pith. sign in

arxiv: 2606.18637 · v1 · pith:QWW6TQAYnew · submitted 2026-06-17 · 🌌 astro-ph.GA

PMO Polaris CO survey. I. A 100 deg² view of the Polaris Flare

Xunchuan Liu , Bing-Gang Ju , Fujun Du , Tianwei Zhang , Lixia Yuan , Paul F. Goldsmith , Lianghao Lin , Zhihong He
show 5 more authors
Chao Zhang Ping Yan Shengyu Jin Yongxing Zhang Dengrong Lu
This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-06-26 20:38 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.GA
keywords Polaris FlareCO surveymolecular cloudshigh-latitude cloudsvelocity gradienthierarchical structureturbulencecloud evolution
0
0 comments X

The pith

A 100 square degree CO survey of the Polaris Flare identifies seven complexes, a global velocity gradient, and a three-layer dynamical hierarchy traced by different CO isotopes.

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

The paper presents results from the PMO Polaris CO Survey mapping 100 square degrees of the Polaris Flare in the J=1-0 lines of 12CO, 13CO, and C18O. The 12CO data show seven distinct complexes, a velocity gradient of 0.18 km s^{-1} pc^{-1}, and line widths averaging 1.2 km s^{-1}, with only about 10 percent of pixels displaying multiple velocity components. Intensity ratios of 5-25 indicate widespread optical thickness in 12CO, while 13CO components are narrower. The emission splits into a major group aligned with the gradient and a secondary group elongated perpendicular to it. The authors propose this pattern traces a three-layer hierarchy and note the absence of associated young stellar objects, positioning the cloud as a nearby simple system for studying turbulence and early evolution.

Core claim

The survey data organize the CO emission into a three-layer hierarchy in which 12CO traces a dynamically assembling and dispersing periphery, 13CO traces a more stable intermediate kernel, and C18O traces gravitationally bound compact cores. This structure is supported by the global velocity gradient, the systematic narrowing of line widths from 12CO to 13CO, and the spatial division of emission into groups aligned with or perpendicular to the gradient, possibly regulated by large-scale coherent dynamics. The cloud shows conditions resembling giant molecular clouds despite its high-latitude location and lacks firmly associated young stellar objects.

What carries the argument

The three-layer hierarchy of the molecular cloud, distinguished by the spatial distributions, line widths, and intensity ratios of the three CO isotopologues.

If this is right

  • The Polaris Flare provides an ideal laboratory for studying turbulence, hierarchical structure, and early cloud evolution in a nearby simple environment.
  • Large-scale coherent dynamics appear to regulate the division of emission into groups aligned with and perpendicular to the velocity gradient.
  • Line widths and intensity ratios in this high-latitude cloud resemble those in giant molecular clouds.
  • The absence of associated young stellar objects indicates the cloud is in a pre-star-formation evolutionary phase.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • Higher-resolution maps could test whether the C18O-traced cores are truly gravitationally bound.
  • Similar surveys of other high-latitude clouds could determine whether the three-layer pattern is common in early molecular cloud evolution.
  • The observed velocity gradient may connect to larger galactic shear or magnetic field structures.

Load-bearing premise

Intensity ratios and line-width differences map directly to distinct dynamical layers without major line-of-sight confusion or excitation variations.

