Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 major objections 5 minor 79 references

JVLA Measurement of Grain Size in the Compact Dust Ring around Class I Protostar WL 17

T0 review · 1 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-06 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read The paper claims that WL 17's dust ring contains grains grown to about 4.2 mm, based on JVLA 2–48 GHz observations combined with ALMA data and radiative transfer modeling.

desk verdict Solid new JVLA data on WL 17, but the 4.2 mm grain size is an upper limit, and the abstract should say so. read the letter →

arxiv 2507.08246 v1 pith:MKZAOZK5 submitted 2025-07-11 astro-ph.EP astro-ph.SR

Jun Hashimoto , Hauyu Baobab Liu , Ruobing Dong , Beibei Liu , Takayuki Muto This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.EPastro-ph.SR
keywords CircumstellardisksDustcontinuumemissionPlanetformationProtoplanetaryProtostarsSpectralenergydistributionVeryLargeArrayMaximumgrainsize
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 sets out to measure how large dust grains have grown in the compact ring around WL 17, a Class I protostar only a few hundred thousand years old, using JVLA observations from 2 to 48 GHz. By fitting the observed spectral energy distribution with radiative transfer models that assume the DSHARP dust opacity, the authors conclude that the ring's high-column-density component contains grains with a maximum size of about 4.2 mm. Because grain size controls how efficiently streaming instability and pebble accretion build planets, the result would mean that millimeter-sized particles — and possibly the first steps of planet formation — already exist in a very young disk. The authors also use the inferred dust mass and grain size to argue that, if the gas-to-dust ratio is around 10, pebble accretion in the ring could form a core massive enough to trigger runaway gas accretion and produce a gas giant.

What carries the argument

The central mechanism is the interpretation of the centimeter-to-millimeter spectral energy distribution as the emission of geometrically flat, isothermal, optically thick dust slabs, using the analytic radiative-transfer solution of Birnstiel et al. (2018) (following Miyake & Nakagawa 1993) with the DSHARP dust opacity model and a power-law grain-size distribution $n(a)\propto a^{-3.5}$. The observed SED is decomposed into a low-column-density 'Small' component ($a_{\rm max} = 45\,\mu$m) and a high-column-density 'Grown' component whose $a_{\rm max}$ is a free parameter, plus one or two free-free emission components whose emission measure and solid angle absorb the time-varying low-frequency signal. The curvature of the 18–48 GHz spectrum — where optically thick dust gives a spectral index near 2 that rolls off as the opacity drops — is what constrains $a_{\rm max}$, and the same model, fit with an MCMC routine, simultaneously yields the column density, solid angle, and dust mass of each component.

What would settle it

Take the JVLA in A-configuration at 30–50 GHz to image the WL 17 ring at ≲50 mas resolution. If the 18–48 GHz emission turns out to be spatially smooth and extended rather than concentrated in a compact, high-column-density substructure, the two-component SED decomposition that yields $a_{\rm max} = 4.2$ mm would be falsified.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that the spectral energy distribution of WL 17's ring from 2 to 345 GHz is best reproduced by a model with two dust components: a low-column-density 'Small' component with $a_{\rm max} = 45\,\mu$m that dominates the ALMA (sub)millimeter emission, and a high-column-density 'Grown' component that is optically thick up to ~30 GHz and yields a maximum grain size of $a_{\rm max} = 4.2^{+1.8}_{-2.1}$ mm under the DSHARP dust opacity model (a standard prescription for the emission and absorption opacities of compact dust grains). The 18–48 GHz flux is attributed to this optically thick dust slab, whose spectral index of about 2 flattens at lower frequencies; the curvature of the SED across the JVLA bands is what pins down the grain size. Time-variable free-free emission accounts for the <14 GHz behavior and for part of the 14–18 GHz excess, but the authors argue that without a dust component of roughly millimeter-sized grains it would be difficult to keep the emission optically thick at Q band (40–48 GHz). They therefore conclude that grain growth to millimeter sizes has already occurred in the WL 17 ring, while noting that both free-free and spinning dust could raise the non-dust fraction of the 18–48 GHz emission, making the inferred $a_{\rm max}$ an upper limit.

