Context. The third Data Release of the ESA Gaia mission has provided a large sample of new gravitymode pulsators among which more than 11 600 are  Dor stars. Aims. The goal of the present work is to present the spectroscopic parameters of these  Dor pulsators estimated by the GSPSpec module that analysed millions of Gaia spectra. Such a parametrisation could help confirm their  Dor nature and provide their chemophysical properties. Methods. The Galactic positions kinematics and orbital properties of these new Gaia pulsators were examined in order to define a subsample belonging to the Milky Way thin disc in which these young stars should preferentially be found. The stellar luminosities radii and astrometric surface gravities were estimated without adopting any priors from uncertain stellar evolution models. These parameters combined with the GSPSpec effective temperatures spectroscopic gravities and metallicities were then validated by comparison with recent literature studies. Results. Most stars are found to belong to the Galactic thin disc as expected. It is also found that the derived luminosities radii and astrometric surface gravities are high quality and have values typical of genuine  Dor pulsators. Moreover we show that TSUBeffSUB and MH of pulsators with high enough SN spectra or slow to moderate rotation rates are robust. This allowed to define a subsample of genuine slowrotating Gaia Dor pulsators. Their TSUBeffSUB were found to be between 6500 and 7800 K logg is around 4.2 and the luminosities and stellar radii peak at 5 LSUBSUB and 1.7 RSUBSUB The median metallicity is close to the Solar value although  Dor with higher and lower metallicities by about 0.5 dex were also identified. The Fe content is fully consistent with the chemical properties of the Galactic disc. Conclusions.GaiaDR3 spectroscopic properties of  Dor stars therefore confirm the nature of these pulsators and allow to chemophysically parametrise a new large sample of such stars. Moreover future Gaia data releases should drastically increase the number of  Dor stars with parameters spectroscopically derived with good precision.
['stars: early-type', 'stars: fundamental parameters', 'stars: low-mass', 'stars: variables: general', 'Astrophysics - Solar and Stellar Astrophysics', 'Astrophysics - Astrophysics of Galaxies']
GaiaGSPspec spectroscopic properties of  Doradus pulsators
{'Gaia /GSP-spec spectroscopic properties of γ Doradus pulsators': "P. de Laverny 1 , A. Recio-Blanco 1 , C. Aerts 2 , 3 , 4 , and P.A. Palicio 1  \n- 1 Université Côte d'Azur, Observatoire de la Côte d'Azur, CNRS, Laboratoire Lagrange, Bd de l'Observatoire, CS 34229, 06304 Nice cedex 4, France\n- 2 Institute of Astronomy, KU Leuven, Celestijnenlaan 200D, 3001, Leuven, Belgium\n- 3 Department of Astrophysics, IMAPP, Radboud University Nijmegen, PO Box 9010, 6500 GL Nijmegen, The Netherlands\n- 4 Max Planck Institut für Astronomie, Königstuhl 17, 69117 Heidelberg, Germany  \nReceived ?? ; accepted ??", 'ABSTRACT': 'Context. The third Data Release of the ESA Gaia mission has provided a large sample of new gravity-mode pulsators, among which more than 11,600 are γ Dor stars.  \nAims. The goal of the present work is to present the spectroscopic parameters of these γ Dor pulsators estimated by the the GSP-Spec module that analysed millions of Gaia spectra. Such a parametrisation could help to confirm their γ Dor nature and provide their chemo-physical properties.  \nMethods. The Galactic positions, kinematics, and orbital properties of these new Gaia pulsators were examined in order to define a sub-sample belonging to the Milky Way thin disc, in which these young stars should preferentially be found. The stellar luminosities, radii, and astrometric surface gravities were estimated without adopting any priors from uncertain stellar evolution models. These parameters, combined with the GSP-Spec e ff ective temperatures, spectroscopic gravities, and metallicities were then validated by comparison with recent literature studies.  \nResults. Most stars are found to belong to the Galactic thin disc, as expected. It is also found that the derived luminosities, radii, and astrometric surface gravities are of high quality and have values typical of genuine γ Dor pulsators. Moreover, we have shown that T e ff and [M / H] of pulsators with high enough S / N spectra or slow to moderate rotation rates are robust. This allowed to define a sub-sample of genuine slow-rotating Gaia γ Dor pulsators. Their T e ff are found between ∼ 6,500 and ∼ 7,800 K, log( g ) around 4.2 and luminosities and stellar radii peak at ∼ 5 L ⊙ and ∼ 1.7 L ⊙ , The median metallicity is close to the Solar value, although 0.5 dex more metal-poor and metal-rich γ Dor are identified. The [ α / Fe] content is fully consistent with the chemical properties of the Galactic disc. Conclusions. Gaia / DR3 spectroscopic properties of γ Dor stars therefore confirm the nature of these pulsators and allow to chemophysically parametrise a new large sample of such stars. Moreover, future Gaia data releases should drastically increase the number of γ Dor stars with good-precision spectroscopically derived parameters.  \nKey words. Asteroseismology - Stars: rotation, oscillations (including pulsation), fundamental parameters, abundances - Galaxy: abundances, surveys', '1. Introduction': 'The European Space Agency Gaia mission with the release of its third catalogue (DR3, Gaia Collaboration et al. 2023c) has already revolutionised di ff erent fields of astrophysics. In particular our view of the Milky Way stellar populations is being upgraded substantially (Gaia Collaboration et al. 2023b). Regarding stellar physics and variable stars, Aerts et al. (2023) assessed the fundamental parameters and mode properties of 15,602 newly found Gaia / DR3 gravity-mode ( g -mode hereafter) pulsator candidates, among the more than 100,000 new pulsators along the main sequence identified from their Gaia photometric light-curves by Gaia Collaboration et al. (2023a). These g -mode pulsators are low- and intermediate-mass main-sequence stars (masses between 1.3 and 9 M ⊙ ) and are ideal laboratories for asteroseismology, within the broad landscape of such modern studies (see Aerts 2021; Kurtz 2022, for recent reviews).  \nMeanwhile Hey & Aerts (2024) extracted light curves assembled with the Transiting Exoplanet Survey Satellite (TESS, Ricker et al. 2015) for more than 60,000 of the candidate pulsators discovered by Gaia Collaboration et al. (2023a). They confirmed the pulsational nature for the large majority and found them to be multiperiodic, with about 70% of them even sharing  \nthe same dominant frequency in the totally independent Gaia DR3 and TESS data. By comparing the astrophysical properties of the Gaia g -mode pulsators with those studied asteroseismically from Kepler data by Pedersen et al. (2021, for the B-type stars) and by Van Reeth et al. (2016); Li et al. (2020, for the F-type stars), Aerts et al. (2023) classified them either as Slowly Pulsating B (SPB) or γ Doradus ( γ Dor) candidate stars. Our current work is focused on this last category of pulsating F-type dwarfs, covering masses 1 . 