Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 4 minor 35 references

DRAGyS -- A comprehensive tool to extract scattering phase functions in protoplanetary disks

T0 review · 2 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-07 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read DRAGyS claims that the geometry of ring-shaped protoplanetary disks can be estimated directly from scattered-light images by ellipse-fitting brightness peaks, and that the scattering phase function can then be extracted and corrected for…

desk verdict Useful pipeline with solid synthetic validation, but the limb-brightening formula as printed cannot produce the claimed 10–30% corrections; that needs fixing before this is publishable as is. read the letter →

arxiv 2505.20070 v1 pith:VIRBVBBZ submitted 2025-05-26 astro-ph.IM astro-ph.EPastro-ph.SR

Maxime Roumesy , François Ménard , Ryo Tazaki , Gaspard Duchêne , Laurine Martinien , Rémi Zerna This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.IMastro-ph.EPastro-ph.SR
keywords protoplanetarydisksscatteringphasefunctionpolarizedintensitylimbbrighteningdiskgeometryringfittinghigh-contrastimagingnear-infraredpolarimetry
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 introduces DRAGyS, a tool that claims to recover the scattering phase function (SPF) of ring-shaped protoplanetary disks directly from scattered-light images, without fitting radiative transfer models. The tool fits ellipses to ring brightness peaks to get disk inclination, position angle, and aspect ratio, then uses that geometry to map image pixels to scattering angles and to correct a geometric limb-brightening bias. On synthetic images, the corrected SPF closely matches the intrinsic dust SPF, and on archival polarized-intensity images of six disks the recovered geometry and SPF agree with previously published results to within a few degrees and 2–18 percent. The paper argues this fast geometry-only route makes large-sample SPF surveys feasible and removes a bottleneck when inferring dust grain properties.

What carries the argument

The mechanical core is the assumption that the brightness peaks of a ring outline the ellipse of the disk scattering surface: least-squares ellipse fitting gives the semi-major axis $M$, semi-minor axis $m$, ellipse-center offset $D$, and position angle, from which the inclination follows as $i=\cos^{-1}(m/M)$ and the aspect ratio as $h/r=D/(M\sin i)$ under the flaring law $h(r)=h_{\rm ref}(r/r_{\rm ref})^{\chi}$. The scattering angle at each pixel is then computed with $\cos(\Psi)=\cos(\gamma)\cos(\phi)\sin(i)+\sin(\gamma)\cos(i)$, where $\gamma=h/r$, and the limb-brightening correction applies the ratio $\mathrm{LB} = \frac{\cos\gamma\,\sin(\gamma'-\gamma)}{\cos\gamma\,\sin(\gamma'-\gamma)+\cos i\,\cos(\gamma'-\gamma)-\sin\gamma'\,\cos\Psi}$ with $\gamma'=\chi h/r$. This formula carries the geometric correction that turns the observed near-side-brightened SPF into the intrinsic one, with uncertainties propagated through the fitted parameters.

What would settle it

Run DRAGyS on synthetic images with known intrinsic SPFs while varying the flaring exponent (for example $\chi$ = 0.5 or 1.5) or using an eccentric ring; if the limb-brightening-corrected SPF departs from the intrinsic one by more than the few-percent recovery claimed for circular, $\chi\approx1$ disks, the assumed single circular scattering surface is falsified. The same test applies to low-dust-mass models, where the brightness peak no longer traces the effective scattering surface, a case the paper itself shows in its Appendix D.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that a disk's scattering phase function can be extracted from an image through a purely geometric pipeline that assumes only that the disk is circular and that the brightness maxima of a ring trace the disk scattering surface. Fitting an ellipse to those maxima yields the inclination and position angle directly, while the offset between the ellipse center and the star gives the scattering surface height under the power-law flaring model $h(r)=h_{\rm ref}(r/r_{\rm ref})^{\chi}$. The scattering angle at each pixel follows from the projected geometry, and a published limb-brightening formula, evaluated with the fitted aspect ratio and an assumed flaring exponent near unity, corrects the extracted SPF for the near-side/far-side brightness asymmetry. The paper reports that the limb-brightening-corrected SPF is a much better match to the expected SPF from the model, and that on real observations the differences with reference SPFs are between 2 and 18 percent, while the limb-brightening effect itself can shift the SPF by up to about 30 percent.

