Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 7 minor 62 references

Constraining the physical structure of the circumstellar environment of V838 Monocerotis remnant

T0 review · 4 major / 7 minor · reviewed 2026-08-07 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Using radiative-transfer modeling, this paper argues that the dust around V838 Mon's remnant is arranged as an inner ellipsoid, a tilted torus, and jets that create the observed H-band asymmetry, while the K-band data remain unexplained.

desk verdict A real but flawed step beyond geometric modeling: the dust-survival inconsistency undermines the torus/jet conclusion, yet the paper is honest and worth refereeing. read the letter →

arxiv 2506.02812 v1 pith:IE3KTQMG submitted 2025-06-03 astro-ph.SR astro-ph.GA

Muhammad Zain Mobeen , Tomasz Kamiński , Stephen Potter This is my paper
classification astro-ph.SRastro-ph.GA
keywords V838Monocerotisluminousrednovacircumstellardustradiativetransferopticalinterferometrypolarimetrystellarmergersbluestragglers
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

V838 Monocerotis, a star that erupted as a luminous red nova in 2002 and is expected to evolve into a blue straggler, is surrounded by warm dust whose three-dimensional arrangement has been unclear. This paper tries to pin down that structure by fitting a radiative-transfer model to near-infrared interferometric observations from VLTI and CHARA, combined with new optical polarimetry. The authors argue that a three-component dust distribution—an inner ellipsoid, a tilted torus, and a pair of jets—reproduces the H-band observables well, with the jets creating a brightness gap in the torus that produces the measured asymmetry signal. The model also matches the very low (<2%) intrinsic linear polarization. It does not, however, capture the tiny closure-phase deviations in the K band, and the authors caution that the structure they infer is not unique.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing mechanism is the radiative-transfer model built in RADMC3D: a $250^{3}$ grid with one central star (effective temperature 3500 K, luminosity $10^{5}$ solar luminosities) and a three-component dust density distribution. The components are an inner ellipsoid (3 au × 2 au × 0.5 au) that diffuses the stellar light, a massive tilted torus (inner radius 3 au, outer radius 5 au, density $10^{-14}$ g $cm^{-3}$) at position angle −60°, and two collimated jets at position angle 20° with a radially declining density of 2×$10^{-14}$ g $cm^{-3}$ divided by the distance in au. The jets are the crucial feature: in projection a jet overlaps the torus and absorbs some of its light, creating a brightness gap that breaks the torus's centro-symmetry. That gap is the only source of asymmetry in the model, so without the jets the simulated closure phases fall below 1° in the H band.

What would settle it

Re-observe V838 Mon with CHARA/MIRC-X in the H band a few months after the 2022 epoch and compare the closure phases: the model attributes the signal to a stable gap in the torus produced by the jets, so a large change in the closure-phase pattern over that interval would show the inferred structure is transient rather than persistent.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that the dust immediately surrounding the V838 Mon remnant (within tens of astronomical units) can be described by a multi-component model comprising a compact inner ellipsoid around the star, a tilted torus at radii of 3–5 au, and collimated jets extending beyond 7 au. Comparing synthetic images from the RADMC3D code against VLTI and CHARA interferometric observables, the authors find that this arrangement adequately matches the H-band squared visibilities and closure phases, and that the jets are essential: where a jet overlaps the torus in projection it absorbs torus emission and leaves a gap, and that gap is the sole source of asymmetry that produces nonzero closure phases. The same model yields intrinsic linear polarization below 2% in the BVRI bands, consistent with new SAAO-HIPPO measurements once interstellar polarization is removed. The model is less successful in the K band, where the predicted closure phases are an order of magnitude smaller than observed and the squared visibilities never drop below about 0.6, so the authors conclude the K-band environment is more complex than the adopted geometry. Taken together, the results support—though they do not uniquely prove—a persistent torus and jets in the post-merger remnant.