Load-bearing premise

The grain-size result depends on the assumption that the 18–48 GHz radio emission is dominated by thermally radiating dust that is optically thick at those frequencies, with free-free emission and spinning dust making only minor contributions; if either of those contributes more than modeled, the inferred 4.2 mm maximum grain size would be an upper limit and could be much smaller.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Grain growth to ~4 mm can occur within the Class I stage (age ≲1 Myr), before the disk reaches the Class II phase, so millimeter-sized pebbles are available for planetesimal formation earlier than the standard core-accretion timeline assumes.
  • If the gas-to-dust ratio in the ring is ~10, pebble accretion around an already-formed planetesimal could build a core of ~16 $M_\oplus$, exceeding the critical core mass of ~6 $M_\oplus$ needed for runaway gas accretion and potentially producing a gas giant.
  • The ring may be gravitationally unstable if the disk-to-star mass ratio is above ~0.1, a condition the authors flag as an upper limit because the gas mass is poorly constrained.
  • The existence of a compact, optically thick component with mm-sized grains would make the ring's substructures directly testable: future observations at ≲50 mas resolution in the 30–50 GHz bands could image the narrow rings or vortices that harbor the grown dust.
  • Because free-free and spinning dust could contribute to the 18–48 GHz emission, the inferred $a_{\rm max}$ of 4.2 mm is an upper limit; if either mechanism is significant, the true maximum grain size could be much smaller.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If the 4.2 mm grain size survives higher-resolution imaging, WL 17 would join HL Tau and a few other Class 0/I disks where substructures and large grains appear within the first ~0.5 Myr, strengthening the case that planet formation is not confined to the Class II stage.
  • The two-component structure of the model is not spatially verified; a natural test is to image the ring with the JVLA in A-configuration at 30–50 GHz and check whether the high-column-density 'Grown' component coincides with a compact substructure, or whether the unresolved SED fit has artificially split a single component.
  • A broader extension would be to apply the same two-component SED fit to other Class I disks with cm-wavelength data, using the time variability of the free-free components as a tag to separate dust from ionized gas; if mm-sized grains are common, early pebble accretion could be the default pathway to gas giants.
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

1 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper presents JVLA observations of the Class I protostar WL 17 at 2–48 GHz with five epochs, detecting unresolved emission at 4–48 GHz. The authors construct a spectral energy distribution combining their JVLA fluxes with ALMA data from the literature and fit it with a radiative transfer model consisting of two dust components (a 'Grown' high-column-density component and a 'Small' low-column-density halo) plus one or two free-free emission components. The best fit yields a maximum grain size of amax = 4.2 +1.8/-2.1 mm for the Grown dust component (Table 4). On this basis the authors argue that millimeter-sized grains are present in the WL 17 ring and discuss the ring's gravitational stability and the possibility of forming a planetary core by pebble accretion.

Significance. If the inferred grain size is robust, this would be one of the few measurements of millimeter-sized grains in a Class I disk and would be relevant to early planet formation. The paper reports a careful, multi-epoch JVLA campaign, uses visibility-domain flux fitting, and specifies the calibration and error treatment in detail. The radiative transfer and MCMC fitting are described transparently, and the authors correctly identify several degeneracies (T_dust, Omega_dust, free-free contamination). The main weakness is that the headline claim is presented as a measurement in the abstract while the body text repeatedly characterizes it as an upper limit; the unresolved nature of the source and the spectral decomposition into dust and free-free make the '4.2 mm' value model-dependent rather than uniquely constrained. The data set is useful and the caveats are partly acknowledged, but the framing needs substantial revision before the paper can be accepted.

