Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 7 minor 65 references

The fulcrum wavelength of young stellar objects -- the case of LRLL 31

T0 review · 3 major / 7 minor · reviewed 2026-08-14 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read This paper argues that see-saw mid-infrared variability in young stars comes from a variable-height inner rim, and that a single fulcrum wavelength appears only for highly inclined discs, with the pivot set mainly by the flaring exponent β.

desk verdict A clean mid-IR see-saw pivot in a YSO requires a near-edge-on sightline and the pivot wavelength is set mainly by the disc's vertical density profile; worth a careful referee, though the pivot detection is by eye. read the letter →

arxiv 1908.08703 v1 pith:53ZF5LF6 submitted 2019-08-23 astro-ph.EP

Geoffrey R. Bryan , Sarah T. Maddison , Kurt Liffman This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.EP
keywords youngstellarobjectsmid-infraredvariabilitysee-sawSEDvariationsfulcrumwavelengthpuffedinnerrimdiscinclinationflaringradiativetransfermodelling
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

The paper tries to explain why some young stellar objects show a 'see-saw' in their mid-infrared spectrum: when flux shortward of a pivot wavelength rises, flux longward of it falls, over weeks to years. Using LRLL 31 as the exemplar, it argues that this behaviour is caused by an optically thick, axisymmetric inner rim at the dust sublimation radius whose height inflates and deflates, casting a shadow that cools the outer disc. The key new claim is that a single, clean fulcrum wavelength only appears when the disc is viewed at high inclination (roughly 74–82°), because only then does the line of sight intersect the puffed rim; previous work had not tied the fulcrum to inclination. The paper also shows that the pivot's position is most sensitive to the vertical density exponent β, with flatter discs (β<1.2) placing the fulcrum beyond the 10 μm silicate feature. If right, the fulcrum becomes a cheap diagnostic of both disc orientation and flaring in unresolved young stellar objects.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the puffed, optically thick inner rim of the accretion disc at the dust sublimation radius, modelled with a Gaussian bump on the scale height $H_{\mathrm{rim}}(R)=h(R)[1+H_{\mathrm{puff}}\exp(-((R-R_{\mathrm{rim}})/R_L)^2)]$ (Eq. 8). As $H_{\mathrm{puff}}$ varies, the rim alternately adds short-wavelength wall emission and shadows the outer disc, producing the see-saw. The second piece of machinery is the parametric density law $\rho(R,z)=\rho_0(1-\sqrt{R_\star/R})(R_\star/R)^\alpha \exp(-\tfrac{1}{2}[z/h(R)]^2)$ with scale height $h(R)=h_0(R/R_\star)^\beta$; the vertical flaring exponent $\beta$ is the control parameter that moves the fulcrum, because it sets how quickly the disc rises out of the rim's shadow. The inclination sweep completes the mechanism: only when the line of sight intersects the rim and disc (i≳74°) does the photospheric contribution drop out fast enough to leave one clean pivot rather than a family of crossings.

What would settle it

Directly measure the inclination of a see-saw variable by resolving its disc (e.g. with ALMA or scattered-light imaging) and check whether every object with a clean fulcrum sits above about 70°—a fulcrum seen in a disc known to be near face-on would refute the claim. Alternatively, measure β from resolved images of a sample of see-saw variables and test the predicted ordering: λf>10 μm should occur only for β<1.2.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On the paper's own terms, the discovery is a two-part causal link. First, the see-saw SED variability seen in objects like LRLL 31 is the shadow play of a puffed, optically thick inner rim: as the rim height grows, it intercepts more stellar light, radiates more short-wavelength flux, and casts a longer shadow that chills the outer disc, so the long-wavelength flux drops. Second, a single fulcrum wavelength λf is not a generic property of that mechanism—it emerges only for inclinations where the line of sight grazes or cuts through the disc surface, around 74°–82° in the models, and it disappears at low inclination where the varying curves cross over a band of wavelengths instead. Parametrically varying the inner rim radius, the radial density exponent α, and the vertical density exponent β, the paper finds that λf responds most strongly to β: for β<1.2 the fulcrum sits beyond the 10 μm silicate feature, while more flared discs pivot at shorter wavelengths. The observed λf≈8.5 μm for LRLL 31 is reproduced with a gapped disc at i≈75.5° and β=1.25, and the paper concludes that accretion-rate changes alone cannot produce the see-saw.

