Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 5 minor 108 references

Measuring Interstellar Carbon Abundance via 158 um [CII] Absorption with SOFIA -- A Potential Detection, and Proof-of-Concept for Depletion Studies with Future Far-IR Facilities

T0 review · 2 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-16 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Far-infrared [CII] absorption may expose how much carbon hides in dust

desk verdict A genuinely useful methods paper with a tentative detection: the IC342 CII feature is plausible but unproven, and the sightline catalog and forecasts are the real contribution. read the letter →

arxiv 2505.02748 v2 pith:QYJUNGKJ submitted 2025-05-05 astro-ph.GA astro-ph.IM

Christopher J. R. Clark , Julia. C. Roman-Duval , Suzanne C. Madden Marc Mertens , Claire E. Murray , Jürgen Stutzki , Elizabeth Tarantino , and Kirill Tchernyshyov This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.GAastro-ph.IM
keywords far-infraredastronomyinterstellarlineabsorptionabundancescarbondepletiondiffusemediumastronomicaltechniquestelescopes
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

This paper argues that carbon abundance and depletion in the diffuse interstellar medium can be measured in the far-infrared, by observing 158 µm [CII] absorption against the bright dust continuum of a background galaxy. It presents a catalog of 402 such sightlines and a SOFIA pilot study toward IC 342 that yields a potential first detection of foreground Galactic [CII] absorption. If the method holds, it would bypass the ultraviolet transitions that have limited carbon abundance measurements to fewer than 20 sightlines, and it would reach the high-extinction regions that UV spectroscopy cannot probe. This matters because the fraction of carbon locked in dust grains versus floating as gas is a central, poorly constrained input to dust-to-gas ratios and to the ongoing debates about dust budgets and interstellar carbon abundance.

What carries the argument

The method rests on the fine-structure ground state of C+ and the relation $\int\tau_{\mathrm{[CII]}}\,dv = N_{\mathrm{C^+,l}} / (1.4 \times 10^{17} \ \mathrm{cm^{-2}\,km^{-1}\,s})$, valid when the excitation temperature is below about 30 K so that most C+ is in the ground state. A bright nearby galaxy supplies the far-infrared continuum; foreground Milky Way C+ imprints a Gaussian absorption feature at the velocity of the Galactic HI, while the galaxy's own [CII] emission and dust continuum are modeled and subtracted. The paper builds a catalog by combining 160 µm continuum from an archival galaxy survey with 21 cm HI columns, CO-based H2 columns, a depletion-strength relation, and sky-subtraction simulations using Gaussian process regression.

What would settle it

A decisive test is to observe the same IC 342 sightline with a future far-infrared facility at higher spectral resolution and with a stable baseline, or to observe several catalog sightlines spanning different Galactic latitudes. If the apparent absorption feature does not scale with the independently measured HI column, or if a spatially resolved [CII] map of IC 342 reproduces the residual through intrinsic velocity structure, the foreground-absorption interpretation would collapse.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that 158 µm [CII] absorption from cold foreground Galactic gas can be seen against the far-infrared continuum of a bright background galaxy, and that the integrated opacity of that line directly yields the C+ column density. Applying this to the IC 342 sightline with SOFIA, the authors measure an integrated Galactic [CII] opacity of $\int\tau\,dv = 9.36 \pm 2.38$ km/s (S/N = 4), a C+ column of $(1.31 \pm 0.33) \times 10^{18}$ cm$^{-2}$, and a gas-phase carbon abundance of $12+\log_{10}(\mathrm{C/H}) = 8.54^{+0.10}_{-0.13}$. They characterize this as a potential detection, because the feature could in principle be intrinsic asymmetry in IC 342's [CII] emission rather than foreground absorption; they argue the CO spectrum of the same region shows no such asymmetry, favoring the absorption interpretation. The measured carbon abundance implies little or no carbon depletion along this sightline, consistent with zero depletion within uncertainties.

Load-bearing premise

The potential detection assumes that the intrinsic [CII] emission profile of IC 342 is symmetric and Gaussian across the Milky Way velocity range, so that the residual near 0 km/s is foreground absorption; the CO spectrum shows no such asymmetry, but because CO traces denser gas than [CII], it cannot prove the [CII] emission is symmetric.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If the IC 342 detection is real, it would be the first interstellar carbon abundance measurement made from far-infrared absorption rather than ultraviolet lines.
  • The 402-sightline catalog gives future far-infrared missions dozens of targets where [CII] absorption should be detectable in under 10 hours of integration.
  • The method extends carbon abundance and depletion measurements to high-extinction sightlines that are inaccessible in the ultraviolet because background stars are too faint.
  • The failure of the Circinus sightline, due to baseline instability, identifies instrument baseline stability as the key technical requirement for this technique.
  • A carbon depletion consistent with zero along IC 342 would provide a new anchor point for depletion-strength relations in the diffuse ISM.