major comments (1)
  1. [§4.2, Eq. (2)] The pebble-accretion core mass calculation uses the central values from Table 4 (Mdust ~ 1007 M_earth and amax = 4.2 mm) without propagating the stated upper-limit caveat. While the text notes the result 'should also be considered an upper limit,' the range of Mcore corresponding to the allowed ranges of Mdust and amax (or to the alternative free-free-dominated decomposition) is not given. Please provide a numerical range for Mcore under the systematic variations discussed in §3.2.2, since the qualitative statement is insufficient for the quantitative claim that a gas giant could form if the gas-to-dust ratio is below ~10.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Section 2 vs Table 1] The program ID is given as 23A-124 in the text but 24A-001 in Table 1; please correct the inconsistency.
  2. [Abstract] The phrase 'spatial resolution exceeding 0.5 arcsec' is ambiguous; it should read 'spatial resolution coarser than 0.5 arcsec' or 'with a beam size of ≳0.5 arcsec.'
  3. [§4.2, near Eq. (2)] Equation (2) uses 'fr s' and 'frp' while the text defines 'frs' and 'frp'; please unify the notation. Also, 'Mdust = 1007 M_earth' has an unwarranted precision; prefer 3.1 M_Jup or 1000 M_earth.
  4. [Table 2] The column header 'Adapted error' appears to mean 'Adopted error'; please correct the typo.
  5. [Figure 4 caption] The statement 'Some symbols are larger than their error bars' is informal and underspecified; please clarify which epochs/frequencies are meant or adjust the plotting so the error bars are visible.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: the amax value is an MCMC-fitted model parameter constrained by JVLA/ALMA fluxes, and the cited modeling framework is independent of the target result.

full rationale

The paper's central result (amax ≈ 4.2 mm for the high-column-density dust component) is obtained by fitting a radiative-transfer SED model to observed JVLA 18–48 GHz and ALMA 100–345 GHz flux densities. This is a standard model-dependent measurement, not a derivation of a quantity from its own definition. The dust opacity inputs (DSHARP table, Birnstiel et al. 2018) and the slab radiative-transfer prescription are stated explicitly and are external to this source. The modeling framework follows Liu et al. (2019b, 2021), but those works constrain other sources and do not encode WL 17's amax; hence the self-citation is methodological and not load-bearing. The paper also acknowledges the main degeneracies: unresolved ring, potential free-free and spinning-dust contributions, and fixed Tdust and Small-component amax. Those caveats affect robustness, not circularity. No step reduces by construction to its inputs, so the circularity score is 0.

Assumptions & free parameters 10 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The fitted amax is model-dependent. The key free parameters are the column densities, solid angles, and maximum grain sizes of the two dust components, plus emission measures and solid angles of two free-free components. The assumptions that most affect the result are the DSHARP opacity model, the fixed dust temperature of 35 K, the fixed small-grain amax of 45 µm, and the decomposition of the unresolved SED into dust and free-free emission.

free parameters (10)
  • amax (Grown dust component) = 4.2 mm (+1.8, -2.1)
    Maximum grain size of the high-column-density dust component, fitted to the 18-48 GHz and ALMA SED.
  • Sigma_dust (Grown) = 35 g/cm^2 (+28, -20)
    Column density of the high-column-density dust component, fitted.
  • Omega_dust (Grown) = 4.1e-2 arcsec^2 (+0.5, -0.4)
    Solid angle of the high-column-density component, fitted; degenerate with dust temperature.
  • Mdust (Grown) = 3.1 MJup (+3.1, -1.9)
    Dust mass of the high-column-density component, derived from Sigma and Omega but effectively fitted.
  • Sigma_dust (Small) = 0.11 g/cm^2 (+0.19, -0.07)
    Column density of the low-column-density halo, fitted mainly to ALMA >200 GHz data.
  • Omega_dust (Small) = 28.9e-2 arcsec^2 (+45.9, -17.5)
    Solid angle of the low-column-density halo, fitted.
  • EM_free-free-I (per epoch) = 0.10e7 cm^-6 pc for Jan 27, varying by epoch
    Emission measure of the extended free-free component, fitted separately for each epoch.
  • Omega_ff_free-free-I (per epoch) = 62e-14 sr for Jan 27, varying by epoch
    Solid angle of the extended free-free component, fitted.
  • EM_free-free-II (per epoch) = 58e7 cm^-6 pc for Feb 05, varying by epoch
    Emission measure of the compact variable free-free component, fitted for Feb 05-21.
  • Omega_ff_free-free-II (per epoch) = 0.081e-14 sr for Feb 05, varying by epoch
    Solid angle of the compact free-free component, fitted.
assumptions (6)
  • domain assumption DSHARP dust opacity model with compact grain composition (Birnstiel et al. 2018)
    Used in Appendix A.1 to compute size-averaged opacities; the fitted amax is directly dependent on this assumed opacity.
  • domain assumption Geometrically flat isothermal dust slab approximation (Miyake & Nakagawa 1993; Birnstiel et al. 2018)
    Equations (10)-(20) of Birnstiel et al. 2018 are used to compute dust SEDs.
  • domain assumption Power-law grain size distribution n(a) proportional to a^-3.5 between amin = 1e-4 mm and amax
    Assumed in Appendix A.1; size-averaged opacities depend on the assumed slope and amin.
  • domain assumption Free-free emission formula from Keto (2003) with electron temperature Te = 8000 K
    Appendix A.2; the turnover frequency is set by EM, and Te is fixed.
  • ad hoc to paper Mutual obscuration between dust and free-free components is negligible (tau = 0)
    Section 3.2.1 states that obscuration was not necessary to fit the observed SEDs.
  • domain assumption The 18-48 GHz emission is dominated by optically thick dust from a high-column-density component, with free-free and spinning dust contributions subdominant
    This is the core assumption behind the amax estimate; the authors acknowledge in §3.2.2 that free-free or spinning dust could bias the value upward.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of JVLA Measurement of Grain Size in the Compact Dust Ring around Class I Protostar WL 17." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/MKZAOZK5

