Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 104 references

LAMOST Reveals Long-lived Protoplanetary Disks

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-10 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read LAMOST data reveal 14 M/K stars older than 10 million years that still harbor actively accreting protoplanetary disks, nearly doubling the census of the rare class known as Peter Pan disks.

desk verdict A careful search that likely produces real disk-bearing M-star candidates, but the 'older than 10 Myr' label rests on one isochrone family and needs independent age checks before the Peter Pan claim carries. read the letter →

arxiv 2501.04295 v1 pith:3XSZY2VN submitted 2025-01-08 astro-ph.GA

Xiao-Long Wang , Min Fang , Yao Liu , Miao-Miao Zhang , Wen-Yuan Cui This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.GA PACS 97.21.+a
keywords PeterPandisksprotoplanetaryTTauristarsmassaccretionratesstellarisochronalagesLAMOSTMdwarfsinfraredexcess
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

Protoplanetary disks are supposed to be gone within about 10 million years, yet a few rare exceptions known as Peter Pan disks survive much longer. The paper reports a systematic, catalog-wide search of the LAMOST M-star archive that identifies 14 M/K stars older than 10 Myr that still carry a circumstellar disk and still accrete gas as classical T Tauri stars, nearly doubling the previously known census of about 15 such objects. To count as a Peter Pan disk, a source must lie below the 10 Myr isochrone in two separately constructed Hertzsprung-Russell diagrams, show infrared excess above its stellar photosphere, and have H$\alpha$ emission strong enough to mark active accretion. Most of the new cases are not in the nearby associations that hosted the earlier finds; they are members of open clusters or isolated field stars. The paper finds that these aged disks accrete at systematically lower rates than young disks around stars of similar mass, while the decline of accretion rate with age continues the same trend seen in young disks.

What carries the argument

The working machinery is a three-stage filter. First, infrared excess: sources are selected in $J-H$ versus $H-W1$, $H-W2$, and $H-W3$ color-color planes against the intrinsic colors of 5-30 Myr old stars, and every candidate's WISE image is inspected by eye to remove spurious photometry. Second, age: a source must fall below the 10 Myr PARSEC isochrone in the H-R diagram in both a photosphere-only SED fit and a full disk-inclusive SED fit, the doubled requirement guarding against scattered disk light mimicking an older star. Third, accretion: H$\alpha$ equivalent widths above spectral-type-dependent thresholds classify a source as a classical T Tauri star, and the H$\alpha$ luminosity is converted to a mass accretion rate through an empirical accretion-luminosity relation and the boundary-layer formula $\dot{M}_{\rm acc}=L_{\rm acc}R_\star/(GM_\star(1-R_\star/R_{\rm in}))$. That combination — old isochronal age, persistent disk, ongoing accretion — is what defines a Peter Pan disk in this study.

What would settle it

High-resolution spectroscopy of the 14 candidates measuring Li I $\lambda$6707 absorption and [O I] $\lambda$6300 line profiles would settle the matter: strong lithium or near-edge-on disk geometry would mean the sources are young systems mis-aged by the isochrones, while re-deriving the ages with the Baraffe et al. (2015) tracks and finding most candidates above the 10 Myr isochrone would directly falsify the age certification.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that long-lived protoplanetary disks are common enough to be found by a blind search rather than only as anomalies in well-studied young associations. Applying three successive filters to the LAMOST M-star catalog — infrared excess in WISE bands, placement below the 10 Myr PARSEC isochrone in two H-R diagrams built from photosphere-only and disk-inclusive SED fits, and H$\alpha$ emission above the classical T Tauri star threshold — the authors arrive at 14 previously unknown Peter Pan disks with isochronal ages from just over 10 Myr to beyond 50 Myr. These objects nearly double the known class. Their mass accretion rates, derived from H$\alpha$ line luminosity, are systematically lower than those of young accreting disks with similar stellar masses, yet the accretion-rate decline with age follows the same trend as in young populations. Spatially, nearly all of them avoid nearby star-forming regions; most appear to belong to open clusters or to be isolated, with a few possibly ejected from their birth sites.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that PARSEC isochronal ages for individual low-mass stars are trustworthy enough to certify ages beyond 10 Myr; the paper itself shows that with the Baraffe et al. (2015) tracks only 1 of 10 previously known Peter Pan disks stays older than 10 Myr, and no lithium absorption is available to independently confirm youth.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Long-lived disks are not confined to nearby associations: most of the 14 new Peter Pan disks are open-cluster members or isolated field stars, so the phenomenon is not tied to a single environment.
  • The known census nearly doubles, from about 15 catalogued Peter Pan disks to 29, giving the first sample large enough to test statistically what governs disk survival.
  • Aged disks accrete at systematically lower rates than young disks of the same stellar mass, suggesting that low accretion activity goes together with long disk lifetime.
  • The decline of mass accretion rate with age in these old disks follows the same trend as in young accretors, meaning late disk evolution extends the normal sequence rather than breaking it.
  • Several objects sit well below the 50 Myr isochrone; if they are truly that old and not edge-on young disks, their existence would challenge current models of disk dispersal.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The paper's own cross-check shows the isochronal-age verdict flips largely when another evolutionary-track family is used, so part of the 14-object census may not survive better age indicators; lithium measurements or kinematic trace-back would separate confident members from borderline ones.
  • The systematically low accretion rates of these disks suggest a testable mechanism: disks that accrete quietly from the start may be the ones that survive longest, and millimeter interferometric gas-mass measurements of the 14 systems could test whether low turbulence or weak external radiation is the cause.
  • Because most new cases sit in open clusters, mining cluster catalogs built from astrometric surveys for infrared-excess members could uncover further long-lived disks far more efficiently than the association-by-association searches that produced the earlier sample.
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 / 5 minor