Load-bearing premise

The model's static torus, jets, and ellipsoid depend on dust surviving at equilibrium temperatures up to about 7000 K, far above the 1700 K silicate sublimation temperature the authors adopted; applying the sublimation cutoff removed nearly all dust and was therefore abandoned.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If the model is correct, the H-band closure-phase signal directly traces a jet-induced gap in the torus, so CHARA closure phases become a probe of jet-torus interaction.
  • The inferred dust structure implies a persistent, geometrically ordered envelope—torus plus jets—around the merger remnant, matching theoretical predictions for how intermediate-mass merger products lose angular momentum.
  • The model's K-band failure indicates that the true environment contains additional fine-scale structures or asymmetries, so the K-band observables still lack a physical explanation.
  • The very low (<2%) intrinsic polarization means scattering is dominated by the torus rather than the jets, so polarization monitoring can track changes in the torus geometry.
  • The near-IR-bright dust mass (about 10^-6 solar masses) is three orders of magnitude smaller than the cold dust seen by ALMA, showing the warm inner structure is only a small skin of a much larger envelope.

Reading between the lines

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

  • A natural extension, not made in the paper, is to monitor the H-band closure phases repeatedly over months to years, which could measure jet precession or wobbling and directly test the jet-variability scenario for red novae cited in the paper.
  • Because the sublimation correction removes nearly all dust, the inferred structure is probably not in thermodynamic steady state; a physically consistent picture may require dust condensation near the star and rapid destruction, which would make the torus and jets transient signposts rather than permanent features.
  • The paper's own polarization maps show the jets are highly polarized (over 50% degree of linear polarization) while the torus is weakly polarized (under 2%), so wavelength-resolved imaging polarimetry could in principle separate the two components observationally, a test the authors do not propose.
  • The K-band degeneracy suggests that squared visibilities alone cannot break the model ambiguity; adding closure phases from more triangle configurations or combining H- and K-band data in a single simultaneous fit might do so.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

4 major / 7 minor

Summary. This paper presents RADMC3D radiative-transfer modeling of the circumstellar dust around V838 Mon, the luminous red nova remnant, aimed at constraining the 3D dust distribution using VLTI/GRAVITY K-band and CHARA/MIRC-X H-band interferometric observables (squared visibilities and closure phases) that were imaged by the same group in Mobeen et al. (2024). The adopted model has three components: an inner ellipsoid around the 3500 K central star, a tilted torus with inner and outer radii of 3 au and 5 au, and jets perpendicular to the torus plane; component densities, orientations, and sizes are tuned by trial and error. The paper reports that the model reproduces the general H-band visibility trend and about half of the H-band closure-phase population, but fails on the K-band observables: the model squared visibilities stay above 0.6 at spatial frequencies where the observed values tend toward zero, and the modeled closure phases reach only about 0.2 degrees, an order of magnitude below the observed scatter. New SAAO-HIPPO polarimetric observations show intrinsic polarization below 2% with large uncertainties, which the authors argue is consistent with the model. The authors conclude that, although not unique, the model suggests a persistent torus-like structure and jets, possibly signposts of the remnant's evolution toward a blue straggler.

Significance. If the H-band inference were sustained, this would be the first attempt to place three-dimensional dust-density constraints on the innermost environment of a luminous red nova remnant, with implications for merger remnant angular-momentum loss, jet launching, and the blue-straggler precursor question, all of which are timely topics. The paper has real strengths: the synthetic observables are computed on the actual OIFITS baseline and wavelength sampling (Section 3.1, via AMHRA), a large family of alternative models is explored and documented in the appendices, the full-Stokes polarization treatment is included, and the authors are unusually candid about the K-band failures and the non-uniqueness of the model. These virtues, however, are currently outweighed by a load-bearing physical inconsistency: the radiative-equilibrium calculation yields dust temperatures up to about 7000 K while the adopted silicate sublimation temperature is 1700 K, and the authors' own iterative sublimation test removed nearly all dust, so the correction was disabled (Section 3).