@misc{pith2026250708246,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: JVLA Measurement of Grain Size in the Compact Dust Ring around Class I Protostar WL 17},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/MKZAOZK5}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2507.08246}
}
abstract

The maximum grain size in protoplanetary disks is a critical parameter for planet formation, as the efficiency of mechanisms like streaming instability and pebble accretion depend on grain size. Even young class 0/I objects, such as HL Tau, show substructures in their disks, indicating the potential for early planet formation. In this study, we investigated the grain size in the dust surrounding the class I object WL 17 using the Karl G. Jansky Very Large Array. Observations were conducted across seven frequency bands (Q, Ka, K, Ku, X, C, and S bands) ranging from 2 to 48 GHz, corresponding to wavelengths of 15 cm to 6.3 mm, with a spatial resolution exceeding 0\farcs5. While the ring structure at 0\farcs1 of WL 17 remains unresolved in our data, its emission is clearly detected at all observed frequencies, except at 2 GHz. To estimate the maximum grain size ($a_{\rm max}$) within the ring, we compared the observed spectral energy distribution (SED) with theoretical SEDs calculated for various $a_{\rm max}$ values using radiative transfer models. Assuming the dust opacity follows the DSHARP model, our analysis suggests that certain structures internal to the ring achieved a maximum grain size of approximately 4.2 mm. Additionally, we discuss the gravitational stability of the ring and the potential planetary core mass that could form through pebble accretion within the structure.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2507.08246 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. The JVLA intra-band images of WL 17. The observing frequency and epoch are labeled in each panel. The center of the image corresponds to the stellar position in FK5 J2000.0 at the observing epoch of 2024.1, calculated as (16h 27m06. s 7639, −24◦ 38m15. s 53589) (see the text for details). The offset between the stellar position and the peak emission is approximately 0. ′′1–0. ′′2. The synthesized beams are represent… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Same as [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Same as [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (1 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: The 2–345 GHz spectral profile of WL 17. Top left panel shows the flux densities obtained from all of our JVLA observations ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_4.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

79 extracted references · 15 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    L., Pérez, L

    ALMA Partnership, Brogan, C. L., Pérez, L. M., et al. 2015, ApJL, 808, L3, doi: 10.1088/2041-8205/808/1/L3

    doi:10.1088/2041-8205/808/1/l3 2015

  2. [2]

    M., Huang, J., Pérez, L

    Andrews, S. M., Huang, J., Pérez, L. M., et al. 2018, ApJL, 869, L41, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/aaf741

    doi:10.3847/2041-8213/aaf741 2018

  3. [3]

    1998, AJ, 116, 2953, doi: 10.1086/300637

    Anglada, G., Villuendas, E., Estalella, R., et al. 1998, AJ, 116, 2953, doi: 10.1086/300637

    doi:10.1086/300637 1998

  4. [4]

    P., Manara, C

    Ansdell, M., Williams, J. P., Manara, C. F., et al. 2017, AJ, 153, 240, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/aa69c0

    doi:10.3847/1538-3881/aa69c0 2017

  5. [5]

    2021, ApJ, 920, 71, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac15f3

    Aso, Y., Kwon, W., Hirano, N., et al. 2021, ApJ, 920, 71, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac15f3