Load-bearing premise

The method depends on the assumption that each disk's ring is a perfect circle lying on a single smooth, tilted surface whose height above the midplane rises as a fixed power of radius; if the ring is off-circle, the surface height follows a different law, or the bright arc does not mark the effective scattering surface, the geometry that feeds the correction is biased.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Large archival samples of ringed disks observed with high-contrast polarimeters can be processed quickly, giving SPFs for many disks without per-disk radiative transfer fits.
  • SPFs corrected for limb brightening will be systematically shallower than uncorrected ones, so dust grain sizes and compositions inferred from uncorrected curves will need revision.
  • Because the tool extracts SPFs globally or per sector, brightness asymmetries of the kind highlighted for HD 163296 and RX J1615 can be identified automatically and either excluded or analyzed separately.
  • The method allows each ring in a multi-ring disk to be treated separately, so radial trends in dust properties can be probed without assuming one SPF for the whole disk.

Reading between the lines

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

  • A natural extension the paper does not quantify is to run the same pipeline on simulated eccentric rings and measure at what eccentricity the extracted SPF departs from the intrinsic curve.
  • The reported weak dependence of limb brightening on the flaring exponent suggests a two-parameter variant could fit $\chi$ itself rather than fixing it near unity, which might reduce bias in strongly flared disks.
  • The same ellipse-plus-offset machinery could plausibly be applied to debris disks or other scattered-light nebulae where brightness peaks trace a single scattering surface, though the paper does not claim this.
  • Combining sector-by-sector SPF extraction with radiative transfer models could separate genuine dust-asymmetry signals from the geometric limb-brightening effect, which the paper motivates but does not pursue.
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 / 4 minor

Summary. DRAGyS is a purely geometric pipeline for ring-shaped protoplanetary disks: it detects intensity peaks, fits an ellipse, converts the ellipse parameters into inclination, position angle, and scattering-surface aspect ratio h/r, and extracts total and polarized scattering phase functions. It also applies a limb-brightening correction following Tazaki et al. (2023). The method is validated on noiseless MCFOST images with known geometry and intrinsic SPF, then applied to nine archival SPHERE/IRDIS polarized-intensity images of six disks. The paper claims recovery of inclination within about 2 degrees, position angle within about 1.5 degrees, SPFs consistent with the reference Diskmap method to 2-18 percent, and limb-brightening corrections that can reach about 30 percent.

Significance. The tool addresses a real need: fast SPF extraction for large samples without per-target radiative transfer modeling. The synthetic validation is well designed because the input geometry and intrinsic SPF are known from MCFOST, and the authors make the code publicly available. The sector-based extraction for asymmetric disks is a useful feature. If the limb-brightening correction is correctly implemented, the tool would be a valuable complement to Diskmap. However, the printed limb-brightening formula and the assumed flaring exponent are internally inconsistent, so the quantitative limb-brightening result is not reproducible as written.