Summary. The paper searches the LAMOST M-star catalog for old, disk-bearing, actively accreting stars (Peter Pan disks). From 855 objects with infrared excess, the authors identify 526 as isochronally older than 10 Myr using PARSEC isochrones, and 14 of these as classical T Tauri stars. They derive stellar parameters, variability, accretion rates, and disk classifications, and argue that these 14 objects nearly double the known census of Peter Pan disks, with most located outside nearby associations and instead associated with open clusters or isolated. The accretion analysis finds lower accretion rates for old disks at a given stellar mass, while the age evolution of accretion rates is similar to young disks.

Significance. If correct, the paper would substantially expand the census of long-lived protoplanetary disks, extend them from nearby associations to open clusters and the field, and provide new constraints on disk evolution and accretion physics. The disk selection is carefully done: the authors visually inspect WISE images, use two separate SED-fitting approaches, and reclassify spectral types with veiling. The variability and accretion characterizations are standard and clearly described. However, the central age claim rests on isochronal ages for individual late-K/M stars, a method the authors themselves show is strongly model-dependent, and no independent youth indicator is available. The strength of the paper is its systematic census and the careful disk identification; the fragility is in the age certification that defines the sample.

major comments (3)
  1. [§3.2, §5.1] The central age criterion is entirely isochronal and model-dependent. The paper's own validation in Section 5.1 shows that when the same isochronal analysis is applied to the ten literature Peter Pan disks using Baraffe et al. (2015) tracks, only one remains older than 10 Myr. This demonstrates that PARSEC-based isochronal ages are not robust for individual low-mass stars. Because both H-R diagrams in Section 3.2 are based on PARSEC, the requirement that a source lie below the 10 Myr isochrone in both diagrams does not provide an independent check of the age. Please provide age estimates with uncertainties from multiple evolutionary models, or otherwise justify why PARSEC is reliable for these late-K/M stars when it demotes most known Peter Pan disks to ages below 10 Myr.
  2. [§4.2, §5.2] No independent youth indicator is available for the sample. The Li I 6707 Å line is not detected because the LAMOST spectra are too noisy, and Section 5.2 explicitly concedes that edge-on young disks cannot be excluded. For a young disk viewed edge-on, scattered light can reduce the apparent bolometric luminosity and mimic an old, low-luminosity star. Thus, for the 12 candidates not associated with the 32 Ori association, the only evidence for ages beyond 10 Myr is the PARSEC isochronal placement. Please quantify how many of the 14 candidates would survive if Baraffe et al. (2015) tracks or other evolutionary models are adopted, and discuss the edge-on degeneracy more quantitatively using the inclination angles from the SED fitting reported in Figure 4.
  3. [Table 1, §4.2] The ages in Table 1 are quoted without uncertainties (e.g., 11.6 Myr, 32.9 Myr, >50 Myr). For individual low-mass stars, isochronal ages are notoriously uncertain, especially for M dwarfs near or below 0.2 M☉, as in source 3308700559817832576 with M⋆ = 0.16 M☉ and an age of 12.4 Myr. Without error bars or a multi-model comparison, it is impossible to assess whether any individual source is older than 10 Myr at a statistically significant level. Please report age uncertainties that propagate the Teff and Lbol uncertainties and, at least for the 14 candidates, the spread among different evolutionary tracks.
minor comments (5)
  1. [§5.3] The text contains the typo 'Perter Pan' in the first sentence; it should be 'Peter Pan'.
  2. [§5.1] The cluster name is misspelled as 'Columnba'; it should be 'Columba'.
  3. [Table 1] The disk type entry 'EVOL VED' contains a spurious space; it should read 'EVOLVED'.
  4. [§4.2, Eq. (4)] Equation (4) is written with a comma-separated formula that is ambiguous; it should be presented as a fraction with the weighted mean defined clearly.
  5. [Author byline] The first author's name appears as 'Xiao-Long W ang' with an extra space; this should be corrected to 'Xiao-Long Wang'.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity found: this is an observational census whose age criterion and accretion rates rest on standard, externally calibrated models and relations, not on predictions that reduce to fitted inputs.

full rationale

The paper's central claim is the discovery of 14 isochronally old, disk-bearing, accreting M/K stars from the LAMOST catalog. The chain is: select WISE excess candidates, fit SEDs to obtain Teff and Lbol, place sources on H-R diagrams, and classify as old when they fall below the 10 Myr PARSEC isochrone. The 10 Myr threshold is a definitional input of the method, not a result derived from the data; the paper explicitly says 'only sources below the 10 Myr isochrone in both H-R diagrams are identified as old' (Section 3.2). This is a standard isochronal-age procedure, and calling the selected objects 'old' is a characterization, not a circular prediction. The accretion identification uses EWHalpha thresholds from Fang et al. (2009), an external empirical calibration, and the accretion-rate calculation uses the standard Gullbring et al. (1998) formula with an assumed truncation radius; these are independent inputs, not outputs of the paper. The paper's own Section 5.1 notes that with Baraffe et al. (2015) tracks only one of ten literature Peter Pan disks remains older than 10 Myr, and Section 5.2 concedes that edge-on young disks cannot be ruled out. These are honest validity caveats about model dependence and possible contamination, not circular reasoning. The self-citations to Fang et al. (2020) and Fang et al. (2009) are methodological references with empirical content and are not used as unverified grounds for the main claim. No step in the paper reduces by construction to its own inputs, so the appropriate finding is no significant circularity.

