pith. sign in

arxiv: 2605.28043 · v2 · pith:HAQYRFSHnew · submitted 2026-05-27 · 🌌 astro-ph.EP

Molecular Similarity and Water Diversity in Coeval Binary Disks: JWST/MIRI Observations of Sz 65 and Sz 66

Jinghuai Yao , Ke Zhang , Andrea Banzatti , Naman S. Bajaj , Ilaria Pascucci , James Miley , Geoffrey A. Blake , Colette Salyk
show 5 more authors
John M. Carpenter Paola Pinilla Lucas A. Cieza Miguel Vioque Beno\^it Tabone
This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-06-29 10:17 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.EP
keywords protoplanetary disksbinary starsJWST MIRIwater vapormolecular emissionpebble driftsnow linedisk gaps
0
0 comments X

The pith

A wide binary pair of protoplanetary disks shows excess cold water vapor in the secondary because its dust lacks gaps.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper compares JWST/MIRI spectra of Sz 65 and Sz 66, two coeval disks in a wide binary. Both show similar emission from H2O, CO2, and HCN at shorter wavelengths, but the secondary has markedly stronger cold H2O lines beyond 18 microns. The authors attribute the difference to the secondary's smooth dust disk versus the primary's gaps at 6 and 20 au. They argue that an unstructured disk permits more efficient inward pebble drift, releasing extra water vapor when ices cross the snow line. This setup lets the binary serve as a natural experiment that holds age and metallicity fixed while varying only disk structure.

Core claim

The scaled spectra of Sz 65 and Sz 66 are nearly identical in H2O, CO2, and HCN between 13 and 18 microns, with only stronger C2H2 in the primary; beyond 18 microns the secondary shows higher cold-to-hot and warm-to-hot H2O mass ratios. Because the stars share age and metallicity and both disks are compact in millimeter continuum, the excess cold water is explained by the secondary's lack of dust gaps, which allows more pebbles to drift across the water snow line and sublimate their icy mantles.

What carries the argument

Comparison of cold-to-hot H2O line flux and slab-model mass ratios between the two disks, linked to the presence or absence of millimeter dust gaps.

If this is right

  • Wide-separation binaries can isolate the effect of dust-disk structure on inner-disk molecular chemistry.
  • Gaps at a few tens of au can suppress cold water vapor by interrupting pebble delivery to the snow line.
  • Unstructured compact disks may retain higher inner-disk water abundances available for planetesimal formation.
  • Molecular line ratios measured at 13-28 microns can serve as diagnostics of outer-disk pebble transport.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The same binary-control approach could test whether gap presence also alters carbon-bearing species or nitrogen chemistry in other systems.
  • If pebble drift is the dominant mechanism, cold-water excess should correlate with disk size and smoothness across a larger sample of binaries.
  • Planet-formation models that include gap opening may need to predict lower water delivery to inner regions when gaps appear early.

Load-bearing premise

The only relevant difference between the two disks is the presence of gaps in one and their absence in the other.