major comments (2)
  1. [Section 3.3, Eq. (3)] As written, the limb-brightening correction is inconsistent with the text. Setting chi=1 gives gamma'=gamma, hence sin(gamma'-gamma)=0 and LB=0 identically; for chi=1.00001 the correction is numerically negligible. The text says a fixed flaring exponent 'close to unity' is adopted, yet Section 4 reports corrections of about 10 percent on average and up to about 30 percent, and Fig. 4 shows a substantial correction. Concretely, for i=70 deg, h/r=0.15, chi=1.1, Eq. (3) gives at most about 8 percent; for the real geometries in Table 2 the correction stays below about 10 percent even for chi=1.2. A 30 percent correction would require chi well above the values shown in Fig. 5, which are 1.00001, 1.1, and 1.2. The adopted chi value must be stated explicitly, or the equation must be corrected, and the corrected SPFs in Figs. 4 and 7 must be reproducible from the text and the code.
  2. [Section 3.3 and Appendix D] The limb-brightening correction and the scattering-angle mapping assume that the detected ring traces the tau_s=1 surface and that h(r) follows Eq. (1) with a fixed flaring exponent. Appendix D shows that for low dust masses (10^-6 and 10^-7 M_sun per ring) the surface measured by DRAGyS lies below the tau_s=1 surface, and no test in the paper varies the true flaring exponent of the input model. Since the correction depends on chi, the paper should state the range of disk parameters for which the assumption holds, demonstrate that the corrected SPF is not biased by an incorrect chi, or provide a way to estimate chi from the data.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Fig. 5] The curve with chi=1.00001 is effectively identical to unity under Eq. (3) and adds no information; it should be replaced by a realistic chi value or removed.
  2. [Fig. 7] The percentage offsets between SPFs are given without error bars; the uncertainty propagation described in Section 2.3 should be applied to these numbers so the reader can judge whether the differences are significant.
  3. [Section 2.2] The position-angle convention is described as measured from the horizontal left axis counter-clockwise; because PA is normally quoted from north to east, please clarify how this convention relates to the values in Table 2 and to the reference values.
  4. [Section 4] The text says the sample is six disks observed in J and/or H bands, while the abstract says 'nine images for six disks'; please make the count explicit in the main text to avoid confusion.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 2.0 of 10

No circularity: the geometry and SPF are checked against independent MCFOST ground truth and Diskmap benchmarks; the one co-authored citation (Eq. 3) is external support, not a fitted input.

full rationale

The derivation chain is not circular. DRAGyS estimates i, PA, and h/r by least-squares ellipse fitting to brightness peaks (Section 2.2); none of these inputs is the SPF being predicted. The SPF is then produced by directly binning pixel fluxes by the scattering angle computed from Eq. (2), not by fitting a model SPF. In the synthetic tests the extracted SPF is compared with the MCFOST theoretical intrinsic SPF, which is computed independently from the dust properties, so agreement is a genuine external check. The limb-brightening correction (Eq. 3) is imported from Tazaki et al. (2023), one of whose authors is a co-author here, but it is a published formula with stated geometric assumptions, and the paper applies it using the fitted h/r and a fixed flaring exponent; the corrected SPF is then judged against the same independent intrinsic SPF, so the correction is not a fit to the target. The real-data comparison against Diskmap/Ginski et al. (2023) is likewise an external benchmark rather than a self-fit. The only caveat is a reproducibility/consistency concern, not a circularity one: with the printed Eq. (3), LB vanishes for chi=1 and is tiny for chi=1.00001, so the plotted 10-30% corrections require either a different implemented expression or a larger chi than the text's 'close to unity'. That is a verification issue, not evidence that outputs are equivalent to inputs by construction.

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 7 assumptions · 0 invented entities

DRAGyS introduces no new physical entities; its outputs are derived from the image under a set of geometric assumptions. The only hand-set parameter entering the central extraction is the flaring exponent chi, fixed near unity for the limb brightening correction. The extraction zone radii are user-supplied, and for real data they are taken from the reference study. The validity of the limb brightening formula from Tazaki et al. (2023), the circular disk assumption, and the neglect of multiple scattering are the main domain assumptions the central claim rests on.

