Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 5 minor 2 cited by

The ALMA Survey of Gas Evolution of PROtoplanetary Disks (AGE-PRO): IV. Dust and Gas Disk Properties in the Upper Scorpius Star-forming Region

T0 review · 4 major / 5 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 CO gas abundance stays nearly constant through the Class II stage of disk evolution, while dust masses drop by an order of magnitude in 5–10 Myr old disks.

desk verdict Valuable new Upper Sco ALMA data, but the abstract's claims of stable CO abundance and comparable disk sizes outrun what the paper's own statistics and image-plane radii support. read the letter →

arxiv 2506.10735 v2 pith:ZDAA76BX submitted 2025-06-12 astro-ph.EP astro-ph.SR

Carolina Agurto-Gangas , L. M. Pérez , Anibal Sierra , James Miley , Ke Zhang , Ilaria Pascucci , Paola Pinilla , Dingshan Deng
show 13 more authors
John Carpenter Leon Trapman Miguel Vioque Giovanni P. Rosotti Nicolás Kurtovic Lucas A. Cieza Kamber Schwarz Michiel R. Hogerheijde Rossella Anania Benoît Tabone Estephani E. Torres-Villanueva Dary A. Ruiz-Rodriguez Camilo González-Ruilova
This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.EPastro-ph.SR
keywords protoplanetarydisksdiskevolutionCOisotopologuesN2H+chemistrydustradialdrifttrapsUpperScorpiusALMAsurvey
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 presents ALMA observations of ten 5–10 Myr old protoplanetary disks in Upper Scorpius and argues that the CO gas abundance in the warm molecular layer remains nearly constant across the Class II stage of disk evolution. The key evidence is that the empirical correlation between C18O and N2H+ line fluxes is indistinguishable between these older disks and the younger Lupus disks at 1–3 Myr, even though dust masses are about an order of magnitude lower. If correct, the decline in CO brightness with age traces real gas loss rather than CO depletion, and the comparable gas and dust radii imply that millimeter grains must be trapped rather than freely drifting inward. The paper also finds more scatter in gas-versus-dust correlations for Upper Sco than for Lupus, possibly reflecting age spread or per-disk differences in CO abundance or gas-to-dust ratio.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing mechanism is the C18O (2–1) versus N2H+ (3–2) flux–flux correlation. N2H+ forms where CO is absent and is destroyed by CO, so a fixed relation between these fluxes across regions of different age implies a fixed CO abundance in the warm molecular layer. The paper measures this correlation using a censored Kendall's τ test and compares the best-fit linear regression with the Lupus sample from Deng et al. (2025b). For disk sizes, the curve-of-growth (COG) method provides the R68 and R90 radii from the image plane, which are then compared with the deconvolved radii from visibility fitting.

What would settle it

If visibility fitting of the Band 6 continuum (as in Vioque et al. 2025) yields true dust radii that are substantially smaller than the image-plane R68 values, the radial-drift-halted interpretation fails. Alternatively, a thermochemical model of these specific disks that reproduces the observed C18O and N2H+ fluxes with a strongly varying CO abundance would falsify the constant-CO claim.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that the CO gas abundance does not evolve significantly between roughly 1–3 Myr and 5–10 Myr in Class II disks. Because N2H+ is destroyed by reactions with gaseous CO, the ratio of C18O to N2H+ emission constrains the CO abundance, and the C18O–N2H+ flux correlation in Upper Sco falls on the same line as in Lupus. The paper therefore concludes that the lower dust masses and lower CO fluxes in the older region reflect genuine depletion of the disk material, not a chemical masking of gas. This is paired with the finding that dust disk radii in the image plane are comparable to or larger than in Lupus, which the authors interpret as evidence that dust trapping halts the expected inward drift of grains.