What would settle it

A millimeter image of Sz 66 that reveals gaps at radii comparable to those in Sz 65, or a binary pair with matched dust structure but mismatched cold-water ratios.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2605.28043 by Andrea Banzatti, Beno\^it Tabone, Colette Salyk, Geoffrey A. Blake, Ilaria Pascucci, James Miley, Jinghuai Yao, John M. Carpenter, Ke Zhang, Lucas A. Cieza, Miguel Vioque, Naman S. Bajaj, Paola Pinilla.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: The 10 µm silicate feature of the primary Sz 65 (upper), and the secondary Sz 66 (lower). The green dotted line shows the interpolated background from 7.5 to 13.5 µm. The continuum estimation is well determined for the primary across the full MIRI wavelength range of 4.9– 28 µm, although noise increases beyond 27 µm. The secondary exhibits absorption signatures between 4.9– 5.5 µm, which degrade the qualit… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: The continuum-subtracted spectrum of the primary Sz 65 (red), and the secondary Sz 66 (blue). The flux of the secondary is scaled by a factor of 2 to approximately match the lines at 13–18 µm. Main emission features of C2H2, HCN and CO2 are highlighted. and [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Line diagnostic diagrams for Sz 65 and Sz 66, together with reference disks from Banzatti et al. (2025) (green) and slab-model predictions (gray). Values for reference disks are updated to JDISCS version 9.0 (see Section 2.2 of Mallaney et al. (2026)). Left: The radius of the hot (850 K) component increases from left to right with the 6000 K line luminosity, and the warm and cold components increase from b… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Line diagnostic diagrams showing line ratios versus the dust disk size R90. The three line pairs represent the flux ratio of cold/hot (left), warm/hot (middle), and cold/warm (right) H2O. The anti-correlation (orange) is fitted from a subset of single stars without cloud contamination or disk cavity (black outline). See [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Line diagnostics diagram showing accretion lu￾minosity derived from mid-infrared H I lines versus the 6000 K line luminosity. Triangles indicate upper limits. For Sz 65 and Sz 66, the accretion luminosities reported in Manara et al. (2023) (PPVII) derived from Balmer-jump fitting are added with hollow marks. The anti-correlation (orange) is fitted from reference disks with upper limits excluded [PITH_FULL… view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: The best-fit models and the continuum-subtracted spectra (black) of the primary Sz 65 and the secondary Sz 66 in the 13–27 µm range. The total model flux is shown in cyan in the upper axis, while the molecular contributions are shown in the lower axis. The H2 line, not included in the model, is indicated separately [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: The posterior distribution of the slab model parameters of H2O, CO2, C2H2, and HCN for the primary Sz 65 (red) and the secondary Sz 66 (blue) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_8.png] view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: The continuum-subtracted spectra and the model flux in 5.5–7µm scaled by the best-fit suppression factors obtained in Section 3.2.2. sity. The best-fit HCN and CO2 masses are consistently higher in the primary. The C2H2 fits yield unconstrained column density and unphysical temperatures pegged near the prior upper limit (1400 K). The fitted tempera￾ture is well above the common value (800–1000 K) seen in J… view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: The observed fluxes of the primary Sz 65 (red) and the secondary Sz 66 (blue) over 4.9–5.15 µm, shown to￾gether with the continuum and CO model flux of the primary. The secondary is severely affected by photospheric absorp￾tion; therefore, the continuum estimation and model fitting are not performed. The observed non-LTE effects are attributed to low gas densities that are insufficient to thermalize the r… view at source ↗
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: [Ne II] lines of Sz 65 and Sz 66. The rest wave￾length is indicated by the grey line, and the cyan regions represent the molecular model flux obtained in Section 3.2.1. 0.000 0.002 0.004 0.006 0.008 [Ar II] Sz 65 6.965 6.970 6.975 6.980 6.985 6.990 6.995 7.000 Wavelength ( m) 0.000 0.002 0.004 0.006 [Ar II] Sz 66 full model Flux (Jy) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_11.png] view at source ↗
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: [Ar II] lines of Sz 65 and Sz 66; plotting conven￾tions follow [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_12.png] view at source ↗
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: (a) The line-subtracted continuum, (b) line intensity, and (c) Doppler velocity of the extended [Ne II] emission of the primary (Sz 65). The orange dotted line marks the major axis of the disk. 4 2 0 2 4 RA [arcsec] 3 2 1 0 1 2 3 Dec [arcsec] Sz 66 (a) 12.813 m continuum 4 2 0 2 4 RA [arcsec] 3 2 1 0 1 2 3 Dec [arcsec] (b) [Ne II] m integrated intensity 4 2 0 2 4 RA [arcsec] 3 2 1 0 1 2 3 Dec [arcsec] (c)… view at source ↗
Figure 14
Figure 14. Figure 14: (a) The line-subtracted continuum, (b) line intensity, and (c) Doppler velocity of the extended [Ne II] emission of the secondary (Sz 66). A jet feature (cyan) perpendicular to the disk’s major axis is tentatively detected [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_14.png] view at source ↗
Figure 15
Figure 15. Figure 15: Illustration of the disk structures and the pebble drift conditions of the two disks, with the mm-wavelength radial intensity profiles from Miley et al. (2024) on the right. The intensity profiles are extracted from the uv plane of ALMA observations. Sz 66 has a smaller, unstructured disk that facilitates pebble drift, enriching the warm and cold water reservoirs through the sublimation of ice mantles, wh… view at source ↗
Figure 16
Figure 16. Figure 16: Continuum estimation (green), continuum estimation with calculated offset (red), and observed spectrum (gray) of Sz 65. The wavelength channels excluded from continuum subtraction and interpolated over are indicated in orange, and the line-free regions used for flux offset calibration are represented by the blue dots. See Appendix B in Banzatti et al. (2025) for related details [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/f… view at source ↗
Figure 17
Figure 17. Figure 17: Continuum estimation (green), continuum estimation with calculated offset (red), and observed spectrum (gray) of Sz 66. The wavelength channels excluded from continuum subtraction and interpolated over are indicated in orange, and the line-free regions used for flux offset calibration are represented by the blue dots. The estimation at 4.9–5.5 µm might be degraded by photospheric absorption of the host st… view at source ↗
Figure 18
Figure 18. Figure 18: The NewEra photospheric models (Hauschildt et al. 2025) of Sz 65 and Sz 66 overlaid on their observed spectra. The vertical green dashed lines indicate the CO v = 1–0 transitions. D. COLDEST EMISSION DIAGNOSTICS In addition to the water line-ratio diagnostics presented in Section 3.1, we also applied a two-line ratio diagnostic using the 23.81676 µm (Eu = 1448 K) and 23.89518 µm (Eu = 1615 K) lines to pro… view at source ↗
Figure 19
Figure 19. Figure 19: Line diagnostic diagram showing the 1448/1615 K line ratio that traces the coldest emission and the 1500/6000 K line ratio that traces the cold water contribution. Most reference disks fall above the 200 K threshold (red dashed line), implying coldest emitting temperatures below 200 K. See [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p019_19.png] view at source ↗
Figure 20
Figure 20. Figure 20: presents the posterior distribution of the OH parameters fitted in Section 3.2.1. The three OH components are included in the molecular model to remove OH emissions that overlap with other molecules. Because of the non￾LTE effects on OH emission, the posterior distributions are not well-constrained and not physically representative of the thermalized conditions. 400 600 800 0.000 0.002 0.004 0.006 0.008 D… view at source ↗
Figure 21
Figure 21. Figure 21: The 13CO2 models and the spectra obtained after subtracting the main emission species. The red dotted lines show the model obtained by scaling 12CO2, while the cyan shades show the best-fit slab model. 0.010 0.005 0.000 0.005 0.010 Sz 65 15.36 15.38 15.40 15.42 15.44 15.46 Wavelength ( m) 0.0050 0.0025 0.0000 0.0025 0.0050 Sz 66 full H2O_H H2O_W H2O_C C2H2 HCN CO2 OH_H OH_M OH_C Flux (Jy) [PITH_FULL_IMAG… view at source ↗
Figure 22
Figure 22. Figure 22: The models of the main emission species (not including 13CO2) and the continuum-subtracted spectra near the wavelength region of 13CO2 emission (pale yellow). constitute only a small fraction of the total continuum-subtracted spectra, as H2O and 12CO2 emissions dominate at this wavelength. G. SLAB MODEL RESIDUALS We identify two relatively broad residuals of our slab models at 13.55 µm and 13.8 µm that ap… view at source ↗
Figure 23
Figure 23. Figure 23: The best-fit model and the continuum-subtracted spectra for the binary in the 13.5–14.0 µm range. The underpre￾dicted regions are highlighted in pale yellow. A broader and less prominent underprediction occurs around 13.8 µm. This wavelength range is dominated by emission from C2H2 and HCN, and the residual may share a common origin with the unphysical best-fit parameters of C2H2 (see [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:fi… view at source ↗
read the original abstract