3 M ⊙ < ∼ M < ∼ 1 . 9 M ⊙ . In the Hertzsprung-Russell diagram (HRD), they are found in a rather small main-sequence area (Fritzewski et al. 2024, Fig. 2), close to the cool limit of δ Scuti instability strip (Murphy et al. 2019). However, we do point out that many of the γ Dor stars actually turn out to be hybrid pulsators when observed in highcadence space photometry. Indeed a good fraction of these pulsators exhibit not only high-order g modes, but also acoustic waves known as pressure (or p ) modes (Grigahcène et al. 2010; Hareter et al. 2011; Sánchez Arias et al. 2017; Audenaert & Tkachenko 2022). This makes their instability strip overlap with the one of the δ Scuti stars (Gaia Collaboration et al. 2023a; Hey &Aerts 2024).  \nOne of the new products published with Gaia / DR3 are the stellar atmospheric parameters derived from the analysis of the Gaia / Radial Velocity Spectrometer (RVS) spectra by the DPAC / GSP-Spec module (Recio-Blanco et al. 2023). RVS spectra cover the Ca II IR domain (846-870 nm) and have a resolution around 11,500. By automatically analysing these spectra, Recio-Blanco et al. (2023) parametrised about 5.6 million single low-rotating stars belonging to the FGKM-spectral type. Hotter stars ( T e ff > 8000 K) or highly-rotating stars (more than ∼ 30-50 km.s -1 , depending on the stellar type) were disregarded for the Gaia / DR3 (this will be updated for the next Gaia Data Releases). These limitations come from the adopted reference grids upon which rely the parametrisation algorithms of GSPSpec . The derived stellar atmospheric parameters are: the e ff ective temperature T e ff , the surface gravity log( g ), the global metallicity [M / H], and the enrichment in α -element with respect to iron [ α / Fe]. Moreover, up to 13 individual chemical abundances were also estimated for most of these stars. This analysis led to the first all-sky spectroscopic catalogue and the largest compilation of stellar chemo-physical parameters ever published. Moreover, radial velocities ( V Rad) of about 33 millions stars were published in the DR3 catalogue (Katz et al. 2023). All these data allow to study the Galactic kinematics and orbital properties of this huge number of stars, along with their atmospheric and chemical characteristics, keeping in mind that they belong to various populations in the Milky Way. This multitude of data also facilitates constraining stellar evolution models for a broad range of masses. In particular, the Gaia spectroscopic data give us the opportunity to unravel the properties of di ff erent kinds of variable stars, among which the g -mode pulsators characterised photometrically by Aerts et al. (2023).  \nOne of the main goals of the present study is to apply spectroscopic techniques to characterise the g -mode and hybrid pulsators identified in Aerts et al. (2023) and Hey & Aerts (2024). This perspective adds to their photometrically-deduced properties and may help future asteroseismic modelling of the most promising pulsators. Some contamination by other or additional variability could also occur, such as rotational modulation. This is expected since Gaia Collaboration et al. (2023a) and Aerts et al. (2023) could infer only one secure frequency for many of these 15,602 candidates. Moreover, Hey & Aerts (2024) found a fraction of the g -mode and hybrid pulsators to reveal Ap / Bp characteristics in addition to their pulsational behaviour. Therefore, some of them might be Ap / Bp pulsators with anomalous chemical abundances from spots, as previously found from Kepler space photometry (e.g., Bowman et al. 2018; Henriksen et al. 2023). Gaia / GSP-Spec spectroscopic parameters could therefore help to confirm the nature of these pulsators and facilitate to build sub-catalogues of g -mode and hybrid pulsating stars with respect to their chemical properties. In addition, the main properties of these stars can be constrained from the Gaia spectroscopy and compared with the values deduced from the photometry, such as their e ff ective temperature, surface gravity, luminosities, radius, etc.  \nAnother goal is to explore the metallicity (and, possibly, chemical abundances) of genuine Gaia g -mode and hybrid pulsators. This is an important input for asteroseismic modelling, once a su ffi cient number of oscillation frequencies has been identified(Aerts et al. 2018; Mombarg et al. 2021, 2022). Aside from the Kepler sample of γ Dor pulsators modelled by Li et al. (2020), the confirmed g -mode and hybrid pulsators from Hey & Aerts (2024) are currently under study to derive their global parameters (mass, convective core mass, radius, and evolutionary stage; Mombarg et al., submitted), as well as all their significant  \noscillation mode frequencies from high-cadence TESS photometry. Future studies will point out whether their TESS data allow us to find period spacing patterns to assess their suitability for asteroseismology, as has been possible for γ Dor stars in the TESS Continuous Viewing Zones (Garcia et al. 2022b,a).  \nWe note that the present work focuses only on the γ Dor stars or hybrid pulsators with dominant g modes in the catalogue by Aerts et al. (2023), for several reasons. First, only ∼ 12% of the SPB candidates in that paper have a DR3 radial velocity ( V Rad) and, when available, the associated V Rad uncertainties are quite large, suggesting possible problems in their RVS spectra. Moreover, most of the SPB candidates are too faint to have a high enough S / N to be analysed meaningfully with GSPSpec . Finally, we remind that GSP-Spec was initially constructed to achieve proper parametrisation of slowly-rotating rather cool stars. In particular, the reference training grid does not contain model spectra for stars hotter than T e ff ∼ 8000 K and the lines identified in the stellar spectra are assumed not to be too broadened. These restrictions led to the rejection of A-type or hotter stars and / or to lower quality parametrisation for the fastest rotators, as indicated by specific quality flags (and even rejection for the extreme cases). This is confirmed by examining the few SPB stars with available GSP-Spec parameters: most of them are indeed flagged as doubtful. We therefore postpone the spectroscopic study of these SPB to the next Gaia Data Releases in which the spectral parametrisation of hotter and / or fast rotators, such as many of the γ Dor and SPB pulsators (see Aerts et al. 2019; Li et al. 2020; Pedersen et al. 2021; Aerts 2021, for summaries), will be optimised.  \nThis article is structured as follows. In Sect. 2, we present the sample of γ Dor pulsators with available Gaia spectroscopic data and we study their spatial distribution, kinematics, and orbital properties in the Milky Way. This led to the definition of a sub-sample of stars with very-high probability of being genuine γ Dor stars belonging to the Galactic thin disc. Subsequently, we present in Sect. 3 the physical parameters of the γ Dor candidates analysed by the GSP-Spec module and discuss their properties in Sect. 4. Our conclusions are summarised in Sect. 5.', '2. The Gaia /DR3 spectroscopic sample of γ Dor stars': 'Among the 11,636 γ Dor pulsator candidates presented in Aerts et al. (2023), 4,383 stars (38%) have a published Gaia / DR3 radial velocity (Katz et al. 2023) and only 650 of them are found in the GSP-Spec catalogue. These numbers can be explained by taking into account that (i) 58% of these pulsating stars are too faint for having a high enough S / N spectrum, necessary to estimate their V Rad and / or to be parametrised by GSP-Spec ( G < ∼ 13.5 mag for this later case) and (ii) many of them are too hot, preventing their GSP-Spec parametrisation (see the limitation caused by the reference grid hot boundary, described in the introduction). In the following, we will discuss the Galactic properties of these candidate stars, derived from their available distances and V Rad, in order to define a sub-sample of bona-fide γ Dor stars based only on kinematic and dynamical criteria.', '2.1. Spatial distribution, kinematics, and Galactic orbits': "We derived the spatial (Cartesian coordinates) and kinematic properties of all the 4,383 γ Dor candidate stars from their Gaia coordinates, proper motions and V Rad, adopting the distances of Bailer-Jones et al. (2021). Their Galactic orbital properties (ec-  \nFig. 1. Galactic location of the 2,721 γ Dor candidates with high-quality astrometric and radial velocity data. The Solar position is indicated by the dotted lines. The left panel is a density plot of the whole sample and the middle and right panels colour-code shows their Galactic rotational velocity ( V ϕ ). The right panel illustrates the location of the stars parametrised by GSP-Spec . The domain of shown (R, Z)-values in each panel decreases from left to right.  \n<!-- image -->  \n<!-- image -->  \nFig. 2. Toomre diagrams of the 2,721 γ Dor candidates with highquality astrometric and radial velocity data, colour-coded with their orbital eccentricity. The upper and lower panels show the whole sample and a closer view of the sub-sample of stars parametrised by GSP-Spec , respectively. The dotted lines correspond to a total velocity equal to 50 and 100 km / s with respect to the LSR value.  \n<!-- image -->  \nentricity) were computed as described in Palicio et al. (2023) using the Solar Galactic constants presented in Gaia Collabora-t  \nion et al. (2023b). We also adopted for the LSR velocity of the Sun V LSR = 238.5 km / s.  \nAmong all these stars with Galactic data, 560 were parametrised by GSP-Spec . We note that the parametrisation is available for 90 more stars (see Sect. 3) because GSP-Spec parametrised some spectra whose V Rad was finally not published within Gaia / DR3, hence their Galactic properties were not computed.  \nThe following quality selections were then applied to define a sub-sample of 2,721 stars (405 of them with GSP-Spec parameters) with high-quality Galactic parameters. (1) The best astrometric data were selected thanks to the ruwe parameter ( ruwe < 1.4) and the identification of the non-spurious solutions ( f idelityv 2 > 0.5, Rybizki et al. 2022). This filters out 521 stars. (2) We then rejected 152 stars having a distance uncertainty larger than 10%. (3) The V Rad determination of several of these γ Dor candidates was found to be of poor quality, mostly because of the low S / N of their spectra. We therefore disregarded 1,258 stars having a relative V Rad error larger than 50%.  \nThe Galactic location of this high-quality sub-sample of 2,721 γ Dor candidates with astrometric and V Rad information is presented in Fig.1. The colour-code of the middle and right panels represents their rotational velocity in the Galactic plane ( V ϕ , whose typical value for thin disc stars in the Solar vicinity is around ∼ 240 km / s). In the following, we will adopt for this last quantity the velocity of the LSR at the Sun's position. The location of the same stars in a Toomre diagram, colour-coded with their Galactic orbit eccentricity is shown in Fig.2. The regions enclosed by the circular dotted lines denote those populated by stars with thin disc kinematics, i.e. typical total velocity found within ± 40-50 km / s around the LSR value (see, for instance, Gaia Collaboration et al. 2023b, for more details). From these figures, it is clear that most stars have thin disc kinematics as expected, although some γ Dor candidates belong actually to the Galactic thick disc or halo (low V ϕ -values, high Galactic latitudes, large eccentricities or total velocities). Among those having a total velocity larger than ± 50 km / s compared with the LSR value (i.e. too large velocities for belonging to the thin disc, first dotted line in Fig. 2), very few have published GSP-Spec atmospheric parameters. Their spectra S / N is indeed low (around 25) leading to rather large V Rad uncertainty. Moreover, their rotational rate is high, and their metallicity could be too low for thin disc stars; but, more importantly, the associated [M / H] un-  \nies are very large. All of this reveals that their spectra were probably not properly analysed by GSP-Spec . In any case, the fact of not belonging kinematically to the thin disc is contradictory to our understanding of the evolutionary stage of this class of variable stars and they will be rejected from the studied sample (see below). On the contrary, most of the brightest candidates with GSP-Spec parameters (i.e. with the highest S / N spectra) are found closer to the Galactic plane with kinematics and orbital properties typical of thin disc stars (circular orbits, V ϕ ∼ 215 -260 km / s and / or abs( V Tot -V LSR) < ∼ 25 km / s.", '2.2. γ Dor candidates belonging to the thin disc': 'γ Dor stars are known to be late A- to early F-type stars, located on the main-sequence below the classical instability strip. As already mentioned, they have masses between ∼ 1.3 and ∼ 1.9 M ⊙ (see, for instance, Mombarg et al. 2019; Ouazzani et al. 2019; Fritzewski et al. 2024) and have therefore rather young ages. We refer to Mombarg et al. (2021, see their Fig. 17) who deduced the ages of the 37 best characterised γ Dor stars from asteroseismic modelling of their identified oscillation modes and found ages ranging from ∼ 0.15 up to 2 Gyr. Similarly, Fritzewski et al. (2024) also report asteroseismic ages for 490 γ Dor that are always smaller than 3.0 Gyr, their mean age being close to 1.5 Gyr with a dispersion of 0.5 Gyr. On the contrary, thick disc stars are older than ∼ 8 Gyr (see, for instance, Hayden et al. 2017; SantosPeral et al. 2021; Xiang & Rix 2022) whereas halo stars are even older. Therefore, most of the Galactic γ Dor stars are expected to belong to the thin disc of the Milky Way.  \nOne can thus use the above described kinematic and orbital properties of the candidates from Aerts et al. (2023) to select those with the highest probability of being bona-fide γ Dor pulsators. This is an entirely complementary and independent selection to the one based on the DR3 or TESS light curves. We have therefore selected all the above candidates having a high probability to belong to the thin disc, i.e. those having close to circular orbits (eccentricity lower than 0.2) and ( V Tot -V LSR) < 25 km / s. These kinematic criteria 1 led to the selection of 2,245 γ Dor candidates belonging to the Galactic thin disc (i.e. 83% of the stars with high-quality Galactic parameters), 385 of them having GSP-Spec parameters. This sub-sample, called the Thin Disc -sample hereafter, is discussed below. We can therefore conclude that most stars of the initial sample are thin disc members.', '3. Physical parameters of the γ Dor pulsators': "All the 650 γ Dor pulsators with parameters from GSP-Spec have a published e ff ective temperature ( T e ff ) and a surface gravity (log( g )). In addition, one can also access their global metallicity ([M / H]) and abundances in α -elements with respect to iron ([ α / Fe]) for 602 and 595 of them, respectively. We remind that, within GSP-Spec , [M / H] is estimated from all the available atomic lines in the RVS spectra and is a good proxy of [Fe / H]. Similarly, α -element abundances are derived from all the available lines of any α -elements. The [ α / Fe] abundance ratio is, however, strongly dominated by the huge Ca ii infrared lines that are present in the Gaia / RVS wavelength domain and is thus strongly correlated to [Ca / Fe]. Moreover, because of the complex analysis of these rather hot and, usually, fast-rotating stars, very few other atomic lines are present in their RVS spectra. Therefore, individual chemical abundances were derived for only very few  \ntens of them. Only 20 stars have an estimate of their [Ca / Fe] and the number of stars with other published chemical abundances is even lower. As a consequence, we will only consider hereafter the [ α / Fe] abundance ratio for this γ Dor sample. We calibrated all the above mentioned atmospheric parameters and abundances as a function of T e ff , adopting the prescriptions recommended in Recio-Blanco et al. (2023, 2024). In addition, we remind that, associated to the GSP-Spec parameters, there are several quality flags ( flags\\_gspspec ) that have to be considered to assess the quality of this parametrisation.  \nWe also adopted other parameters derived from the analysis of the RVS spectra. For example, we partially used the Gaia / DR3 spectral type provided by the spectraltype \\_ esphs parameters. In addition, 409 of the GSP-Spec γ Dor candidates have a published line-broadening measurement ( vbroad , related to their rotational velocity, see Frémat et al. 2023), confirming the fast-rotating nature for most of them. We refer to Aerts et al. (2023) for a detailed study of the Gaia vbroad properties of the g -mode pulsators. Even if vbroad was in the end not published for most stars in Gaia / DR3, GSP-Spec has published three quality flags ( vbroadT , vbroadG , vbroadM , see Tab. 2 in RecioBlanco et al. 2023) that depend directly on vbroad (internally delivered within DPAC for the spectra analysis). The possible biases in the GSP-Spec parameters that could be induced by rotational line-broadening can therefore be explored by future users thanks to these three vbroadTGM flags. Contrarily to vbroad , these flags are available for the whole sample and are used below to complement the rotational broadening information, when necessary. In the following and for convenience, all these linebroadening quantities will be referred to as rotational velocities .  \nFinally, we remind that the Gaia / DR3 spectroscopic parameters were derived by the GSP-Spec module by assuming that the rotation rate of the analysed stars are rather low. Therefore, highly rotating stars were rejected: depending on the stellar type, vbroad limitations are around ∼ 30-40 km.s -1 , and the parametrisation quality degrades quickly above ∼ 25 km.s -1 . Because of this parametrisation limitation, we warn the reader that the γ Dor candidates parametrised by GSP-Spec have thus lower rotational velocities than typical values for these variable stars. Indeed, the vbroad distribution of our stars has a mean value around ∼ 25 km.s -1 , associated to a standard deviation equal to ∼ 10 km.s -1 , and a maximum value of 58 km.s -1 . As a comparison, these stars are known to rotate at 40-100 km.s -1 and some can reach up to ∼ 150 km.s -1 , see for instance Gebruers et al. (2021); Aerts et al. (2023). This rotational velocity of the stellar atmosphere is related to the internal rotation rate, as discussed for instance by Li et al. (2020). As a consequence, we are conscious that our sample is biased towards γ Dor with rather low rotation rate, and should therefore not be fully representative of these specific class of variable stars.  \nStellar luminosities and radii: To complement this spectral parametrisation, we computed the luminosity ( L ⋆ ) and radius ( R ⋆ ) for each star. For that purpose, we first estimated the extinction E ( BP -Rp ) in the Gaia bands by subtracting the observed ( BP -Rp ) colour from a theoretical one. The latter was calculated from the GSP-Spec T e ff , log( g ) and [M / H], inverting the Casagrande et al. (2021) relation that predicts stellar colour from atmospheric parameters (see also Sect. 10.2 in Recio-Blanco et al. 2023). This procedure did not converge for a few stars, hence these were rejected hereafter. We then estimated the coe ffi cients kTGMA = AG / E ( BP -Rp ), AG being the absorption in the G -band. These coe ffi cients depend on the four atmospheric parameters and have been estimated thanks  \nto the tables provided with the Gaia stellar parameters 2 . The value of AG then allows to deduce the absolute magnitude in the G -band from the Gaia DR3 G -magnitude and the Bailer-Jones et al. (2021) geometric distances. We derived the luminosities, adopting the bolometric corrections ( BC ) from Casagrande & VandenBerg (2018). We note that the considered relations to estimate kTGMA and BC do not depend on [ α / Fe]. When available, we adopted the relation of Salaris et al. (1993) to include the α -element content into the global metallicity. Finally, thanks to the GSP-Spec T e ff one directly obtains the stellar radius. The quality of these radii simply computed from Gaia photometry, distances and spectroscopic parameters is excellent. We refer to de Laverny et al. (2024, to be submitted) and Recio-Blanco et al. (2024) for a detailed comparison with interferometric and / or asteroseismic radii, that confirmed the high-quality of our R ⋆ estimates. One could then also get the stellar mass ( M ⋆ ) from the surface gravities, but we favoured to fix this quantity thanks to the known typical masses of γ Dor (see below the discussion on the adopted log( g )). For all these parameters, the uncertainties were estimated by performing 1000 Monte-Carlo realisations, propagating the uncertainties on each atmospheric parameters (that reflect the S / N spectra), distance and Gaia magnitudes.  \nE ff ective temperatures: Since γ Dor stars are known to be early-F spectral type and in order to define a sub-sample of high-quality parametrised stars, we first checked their spectral type provided by the Gaia / DR3. Among the 650 candidates parametrised by GSP-Spec , 562, 82 and 6 were found by the DPAC / ESP-HS module to belong to the 'F', 'A' or 'B' spectral types, respectively. The GSP-Spec T e ff also confirmed the too hot temperature with respect to typical γ Dor stars of a few other stars (see, for instance, Van Reeth et al. 2015; Aerts et al. 2023), hence they were filtered out. Moreover, we also found that ∼ 6% of the candidates have a GSP-Spec T e ff much cooler and not compatible with an early spectral type. All the spectra of these outliers su ff er from large V Rad uncertainties and / or very large rotational velocities and / or low S / N that may lead to an erroneous parametrisation. Therefore, all these too cool stars were also rejected. The remaining 598 spectroscopic candidates have a Gaia ( Bp -Rp )0 colour (corrected from extinction by us) fully compatible with their T e ff . The median of their ( Bp -Rp )0 colour is 0.5 and the associated dispersion is found to be extremely small (0.04 mag.), confirming their early F-type nature. These 598 stars will be called F-type GSP-Spec sample, hereafter.  \nStellar surface gravities: Knowing the stellar luminosity, the GSP-Spec e ff ective temperature and adopting a γ Dor typical mass, the surface gravity can simply be estimated for almost all the GSP-Spec pulsators (called log( g )Lum, hereafter). Practically, we randomly chose the mass of each star within the γ Dor mass range 1.3 to 1.9 M ⊙ (see, for instance, Fritzewski et al. 2024), assuming an uniform distribution. The associated mass uncertainty has been fixed to half of this range ( ± 0.3 M ⊙ ). We note that varying the mass over the entire range covered by genuine γ Dor stars changes our log( g )Lum estimates by about 0.1 dex and, thus, do not a ff ect our conclusions. The log( g )Lum uncertainties were computed from 1000 Monte-Carlo realisations, propagating the uncertainties on L ⋆ , T e ff and M ⋆ . We finally point out that 30  \nstars (among the 650) have no log( g )Lum because no extinction was available for them (see above).  \nIt was found that most of these log( g )Lum are in very good agreement with the GSP-Spec log( g ) for stars with a rather low rotational velocity ( vbroad < ∼ 15-20 km / s) or for stars with slightly larger rotational rate but with high S / N spectra ( > ∼ 100). However, larger discrepancies between the two surface gravity estimates are found for the highest rotators and / or stars with low S / N spectra (mean di ff erence of log( gGSP -Spec / g Lum) ∼ 0.35 dex, with a standard deviation of 0.4 dex). This results from the DR3 GSP-Spec pipeline that is optimised for non-rotating stars and some parameter biases could exist for stars with large rotation rates 3  \nIn the following and in order to avoid surface gravities potentially a ff ected by the stellar rotation, we adopted these log( g )Lum and their associated uncertainties. Thanks to this procedure, we have a sub-sample of about 600 γ Dor pulsators with rather accurate surface gravity (found in the range from ∼ 3.5 to ∼ 4.5) and e ff ective temperatures typical of γ Dor stars, according to Van Reeth et al. (2015); Fritzewski et al. (2024). We emphasize that all the above derived quantities do not rely on any stellar isochrones, but only on Gaia astrometric and photometric data and RVS spectra.  \nGlobal metallicities: We simply adopted the GSP-Spec calibrated metallicities for all the γ Dor pulsators having a T e ff and a log( g )Lum, as defined above.  \nParameter uncertainties: The RVS spectra of all these γ Dor pulsators belonging to the F-type GSP-Spec sample have rather low S / N ratios. The median of these S / N is 34 and only 9% of the spectra have a S / N > 100. The resulting median uncertainties 4 on ( T e ff , log( g ), [M / H], L ⋆ , R ⋆ ) are therefore rather high (182 K, 0.13 dex, 0.21 dex, 0.13 L ⊙ , 0.11 R ⊙ ) with a dispersion although still reasonable of (62 K, 0.02 dex, 0.07 dex, 0.07 L ⊙ , 0.04 R ⊙ ).", '4. Properties of the Gaia γ Dor pulsators': "The distribution of the main stellar parameters derived above T e ff , log( g ) (both derived from the spectrum analysis and from the luminosity), [M / H], L ⋆ , and R ⋆ are shown in Fig. 3. In the di ff erent panels of this figure, we considered the sub-sample of 371 slowly-rotating stars belonging to both the F-type GSP-Spec and Thin Disc samples, that is those having e ff ective temperature typical of γ Dor stars and having typical thin disc kinematics as defined in Sect. 2.2. This sub-sample will be called F-type Thin Disc ( FTD ) hereafter. It is shown as light-blue histograms in Fig. 3 and should contain good Gaia γ Dor candidate stars.  \nFor comparison purposes, we have over-plotted in Fig. 3 the parameter distributions derived by three recent studies that provide parameters for large numbers of γ Dor stars. First, Gebruers et al. (2021, red-line distributions in Fig. 3) report T e ff , log( g ) and [M / H] estimated from the analysis of high-resolution spectra ( R ∼ 85,000) for 77 bona-fide γ Dor stars with asteroseismic modelling from Kepler observations. None of these stars were found in the F-type GSP-Spec sample. Secondly, Fritzewski et al. (2024) published luminosities and asteroseismic radii of 490 γ Dor derived from Gaia and Kepler observations. Their parameter distributions are shown  \n<!-- image -->  \n<!-- image -->  \n<!-- image -->  \n<!-- image -->  \n<!-- image -->  \nFig. 3. Distribution of the GSP-Spec γ Dor e ff ective temperatures, luminosities, surface gravities, global metallicities and stellar radii for the F-type Thin Disc ( FTD , light-blue histograms) and High-Quality ( HQ , in dark-blue) sub-samples (see text for details). The red, black and green distributions are for the parameters derived by Gebruers et al. (2021), Aerts et al. (2023) and Fritzewski et al. (2024), respectively, artificially scaled since their statistics di ff er from ours. log( g )GSP -spec refers to the stellar surface gravities derived from the spectra analysis by GSP-Spec whereas log( g )Lum is the estimation from the stellar luminosity, assuming typical γ Dor masses. The number of stars in each panel may di ff er since not all the parameters are available for every sources.  \n<!