Load-bearing premise

The conclusion that dust radii in Upper Sco are comparable to or larger than in Lupus, and hence that dust is trapped, assumes that the image-plane R68 radii are not systematically inflated by the beam for the many unresolved or marginally resolved disks.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Gas disk masses inferred from CO in 5–10 Myr old disks are not systematically biased by varying CO depletion, so the observed gas deficit is real.
  • The combination of declining dust mass and non-shrinking dust radius points to dust traps that hold millimeter grains at large radii, preserving pebble reservoirs for late planet formation.
  • The increased scatter in the CO-versus-continuum correlations in Upper Sco compared with Lupus suggests either an age spread within the region or disk-to-disk variations in CO abundance or gas-to-dust ratio.
  • Higher-resolution imaging should directly test the dust-trap scenario; confirmation would establish dust trapping as a primary mechanism of disk evolution in older regions.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If CO abundance is truly constant across the Class II phase, C18O-based gas mass estimates at intermediate ages could be calibrated against N2H+ without invoking evolution of CO depletion, a generalization the paper itself does not fully claim beyond its two regions.
  • The paper's dust-radius conclusion rests on image-plane R68 values that are beam-dominated for seven of ten disks, so the companion visibility-fitting analysis is the natural decisive test of the radial-drift-halted interpretation.
  • A testable extension is to apply the same C18O–N2H+ analysis to a region of intermediate age, to see whether the correlation line shifts gradually or abruptly and thereby distinguish smooth CO abundance evolution from a step change.
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

4 major / 5 minor

Summary. This paper presents ALMA Band 6 and 7 observations of ten Class II disks in Upper Scorpius from the AGE-PRO large program. The authors measure dust continuum fluxes and spectral indices, dust masses under standard optically thin assumptions, image-plane COG radii for gas and dust, and CO isotopologue and N2H+ line fluxes. The main empirical results are that Upper Sco dust masses are roughly an order of magnitude lower than in Lupus/Ophiuchus, gas and dust radii appear comparable to or larger than Lupus, and the C18O–N2H+ flux correlation looks similar to the younger Lupus sample. The paper interprets these findings as evidence for dust evolution, radial drift halting or dust trapping, and a nearly constant CO abundance across the Class II phase. Much of the detailed modeling and deconvolved size work is deferred to companion AGE-PRO papers.

Significance. If the conclusions hold, this is a valuable contribution: it extends a standardized, multi-tracer ALMA survey to an intermediate-age region, provides homogeneous flux and size measurements for a sparse but important sample, and places empirical constraints on gas and dust evolution between ~1–3 Myr and ~5–10 Myr. The paper's strength is its careful presentation of the observational material, the explicit comparison with the Lupus AGE-PRO sample, and the candid statement of resolution limitations in Appendix D. The most novel claim, constant CO abundance over the Class II stage, is interesting but is not fully established by the in-paper analysis; the supporting statistical and modeling steps need to be made reproducible and quantitative before the claim can be regarded as load-bearing.

major comments (4)
  1. [§4.3, Table 4, Figure 11 caption] The N2H+ detection set is internally inconsistent. The text in §4.3 states that N2H+(3–2) is detected in four disks (USco 1, 7, 9, 10) with SNR > 5σ and that the rest are nondetections, but Table 4 lists USco 8 at 27.3 ± 4 mJy km s−1, which is about 6.8σ, and USco 6 at 7.8 ± 3 mJy km s−1, about 2.6σ. The Figure 11 caption, in contrast, says that only USco 3, 4, and 5 are nondetections. This ambiguity makes the censored Kendall-τ analysis impossible to reproduce and directly affects the claimed C18O–N2H+ correlation, since including or excluding USco 8 and USco 6 changes the censoring pattern and the correlation strength. The authors should state explicitly which sources are detections, which are upper limits, and which are excluded, and rerun the correlation with that census.
  2. [§5.4, Figure 11, bottom-right panel] The claim that the Upper Sco and Lupus C18O–N2H+ correlations are indistinguishable rests on a visual comparison of two regression lines, not on a formal test. No slope or intercept uncertainties are quoted for the Upper Sco fit, no joint censored regression is presented, and no test of whether the two data sets are drawn from the same relation is performed. With p ≈ 4% for the Upper Sco correlation and a small number of detections, the evidence is weak; a bootstrap or likelihood-ratio comparison between the Lupus and Upper Sco relations is needed before the word "indistinguishable" is used.
  3. [§5.3, §5.4, Summary point 5] The interpretive step from an unchanged C18O–N2H+ flux–flux trend to a constant CO abundance is not demonstrated. As the paper itself notes in §5.3, a positive C18O–N2H+ correlation is the expected signature of a spread in gas mass at fixed XCO, and correlated changes in gas surface density, disk size, excitation, or dust temperature could mask an age-dependent CO abundance. No thermochemical fit that marginalizes over these nuisance parameters is reported in this paper; the correlation is therefore consistent with, but does not establish, constant CO abundance. Summary point 5 and the abstract should either be weakened or explicitly cite the companion modeling paper (L. Trapman et al. 2025b) as the source of the quantitative inference.
  4. [§5.1, Figure 10, Table 5, Appendix D] The size comparison that supports the dust-trapping interpretation is based on image-plane COG radii that Appendix D admits are overestimated for all but USco 1. Figure 10 places all Upper Sco disks outside the drift-dominated region using these beam-limited R68 and R90 values, and Summary point 3 repeats the claim that dust disk sizes are comparable to or larger than Lupus. For the seven or eight unresolved or marginally resolved disks, the image-plane radii are dominated by beam smearing, so the empirical conclusion does not follow from this paper's own measurements. The main text should either plot the deconvolved/visibility radii from M. Vioque et al. (2025) and L. Trapman et al. (2025a) in Figure 10, or add an explicit caveat in the abstract and summary that the size comparison is only secure for USco 1 and otherwise relies on companion visibility fitting.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Table 6] The dust masses are listed without uncertainties or error bars; given that the dust mass formula in Eq. (1) depends on the assumed Tdust and κν, at minimum the adopted fixed values and an estimate of the systematic uncertainty should be stated in the table notes or text.
  2. [Appendix E] The text "3σ < flux < σ" appears to be a typo; it should read "3σ < flux < 5σ".
  3. [§5.3] The sentence "As seen in the bottom-right panel of Figure 7" refers to the flux–flux comparison, which is actually shown in Figure 11; the figure number appears to be a typo.
  4. [Abstract and Summary] The abstract's statement that disk radii are comparable to those in Lupus should be qualified as image-plane, beam-affected measurements, consistent with the acknowledgment in Appendix D that these values are overestimated for most sources.
  5. [Figure 11 caption] The caption's statement that only USco 3, 4, and 5 are N2H+ nondetections conflicts with the text in §4.3; the caption and the text should be made consistent after the detection census is clarified.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the paper's conclusions rest on new ALMA measurements and external modeling, not on inputs redefined as predictions.