free parameters (3)
  • Scattering surface flaring exponent chi = about 1 (assumed, not fitted)
    Section 3.3 states 'We therefore assume a fixed flaring exponent value close to unity for the DRAGyS SPF extraction process and for the limb brightening effect estimation.' It enters the limb brightening correction via gamma' = chi h/r in Eq. (3).
  • Extraction zone inner and outer radii (R_in, R_out) = Per object, e.g., HD 163296 H: 55-75 au; taken from Ginski et al. (2023) for observations
    Section 2.3 limits the extraction zone by minimum and maximum midplane radii; for the observational sample these values are copied from the reference study (Table 2 notes).
  • Peak detection filtering thresholds (spatial averaging and intensity filtering) = Not quantified in the paper
    Section 2.1 describes spatial and intensity filtering with 'more aggressive filtering' for real data; the exact choices are user-defined and could affect the fitted ellipse.
assumptions (7)
  • domain assumption Disks are circular; rings project as ellipses.
    Section 2: 'assuming the disks are circular'; Section 2.2 fits ellipses to the detected peaks.
  • domain assumption Maximum flux comes from the disk scattering surface (tau_s=1), not from the inner rim or other rings.
    Section 2: 'we assume that maximum flux comes from the surface of the disk, illuminated by the star'; Appendix D shows the estimated surface tracks tau_s=1 only for high dust masses.
  • domain assumption The scattering surface height follows a power law h(r)=h_ref (r/r_ref)^chi with chi fixed near unity.
    Eq. (1) defines the power law; Section 3.3 fixes chi close to unity for the LB correction.
  • domain assumption The limb brightening formula of Tazaki et al. (2023), Eq. (3), correctly describes the geometric bias.
    Adopted without derivation; the paper validates it on MCFOST synthetic images.
  • domain assumption Multiple scattering does not significantly distort the extracted polarized SPF for the tested conditions.
    Section 5.1: 'multiple scattering remains an uncalibrated factor'; Appendix E finds 'modest influence' but some biases at small angles for certain dust compositions.
  • standard math Halir and Flusser (1998) least-squares ellipse fitting provides unbiased parameter estimates.
    Section 2.2 relies on this standard fitting algorithm.
  • domain assumption MCFOST simulations reproduce the relevant single and multiple scattering physics.
    Section 3.1 uses MCFOST to generate synthetic images and theoretical SPFs used as ground truth.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of DRAGyS -- A comprehensive tool to extract scattering phase functions in protoplanetary disks." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/VIRBVBBZ

@misc{pith2026250520070,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: DRAGyS -- A comprehensive tool to extract scattering phase functions in protoplanetary disks},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/VIRBVBBZ}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2505.20070}
}
read the original abstract

The early stages of planet formation, involving dust grain growth and planetesimals formation, remain shrouded in mystery. The analysis of the Scattering Phase Function (SPF) measured in disks surrounding young stars holds great potential for revealing crucial information about dust grain properties. Given the increasing number of high-quality datasets available, an efficient method to extract the SPF is required. DRAGyS is a tool designed for the quick and comprehensive analysis of ring-shaped protoplanetary disks. It directly estimates the disk geometry and extracts the total and polarized SPF from scattered light images, without requiring any radiative transfer modeling, a limitation of previous efforts. Key disk parameters (inclination, position angle, aspect ratio) are obtained by fitting ellipses to the disk intensity peaks from the ring surface, assuming the disks are circular. We validated the method using simulated disk images and then applied it to archival polarized-intensity images of nine images for six protoplanetary disks. DRAGyS provides a method to correct for the effect of limb brightening on the SPF. DRAGyS recovers well the injected geometry and the SPF from synthetic images where the parameters are known. When compared to previously published results extracted from images without considering limb brightening, DRAGyS yields similar results for the inclination, position angle, and SPF. We show that the effect of limb brightening on the SPF is significant, with consequences for the inference of dust properties. DRAGyS takes advantage of a fast and purely geometrical approach to estimate ringed-disk geometries. It allows the efficient extraction of SPF either globally or by sectors, allowing it to deal with disk asymmetries. By bypassing the need for a full modeling of the disk geometry before SPF extraction, DRAGyS is well suited to study large samples of disk images.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2505.20070 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Illustration of the DRAGyS method, illustrating the ellipse estimation of the disk (red), and the geometrical method to recover the different structure parameters. Left: image as seen by the observer, with the ellipse in red and different estimated quantities such as semi-minor and -major axis m and M, the position angle PA and the projected distance between star and major axis D used to compute the aspect ratio. Ri… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Illustration of the elliptical fit process on Qphi simulated disk image with multiple rings. Left: Disk image with a radial cut at one azimuthal angle in white. Points used for ellipse fitting are shown in green and unwanted deleted points in smaller orange dots. Middle: The radial profile extracted along the white line, where the purple curve corresponds to the smoothed profile. The maxima corresponding to the sele… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Comparison of estimated scattering height estimation with the τs = 1 surface integrated from the star (red) for each ring (respectively between 60-90 au, 110-140 au, and 160-190 au). We overplot the scat￾tering height surface estimated using DRAGyS, for each inclination and position angle, in different colors and markers. We add the dust density map in the background and, we also plot the gas pressure scale height i… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (4 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Typical case of SPF extraction for simulated data. Using a disk with PA = 270◦ and i = 70◦ . Left: Disk image in polarized intensity, with an extraction zone defined by the green-shaded annulus. Right: Polarized SPF normalized at 90◦ directly extracted from the disk su…
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Limb brightening effect for different disk geometry. The forward scattering part is more affected than the backward scattering. 1.5 1.0 0.5 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 D E C (a r c s e c) HD163296 H LkCa15 J PDS 66 H 1.5 1.0 0.5 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 D E C (a r c s e c) PDS 66 J RX J161…
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Qϕ images of 6 protoplanetary disks observed in J or H bands using DPI with the VLT/SPHERE IRDIS instrument. The maximum pixel positions for parameter estimation are shown as white dots. and fitted ellipse in black dashed line 4. Application to observational data Sever…
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Polarized SPFs extracted from SPHERE Qphi observations (Ginski et al. 2023) of protoplanetary disks. The left and right panels are for H and J band observations, respectively. Colored solid and dashed lines are respectively SPFs uncorrected and corrected from the limb …