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ac15f3 2021

  6. [6]

    Grain Size in the Class I Protostellar System TMC-1A Constrained with ALMA and VLA Observations

    Aso, Y., Ohashi, S., Liu, H. B., & Xu, W. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2411.13044, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2411.13044 Astropy Collaboration, Robitaille, T. P., Tollerud, E. J., et al. 2013, A&A, 558, A33, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201322068 Astropy Collaboration, Price-Whelan, A. M., Sipőcz, B. M., et al. 2018, AJ, 156, 123, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/aabc4f Astropy ...

    work page Pith review arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2411.13044 2024

  7. [7]

    M., Padovani, M., et al

    Bacciotti, F., Girart, J. M., Padovani, M., et al. 2018, ApJL, 865, L12, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/aadf87

    doi:10.3847/2041-8213/aadf87 2018

  8. [8]

    A., Cleeves, L

    Bergin, E. A., Cleeves, L. I., Gorti, U., et al. 2013, Nature, 493, 644, doi: 10.1038/nature11805

    doi:10.1038/nature11805 2013

Show all 79 references
  1. [9]

    P., Zhu, Z., et al

    Birnstiel, T., Dullemond, C. P., Zhu, Z., et al. 2018, ApJL, 869, L45, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/aaf743

    2018 doi

  2. [10]

    C., Savage, B

    Bohlin, R. C., Savage, B. D., & Drake, J. F. 1978, ApJ, 224, 132, doi: 10.1086/156357 CASA Team, Bean, B., Bhatnagar, S., et al. 2022, PASP, 134, 114501, doi: 10.1088/1538-3873/ac9642

    1978 doi

  3. [11]

    M., Gurwell, M

    Chung, C.-Y., Andrews, S. M., Gurwell, M. A., et al. 2024, ApJS, 273, 29, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/ad528b

    2024 doi

  4. [12]

    2025, ApJS, 277, 45, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/adb717

    Chung, C.-Y., Tsai, A.-L., Wright, M., et al. 2025, ApJS, 277, 45, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/adb717

    2025 doi

  5. [13]

    B., Jiménez-Serra, I., et al

    Coutens, A., Liu, H. B., Jiménez-Serra, I., et al. 2019, A&A, 631, A58, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201935340

    2019 doi

  6. [14]

    2015a, ApJL, 812, L32, doi: 10.1088/2041-8205/812/2/L32

    Dong, R., Hall, C., Rice, K., & Chiang, E. 2015a, ApJL, 812, L32, doi: 10.1088/2041-8205/812/2/L32

    doi

  7. [15]

    2015b, ApJ, 809, 93, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/809/1/93

    Dong, R., Zhu, Z., & Whitney, B. 2015b, ApJ, 809, 93, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/809/1/93

    doi

  8. [16]

    2018, ApJ, 860, 124, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aac6cb

    Dong, R., Liu, S.-y., Eisner, J., et al. 2018, ApJ, 860, 124, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aac6cb

    2018 doi

  9. [17]

    Draine, B. T. 2003, ARA&A, 41, 241, doi: 10.1146/annurev.astro.41.011802.094840 —. 2006, ApJ, 636, 1114, doi: 10.1086/498130 Drążkowska, J., Bitsch, B., Lambrechts, M., et al. 2023, in Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series, Vol. 534, Protostars and Planets VII,...

    2003 arXiv

  10. [18]

    2017, A&A, 597, A90, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201527574

    Ducourant, C., Teixeira, R., Krone-Martins, A., et al. 2017, A&A, 597, A90, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201527574

    2017 doi

  11. [19]

    A., Loinard, L., Mioduszewski, A

    Dzib, S. A., Loinard, L., Mioduszewski, A. J., et al. 2013, ApJ, 775, 63, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/775/1/63

    2013 doi

  12. [20]

    J., Dunham, M

    Evans, II, N. J., Dunham, M. M., Jørgensen, J. K., et al. 2009, ApJS, 181, 321, doi: 10.1088/0067-0049/181/2/321

    2009 doi

  13. [21]

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

    Foreman-Mackey, D., Hogg, D. W., Lang, D., & Goodman, J. 2013, PASP, 125, 306, doi: 10.1086/670067 Gaia Collaboration, Prusti, T., de Bruijne, J. H. J., et al. 2016, A&A, 595, A1, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201629272 Gaia Collaboration, Vallenari, A., Brown, A. G. A., et al. 2022,...