Reading between the lines

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

  • A systematic survey with a future facility could map carbon depletion as a function of Galactic column density, testing whether depletion rises with density or stays flat, a question the paper notes is currently unconstrained.
  • The same absorption technique could be extended to other far-infrared fine-structure lines, such as [O I] at 63 µm, to measure the depletion of oxygen if its excitation temperature is similarly low.
  • If carbon depletion really is small along diffuse sightlines, the tension between dust models requiring abundant interstellar carbon and stellar photospheric abundances would be sharpened rather than resolved.
  • Combining [CII] absorption with 21 cm and CO emission along the same sightline would yield a direct gas-phase carbon-to-hydrogen ratio without assuming a total interstellar carbon abundance.
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

2 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper proposes a novel method for measuring interstellar carbon abundance and depletion using 158 μm [CII] absorption against bright extragalactic background sources, rather than traditional UV absorption lines. The authors construct a catalog of 402 candidate sightlines after successive cuts for continuum brightness, molecular gas fraction, and background-galaxy velocity overlap, and simulate the accuracy of Milky Way [CII] emission subtraction using Gaussian process regression on IRAS data. They report a SOFIA-upGREAT pilot observation toward IC 342 in which a negative residual at v_LSR ≈ 0 km/s is modeled as foreground Galactic [CII] absorption, yielding an integrated opacity of 9.36±2.38 km/s and a gas-phase carbon abundance of 12+log(C/H)=8.54(+0.10,-0.13). They also present forecasts for PRIMA, FIRSST, SALTUS, and Origins, concluding that all four future facilities could detect [CII] absorption along a substantial number of sightlines. The detection is explicitly labeled as a potential detection, with the main alternative interpretation being intrinsic asymmetry in IC 342's [CII] emission profile.

Significance. If the IC 342 detection is confirmed, this would be the first detection of foreground Galactic [CII] absorption against an extragalactic background source, opening a new window for carbon depletion studies in high-extinction sightlines that are inaccessible to UV spectroscopy. The 402-sightline catalog and the detailed sky-subtraction simulations are independently useful products for future FIR missions. The paper is also honest about the provisional nature of the detection, and the future-facility forecasts are clearly presented. However, the central detection currently rests on an unproven symmetry assumption, and the derived abundance is therefore not yet on firm ground; the proof-of-concept value of the study is substantial, but the quantitative abundance claim is not robust as it stands.

major comments (2)
  1. [Section 3.2.2 and Section 3.2.3] The central detection is not uniquely established because the alternative hypothesis of intrinsically asymmetric [CII] emission from IC 342 is not quantitatively excluded. Section 3.2.2 explicitly concedes that the negative residual could be caused by intrinsic asymmetry in IC 342's [CII] emission, and that the CO symmetry test is not decisive because CO traces denser gas than [CII]. The χ² comparison in Section 4 (41.2 with absorption versus 67.0 with two Gaussian emission components) excludes a specific two-Gaussian emission model with no absorption, but it does not test a single skewed or otherwise asymmetric emission profile, which is the natural alternative for a rotating disk with radial variations or an outflow. A blue-side deficit in the IC 342 [CII] profile at a velocity coinciding with the Milky Way range is a plausible coincidence. I recommend that the authors fit a skewed Gaussian or an empirically flexible emission model to the [CII] data outside the Milky Way velocity range and assess whether the residual persists, or obtain 21 cm HI absorption data toward IC 342 as an independent test of foreground Galactic absorption. Until such a test is performed, the 'potential detection' should be treated as a tentative residual rather than a measurement, and the abundance derived in Section 4 should be presented as conditional on the absorption interpretation.
  2. [Section 4] The quantitative carbon abundance result is derived from an integrated opacity with S/N=4 (9.36±2.38 km/s), and the quoted uncertainties from the MCMC posterior do not include the systematic uncertainty associated with the emission-profile assumption. Because the asymmetry alternative would change the inferred opacity to zero (or to an unconstrained quantity), the stated abundance 12+log(C/H)=8.54(+0.10,-0.13) and the consequent 'non-detection of depletion' are not robust measurements. The manuscript should either add a systematic term for the emission-profile uncertainty, or reframe these numbers as an illustrative consistency check under a specified model rather than as a measured carbon abundance. This is a load-bearing issue because the abstract and conclusions present the abundance as one of the paper's main outcomes.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Abstract and Section 2.2.3] The abstract states that the catalog contains 432 candidate sightlines, but after the cuts described in Sections 2.2.2 and 2.2.3 the final catalog contains 402 sightlines; the number in the abstract should be corrected to 402 or the wording should clarify that 432 is the pre-cut number.
  2. [Section 3.2] In the paragraph beginning 'We expect the Galactic [CII] emission along the Circinus sightline...', the text appears to describe the IC 342 sightline, since Table 1 lists a predicted [CII]-emission-to-absorption ratio of 0.92 for IC 342 and 1.63 for Circinus; this mislabeling should be corrected.
  3. [Table 2] The grid range for μ_emit is listed as 0.30–0.38 km/s with 17 points, which is inconsistent with the central velocity of ~34 km/s quoted elsewhere; this is likely a typo for 30–38 km/s and should be corrected.
  4. [Figures 3 and 7] The label 'Absoprtion' in the legend is a typo and should read 'Absorption'.
  5. [General] There are several minor typographical issues, such as 'intergrations' in Section 5.1 and the title typesetting of 'F uture'; a careful proofread would improve the manuscript.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 2.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the detected [CII] absorption is not forced by a fitted parameter or by the paper's predictive model, and the self-citations are data/calibration inputs, not load-bearing derivations.

full rationale

The paper's central measurement chain is not circular. The opacity-to-column conversion (Eq. 2) is taken from Gerin et al. (2015), and the depletion relations (Eqs. 5-6) from Jenkins (2009); neither is derived or fitted in this paper. The predicted [CII] absorption toward IC 342 is a forward model based on HI4PI/Planck column densities, the adopted carbon abundance, and Eq. 2, but the MCMC fit to the SOFIA spectrum leaves the absorption parameters free. The recovered integrated opacity, 9.36 +/- 2.38 km/s, differs from the predicted 5.49 km/s (a 1.6-sigma excess), so the detection is not forced to match the prediction. The CO symmetry check and the Gaussian emission model are physical assumptions, not circular reductions; the paper explicitly acknowledges that intrinsic asymmetry in IC 342's [CII] emission remains an alternative explanation. The self-citations (DustPedia/Herschel data from Clark et al. 2018, depletion work of Roman-Duval et al. 2022) supply external data or calibration but are not used to define the measured quantity. Because the central claim remains dependent only on ordinary astrophysical modeling and external calibrations, any circularity is at most minor and non-load-bearing.