full rationale

The derivation chain is not circular. Fluxes, radii, masses, and spectral indices are measured from the new ALMA data using the COG method; no parameter is fitted to a subset of these data and then reported as a prediction of a closely related quantity. The central 'constant CO abundance' claim (Summary point 5) is an empirical statement that the C18O-N2H+ flux correlation in Upper Sco matches the Lupus correlation, with the sign/direction interpretation taken from prior thermochemical modeling (Trapman et al. 2022). That modeling is parameter-free with respect to the present data and does not use the Upper Sco fluxes as inputs, so citing it is independent support rather than circular self-citation. The Lupus comparison uses measured fluxes from the companion AGE-PRO paper (Deng et al. 2025b), again an external data benchmark. The weakest point identified by the reader, that image-plane R68 radii are beam-overestimated for unresolved disks, is explicitly acknowledged in Appendix D ('the radii measured in the image plane are strongly affected by the beam smearing, and hence are overestimated'); this is a measurement-limitation and correctness caveat, not a circular step. The skeptical concerns about detection counting and the absence of a formal slope comparison are statistical robustness issues, not circularity. No equation in the paper is equivalent to its input, and no self-citation is used to forbid alternatives.

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claims rest on standard millimeter dust mass assumptions, chemical diagnostics for CO abundance, and image-plane size measurements whose beam bias is acknowledged. No new physical entities are introduced; the dust traps are pre-existing theoretical structures invoked for interpretation.

free parameters (3)
  • Average dust temperature Tdust = 20 K
    Assumed in Eq. (1) for dust mass calculation; affects Mdust linearly. Not fit to data, adopted from standard disk analysis.
  • Dust opacity kappa_nu = 2.3 (nu/230 GHz) cm2/g
    Adopted from Andrews et al. (2013) with an implied opacity index beta=1; directly sets the dust mass scale and the alpha_mm interpretation.
  • Absolute flux uncertainty = 10%
    Used for alpha_mm uncertainties, following Chiang et al. (2012); a rough approximation of ALMA absolute flux calibration error.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption Dust continuum emission at 1.3 mm is optically thin.
    Invoked in Section 4.5 to convert flux to dust mass via Eq. (1); if optically thick, masses are underestimated.
  • domain assumption C18O (2-1) and N2H+ (3-2) fluxes trace the CO abundance and gas mass as described by Trapman et al. (2022).
    Used in Section 5.3 to interpret the C18O-N2H+ correlation as evidence of stable CO abundance; depends on the chemical model.
  • domain assumption COG method gives unbiased total fluxes and radii for faint, partially resolved sources.
    Section 4.4 uses COG to measure fluxes and R68/R90; the paper notes negative bowls can affect faint sources but takes the first peak.
  • domain assumption Stellar evolutionary tracks (Baraffe et al. 2015, Feiden 2016) and the Bayesian method (Pascucci et al. 2016) give reliable ages and masses.
    Used to derive stellar masses and ages in Section 2.2; systematic errors in the tracks propagate to the age and mass interpretation.
  • domain assumption The 10-disk sample is representative of the Upper Sco full disk population around M3-M4.5 to K6 stars.
    Used in Section 2.1 and Figure 4 to generalize the findings; K-S tests show similarity in accretion rate and mm flux, but the sample was pre-selected on detections.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of The ALMA Survey of Gas Evolution of PROtoplanetary Disks (AGE-PRO): IV. Dust and Gas Disk Properties in the Upper Scorpius Star-forming Region." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/ZDAA76BX

