Notes. Clusters from literature catalogs are listed in this table if their overlap is at least 10% of the respective smaller cluster. For example, if the disk stream size is 300 and a given literature cluster has 150 members, their combined overlap must equal or exceed 15. We additionally impose a minimum overlap size of 10 to exclude chance alignments between unrelated clusters. ^(a)The "size" reports the absolute number of sources in respective literature searches. ^(b)The "shared" column reports the size of the intersection/overlap between sources from our selection and the corresponding literature catalog cluster. ^(c)The "gain" column shows how much our survey increases source counts compared to a specific literature catalog. It compares our group size to the intersection size, representing confirmed samples in the literature. The gain is always greater than one and adjusts for potential contamination in the literature sample (see Fig. 5). This statistic becomes meaningful under the assumption of low contamination in our sample. ^(d)The column “f_C” reports an estimation of the completeness fraction (in %) of our sample based on a given reference sample from the literature. We compute the completeness f_C by first considering the incompleteness fraction (1 − f_C). We define incompleteness as the number of literature sources we are unable to find divided by the union of our sample and the literature sample. The union provides an estimate of the total number of potential cluster members relative to a given literature selection. Note, however, that the incompleteness fraction is only meaningful as a comparison metric as it depends heavily on the quality of the literature selection and does not take into account the reference’s contamination and completeness.^(e) (contaminated) The corresponding literature cluster partially overlaps with our selection but appears to be (sometimes significantly) contaminated or describes a (sometimes vastly) different stellar population. See examples in Fig. 5. ^(f)(merge proposed) Several literature clusters suggest that our selection of two disk streams (SI, S4, and S12) should actually be split into multiple clusters. Analyzing the 3D velocity and HRD distribution of these stream fragments (see Ratzenböck et al. in prep), we conclude that these fragments likely correspond to the same stream and should thus not be separated.