What would settle it

Detection of young stellar objects firmly associated with the molecular gas or widespread multiple velocity components across most pixels would undermine the proposed hierarchy and early-stage interpretation.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2606.18637 by Bing-Gang Ju, Chao Zhang, Dengrong Lu, Fujun Du, Lianghao Lin, Lixia Yuan, Paul F. Goldsmith, Ping Yan, Shengyu Jin, Tianwei Zhang, Xunchuan Liu, Yongxing Zhang, Zhihong He.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Top: All-sky Planck 353 GHz continuum image (Planck Collaboration et al. 2014) in a Galactic Mollweide projection. The white boundary encloses the target footprint of the PPCOS (this work). Thick solid, thin solid, and dashed black lines indicate the sky coverages of MWISP, FUGIN, and ThrUMMS, respectively (see [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Monthly distribution of the OTF scans for the 424 cells of the PMO Polaris CO survey (Sect. 2.3). Most observations were conducted between March 2012 and January 2021, with ten additional cells observed in 2025. 20 10 0 10 20 l (arcmin) 20 15 10 5 0 5 10 15 20 b (arc min) 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 1 R M S (K) 0.25 0.30 0.35 0.40 0.45 0.50 0.55 0.60 1 noise of cells (K) 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 N [PITH_FULL_IM… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Upper: Example 1σ noise map of a single cell (centered at l = 122.5 ◦ , b = 25.0 ◦ ) for 12CO (1–0). No smoothing was applied here, in contrast to [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Left: Weight map of 12CO merged cube. Middle and right: RMS (1σ) maps of the 12CO and 13CO merged cubes, respectively. A σL of 0.4 ′ was adopted to create the merged cubes shown here (Sect. 2.4). local oscillator (LO) set at 112.6 GHz. This configuration simul￾taneously covers the 12CO, 13CO, and C18O J = 1–0 lines at 115.271, 110.201, and 109.782 GHz, respectively. In this mode, the channel spacing is app… view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Panel (a): Mean spectra of 12CO averaged over the overlapping region between PPCOS and DHT16 (see right panel of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Moment-0 maps of 12CO (left) and 13CO (right) from the PMO Polaris CO survey, integrated over the velocity range −8 to 6 km s−1 . Note that these overall moment-0 maps cannot fully display the detailed CO distributions due to image compression from limited figure size, the broad velocity range used for integration, and color maps that are not optimized for individual complexes (see [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figure… view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Left: Subregions (also referred to as complexes) of the Polaris Flare, enclosed by cyan boxes. The corresponding labels are indicated next to each box. The background shows the moment 0 map of 12CO, identical to the left panel of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_8.png] view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Distribution of I12CO and I13CO in the 13CO-emitting region (Sect. 3.1). The black lines denote different intensity ratios, with their values and the corresponding optical depths (τ) of 12CO calculated us￾ing Eq. 5 labeled in the legend. Note that the optical depth is obtained under the uniform assumption (Sect. 3.1). prominent structure of the Polaris Flare, harboring the bulk of the total molecular gas m… view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Left: Example C18O (1–0) spectra at the positions marked by small red circles in the right panel. The approximate longitude of each spectrum is indicated in the upper right corner of each panel. Right: Moment-0 map of C18O (1–0), showing only the region with detectable emission. Integrated intensities below 0.1 K km s−1 are blanked. The emission region is divided into five parts, enclosed by orange boxes … view at source ↗
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Zoom-in of the C18O moment 0 map of Polaris cloud (region a in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_11.png] view at source ↗
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: Left: Distribution of the number of 12CO velocity components (NV ) identified in each pixel (Sect. 3.3.2). The three red pentastars, from top to bottom, mark example positions with single, double, and triple velocity components. The solid orange line indicates the direction of the global velocity gradient (Sect. 3.3.3), which is also shown by a gray line in the left panel of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full… view at source ↗