Assumptions & free parameters 2 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The method rests on standard astrophysical tracers and empirical relations (HI4PI, Planck CO, Jenkins depletion, IRAS-based sky subtraction). No new physical entities are introduced. The main fitted-to-data parameters used for forecasts are the power-law coefficients for sky-subtraction error; the IC342 detection itself is a fitted model component but is the measurement result, not an adjustable input.

free parameters (2)
  • GPR sky-subtraction error power-law index = 0.502 +/- 0.009
    Fitted to IRAS-IRIS simulation points in Appendix C.1 and extrapolated to 20 arcsec to claim 0.33% subtraction accuracy; affects how many sightlines are considered detectable.
  • GPR sky-subtraction error intercept = 0.601% +/- 0.021% at 1 arcmin
    Same fit as the power-law index, used to extrapolate sky-subtraction error to smaller angular scales.
assumptions (6)
  • domain assumption C+ in the diffuse ISM has excitation temperature Tex < 30 K (ideally <25 K), so the fraction in the ground state is high and Eq. 2 traces total C+ column.
    Invoked in Section 2.1; if Tex is higher, opacity underestimates C+ column and the derived carbon abundance and depletion are biased.
  • ad hoc to paper The background galaxy IC342 [CII] emission profile is intrinsically symmetric and Gaussian across the Milky Way velocity range.
    Used in Sections 3.2.1 to 3.2.3; the detection is the residual after subtracting a Gaussian emission model. The paper flags this as the main alternative explanation.
  • domain assumption Standard Milky Way CO-to-H2 conversion coefficient alpha_CO = 3.2 M_sun pc^-2 (K km/s)^-1 applies to Planck CO maps.
    Used in Eq. 3 to derive N_H2 and total hydrogen column for each sightline; systematic errors in alpha_CO propagate to predicted carbon columns.
  • domain assumption The Jenkins (2009) depletion strength relation (Eqs. 5 to 6) predicts carbon depletion as a function of N_H.
    Used to predict gas-phase carbon fraction for every candidate sightline; the relation was derived from UV measurements and may not hold in all environments.
  • domain assumption Diffuse ISM structure is fractal and scale-invariant from arcminute scales down to 20 arcsec, so GPR sky-subtraction errors extrapolate as a power law.
    Section C.1 extrapolates the error from IRAS 4.3 arcmin resolution to 20 arcsec; if the power law is wrong, the detectable sightline counts for future facilities change.
  • domain assumption The [CII] absorption line width is about 1.5 times narrower than the HI width, sigma_C+ = sigma_HI/1.5.
    Section 2.2.5 uses this to convert predicted opacity into peak optical depth; significant scatter in this ratio affects predicted detectability.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Measuring Interstellar Carbon Abundance via 158 um [CII] Absorption with SOFIA -- A Potential Detection, and Proof-of-Concept for Depletion Studies with Future Far-IR Facilities." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/QYJUNGKJ

@misc{pith2026250502748,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Measuring Interstellar Carbon Abundance via 158 um [CII] Absorption with SOFIA -- A Potential Detection, and Proof-of-Concept for Depletion Studies with Future Far-IR Facilities},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/QYJUNGKJ}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2505.02748}
}
abstract

