4.2 [Sun] [Co/H]At [0.01/0.15] Error from differential stellar parameters in [Co/H]A 827- 830 F4.2 [Sun] e_[Co/H]A [0.02/0.18] Uncertainty in [Co/H]A 832- 836 F5.2 [Sun] [Co/H]B [-0.26/0.34] Component B nLBL method [Co/H]B 838- 841 F4.2 [Sun] [Co/H]Bl [0.02/0.08] Statistical line-to-line scatter in [Co/H]B 843- 846 F4.2 [Sun] [Co/H]Bt [0.01/0.13] Error from differential stellar parameters in [Co/H]B 848- 851 F4.2 [Sun] e_[Co/H]B [0.03/0.13] Uncertainty in [Co/H]B 853- 857 F5.2 [Sun] del[Ni/H] [-0.19/0.21] Differential method [Ni/H] (1) 859- 862 F4.2 [Sun] del[Ni/H]l [0/0.02] Statistical line-to-line scatter in [Ni/H] 864- 867 F4.2 [Sun] del[Ni/H]t [0.02/0.11] Error from differential stellar parameters in [Ni/H] 869- 872 F4.2 [Sun] e_del[Ni/H] [0.02/0.11] Uncertainty in del[Ni/H] (2) 874- 878 F5.2 [Sun] [Ni/H]A [-0.43/0.38] Component A nLBL method [Ni/H]A 880- 883 F4.2 [Sun] [Ni/H]Al [0.02/0.03] Statistical line-to-line scatter in [Ni/H]A 885- 888 F4.2 [Sun] [Ni/H]At [0.01/0.15] Error from differential stellar parameters in [Ni/H]A 890- 893 F4.2 [Sun] e_[Ni/H]A [0.03/0.15] Uncertainty in [Ni/H]A 895- 899 F5.2 [Sun] [Ni/H]B [-0.33/0.36] Component B nLBL method [Ni/H]B 901- 904 F4.2 [Sun] [Ni/H]Bl [0.02/0.03] Statistical line-to-line scatter in [Ni/H]B 906- 909 F4.2 [Sun] [Ni/H]Bt [0.01/0.05] Error from differential stellar parameters in [Ni/H]B 911- 914 F4.2 [Sun] e_[Ni/H]B [0.03/0.06] Uncertainty in [Ni/H]B 916- 920 F5.2 [Sun] del[Cu/H] [-0.18/0.21] Differential method [Cu/H] (1) 922- 925 F4.2 [Sun] del[Cu/H]l [0/0.04] Statistical line-to-line scatter in [Cu/H] 927- 930 F4.2 [Sun] del[Cu/H]t [0.02/0.06] Error from differential stellar parameters in [Cu/H] 932- 935 F4.2 [Sun] e_del[Cu/H] [0.03/0.06] Uncertainty in del[Cu/H] (2) 937- 941 F5.2 [Sun] [Cu/H]A [-0.51/0.28] Component A nLBL method [Cu/H]A 943- 946 F4.2 [Sun] [Cu/H]Al [0.01/0.07] Statistical line-to-line scatter in [Cu/H]A 948- 951 F4.2 [Sun] [Cu/H]At [0.01/0.1] Error from differential stellar parameters in [Cu/H]A 953- 956 F4.2 [Sun] e_[Cu/H]A [0.03/0.11] Uncertainty in [Cu/H]A 958- 962 F5.2 [Sun] [Cu/H]B [-0.44/0.3] Component B nLBL method [Cu/H]B 964- 967 F4.2 [Sun] [Cu/H]Bl [0.01/0.05] Statistical line-to-line scatter in [Cu/H]B 969- 972 F4.2 [Sun] [Cu/H]Bt [0.01/0.07] Error from differential stellar parameters in [Cu/H]B 974- 977 F4.2 [Sun] e_[Cu/H]B [0.03/0.08] Uncertainty in [Cu/H]B 979- 983 F5.2 [Sun] del[Zn/H] [-0.21/0.14] Differential method [Zn/H] (1) 985- 988 F4.2 [Sun] del[Zn/H]l [0/0.04] Statistical line-to-line scatter in [Zn/H] 990- 993 F4.2 [Sun] del[Zn/H]t [0.02/0.17] Error from differential stellar parameters in [Zn/H] 995- 998 F4.2 [Sun] e_del[Zn/H] [0.02/0.17] Uncertainty in del[Zn/H] (2) 1000- 1004 F5.2 [Sun] [Zn/H]A [-0.5/0.21] Component A nLBL method [Zn/H]A 1006- 1009 F4.2 [Sun] [Zn/H]Al [0/0.06] Statistical line-to-line scatter in [Zn/H]A 1011- 1014 F4.2 [Sun] [Zn/H]At [0.01/0.19] Error from differential stellar parameters in [Zn/H]A 1016- 1019 F4.2 [Sun] e_[Zn/H]A [0.02/0.19] Uncertainty in [Zn/H]A 1021- 1025 F5.2 [Sun] [Zn/H]B [-0.44/0.26] Component B nLBL method [Zn/H]B 1027- 1030 F4.2 [Sun] [Zn/H]Bl [0/0.1] Statistical line-to-line scatter in [Zn/H]B 1032- 1035 F4.2 [Sun] [Zn/H]Bt [0.01/0.05] Error from differential stellar parameters in [Zn/H]B 1037- 1040 F4.2 [Sun] e_[Zn/H]B [0.02/0.1] Uncertainty in [Zn/H]B 1042- 1046 F5.2 [Sun] del[Sr/H] [-0.34/0.13]? Differential method [Sr/H] (1) 1048- 1051 F4.2 [Sun] del[Sr/H]l [0.1/0.1]? Statistical line-to-line scatter in [Sr/H] 1053- 1056 F4.2 [Sun] del[Sr/H]t [0.02/0.43] Error from differential stellar parameters in [Sr/H] 1058- 1061 F4.2 [Sun] e_del[Sr/H] [0.1/0.44]? Uncertainty in del[Sr/H] (2) 1063- 1067 F5.2 [Sun] [Sr/H]A [-0.57/0.53] Component A nLBL method [Sr/H]A 1069- 1072 F4.2 [Sun] [Sr/H]Al [0.02/0.17] Statistical line-to-line scatter in [Sr/H]A 1074- 1077 F4.2 [Sun] [Sr/H]At [0.01/0.34] Error from differential stellar parameters in [Sr/H]A 1079- 1082 F4.2 [Sun] e_[Sr/H]A [0.06/0.38] Uncertainty in [Sr/H]A 1084- 1088 F5.2 [Sun] [Sr/H]B [-0.61/0.21]? Component B nLBL method [Sr/H]B 1090- 1093 F4.2 [Sun] [Sr/H]Bl [0/0.17]? Statistical line-to-line scatter in [Sr/H]B 1095- 1098 F4.2 [Sun] [Sr/H]Bt [0.02/0.24] Error from differential stellar parameters in [Sr/H]B 1100- 1103 F4.2 [Sun] e_[Sr/H]B [0.04/0.29]? Uncertainty in [Sr/H]B 1105- 1109 F5.2 [Sun] del[Y/H] [-0.25/0.16] Differential method [Y/H] (1) 1111- 1114 F4.2 [Sun] del[Y/H]l [0/0.06] Statistical line-to-line scatter in [Y/H] 1116- 1119 F4.2 [Sun] del[Y/H]t [0.05/0.08] Error from differential stellar parameters in [Y/H] 1121- 1124 F4.2 [Sun] e_del[Y/H] [0.05/0.1] Uncertainty in del[Y/H] (2) 1126- 1130 F5.2 [Sun] [Y/H]A [-0.63/0.23] Component A nLBL method [Y/H]A 1132- 1135 F4.2 [Sun] [Y/H]Al [0/0.07] Statistical line-to-line scatter in [Y/H]A 1137- 1140 F4.2 [Sun] [Y/H]At [0.02/0.2] Error from differential stellar parameters in [Y/H]A 1142- 1145 F4.2 [Sun] e_[Y/H]A [0.04/0.21] Uncertainty in [Y/H]A 1147- 1151 F5.2 [Sun] [Y/H]B [-0.6/0.12] Component B nLBL method [Y/H]B 1153- 1156 F4.2 [Sun] [Y/H]Bl [0.01/0.07] Statistical line-to-line scatter in [Y/H]B 1158- 1161 F4.2 [Sun] [Y/H]Bt [0.02/0.12] Error from differential stellar parameters in [Y/H]B 1163- 1166 F4.2 [Sun] e_[Y/H]B [0.04/0.13] Uncertainty in [Y/H]B 1168- 1172 F5.2 [Sun] del[Zr/H] [-0.25/0.22] Differential method [Zr/H] (1) 1174- 1177 F4.2 [Sun] del[Zr/H]l [0/0.06] Statistical line-to-line scatter in [Zr/H] 1179- 1182 F4.2 [Sun] del[Zr/H]t [0.02/0.08] Error from differential stellar parameters in [Zr/H] 1184- 1187 F4.2 [Sun] e_del[Zr/H] [0.03/0.09] Uncertainty in del[Zr/H] (2) 1189- 1193 F5.2 [Sun] [Zr/H]A [-0.48/0.42] Component A nLBL method [Zr/H]A 1195- 1198 F4.2 [Sun] [Zr/H]Al [0/0.07] Statistical line-to-line scatter in [Zr/H]A 1200- 1203 F4.2 [Sun] [Zr/H]At [0.04/0.18] Error from differential stellar parameters in [Zr/H]A 1205- 1208 F4.2 [Sun] e_[Zr/H]A [0.04/0.18] Uncertainty in [Zr/H]A 1210- 1214 F5.2 [Sun] [Zr/H]B [-0.33/0.3] Component B nLBL method [Zr/H]B 1216- 1219 F4.2 [Sun] [Zr/H]Bl [0.01/0.09] Statistical line-to-line scatter in [Zr/H]B 1221- 1224 F4.2 [Sun] [Zr/H]Bt [0.03/0.15] Error from differential stellar parameters in [Zr/H]B 1226- 1229 F4.2 [Sun] e_[Zr/H]B [0.04/0.16] Uncertainty in [Zr/H]B 1231- 1235 F5.2 [Sun] del[Ba/H] [-0.23/0.08] Differential method [Ba/H] (1) 1237- 1240 F4.2 [Sun] del[Ba/H]l [0/0.1] Statistical line-to-line scatter in [Ba/H] 1242- 1245 F4.2 [Sun] del[Ba/H]t [0.02/0.36] Error from differential stellar parameters in [Ba/H] 1247- 1250 F4.2 [Sun] e_del[Ba/H] [0.02/0.37] Uncertainty in del[Ba/H] (2) 1252- 1256 F5.2 [Sun] [Ba/H]A [-0.21/0.61] Component A nLBL method [Ba/H]A 1258- 1261 F4.2 [Sun] [Ba/H]Al [0.02/0.11] Statistical line-to-line scatter in [Ba/H]A 1263- 1266 F4.2 [Sun] [Ba/H]At [0.01/0.37] Error from differential stellar parameters in [Ba/H]A 1268- 1271 F4.2 [Sun] e_[Ba/H]A [0.03/0.38] Uncertainty in [Ba/H]A 1273- 1277 F5.2 [Sun] [Ba/H]B [-0.22/0.56] Component B nLBL method [Ba/H]B 1279- 1282 F4.2 [Sun] [Ba/H]Bl [0.02/0.11] Statistical line-to-line scatter in [Ba/H]B 1284- 1287 F4.2 [Sun] [Ba/H]Bt [0.02/0.07] Error from differential stellar parameters in [Ba/H]B 1289- 1292 F4.2 [Sun] e_[Ba/H]B [0.03/0.11] Uncertainty in [Ba/H]B 1294- 1298 F5.2 [Sun] del[La/H] [-0.42/0.19]? Differential method [La/H] (1) 1300- 1303 F4.2 [Sun] del[La/H]l [0/0.19]? Statistical line-to-line scatter in [La/H] 1305- 1308 F4.2 [Sun] del[La/H]t [0.04/0.12] Error from differential stellar parameters in [La/H] 1310- 1313 F4.2 [Sun] e_del[La/H] [0.04/0.2]? Uncertainty in del[La/H] (2) 1315- 1319 F5.2 [Sun] [La/H]A [-0.19/0.48] Component A nLBL method [La/H]A 1321- 1324 F4.2 [Sun] [La/H]Al [0/0.14] Statistical line-to-line scatter in [La/H]A 1326- 1329 F4.2 [Sun] [La/H]At [0.01/0.22] Error from differential stellar parameters in [La/H]A 1331- 1334 F4.2 [Sun] e_[La/H]A [0.03/0.26] Uncertainty in [La/H]A 1336- 1340 F5.2 [Sun] [La/H]B [-0.08/0.4]? Component B nLBL method [La/H]B 1342- 1345 F4.2 [Sun] [La/H]Bl [0/0.11]? Statistical line-to-line scatter in [La/H]B 1347- 1350 F4.2 [Sun] [La/H]Bt [0.02/0.28] Error from differential stellar parameters in [La/H]B 1352- 1355 F4.2 [Sun] e_[La/H]B [0.04/0.3]? Uncertainty in [La/H]B 1357- 1361 F5.2 [Sun] del[Nd/H] [-0.21/0.22] Differential method [Nd/H] (1) 1363- 1366 F4.2 [Sun] del[Nd/H]l [0/0.18] Statistical line-to-line scatter in [Nd/H] 1368- 1371 F4.2 [Sun] del[Nd/H]t [0.04/0.09] Error from differential stellar parameters in [Nd/H] 1373- 1376 F4.2 [Sun] e_del[Nd/H] [0.05/0.18] Uncertainty in del[Nd/H] (2) 1378- 1382 F5.2 [Sun] [Nd/H]A [-0.37/0.3] Component A nLBL method [Nd/H]A 1384- 1387 F4.2 [Sun] [Nd/H]Al [0/0.13] Statistical line-to-line scatter in [Nd/H]A 1389- 1392 F4.2 [Sun] [Nd/H]At [0.05/0.23] Error from differential stellar parameters in [Nd/H]A 1394- 1397 F4.2 [Sun] e_[Nd/H]A [0.06/0.24] Uncertainty in [Nd/H]A 1399- 1403 F5.2 [Sun] [Nd/H]B [-0.22/0.31] Component B nLBL method [Nd/H]B 1405- 1408 F4.2 [Sun] [Nd/H]Bl [0.01/0.13] Statistical line-to-line scatter in [Nd/H]B 1410- 1413 F4.2 [Sun] [Nd/H]Bt [0.03/0.19] Error from differential stellar parameters in [Nd/H]B 1415- 1418 F4.2 [Sun] e_[Nd/H]B [0.04/0.21] Uncertainty in [Nd/H]B 1420- 1424 F5.2 [Sun] del[Eu/H] [-0.26/0.25]? Differential method [Eu/H] (1) 1426- 1429 F4.2 [Sun] del[Eu/H]l [0/0.12]? Statistical line-to-line scatter in [Eu/H] 1431- 1434 F4.2 [Sun] del[Eu/H]t [0.04/0.15] Error from differential stellar parameters in [Eu/H] 1436- 1439 F4.2 [Sun] e_del[Eu/H] [0.06/0.18]? Uncertainty in del[Eu/H] (2) 1441- 1445 F5.2 [Sun] [Eu/H]A [-0.11/0.48]? Component A nLBL method [Eu/H]A 1447- 1450 F4.2 [Sun] [Eu/H]Al [0/0.14]? Statistical line-to-line scatter in [Eu/H]A 1452- 1455 F4.2 [Sun] [Eu/H]At [0.03/0.21] Error from differential stellar parameters in [Eu/H]A 1457- 1460 F4.2 [Sun] e_[Eu/H]A [0.06/0.23]? Uncertainty in [Eu/H]A 1462- 1466 F5.2 [Sun] [Eu/H]B [-0.03/0.48]? Component B nLBL method [Eu/H]B 1468- 1471 F4.2 [Sun] [Eu/H]Bl [0.03/0.18]? Statistical line-to-line scatter in [Eu/H]B 1473- 1476 F4.2 [Sun] [Eu/H]Bt [0.03/0.33] Error from differential stellar parameters in [Eu/H]B 1478- 1481 F4.2 [Sun] e_[Eu/H]B [0.1/0.34]? Uncertainty in [Eu/H]B 1483- 1487 F5.2 [Sun] del[Li/H] [-1.01/0.74]? Differential method [Li/H] (1) 1489- 1492 F4.2 [Sun] del[Li/H]l [0.1/0.1]? Statistical line-to-line scatter in [Li/H] 1494- 1497 F4.2 [Sun] del[Li/H]t [0.02/0.05] Error from differential stellar parameters in [Li/H] 1499- 1502 F4.2 [Sun] e_del[Li/H] [0.1/0.1]? Uncertainty in del[Li/H] (2) 1504- 1507 F4.2 [Sun] [Li/H]A [0.63/1.46]? Component A nLBL method [Li/H]A 1509- 1512 F4.2 [Sun] [Li/H]Al [0.1/0.1]? Statistical line-to-line scatter in [Li/H]A 1514- 1517 F4.2 [Sun] [Li/H]At [0/0.05] Error from differential stellar parameters in [Li/H]A 1519- 1522 F4.2 [Sun] e_[Li/H]A [0.1/0.11]? Uncertainty in [Li/H]A 1524- 1527 F4.2 [Sun] [Li/H]B [0.04/1.92]? Component B nLBL method [Li/H]B 1529- 1532 F4.2 [Sun] [Li/H]Bl [0.1/0.1]? Statistical line-to-line scatter in [Li/H]B 1534- 1537 F4.2 [Sun] [Li/H]Bt [0.01/0.04] Error from differential stellar parameters in [Li/H]B 1539- 1542 F4.2 [Sun] e_[Li/H]B [0.1/0.11]? Uncertainty in [Li/H]B 1544- 1548 F5.2 [Sun] del[C/H] [-0.18/0.14] Differential method [C/H] (1) 1550- 1553 F4.2 [Sun] del[C/H]l [0/0.03] Statistical line-to-line scatter in [C/H] 1555- 1558 F4.2 [Sun] del[C/H]t [0.01/0.04] Error from differential stellar parameters in [C/H] 1560- 1563 F4.2 [Sun] e_del[C/H] [0.01/0.05] Uncertainty in del[C/H] (2) 1565- 1569 F5.2 [Sun] [C/H]A [-0.34/0.48] Component A nLBL method [C/H]A 1571- 1574 F4.2 [Sun] [C/H]Al [0.01/0.03] Statistical line-to-line scatter in [C/H]A 1576- 1579 F4.2 [Sun] [C/H]At [0.01/0.11] Error from differential stellar parameters in [C/H]A 1581- 1584 F4.2 [Sun] e_[C/H]A [0.02/0.11] Uncertainty in [C/H]A 1586- 1590 F5.2 [Sun] [C/H]B [-0.3/0.35] Component B nLBL method [C/H]B 1592- 1595 F4.2 [Sun] [C/H]Bl [0.01/0.03] Statistical line-to-line scatter in [C/H]B 1597- 1600 F4.2 [Sun] [C/H]Bt [0.01/0.08] Error from differential stellar parameters in [C/H]B 1602- 1605 F4.2 [Sun] e_[C/H]B [0.02/0.08] Uncertainty in [C/H]B 1607- 1610 A4 --- ID Internal comoving pair identifier 1612- 1616 A5 --- delRV Different radial velocity in Gaia EDR3? True|False -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Note (1): By definition, the differential analysis only applies to the differences of the two components, and there will be no individual values with the differential method. Note (2): Total errors are added in quadrature. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Byte-by-byte Description of file: refs.dat -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Bytes Format Units Label Explanations -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1- 19 A19 --- Ref Reference code 21- 39 A19 --- BibCode Bibcode of the reference if any 41- 64 A24 --- Auth Author 66-212 A147 --- Comm Comment -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- History: From electronic version of the journal
(End) Prepared by [AAS], Emmanuelle Perret [CDS] 22-Feb-2023
The document above follows the rules of the Standard Description for Astronomical Catalogues; from this documentation it is possible to generate f77 program to load files into arrays or line by line