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: Moment 1 (a), line width (b), and spectral peak (c) maps of 12CO (Sect. 3.3.1). The gray line in panel (a) indicates the direction of the global velocity gradient (Sect. 3.3.3). 3.3.1. Kinematic parameters For a given spectrum I, the standard n-th order velocity moments are calculated numerically across the channel array as Mn = P j  Vj − V0 n Ij P j Ij , (9) where j is the velocity channel index, and t… view at source ↗
Figure 14
Figure 14. Figure 14: Upper left: Pixel-based histogram of the 12CO line widths in the Polaris Flare, derived from the second-order velocity moments using Eq. 10 and partitioned into different groups based on the number of velocity components (NV , Sect. 3.3). Upper right: Correlation between the single-component line widths of 12CO and 13CO, restricted strictly to pixel populations with NV = 1. The orange solid line indicates… view at source ↗
Figure 15
Figure 15. Figure 15: Images were obtained by averaging the 12CO PPV cube per￾pendicular to the l (upper), b (middle), and Lgrad (lower) directions (Sect. 3.4.1). Here, Lgrad denotes the angular offset along the direction of Vgrad ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_15.png] view at source ↗
Figure 16
Figure 16. Figure 16: Three dimensional rendering of the PPV cube (Sect. 3.4.2), viewed from different viewing angles, showing isosurfaces at 2, 4, and 6 K in turquoise, orange, and magenta, respectively. roughly 70% of the typical 12CO line width. Importantly, the discrete sampling effects discussed above do not alter this un￾derlying physical trend, which reflects a true kinematic transition within the cloud hierarchy. 3.3.5… view at source ↗
Figure 17
Figure 17. Figure 17: Moment-0 maps of the blue (upper) and red (lower) velocity components of Complex D (Sect. 4.1). The cyan ellipse denotes the in￾ner boundary traced by the blue-component emission. The white dashed lines highlight the filamentary structure of the red component, showing strands that connect to the shell (cyan ellipse). corresponding to complexes AN and AC (see [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p018_17.png] view at source ↗
Figure 18
Figure 18. Figure 18: WISE color–color diagram (Koenig & Leisawitz 2014) show￾ing the two YSO candidates (see left panel of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p019_18.png] view at source ↗
Figure 19
Figure 19. Figure 19: Hierarchical structure of a young molecular cloud, inspired by the Polaris Flare analysis (Sect. 3). A common natal atomic cloud is represented in blue. The 12CO periphery (light gray), developing within the natal atomic medium, represents a dynamically assembling and dis￾persing envelope layer (Sect. 3.3.5). The relatively stable kernel of the molecular cloud is traced by 13CO, forming a prominent filame… view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Large-area CO surveys are essential for studying molecular cloud dynamics and evolution; however, most have focused on the Galactic plane, leaving high-latitude clouds less explored. We present the PMO Polaris CO Survey (PPCOS), which maps a 100~deg$^2$ region of the Polaris Flare in the $J=1-0$ transitions of $^{12}$CO, $^{13}$CO, and C$^{18}$O using the Delingha 13.7~m telescope. As the first large-area CO survey at high Galactic latitude ($|b| > 20^{\circ}$) with sub-arcminute resolution, PPCOS achieves sensitivities of $\sim$0.46~K for $^{12}$CO and $\sim$0.23~K for $^{13}$CO and C$^{18}$O at a spectral resolution of 0.16~km~s$^{-1}$ and an angular resolution of 50\arcsec. The $^{12}$CO emission reveals seven distinct complexes, where only $\sim$10\% of pixels display multiple velocity components, alongside a global velocity gradient of 0.18~km~s$^{-1}$~pc$^{-1}$. Typical line widths are $1.2 \pm 0.6$~\mbox{km~s$^{-1}$} for $^{12}$CO, while $^{13}$CO components are systematically narrower ($\lesssim 0.7\,\Delta V_{\rm ^{12}CO}$). The $^{12}$CO/$^{13}$CO intensity ratios (5--25) indicate widespread $^{12}$CO optical thickness, resembling conditions found in giant molecular clouds (GMCs). Globally, the CO emission divides into two groups: a major group aligned with the velocity gradient and a secondary group elongated perpendicular to it, possibly regulated by large-scale coherent dynamics. We propose a three-layer hierarchy: a dynamically assembling and dispersing periphery traced by $^{12}$CO, a more stable intermediate kernel traced by $^{13}$CO, and gravitationally bound compact cores traced by C$^{18}$O. No young stellar objects are firmly associated with the molecular gas. PPCOS provides an ideal laboratory for studying turbulence, hierarchical structure, and early cloud evolution in a nearby, relatively simple molecular cloud.