Assumptions & free parameters 4 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central age claim rests on PARSEC isochrones and SED model fits, with no independent age indicator such as lithium detection or kinematic trace-back. The fitted extinction, scaling factor, and disk inclination all feed into the inferred luminosities and ages. The accretion rate comparison additionally assumes a standard empirical relation and a fixed truncation radius. These are reasonable domain assumptions but they carry substantial systematic uncertainty for the specific claim of age greater than 10 Myr.

free parameters (4)
  • A_V extinction per source = varies by source, not tabulated in preprint
    Fitted in Equation 1 for each SED; affects Teff, Lbol, and hence the isochronal age.
  • C scaling factor per source = varies, related to R_star/d
    Fitted in Equation 1; determines R_star through C = -5 log(R_star/d) and therefore Lbol and isochronal age.
  • Disk inclination i = between 9 and 76 degrees from SED fits in Table 1
    Best-fit parameter in the disk model SEDs; used to argue most sources are not edge-on. The degeneracy between inclination and age is not fully explored.
  • Truncation radius R_in = 5 R_star (assumed)
    Assumed in Equation 5 to convert accretion luminosity to mass accretion rate; affects the accretion rate comparison but not the age claim.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption PARSEC stellar evolution tracks accurately describe pre-main-sequence evolution of M/K stars in the 10-100 Myr range.
    All ages and masses are read from PARSEC isochrones in Section 4.2 and Figure 3; the authors note disagreement with Baraffe et al. (2015) in Section 5.1.
  • domain assumption The Robitaille (2017) disk model SED grid can separate photospheric from disk emission and recover inclination angles reliably.
    Used in Section 4.2 to construct the disk-corrected H-R diagram and to estimate inclinations shown in Figure 4.
  • domain assumption The Fang et al. (2009) L_Halpha versus L_acc empirical relation holds at the low accretion rates of these old, low-mass stars.
    Adopted in Section 4.4 to compute mass accretion rates down to about 1e-11 M_sun/yr; the relation was calibrated on younger, stronger accretors.
  • domain assumption The H-alpha equivalent width thresholds separating CTTSs from WTTSs remain valid for old M dwarfs.
    Used in Section 4.4 to classify 14 old objects as actively accreting; old chromospherically active M dwarfs can also produce H-alpha emission.
  • domain assumption Infrared excess above 5 sigma over the best-fit stellar photosphere, after visual rejection of artifacts, reliably traces a circumstellar disk.
    The basis of the working sample selection in Section 3.1; background contamination is addressed but not eliminated for every source.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of LAMOST Reveals Long-lived Protoplanetary Disks." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/3XSZY2VN

@misc{pith2026250104295,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: LAMOST Reveals Long-lived Protoplanetary Disks},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/3XSZY2VN}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2501.04295}
}
abstract

While both observations and theories demonstrate that protoplanetary disks are not expected to live much longer than $\sim$10 Myr, several examples of prolonged disks have been observed in the past. In this work, we perform a systematic search for aged YSOs still surrounded by protoplanetary disks in the M star catalog from the LAMOST archive. We identify 14 sources older than 10 Myr, still surrounded by protoplanetary disks and with ongoing accretion activities, significantly improving the census of the category known as the Peter Pan disks. The stellar parameters, variability and accretion properties of these objects, as well as their spatial distribution, are investigated. Nearly all of these objects are distributed far away from nearby associations and star forming regions, but show evidence of being members of open clusters. Investigating the correlation between mass accretion rates and stellar masses, we find these long-lived disks accrete at systematically lower levels, compared to their younger counterparts with similar stellar masses. Studying the evolution of mass accretion rates with stellar ages, we find these aged disks follow similar trend as young ones.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2501.04295 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Infrared color-color plots used to select candidates displaying infrared excess emission. In each panel, the solid cyan curve denotes the intrinsic colors of 5−30 Myr old stars (Pecaut & Mamajek 2013). The dashed blue line displays the extinction direction (Wang & Chen 2019), and is used as the border line separating disked objects from diskless ones. The background gray image displays the distribution of the full c… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Comparison of the spectral types de￾rived in this work and that from the LAMOST archive. The solid line is the line of equality. The dashed and dash-dotted lines show differences of 3 and 5 subtypes, respectively. In the bottom-right corner, we display the typical uncertainties of our spectral typing (∼1.0 subtypes). classify main-sequence stars and no veiling ef￾fect is considered in the pipeline, but most of the 8… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. H-R diagram of the identified disked objects (gray circles). Left: the stellar luminosities and effective temperatures are determined by fitting stellar photospheres to the observed optical and NIR pho￾tometry. The blue solid curves are isochrones from the PARSEC stellar model (Bressan et al. 2012) with corresponding ages labeled. The 14 newly discovered Peter Pan disks are marked with additional red pluses. Right: … view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (9 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: SEDs and WISE images of the 14 newly discovered Peter Pan disks. For each source, the main panel shows the SED of the target, with blue, orange and red circles represent optical, NIR and WISE photometry, respectively. The black dashed line represents the best-fitted st…
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Histogram shows the distribution of the reduced χ 2 of the lightcurves. The old and young populations are shown as blue hatched and red filled histograms, respectively. The black verti￾cal dashed line marks the threshold distinguishing between variables and non-variabl…
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Equivalent width of Hα emission line as a function of spectral type. The young population is displayed as red pluses and the old population as blue circles. The solid curve is the dividing line separating strong accretors from weak ones (Fang et al. 2009). in their LAM…
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Accretion rates versus stellar masses (left) and ages (right). In each panel, Young and old accretors are shown as red and blue circles, respectively. Non-accreting stars are shown as downward triangles, with purple for young population and cyan for old population. The…
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Left: E(KS −W3) vs. E(KS −W4) color excess plot for our targets. Full disks, transitional disks, evolved disks and debris disks are shown as red circles, orange squares, cyan triangles and blue diamonds, respectively. The newly discovered Peter Pan disks are highlighte…
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Spatial distribution of the disked objects studied in this work. Red and blue circles represent young and old populations respectively, and the Peter Pan disks identified in this work are marked with additional cyan dots with arrows denote their proper motions. The gra…
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Left: SED and WISE images of a selected candidate that is rejected by our visual inspection. The top panels show the WISE images of this source and the target location is marked as white plus in each panel. The bottom panel shows the SED of the candidate. Blue, orange…
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Illustration of our spectral typing for Gaia DR3 147605282796916992, where the nonveiled model is the preferred fit to the observed spectrum. Left: best-fitted templates with (red) and without (blue) veiling overplotted on the observed spectrum (gray). The inset shows…
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: Same as [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p021_12.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