major comments (4)
  1. [Section 3 (paragraph beginning "In our initial RADMC3D runs")] The dust-survival inconsistency is load-bearing for the central conclusion. The radiative-equilibrium calculation gives dust temperatures up to about 7000 K, far above the adopted 1700 K silicate sublimation temperature, and the authors state that applying the sublimation correction iteratively removed nearly all dust out to the outermost modeled radii, and that even increasing the sublimation temperature to 2700 K did not help. The correction was therefore disabled, and the final model places dust in regions where, by the paper's own opacity and sublimation assumptions, it cannot survive. The paper acknowledges this and invokes continuous dust production and destruction, but the static RADMC3D framework cannot represent such a process, so the abstract's and Section 5's inference of a 'persistent torus-like structure and jet or jets' is not supported by the calculation as presented. This needs to be addressed quantitatively, for example by reporting the mass fraction of dust with T > 1700 K in the final model, testing whether higher torus optical depths (self-shielding) keep the dust cool enough to survive, and, until such a test succeeds, reformulating the conclusions to describe a brightness-distribution model whose physical persistence is an open question.
  2. [Section 3.2 and Figure 4] The K-band model is in clear quantitative disagreement with the observations, and this disagreement is acknowledged in the abstract but not properly integrated into the conclusions. The simulated squared visibilities reach a minimum of about 0.6 at 67 Mlambda while the observed values tend toward zero at higher spatial frequencies, and the simulated closure phases rise to only about 0.2 degrees against an observed scatter roughly an order of magnitude larger. Because the same physical dust distribution emits in both H and K bands, a model that describes the H-band structure but fails the K-band visibilities and closure phases cannot be said to constrain the physical structure of the circumstellar environment without a discussion of why the two bands decouple. The conclusions (Section 5) should be limited to the H-band morphology, and the K-band failure should be presented as an unresolved constraint on the model rather than a secondary caveat.
  3. [Section 3 (model construction) and Section 4.1] The model is not an independent test of the inferred morphology. The paper states that the model construction 'took a cue from the image reconstructions presented in Mobeen et al. (2024)', i.e., the three-component structure, the bipolar orientation, and the size scale were all read off the same H- and K-band interferometric data that the model is later compared with. The comparison therefore demonstrates that a parametrized version of the reconstructed morphology can reproduce part of the observables, which is weaker than the claimed confirmation of a torus and jets. The only independent dataset, the HIPPO polarimetry, is consistent with zero intrinsic polarization within the uncertainties in the V, R, and I bands (Table 1: 1.095 +/- 0.471, 0.397 +/- 0.498, and 0.236 +/- 0.767 percent, respectively), and the average intrinsic position angle of 16.3 +/- 39.9 degrees is unconstraining. This does not invalidate the model, but it should be stated that the polarimetric check cannot discriminate between the proposed geometry and a nearly centro-symmetric envelope.
  4. [Sections 3.1-3.3 and Appendices B-D] No quantitative goodness-of-fit measure is provided for any model. All comparisons between simulated and observed squared visibilities and closure phases are made by eye ('we are able to somewhat reproduce', 'qualitatively reproduces observations quite well'), and no chi-square, reduced chi-square, or parameter uncertainties are reported. Given the large number of free parameters (torus inner and outer radii, inner ellipsoid axes and orientation, torus orientation, jet geometry, component densities, and grain properties for the polarization model), the claim that the adopted model provides an 'adequate fit' and the relative ranking of the main model against the appendix alternatives is not established without a fit statistic. At minimum, the authors should report the per-band residual statistics for V2 and closure phase for the main model and for the alternative models shown in Appendices B, C, and D.
minor comments (7)
  1. [Abstract] The abstract contains several typographical errors that should be corrected before submission: 'assymetry' (asymmetry), 'intermedite' (intermediate), 'distibution' (distribution), and 'remant star' (remnant star).
  2. [Section 3] The phrase 'Monte Carlo Markov Chain (MCMC) algorithms' is a misnomer in this context: RADMC3D performs Monte Carlo radiative transfer (thermal Monte Carlo), not Markov Chain Monte Carlo fitting. Please reword to avoid confusing the radiative-transfer method with a sampling algorithm.
  3. [Section 2.2] The sentence 'the MIRC-X and GRAVITY interferometric observations are, however, complemented by original and and nearly contemporary polarimetric measurements' contains a duplicated 'and'.
  4. [Section 3.2] The sentence 'It was not possible to explain the remaining 40% of the unresolved flux' is ambiguous. The issue is that 40% of the flux remains unresolved in the model (the squared visibility floor of 0.6), meaning the modeled structure is too compact relative to the observations; please rephrase to say that the model overpredicts V2 at high spatial frequencies.
  5. [Section 5] The conclusion that in the K band 'the squared visibilities are underestimated' is confusing, since the model visibilities are larger than the observed ones at high spatial frequencies. The correct statement is that the model overpredicts the K-band squared visibilities (the model is under-resolved compared with the data).
  6. [Abstract and Section 1] The abstract mentions interferometric observations in the 'HKLM bands', but the present analysis uses only H- and K-band data (the L- and M-band data are explicitly set aside in Section 2.1). Please rephrase so the abstract does not imply that L- and M-band data are modeled in this paper.
  7. [Figures 4 and 5] The two H-band closure-phase populations (one centered at zero, one at about 10 degrees) are central to the paper's claim, but the figure captions do not identify which baseline triangles or observing configurations produce each population. A short caption addition would help the reader evaluate the claimed partial reproduction.