Load-bearing premise

The model assumes the see-saw is caused by an optically thick, axisymmetric inner rim whose height changes while every other disc property stays fixed, and that LRLL 31 really is viewed at i>70°; if the variability comes from a non-axisymmetric cloud, a warp, or accretion-heating changes, or if the inclination is lower, the predicted fulcrum diagnostics need not hold.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • A single clean fulcrum wavelength in a YSO mid-infrared SED becomes a practical marker for a nearly edge-on disc, since low-inclination models produce no unique pivot.
  • The measured λf can be read as a flaring diagnostic: a pivot beyond 10 μm implies a flatter disc with β<1.2, while a pivot near 7–8 μm implies a more flared disc.
  • Accretion-rate variability, although present in LRLL 31, cannot by itself generate see-saw SED changes; monitoring programs should look for rim-height changes instead.
  • The presence or absence of an inner gap of order 1–15 au hardly moves the pivot (about 0.2 μm), so the fulcrum constrains the inner rim and flaring, not gap structure.
  • If disc inclinations are roughly isotropic, only about 10% of similar classical T Tauri stars should display a fulcrum—those seen in the narrow 74°–82° window.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • A natural extension is to use λf as a quick-look orientation and flaring classifier for large mid-infrared variability surveys, before expensive imaging resolves the disc.
  • If the axisymmetric-rim picture is right, see-saw variables whose pivots lie longward of 10 μm should, when resolved in scattered light, show systematically flatter disc profiles than those pivoting shortward of 10 μm.
  • The model also predicts that non-axisymmetric occulters (clouds, warps, companions) should blur or destroy the single pivot, so the sharpness of λf could be used to discriminate occulter geometry.
  • Polarimetric monitoring during a see-saw cycle would give an independent test: if the rim height is the driver, polarization should modulate as the line of sight passes through denser disc material at high inclination.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 7 minor

Summary. The paper uses Monte Carlo radiative transfer simulations (Hochunk3D) of the pre-transition disc of LRLL 31 to study the conditions under which the mid-infrared SED of a young stellar object exhibits a single 'fulcrum wavelength' λf, about which the flux pivots as the height of the optically thick inner rim changes. Varying the rim height, disc inclination, accretion rate, inner rim temperature/radius, radial density exponent α, vertical density exponent β, and the presence of a 1–15 au gap, the authors find that a single λf appears only for disc inclinations above roughly 70° when the line of sight grazes or intersects the disc; that λf is most sensitive to β, with flatter discs (β<1.2) placing λf beyond the 10 μm silicate feature; and that the observed λf≈8.5 μm of LRLL 31 can be approximately reproduced.

Significance. The paper addresses a previously open question—what determines the existence and position of a single see-saw pivot in YSO SEDs—and offers a falsifiable diagnostic: detection of a clean mid-infrared fulcrum indicates a nearly edge-on disc, and its wavelength constrains the vertical density profile. Strengths include the use of a parametric radiative transfer code with parameters anchored in the literature, an emergent (not fitted) λf, and a broad parameter sweep. The central claims are plausible and interesting; however, the lack of a quantitative fulcrum definition and the reliance on a single inclination for the β-sensitivity claim currently leave the main conclusions under-supported.