@misc{pith2026250610735,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: The ALMA Survey of Gas Evolution of PROtoplanetary Disks (AGE-PRO): IV. Dust and Gas Disk Properties in the Upper Scorpius Star-forming Region},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/ZDAA76BX}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2506.10735}
}
abstract

The Atacama Large Millimeter/submillimeter Array (ALMA) large program AGE-PRO explores protoplanetary disk evolution by studying gas and dust across various ages. This work focuses on ten evolved disks in Upper Scorpius, observed in dust continuum emission, CO and its isotopologues, and N$_2$H$^+$ with ALMA Bands 6 and 7. Disk radii, from the radial location enclosing 68% of the flux, are comparable to those in the younger Lupus region for both gas and dust tracers. However, solid masses are about an order of magnitude below those in Lupus and Ophiuchus, while the dust spectral index suggests some level of dust evolution. These empirical findings align with a combination of radial drift, dust trapping, and grain growth into larger bodies. A moderate correlation between CO and continuum fluxes suggests a link between gas and dust content, through the increased scatter compared to younger regions, possibly due to age variations, gas-to-dust ratio differences, or CO depletion. Additionally, the correlation between C$^{18}$O and N$_2$H$^+$ fluxes observed in Lupus persists in Upper Sco, indicating a relatively stable CO gas abundance over the Class II stage of disk evolution. In conclusion, the AGE-PRO survey of Upper Scorpius disks reveals intriguing trends in disk evolution. The findings point towards potential gas evolution and the presence of dust traps in these older disks. Future high-resolution observations are needed to confirm these possibilities and further refine our understanding of disk evolution and planet formation in older environments.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2506.10735 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Class II disks in Upper Sco and the selected AGE-PRO sample on top of the Planck dust map (Planck Collaboration et al. 2014). The 10 Upper Sco disks selected in the AGE-PRO sample are shown as blue stars with their assigned ID in white, and the other disks are represented as pink points. On those pink points, green crosses show the Class II disks, and orange squares mark disks with a spectral type between M3 and K6.… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. The Hertzsprung–Russell diagram for young stars in Upper Sco shown in gray, with AGE-PRO Upper Sco targets shown as blue points with magenta labels for their IDs. Their stellar luminosity and stellar effective temperature are summarized in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Spectral energy distributions for the AGE-PRO Upper Sco sample. The lines are the corresponding stellar photospheric model spectra from PHOENIX models (T. O. Husser et al. 2013). We apply the extinction to the photospheric models and then scale it to the distance of each star. The blue points are the observations collected from the literature: Sloan Digital Sky Survey (K. G. Stassun et al. 2019), APASS data release … view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (8 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Histograms for the mass accretion rate (M acc, from M. Fang et al. 2023, left) and millimeter flux (F0.89mm, from S. A. Barenfeld et al. 2016; J. M. Carpenter et al. 2025, right) comparing our AGE-PRO Upper Sco sample (blue) with the “full disks” in Upper Sco that hav…
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Gallery of Band 6 dust continuum images and line moment zero maps for our Upper Sco sample. The 12CO (2–1) images were obtained using robust 0.5 with a circularized beam, while the 13CO (2–1) and C18O (2–1) images use robust 1.0 with a circularized beam. Contours in co…
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Disk-integrated line spectra of CO and its isotopologues for Upper Sco targets in Band 6. We use an aperture corresponding to the gas disk radii for 12CO (2–1), and smaller apertures for 13CO (2–1) and C18O (2–1). Disks without >3σ detections are shown in grayscale the…
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Normalized radial profiles of dust continuum and gas line emission for our Upper Sco sample in AGE-PRO. Profiles were obtained using GoFish; the deprojection employed the stellar parameters in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_7.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Gallery of Band 7 dust continuum images and line moment zero maps for our Upper Sco sample. Disks with clear detections are shown in color. Nondetections are shown in grayscale. Lines not included in the AGE-PRO observational setup are dark gray. The northern source wi…
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Disk-integrated line spectra of N2H+,H2CO, DCN, DCO+, and C34S for Upper Sco targets in Band 7. We use the aperture corresponding to the gas disk radii for 12CO(J = 2–1). Disks without a 3σ detection of line emission are shown in gray, with red dashed lines indicating …
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Gas and dust disk sizes, traced by the disk radius of 12CO line emission and Band 6 dust continuum emission. Upper and bottom panels show R68 and R90, respectively, while right and left panels show disk radii in units of au and arcsec, respectively. Typical beam sizes…
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Comparison between fluxes of gas and dust tracers for the AGE-PRO sample of disks in Upper Sco. The results of pymccorrelation Kendall’s τ tests for the Upper Sco sample are reported in each panel, suggesting a positive correlation with large scatter between gas and d…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 2 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. JWST/MIRI Reveals the Evolution from Molecular to Atomic Disk Winds