104 extracted references · 15 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    , " * write output.state after.block = add.period write newline

    ENTRY address archivePrefix author booktitle chapter doi edition editor eprint howpublished institution journal key month number organization pages publisher school series title misctitle type volume year version url label extra.label sort.label short.list INTEGERS output.state before.all mid.sentence after.sentence after.block FUNCTION init.state.consts ...

  2. [2]

    write newline

    " write newline "" before.all 'output.state := FUNCTION format.url url empty "" new.block "" url * "" * if FUNCTION format.eprint eprint empty "" archivePrefix empty "" archivePrefix "arXiv" = new.block " " eprint * " " * new.block " " eprint * " " * if if if FUNCTION format.doi doi empty "" " " doi * " " * if FUNCTION format.pid doi empty eprint empty ur...

  3. [3]

    H=z j>FJ@t LJ @ =0pP`7f^ahvvj #>vy <v3 Nk 8e۹# _B * x zS/嶺; tޣ aVk!v ރ GIk =d0pPeg 0 Nm xS0 02: R烒/3 qhuvbAMwz W e/fi 5

    thebibliography [1] 20pt to REFERENCES 6pt =0pt -12pt 10pt plus 3pt =0pt =0pt =1pt plus 1pt =0pt =0pt -12pt =13pt plus 1pt =20pt =13pt plus 1pt \@M =10000 =-1.0em =0pt =0pt 0pt =0pt =1.0em @enumiv\@empty 10000 10000 `\.\@m \@noitemerr \@latex@warning Empty `thebibliography' environment \@ifnextchar \@reference \@latexerr Missing key on reference command E...

    2021

  4. [4]

    M., Natta, A., Manara, C

    Alcal \' a , J. M., Natta, A., Manara, C. F., et al. 2014, Astronomy and Astrophysics, 561, A2, 10.1051/0004-6361/201322254

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201322254 2014

  5. [5]

    M., Manara, C

    Alcal \' a , J. M., Manara, C. F., Natta, A., et al. 2017, Astronomy and Astrophysics, 600, A20, 10.1051/0004-6361/201629929

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201629929 2017

  6. [6]

    2023, in Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series, Vol

    Bae, J., Isella, A., Zhu, Z., et al. 2023, in Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series, Vol. 534, Protostars Planets VII, ed. S. Inutsuka, Y. Aikawa, T. Muto, K. Tomida, & M. Tamura (San Francisco: CA: ASP), 423, 10.48550/arXiv.2210.13314

    arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2210.13314 2023

  7. [7]

    2019, The Astrophysics Journal, 870, 76, 10.3847/1538-4357/aaf1aa

    Banzatti, A., Pascucci, I., Edwards, S., et al. 2019, The Astrophysics Journal, 870, 76, 10.3847/1538-4357/aaf1aa

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aaf1aa 2019

  8. [8]

    2015, Astronomy and Astrophysics, 577, A42, 10.1051/0004-6361/201425481

    Baraffe, I., Homeier, D., Allard, F., & Chabrier, G. 2015, Astronomy and Astrophysics, 577, A42, 10.1051/0004-6361/201425481

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201425481 2015

Show all 104 references
  1. [9]

    2010, The Astrophysics Journal, 720, 1108, 10.1088/0004-637X/720/2/1108

    Beccari, G., Spezzi, L., De Marchi , G., et al. 2010, The Astrophysics Journal, 720, 1108, 10.1088/0004-637X/720/2/1108

    2010 doi

  2. [10]

    W., Mann, A

    Birky, J., Hogg, D. W., Mann, A. W., & Burgasser, A. 2020, The Astrophysics Journal, 892, 31, 10.3847/1538-4357/ab7004

    2020 doi

  3. [11]

    1995, Annual Review of Astronomy and Astrophysics, 33, 199, 10.1146/annurev.aa.33.090195.001215

    Bodenheimer, P. 1995, Annual Review of Astronomy and Astrophysics, 33, 199, 10.1146/annurev.aa.33.090195.001215

    1995

  4. [12]

    2012, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 427, 127, 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2012.21948.x

    Bressan, A., Marigo, P., Girardi, L., et al. 2012, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 427, 127, 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2012.21948.x