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

35 extracted references · 30 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    P., Garufi, A., et al

    Avenhaus, H., Quanz, S. P., Garufi, A., et al. 2018, The Astrophysical Journal, 863, 44

    work page 2018

  2. [2]

    2023, Optical and Near -infrared View of Planet -forming Disks and Protoplanets , version Number: 1

    Benisty, M., Dominik, C., Follette, K., et al. 2023, Optical and Near -infrared View of Planet -forming Disks and Protoplanets , version Number: 1

    work page 2023

  3. [3]

    H.-M., Avenhaus, H., Casassus, S., et al

    Bertrang, G. H.-M., Avenhaus, H., Casassus, S., et al. 2018, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 474, 5105

    work page 2018

  4. [4]

    2019, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 631, A155

    Beuzit, J.-L., Vigan, A., Mouillet, D., et al. 2019, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 631, A155

    work page 2019

  5. [5]

    d., Salter, G., Benisty, M., et al

    Boer, J. d., Salter, G., Benisty, M., et al. 2016, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 595, A114, publisher: EDP Sciences

    work page 2016

  6. [6]

    Bohren, C. F. & Huffman, D. R. 1983, Absorption and scattering of light by small particles (New York Chichester Brisbane [Australia] [etc.]: J. Wiley & sons)

    work page 1983

  7. [7]

    D., et al

    Chen, M., Lawson, K., Brandt, T. D., et al. 2024, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 533, 2473

    work page 2024

  8. [8]

    I., Joung, M

    Chiang, E. I., Joung, M. K., Creech-Eakman, M. J., et al. 2001, The Astrophysical Journal, 547, 1077

    work page 2001

Show all 35 references
  1. [9]

    2008, in The infra-red dual imaging and spectrograph for SPHERE : design and performance, ed

    Dohlen, K., Langlois, M., Saisse, M., et al. 2008, in The infra-red dual imaging and spectrograph for SPHERE : design and performance, ed. I. S. McLean & M. M. Casali, Marseille, France, 70143L

    2008

  2. [10]

    Dohnanyi, J. S. 1969, Journal of Geophysical Research, 74, 2531

    1969

  3. [11]

    Draine, B. T. & Lee, H. M. 1984, The Astrophysical Journal, 285, 89

    1984

  4. [12]

    2022, Planet Formation Theory in the Era of ALMA and Kepler : from Pebbles to Exoplanets

    Drazkowska, J., Bitsch, B., Lambrechts, M., et al. 2022, Planet Formation Theory in the Era of ALMA and Kepler : from Pebbles to Exoplanets

    2022

  5. [13]

    2016, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 595, A112

    Ginski, C., Stolker, T., Pinilla, P., et al. 2016, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 595, A112

    2016

  6. [14]

    2023, The Astrophysical Journal, 953, 92

    Ginski, C., Tazaki, R., Dominik, C., & Stolker, T. 2023, The Astrophysical Journal, 953, 92