We present JWST/MIRI Medium Resolution Spectrometer spectra of the wide-separation (projected separation $= 980$ au) binary protoplanetary disks Sz 65 (K7; $0.68~M_{\odot}$) and Sz 66 (M3; $0.30~M_{\odot}$), reduced using the uniform pipeline of the JWST Disk Infrared Spectral Chemistry Survey. Both disks show rich molecular emission, including H$_2$O, CO$_2$, HCN, C$_2$H$_2$, and OH. The scaled spectra of the two disks exhibit remarkably similar H$_2$O, CO$_2$, and HCN line emission in the 13--18 $\mu$m region, with the only notable difference being stronger C$_2$H$_2$ emission in the primary (Sz 65). Beyond 18 $\mu$m, the difference in H$_2$O line emission between the two disks increases. Both the flux ratios and the slab-model-derived mass ratios of cold to hot H$_2$O ($\sim$200 K to $\sim$750 K) and warm to hot H$_2$O ($\sim$450 K to $\sim$750 K) are significantly higher in the secondary (Sz 66). Because binary stars share nearly the same age and metallicity, and as both disks appear compact in millimeter emission ($<30$ au), we suggest that the excess cold H$_2$O in the secondary is best explained by its unstructured dust disk, in contrast to the primary, which shows gaps at 6 and 20 au. The enhanced cold water in the secondary is consistent with efficient pebble drift across the water snow line and increased H$_2$O vapor from the sublimation of icy mantles. Our results demonstrate that wide-separation binaries can serve as powerful control samples for isolating the impact of individual disk properties on inner-disk chemistry and evolution.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 1 minor

Summary. The manuscript reports JWST/MIRI MRS spectra of the wide binary protoplanetary disks Sz 65 (K7, 0.68 M⊙) and Sz 66 (M3, 0.30 M⊙), reduced via the uniform JWST Disk Infrared Spectral Chemistry Survey pipeline. The scaled spectra are similar in H₂O, CO₂, and HCN emission between 13–18 μm (with stronger C₂H₂ in the primary), but show enhanced H₂O emission beyond 18 μm in the secondary. Slab-model fits yield higher cold-to-hot (~200 K / ~750 K) and warm-to-hot (~450 K / ~750 K) H₂O mass ratios in Sz 66. The authors attribute the excess cold H₂O to the secondary’s unstructured dust disk (versus gaps at 6 and 20 au in the primary), consistent with efficient pebble drift across the snow line, given shared age, metallicity, and compact (<30 au) mm emission.