    astro-ph.EP 2026-07 conditional novelty 7.0 of 10

    Across 72 protoplanetary disks, JWST shows atomic jets and molecular winds dominate at high accretion rates and give way to predominantly atomic winds as accretion declines.

  2. Angular Momentum of Planet-Forming Disks: Implications for Infall Driven Misalignments

    astro-ph.EP 2026-07 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    Most planet-forming disks have less angular momentum than late-infalling cloud gas is predicted to carry, so infalling streamers are a plausible cause of the observed misalignments.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

83 extracted references · 61 canonical work pages · cited by 2 Pith papers

  1. [1]

    2025, ApJ, 989, 8

    Anania, R., Rosotti, G., Gárate, M., et al. 2025, ApJ, 989, 8

    2025

  2. [2]

    E., Blake, G

    Anderson, D. E., Blake, G. A., Bergin, E. A., et al. 2019, ApJ, 881, 127

    2019

  3. [3]

    M., Huang, J., Pérez, L

    Andrews, S. M., Huang, J., Pérez, L. M., et al. 2018, ApJL, 869, L41

    2018

  4. [4]

    M., Rosenfeld, K

    Andrews, S. M., Rosenfeld, K. A., Kraus, A. L., & Wilner, D. J. 2013, ApJ, 771, 129

    2013

  5. [5]

    P., Trapman, L., et al

    Ansdell, M., Williams, J. P., Trapman, L., et al. 2018, ApJ, 859, 21

    work page 2018

  6. [6]

    P., van der Marel, N., et al

    Ansdell, M., Williams, J. P., van der Marel, N., et al. 2016, ApJ, 828, 46

    work page 2016

  7. [7]

    2023, A&A, 673, A139 Astropy Collaboration, Price-Whelan, A

    Appelgren, J., Lambrechts, M., & van der Marel, N. 2023, A&A, 673, A139 Astropy Collaboration, Price-Whelan, A. M., Sip őcz, B. M., et al. 2018, AJ, 156, 123 Figure F5. Channel maps of the CO (J = 2–1) emission in the USco 9 (top) and 10 (bottom) disks. 26 The Astrophysical Journal, 989:4 (27pp), 2025 August 10 Agurto-Gangas et al. Astropy Collaboration, ...

    work page 2023

  8. [8]

    2015, A&A, 577, A42

    Baraffe, I., Homeier, D., Allard, F., & Chabrier, G. 2015, A&A, 577, A42

    2015

Show all 83 references
  1. [9]

    2017, extinction v0.3.0, Zenodo, doi: 10.5281/zenodo.804967

    Barbary, K. 2017, extinction v0.3.0, Zenodo, doi: 10.5281/zenodo.804967

    2017 doi

  2. [10]

    A., Carpenter, J

    Barenfeld, S. A., Carpenter, J. M., Ricci, L., & Isella, A. 2016, ApJ, 827, 142

    2016

  3. [11]

    A., Carpenter, J

    Barenfeld, S. A., Carpenter, J. M., Sargent, A. I., Isella, A., & Ricci, L. 2017, ApJ, 851, 85

    2017

  4. [12]