major comments (3)
  1. [§3.1, §2.2 (Figs 3–5, 10)] The identification of a 'single fulcrum wavelength' is done by eye; no quantitative criterion (e.g., a tolerance on the scatter of pairwise SED intersections, or a fitting procedure) is specified, so the threshold i≈70–74° between 'no fulcrum' and 'fulcrum' is arbitrary. Because conclusions (i) and (vi) are statements about a family of SEDs sharing one intersection point, please define λf operationally and apply the definition uniformly to all runs.
  2. [§3.5, Fig. 11(b)] The claim that λf is most strongly influenced by β is based on simulations at a single inclination i=75.5°, and the extreme grid point β=1.0 yields λf≈28 μm with no demonstration that a single, well-defined fulcrum actually exists there. Please show λf(β) for several inclinations, include the scatter or uncertainty in the inferred λf, and address how the noise noted for i>82° in §3.1 is handled.
  3. [§2 (Eqs 1, 2, 8) and §4.1] The high-inclination requirement is derived under the assumption that the variability is caused by an axisymmetric, optically thick inner rim of variable height. The paper states this assumption but does not discuss how the diagnostic would change if the occulter were non-axisymmetric (e.g., a magnetospheric warp or an azimuthally confined cloud) or if accretion-heating variations contributed. Since the conclusion 'a fulcrum only occurs for high inclinations' is the paper's headline new claim, please add a discussion of the model-dependence and, if feasible, test a non-axisymmetric perturbation to bound the applicability.
minor comments (7)
  1. [§2.1] The text 'We, however, adopt a lower value of M⋆ = 0.01 M⊙' should be 'Mdisc = 0.01 M⊙', since M⋆ is already given as the stellar mass 1.6 M⊙.
  2. [§3.3] The sentence 'as one increases the temperature of the inner rim, λf .' is incomplete; presumably λf decreases.
  3. [Fig. 7 caption] The caption says λf is shown 'as a function of Trim', but the plotted axis appears to be inclination; please clarify the caption and axes.
  4. [§4.1] The estimated fraction f = 82°−74°/82° should be written as (82°−74°)/82° to avoid ambiguity.
  5. [Table 4, Sim. 4] The entry '14.0 0 0 0' is difficult to parse; state explicitly that a single gap width δR=14 au was used.
  6. [§4.2] The sentence 'The YSO's SED can be approximately decomposed...' contains garbled text ('cˆa˘A´Zs'); fix the encoding.
  7. [Conclusion (ii)] The upper bound i<85° is inconsistent with the statement in §3.1 that simulations become noisy above i≈82°; qualify the upper limit accordingly.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the fulcrum-wavelength results are emergent outputs of radiative-transfer simulations with literature-based inputs; the only self-citation is non-load-bearing.

full rationale

The paper does not derive lambda_f from a fitted constant or define it in terms of a parameter being predicted. The parametric study varies H_puff, inclination, accretion rate, inner rim temperature, gap width, alpha, and beta, and then identifies lambda_f as the crossing point of the computed SED family; the observed lambda_f = 8.5 um is used only as a comparison value (Section 3.4), and the gap width is taken from Espaillat et al. (2012) and Pinilla et al. (2014), not fit to lambda_f. The central claims -- that a single fulcrum appears only for i > 70 deg and that lambda_f is most sensitive to beta -- are emergent outputs of the Monte Carlo radiative transfer, not restatements of the assumed geometry. The only self-citation is Liffman et al. (2019), used for R_trunc and B_star values in Table 2; R_trunc is not varied in the simulations and does not enter the lambda_f or inclination conclusions, so it is not load-bearing. The absence of a quantitative algorithm for identifying a 'single' fulcrum is a methodological caveat about the visual classification of crossing points, not a circularity: the classification is applied to simulation output rather than imposed as an input.

Assumptions & free parameters 7 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The model freely adopts several parameters from the literature or chooses them by hand; none are truly fitted to the observed fulcrum, so the central λf dependence is not a fit in disguise. However, the axisymmetric puffing-rim geometry and the parametric density profile are assumed, not derived, and the high-inclination orientation of LRLL 31 is inferred. No new physical entities are introduced.