Significance. If the attribution to dust structure holds after controlling for other variables, the result provides a concrete observational demonstration that wide-separation binaries can isolate the effects of disk substructure on inner-disk molecular chemistry. The uniform pipeline strengthens the direct spectral comparison, and the work supplies a falsifiable prediction that gap-free disks should exhibit systematically higher cold-H₂O ratios under otherwise similar conditions.

major comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract: the central claim isolates dust-disk structure (gaps vs. unstructured) as the driver of the higher cold-to-hot H₂O mass ratio in Sz 66 after controlling for age and metallicity. However, the stellar masses differ by a factor of >2 (0.68 vs. 0.30 M⊙), implying different luminosities, temperature gradients, and snow-line locations that are not discussed or corrected for; these could independently alter pebble-drift efficiency and the slab-model ratios.
  2. [Abstract] Abstract: the statement that “flux ratios and the slab-model-derived mass ratios … are significantly higher” supplies no numerical values, uncertainties, or details on the temperature components, column densities, or fitting procedure used to obtain the ~200 K / ~450 K / ~750 K components, preventing assessment of whether the reported difference is statistically robust or sensitive to model assumptions.
minor comments (1)
  1. The manuscript would benefit from an explicit paragraph (perhaps in §4 or the discussion) addressing how stellar-mass and luminosity differences were evaluated as potential confounders before attributing the H₂O excess solely to dust structure.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their thoughtful and constructive report. The comments highlight important points regarding stellar mass differences and the level of detail in the abstract. We address each below and will revise the manuscript accordingly to strengthen the presentation.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract: the central claim isolates dust-disk structure (gaps vs. unstructured) as the driver of the higher cold-to-hot H₂O mass ratio in Sz 66 after controlling for age and metallicity. However, the stellar masses differ by a factor of >2 (0.68 vs. 0.30 M⊙), implying different luminosities, temperature gradients, and snow-line locations that are not discussed or corrected for; these could independently alter pebble-drift efficiency and the slab-model ratios.

    Authors: We agree that the factor of ~2.3 difference in stellar mass is relevant and should be explicitly addressed. In the revised manuscript we will add a dedicated paragraph in the discussion section that estimates the stellar luminosities from the given spectral types, computes approximate snow-line locations for each star, and evaluates how these might affect pebble-drift efficiency. We will also note that both disks remain compact (<30 au) in millimeter continuum and that the primary exhibits resolved gaps at 6 and 20 au while the secondary does not; these structural differences are still the most direct explanation for the observed cold-to-hot water ratio contrast. The revision will therefore retain the central claim while providing the missing quantitative context on stellar-mass effects. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract: the statement that “flux ratios and the slab-model-derived mass ratios … are significantly higher” supplies no numerical values, uncertainties, or details on the temperature components, column densities, or fitting procedure used to obtain the ~200 K / ~450 K / ~750 K components, preventing assessment of whether the reported difference is statistically robust or sensitive to model assumptions.

    Authors: The abstract is written as a concise summary; the full slab-model results (temperature components, column densities, uncertainties, and fitting methodology) are presented in Section 3.2 and Table 2 of the manuscript. To address the referee’s concern we will revise the abstract to include the approximate cold-to-hot and warm-to-hot mass ratios with their 1σ uncertainties, thereby allowing readers to assess the magnitude and robustness of the difference without immediately consulting the main text. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: purely observational spectral comparison with slab-model fits

full rationale

The paper reports JWST/MIRI spectra of Sz 65 and Sz 66, notes similar 13-18 μm emission and stronger >18 μm cold H2O in the secondary, then derives cold/hot and warm/hot H2O mass ratios via slab models at fixed temperatures (~200 K / ~450 K / ~750 K). The central attribution to dust structure (gaps vs unstructured) rests on the observational premise of shared age/metallicity and compact mm disks; this is an interpretive inference, not a derivation that reduces to fitted inputs or self-citations by construction. No equations, predictions, or uniqueness theorems appear that would trigger any of the enumerated circularity patterns. The stellar-mass difference is a potential uncontrolled variable for correctness but does not create circularity.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

3 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The interpretation rests on domain assumptions about coeval binaries and standard slab modeling for line emission; temperatures and mass ratios are derived from models rather than direct measurement.

free parameters (3)
  • cold H2O temperature component = ~200 K
    Approximate value of ~200 K used in slab models to derive cold-to-hot mass ratio
  • warm H2O temperature component = ~450 K
    Approximate value of ~450 K used in slab models to derive warm-to-hot mass ratio
  • hot H2O temperature component = ~750 K
    Approximate value of ~750 K used as reference in slab models
axioms (2)
  • domain assumption Binary stars share nearly the same age and metallicity
    Invoked in the abstract to attribute observed differences solely to disk properties
  • domain assumption Both disks are compact in millimeter emission (<30 au)
    Stated in the abstract to support the pebble drift interpretation

pith-pipeline@v0.9.1-grok · 5950 in / 1518 out tokens · 45760 ms · 2026-06-29T10:17:38.616572+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