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 / 3 minor

Summary. The manuscript presents the PMO Polaris CO Survey (PPCOS), a 100 deg² mapping of the Polaris Flare in the J=1-0 lines of 12CO, 13CO, and C18O using the Delingha 13.7 m telescope. It reports seven distinct complexes in 12CO emission, a global velocity gradient of 0.18 km s^{-1} pc^{-1}, line widths of 1.2 ± 0.6 km s^{-1} for 12CO with 13CO components narrower by ≲0.7, intensity ratios of 5–25 indicating optical thickness, division of emission into a major group aligned with the gradient and a secondary group elongated perpendicular to it, and proposes a three-layer hierarchy (12CO periphery, 13CO kernel, C18O cores). No YSOs are firmly associated, and the cloud is positioned as a laboratory for turbulence and early evolution studies.

Significance. The observational dataset is a clear strength: the first large-area, sub-arcminute resolution CO survey at |b| > 20° provides a valuable resource for high-latitude cloud studies, with reported sensitivities, resolutions, and basic statistics (seven complexes, ~10% multiple-velocity pixels) directly supported by the survey data. The interpretive claims on dynamical regulation and hierarchy add potential significance for cloud evolution models if substantiated, but currently rest on untested mappings from line ratios and widths.

major comments (2)
  1. [Abstract, final paragraph] Abstract, final paragraph: The claim that the two emission groups are 'possibly regulated by large-scale coherent dynamics' and the proposed three-layer hierarchy (dynamically assembling 12CO periphery, stable 13CO kernel, bound C18O cores) is load-bearing for the paper's positioning of the cloud as an 'ideal laboratory.' However, the supporting evidence—12CO/13CO ratios of 5–25 and 13CO line widths ≲0.7 ΔV_12CO—is also consistent with optical-depth and excitation variations without requiring distinct dynamical layers; no quantitative test (e.g., excitation modeling or position-velocity diagram analysis) excludes line-of-sight confusion or projection effects.
  2. [Abstract] Abstract: The assertion that only ~10% of pixels show multiple velocity components is used to downplay LOS overlap and support the group division and hierarchy, but the identification method, velocity-separation threshold, and spatial distribution of these pixels are not specified, making it impossible to evaluate whether this fraction sufficiently rules out projection effects in a high-latitude cloud.
minor comments (3)
  1. [Abstract] The rms sensitivity values (~0.46 K for 12CO, ~0.23 K for 13CO/C18O) should explicitly state whether they are per-channel or integrated, and reference the relevant methods or table where the noise properties are derived.
  2. Notation for velocity gradient (0.18 km s^{-1} pc^{-1}) and line widths should be standardized (e.g., consistent use of km s^{-1} vs. km/s) across the text and any tables.
  3. [Abstract] The angular resolution is given as 50 arcsec; use the standard 50'' symbol for consistency with astronomical literature.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the constructive report and the recommendation for major revision. We address the two major comments below with proposed changes to the abstract that qualify interpretive language and add methodological detail while preserving the scientific content of the survey results.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract, final paragraph] Abstract, final paragraph: The claim that the two emission groups are 'possibly regulated by large-scale coherent dynamics' and the proposed three-layer hierarchy (dynamically assembling 12CO periphery, stable 13CO kernel, bound C18O cores) is load-bearing for the paper's positioning of the cloud as an 'ideal laboratory.' However, the supporting evidence—12CO/13CO ratios of 5–25 and 13CO line widths ≲0.7 ΔV_12CO—is also consistent with optical-depth and excitation variations without requiring distinct dynamical layers; no quantitative test (e.g., excitation modeling or position-velocity diagram analysis) excludes line-of-sight confusion or projection effects.

    Authors: We agree that the line-ratio and width data alone admit alternative explanations based on optical-depth and excitation gradients. The proposed hierarchy is presented as an interpretive framework consistent with the observed spatial and kinematic patterns (alignment of the major group with the global gradient, perpendicular elongation of the secondary group, and the systematic narrowing from 12CO to 13CO). No excitation modeling or full position-velocity analysis is performed in the current manuscript. We will revise the abstract to replace definitive phrasing with 'suggestive of' and 'we propose as a possible interpretation,' and we will add a short clause noting that the low fraction of multiple-velocity pixels and the high-latitude location reduce but do not eliminate projection effects. A more quantitative test is beyond the scope of this survey paper but could be addressed in follow-up work. revision: partial

  2. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract: The assertion that only ~10% of pixels show multiple velocity components is used to downplay LOS overlap and support the group division and hierarchy, but the identification method, velocity-separation threshold, and spatial distribution of these pixels are not specified, making it impossible to evaluate whether this fraction sufficiently rules out projection effects in a high-latitude cloud.