    A., Carpenter, J

    Barenfeld, S. A., Carpenter, J. M., Sargent, A. I., et al. 2019, ApJ, 878, 45

    2019

  5. [13]

    A., Cleeves, L

    Bergin, E. A., Cleeves, L. I., Gorti, U., et al. 2013, Natur, 493, 644

    2013

  6. [14]

    B., Öberg, K

    Bergner, J. B., Öberg, K. I., Bergin, E. A., et al. 2020, ApJ, 898, 97

    2020

  7. [15]

    A., Clayton, G

    Cardelli, J. A., Clayton, G. C., & Mathis, J. S. 1989, ApJ, 345, 245

    1989

  8. [16]

    Andrews, S. M. 2025, ApJ, 978, 117

    2025

  9. [17]

    M., Mamajek, E

    Carpenter, J. M., Mamajek, E. E., Hillenbrand, L. A., & Meyer, M. R. 2009, ApJ, 705, 1646

    2009

  10. [18]

    M., Ricci, L., & Isella, A

    Carpenter, J. M., Ricci, L., & Isella, A. 2014, ApJ, 787, 42

    2014

  11. [19]

    W., & Tobin, J

    Chiang, H.-F., Looney, L. W., & Tobin, J. J. 2012, ApJ, 756, 168

    2012

  12. [20]

    A., Ruíz-Rodríguez, D., Hales, A., et al

    Cieza, L. A., Ruíz-Rodríguez, D., Hales, A., et al. 2019, MNRAS, 482 698

    2019

  13. [21]

    A., Swift, J

    Cieza, L. A., Swift, J. J., Mathews, G. S., & Williams, J. P. 2008, ApJL, 686, L115

    2008

  14. [22]

    M., Skrutskie, M

    Cutri, R. M., Skrutskie, M. F., van Dyk, S., et al. 2003, yCat, 2246, 0 de Geus, E. J., de Zeeuw, P. T., & Lub, J. 1989, A&A, 216, 44

    2003

  15. [23]

    2023, ApJ, 954, 165

    Deng, D., Ruaud, M., Gorti, U., & Pascucci, I. 2023, ApJ, 954, 165

    2023

  16. [24]

    2025b, ApJ, 989, 3 DENIS Consortium 2005, yCat, 2263, 0

    Deng, D., Vioque, M., Pascucci, I., et al. 2025b, ApJ, 989, 3 DENIS Consortium 2005, yCat, 2263, 0

    2005

  17. [25]

    Evans, N. J. I., Allen, L. E., Blake, G. A., et al. 2003, PASP, 115, 965

    2003

  18. [26]

    2023, ApJ, 945, 112

    Fang, M., Pascucci, I., Edwards, S., et al. 2023, ApJ, 945, 112

    2023

  19. [27]

    I., Bergin, E

    Favre, C., Cleeves, L. I., Bergin, E. A., Qi, C., & Blake, G. A. 2013, ApJL, 776, L38

    2013

  20. [28]

    Feiden, G. A. 2016, A&A, 593, A99 Gaia Collaboration, Brown, A. G. A., Vallenari, A., et al. 2018, A&A, 616, A1 Gaia Collaboration, Brown, A. G. A., Vallenari, A., et al. 2021, A&A, 649, A1

    2016

  21. [29]

    2001, AJ, 121, 1030

    Hartmann, L. 2001, AJ, 121, 1030

    2001

  22. [30]

    A., Levine, S., Terrell, D., & Welch, D

    Henden, A. A., Levine, S., Terrell, D., & Welch, D. L. 2015, AAS Meeting, 225, 336.16

    2015

  23. [31]

    2020, ApJ, 895, 126

    Hendler, N., Pascucci, I., Pinilla, P., et al. 2020, ApJ, 895, 126

    2020

  24. [32]

    Hunter, J. D. 2007, CSE, 9, 90

    2007

  25. [33]

    O., Wende-von Berg, S., Dreizler, S., et al

    Husser, T. O., Wende-von Berg, S., Dreizler, S., et al. 2013, A&A, 553, A6

    2013

  26. [34]

    D., & Nelson, P

    Isobe, T., Feigelson, E. D., & Nelson, P. I. 1986, ApJ, 306, 490

    1986

  27. [35]

    D., Zhang, K., et al

    Krijt, S., Bosman, A. D., Zhang, K., et al. 2020, ApJ, 899, 134

    2020

  28. [36]