Carbon plays key roles in the InterStellar Medium (ISM) -- as a constituent of dust, as the carrier of the dominant far-infrared cooling line, and as a component of various important molecules. But despite this, there are very few measurements of the abundance and depletion of carbon in the diffuse ISM. As with other elements, these measurements are traditionally performed in the ultraviolet. But for carbon, such measurements are extremely difficult, and less than 20 have been reported in the literature to date. Here, we present a novel method of measuring the abundance and depletion of carbon in the diffuse ISM: by observing absorption of the 158 $\mu$m [CII] line in the far-infrared. We present a catalog of 432 candidate sightlines that use bright nearby galaxies as background sources, and predict the [CII] absorption expected towards each. We conducted a pilot study using SOFIA, targeting sightlines towards the galaxies IC342 and Circinus. We report a potential detection of Galactic [CII] absorption along the IC342 sightline, although it requires disentangling [CII] emission from IC342 itself. The Circinus sightline had an insufficiently stable instrumental baseline to allow a detection. This SOFIA study informs the prospects for [CII] absorption measurements with future facilities. To that end, we explore the potential for four proposed future FIR telescopes -- PRIMA, FIRSST, SALTUS, and Origins -- to detect [CII] absorption. We find that all four facilities would be able to detect [CII] absorption along a significant number of sightlines.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2505.02748 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Black: Plot of how the fraction of C+ ions in the fine-structure ground state evolves with excitation tempera￾ture. Red: Plot of how the column density of C+ determined from a given level of [Cii] integrated line opacity, R τ[CII] dv, evolves with excitation temperature. C. Guevara et al. (2020) use multi-tracer multi￾isotopologue observations of [Cii] absorption for nu￾merous sightlines8 towards a number of Galacti… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Idealized model spectra for the sightline towards background galaxy NGC 7331. Left: Predicted model of 158 µm continuum emission from NGC 7331 with Milky Way [Cii] absorption; also plotted is the predicted MW [Cii] emission, and the observed Milky Way Hi emission (from HI4PI) for reference. Centre: Predicted combined spectra of background galaxy continuum emission plus Milky Way [Cii] emission, plotted with and with… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. SOFIA-upGREAT 157.7 µm spectrum of the IC 342 sightline, plotted in blue. Plotted in orange is a model of dust continuum plus Gaussian [Cii] emission from IC 342 itself, produced by fitting only to data outside the Milky Way velocity range. This model has significant residuals, shown in purple, centered around vLSR ∼ 0 km s−1 . Also shown for reference, in black, is the HI4PI 21 cm Hi spectrum with Tb × 0.03, for ea… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (4 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Spectrum of CO(1-0) emission from IC 342 (using data from M. Querejeta et al. 2023), within the same aper￾ture as our SOFIA-upGREAT 157.7 µm spectrum, at the same angular resolution. Also plotted is our best-fit Gaus￾sian model to the CO data (produced by fitting only …
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: SOFIA-upGREAT [Cii] spectrum (blue), HI4PI 21 cm Hi spectrum (black), and Milky Way velocity range (green shading), plotted same as per [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_7.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Corner plot of the probability distribution of our full model (continuum + [Cii] emission + [Cii] absorption) of the IC 342 spectrum, from MCMC sampling. The marginal￾ized posterior of each parameter is shown, along with its covariance with the other parameters. For ea…
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Plot of predicted peak [Cii] absorption opacity, τ (peak) [CII] , that would be observed at instrumental velocity resolution, against the integration time required to detect that absorption at S/N = 10. Points are plotted for FIRSST, PRIMA, SALTUS, and Origins proposed…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

108 extracted references · 15 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    2018, MNRAS, 474, 2094, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stx2109

    Angus, R., Morton, T., Aigrain, S., Foreman- Mackey, D., & Rajpaul, V. 2018, MNRAS, 474, 2094, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stx2109

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stx2109 2018

  2. [2]

    R., et al

    Argyriou, I., Glasse, A., Law, D. R., et al. 2023, A&A, 675, A111, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202346489 Astropy Collaboration, Robitaille, T. P., Tollerud, E. J., et al. 2013, A&A, 558, A33, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201322068 Astropy Collaboration, Price-Whelan, A. M., Sip˝ ocz, B. M., et al. 2018, AJ, 156, 123, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/aabc4f

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202346489 2023

  3. [3]

    E., Ossenkopf, V., et al

    Beuther, H., Ragan, S. E., Ossenkopf, V., et al. 2014, A&A, 571, A53, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201424757

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201424757 2014

  4. [4]

    2018, A&A, 620, A112, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201833699

    Bianchi, S., De Vis, P., Viaene, S., et al. 2018, A&A, 620, A112, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201833699

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201833699 2018

  5. [5]

    2008, AJ, 136, 2846, doi: 10.1088/0004-6256/136/6/2846

    Bigiel, F., Leroy, A., Walter, F., et al. 2008, AJ, 136, 2846, doi: 10.1088/0004-6256/136/6/2846

    doi:10.1088/0004-6256/136/6/2846 2008

  6. [6]

    G., Tan, J

    Bisbas, T. G., Tan, J. C., Csengeri, T., et al. 2018, MNRAS, 478, L54, doi: 10.1093/mnrasl/sly039

    work page doi:10.1093/mnrasl/sly039 2018

  7. [7]

    D., Wolfire, M., & Leroy, A

    Bolatto, A. D., Wolfire, M., & Leroy, A. K. 2013, Annual Review of Astronomy and Astrophysics, 51, 207, doi: 10.1146/annurev-astro-082812-140944

    doi:10.1146/annurev-astro-082812-140944 2013

  8. [8]

    2022, in American Astronomical Society Meeting Abstracts, Vol

    Bradford, C., Glenn, J., Armus, L., et al. 2022, in American Astronomical Society Meeting Abstracts, Vol. 54, American Astronomical Society Meeting Abstracts, 304.07 26

    2022

Show all 108 references
  1. [9]

    M., Cameron, B., Moore, B., et al

    Bradford, C. M., Cameron, B., Moore, B., et al. 2018, in Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, Vol. 10698, Space Telescopes and Instrumentation 2018: Optical, Infrared, and Millimeter Wave, ed. M. Lystrup, H. A. MacEwen, G. G. Fazio, N. B...