Circularity Check

2 steps flagged · score 4.0 of 10

Jets are added to match H-band closure phases, then reported as vital; model geometry is inherited from the same data via self-citation, though forward RT and weak polarimetry add independent content.

  1. fitted input called prediction [Abstract; Section 3.3 (H band)]
    "The jets in our model are vital to produce nonzero closure phases, as they help to produce a gap in the torus, which is the sole source of asymmetry. ... In the Hband we find that the jet component in our model helps to explain the noticeable closure phase deviations. Without including a jet in the models, we noticed that the resulting simulated closure phases were <1◦."

    The jet is a freely adjustable component inserted, by the authors' own account, through trial and error, specifically to match the same H-band closure-phase observables that are later quoted as evidence that a jet is 'vital.' Removing the jet makes the simulated closure phases vanish, which is exactly what one expects if the jet was the component engineered to produce them. The statement is therefore a property of the chosen parameterization, not an inference from first principles; the closure-phase 'result' is the fitting target wearing the costume of a finding.

  2. self citation load bearing [Section 3, model construction; Section 3.1]
    "In constructing the first models, we took a cue from the image reconstructions presented in Mobeen et al. (2024). ... In Mobeen et al. (2024), image reconstructions suggested the presence of a bipolar feature in V838 Mon."

    The bipolar morphology is not independently derived in this paper: it is inherited, via a citation to the authors' predecessor paper, from image reconstructions of the same VLTI/CHARA observations used later for comparison. Since the model parameters were then adjusted to best reproduce those same observables, the claimed 'constraint' on the physical structure is largely a re-expression of the earlier image-reconstruction result. The RADMC3D radiative transfer itself is genuine, so this is partial, not total, circularity.

full rationale

The paper contains a genuine forward radiative-transfer calculation and an independent, though weak, polarimetric check: P_model is computed from the model and compared with measured intrinsic polarization, which is a non-circular test. It also honestly acknowledges model non-uniqueness and the K-band closure-phase failure. However, the central morphological content is self-referential in two ways. First, the jet component was introduced as the engineered source of H-band closure-phase asymmetry, then reported as 'vital,' which is a fitted input described as a result. Second, the torus/jet/ellipsoid geometry is taken from the authors' own image reconstruction of the same interferometric dataset that is later used to validate the model, making the 'constraint' partly a restatement of the earlier analysis. An additional physical concern is not circular but load-bearing: the authors state that applying a sublimation-temperature correction removed nearly all dust, even at 2700 K, and that the correction was therefore disabled; the resulting dust temperatures up to ~7000 K are inconsistent with the adopted silicate sublimation limit. That problem weakens the physical interpretation but does not, by itself, constitute definitional circularity. Overall, the derivation is not equivalent to its inputs; there is independent modeling content, so a moderate circularity score of 4 is appropriate.

Assumptions & free parameters 6 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

No new particles or forces are introduced. The torus, jets, and ellipsoid are fitted density components, not independent entities. The main unproved inputs are the static radiative-equilibrium framework, the silicate/MRN opacity law, the single-star illumination, and the decision to ignore sublimation because it removes all dust.