    V., Kholopov, P

    Kukarkin, B. V., Kholopov, P. N., Pskovsky, Y. P., et al. 1971, General Catalogue of Variable Stars (3rd ed.; Moscow: Sternberg State Astronomical Inst. of the Moscow State Univ. )

    1971

  29. [37]

    T., Gárate, M., Pinilla, P., et al

    Kurtovic, N. T., Gárate, M., Pinilla, P., et al. 2025, ApJ, 989, 6

    2025

  30. [38]

    M., Lattanzi, M

    Lasker, B. M., Lattanzi, M. G., McLean, B. J., et al. 2008, AJ, 136, 735

    2008

  31. [39]

    Luhman, K. L. 2022, AJ, 163, 24

    2022

  32. [40]

    L., & Esplin, T

    Luhman, K. L., & Esplin, T. L. 2020, AJ, 160, 44

    2020

  33. [41]

    Pecaut, M. J. 2019, VizieR On-line Data Catalog: J /AJ/156/76,

    2019

  34. [42]

    L., & Mamajek, E

    Luhman, K. L., & Mamajek, E. E. 2012, ApJ, 758, 31

    2012

  35. [43]

    F., Ansdell, M., Rosotti, G

    Manara, C. F., Ansdell, M., Rosotti, G. P., et al. 2023, in ASP Conf. Ser. 534, Protostars and Planets VII, ed. S. Inutsuka et al. (San Francisco, CA: ASP), 539

    2023

  36. [44]

    F., Natta, A., Rosotti, G

    Manara, C. F., Natta, A., Rosotti, G. P., et al. 2020, A&A, 639, A58

    2020

  37. [45]

    S., Pinte, C., Duchêne, G., Williams, J

    Mathews, G. S., Pinte, C., Duchêne, G., Williams, J. P., & Ménard, F. 2013, A&A, 558, A66

    2013

  38. [46]

    K., Bergin, E

    McClure, M. K., Bergin, E. A., Cleeves, L. I., et al. 2016, ApJ, 831, 167

    2016

  39. [47]

    M., Pérez, L

    Miley, J. M., Pérez, L. M., Agurto-Gangas, C., et al. 2025, ApJ, 989, 11

    2025

  40. [48]

    F., Kama, M., & Bruderer, S

    Miotello, A., van Dishoeck, E. F., Kama, M., & Bruderer, S. 2016, A&A, 594, A85

    2016

  41. [49]

    2007, in Protostars and Planets V, ed

    Natta, A., Testi, L., Calvet, N., et al. 2007, in Protostars and Planets V, ed. B. Reipurth, D. Jewitt, & K. Keil (Tucson, AZ: Univ. Arizona Press ), 767 Öberg, K. I., & Bergin, E. A. 2016, ApJL, 831, L19 Öberg, K. I., Guzmán, V. V., Walsh, C., et al. 2021, ApJS, 257, 1

    2007

  42. [50]

    N., Deng, D., et al

    Pascucci, I., Skinner, B. N., Deng, D., et al. 2023, ApJ, 953, 183

    2023

  43. [51]

    J., et al

    Pascucci, I., Testi, L., Herczeg, G. J., et al. 2016, ApJ, 831, 125

    2016

  44. [52]

    J., & Mamajek, E

    Pecaut, M. J., & Mamajek, E. E. 2013, ApJS, 208, 9

    2013

  45. [53]

    J., Mamajek, E

    Pecaut, M. J., Mamajek, E. E., & Bubar, E. J. 2012, ApJ, 746, 154

    2012

  46. [54]

    I., Bergner, J

    Pegues, J., Öberg, K. I., Bergner, J. B., et al. 2020, ApJ, 890, 142

    2020

  47. [55]

    2020, A&A, 635, A105 Planck Collaboration, Abergel, A., Ade, P

    Pinilla, P., Pascucci, I., & Marino, S. 2020, A&A, 635, A105 Planck Collaboration, Abergel, A., Ade, P. A. R., et al. 2014, A&A, 571, A11

    2020

  48. [56]

    Preibisch, T., Brown, A. G. A., Bridges, T., Guenther, E., & Zinnecker, H. 2002, AJ, 124, 404

    2002

  49. [57]

    Pringle, J. E. 1981, ARA&A, 19, 137 Ratzenböck, S., Großschedl, J. E., Alves, J., et al. 2023, A&A, 678, A71

    1981

  50. [58]

    2019, ApJ, 885, 146

    Ruaud, M., & Gorti, U. 2019, ApJ, 885, 146

    2019

  51. [59]

