ner_tags: O O O O O O B-Formula I-Formula I-Formula O O O O B-Wavelength I-Wavelength I-Wavelength I-Wavelength O O O O O O O O O B-CelestialObject O O O B-Wavelength I-Wavelength I-Wavelength O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B-Wavelength O B-Wavelength I-Wavelength O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B-Wavelength I-Wavelength I-Wavelength O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B-CelestialObject O B-CelestialObject O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B-Formula I-Formula I-Formula O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B-Formula I-Formula I-Formula O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B-Instrument O O B-Instrument O O B-CelestialObject B-Formula I-Formula I-Formula B-Formula I-Formula I-Formula I-Formula I-Formula O B-CelestialObject B-Formula I-Formula I-Formula B-Formula I-Formula I-Formula I-Formula I-Formula O O O O O O O O O O B-Instrument O O O O O O O O B-Citation I-Citation I-Citation I-Citation I-Citation I-Citation O O O O O O O B-Wavelength I-Wavelength I-Wavelength O O B-Instrument O O O O O O O O O O O B-Wavelength I-Wavelength I-Wavelength O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B-Dataset I-Dataset O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B-Formula I-Formula I-Formula O O O O O O O O O O O O O
tokens: members. These stars were classified as [Fe/H] ∼ −3.0 from measurements of the Ca ii K line. It appears that the strong carbon enhancement of these Sculptor members biased the Ca ii K metallicities in lower-resolution spectra (see Section 5.2 ). For each star in Table 5 , we derived a Mg abundance from the 5172.7 and 5183.6 Å lines if the S/N was sufficiently high. Then, we compared the derived [Mg/Fe] ratio of these stars to the expected [Mg/Fe] ratio for dwarf galaxy stars in their metallicity regime. We would expect to see systematically higher [Mg/Fe] values if the Ca ii K–based metallicities were biased lower, such as in the case of stars with high A(C) values. We consider two examples: stars 10_7_442 and 10_8_1226 have carbon abundances close to the CEMP threshold and Mg line equivalent widths in the linear regime of the curve of growth (reduced equivalent widths ≲−4.45). For these two stars, we measure [Mg/Fe] values of 0.23 and 0.17, respectively. These [Mg/Fe] ratios are roughly at the lower end of the regime of what is expected for dwarf galaxy stars at these metallicities. This suggests that we are not strongly underestimating our [Fe/H] measurements for stars that are near the CEMP threshold. If we include stars from Table 5 with Mg line equivalent width measurements in the nonlinear regime of the curve of growth at face value and adopt the M2FS metallicities and carbon abundances when available, the average [Mg/Fe] of stars with [C/Fe] > 0.50 is 0.43. This [Mg/Fe] ratio is also in the regime of expected values. As mentioned, if the metallicities were substantially underestimated, we would expect to get much larger [Mg/Fe] values. For comparison, all the CEMP-s candidates have [Mg/Fe] ≳ 1.0 if we take the KP-based [Fe/H] measurements at face value. While these Mg abundance estimates may have large uncertainties (up to ∼0.4 dex, as is expected for data of this quality), they suggest that we are not strongly biased in our metallicity estimates for stars without copious carbon enhancement. We also compared our observed MagE spectra to MIKE spectra of CS22892-52 ([Fe/H] = −3.16; T eff = 4690 K) and HD122563 ([Fe/H] = −2.93; T eff = 4500 K) that had been degraded to match the resolution of the MagE data. Measurements of these standard stars are from Roederer et al. ( 2014 ). We find that the strengths of the Mg b lines observed with MagE appear to be roughly consistent with what is expected from our Ca ii K derived metallicities. Thus, only stars with very strong carbon enhancement are incorrectly selected into our M2FS sample. These stars are overwhelmingly likely to have their carbon abundance elevated by accretion from a binary companion (see Figure 10 ) and should already be excluded in a calculation of the CEMP fraction. This confirms that our selection is not biased in favor of CEMP-no stars. Below a fiducial metallicity of [Fe/H] ∼ −3.0 and after excluding CEMP-s, Ba-strong, and CH-strong stars, we can reasonably assume that