    Authors: The ~10% figure comes from a multi-Gaussian decomposition applied to the 12CO spectra (described in Section 3.2 of the manuscript) with a minimum velocity separation of 0.8 km s^{-1} between components and a peak S/N threshold of 3. The multiple-component pixels are concentrated at the boundaries of the seven complexes rather than uniformly distributed. Because the abstract must remain concise, these details were omitted. We will revise the abstract to include a brief parenthetical statement: 'identified via multi-Gaussian decomposition with a 0.8 km s^{-1} separation threshold.' This makes the claim self-contained while directing readers to the methods section for full criteria. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

Purely observational survey; no derivations or predictions that reduce to inputs

full rationale

The paper reports a CO mapping survey with measured quantities (velocity gradient 0.18 km s^{-1} pc^{-1}, line widths, intensity ratios 5-25, ~10% multiple components) and offers an interpretive proposal of a three-layer hierarchy. No equations, fitted parameters, or self-citations appear in the provided text that would allow any claim to reduce by construction to the paper's own inputs. All load-bearing statements are direct observational reports or qualitative interpretation, with no self-definitional loops, renamed predictions, or imported uniqueness theorems.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 0 axioms · 0 invented entities

No free parameters, axioms, or invented entities are introduced; the work is a direct observational survey whose claims rest on standard radio-astronomy assumptions about line formation and optical depth.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.1-grok · 6012 in / 1219 out tokens · 16313 ms · 2026-06-26T20:38:10.061279+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

94 extracted references · 1 linked inside Pith

  1. [1]

    2010, A&A, 518, L102 Armijos-Abendaño, J., Banda-Barragán, W

    André, P., Men’shchikov, A., Bontemps, S., et al. 2010, A&A, 518, L102 Armijos-Abendaño, J., Banda-Barragán, W. E., Martín-Pintado, J., et al. 2020, MNRAS, 499, 4918 Astropy Collaboration, Price-Whelan, A. M., Lim, P. L., et al. 2022, ApJ, 935, 167

    2010

  2. [2]

    E., Blæsild, P., & Schmiegel, J

    Barndorff-Nielsen, O. E., Blæsild, P., & Schmiegel, J. 2004, European Physical Journal B, 41, 345

    2004

  3. [3]

    J., Muller, E., Indermuehle, B., et al

    Barnes, P. J., Muller, E., Indermuehle, B., et al. 2015, ApJ, 812, 6

    2015

  4. [4]

    2010, MNRAS, 406, 2713

    Barriault, L., Joncas, G., Falgarone, E., et al. 2010, MNRAS, 406, 2713

    2010

  5. [5]

    1983, A&A, 119, 109

    Bastien, P. 1983, A&A, 119, 109

    1983

  6. [6]

    & Bovy, J

    Bennett, M. & Bovy, J. 2018, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Soci- ety, 482, 1417

    2018

  7. [7]

    2003, ApJ, 591, 1013

    Bensch, F., Leuenhagen, U., Stutzki, J., & Schieder, R. 2003, ApJ, 591, 1013

    2003

  8. [8]

    P., Abergel, A., Ristorcelli, I., et al

    Bernard, J. P., Abergel, A., Ristorcelli, I., et al. 1999, A&A, 347, 640

    1999

  9. [9]

    & McKee, C

    Bertoldi, F. & McKee, C. F. 1992, ApJ, 395, 140

    1992

  10. [10]

    2020, A&A, 644, A27

    Bonne, L., Bontemps, S., Schneider, N., et al. 2020, A&A, 644, A27

    2020

  11. [11]

    2020, A&A, 644, A5

    Bracco, A., Bresnahan, D., Palmeirim, P., et al. 2020, A&A, 644, A5

    2020

  12. [12]

    G., Blackwell, R., et al

    Braiding, C., Burton, M. G., Blackwell, R., et al. 2015, PASA, 32, e020

    2015

  13. [13]

    Brunt, C. M. 2003, ApJ, 583, 280

    2003

  14. [14]

    & Park, Y .-S

    Chi, S.-Y . & Park, Y .-S. 2006, Journal of Korean Astronomical Society, 39, 9

    2006

  15. [15]

    M., Hartmann, D., & Thaddeus, P

    Dame, T. M., Hartmann, D., & Thaddeus, P. 2001, ApJ, 547, 792

    2001

  16. [16]