90 extracted references · 90 canonical work pages · 2 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    L., Jensen, E

    Akeson, R. L., Jensen, E. L. N., Carpenter, J., et al. 2019, ApJ, 872, 158, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aaff6a Alcalá, J. M., Natta, A., Manara, C. F., et al. 2014, A&A, 561, A2, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201322254 Alcalá, J. M., Manara, C. F., Natta, A., et al. 2017, A&A, 600, A20, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201629929

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aaff6a 2019

  2. [2]

    E., Blake, G

    Anderson, D. E., Blake, G. A., Cleeves, L. I., et al. 2021, ApJ, 909, 55, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/abd9c1

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/abd9c1 2021

  3. [3]

    M., Kamp, I., Henning, T., et al

    Arabhavi, A. M., Kamp, I., Henning, T., et al. 2024, Science, 384, 1086, doi: 10.1126/science.adi8147

    work page doi:10.1126/science.adi8147 2024

  4. [4]

    M., Kamp, I., van Dishoeck, E

    Arabhavi, A. M., Kamp, I., van Dishoeck, E. F., et al. 2025, ApJL, 984, L62, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/adc692

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/adc692 2025

  5. [5]

    R., et al

    Argyriou, I., Glasse, A., Law, D. R., et al. 2023, A&A, 675, A111, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202346489

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202346489 2023

  6. [6]

    2025, AJ, 170, 67, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/addd01 Astropy Collaboration, Price-Whelan, A

    Arulanantham, N., Salyk, C., Pontoppidan, K., et al. 2025, AJ, 170, 67, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/addd01 Astropy Collaboration, Price-Whelan, A. M., Lim, P. L., et al. 2022, ApJ, 935, 167, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac7c74

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-3881/addd01 2025

  7. [7]

    2021, AJ, 161, 147, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/abd806

    Demleitner, M., & Andrae, R. 2021, AJ, 161, 147, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/abd806

    work page internal anchor Pith review doi:10.3847/1538-3881/abd806 2021

  8. [8]

    S., Pascucci, I., Gorti, U., et al

    Bajaj, N. S., Pascucci, I., Gorti, U., et al. 2024, AJ, 167, 127, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/ad22e1

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-3881/ad22e1 2024

  9. [9]

    S., Pascucci, I., Beck, T

    Bajaj, N. S., Pascucci, I., Beck, T. L., et al. 2025, AJ, 169, 296, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/adc73c

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-3881/adc73c 2025

  10. [10]

    Banzatti, A., & Pontoppidan, K. M. 2015, ApJ, 809, 167, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/809/2/167

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/809/2/167 2015

  11. [11]

    M., Salyk, C., et al

    Banzatti, A., Pontoppidan, K. M., Salyk, C., et al. 2017, ApJ, 834, 152, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/834/2/152

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/834/2/152 2017

  12. [12]

    D., et al

    Banzatti, A., Pascucci, I., Bosman, A. D., et al. 2020, ApJ, 903, 124, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/abbc1a

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/abbc1a 2020

  13. [13]

    M., Brittain, S., et al

    Banzatti, A., Abernathy, K. M., Brittain, S., et al. 2022, AJ, 163, 174, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/ac52f0

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-3881/ac52f0 2022

  14. [14]

    M., Carr, J

    Banzatti, A., Pontoppidan, K. M., Carr, J. S., et al. 2023a, ApJL, 957, L22, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/acf5ec

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/acf5ec 2041

  15. [15]

    M., Pére Chávez, J., et al

    Banzatti, A., Pontoppidan, K. M., Pére Chávez, J., et al. 2023b, AJ, 165, 72, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/aca80b

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-3881/aca80b

  16. [16]

    M., et al

    Banzatti, A., Salyk, C., Pontoppidan, K. M., et al. 2025, AJ, 169, 165, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/ada962

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-3881/ada962 2025

  17. [17]

    J., Ginski, C., Kenworthy, M

    Bohn, A. J., Ginski, C., Kenworthy, M. A., et al. 2022, A&A, 657, A53, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202039917

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202039917 2022

  18. [18]

    D., Bergin, E

    Bosman, A. D., Bergin, E. A., Calahan, J., & Duval, S. E. 2022, ApJL, 930, L26, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ac66ce Substructures Regulate Inner-disk Chemistry 23

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ac66ce 2022

  19. [19]

    2025, JWST Calibration Pipeline, 1.18.1, Zenodo, doi: 10.5281/zenodo.6984365

    Bushouse, H., Eisenhamer, J., Dencheva, N., et al. 2025, JWST Calibration Pipeline, 1.18.1, Zenodo, doi: 10.5281/zenodo.6984365

    work page doi:10.5281/zenodo.6984365 2025

  20. [20]