    2013 doi arXiv

  14. [22]

    S., & Mason, B

    Greaves, J. S., & Mason, B. 2022, MNRAS, 513, 3180, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stac856

    2022 doi

  15. [23]

    S., Scaife, A

    Greaves, J. S., Scaife, A. M. M., Frayer, D. T., et al. 2018, Nature Astronomy, 2, 662, doi: 10.1038/s41550-018-0495-z Güdel, M. 2002, ARA&A, 40, 217, doi: 10.1146/annurev.astro.40.060401.093806

    2018

  16. [24]

    M., van der Marel, N., Di Francesco, J., et al

    Guerra-Alvarado, O. M., van der Marel, N., Di Francesco, J., et al. 2024, A&A, 681, A82, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202347685

    2024 doi

  17. [25]

    2022, A&A, 664, A137, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202142303

    Guidi, G., Isella, A., Testi, L., et al. 2022, A&A, 664, A137, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202142303

    2022 doi

  18. [26]

    C., Sadavoy, S., Matrà, L., Sheehan, P., & van der Marel, N

    Gulick, H. C., Sadavoy, S., Matrà, L., Sheehan, P., & van der Marel, N. 2021, ApJ, 922, 150, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac21cc

    2021 doi

  19. [27]

    2023, ApJ, 956, 9, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/acf853

    Han, I., Kwon, W., Aso, Y., Bae, J., & Sheehan, P. 2023, ApJ, 956, 9, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/acf853

    2023 doi

  20. [28]

    B., Dong, R., Liu, B., & Muto, T

    Hashimoto, J., Liu, H. B., Dong, R., Liu, B., & Muto, T. 2022, ApJ, 941, 66, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aca01d

    2022 doi

  21. [29]

    B., Dong, R., et al

    Hashimoto, J., Liu, H. B., Dong, R., et al. 2023, AJ, 166, 186, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/acf3e9

    2023 doi

  22. [30]

    1996, A&A, 311, 291

    Henning, T., & Stognienko, R. 1996, A&A, 311, 291

    1996

  23. [31]

    Hildebrand, R. H. 1983, QJRAS, 24, 267

    1983

  24. [32]

    2018, ApJ, 862, 116, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aaccf0

    Hoang, T., Lan, N.-Q., Vinh, N.-A., & Kim, Y.-J. 2018, ApJ, 862, 116, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aaccf0

    2018 doi

  25. [33]

    Hull, C. L. H., Yang, H., Li, Z.-Y., et al. 2018, ApJ, 860, 82, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aabfeb

    2018 doi

  26. [34]

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

    2007 doi

  27. [35]

    2022, A&A, 664, A86, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202243368

    Jang, H., Liu, B., & Johansen, A. 2022, A&A, 664, A86, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202243368

    2022 doi

  28. [36]

    Jiang, H., & Ormel, C. W. 2023, MNRAS, 518, 3877, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stac3275

    2023 doi

  29. [37]

    2014, in Protostars and Planets VI, ed

    Johansen, A., Blum, J., Tanaka, H., et al. 2014, in Protostars and Planets VI, ed. H. Beuther, R. S. Klessen, C. P. Dullemond, & T. Henning, 547, doi: 10.2458/azu_uapress_9780816531240-ch024

    2014 doi

  30. [38]

    Dullemond, C. P. 2016a, ApJ, 820, 54, doi: 10.3847/0004-637X/820/1/54

    doi

  31. [39]

    2015, ApJ, 809, 78, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/809/1/78

    Kataoka, A., Muto, T., Momose, M., et al. 2015, ApJ, 809, 78, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/809/1/78

    2015 doi

  32. [40]

    2016b, ApJL, 831, L12, doi: 10.3847/2041-8205/831/2/L12

    Kataoka, A., Tsukagoshi, T., Momose, M., et al. 2016b, ApJL, 831, L12, doi: 10.3847/2041-8205/831/2/L12

    doi

  33. [41]