    2012

  5. [13]

    A., Clayton, G

    Cardelli, J. A., Clayton, G. C., & Mathis, J. S. 1989, The Astrophysics Journal, 345, 245, 10.1086/167900

    1989 doi

  6. [14]

    M., Mamajek, E

    Carpenter, J. M., Mamajek, E. E., Hillenbrand, L. A., & Meyer, M. R. 2006, The Astrophysics Journal Letters, 651, L49, 10.1086/509121

    2006 doi

  7. [15]

    C., Magnier, E

    Chambers, K. C., Magnier, E. A., Metcalfe, N., et al. 2016, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:1612.05560. 1612.05560

    2016 arXiv

  8. [16]

    2012, Research in Astronomy and Astrophysics, 12, 1197, 10.1088/1674-4527/12/9/003

    Cui, X.-Q., Zhao, Y.-H., Chu, Y.-Q., et al. 2012, Research in Astronomy and Astrophysics, 12, 1197, 10.1088/1674-4527/12/9/003

    2012 doi

  9. [17]

    Currie, T., & Kenyon, S. J. 2009, The Astronomical Journal, 138, 703, 10.1088/0004-6256/138/3/703

    2009 doi

  10. [18]

    J., et al

    Currie, T., Balog, Z., Kenyon, S. J., et al. 2007, The Astrophysics Journal, 659, 599, 10.1086/512006

    2007 doi

  11. [19]

    2013 a , The Astrophysics Journal, 775, 68, 10.1088/0004-637X/775/1/68

    De Marchi , G., Beccari, G., & Panagia, N. 2013 a , The Astrophysics Journal, 775, 68, 10.1088/0004-637X/775/1/68

    2013 doi

  12. [20]

    G., & Bonito, R

    De Marchi , G., Panagia, N., Guarcello, M. G., & Bonito, R. 2013 b , Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 435, 3058, 10.1093/mnras/stt1499

    2013 doi

  13. [21]

    L., Luhman, K

    Esplin, T. L., Luhman, K. L., & Mamajek, E. E. 2014, The Astrophysics Journal, 784, 126, 10.1088/0004-637X/784/2/126

    2014 doi

  14. [22]

    L., Luhman, K

    Esplin, T. L., Luhman, K. L., Miller, E. B., & Mamajek, E. E. 2018, The Astronomical Journal, 156, 75, 10.3847/1538-3881/aacce0

    2018 doi

  15. [23]

    A., Kim, J

    Fang, M., Hillenbrand, L. A., Kim, J. S., et al. 2020, The Astrophysics Journal, 904, 146, 10.3847/1538-4357/abba84

    2020 doi

  16. [24]

    2023, The Astrophysics Journal, 945, 112, 10.3847/1538-4357/acb2c9

    Fang, M., Pascucci, I., Edwards, S., et al. 2023, The Astrophysics Journal, 945, 112, 10.3847/1538-4357/acb2c9

    2023 doi

  17. [25]

    2009, Astronomy and Astrophysics, 504, 461, 10.1051/0004-6361/200912468

    Fang, M., van Boekel, R., Wang, W., et al. 2009, Astronomy and Astrophysics, 504, 461, 10.1051/0004-6361/200912468

    2009 doi

  18. [26]

    R., et al

    Fang, M., van Boekel, R., King, R. R., et al. 2012, Astronomy and Astrophysics, 539, A119, 10.1051/0004-6361/201015914

    2012 doi

  19. [27]

    S., Pascucci, I., et al

    Fang, M., Kim, J. S., Pascucci, I., et al. 2017, The Astronomical Journal, 153, 188, 10.3847/1538-3881/aa647b

    2017 doi

  20. [28]

    2018, The Astrophysics Journal, 868, 28, 10.3847/1538-4357/aae780

    Fang, M., Pascucci, I., Edwards, S., et al. 2018, The Astrophysics Journal, 868, 28, 10.3847/1538-4357/aae780

    2018 doi

  21. [29]

    Gaia Collaboration , Prusti, T., de Bruijne, J. H. J., et al. 2016, Astronomy and Astrophysics, 595, A1, 10.1051/0004-6361/201629272

    2016 doi

  22. [30]

    Gaia Collaboration , Brown, A. G. A., Vallenari, A., et al. 2021, Astronomy and Astrophysics, 649, A1, 10.1051/0004-6361/202039657

    2021 doi

  23. [31]

    Gaia Collaboration , Vallenari, A., Brown, A. G. A., et al. 2023 a , Astronomy and Astrophysics, 674, A1, 10.1051/0004-6361/202243940

    2023 doi

  24. [32]

    2023 b , Astronomy and Astrophysics, 674, A33, 10.1051/0004-6361/202243709

    Gaia Collaboration , Montegriffo, P., Bellazzini, M., et al. 2023 b , Astronomy and Astrophysics, 674, A33, 10.1051/0004-6361/202243709

    2023 doi

  25. [33]

    S., & Rice, W

    Greaves, J. S., & Rice, W. K. M. 2010, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 407, 1981, 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2010.17043.x

    2010

  26. [34]

    P., Wilking, B

    Greene, T. P., Wilking, B. A., Andr \' e , P., Young, E. T., & Lada, C. J. 1994, The Astrophysics Journal, 434, 614, 10.1086/174763

    1994 doi

  27. [35]

    1998, The Astrophysics Journal, 492, 323, 10.1086/305032

    Gullbring, E., Hartmann, L., Brice \ n o, C., & Calvet, N. 1998, The Astrophysics Journal, 492, 323, 10.1086/305032