free parameters (7)
  • β (vertical density exponent) = 1.25 fiducial; varied 1.0 to 1.30
    Taken from Kenyon & Hartmann (1987) and varied independently; the central claim that λf is most sensitive to β rests on this parameterization.
  • α (radial density exponent) = 2.25 fiducial; varied 2.0 to 2.5
    Adopted from Kenyon & Hartmann (1987) and varied; the effect on λf is smaller than that of β.
  • H_puff (inner rim puffing scale factor) = 0.0 to 6.5 in 10 increments
    The time-varying quantity assumed to drive the see-saw variability; the range is chosen to cover inferred rim-height changes, not fitted to λf.
  • Trim / Rrim (inner rim temperature and radius) = 1,000 to 2,000 K (fiducial 1,500 K)
    Rim temperature sets Rrim via Eq. 5 and shifts λf by about 1.8 μm; it is varied to test the dependence of λf on inner rim location.
  • Mdisc (total disc mass) = 0.01 M_sun
    Chosen below the observed upper limit of 0.06 M_sun from Espaillat et al. (2012); it affects disc heating but is not the main driver of λf.
  • δR (disc gap width) = 0 au fiducial; 14 au in gap model
    Gap width is taken from independent observations; including it moves λf from 7.7 to 7.9 μm and improves agreement with the observed SED.
  • Mdot (disc accretion rate) = 1.6e-8 M_sun/yr fiducial; varied to 1.6e-7 M_sun/yr
    Varied in Sim 2; the results are used to argue that accretion-rate changes alone do not create the see-saw behavior.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption The occulter is an optically thick, axisymmetric inner rim whose height varies while all other disc properties stay fixed.
    Stated in Section 2: 'We assumed that the occulter (an opaque inner rim wall or some other object) is axisymmetric.' Non-axisymmetric clouds or temperature-driven variability are not modeled.
  • domain assumption The disc density follows the parametric form ρ(R,z) with scale height h(R) ∝ R^β (Eqs. 1 and 2).
    All β conclusions depend on this assumed functional form and on interpreting β as the flaring exponent; real discs may not obey a single power law.
  • domain assumption The inner rim sits at the dust sublimation radius with Tsub = 1,500 K, using Eq. 5 for Rsub.
    The actual rim temperature inferred from the infrared excess ranges from 1,540 to 1,940 K (Flaherty et al. 2011); the fiducial 1,500 K is a modeling choice that affects Rrim and λf.
  • domain assumption The central star is a blackbody at Teff = 5,700 K and the disc is passively heated.
    Stated in Section 2.1; stellar atmosphere details and accretion heating are simplified, which can alter the SED shape and pivot position.
  • domain assumption LRLL 31's disc is highly inclined, i > 70°, with the line of sight intersecting the disc.
    Based on high polarization and prior SED modeling (Flaherty & Muzerolle 2010), not on direct measurement; the single-fulcrum prediction applies only in this orientation regime.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of The fulcrum wavelength of young stellar objects -- the case of LRLL 31." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/53ZF5LF6

@misc{pith2026190808703,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: The fulcrum wavelength of young stellar objects -- the case of LRLL 31},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/53ZF5LF6}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:1908.08703}
}
abstract

A small subset of young stellar objects (YSOs) exhibit "see-saw" temporal variations in their mid-infrared SED; as the flux short-ward of a fulcrum wavelength ($\lambda_{f}$) increases the flux long-wards of this wavelength decreases (and vice-versa) over timescales of weeks to years. While previous studies have shown that an opaque, axisymmetric occulter of variable height can cause this behaviour in the SED of these objects, the conditions under which a single $\lambda_{f}$ occurs have not previously been determined, nor the factors determining its value. Using radiative transfer modelling, we conduct a parametric study of the exemplar of this class, LRLL 31 to explore this phenomenon, and confirm that the cause of this flux variation is likely due to the change in height of the optically thick inner rim of the accretion disc at the dust sublimation radius, or some other phenomenon which results in a similar appearance. We also determine that a fulcrum wavelength only occurs for high inclinations, where the line of sight intersects the accretion disc. Accepting that the disc of LRLL 31 is highly inclined, the inner rim radius, radial and vertical density profiles are independently varied to gauge what effect this had on $\lambda_{f}$ and its position relative to the silicate feature near $10 \mu$m. While $\lambda_{f}$ is a function of each of these parameters, it is found to be most strongly dependent on the vertical density exponent $\beta$. All other factors being held constant, only for flatter discs ($\beta < 1.2$) did we find a $\lambda_{f}$ beyond the silicate feature.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 1908.08703 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Schematics of the geometry of LRLL 31 disc. (a) Inner disc showing the puffed inner rim (Rco and Rtrunc not to scale); and (b) outer disc with a gap of width δR [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. The SED of LRLL 31, with Spitzer IRS data from Flaherty et al. (2011). disc derived by Kenyon & Hartmann (1987): α = 2.25 and β = 1.25, for our fiducial simulation. 2.2 Simulation suite The stellar and disc parameters of LRLL 31 are given in Tables 1 & 2 respectively, with additional parameters using the fiducial model given in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Left: The SEDs of LRLL 31 for a variety of puffed inner rim heights, Hrim, for a near face-on system with inclination i = 6.0 ◦ . Right: The modelled disc density with the line of sight superimposed in green (data from Sim.1) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (7 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Same as [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_4.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: MIR SED of LRLL 31 as a function of the mass accre￾tion rate, MÛ , for an almost face-on (blue) and edge-on (red) disc (Sim. 2). 2) we note that the addition of the gap has the effect of: (i) moving λf from 7.7µm to 7.9µm, closer to the observed value of 8.5µm; moving …
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Fulcrum wavelength λf as a function of Trim for Teff = 5, 700 K, (Sim. 3) λf ≈ 8µm does not change significantly between the full and gapped case, and that the general shape of the SEDs are very similar but that the peak in the curve beyond the silicate feature is slig…
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: SEDs of LRLL 31 modelled with a gap between 1-15 au with a viewing angle of i = 75.5 ◦ (Sim. 4) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_8.png]
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Same as [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_9.png]
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: MIR portion, for a gapped disc (gap 1 - 15 au), of the SED for four inclinations: (a) i = 6.0 ◦ ; (b) i = 45.1 ◦ ; (c) i = 60.4 ◦ ; and (d) i = 75.5 ◦ for each of six puffed rim heights (1h < Hrim < 4.9h). Note how the intersections of the curves move long-wards in wa…
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Variation in the fulcrum wavelength, λf , as (a): A function of the radial density exponent α (Sim. 5), and (b) the vertical density exponent β (Sim. 6) for a disc inclination i = 75.5 ◦ . MNRAS 000, 1–13 (2019) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_11.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