free parameters (6)
  • Torus inner and outer radii = inner 3 au, outer 5 au
    Set by trial and error to match the angular size of the H/K emission; outer radii up to 40 au were explored in Appendix B.
  • Inner ellipsoid axes and orientation = 3 au x 2 au x 0.5 au, PA 20 deg
    Introduced to diffuse stellar light so the point source does not dominate; dimensions chosen by trial and error.
  • Torus orientation = PA -60 deg
    Chosen to match the observed orientation of the bipolar structure and previous position angle measurements.
  • Jet geometry = from 7 au to the 50 au domain edge, perpendicular to the torus
    Chosen so the jets extend beyond the torus and can create a projected gap in the torus.
  • Dust densities = 1e-14 g/cm3 for ellipsoid and torus; 2e-14/r g/cm3 for jets
    Trial-and-error values giving a total dust mass of about 1e-6 solar masses.
  • Grain properties for polarization model = 0.1 micron amorphous silicate (Mg/Fe olivine), RADMC3D default opacity
    Used for full scattering polarization maps; slightly different from the main silicate opacity, chosen as a reasonable default.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption Dust distribution is static and in radiative equilibrium.
    RADMC3D computes equilibrium temperatures for a fixed density grid; the paper notes dust may be continuously produced and destroyed, so this is an approximation.
  • domain assumption A single central star is the only radiation source.
    The companion at 225 au is outside the modeled volume and is ignored.
  • domain assumption Amorphous silicate with an MRN size distribution describes the dust opacity.
    Chosen because V838 Mon is oxygen-rich and showed a silicate feature, but no independent verification is given.
  • ad hoc to paper Dust can survive at temperatures up to about 7000 K.
    The sublimation correction was abandoned because it removed nearly all dust; the final model thus assumes hot dust exists despite the adopted 1700 K silicate sublimation temperature.
  • domain assumption ISM polarization parameters from Wisniewski et al. (2003) apply to the line of sight.
    Used to derive intrinsic polarization; large uncertainties make the resulting intrinsic polarization consistent with zero.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Constraining the physical structure of the circumstellar environment of V838 Monocerotis remnant." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/IE3KTQMG

@misc{pith2026250602812,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Constraining the physical structure of the circumstellar environment of V838 Monocerotis remnant},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/IE3KTQMG}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2506.02812}
}
read the original abstract

V838 Monocerotis (V838 Mon) erupted in 2002 as a luminous red nova after which it cooled and began to form dust. The remnant is predicted to become a blue straggler. Interferometric observations in the HKLM bands have uncovered a stable bipolar feature in the closest vicinity of the remnant star. We aim to constrain the physical structure and nature of the circumstellar material immediately surrounding V838 Mon. Using the radiative-transfer code RADMC3D we managed to constrain the dust density distribution that best represents recent VLTI and CHARA interferometric imaging experiments. We also present recent SAAO-HIPPO polarimetric measurements which further test dust distribution models. We find that a multi-component model consisting of jets, a torus, and an ellipsoid provides an adequate fit to H band interferometric observables, however, it struggles to reproduce the extremely small closure phase deviations in the K band. The jets in our model are vital to produce nonzero closure phases, as they help to produce a gap in the torus, which is the sole source of asymmetry. The polarimetric measurements show that the intrinsic linear polarization is currently very low, with degree of polarization < 2%, consistent with our model. Although not unique, our dust model suggests a persistent torus-like structure and jet or jets in the remnant, in agreement with several predictions for an intermediate-mass merger product. However, even though these features may be important signposts of the evolution of V838 Mon to the blue straggler phase, the origin of these features, remains largely unclear.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2506.02812 by the authors.

Figure 2
Figure 2. K band simulated image for our best model. The colorbar shows normalized logarithmic intensity. Note that the dynamic range limit of the array is of ≈100 which means parts of the displayed structure, e.g., the jets, would not be registered by the interferometers. dust analogs are not a good representation of the real dust sur￾rounding V838 Mon. Even more likely, the environment may be constantly producing and destro… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. H band simulated image for our best model. The colorbar shows normalized logarithmic intensity. show promise of representing the observations well, especially the closure phases. Some of these models are briefly described in online materials3 . 3.1. Optimizing the model to the interferometric observables The H and K images obtained from RADMC3D were used to generate synthetic squared visibilities and closure phases … view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. K band simulated (red) and observed (grey) visibilities. The top panel shows squared visibilities, while the bottom panel shows closure phases. We carried out a number of other simulations in order to see if we can get simulated K band visibilities less than 0.6 at higher spatial frequencies, since the observed K band visibilities do tend towards zero at higher spatial frequencies. These models can be seen in Append… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (4 more)
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_6.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: H band simulated (red) and observed (blue) visibilities. The top panel shows squared visibilities, while the bottom panel shows closure phases. K band the circumstellar environment is a lot more complex than the models that we have assumed in this study. 3.3. H band Th…
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Simulated maps of degree of linear polarization in V (top) and I (bottom) bands. Concentric rays are due to imperfect ray tracing. tion Pmodel, given its low values, is therefore dominated by the polarized emission arising from the torus, which is brighter. 3.6. SiO ma…
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Location of SiO maser spots relative to the H band image of our best dust model. The three white circles represent the three strongest spots detected by Ortiz-León et al. (2020) with the VLBA at 43 GHz. We located the spots with respect to the brightest pixel, assuming…