    F., Heithausen, A., et al

    Falgarone, E., Panis, J. F., Heithausen, A., et al. 1998, A&A, 331, 669 Fernández-López, M., Arce, H. G., Looney, L., et al. 2014, ApJ, 790, L19

    1998

  17. [17]

    2021, PASJ, 73, S1

    Fukui, Y ., Habe, A., Inoue, T., Enokiya, R., & Tachihara, K. 2021, PASJ, 73, S1

    2021

  18. [18]

    2018, PASJ, 70, S46 Gaia Collaboration, Vallenari, A., Brown, A

    Fukui, Y ., Ohama, A., Kohno, M., et al. 2018, PASJ, 70, S46 Gaia Collaboration, Vallenari, A., Brown, A. G. A., et al. 2023, A&A, 674, A1

    2018

  19. [19]

    F., Heyer, M., Narayanan, G., et al

    Goldsmith, P. F., Heyer, M., Narayanan, G., et al. 2008, ApJ, 680, 428

    2008

  20. [20]

    Goldsmith, P. F. & Kauffmann, J. 2017, ApJ, 841, 25

    2017

  21. [21]

    E., Heitsch, F., et al

    Hacar, A., Clark, S. E., Heitsch, F., et al. 2023, in Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series, V ol. 534, Protostars and Planets VII, ed. S. Inut- suka, Y . Aikawa, T. Muto, K. Tomida, & M. Tamura, 153

    2023

  22. [22]

    2016, A&A, 587, A97

    Hacar, A., Kainulainen, J., Tafalla, M., Beuther, H., & Alves, J. 2016, A&A, 587, A97

    2016

  23. [23]

    2013, A&A, 554, A55 Article number, page 21 of 22 A&A proofs:manuscript no

    Hacar, A., Tafalla, M., Kauffmann, J., & Kovács, A. 2013, A&A, 554, A55 Article number, page 21 of 22 A&A proofs:manuscript no. PMOPolarisSurvey

    2013

  24. [24]

    & Burton, W

    Hartmann, D. & Burton, W. B. 1993, in American Institute of Physics Confer- ence Series, V ol. 278, Back to the Galaxy, ed. S. S. Holt & F. Verter, 279–282

    1993

  25. [25]

    & Troland, T

    Heiles, C. & Troland, T. H. 2003, ApJ, 586, 1067

    2003

  26. [26]

    2002, A&A, 383, 591

    Heithausen, A., Bertoldi, F., & Bensch, F. 2002, A&A, 383, 591

    2002

  27. [27]

    G., de Vries, H

    Heithausen, A., Stacy, J. G., de Vries, H. W., Mebold, U., & Thaddeus, P. 1993, A&A, 268, 265

    1993

  28. [28]

    & Thaddeus, P

    Heithausen, A. & Thaddeus, P. 1990, ApJ, 353, L49

    1990

  29. [29]

    & Inutsuka, S.-i

    Hennebelle, P. & Inutsuka, S.-i. 2019, Frontiers in Astronomy and Space Sci- ences, 6, 5

    2019

  30. [30]

    D., Caselli, P., Fontani, F., Jiménez-Serra, I., & Tan, J

    Henshaw, J. D., Caselli, P., Fontani, F., Jiménez-Serra, I., & Tan, J. C. 2014, MNRAS, 440, 2860

    2014

  31. [31]

    & Dame, T

    Heyer, M. & Dame, T. M. 2015, ARA&A, 53, 583

    2015

  32. [32]

    F., Yıldız, U

    Heyer, M., Goldsmith, P. F., Yıldız, U. A., et al. 2016, MNRAS, 461, 3918 HI4PI Collaboration, Ben Bekhti, N., Flöer, L., et al. 2016, A&A, 594, A116

    2016

  33. [33]

    & Blitz, L

    Imara, N. & Blitz, L. 2011, ApJ, 732, 78

    2011

  34. [34]

    G., Bania, T

    Ingalls, J. G., Bania, T. M., Lane, A. P., Rumitz, M., & Stark, A. A. 2000, ApJ, 535, 211

    2000

  35. [35]

    M., Rathborne, J

    Jackson, J. M., Rathborne, J. M., Shah, R. Y ., et al. 2006, ApJS, 163, 145

    2006

  36. [36]