65 extracted references · 8 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    ALMA Partnership et al., 2015, @doi [ ] 10.1088/2041-8205/808/1/L3 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/#abs/2015ApJ...808L...3A 808, L3

    doi:10.1088/2041-8205/808/1/l3 2015

  2. [2]

    \'A brah \'a m P., et al., 2009, @doi [ ] 10.1038/nature08004 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2009Natur.459..224A 459, 224

    doi:10.1038/nature08004 2009

  3. [4]

    D., Clarke C

    Alexander R. D., Clarke C. J., Pringle J. E., 2006b, @doi [ ] 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2006.10294.x , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/#abs/2006MNRAS.369..229A 369, 229

    arXiv 2006

  4. [5]

    M., Wilner D

    Andrews S. M., Wilner D. J., Hughes A. M., Qi C., Dullemond C. P., 2009, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/700/2/1502 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2009ApJ...700.1502A 700, 1502

    doi:10.1088/0004-637x/700/2/1502 2009

  5. [6]

    M., Wilner D

    Andrews S. M., Wilner D. J., Hughes A. M., Qi C., Dullemond C. P., 2010, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/723/2/1241 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2010ApJ...723.1241A 723, 1241

    doi:10.1088/0004-637x/723/2/1241 2010

  6. [7]

    P., Kennedy G., Wyatt M

    Ansdell M., Gaidos E., Williams J. P., Kennedy G., Wyatt M. C., LaCourse D. M., Jacobs T. L., Mann A. W., 2016a, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnrasl/slw140 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2016MNRAS.462L.101A 462, L101

    doi:10.1093/mnrasl/slw140

  7. [8]

    Ansdell M., et al., 2016b, @doi [ ] 10.3847/0004-637X/828/1/46 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2016ApJ...828...46A 828, 46

    doi:10.3847/0004-637x/828/1/46

  8. [9]

    Avenhaus H., et al., 2018, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/aab846 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/#abs/2018ApJ...863...44A 863, 44

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aab846 2018

Show all 65 references
  1. [10]

    Beckwith S. V. W., Sargent A. I., 1991, @doi [ ] 10.1086/170646 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/\#abs/1991ApJ...381..250B 381, 250

    1991 doi

  2. [11]

    Beckwith S. V. W., Sargent A. I., Chini R. S., Guesten R., 1990, @doi [ ] 10.1086/115385 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/#abs/1990AJ.....99..924B 99, 924

    1990 doi

  3. [12]

    Bouvier J., et al., 1999, , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/#abs/1999A&A...349..619B 349, 619

    1999

  4. [13]

    Bouvier J., Alencar S. H. P., Harries T. J., Johns- Krull C. M., Romanova M. M., 2007, in Reipurth B., Jewitt D., Keil K., eds, Protostars and Planets V. p. 479 ( @eprint arXiv astro-ph/0603498 )