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

62 extracted references · 52 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Jets, Outflows, and Explosions in Massive Star Formation

    Bally, J. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2401.05623

    work page Pith review arXiv 2024

  2. [2]

    Banerjee, D. P. K. & Ashok, N. M. 2002, A&A, 395, 161

    work page 2002

  3. [3]

    D., & Kloppenborg, B

    Baron, F., Monnier, J. D., & Kloppenborg, B. 2010, in Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, V ol. 7734, Optical and Infrared Interferometry II, ed. W. C. Danchi, F. Delplancke, & J. K. Ra- jagopal, 77342I

    work page 2010

  4. [4]

    E., Henden, A., Levay, Z

    Bond, H. E., Henden, A., Levay, Z. G., et al. 2003, Nature, 422, 405

    2003

  5. [5]

    & Han, Z

    Chen, X. & Han, Z. 2008, MNRAS, 384, 1263

    work page 2008

  6. [6]

    2014, A&A, 569, L3

    Chesneau, O., Millour, F., De Marco, O., et al. 2014, A&A, 569, L3

    work page 2014

  7. [7]

    O., Miyahara, T., Omodaka, T., et al

    Chibueze, J. O., Miyahara, T., Omodaka, T., et al. 2016, ApJ, 817, 115

    work page 2016

  8. [8]

    J., Bond, H

    Claussen, M. J., Bond, H. E., Starrfield, S., & Healy, K. 2007, in Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series, V ol. 363, The Nature of V838 Mon and its Light Echo, ed. R. L. M. Corradi & U. Munari, 87

    work page 2007

Show all 62 references
  1. [9]

    2005, Publications of the Astronom- ical Society of Japan, 57, L25

    Deguchi, S., Matsunaga, N., & Fukushi, H. 2005, Publications of the Astronom- ical Society of Japan, 57, L25

    2005

  2. [10]

    2023, ApJ, 954, 143

    Dori, N., Bear, E., & Soker, N. 2023, ApJ, 954, 143

    2023

  3. [11]

    1995, Astronomy and Astrophysics, v

    Dorschner, J., Begemann, B., Henning, T., Jaeger, C., & Mutschke, H. 1995, Astronomy and Astrophysics, v. 300, p. 503, 300, 503

    1995

  4. [12]

    Duvert, G., Young, J., & Hummel, C. A. 2017, A&A, 597, A8

    2017

  5. [13]

    R., Rushton, M

    Evans, A., Geballe, T. R., Rushton, M. T., et al. 2003, MNRAS, 343, 1054

    2003

  6. [14]

    & Pejcha, O

    Gagnier, D. & Pejcha, O. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2412.04419

    2024 arXiv

  7. [15]

    D., Wittkowski, M., Scholz, M., et al

    Gray, M. D., Wittkowski, M., Scholz, M., et al. 2009, MNRAS, 394, 51

    2009

  8. [16]

    C., Metzger, B

    Hoadley, K., Martin, D. C., Metzger, B. D., et al. 2020, Nature, 587, 387

    2020

  9. [17]

    D., Kraus, S., et al

    Ibrahim, N., Monnier, J. D., Kraus, S., et al. 2023, The Astrophysical Journal, 947, 68

    2023

  10. [18]

    D., et al

    Issaoun, S., Goddi, C., Matthews, L. D., et al. 2017, A&A, 606, A126 Article number, page 9 of 17 A&A proofs:manuscript no. main

    2017

  11. [19]