    Ruaud, M., Gorti, U., & Hollenbach, D. J. 2022, ApJ, 925, 49

    2022

  52. [60]

    A., González-Ruilova, C., Cieza, L

    Ruiz-Rodriguez, D. A., González-Ruilova, C., Cieza, L. A., et al. 2025,ApJ, 989, 2

    2025

  53. [61]

    2021, A&A, 649, A19

    Sanchis, E., Testi, L., Natta, A., et al. 2021, A&A, 649, A19

    2021

  54. [62]

    F., Barenfeld, S

    Scaringi, S., Manara, C. F., Barenfeld, S. A., et al. 2016, MNRAS, 463, 2265

    2016

  55. [63]

    M., Agurto-Gangas, C., et al

    Sierra, A., Pérez, L. M., Agurto-Gangas, C., et al. 2024, AJ, 974, id.102

    2024

  56. [64]

    F., Cutri, R

    Skrutskie, M. F., Cutri, R. M., Stiening, R., et al. 2006, AJ, 131, 1163

    2006

  57. [65]

    G., Oelkers, R

    Stassun, K. G., Oelkers, R. J., Paegert, M., et al. 2019, AJ, 158, 138

    2019

  58. [66]

    Sullivan, K., & Kraus, A. L. 2021, ApJ, 912, 137

    2021

  59. [67]

    K., Ogihara, M., Morbidelli, A., Crida, A., & Guillot, T

    Suzuki, T. K., Ogihara, M., Morbidelli, A., Crida, A., & Guillot, T. 2016, A&A, 596, A74

    2016

  60. [68]

    P., Lodato, G., et al

    Tabone, B., Rosotti, G. P., Lodato, G., et al. 2022, MNRAS, 512, L74

    2022

  61. [69]

    P., Trapman, L., et al

    Tabone, B., Rosotti, G. P., Trapman, L., et al. 2025, ApJ, 989, 7

    2025

  62. [70]

    2019, JOSS, 4, 1632

    Teague, R. 2019, JOSS, 4, 1632

    2019

  63. [71]

    2020, richteague /keplerian_mask: Initial Release, Version 1.0, Zenodo, doi: 10.5281/zenodo.4321137

    Teague, R. 2020, richteague /keplerian_mask: Initial Release, Version 1.0, Zenodo, doi: 10.5281/zenodo.4321137

    2020 doi

  64. [72]

    2014, in Protostars and Planets VI, ed

    Testi, L., Birnstiel, T., Ricci, L., et al. 2014, in Protostars and Planets VI, ed. H. Beuther et al. (Tucson, AZ: Univ. Arizona Press ), 339

    2014

  65. [73]

    F., et al

    Testi, L., Natta, A., Manara, C. F., et al. 2022, A&A, 663, A98

    2022

  66. [74]

    The, P. S. 1964, PASP, 76, 293

    1964

  67. [75]

    2021, MNRAS, 507, 818

    Toci, C., Rosotti, G., Lodato, G., Testi, L., & Trapman, L. 2021, MNRAS, 507, 818

    2021

  68. [76]

    R., et al

    Trapman, L., Ansdell, M., Hogerheijde, M. R., et al. 2020, A&A, 638, A38

    2020

  69. [77]

    2019, A&A, 629, A79

    Bruderer, S. 2019, A&A, 629, A79

    2019

  70. [78]

    Bergin, E. A. 2022, ApJL, 926, L2 van der Marel, N., & Mulders, G. D. 2021, AJ, 162, 28

    2022

  71. [79]

    T., Trapman, L., et al

    Vioque, M., Kurtovic, N. T., Trapman, L., et al. 2025, ApJ, 989, 9

    2025

  72. [80]

    E., et al

    Virtanen, P., Gommers, R., Oliphant, T. E., et al. 2020, NatMe, 17, 261

    2020

  73. [81]

    M., Liu, H

    Yen, H.-W., Koch, P. M., Liu, H. B., et al. 2016, ApJ, 832, 204

    2016

  74. [82]

    M., Pascucci, I., et al

    Zhang, K., Pérez, L. M., Pascucci, I., et al. 2025, ApJ, 989, 1

    2025

  75. [83]

    R., & Bergin, E

    Zhang, K., Schwarz, K. R., & Bergin, E. A. 2020, ApJL, 891, L17 27 The Astrophysical Journal, 989:4 (27pp), 2025 August 10 Agurto-Gangas et al

    2020

Pith tools

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