    2018 doi

  2. [10]

    B., France, K., & McCandliss, S

    Burgh, E. B., France, K., & McCandliss, S. R. 2007, ApJ, 658, 446, doi: 10.1086/511259

    2007 doi

  3. [11]

    L., & Walter, F

    Carilli, C. L., & Walter, F. 2013, ARA&A, 51, 105, doi: 10.1146/annurev-astro-082812-140953

    2013 doi

  4. [12]

    M., Bergner, J., et al

    Chin, G., Anderson, C. M., Bergner, J., et al. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2405.12829, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2405.12829

    2024 doi arXiv

  5. [13]

    S., et al

    Choudhuri, S., Bharadwaj, S., Ali, S. S., et al. 2017, MNRAS, 470, L11, doi: 10.1093/mnrasl/slx066

    2017 doi

  6. [14]

    Clark, C. J. R., Verstocken, S., Bianchi, S., et al. 2018, A&A, 609, A37, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201731419

    2018 doi

  7. [15]

    C., Glover, S

    Clark, P. C., Glover, S. C. O., Ragan, S. E., & Duarte-Cabral, A. 2019, MNRAS, 486, 4622, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stz1119

    2019 doi

  8. [16]

    2023, in American Astronomical Society Meeting Abstracts, Vol

    Cooray, A., & Firsst Science Team. 2023, in American Astronomical Society Meeting Abstracts, Vol. 241, American Astronomical Society Meeting Abstracts, 160.17

    2023

  9. [17]

    V., Smith, J

    Croxall, K. V., Smith, J. D., Pellegrini, E., et al. 2017, ApJ, 845, 96, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aa8035

    2017 doi

  10. [18]

    I., Baes, M., Bianchi, S., et al

    Davies, J. I., Baes, M., Bianchi, S., et al. 2017, PASP, 129, 044102, doi: 10.1088/1538-3873/129/974/044102 de Blok, W. J. G., Walter, F., Smith, J. D. T., et al. 2016, AJ, 152, 51, doi: 10.3847/0004-6256/152/2/51 de Graauw, T., Helmich, F. P., Phillips, T. G., et al. 2010, A&...

    2017 doi

  11. [19]

    Draine, B. T. 2003, ARA&A, 41, 241, doi: 10.1146/annurev.astro.41.011802.094840

    2003 arXiv

  12. [20]

    T., & Li, A

    Draine, B. T., & Li, A. 2001, ApJ, 551, 807, doi: 10.1086/320227

    2001 doi

  13. [21]

    T., Dale, D

    Draine, B. T., Dale, D. A., Bendo, G., et al. 2007, ApJ, 663, 866, doi: 10.1086/518306

    2007 doi

  14. [22]

    A., Kreckel, K., et al

    Drory, N., Blanc, G. A., Kreckel, K., et al. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2405.01637, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2405.01637

    2024 doi arXiv

  15. [23]

    2010, A&A, 518, L118, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201014671

    Falgarone, E., Ossenkopf, V., Gerin, M., et al. 2010, A&A, 518, L118, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201014671

    2010 doi

  16. [24]

    J., Bennett, C

    Fixsen, D. J., Bennett, C. L., & Mather, J. C. 1999, ApJ, 526, 207, doi: 10.1086/307962

    1999 doi

  17. [25]

    2016, The Journal of Open Source Software, 1, 24, doi: 10.21105/joss.00024

    Foreman-Mackey, D. 2016, The Journal of Open Source Software, 1, 24, doi: 10.21105/joss.00024

    2016 doi

  18. [26]

    W., Lang, D., & Goodman, J

    Foreman-Mackey, D., Hogg, D. W., Lang, D., & Goodman, J. 2013, Publications of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific, 125, 306, doi: 10.1086/670067

    2013 doi

  19. [27]

    2017, in Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, Vol

    France, K., Fleming, B., West, G., et al. 2017, in Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, Vol. 10397, Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, ed. O. H. Siegmund, 1039713, doi: 10.1117/12.2272025

    2017 doi

  20. [28]

    P., Mather, J

    Gardner, J. P., Mather, J. C., Clampin, M., et al. 2006, SSRv, 123, 485, doi: 10.1007/s11214-006-8315-7

    2006 doi

  21. [29]

    R., et al

    Gerin, M., Ruaud, M., Goicoechea, J. R., et al. 2015, A&A, 573, A30, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201424349

    2015 doi

  22. [30]

    Glover, S. C. O., & Clark, P. C. 2014, MNRAS, 437, 9, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stt1809

    2014 doi

  23. [31]

    R., Teyssier, D., Etxaluze, M., et al

    Goicoechea, J. R., Teyssier, D., Etxaluze, M., et al. 2015, ApJ, 812, 75, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/812/1/75

    2015 doi

  24. [32]

    F., Langer, W

    Goldsmith, P. F., Langer, W. D., Pineda, J. L., & Velusamy, T. 2012, ApJS, 203, 13, doi: 10.1088/0067-0049/203/1/13

    2012 doi

  25. [33]

    D., Clayton, G

    Gordon, K. D., Clayton, G. C., Misselt, K. A., Landolt, A. U., & Wolff, M. J. 2003, ApJ, 594, 279, doi: 10.1086/376774

    2003 doi

  26. [34]

    A., & Burton, W

    Gordon, M. A., & Burton, W. B. 1976, ApJ, 208, 346, doi: 10.1086/154613

    1976 doi

  27. [35]

    U., Simon, R., Stutzki, J., et al

    Graf, U. U., Simon, R., Stutzki, J., et al. 2012, A&A, 542, L16, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201218930

    2012 doi

  28. [36]

    J., Abergel, A., Abreu, A., et al

    Griffin, M. J., Abergel, A., Abreu, A., et al. 2010, A&A, 518, L3, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201014519

    2010 doi

  29. [37]

    2020, A&A, 636, A16, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201834380

    Guevara, C., Stutzki, J., Ossenkopf-Okada, V., et al. 2020, A&A, 636, A16, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201834380

    2020 doi

  30. [38]

    R., Jarrod Millman, K., van der Walt, S

    Harris, C. R., Jarrod Millman, K., van der Walt, S. J., et al. 2020, Nature, 585, 537, doi: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-020-2649-2