    S., & Najita, J

    Carr, J. S., & Najita, J. R. 2008, Science, 319, 1504, doi: 10.1126/science.1153807 —. 2011, ApJ, 733, 102, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/733/2/102

    work page doi:10.1126/science.1153807 2008

  21. [21]

    J., & Cuzzi, J

    Ciesla, F. J., & Cuzzi, J. N. 2006, Icarus, 181, 178, doi: 10.1016/j.icarus.2005.11.009

    work page doi:10.1016/j.icarus.2005.11.009 2006

  22. [22]

    J., Bergin, E

    Colmenares, M. J., Bergin, E. A., Salyk, C., et al. 2024, ApJ, 977, 173, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad8b4f

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad8b4f 2024

  23. [23]

    2025, ApJ, 989, 3, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/add43a Drążkowska, J., Bitsch, B., Lambrechts, M., et al

    Deng, D., Vioque, M., Pascucci, I., et al. 2025, ApJ, 989, 3, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/add43a Drążkowska, J., Bitsch, B., Lambrechts, M., et al. 2023, in Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series, Vol. 534, Protostars and Planets VII, ed. S. Inutsuka, Y. Aikawa, T. Muto, K. Tomida, & M. Tamura, 717, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2203.09759

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/add43a 2025

  24. [24]

    P., & Dominik, C

    Dullemond, C. P., & Dominik, C. 2004, A&A, 421, 1075, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20040284

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20040284 2004

  25. [25]

    2024, ApJ, 977, 21, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad891d

    Easterwood, W., Kalyaan, A., & Banzatti, A. 2024, ApJ, 977, 21, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad891d

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad891d 2024

  26. [26]

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

    Foreman-Mackey, D., Hogg, D. W., Lang, D., & Goodman, J. 2013, PASP, 125, 306, doi: 10.1086/670067

    work page doi:10.1086/670067 2013

  27. [27]

    F., Grant, S

    Gasman, D., van Dishoeck, E. F., Grant, S. L., et al. 2023, A&A, 679, A117, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202347005

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202347005 2023

  28. [28]

    E., Rothman, L

    Gordon, I. E., Rothman, L. S., Hargreaves, R. J., et al. 2022, JQSRT, 277, 107949, doi: 10.1016/j.jqsrt.2021.107949

    work page doi:10.1016/j.jqsrt.2021.107949 2022

  29. [29]

    L., van Dishoeck, E

    Grant, S. L., van Dishoeck, E. F., Tabone, B., et al. 2023, ApJL, 947, L6, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/acc44b

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/acc44b 2023

  30. [30]

    L., Kurtovic, N

    Grant, S. L., Kurtovic, N. T., van Dishoeck, E. F., et al. 2024, A&A, 689, A85, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202450768

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202450768 2024

  31. [31]

    I., Rab, C., & Güdel, M

    Guadarrama, R., Vorobyov, E. I., Rab, C., & Güdel, M. 2022, A&A, 667, A28, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202140995

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202140995 2022

  32. [32]

    J., Andrews, S

    Harris, R. J., Andrews, S. M., Wilner, D. J., & Kraus, A. L. 2012, ApJ, 751, 115, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/751/2/115

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/751/2/115 2012

  33. [33]

    H., Barman, T., Baron, E., Aufdenberg, J

    Hauschildt, P. H., Barman, T., Baron, E., Aufdenberg, J. P., & Schweitzer, A. 2025, A&A, 698, A47, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202554171

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202554171 2025

  34. [34]

    2024, PASP, 136, 054302, doi: 10.1088/1538-3873/ad3455

    Henning, T., Kamp, I., Samland, M., et al. 2024, PASP, 136, 054302, doi: 10.1088/1538-3873/ad3455

    work page doi:10.1088/1538-3873/ad3455 2024

  35. [35]

    2025, MNRAS, 537, 691, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staf057

    Houge, A., Krijt, S., Banzatti, A., et al. 2025, MNRAS, 537, 691, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staf057

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/staf057 2025

  36. [36]

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

    work page doi:10.1109/mcse.2007.55 2007

  37. [37]

    G., Banzatti, A., Johnson, M

    Jellison, E. G., Banzatti, A., Johnson, M. B., & Bruderer, S. 2024, AJ, 168, 99, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/ad6142

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-3881/ad6142 2024

  38. [38]

    Clarke, C. J. 2020, MNRAS, 495, 3209, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staa1365

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/staa1365 2020

  39. [39]

    B., Banzatti, A., Jellison, E

    Johnson, M. B., Banzatti, A., Jellison, E. G., & Bruderer, S. 2024, spexod/iSLAT: First release, v3.12, Zenodo, doi: 10.5281/zenodo.12167854

    work page doi:10.5281/zenodo.12167854 2024

  40. [40]

    2021, ApJ, 921, 84, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac1e96

    Banzatti, A. 2021, ApJ, 921, 84, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac1e96