    2023

  7. [15]

    & Flusser, J

    Hal r, R. & Flusser, J. 1998

    1998

  8. [16]

    2014, in Protostars and Planets VI (University of Arizona Press)

    Johansen, A., Blum, J., Tanaka, H., et al. 2014, in Protostars and Planets VI (University of Arizona Press)

    2014

  9. [17]

    2018, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 617, A44

    Keppler, M., Benisty, M., M \"u ller, A., et al. 2018, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 617, A44

    2018

  10. [18]

    2006, Science, 314, 621

    Lagage, P.-O., Doucet, C., Pantin, E., et al. 2006, Science, 314, 621

    2006

  11. [19]

    Marel, N. v. d., Dong, R., Francesco, J. d., Williams, J., & Tobin, J. 2019, The Astrophysical Journal, 872, 112, arXiv:1901.03680 [astro-ph]

    2019 arXiv

  12. [20]

    2017, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 599, A108

    Milli, J., Vigan, A., Mouillet, D., et al. 2017, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 599, A108

    2017

  13. [21]

    D., Harries, T

    Monnier, J. D., Harries, T. J., Aarnio, A., et al. 2017, The Astrophysical Journal, 838, 20

    2017

  14. [22]

    A., Dominik, C., Waters, L

    Muro-Arena, G. A., Dominik, C., Waters, L. B. F. M., et al. 2018, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 614, A24

    2018

  15. [23]

    J., Min, M., et al

    Pinte, C., Harries, T. J., Min, M., et al. 2009, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 498, 967

    2009

  16. [24]

    2006, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 459, 797

    Pinte, C., M \'e nard, F., Duch \^e ne, G., & Bastien, P. 2006, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 459, 797

    2006

  17. [25]

    J., M \'e nard, F., et al

    Pinte, C., Price, D. J., M \'e nard, F., et al. 2018, The Astrophysical Journal Letters, 860, L13

    2018

  18. [26]

    A., Kastner, J

    Rapson, V. A., Kastner, J. H., Millar-Blanchaer, M. A., & Dong, R. 2015, The Astrophysical Journal, 815, L26

    2015

  19. [27]

    M., Joos, F., & Tschan, D

    Schmid, H. M., Joos, F., & Tschan, D. 2006, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 452, 657

    2006

  20. [28]

    2016, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 596, A70

    Stolker, T., Dominik, C., Min, M., et al. 2016, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 596, A70

    2016

  21. [29]

    2023, The Astrophysical Journal Letters, 944, L43

    Tazaki, R., Ginski, C., & Dominik, C. 2023, The Astrophysical Journal Letters, 944, L43

    2023

  22. [30]

    A., Birnstiel, T., & Foreman-Mackey, D

    Teague, R., Bae, J., Bergin, E. A., Birnstiel, T., & Foreman-Mackey, D. 2018, The Astrophysical Journal Letters, 860, L12

    2018

  23. [31]

    2016, The Astrophysical Journal Letters, 828, L17

    Thalmann, C., Janson, M., Garufi, A., et al. 2016, The Astrophysical Journal Letters, 828, L17

    2016

  24. [32]

    2022, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 666, A68

    Tobon Valencia, V., Geffrin, J.-M., M \'e nard, F., et al. 2022, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 666, A68

    2022

  25. [33]

    2024, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 688, A70

    Tobon Valencia, V., Geffrin, J.-M., M \'e nard, F., et al. 2024, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 688, A70

    2024

  26. [34]

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

    ENTRY address archiveprefix author booktitle chapter edition editor howpublished institution eprint journal key month note number organization pages publisher school series title type volume year label extra.label sort.label short.list INTEGERS output.state before.all mid.sent...

  27. [35]

    write newline

    " write newline "" before.all 'output.state := FUNCTION n.dashify 't := "" t empty not t #1 #1 substring "-" = t #1 #2 substring "--" = not "--" * t #2 global.max substring 't := t #1 #1 substring "-" = "-" * t #2 global.max substring 't := while if t #1 #1 substring * t #2 gl...

Pith tools

Reviewed August 7, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.