    2020 doi

  31. [39]

    R., Malek, L., & Boehmer, L

    Helou, G., Khan, I. R., Malek, L., & Boehmer, L. 1988, ApJS, 68, 151, doi: 10.1086/191285

    1988 doi

  32. [40]

    S., & Draine, B

    Hensley, B. S., & Draine, B. T. 2020, ApJ, 895, 38, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab8cc3

    2020 doi

  33. [41]

    U., G¨ usten, R., et al

    Heyminck, S., Graf, U. U., G¨ usten, R., et al. 2012, A&A, 542, L1, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201218811 HI4PI Collaboration, Ben Bekhti, N., Fl¨ oer, L., et al. 2016, A&A, 594, A116, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201629178

    2012 doi

  34. [42]

    T., Valtchanov, I., et al

    Hopwood, R., Polehampton, E. T., Valtchanov, I., et al. 2015, MNRAS, 449, 2274, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stv353

    2015 doi

  35. [43]

    Hunter, J. D. 2007, Computing in Science & Engineering, 9, 90, doi: 10.1109/MCSE.2007.55

    2007 doi

  36. [44]

    G., Bania, T

    Ingalls, J. G., Bania, T. M., Boulanger, F., et al. 2011, ApJ, 743, 174, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/743/2/174

    2011 doi

  37. [45]

    Jenkins, E. B. 2009, ApJ, 700, 1299, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/700/2/1299

    2009 doi

  38. [46]

    B., & Tripp, T

    Jenkins, E. B., & Tripp, T. M. 2011, ApJ, 734, 65, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/734/1/65

    2011 doi

  39. [47]

    P., Fanciullo, L., K¨ ohler, M., et al

    Jones, A. P., Fanciullo, L., K¨ ohler, M., et al. 2013, A&A, 558, A62, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201321686

    2013 doi

  40. [48]

    P., K¨ ohler, M., Ysard, N., et al

    Jones, A. P., K¨ ohler, M., Ysard, N., et al. 2016, A&A, 588, A43, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201527488

    2016 doi

  41. [49]

    2001, http://www.scipy.org/

    Jones, E., Oliphant, T., Peterson, P., et al. 2001, http://www.scipy.org/

    2001

  42. [50]

    2022, A&A, 659, A36, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202142575

    Kabanovic, S., Schneider, N., Ossenkopf-Okada, V., et al. 2022, A&A, 659, A36, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202142575

    2022 doi

  43. [51]

    D., Goldsmith, P

    Langer, W. D., Goldsmith, P. F., & Pineda, J. L. 2016, A&A, 590, A43, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201628151

    2016 doi

  44. [52]

    D., Velusamy, T., Pineda, J

    Langer, W. D., Velusamy, T., Pineda, J. L., Willacy, K., & Goldsmith, P. F. 2014, A&A, 561, A122, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201322406

    2014 doi

  45. [53]

    2018, in Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, Vol

    Leisawitz, D., Amatucci, E., Carter, R., et al. 2018, in Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, Vol. 10698, Space Telescopes and Instrumentation 2018: Optical, Infrared, and Millimeter Wave, ed. M. Lystrup, H. A. MacEwen, G. G. Fazio, N. B...

    2018 doi

  46. [54]

    K., Walter, F., Sandstrom, K., et al

    Leroy, A. K., Walter, F., Sandstrom, K., et al. 2013, AJ, 146, 19, doi: 10.1088/0004-6256/146/2/19

    2013 doi

  47. [55]

    S., Pety, J., & Lucas, R

    Liszt, H. S., Pety, J., & Lucas, R. 2010, A&A, 518, A45, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201014510

    2010 doi

  48. [56]

    2003, ApJ, 591, 1220, doi: 10.1086/375492

    Lodders, K. 2003, ApJ, 591, 1220, doi: 10.1086/375492

    2003 doi

  49. [57]

    2014, A&A, 570, A13, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201423496

    Makarov, D., Prugniel, P., Terekhova, N., Courtois, H., & Vauglin, I. 2014, A&A, 570, A13, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201423496

    2014 doi

  50. [58]

    2023, in American Astronomical Society Meeting Abstracts, Vol

    McGuire, B., MacGregor, M., Cooray, A., & Firsst Probe Team. 2023, in American Astronomical Society Meeting Abstracts, Vol. 55, American Astronomical Society Meeting Abstracts, 160.07

    2023

  51. [59]

    2010, in Proceedings of the 9th Python in Science Conference, ed

    McKinney, W. 2010, in Proceedings of the 9th Python in Science Conference, ed. S. van der Walt & J. Millman, 51 – 56

    2010

  52. [60]

    2019, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:1912.06213, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.1912.06213 Miville-Deschˆ enes, M.-A., Lagache, G., & Lagache, G

    Meixner, M., Cooray, A., Leisawitz, D., et al. 2019, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:1912.06213, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.1912.06213 Miville-Deschˆ enes, M.-A., Lagache, G., & Lagache, G. 2005, ApJS, 157, 302, doi: 10.1086/427938

    2019 doi arXiv

  53. [61]

    2016, A&A, 586, A37, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201527366

    Mookerjea, B., Israel, F., Kramer, C., et al. 2016, A&A, 586, A37, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201527366

    2016 doi

  54. [62]

    Morton, D. C. 2003, ApJS, 149, 205, doi: 10.1086/377639 National Academies. 2021, Pathways to Discovery in Astronomy and Astrophysics for the 2020s, doi: 10.17226/26141