    2007 arXiv

  5. [14]

    I., Goldreich P., 1997, @doi [ ] 10.1086/304869 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1997ApJ...490..368C 490, 368

    Chiang E. I., Goldreich P., 1997, @doi [ ] 10.1086/304869 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1997ApJ...490..368C 490, 368

    1997 doi

  6. [15]

    M., et al., 2014, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-6256/147/4/82 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/#abs/2014AJ....147...82C 147, 82

    Cody A. M., et al., 2014, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-6256/147/4/82 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/#abs/2014AJ....147...82C 147, 82

    2014 doi

  7. [16]

    F., Hogerheijde M

    Crapsi A., van Dishoeck E. F., Hogerheijde M. R., Pontoppidan K. M., Dullemond C. P., 2008, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361:20078589 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/#abs/2008A&A...486..245C 486, 245

    2008 doi

  8. [17]

    D'Alessio P., Cant \"o J., Calvet N., Lizano S., 1998, @doi [ ] 10.1086/305702 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/#abs/1998ApJ...500..411D 500, 411

    1998 doi

  9. [18]

    D'Alessio P., Calvet N., Hartmann L., Lizano S., Cant \'o J., 1999, @doi [ ] 10.1086/308103 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/\#abs/1999ApJ...527..893D 527, 893

    1999 doi

  10. [19]

    D'Alessio P., Calvet N., Hartmann L., 2001, @doi [ ] 10.1086/320655 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/\#abs/2001ApJ...553..321D 553, 321

    2001 doi

  11. [20]

    Dong R., 2015, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/810/1/6 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015ApJ...810....6D 810, 6

    2015 doi

  12. [21]

    P., Dominik C., 2004, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361:20031768 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/#abs/2004A&A...417..159D 417, 159

    Dullemond C. P., Dominik C., 2004, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361:20031768 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/#abs/2004A&A...417..159D 417, 159

    2004 doi

  13. [22]

    Dullemond C., Monnier J., 2010, @doi [ ] 10.1146/annurev-astro-081309-130932 , 48, 205

    2010 doi

  14. [23]

    P., Dominik C., Natta A., 2001, @doi [ ] 10.1086/323057 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/#abs/2001ApJ...560..957D 560, 957

    Dullemond C. P., Dominik C., Natta A., 2001, @doi [ ] 10.1086/323057 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/#abs/2001ApJ...560..957D 560, 957

    2001 doi

  15. [24]

    Espaillat C., et al., 2010, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/717/1/441 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2010ApJ...717..441E 717, 441

    2010 doi

  16. [25]

    M., Muzerolle J., 2011, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/728/1/49 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2011ApJ...728...49E 728, 49

    Espaillat C., Furlan E., D'Alessio P., Sargent B., Nagel E., Calvet N., Watson D. M., Muzerolle J., 2011, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/728/1/49 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2011ApJ...728...49E 728, 49

    2011 doi

  17. [26]

    Espaillat C., et al., 2012, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/747/2/103 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2012ApJ...747..103E 747, 103

    2012 doi

  18. [27]

    M., Muzerolle J., 2010, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/719/2/1733 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/#abs/2010ApJ...719.1733F 719, 1733

    Flaherty K. M., Muzerolle J., 2010, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/719/2/1733 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/#abs/2010ApJ...719.1733F 719, 1733

    2010 doi

  19. [28]

    M., Muzerolle J., Rieke G., Gutermuth R., Balog Z., Herbst W., Megeath S

    Flaherty K. M., Muzerolle J., Rieke G., Gutermuth R., Balog Z., Herbst W., Megeath S. T., Kun M., 2011, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/732/2/83 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2011ApJ...732...83F 732, 83

    2011 doi

  20. [29]

    M., Muzerolle J., Rieke G., Gutermuth R., Balog Z., Herbst W., Megeath S

    Flaherty K. M., Muzerolle J., Rieke G., Gutermuth R., Balog Z., Herbst W., Megeath S. T., Kun M., 2012, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/748/1/71 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/#abs/2012ApJ...748...71F 748, 71

    2012 doi

  21. [30]