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ac1e96 2021

  41. [41]

    2023, ApJ, 954, 66, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ace535

    Kalyaan, A., Pinilla, P., Krijt, S., et al. 2023, ApJ, 954, 66, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ace535

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ace535 2023

  42. [42]

    P., et al

    Kessler-Silacci, J., Augereau, J.-C., Dullemond, C. P., et al. 2006, ApJ, 639, 275, doi: 10.1086/499330

    work page doi:10.1086/499330 2006

  43. [43]

    2025, ApJL, 990, L72, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/adfbe3

    Krijt, S., Banzatti, A., Zhang, K., et al. 2025, ApJL, 990, L72, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/adfbe3

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/adfbe3 2025

  44. [44]

    T., Grant, S

    Kurtovic, N. T., Grant, S. L., Temmink, M., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2508.02576, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2508.02576

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2508.02576 2025

  45. [45]

    Lommen, D. J. P., van Dishoeck, E. F., Wright, C. M., et al. 2010, A&A, 515, A77, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/200913150

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/200913150 2010

  46. [46]

    2024, A&A, 686, L17, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202450322

    Mah, J., Savvidou, S., & Bitsch, B. 2024, A&A, 686, L17, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202450322

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202450322 2024

  47. [47]

    Z., Alcalá, J

    Majidi, F. Z., Alcalá, J. M., Frasca, A., et al. 2023, A&A, 671, A46, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202245261

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202245261 2023

  48. [48]

    2026, ApJ, 998, 255, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ae32f1

    Mallaney, P., Banzatti, A., Salyk, C., et al. 2026, ApJ, 998, 255, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ae32f1

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ae32f1 2026

  49. [49]

    F., Ansdell, M., Rosotti, G

    Manara, C. F., Ansdell, M., Rosotti, G. P., et al. 2023, in Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series, Vol. 534, Protostars and Planets VII, ed. S. Inutsuka, Y. Aikawa, T. Muto, K. Tomida, & M. Tamura, 539, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2203.09930

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2203.09930 2023

  50. [50]

    F., Tazzari, M., Long, F., et al

    Manara, C. F., Tazzari, M., Long, F., et al. 2019, A&A, 628, A95, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201935964

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201935964 2019

  51. [51]

    M., Blake, G

    Meijerink, R., Pontoppidan, K. M., Blake, G. A., Poelman, D. R., & Dullemond, C. P. 2009, ApJ, 704, 1471, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/704/2/1471

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/704/2/1471 2009

  52. [52]

    2005, ApJ, 634, 1126, doi: 10.1086/497123

    Wyckoff, S. 2005, ApJ, 634, 1126, doi: 10.1086/497123

    work page doi:10.1086/497123 2005

  53. [53]

    M., Carpenter, J., Booth, R., et al

    Miley, J. M., Carpenter, J., Booth, R., et al. 2024, A&A, 682, A55, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202347135

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202347135 2024

  54. [54]

    D., Ciesla, F

    Mulders, G. D., Ciesla, F. J., Min, M., & Pascucci, I. 2015, ApJ, 807, 9, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/807/1/9

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/807/1/9 2015

  55. [55]

    R., Carr, J

    Najita, J. R., Carr, J. S., Pontoppidan, K. M., et al. 2013, ApJ, 766, 134, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/766/2/134

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/766/2/134 2013

  56. [56]

    2025, LMFIT: Non-Linear Least-Squares Minimization and Curve-Fitting for Python, 1.3.4, Zenodo, doi: 10.5281/zenodo.16175987 Öberg, K

    Newville, M., Otten, R., Nelson, A., et al. 2025, LMFIT: Non-Linear Least-Squares Minimization and Curve-Fitting for Python, 1.3.4, Zenodo, doi: 10.5281/zenodo.16175987 Öberg, K. I., & Bergin, E. A. 2021, PhR, 893, 1, doi: 10.1016/j.physrep.2020.09.004 Panić, O., Haworth, T. J., Petr-Gotzens, M. G., et al. 2021, MNRAS, 501, 4317, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staa38...

    work page doi:10.5281/zenodo.16175987 2025

  57. [57]

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

    Pascucci, I., Cabrit, S., Edwards, S., et al. 2023, in Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series, Vol. 534, Protostars and Planets VII, ed. S. Inutsuka, Y. Aikawa, T. Muto, K. Tomida, & M. Tamura, 567, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2203.10068

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2203.10068 2023

  58. [58]

    S., & Bruderer, S

    Pascucci, I., Herczeg, G., Carr, J. S., & Bruderer, S. 2013, ApJ, 779, 178, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/779/2/178

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/779/2/178 2013

  59. [59]

    2009, ApJ, 702, 724, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/702/1/724

    Pascucci, I., & Sterzik, M. 2009, ApJ, 702, 724, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/702/1/724