    1994, A&A, 292, 641

    Jaeger, C., Mutschke, H., Begemann, B., Dorschner, J., & Henning, T. 1994, A&A, 292, 641

    1994

  12. [20]

    1994, Astron

    Jager, C. 1994, Astron. Astrophys., 292, 641

    1994

  13. [21]

    Jennison, R. C. 1958, MNRAS, 118, 276

    1958

  14. [22]

    2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2401.03919 Kami´nski, T., Menten, K

    Kaminski, T. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2401.03919 Kami´nski, T., Menten, K. M., Tylenda, R., et al. 2020, A&A, 644, A59 Kami´nski, T., Schmidt, M., Tylenda, R., Konacki, M., & Gromadzki, M. 2009, ApJS, 182, 33 Kami´nski, T., Steffen, W., Bujarrabal, V ., et al. 2021, Astrono...

    2024 arXiv

  15. [23]

    2009, The Astrophysical Journal Letters, 709, L11

    Kashi, A., Frankowski, A., & Soker, N. 2009, The Astrophysical Journal Letters, 709, L11

    2009

  16. [24]

    & Domiciano de Souza, A

    Kervella, P. & Domiciano de Souza, A. 2006, A&A, 453, 1059

    2006

  17. [25]

    F., Retter, A., Thompson, R

    Lane, B. F., Retter, A., Thompson, R. R., & Eisner, J. A. 2005, ApJ, 622, L137

    2005

  18. [26]

    2003, Ap&SS, 286, 73

    Leinert, C., Graser, U., Przygodda, F., et al. 2003, Ap&SS, 286, 73

    2003

  19. [27]

    2023, A&A, 670, A13

    Liimets, T., Kolka, I., Kraus, M., et al. 2023, A&A, 670, A13

    2023

  20. [28]

    R., Wisniewski, J

    Loebman, S. R., Wisniewski, J. P., Schmidt, S. J., et al. 2015, AJ, 149, 17

    2015

  21. [29]

    C., Warren, J

    Lombardi, Jr., J. C., Warren, J. S., Rasio, F. A., Sills, A., & Warren, A. R. 2002, ApJ, 568, 939

    2002

  22. [30]

    G., et al

    Lopez, B., Lagarde, S., Petrov, R. G., et al. 2022, A&A, 659, A192

    2022

  23. [31]

    2022, ApJ, 937, 96

    MacLeod, M., De, K., & Loeb, A. 2022, ApJ, 937, 96

    2022

  24. [32]

    S., Rumpl, W., & Nordsieck, K

    Mathis, J. S., Rumpl, W., & Nordsieck, K. H. 1977, ApJ, 217, 425

    1977

  25. [33]

    2000, PASJ, 52, 895

    Matsuura, M., Yamamura, I., Murakami, H., et al. 2000, PASJ, 52, 895

    2000

  26. [34]

    D., Greenhill, L

    Matthews, L. D., Greenhill, L. J., Goddi, C., et al. 2010, ApJ, 708, 80

    2010

  27. [35]

    Z., Kami´nski, T., Matter, A., et al

    Mobeen, M. Z., Kami´nski, T., Matter, A., et al. 2024, A&A, 686, A260

    2024

  28. [36]

    Z., Kami ´nski, T., Matter, A., Wittkowski, M., & Paladini, C

    Mobeen, M. Z., Kami ´nski, T., Matter, A., Wittkowski, M., & Paladini, C. 2021, A&A, 655, A100

    2021

  29. [37]

    Nandez, J. L. A., Ivanova, N., & Lombardi, Jr., J. C. 2014, ApJ, 786, 39 Ortiz-León, G. N., Menten, K. M., Kami´nski, T., et al. 2020, A&A, 638, A17

    2014

  30. [38]

    2019, A&A, 630, A75

    Pastorello, A., Mason, E., Taubenberger, S., et al. 2019, A&A, 630, A75

    2019

  31. [39]

    D., Tyles, J

    Pejcha, O., Metzger, B. D., Tyles, J. G., & Tomida, K. 2017, ApJ, 850, 59

    2017

  32. [40]

    D., Tyles, J

    Pejcha, O., Metzger, B. D., Tyles, J. G., & Tomida, K. 2017, The Astrophysical Journal, 850, 59

    2017

  33. [41]