    M., DeMarchi L., Muzerolle J., Balog Z., Herbst W., Megeath S

    Flaherty K. M., DeMarchi L., Muzerolle J., Balog Z., Herbst W., Megeath S. T., Furlan E., Gutermuth R., 2016, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/833/1/104 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/#abs/2016ApJ...833..104F 833, 104

    2016 doi

  22. [31]

    arXiv:1906.06910

    Garufi A., et al., 2019, arXiv e-prints, https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019arXiv190606910G p. arXiv:1906.06910

    2019 arXiv

  23. [32]

    Hayashi C., 1981, @doi [Progress of Theoretical Physics Supplement] 10.1143/PTPS.70.35 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/\#abs/1981PThPS..70...35H 70, 35

    1981 doi

  24. [33]

    M., Wilner D

    Hughes A. M., Wilner D. J., Qi C., Hogerheijde M. R., 2008, @doi [ ] 10.1086/586730 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2008ApJ...678.1119H 678, 1119

    2008 doi

  25. [34]

    J., Kraus A

    Ireland M. J., Kraus A. L., 2008, @doi [ ] 10.1086/588216 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/#abs/2008ApJ...678L..59I 678, L59

    2008 doi

  26. [35]

    Isella A., Natta A., 2005, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361:20052773 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/#abs/2005A&A...438..899I 438, 899

    2005 doi

  27. [36]

    J., Hartmann L., 1987, @doi [ ] 10.1086/165866 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1987ApJ...323..714K 323, 714

    Kenyon S. J., Hartmann L., 1987, @doi [ ] 10.1086/165866 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1987ApJ...323..714K 323, 714

    1987 doi

  28. [37]

    J., Hartmann L., 1995, @doi [ ] 10.1086/192235 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/#abs/1995ApJS..101..117K 101, 117

    Kenyon S. J., Hartmann L., 1995, @doi [ ] 10.1086/192235 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/#abs/1995ApJS..101..117K 101, 117

    1995 doi

  29. [38]

    G., Hendry P

    Kim S.-H., Martin P. G., Hendry P. D., 1994, @doi [ ] 10.1086/173714 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1994ApJ...422..164K 422, 164

    1994 doi

  30. [39]

    M., Ercolano B., Dale J., Teixeira P

    Koepferl C. M., Ercolano B., Dale J., Teixeira P. S., Ratzka T., Spezzi L., 2013, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/sts276 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/#abs/2013MNRAS.428.3327K 428, 3327

    2013 doi

  31. [40]

    E., 2000, in Mannings V., Boss A

    Konigl A., Pudritz R. E., 2000, in Mannings V., Boss A. P., Russell S. S., eds, Protostars and Planets IV. p. 759 ( @eprint arXiv astro-ph/9903168 )

    2000 arXiv

  32. [41]

    K \"o nigl A., Salmeron R., Wardle M., 2010, @doi [ ] 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2009.15664.x , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2010MNRAS.401..479K 401, 479

    2010

  33. [42]

    Kreplin A., Madlener D., Chen L., Weigelt G., Kraus S., Grinin V., Tambovtseva L., Kishimoto M., 2016, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201628281 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/\#abs/2016A&A...590A..96K 590, A96

    2016 doi

  34. [43]

    Lagage P.-O., et al., 2006, @doi [Science] 10.1126/science.1131436 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/\#abs/2006Sci...314..621L 314, 621

    2006 doi

  35. [44]

    Lai D., Zhang H., 2008, , 683, 949

    2008

  36. [45]

    D., Papaloizou J

    Larwood J. D., Papaloizou J. C. B., 1997, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/285.2.288 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/#abs/1997MNRAS.285..288L 285, 288

    1997 doi

  37. [46]

    Liffman K., Maddison S., Bryan G., 2019, Infrared Variability due to Magnetic Pressure Driven Jets, Dust Ejection and Quasi-Puffed-Up Inner Rims , submitted to MNRAS

    2019

  38. [47]

    L., Stauffer J

    Luhman K. L., Stauffer J. R., Muench A. A., Rieke G. H., Lada E. A., Bouvier J., Lada C. J., 2003, @doi [ ] 10.1086/376594 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/#abs/2003ApJ...593.1093L 593, 1093

    2003 doi

  39. [48]

    E., 1974, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/168.3.603 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1974MNRAS.168..603L 168, 603