    1998 doi

  28. [36]

    2024, The Astrophysics Journal, 960, 58, 10.3847/1538-4357/ad04d3

    Haerken, H., Li, G.-W., Li, M., Duan, F., & Zhao, Y. 2024, The Astrophysics Journal, 960, 58, 10.3847/1538-4357/ad04d3

    2024 doi

  29. [37]

    Haisch, K. E. J., Lada, E. A., & Lada, C. J. 2001, The Astrophysics Journal Letters, 553, L153, 10.1086/320685

    2001 doi

  30. [38]

    2016, Annual Review of Astronomy and Astrophysics, 54, 135, 10.1146/annurev-astro-081915-023347

    Hartmann, L., Herczeg, G., & Calvet, N. 2016, Annual Review of Astronomy and Astrophysics, 54, 135, 10.1146/annurev-astro-081915-023347

    2016 doi

  31. [39]

    1994, The Astrophysics Journal, 426, 669, 10.1086/174104

    Hartmann, L., Hewett, R., & Calvet, N. 1994, The Astrophysics Journal, 426, 669, 10.1086/174104

    1994 doi

  32. [40]

    J., & Hillenbrand, L

    Herczeg, G. J., & Hillenbrand, L. A. 2014, The Astrophysics Journal, 786, 97, 10.1088/0004-637X/786/2/97

    2014 doi

  33. [41]

    2015, The Astrophysics Journal, 808, 23, 10.1088/0004-637X/808/1/23

    ---. 2015, The Astrophysics Journal, 808, 23, 10.1088/0004-637X/808/1/23

    2015 doi

  34. [42]

    2007 a , The Astrophysics Journal, 662, 1067, 10.1086/513735

    Hern \' a ndez, J., Hartmann, L., Megeath, T., et al. 2007 a , The Astrophysics Journal, 662, 1067, 10.1086/513735

    2007 doi

  35. [43]

    2007 b , The Astrophysics Journal, 671, 1784, 10.1086/522882

    Hern \' a ndez, J., Calvet, N., Brice \ n o, C., et al. 2007 b , The Astrophysics Journal, 671, 1784, 10.1086/522882

    2007 doi

  36. [44]

    W., Kaiser, N., Aussel, H., et al

    Hodapp, K. W., Kaiser, N., Aussel, H., et al. 2004, Astron. Nachrichten, 325, 636, 10.1002/asna.200410300

    2004 doi

  37. [45]

    2005, Astronomy and Astrophysics, 442, 703, 10.1051/0004-6361:20041905

    Hueso, R., & Guillot, T. 2005, Astronomy and Astrophysics, 442, 703, 10.1051/0004-6361:20041905

    2005 doi

  38. [46]

    L., & Reffert, S

    Hunt, E. L., & Reffert, S. 2023, Astronomy and Astrophysics, 673, A114, 10.1051/0004-6361/202346285

    2023 doi

  39. [47]

    M., & Kenyon, S

    Kennedy, G. M., & Kenyon, S. J. 2009, The Astrophysics Journal, 695, 1210, 10.1088/0004-637X/695/2/1210

    2009 doi

  40. [48]

    P., & Leisawitz, D

    Koenig, X. P., & Leisawitz, D. T. 2014, The Astrophysics Journal, 791, 131, 10.1088/0004-637X/791/2/131

    2014 doi

  41. [49]

    Kulkarni, S. R. 2018, Astron. Telegr., 11266, 1. https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018ATel11266....1K

    2018

  42. [50]

    J., & Wilking, B

    Lada, C. J., & Wilking, B. A. 1984, The Astrophysics Journal, 287, 610, 10.1086/162719

    1984 doi

  43. [51]

    J., Muench, A

    Lada, C. J., Muench, A. A., Luhman, K. L., et al. 2006, The Astronomical Journal, 131, 1574, 10.1086/499808

    2006 doi

  44. [52]

    P., Kuchner, M

    Laos, S., Wisniewski, J. P., Kuchner, M. J., et al. 2022, The Astrophysics Journal, 935, 111, 10.3847/1538-4357/ac8156

    2022 doi

  45. [53]

    2020, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 494, 62, 10.1093/mnras/staa689

    Lee, J., Song, I., & Murphy, S. 2020, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 494, 62, 10.1093/mnras/staa689

    2020 doi

  46. [54]

    2018, Re-normalising the Astrometric Chi-square in Gaia DR2 , Tech

    Lindegren, L. 2018, Re-normalising the Astrometric Chi-square in Gaia DR2 , Tech. Rep. GAIA-C3-TN-LU-LL-124-01. http://www.rssd.esa.int/doc_fetch.php?id=3757412

    2018

  47. [55]

    2021, The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series, 254, 20, 10.3847/1538-4365/abf4d1

    Liu, J., Fang, M., Tian, H., et al. 2021, The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series, 254, 20, 10.3847/1538-4365/abf4d1

    2021 doi

  48. [56]

    Luhman, K. L. 2022 a , The Astronomical Journal, 163, 25, 10.3847/1538-3881/ac35e3

    2022 doi

  49. [57]

    2022 b , The Astronomical Journal, 164, 151, 10.3847/1538-3881/ac85e2

    ---. 2022 b , The Astronomical Journal, 164, 151, 10.3847/1538-3881/ac85e2

    2022 doi

  50. [58]

    L., & Esplin, T

    Luhman, K. L., & Esplin, T. L. 2020, The Astronomical Journal, 160, 44, 10.3847/1538-3881/ab9599