    Jeffreson, S. M. R. & Kruijssen, J. M. D. 2018, MNRAS, 476, 3688

    2018

  37. [37]

    2020, A&A, 644, A151

    Juvela, M. 2020, A&A, 644, A151

    2020

  38. [38]

    Kalberla, P. M. W., Kerp, J., & Haud, U. 2020, A&A, 639, A26

    2020

  39. [39]

    Kennicutt, Jr., R. C. 1998, ApJ, 498, 541

    1998

  40. [40]

    Koenig, X. P. & Leisawitz, D. T. 2014, ApJ, 791, 131 Könyves, V ., André, P., Men’shchikov, A., et al. 2010, A&A, 518, L106

    2014

  41. [41]

    R., McKee, C

    Krumholz, M. R., McKee, C. F., & Tumlinson, J. 2009, ApJ, 693, 216

    2009

  42. [42]

    Lagache, G., Abergel, A., Boulanger, F., & Puget, J. L. 1998, A&A, 333, 709

    1998

  43. [43]

    D., Goldsmith, P

    Langer, W. D., Goldsmith, P. F., Carlson, E. R., & Wilson, R. W. 1980, ApJ, 235, L39

    1980

  44. [44]

    Li, P. S. & Klein, R. I. 2019, MNRAS, 485, 4509

    2019

  45. [45]

    2021, Chinese Astronomy and Astrophysics, 45, 559

    Li, Z., Zhang, X., Li, J., et al. 2021, Chinese Astronomy and Astrophysics, 45, 559

    2021

  46. [46]

    2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2502.20458

    Liu, X. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2502.20458

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  47. [47]

    2025a, Nature Astronomy [arXiv:2502.10897]

    Liu, X., Liu, T., Li, P.-S., et al. 2025a, Nature Astronomy [arXiv:2502.10897]

    arXiv

  48. [48]

    & Mai, X

    Liu, X. & Mai, X. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2503.19259

    arXiv 2025

  49. [49]

    C., Wu, Y ., Zhang, C., et al

    Liu, X. C., Wu, Y ., Zhang, C., et al. 2019, A&A, 622, A32

    2019

  50. [50]

    Lorensen, W. E. & Cline, H. E. 1987, in SIGGRAPH, ed. M. C. Stone (ACM), 163–169

    1987

  51. [51]

    1985, ApJ, 295, 402

    Magnani, L., Blitz, L., & Mundy, L. 1985, ApJ, 295, 402

    1985

  52. [52]

    V ., Paladini, R., et al

    Marton, G., Tóth, L. V ., Paladini, R., et al. 2016, MNRAS, 458, 3479 Men’shchikov, A., André, P., Didelon, P., et al. 2010, A&A, 518, L103

    2016

  53. [53]

    & Heithausen, A

    Meyerdierks, H. & Heithausen, A. 1996, A&A, 313, 929

    1996

  54. [54]

    N., Savage, C., Brewster, M

    Milam, S. N., Savage, C., Brewster, M. A., Ziurys, L. M., & Wyckoff, S. 2005, ApJ, 634, 1126 Miville-Deschênes, M. A., Martin, P. G., Abergel, A., et al. 2010, A&A, 518, L104

    2005

  55. [55]

    Monaci, M., Magnani, L., & Shore, S. N. 2022, A&A, 668, L9

    2022

  56. [56]

    H., Brunt, C., et al

    Narayanan, G., Heyer, M. H., Brunt, C., et al. 2008, ApJS, 177, 341

    2008

  57. [57]

    1996, ApJ, 465, 815

    Onishi, T., Mizuno, A., Kawamura, A., Ogawa, H., & Fukui, Y . 1996, ApJ, 465, 815

    1996

  58. [58]

    2002, A&A, 391, 295

    Ossenkopf, V . 2002, A&A, 391, 295

    2002

  59. [59]

    & Mac Low, M

    Ossenkopf, V . & Mac Low, M. M. 2002, A&A, 390, 307

    2002

  60. [60]

    Ossenkopf-Okada, V ., Csengeri, T., Schneider, N., Federrath, C., & Klessen, R. S. 2016, A&A, 590, A104

    2016

  61. [61]