    2003, ApJ, 599, 1196, doi: 10.1086/379545

    Keto, E. 2003, ApJ, 599, 1196, doi: 10.1086/379545

    2003 doi

  34. [42]

    B., Lai, S.-P., et al

    Ko, C.-L., Liu, H. B., Lai, S.-P., et al. 2020, ApJ, 889, 172, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab5e79

    2020 doi

  35. [43]

    2016, ARA&A, 54, 271, doi: 10.1146/annurev-astro-081915-023307

    Kratter, K., & Lodato, G. 2016, ARA&A, 54, 271, doi: 10.1146/annurev-astro-081915-023307

    2016 doi

  36. [44]

    2012, A&A, 544, A32, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201219127

    Lambrechts, M., & Johansen, A. 2012, A&A, 544, A32, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201219127

    2012 doi

  37. [45]

    Lee, C.-F., Li, Z.-Y., & Turner, N. J. 2020a, Nature Astronomy, 4, 142, doi: 10.1038/s41550-019-0905-x

    doi

  38. [46]

    2021, ApJ, 910, 75, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/abe53a

    Lee, C.-F., Li, Z.-Y., Yang, H., et al. 2021, ApJ, 910, 75, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/abe53a

    2021 doi

  39. [47]

    2020b, ApJ, 889, 20, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab5a7e

    Lee, S., Lee, J.-E., Aikawa, Y., Herczeg, G., & Johnstone, D. 2020b, ApJ, 889, 20, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab5a7e

    doi

  40. [48]

    I.-H., Liu, H

    Li, J. I.-H., Liu, H. B., Hasegawa, Y., & Hirano, N. 2017, ApJ, 840, 72, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aa6f04

    2017 doi

  41. [49]

    2020, Research in Astronomy and Astrophysics, 20, 164, doi: 10.1088/1674-4527/20/10/164

    Liu, B., & Ji, J. 2020, Research in Astronomy and Astrophysics, 20, 164, doi: 10.1088/1674-4527/20/10/164

    2020 doi

  42. [50]

    2019a, A&A, 632, A7, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201936309

    Liu, B., Lambrechts, M., Johansen, A., & Liu, F. 2019a, A&A, 632, A7, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201936309

    doi

  43. [51]

    Liu, H. B. 2019, ApJL, 877, L22, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ab1f8e —. 2021, ApJ, 914, 25, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/abf8b6

    2019 doi

  44. [52]

    B., Casassus, S., Dong, R., et al

    Liu, H. B., Casassus, S., Dong, R., et al. 2024a, ApJ, 972, 163, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad5dab

    doi

  45. [53]

    B., Galván-Madrid, R., Forbrich, J., et al

    Liu, H. B., Galván-Madrid, R., Forbrich, J., et al. 2014, ApJ, 780, 155, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/780/2/155

    2014 doi

  46. [54]

    B., Mérand, A., Green, J

    Liu, H. B., Mérand, A., Green, J. D., et al. 2019b, ApJ, 884, 97, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab391c

    doi

  47. [55]

    B., Tsai, A.-L., Chen, W

    Liu, H. B., Tsai, A.-L., Chen, W. P., et al. 2021, ApJ, 923, 270, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac31b9

    2021 doi

  48. [56]

    B., Muto, T., Konishi, M., et al

    Liu, H. B., Muto, T., Konishi, M., et al. 2024b, A&A, 685, A18, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202348896

    doi

  49. [57]

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

    Manara, C. F., Morbidelli, A., & Guillot, T. 2018, A&A, 618, L3, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201834076

    2018 doi

  50. [58]

    J., Pineda, J

    Maureira, M. J., Pineda, J. E., Liu, H. B., et al. 2024, A&A, 689, L5, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202451166

    2024 doi

  51. [59]

    K., Furlan, E., Manoj, P., et al

    McClure, M. K., Furlan, E., Manoj, P., et al. 2010, ApJS, 188, 75, doi: 10.1088/0067-0049/188/1/75

    2010 doi

  52. [60]

    1993, Icarus, 106, 20, doi: 10.1006/icar.1993.1156

    Miyake, K., & Nakagawa, Y. 1993, Icarus, 106, 20, doi: 10.1006/icar.1993.1156

    1993

  53. [61]