    Lynden-Bell D., Pringle J. E., 1974, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/168.3.603 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1974MNRAS.168..603L 168, 603

    1974 doi

  40. [49]

    Mac \' as E., et al., 2018, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/aad811 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/#abs/2018ApJ...865...37M 865, 37

    2018 doi

  41. [50]

    Morales-Calder \'o n M., et al., 2011, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/733/1/50 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/#abs/2011ApJ...733...50M 733, 50

    2011 doi

  42. [51]

    Muzerolle J., Hartmann L., Calvet N., 1998, @doi [ ] 10.1086/300636 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/\#abs/1998AJ....116.2965M 116, 2965

    1998 doi

  43. [52]

    Muzerolle J., et al., 2009, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/704/1/L15 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2009ApJ...704L..15M 704, L15

    2009 doi

  44. [53]

    P., Mannings V., 2001, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361:20010334 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/#abs/2001A&A...371..186N 371, 186

    Natta A., Prusti T., Neri R., Wooden D., Grinin V. P., Mannings V., 2001, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361:20010334 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/#abs/2001A&A...371..186N 371, 186

    2001 doi

  45. [54]

    Pinilla P., et al., 2014, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201323322 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/\#abs/2014A&A...564A..51P 564, A51

    2014 doi

  46. [55]

    E., 1981, @doi [ ] 10.1146/annurev.aa.19.090181.001033 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1981ARA&A..19..137P 19, 137

    Pringle J. E., 1981, @doi [ ] 10.1146/annurev.aa.19.090181.001033 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1981ARA&A..19..137P 19, 137

    1981

  47. [56]

    Ragland S., et al., 2012, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637x/746/2/126 , 746, 126

    2012 doi

  48. [57]

    M., et al., 2015, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-6256/150/6/175 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/#abs/2015AJ....150..175R 150, 175

    Rebull L. M., et al., 2015, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-6256/150/6/175 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/#abs/2015AJ....150..175R 150, 175

    2015 doi

  49. [58]

    J., 1977, @doi [ ] 10.1007/BF00642464 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1977Ap

    Weidenschilling S. J., 1977, @doi [ ] 10.1007/BF00642464 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1977Ap

    1977 doi

  50. [59]

    A., Wood K., Bjorkman J

    Whitney B. A., Wood K., Bjorkman J. E., Wolff M. J., 2003a, @doi [ ] 10.1086/375415 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2003ApJ...591.1049W 591, 1049

    doi

  51. [61]

    A., Wood K., Bjorkman J

    Whitney B. A., Wood K., Bjorkman J. E., Cohen M., 2003c, @doi [ ] 10.1086/379068 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2003ApJ...598.1079W 598, 1079

    doi

  52. [62]

    A., Indebetouw R., Bjorkman J

    Whitney B. A., Indebetouw R., Bjorkman J. E., Wood K., 2004, @doi [ ] 10.1086/425608 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/\#abs/2004ApJ...617.1177W 617, 1177

    2004 doi

  53. [63]

    A., Robitaille T

    Whitney B. A., Robitaille T. P., Bjorkman J. E., Dong R., Wolff M. J., Wood K., Honor J., 2013, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series] 10.1088/0067-0049/207/2/30 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2013ApJS..207...30W 207, 30

    2013 doi

  54. [64]

    G., et al., 2017, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/aa9981 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/#abs/2017ApJ...851...56W 851, 56

    Wolff S. G., et al., 2017, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/aa9981 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/#abs/2017ApJ...851...56W 851, 56

    2017 doi

  55. [65]

    J., Bjorkman J

    Wood K., Wolff M. J., Bjorkman J. E., Whitney B., 2002, @doi [ ] 10.1086/324285 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2002ApJ...564..887W 564, 887

    2002 doi

  56. [66]

    di Folco E., Dutrey A., Chesneau O., Wolf S., Schegerer A., Leinert C., Lopez B., 2009, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/200809902 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/\#abs/2009A&A...500.1065D 500, 1065

    2009 doi

  57. [67]

    P., Dominik C., 2005, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361:20042252 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2005A&A...441..563V 441, 563

    van Boekel R., Dullemond C. P., Dominik C., 2005, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361:20042252 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2005A&A...441..563V 441, 563

    2005 doi

Pith tools

Reviewed August 14, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.