    2020 doi

  51. [59]

    L., & Mamajek, E

    Luhman, K. L., & Mamajek, E. E. 2012, The Astrophysics Journal, 758, 31, 10.1088/0004-637X/758/1/31

    2012 doi

  52. [60]

    2015, Research in Astronomy and Astrophysics, 15, 1095, 10.1088/1674-4527/15/8/002

    Luo, A.-L., Zhao, Y.-H., Zhao, G., et al. 2015, Research in Astronomy and Astrophysics, 15, 1095, 10.1088/1674-4527/15/8/002

    2015 doi

  53. [61]

    A., Schlafly, E., Finkbeiner, D., et al

    Magnier, E. A., Schlafly, E., Finkbeiner, D., et al. 2013, The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series, 205, 20, 10.1088/0067-0049/205/2/20

    2013 doi

  54. [62]

    Mamajek, E. E. 2009, in American Institute of Physics Conference Series, Vol. 1158, Exopl. Disk. Their Form. Divers., ed. T. Usuda, M. Tamura, & M. Ishii, 3--10, 10.1063/1.3215910

    2009 doi

  55. [63]

    E., Meyer, M

    Mamajek, E. E., Meyer, M. R., & Liebert, J. 2002, The Astronomical Journal, 124, 1670, 10.1086/341952

    2002 doi

  56. [64]

    F., Morbidelli, A., & Guillot, T

    Manara, C. F., Morbidelli, A., & Guillot, T. 2018, Astronomy and Astrophysics, 618, L3, 10.1051/0004-6361/201834076

    2018 doi

  57. [65]

    2011, The Astrophysics Journal Letters, 740, L7, 10.1088/2041-8205/740/1/L7

    Mo \' o r, A., \' A brah \' a m, P., Juh \' a sz, A., et al. 2011, The Astrophysics Journal Letters, 740, L7, 10.1088/2041-8205/740/1/L7

    2011 doi

  58. [66]

    J., Lawson, W

    Murphy, S. J., Lawson, W. A., & Bento, J. 2015, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 453, 2220, 10.1093/mnras/stv1745

    2015 doi

  59. [67]

    J., Mamajek, E

    Murphy, S. J., Mamajek, E. E., & Bell, C. P. M. 2018, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 476, 3290, 10.1093/mnras/sty471

    2018 doi

  60. [68]

    1998 a , The Astronomical Journal, 116, 2965, 10.1086/300636

    Muzerolle, J., Hartmann, L., & Calvet, N. 1998 a , The Astronomical Journal, 116, 2965, 10.1086/300636

    1998 doi

  61. [69]

    1998 b , The Astronomical Journal, 116, 455, 10.1086/300428

    ---. 1998 b , The Astronomical Journal, 116, 455, 10.1086/300428

    1998 doi

  62. [70]

    R., & Kenyon, S

    Najita, J. R., & Kenyon, S. J. 2014, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 445, 3315, 10.1093/mnras/stu1994

    2014 doi

  63. [71]

    J., & Mamajek, E

    Pecaut, M. J., & Mamajek, E. E. 2013, The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series, 208, 9, 10.1088/0067-0049/208/1/9

    2013 doi

  64. [72]

    2016, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 461, 794, 10.1093/mnras/stw1300

    ---. 2016, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 461, 794, 10.1093/mnras/stw1300

    2016 doi

  65. [73]

    Pfalzner, S., & Bannister, M. T. 2019, The Astrophysics Journal Letters, 874, L34, 10.3847/2041-8213/ab0fa0

    2019 doi

  66. [74]

    M., Cody, A

    Rebull, L. M., Cody, A. M., Covey, K. R., et al. 2014, The Astronomical Journal, 148, 92, 10.1088/0004-6256/148/5/92

    2014 doi

  67. [75]

    2015, Astronomy and Astrophysics, 576, A52, 10.1051/0004-6361/201424846

    Ribas, \' A ., Bouy, H., & Mer \' i n, B. 2015, Astronomy and Astrophysics, 576, A52, 10.1051/0004-6361/201424846

    2015 doi

  68. [76]

    Ribas, \' A ., Mer \' i n, B., Bouy, H., & Maud, L. T. 2014, Astronomy and Astrophysics, 561, A54, 10.1051/0004-6361/201322597

    2014 doi

  69. [77]

    Robitaille, T. P. 2017, Astronomy and Astrophysics, 600, A11, 10.1051/0004-6361/201425486

    2017 doi

  70. [78]

    P., Whitney, B

    Robitaille, T. P., Whitney, B. A., Indebetouw, R., & Wood, K. 2007, The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series, 169, 328, 10.1086/512039

    2007 doi

  71. [79]

    P., Whitney, B

    Robitaille, T. P., Whitney, B. A., Indebetouw, R., Wood, K., & Denzmore, P. 2006, The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series, 167, 256, 10.1086/508424

    2006 doi

  72. [80]

    R., Bessell, M

    Rodriguez, D. R., Bessell, M. S., Zuckerman, B., & Kastner, J. H. 2011, The Astrophysics Journal, 727, 62, 10.1088/0004-637X/727/2/62

    2011 doi

  73. [81]

    R., Zuckerman, B., Faherty, J

    Rodriguez, D. R., Zuckerman, B., Faherty, J. K., & Vican, L. 2014, Astronomy and Astrophysics, 567, A20, 10.1051/0004-6361/201423604

    2014 doi

  74. [82]

