Temperature-dependent differences between empirical lithium age estimators in benchmark open clusters

Clicks: 2
ID: 338332
2026
Free PDF
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score — reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
Emerging

Ranked #1,332 of 1,339 articles by views in monthly notices of the royal astronomical society

Most read Least read

Bar heights use a square-root scale. Only the 120 most-read articles are drawn; the journal has 1,339 in total.

Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet minted

Create a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.

5 SUSD one-off · no wallet required
Sign in to mint
Abstract
Abstract The two public versions of the EAGLES empirical lithium age estimator, analytic (v1) and neural-network (v2.0), are applied to identical published lithium equivalent widths for Blanco 1, the Pleiades and NGC 2516. In these samples, they agree within their combined 68 per cent uncertainties above 4900 K and within half those uncertainties in the three tested windows above 4700 K. For the cool subsets (at or below 4300 K) the ages differ by 37 to 136 Myr. In Blanco 1, where 2 of 103 cool members have lithium detections above three sigma, the versions agree on detected stars at every tested temperature boundary; this selection does not establish the cause of the difference. In the Pleiades cool members and the NGC 2516 K dwarfs they differ on detected stars too. Extending the cool sample to warmer stars yields agreement only in the Pleiades. The external ages do not settle which version is right: two clusters belong to both calibrations, the Blanco 1 depletion-boundary ages favour the network, and an asteroseismic age for NGC 2516 favours the analytic model for the original samples. For cool-dominated samples in this 60 to 300 Myr comparison, users should report the estimator spread.
Reference Key
openalex_W7225158167 Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
Authors R. Tata, Eduardo Lorenzo Martín Guerrero de Escalante, Eder Martioli, Diego Lorenzo-Oliveira, Junyan Zhang
Are you one of these authors? Claim your profile
Journal monthly notices of the royal astronomical society
Year 2026
DOI
10.1093/mnras/stag2098
URL
https://doi.org/10.1093/mnras/stag2098
Keywords Keywords not found

Citations

No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org

Comments

No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.