    G., Malbet, F., Weigelt, G., et al

    Petrov, R. G., Malbet, F., Weigelt, G., et al. 2007, A&A, 464, 1

    2007

  34. [42]

    2008, in Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, V ol

    Potter, S., Buckley, D., O’Donoghue, D., et al. 2008, in Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, V ol. 7014, Ground- based and Airborne Instrumentation for Astronomy II, ed. I. S. McLean & M. M. Casali, 70145E

    2008

  35. [43]

    B., Buckley, D

    Potter, S. B., Buckley, D. A. H., O’Donoghue, D., et al. 2010, MNRAS, 402, 1161

    2010

  36. [44]

    Richards, A. M. S., Impellizzeri, C. M. V ., Humphreys, E. M., et al. 2014, A&A, 572, L9

    2014

  37. [45]

    2013, MNRAS, 436, 1708

    Richter, L., Kemball, A., & Jonas, J. 2013, MNRAS, 436, 1708

    2013

  38. [46]

    T., Geballe, T., Evans, A., et al

    Rushton, M. T., Geballe, T., Evans, A., et al. 2005, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 359, 624

    2005

  39. [47]

    2025, PASP, 137, 034201

    Scolnic, A., Bear, E., & Soker, N. 2025, PASP, 137, 034201

    2025

  40. [48]

    2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2503.05250

    Shinnaga, H., Oyadomari, M., Imai, H., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2503.05250

    2025 arXiv

  41. [49]

    2010, in American Institute of Physics Conference Series, V ol

    Sills, A. 2010, in American Institute of Physics Conference Series, V ol. 1314, International Conference on Binaries: in celebration of Ron Webbink’s 65th Birthday, ed. V . Kalogera & M. van der Sluys (AIP), 105–112

    2010

  42. [50]

    2019, MNRAS, 483, 5020

    Soker, N. 2019, MNRAS, 483, 5020

    2019

  43. [51]

    2023, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2306.07702

    Soker, N. 2023, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2306.07702

    2023 arXiv

  44. [52]

    2024, Galaxies, 12, 33

    Soker, N. 2024, Galaxies, 12, 33

    2024

  45. [53]

    & Kaplan, N

    Soker, N. & Kaplan, N. 2021, Research in Astronomy and Astrophysics, 21, 090

    2021

  46. [54]

    B., Bond, H

    Sparks, W. B., Bond, H. E., Cracraft, M., et al. 2008, AJ, 135, 605

    2008

  47. [55]

    2024, A&A, 682, A127 Thiébaut, E

    Steinmetz, T., Kami´nski, T., Schmidt, M., & Kiljan, A. 2024, A&A, 682, A127 Thiébaut, E. 2008, in Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, V ol. 7013, Optical and Infrared Interferometry, ed. M. Schöller, W. C. Danchi, & F. Delplancke, 70131I

    2024

  48. [56]

    2005, A&A, 436, 1009

    Tylenda, R. 2005, A&A, 436, 1009

    2005

  49. [57]

    2009, A&A, 503, 899

    Tylenda, R., Kami´nski, T., & Schmidt, M. 2009, A&A, 503, 899

    2009

  50. [58]

    & Soker, N

    Tylenda, R. & Soker, N. 2006, A&A, 451, 223

    2006

  51. [59]

    & Ryu, T

    Wang, C. & Ryu, T. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2410.10314

    2024 arXiv

  52. [60]

    Webbink, R. F. 1976, ApJ, 209, 829

    1976

  53. [61]

    P., Bjorkman, K

    Wisniewski, J. P., Bjorkman, K. S., & Magalhães, A. M. 2003, ApJ, 598, L43

    2003

  54. [62]

    σPmax Pmax !2 + 2K λmax log λmax λ σλmax !2 + 2K λ log λmax λ σλ !2 # 1 2 (A.4) The error formula for the intrinsic polarization (i.e.δP int) is σPint = 1 Pint

    Wisniewski, J. P., Clampin, M., Bjorkman, K. S., & Barry, R. K. 2008, ApJ, 683, L171 Acknowledgements.T. K. and M. Z. M. acknowledge funding from grant no 2018/30/E/ST9/00398 from the Polish National Science Center. Based on ob- servations made with ESO telescopes at Paranal o...

    2003

Pith tools

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