    1980, Progress of Theoretical Physics, 64, 544, doi: 10.1143/PTP.64.544

    Mizuno, H. 1980, Progress of Theoretical Physics, 64, 544, doi: 10.1143/PTP.64.544

    1980 doi

  54. [62]

    B., Ohashi, S., et al

    Nakatani, R., Liu, H. B., Ohashi, S., et al. 2020, ApJL, 895, L2, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ab8eaa

    2020 doi

  55. [63]

    J., Jørgensen, J

    Ohashi, N., Tobin, J. J., Jørgensen, J. K., et al. 2023, ApJ, 951, 8, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/acd384

    2023 doi

  56. [64]

    2019, ApJ, 886, 103, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab5107

    Ohashi, S., & Kataoka, A. 2019, ApJ, 886, 103, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab5107

    2019 doi

  57. [65]

    2020, ApJ, 900, 81, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/abaab4

    Ohashi, S., Kataoka, A., van der Marel, N., et al. 2020, ApJ, 900, 81, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/abaab4

    2020 doi

  58. [66]

    W., & Klahr, H

    Ormel, C. W., & Klahr, H. H. 2010, A&A, 520, A43, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201014903 JVLA Obser v ations of WL 1715

    2010 doi

  59. [67]

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

    Paardekooper, S., Dong, R., Duffell, P., et al. 2023, in Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series, Vol. 534, Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series, ed. S. Inutsuka, Y. Aikawa, T. Muto, K. Tomida, & M. Tamura, 685

    2023

  60. [68]

    B., Hubickyj, O., Bodenheimer, P., et al

    Pollack, J. B., Hubickyj, O., Bodenheimer, P., et al. 1996, Icarus, 124, 62, doi: 10.1006/icar.1996.0190

    1996

  61. [69]

    Rau, U., & Cornwell, T. J. 2011, A&A, 532, A71, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201117104

    2011 doi

  62. [70]

    Reynolds, S. P. 1986, ApJ, 304, 713, doi: 10.1086/164209 Rivière-Marichalar, P., Macías, E., Baruteau, C., et al. 2024, A&A, 683, A141, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202347464

    1986 doi

  63. [71]

    I., Stephens, I

    Sadavoy, S. I., Stephens, I. W., Myers, P. C., et al. 2019, ApJS, 245, 2, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/ab4257

    2019 doi

  64. [72]

    M., Schmiedeke, A., Pineda, J

    Segura-Cox, D. M., Schmiedeke, A., Pineda, J. E., et al. 2020, Nature, 586, 228, doi: 10.1038/s41586-020-2779-6

    2020 doi

  65. [73]

    D., & Eisner, J

    Sheehan, P. D., & Eisner, J. A. 2017, ApJL, 840, L12, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/aa6df8 —. 2018, ApJ, 857, 18, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aaae65

    2017 doi

  66. [74]

    2024, ApJ, 961, 228, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad12b5

    Shoshi, A., Harada, N., Tokuda, K., et al. 2024, ApJ, 961, 228, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad12b5

    2024 doi

  67. [75]

    W., Yang, H., Li, Z.-Y., et al

    Stephens, I. W., Yang, H., Li, Z.-Y., et al. 2017, ApJ, 851, 55, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aa998b van der Walt, S., Colbert, S. C., & Varoquaux, G. 2011, Computing in Science and Engineering, 13, 22, doi: 10.1109/MCSE.2011.37

    2017 doi

  68. [76]

    Warren, S. G. 1984, ApOpt, 23, 1206, doi: 10.1364/AO.23.001206

    1984 doi

  69. [77]

    2022, ApJ, 934, 156, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac7b94

    Xu, W. 2022, ApJ, 934, 156, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac7b94

    2022 doi

  70. [78]

    2022, ApJL, 937, L14, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ac903a

    Ueda, T. 2022, ApJL, 937, L14, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ac903a

    2022 doi

  71. [79]

    2021, A&A, 646, A18, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202039536 16Hashimoto et al

    Henning, T. 2021, A&A, 646, A18, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202039536 16Hashimoto et al. APPENDIX A.EMISSION MECHANISMS A.1.Dust emission The spectral profiles of dust were evaluated based on Equations (10)–(20) presented in Birnstiel et al. (2018), which is the analytic solution ...

    2018 doi

Pith tools

Reviewed August 6, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.