    2003 doi

  55. [63]

    2016, A&A, 593, L2, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201629037

    Nesvadba, N., Kneissl, R., Ca˜ nameras, R., et al. 2016, A&A, 593, L2, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201629037

    2016 doi

  56. [64]

    J., van Duinen, R., et al

    Neugebauer, G., Habing, H. J., van Duinen, R., et al. 1984, ApJL, 278, L1, doi: 10.1086/184209

    1984 doi

  57. [65]

    B., & Ingargiola, A

    Newville, M., Stensitzki, T., Allen, D. B., & Ingargiola, A. 2015,, 0.8.0 Zenodo, doi: 10.5281/zenodo.11813

    2015 doi

  58. [66]

    2009, MNRAS, 394, 1857, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2009.14497.x

    Obreschkow, D., & Rawlings, S. 2009, MNRAS, 394, 1857, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2009.14497.x

    2009

  59. [67]

    A., et al

    Ossenkopf, V., R¨ ollig, M., Neufeld, D. A., et al. 2013, A&A, 550, A57, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201219837

    2013 doi

  60. [68]

    2019, A&A, 621, A5, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201731596

    Ossenkopf-Okada, V., & Stepanov, R. 2019, A&A, 621, A5, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201731596

    2019 doi

  61. [69]

    2011, Journal of Machine Learning Research, 12, 2825 P´ erez, F., & Granger, B

    Pedregosa, F., Varoquaux, G., Gramfort, A., et al. 2011, Journal of Machine Learning Research, 12, 2825 P´ erez, F., & Granger, B. E. 2007, Computing in Science and Engineering, 9, 21, doi: 10.1109/MCSE.2007.53

    2011 doi

  62. [70]

    L., Riedinger, J

    Pilbratt, G. L., Riedinger, J. R., Passvogel, T., et al. 2010, A&A, 518, L1, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201014759

    2010 doi

  63. [71]

    L., Langer, W

    Pineda, J. L., Langer, W. D., Goldsmith, P. F., et al. 2017, ApJ, 839, 107, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aa683a Planck Collaboration, Ade, P. A. R., Aghanim, N., et al. 2014a, A&A, 571, A13, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201321553 Planck Collaboration, Abergel, A., Ade, P. A. R., et al. 20...

    2017 doi

  64. [72]

    2010, A&A, 518, L2, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201014535

    Poglitsch, A., Waelkens, C., Geis, N., et al. 2010, A&A, 518, L2, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201014535

    2010 doi

  65. [73]

    2023, A&A, 680, A4, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202143023

    Querejeta, M., Pety, J., Schruba, A., et al. 2023, A&A, 680, A4, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202143023

    2023 doi

  66. [74]

    E., & Williams, C

    Rasmussen, C. E., & Williams, C. K. I. 2006, Gaussian Processes for Machine Learning, 5th edn. (London: The MIT Press) R´ emy-Ruyer, A., Madden, S. C., Galliano, F., et al. 2014, A&A, 563, A31, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201322803

    2006 doi

  67. [75]

    2023, PASP, 135, 048001, doi: 10.1088/1538-3873/acb293

    Rigby, J., Perrin, M., McElwain, M., et al. 2023, PASP, 135, 048001, doi: 10.1088/1538-3873/acb293

    2023 doi

  68. [76]

    2018, Journal of Astronomical Instrumentation, 7, 1840014, doi: 10.1142/S2251171718400147

    Risacher, C., G¨ usten, R., Stutzki, J., et al. 2018, Journal of Astronomical Instrumentation, 7, 1840014, doi: 10.1142/S2251171718400147

    2018 doi

  69. [77]

    M., Jenkins, E

    Ritchey, A. M., Jenkins, E. B., Shull, J. M., et al. 2023, ApJ, 952, 57, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/acda25

    2023 doi

  70. [78]

    F., Motte, F., Schneider, N., Elia, D., & Bontemps, S

    Robitaille, J. F., Motte, F., Schneider, N., Elia, D., & Bontemps, S. 2019, A&A, 628, A33, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201935545 R¨ ollig, M., Simon, R., G¨ usten, R., et al. 2012, A&A, 542, L22, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201218935

    2019 doi

  71. [79]

    B., Tchernyshyov, K., et al

    Roman-Duval, J., Jenkins, E. B., Tchernyshyov, K., et al. 2022, ApJ, 928, 90, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac5248

    2022 doi

  72. [80]

    L., Dunne, L., et al

    Rowlands, K., Gomez, H. L., Dunne, L., et al. 2014, MNRAS, 441, 1040, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stu605

    2014 doi

  73. [81]

    2019, A&A, 626, A76, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201832869

    Roy, A., Andr´ e, P., Arzoumanian, D., et al. 2019, A&A, 626, A76, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201832869

    2019 doi

  74. [82]

    J., et al

    Saintonge, A., Catinella, B., Tacconi, L. J., et al. 2017, The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series, 233, 22, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/aa97e0

    2017 doi

  75. [83]

    M., Bolatto, A

    Sandstrom, K. M., Bolatto, A. D., Bot, C., et al. 2012, ApJ, 744, 20, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/744/1/20

    2012 doi

  76. [84]

    F., & Finkbeiner, D

    Schlafly, E. F., & Finkbeiner, D. P. 2011, ApJ, 737, 103, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/737/2/103

    2011 doi

  77. [85]