    2012, The Astrophysics Journal, 757, 163, 10.1088/0004-637X/757/2/163

    Schneider, A., Song, I., Melis, C., Zuckerman, B., & Bessell, M. 2012, The Astrophysics Journal, 757, 163, 10.1088/0004-637X/757/2/163

    2012 doi

  75. [83]

    C., Shkolnik, E

    Schneider, A. C., Shkolnik, E. L., Allers, K. N., et al. 2019, The Astronomical Journal, 157, 234, 10.3847/1538-3881/ab1a26

    2019 doi

  76. [84]

    H., Johnstone, D., & Hollenbach, D

    Shu, F. H., Johnstone, D., & Hollenbach, D. 1993, Icarus, 106, 92, 10.1006/icar.1993.1160

    1993

  77. [85]

    M., Kuchner, M

    Silverberg, S. M., Kuchner, M. J., Wisniewski, J. P., et al. 2016, The Astrophysics Journal Letters, 830, L28, 10.3847/2041-8205/830/2/L28

    2016 doi

  78. [86]

    M., Wisniewski, J

    Silverberg, S. M., Wisniewski, J. P., Kuchner, M. J., et al. 2020, The Astrophysics Journal, 890, 106, 10.3847/1538-4357/ab68e6

    2020 doi

  79. [87]

    N., Pascucci, I., Edwards, S., et al

    Simon, M. N., Pascucci, I., Edwards, S., et al. 2016, The Astrophysics Journal, 831, 169, 10.3847/0004-637X/831/2/169

    2016 doi

  80. [88]

    F., Cutri, R

    Skrutskie, M. F., Cutri, R. M., Stiening, R., et al. 2003, 2MASS All-Sky Point Source Catalog , IPAC, 10.26131/IRSA2

    2003 doi

  81. [89]

    2006, The Astronomical Journal, 131, 1163, 10.1086/498708

    ---. 2006, The Astronomical Journal, 131, 1163, 10.1086/498708

    2006 doi

  82. [90]

    V., Gavras, P., Karampelas, A., et al

    Sokolovsky, K. V., Gavras, P., Karampelas, A., et al. 2017, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 464, 274, 10.1093/mnras/stw2262

    2017 doi

  83. [91]

    2012, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 421, 78, 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2011.20130.x

    Spezzi, L., De Marchi , G., Panagia, N., Sicilia-Aguilar, A., & Ercolano, B. 2012, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 421, 78, 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2011.20130.x

    2012

  84. [92]

    M., Rebull, L., et al

    Stauffer, J., Cody, A. M., Rebull, L., et al. 2016, The Astronomical Journal, 151, 60, 10.3847/0004-6256/151/3/60

    2016 doi

  85. [93]

    2019, The Astrophysics Journal, 877, 116, 10.3847/1538-4357/ab1c61

    Wang, S., & Chen, X. 2019, The Astrophysics Journal, 877, 116, 10.3847/1538-4357/ab1c61

    2019 doi

  86. [94]

    J., et al

    Wang, X.-L., Fang, M., Herczeg, G. J., et al. 2023, Research in Astronomy and Astrophysics, 23, 75015, 10.1088/1674-4527/acd58b

    2023 doi

  87. [95]

    L., & Kruijssen, J

    Ward, J. L., & Kruijssen, J. M. D. 2018, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 475, 5659, 10.1093/mnras/sty117

    2018 doi

  88. [96]

    L., Kruijssen, J

    Ward, J. L., Kruijssen, J. M. D., & Rix, H.-W. 2020, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 495, 663, 10.1093/mnras/staa1056

    2020 doi

  89. [97]

    Wilhelm, M. J. C., & Portegies Zwart , S. 2022, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 509, 44, 10.1093/mnras/stab2523

    2022 doi

  90. [98]

    P., & Cieza, L

    Williams, J. P., & Cieza, L. A. 2011, Annual Review of Astronomy and Astrophysics, 49, 67, 10.1146/annurev-astro-081710-102548

    2011 doi

  91. [99]

    L., Eisenhardt, P

    Wright, E. L., Eisenhardt, P. R. M., Mainzer, A. K., et al. 2010, The Astronomical Journal, 140, 1868, 10.1088/0004-6256/140/6/1868

    2010 doi

  92. [100]

    2019, AllWISE Source Catalog , IPAC, 10.26131/IRSA1

    ---. 2019, AllWISE Source Catalog , IPAC, 10.26131/IRSA1

    2019 doi

  93. [101]

    P., Prugniel, P., Gupta, R., & Koleva, M

    Wu, Y., Singh, H. P., Prugniel, P., Gupta, R., & Koleva, M. 2011, Astronomy and Astrophysics, 525, A71, 10.1051/0004-6361/201015014

    2011 doi

  94. [102]

    W., Bodenheimer, P., & Laughlin, G

    Yorke, H. W., Bodenheimer, P., & Laughlin, G. 1993, The Astrophysics Journal, 411, 274, 10.1086/172827

    1993 doi

  95. [103]

    S., Schlafly, E

    Zucker, C., Speagle, J. S., Schlafly, E. F., et al. 2019, The Astrophysics Journal, 879, 125, 10.3847/1538-4357/ab2388

    2019 doi

  96. [104]

    2012, The Astrophysics Journal, 758, 77, 10.1088/0004-637X/758/2/77

    Zuckerman, B., & Song, I. 2012, The Astrophysics Journal, 758, 77, 10.1088/0004-637X/758/2/77

    2012 doi

Pith tools

Reviewed August 10, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.