-- image -->  \nas green lines in Fig. 3. There is only one star of Fritzewski et al. (2024) that was parametrised by GSP-Spec , but it is not included in the F-type GSP-Spec sample because of its too large rotational broadening and associated low-quality flags. Finally, we also show the T e ff , log( g ), L ⋆ and R ⋆ distributions of the γ Dor candidates of (Aerts et al. 2023, black histograms) as another comparison. Some of their stars su ff er from rather large uncertainties on their parameters and we therefore filtered out the stars with T e ff and log( g ) errors larger than 100 K and  \n0.2 dex, respectively, before constructing the black histograms. Moreover, stars with relative uncertainties in L ⋆ and R ⋆ larger than 25% and 50% were also rejected.  \nSome other γ Dor stars were also analysed by highresolution spectroscopy as, for instance, in Tkachenko et al. (2012); Niemczura et al. (2015, 2017). The spectra collected by these authors have a resolution of 32 000, 85 000, and 25 000 / 45 000, respectively, but their sample are much smaller  \nthan ours. None of our stars are found in these samples but one discusses below the atmospheric parameter properties derived by these studies with respect to the GSP-Spec ones (see also the discussion about Fig. 4).  \nRegarding the e ff ective temperatures, it can be seen in Fig. 3 that our T e ff distribution is nearly compatible with the estimates reported in the literature. We do report a large number of cooler γ Dor stars than Gebruers et al. (2021) and Aerts et al. (2023). We checked that most of these cooler stars had bad quality GSP-Spec vbroadTGM flags, meaning that their parametrisation was not optimal because of the broadened lines in their spectra. Moreover, we remind that most RVS γ Dor spectra are of rather low-quality, leading to large T e ff uncertainties. As a consequence, if one selects only the 151 stars belonging to the F-type GSP-Spec sample and having a T e ff error less than 200 K (the mean S / N ratio of the selected spectra is then around 60) plus their three vbroadTGM flags strictly smaller than 2, we then obtain a T e ff distribution fully compatible with the two comparison ones. This High-Quality ( HQ ) sub-sample of γ Dor stars is shown as dark-blue histograms in Fig. 3. Our T e ff distribution is also fully compatible with the ones derived from high-resolution spectroscopy (see above cited references), if one excludes binaries and / or hybrid stars: their T e ff are always found in the ∼ 6700 -∼ 8000 K range.  \nOur stellar luminosity distributions ( FTD and HQ subsamples) are peaked around 5 L ⊙ with few bright stars up to ∼ 25 L ⊙ . They are close to the distribution of the two comparison samples (similar peak in L ⋆ ) although Aerts et al. (2023) and Fritzewski et al. (2024) report a larger number of more luminous stars. We have checked that considering only stars with good Gaia astrometric ruwe parameters ( ruwe < 1.4) in the di ff erent comparison samples (about 10% stars would be rejected) does not modify these distributions. Moreover, we remind that these two other studies computed their stellar luminosity adopting a Gaia / DR3 interstellar reddening that could di ff er from our own absorption estimate. Since we did not find any specific di ff erences between these two reddening flavours, the lack of high-luminosity stars in our sample could be due to selection bias e ff ects: either a lack of too hot and, hence more luminous γ Dor stars, not parametrised by GSP-Spec ; and / or a lack of low surface gravity stars, hence with high-radius and luminosity, as seen in the log( g ) and radius panels of Fig. 4.  \nThe GSP-Spec FTD and Gebruers et al. (2021) spectroscopic surface gravities are in good agreement (left panel, second row in Fig.3). γ Dor surface gravities derived by other analysis of high-resolution spectra studies also agree, although we note that the samples of Niemczura et al. (2015, 2017) have log( g ) within ∼ 3.6-∼ 4.0, i.e. surface gravities slightly smaller than ours and those of Gebruers et al. (2021) that reach up to log( g ) = 4.4. However, more numerous lower gravity values are seen in Fig. 3 compared to Aerts et al. (2023). Such stars with a surface gravity lower than ∼ 3.5 should have left the main sequence (or are close to this evolutionary stage). The agreement between the HQ spectroscopic gravities and those of Aerts et al. (2023) is however excellent, confirming again that low-quality and line-broadened spectra are more di ffi cult to parametrise. Moreover, the results from Aerts et al. (2023) are also in good agreement with our surface gravities estimated from the stellar luminosity (log( g )Lum shown in the right panel, second row) and assuming γ Dor masses in the range 1.3-1.9 M ⊙ . This is quite normal since the Aerts et al. (2023) log( g ) values were estimated  \nFig. 4. Luminosity versus e ff ective temperature diagram of the HQ subsample of γ Dor stars, colour-coded with their global metallicity. Error bars on L ⋆ and T e ff are shown in light-grey and the dotted lines represent the iso-radius relations.  \n<!-- image -->  \nby the DPAC GSP-phot module (Andrae et al. 2023) from the luminosity, T e ff and stellar isochrones, a rather similar method to ours, except for using isochrones. From these di ff erent comparisons, we conclude that γ Dor surface gravities derived from the stellar luminosity and assuming typical γ Dor masses should be preferred over the spectroscopic ones because of the di ffi culty to analyse spectra of fast-rotating stars, except if one considers the HQ stars for which the spectroscopic gravities are excellent.  \nAs for the γ Dor stars' mean metallicities, our FTD sample covers a larger range in [M / H] than the comparison samples. More importantly, it reveals an excess of low-[M / H] stars with respect to the spectroscopic sample of Gebruers et al. (2021). The latter peaks around -0.2 dex, whereas ours peaks at about -0.7 dex. We note that the confirmed γ Dor of Tkachenko et al. (2012) with parameters derived from high-resolution spectra have [M / H] that cover a distribution close to the one of Gebruers et al. (2021). We remind that such low-metallicities are not expected to be numerous for thin disc stars. This shift towards lower metallicities could again be partially explained by the stellar rotation and / or low-quality RVS spectra, as it might induce a bias in the parametrisation. Again, rejecting such complex spectra and considering HQ sub-sample stars with a [M / H] uncertainty less than 0.25 dex leads to a metallicity distribution that is more compatible with Gebruers et al. (2021). We still have however more stars with higher and lower metallicities than them by about ± 0.5dex. They could be present since our sample has a larger spatial coverage in the Milky Way.  \nFinally, the compared stellar radius FTD and HQ distributions are in very good agreement with the asteroseismic radii determined by Fritzewski et al. (2024), which are expected to be the most accurate ones. The spectroscopic radii, whatever the sample considered, are indeed very well representative of  \nFig. 5. Distribution of the HQ sub-sample of γ Dor stars in the [ α / Fe] versus [M / H] plane. Only stars with an uncertainty smaller than 0.15 dex in [ α / Fe] are shown. The Solar location is indicated by the intersection of the dotted lines.  \n<!-- image -->  \nthose expected for γ Dor stars. Our radius median value is close to 1.7 R ⊙ and 90% of the sample is found in the range 1.35 2.35 R ⊙ . The largest stars in our sample have R ∼ 3 . 5 -4 R ⊙ , so they must be rather close to leave the main-sequence, which is confirmed by their e ff ective temperatures and high luminosities ( T e ff ≃ 7000 K and L ≃ 25 L ⊙ ).  \nIn summary, our reported T e ff , log( g ), [M / H], L ⋆ and R ⋆ are in very good agreement with recent literature values, in particular when considering the High-Quality sub-sample defined by selecting high-quality spectra or low-rotating stars. Furthermore, our L ⋆ , log( g )Lum, and R ⋆ values are trustworthy, even without considering the membership of the Galactic thin disc as an extra good measure of the star being a genuine γ Dor pulsator and / or their spectra properties.  \nMoreover, since we have shown that the agreement on the e ff ective temperature and mean metallicity is improved by selecting high-quality S / N stellar spectra or stars without large rotational broadening velocities, we show these HQ γ Dor stars in a luminosity - e ff ective temperature diagram (Fig. 4), colourcoded with their metallicity. This figure is similar to those found in the literature, as for example in Niemczura et al. (2015, 2017); Tkachenko et al. (2012); Gebruers et al. (2021). Excluding binaries and hybrid stars, all our γ Dor stars are very well concentrated in the same small region of the L -T e ff diagram (or log( g )-T e ff , in some of the above cited works). We note that there is no γ Dor stars in this figure with T e ff hotter than ∼ 7750 K 5 . This bias is caused by the GSP-Spec parametrisation that was optimised for FGKM-type stars (we recall that the reference grid is based on spectra models cooler than 8000 K). We therefore cannot exclude that hotter γ Dor could exist but they were rejected during the parameterisation (this will be updated for Gaia / DR4).  \nTable 1. GSP-Spec parameters of the High-Quality γ Dor stars.  \nFinally, it can be seen in Fig.4 that more metal-rich γ Dor are found at higher T e ff , whatever their luminosity is. This could be partly due to some possible parametrisation biases: for instance, metal-poor hot star spectra show very few lines and are thus more di ffi cult to parameterise particularly when their rotation rate is high, explaining probably the absence of such stars in the present sample. But this could also be real and could be a signature of the di ff erent evolution of stars with slightly di ff erent masses and metallicity. For instance, by exploring BaSTI evolutionary tracks (Pietrinferni et al. 2021), it can be seen that metalrich γ Dor stars with masses around 1.6-1.9 M ⊙ appear hotter than lower mass ( ∼ 1.3 M ⊙ ) more metal-poor stars. More specifically, we have estimated that a di ff erence of ∼ 0.3 M ⊙ implies a shift in T e ff of similar amplitude as a di ff erence of ∼ 0.7 dex in metallicity. This rather well corresponds to what is seen in Fig.4.  \nThe same HQ sub-sample but filtering out stars with [ α / Fe] uncertainty greater than 0.15 dex is plotted in an [ α / Fe] versus [M / H] diagram in Fig. 5. Such a filtering again reduces the number of stars but reveals more accurate chemo-physical properties of γ Dor pulsators. We remind that only the global [ α / Fe] abundances (which is a good indicator of [Ca / Fe] for RVS spectra) of these γ Dor stars parametrised by Gaia GSP-Spec are available in the DR3 catalogue because of too low statistics of individual chemical abundances (see above). Fig. 5 confirms that the selected sample has chemical properties consistent with the Galactic disc population, that is a constant decrease of [ α / Fe] with the metallicity for [M / H] > -1.0 dex. Moreover, since the membership of most of these stars to the thin disc was based on purely kinematics and dynamical criteria, such a [ α / Fe] versus [M / H] trend is an independent proof that the chemo-physical properties of the γ Dor pulsators can be safely adopted.  \nThus, the GSP-Spec / DR3 analysis of γ Dor pulsators provides useful physical and / or chemical parameters once an optimized filtering of the poorly parametrised spectra (low S / N or too fast rotating stars) is performed. The parameters of these HQ γ Dor stars are provided in an electronic table which content is presented in Table. 1.", '5. Conclusions': "Wehave studied the Gaia / DR3spectroscopic parameters derived from the analysis of the RVS spectra for the large sample of γ Dor candidate pulsators composed by Aerts et al. (2023) and confirmed in Hey & Aerts (2024). About 38% of these stars have a published radial velocity and ∼ 6% of them were actually anal-  \nd by the GSP-Spec module in charge to analyse their Gaia spectra.  \nThanks to the available V Rad and astrometric Gaia information, we have been able to compute kinematics and orbital information for all these stars. This allowed us to identify that 2,245 of them (i.e. most of the candidates with high-quality kinematics) belong to the thin disc of the Milky Way, which is expected since these gravity mode pulsator should have typical ages lower than 2-3 Gyr.  \nWe then computed their luminosity and stellar radius from Gaia astrometric and photometric data, adopting the GSP-Spec e ff ective temperature and without considering any stellar evolutionary models or isochrone priors. A comparison with recently published values of well studied γ Dor stars reveals that the derived luminosities, stellar surface gravities derived from L ⋆ and assuming typical γ Dor masses, as well as the stellar radii, are of high quality. Moreover, a strict filtering rejecting stars with large T e ff uncertainty (caused by too low S / N RVS spectra) or high rotational velocity led to pulsators with the best derived parameters, including T e ff , [M / H], and [ α / Fe]. All of these observables were found to be fully consistent with typical values of genuine slowly-rotating γ Dor pulsators. Indeed, the GSP-Spec High-Quality γ Dor stars have e ff ective temperatures between ∼ 6,500 and ∼ 7,800 K and surface gravities around 4.2. Their luminosities and stellar radii peak at ∼ 5 L ⊙ and ∼ 1.7 L ⊙ , whereas their metallicity distribution is centered close to the Solar value, covering the range [-0.5, + 0.5] dex. Their [ α / Fe] properties is consistent with the chemical properties of the Galactic disc population. We note that the final number of parametrised stars is smaller compared to the initial sample because of the low S / N spectra of many of them, together with the fact that most of them are fast rotator for which the GSPSpec analysis pipeline was not optimised for the Gaia / DR3. Anyway, the number of newly spectroscopically parametrised γ Dor presented in this work is about a factor two larger than in previous studies.  \nFinally, it can be concluded that the GSP-Spec analysis of γ Dor stars provides a significant added value to the study of these gravity-mode pulsators, delivering their physical and chemical properties. This will be even more important with the future Gaia data releases for which the RVS spectra S / N values and the number of analysed stars will be significantly increased. Indeed, it is expected that the S / N increase between DR3 spectra and those released in DR4 and DR5 will correspond to a factor √ 2 and 2, respectively. Moreover, it is also anticipated that the analysis of fast-rotating stars by the GSP-Spec module will be improved by considering reference grids of synthetic spectra representative of a wide variety of stellar rotational values, contrarily to the present study that is biased towards slowly-rotating γ Dor. Finally, hot star spectra will also be considered for reference, allowing a better parametrisation for stars with high T e ff . These anticipated future improved analyses of gravity-mode pulsators performed by the GSP-Spec module will therefore be of prime interest as input for asteroseismology of such stars. They will indeed allow to define a much larger and thus more statistically significant number of bona-fide γ Dor stars with physical and chemical properties. Furthermore, they will also allow to study the spectroscopic parameters of hotter gravity-mode pulsator, such as the Slowly Pulsating B stars with the aim to improve their asteroseismic modelling (Pedersen et al. 2021).  \nAcknowledgements. This work has made use of data from the European Space Agency (ESA) mission Gaia (https: // www.cosmos.esa.int / gaia), processed by the Gaia Data Processing and Analysis Consortium (DPAC,  \nhttps: // www.cosmos.esa.int / web / gaia / dpac / consortium). Funding for the DPAC has been provided by national institutions, in particular the institutions participating in the Gaia Multilateral Agreement.  \nThis work has also made use of the SIMBAD database, operated at CDS, Strasbourg, France (Wenger et al. 2000), the IPython package (Pérez & Granger 2007), NumPy (Harris et al. 2020), Matplotlib (Hunter 2007), Pandas and TOPCAT (Taylor 2005). PdL and ARB acknowledge funding from the European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation program under SPACE-H2020 grant agreement number 101004214: EXPLORE project. CA acknowledges funding from the European Research Council (ERC) under the Horizon Europe programme (Synergy Grant agreement number 101071505: 4D-STAR project). While partially funded by the European Union, views and opinions expressed are however those of the authors only and do not necessarily reflect those of the European Union or the European Research Council. Neither the European Union nor the granting authority can be held responsible for them. Finally, we are grateful to the anonymous referee for their constructive remarks.", 'References': "Aerts, C. 2021, Reviews of Modern Physics, 93, 015001 Aerts, C., Mathis, S., & Rogers, T. M. 2019, ARA&A, 57, 35 Aerts, C., Molenberghs, G., & De Ridder, J. 2023, A&A, 672, A183 Aerts, C., Molenberghs, G., Michielsen, M., et al. 2018, ApJS, 237, 15 Andrae, R., Fouesneau, M., Sordo, R., et al. 2023, A&A, 674, A27 Audenaert, J. & Tkachenko, A. 2022, A&A, 666, A76  \n- Bailer-Jones, C. A. L., Rybizki, J., Fouesneau, M., Demleitner, M., & Andrae,\n- R. 2021, AJ, 161, 147  \nBowman, D. M., Buysschaert, B., Neiner, C., et al. 2018, A&A, 616, A77  \nCasagrande, L., Lin, J., Rains, A. D., et al. 2021, MNRAS, 507, 2684  \nCasagrande, L. & VandenBerg, D. A. 2018, MNRAS, 479, L102  \nFrémat, Y., Royer, F., Marchal, O., et al. 2023, A&A, 674, A8  \nFritzewski, D. J., Aerts, C., Mombarg, J. S. G., Gossage, S., & Van Reeth, T.  \n- 2024, A&A, 684, A112 Gaia Collaboration, De Ridder, J., Ripepi, V., et al. 2023a, A&A, 674, A36 Gaia Collaboration, Recio-Blanco, A., Kordopatis, G., et al. 2023b, A&A, 674, A38  \nGaia Collaboration, Vallenari, A., Brown, A. G. A., et al. 2023c, A&A, 674, A1 Garcia, S., Van Reeth, T., De Ridder, J., & Aerts, C. 2022a, A&A, 668, A137 Garcia, S., Van Reeth, T., De Ridder, J., et al. 2022b, A&A, 662, A82 Gebruers, S., Straumit, I., Tkachenko, A., et al. 2021, A&A, 650, A151 Grigahcène, A., Antoci, V., Balona, L., et al. 2010, ApJ, 713, L192 Hareter, M., Fossati, L., Weiss, W., et al. 2011, ApJ, 743, 153 Harris, C. R., Millman, K. J., van der Walt, S. J., et al. 2020, Nature, 585, 357 Hayden, M. R., Recio-Blanco, A., de Laverny, P., Mikolaitis, S., & Worley, C. C.  \n2017, A&A, 608, L1  \nHenriksen, A. I., Antoci, V., Saio, H., et al. 2023, MNRAS, 520, 216  \nHey, D. & Aerts, C. 2024, A&A, 688, A93  \nHunter, J. D. 2007, Computing In Science & Engineering, 9, 90  \nKahraman, A., avuš, F., Poretti, E., et al. 2020, in Stars and their Variability  \nObserved from Space, ed. C. Neiner, W. W. Weiss, D. Baade, R. E. Gri  \nffi  \nn,  \n- C. C. Lovekin, & A. F. J. Mo ff at, 103-104  \nKatz, D., Sartoretti, P., Guerrier, A., et al. 2023, A&A, 674, A5  \nKurtz, D. W. 2022, ARA&A, 60, 31  \nLi, G., Van Reeth, T., Bedding, T. R., et al. 2020, MNRAS, 491, 3586  \n- Mombarg, J. S. G., Dotter, A., Rieutord, M., et al. 2022, ApJ, 925, 154 Mombarg, J. S. G., Van Reeth, T., & Aerts, C. 2021, A&A, 650, A58\n- Mombarg, J. S. G., Van Reeth, T., Pedersen, M. G., et al. 2019, MNRAS, 485, 3248\n- Murphy, S. J., Hey, D., Van Reeth, T., & Bedding, T. R. 2019, MNRAS, 485, 2380  \nNiemczura, E., Murphy, S. J., Smalley, B., et al. 2015, MNRAS, 450, 2764 Niemczura, E., Poli'nska, M., Murphy, S. J., et al. 2017, MNRAS, 470, 2870 Ouazzani, R. M., Marques, J. P., Goupil, M. J., et al. 2019, A&A, 626, A121 Palicio, P. A., Recio-Blanco, A., Poggio, E., et al. 2023, A&A, 670, L7 Pedersen, M. G., Aerts, C., Pápics, P. I., et al. 2021, Nature Astronomy, 5, 715 Pérez, F. & Granger, B. E. 2007, Computing in Science and Engineering, 9, 21 Pietrinferni, A., Hidalgo, S., Cassisi, S., et al. 2021, ApJ, 908, 102 Recio-Blanco, A., de Laverny, P., Palicio, P. A., et al. 2024, arXiv e-prints,  \n- arXiv:2402.01522 Recio-Blanco, A., de Laverny, P., Palicio, P. A., et al. 2023, A&A, 674, A29 Ricker, G. R., Winn, J. N., Vanderspek, R., et al. 2015, Journal of Astronomical Telescopes, Instruments, and Systems, 1, 014003  \nRybizki, J., Green, G. M., Rix, H.-W., et al. 2022, MNRAS, 510, 2597  \nSalaris, M., Chie  \nffi  \n, A., & Straniero, O. 1993, ApJ, 414, 580  \nSánchez Arias, J. P., Córsico, A. H., & Althaus, L. G. 2017, A&A, 597, A29  \nSantos-Peral, P., Recio-Blanco, A., Kordopatis, G., Fernández-Alvar, E., & de  \nLaverny, P. 2021, A&A, 653, A85  \n- Taylor, M. B. 2005, in Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series, Vol. 347, Astronomical Data Analysis Software and Systems XIV, ed. P. Shopbell, M. Britton, & R. Ebert, 29\n- Tkachenko, A., Lehmann, H., Smalley, B., Debosscher, J., & Aerts, C. 2012, MNRAS, 422, 2960  \nVan Reeth, T., Tkachenko, A., & Aerts, C. 2016, A&A, 593, A120 Van Reeth, T., Tkachenko, A., Aerts, C., et al. 2015, ApJS, 218, 27 Wenger, M., Ochsenbein, F., Egret, D., et al. 2000, A&AS, 143, 9 Xiang, M. & Rix, H.-W. 2022, Nature, 603, 599"}