    K., Walter, F., et al

    Schruba, A., Leroy, A. K., Walter, F., et al. 2011, AJ, 142, 37, doi: 10.1088/0004-6256/142/2/37

    2011 doi

  78. [86]

    C., Dullemond, C

    Shetty, R., Glover, S. C., Dullemond, C. P., & Klessen, R. S. 2011, MNRAS, 412, 1686, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2010.18005.x

    2011

  79. [87]

    J., Lauroesch, J

    Sofia, U. J., Lauroesch, J. T., Meyer, D. M., & Cartledge, S. I. B. 2004, ApJ, 605, 272, doi: 10.1086/382592

    2004 doi

  80. [88]

    J., Parvathi, V

    Sofia, U. J., Parvathi, V. S., Babu, B. R. S., & Murthy, J. 2011, AJ, 141, 22, doi: 10.1088/0004-6256/141/1/22

    2011 doi

  81. [89]

    Stein, M. L. 1999, Interpolation of Spatial Data: Some Theory for Kriging, 1st edn. (New York: Springer)

    1999

  82. [90]

    U., Simon, R., et al

    Stutzki, J., Graf, U. U., Simon, R., et al. 2013, in Molecular Gas, Dust, and Star Formation in Galaxies, ed. T. Wong & J. Ott, Vol. 292, 57–58, doi: 10.1017/S1743921313000380

    2013 doi

  83. [91]

    A., Croxall, K

    Sutter, J., Dale, D. A., Croxall, K. V., et al. 2019, ApJ, 886, 60, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab4da5

    2019 doi

  84. [92]

    D., Herrera-Camus, R., et al

    Tarantino, E., Bolatto, A. D., Herrera-Camus, R., et al. 2021, ApJ, 915, 92, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/abfcc6

    2021 doi

  85. [93]

    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

    2005

  86. [94]

    2018, Journal of Astronomical Instrumentation, 7, 1840011, doi: 10.1142/S2251171718400111

    Temi, P., Hoffman, D., Ennico, K., & Le, J. 2018, Journal of Astronomical Instrumentation, 7, 1840011, doi: 10.1142/S2251171718400111

    2018 doi

  87. [95]

    2017, Herschel-HiFi Instrument Handbook, 2nd edn., HIFI Consortium and the HIFI Instrument Control Centre

    Teyssier, D., Avruch, I., Beaulieu, S., et al. 2017, Herschel-HiFi Instrument Handbook, 2nd edn., HIFI Consortium and the HIFI Instrument Control Centre

    2017

  88. [96]

    Tristram, K. R. W., Impellizzeri, C. M. V., Zhang, Z.-Y., et al. 2022, A&A, 664, A142, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202243535 Van De Putte, D., Cartledge, S. I. B., Gordon, K. D., Clayton, G. C., &

    2022 doi

  89. [97]

    2023, ApJ, 944, 33, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac9902 van der Walt, S., Colbert, S

    Roman-Duval, J. 2023, ApJ, 944, 33, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac9902 van der Walt, S., Colbert, S. C., & Varoquaux, G. 2011, Computing in Science & Engineering, 13, 22, doi: 10.1109/MCSE.2011.37

    2023 doi

  90. [98]

    2015, ApJ, 801, 127, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/801/2/127

    Vazquez, B., Galianni, P., Richmond, M., et al. 2015, ApJ, 801, 127, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/801/2/127

    2015 doi

  91. [99]

    D., Pineda, J

    Velusamy, T., Langer, W. D., Pineda, J. L., & Goldsmith, P. F. 2012, A&A, 541, L10, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201219303

    2012 doi

  92. [100]

    D., Pineda, J

    Velusamy, T., Langer, W. D., Pineda, J. L., et al. 2010, A&A, 521, L18, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201015091

    2010 doi

  93. [101]

    E., et al

    Virtanen, P., Gommers, R., Oliphant, T. E., et al. 2020, Nature Methods, 17, 261, doi: 10.1038/s41592-019-0686-2

    2020 doi

  94. [102]

    Wang, S., Li, A., & Jiang, B. W. 2015, ApJ, 811, 38, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/811/1/38

    2015 doi

  95. [103]

    2000, A&AS, 143, 9, doi: 10.1051/aas:2000332

    Wenger, M., Ochsenbein, F., Egret, D., et al. 2000, A&AS, 143, 9, doi: 10.1051/aas:2000332

    2000 doi

  96. [104]

    G., Hollenbach, D., & McKee, C

    Wolfire, M. G., Hollenbach, D., & McKee, C. F. 2010, ApJ, 716, 1191, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/716/2/1191

    2010 doi

  97. [105]

    G., Tielens, A

    Wolfire, M. G., Tielens, A. G. G. M., Hollenbach, D., & Kaufman, M. J. 2008, ApJ, 680, 384, doi: 10.1086/587688

    2008 doi

  98. [106]

    E., Kimble, R

    Woodgate, B. E., Kimble, R. A., Bowers, C. W., et al. 1998, PASP, 110, 1183, doi: 10.1086/316243

    1998 doi

  99. [107]

    S., Rieke, G

    Wright, G. S., Rieke, G. H., Glasse, A., et al. 2023, PASP, 135, 048003, doi: 10.1088/1538-3873/acbe66

    2023 doi

  100. [108]

    2019, ApJ, 885, 110, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab481a

    Yang, Q., Shen, Y., Liu, X., et al. 2019, ApJ, 885, 110, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab481a

    2019 doi

Pith tools

Reviewed August 16, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.