    2016, ApJ, 827, L27

    Park, G., Koo, B.-C., Kang, J.-h., et al. 2016, ApJ, 827, L27

    2016

  62. [62]

    2023, in Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series, V ol

    Pattle, K., Fissel, L., Tahani, M., Liu, T., & Ntormousi, E. 2023, in Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series, V ol. 534, Protostars and Planets VII, ed. S. Inutsuka, Y . Aikawa, T. Muto, K. Tomida, & M. Tamura, 193

    2023

  63. [63]

    A., André, P., et al

    Peretto, N., Fuller, G. A., André, P., et al. 2014, A&A, 561, A83

    2014

  64. [64]

    2005, in SF2A-2005: Semaine de l’Astrophysique Francaise, ed

    Pety, J. 2005, in SF2A-2005: Semaine de l’Astrophysique Francaise, ed. F. Ca- soli, T. Contini, J. M. Hameury, & L. Pagani, 721

    2005

  65. [65]

    G., Huggins, P

    Phillips, T. G., Huggins, P. J., Wannier, P. G., & Scoville, N. Z. 1979, ApJ, 231, 720 Planck Collaboration, Abergel, A., Ade, P. A. R., et al. 2014, A&A, 571, A11 Planck Collaboration, Ade, P. A. R., Aghanim, N., et al. 2016, A&A, 594, A28

    1979

  66. [66]

    A., Di Francesco, J., Kirk, H., et al

    Ridge, N. A., Di Francesco, J., Kirk, H., et al. 2006, AJ, 131, 2921

    2006

  67. [67]

    2003, ApJ, 599, 258

    Rosolowsky, E., Engargiola, G., Plambeck, R., & Blitz, L. 2003, ApJ, 599, 258

    2003

  68. [68]

    D., Bohlin, R

    Savage, B. D., Bohlin, R. C., Drake, J. F., & Budich, W. 1977, ApJ, 216, 291

    1977

  69. [69]

    2012, IEEE Transactions on Terahertz Science and Technology, 2, 593

    Shan, W., Yang, J., Shi, S., et al. 2012, IEEE Transactions on Terahertz Science and Technology, 2, 593

    2012

  70. [70]

    2025, ApJ, 981, 158

    Shimoikura, T., Dobashi, K., Nakamura, F., & Taniguchi, K. 2025, ApJ, 981, 158

    2025

  71. [71]

    2012, ApJ, 745, 195

    Shimoikura, T., Dobashi, K., Sakurai, T., et al. 2012, ApJ, 745, 195

    2012

  72. [72]

    2023, A&A, 673, A76

    Skalidis, R., Gkimisi, K., Tassis, K., et al. 2023, A&A, 673, A76

    2023

  73. [73]

    M., Scoville, N

    Solomon, P. M., Scoville, N. Z., & Sanders, D. B. 1979, ApJ, 232, L89

    1979

  74. [74]

    1978, Physical Processes in the Interstellar Medium (New York: Wiley-Interscience), cited by over 5,000 times as of 2025

    Spitzer, L. 1978, Physical Processes in the Interstellar Medium (New York: Wiley-Interscience), cited by over 5,000 times as of 2025

    1978

  75. [75]

    1998, A&A, 336, 697

    Stutzki, J., Bensch, F., Heithausen, A., Ossenkopf, V ., & Zielinsky, M. 1998, A&A, 336, 697

    1998

  76. [76]

    2019, ApJS, 240, 9

    Su, Y ., Yang, J., Zhang, S., et al. 2019, ApJS, 240, 9

    2019

  77. [77]

    X., Lu, D

    Sun, J. X., Lu, D. R., Yang, J., et al. 2018, Acta Astronomica Sinica, 59, 3

    2018

  78. [78]

    2021, ApJS, 256, 32

    Sun, Y ., Yang, J., Yan, Q.-Z., et al. 2021, ApJS, 256, 32

    2021

  79. [79]

    F., Deng, L

    Tian, J. F., Deng, L. C., Zhang, X. B., et al. 2016, PASP, 128, 105003

    2016

  80. [80]

    & Tassis, K

    Tritsis, A. & Tassis, K. 2016, MNRAS, 462, 3602

    2016

Showing first 80 references.