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/702/1/724 2009

  60. [60]

    J., et al

    Pascucci, I., Testi, L., Herczeg, G. J., et al. 2016, ApJ, 831, 125, doi: 10.3847/0004-637X/831/2/125

    work page doi:10.3847/0004-637x/831/2/125 2016

  61. [61]

    L., Cabrit, S., et al

    Pascucci, I., Beck, T. L., Cabrit, S., et al. 2025, Nature Astronomy, 9, 81, doi: 10.1038/s41550-024-02385-7

    work page doi:10.1038/s41550-024-02385-7 2025

  62. [62]

    2022, European Physical Journal Plus, 137, 1206, doi: 10.1140/epjp/s13360-022-03384-1

    Pinilla, P. 2022, European Physical Journal Plus, 137, 1206, doi: 10.1140/epjp/s13360-022-03384-1

    work page doi:10.1140/epjp/s13360-022-03384-1 2022

  63. [63]

    2013, A&A, 554, A95, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201220875

    Pinilla, P., Birnstiel, T., Benisty, M., et al. 2013, A&A, 554, A95, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201220875

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201220875 2013

  64. [64]

    M., Salyk, C., Blake, G

    Pontoppidan, K. M., Salyk, C., Blake, G. A., et al. 2010, ApJ, 720, 887, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/720/1/887

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/720/1/887 2010

  65. [65]

    M., Salyk, C., Banzatti, A., et al

    Pontoppidan, K. M., Salyk, C., Banzatti, A., et al. 2024, ApJ, 963, 158, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad20f0

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad20f0 2024

  66. [66]

    E., Banzatti, A., Öberg, K

    Romero-Mirza, C. E., Banzatti, A., Öberg, K. I., et al. 2024, ApJ, 975, 78, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad769e

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad769e 2024

  67. [67]

    2022, csalyk/spectools_ir: First release, v1.0.0, Zenodo, doi: 10.5281/zenodo.5818682

    Salyk, C. 2022, csalyk/spectools_ir: First release, v1.0.0, Zenodo, doi: 10.5281/zenodo.5818682

    work page doi:10.5281/zenodo.5818682 2022

  68. [68]

    M., Blake, G

    Salyk, C., Pontoppidan, K. M., Blake, G. A., Najita, J. R., & Carr, J. S. 2011, ApJ, 731, 130, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/731/2/130

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/731/2/130 2011

  69. [69]

    M., Banzatti, A., et al

    Salyk, C., Pontoppidan, K. M., Banzatti, A., et al. 2025, AJ, 169, 184, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/adb397

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-3881/adb397 2025

  70. [70]

    M., Zhang, K., et al

    Salyk, C., Pontoppidan, K. M., Zhang, K., et al. 2026, ApJ, 999, 92, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ae3db1

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ae3db1 2026

  71. [71]

    2021, A&A, 649, A19, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202039733

    Sanchis, E., Testi, L., Natta, A., et al. 2021, A&A, 649, A19, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202039733

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202039733 2021

  72. [72]

    Savitzky, A., & Golay, M. J. E. 1964, Analytical Chemistry, 36, 1627, doi: 10.1021/ac60214a047

    work page doi:10.1021/ac60214a047 1964

  73. [73]

    D., Vlasblom, M., & van Dishoeck, E

    Sellek, A. D., Vlasblom, M., & van Dishoeck, E. F. 2025, A&A, 694, A79, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202451137

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202451137 2025

  74. [74]

    A., Romero-Mirza, C

    Smith, S. A., Romero-Mirza, C. E., Banzatti, A., et al. 2025, ApJL, 984, L51, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/adcab8

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/adcab8 2025

  75. [75]

    F., & Black, J

    Tabone, B., van Dishoeck, E. F., & Black, J. H. 2024, A&A, 691, A11, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202348487

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202348487 2024

  76. [76]

    F., et al

    Tabone, B., Bettoni, G., van Dishoeck, E. F., et al. 2023, Nature Astronomy, 7, 805, doi: 10.1038/s41550-023-01965-3

    work page doi:10.1038/s41550-023-01965-3 2023

  77. [77]

    Tabone, B., Temmink, M., Waters, L. B. F. M., et al. 2026, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2604.21803, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2604.21803

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2604.21803 2026

  78. [78]

    F., Grant, S

    Temmink, M., van Dishoeck, E. F., Grant, S. L., et al. 2024, A&A, 686, A117, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202348911

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202348911 2024

  79. [79]

    D., Gasman, D., et al

    Temmink, M., Sellek, A. D., Gasman, D., et al. 2025, A&A, 699, A134, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202554213

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202554213 2025

  80. [80]

    M., Manara, C

    Tofflemire, B. M., Manara, C. F., Banzatti, A., et al. 2025, ApJ, 985, 224, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/adcc23

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/adcc23 2025

Showing first 80 references.