Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

Synthetic Modelling of Polarized Dust Emission in Intermediate-Mass YSOs: II: Effects of Radiative Torque Disruption on Dust Grains in Protostellar Jets/Outflows

T0 review · reviewed 2026-08-10 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Radiative torque disruption can shatter weak aggregate grains up to 500 µm inside protostellar jets and outflows within two years, blocking the migration of very large grains from the disk to the inner envelope.

desk verdict A solid, useful step forward in modeling RATD in protostellar outflows, but the headline <2 yr aggregate disruption time rests on compact-grain RAT efficiencies that the paper's own footnote undercuts, so the quantitative claim needs a fix or a caveat before publication. read the letter →

arxiv 2501.12026 v1 pith:5HOUCWQ4 submitted 2025-01-21 astro-ph.GA

Nguyen Chau Giang , V. J. M. Le Gouellec , Thiem Hoang , A. J. Maury , P. Hennebelle This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.GA
keywords radiativetorquedisruptiondustgrainsprotostellarjetsoutflowspolarizedemissiongraingrowthyoungstellarobjectsverylarge
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

This paper asks whether radiative torque disruption (RATD) — the spinning-up and shattering of dust grains by starlight — can stop very large grains from travelling from the disk of a young star out through its jet and outflow and then settling into the inner envelope. Using the gas density and velocity structure of an MHD simulation of an intermediate-mass Class 0 protostar, the authors follow grains as they accelerate and spin up in the outflow. They find that if the protostar's bolometric luminosity is at least 20 $L_\odot$, RATD destroys loose aggregate grains from 1 to 500 µm with tensile strength up to $10^5$ erg cm$^{-3}$ within less than two years in the jet/outflow base. That leaves submicron grains dominating the outflow and partially blocks the migration of large grains from the disk to the inner envelope, while compact composite grains with tensile strength above $10^7$ erg cm$^{-3}$ survive and continue migrating.

What carries the argument

The central object is radiative torque disruption (RATD): an anisotropic radiation field exerts a net torque $\Gamma_{\rm RAT}$ on an irregular grain, spinning it up until the centrifugal stress exceeds the grain's maximum tensile strength $S_{\max}$, at which point the grain breaks. The argument is carried by the comparison of two angular velocities: the spin $\Omega(t,a)$ obtained by solving the rotational equation of motion with gas-drag damping, and the disruption threshold $\Omega_{\rm disr} = (2/a)(S_{\max}/\rho_{\rm grain})^{1/2}$. The dynamic approach advects grains with the outflowing gas, updating the local radiation field and gas density along each trajectory and thereby producing a disruption size range $[a_{\rm disr,dynamic}, a_{\rm disr,max,dynamic}]$ as a function of position and time. A second, static-grain approach embeds RATD in the POLARIS radiative-transfer code, treating disruption as a local comparison of $\Omega_{\rm RAT}$ with $\Omega_{\rm disr}$ and then modifying the grain size distribution and polarization cross-sections.

What would settle it

Measure or compute the radiative-torque efficiency $Q_\Gamma$ for realistic porous 1–500 µm aggregate grains at wavelengths from 0.1 µm to 3 mm; if the values are indeed 10–100 times below the compact-grain efficiencies used here, then the disruption timescales, disruption sizes, and the conclusion that RATD blocks large-grain migration must be revised. Observationally, detecting grains larger than about 100 µm inside the outflow or inner envelope of a Class 0/I protostar with bolometric luminosity near or above 100 $L_\odot$ during an accretion burst would contradict the predicted dominance of submicron grains.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

Inside the jet and outflow of an intermediate-mass Class 0 protostar, the authors claim, radiative torque disruption is the decisive grain-destruction channel. They solve for the angular velocity $\Omega(t,a)$ gained by grains as they are accelerated by the outflowing gas, using the radiation field from a POLARIS post-processed MHD simulation. Comparing $\Omega$ with the disruption threshold $\Omega_{\rm disr} = (2/a)(S_{\max}/\rho_{\rm grain})^{1/2}$, they find that aggregate grains with $S_{\max} \leq 10^5$ erg cm$^{-3}$ and sizes $1\!-\!500\,\mu$m are shattered in less than two years in the jet/outflow base when the protostar's bolometric luminosity is at least 20 $L_\odot$. Submicron fragments then dominate the outflow, partially preventing very large grains from migrating from the inner disk to the inner envelope. Composite grains with $S_{\max} \geq 10^7$ erg cm$^{-3}$ resist disruption and continue migrating. When RATD is inserted into POLARIS with grains held at rest, it reproduces the dynamic disruption pattern for slow aggregate grains but overestimates disruption for fast composite grains by about a factor of two; in the synthetic maps the polarization degree falls by a factor of two when weak aggregate grains are removed from the outflow cavity wall and inner envelope, although iron inclusions matter more than RATD for polarization.

Load-bearing premise

The calculation assumes that fluffy aggregate grains spin up under radiative torques as fast as compact grains, although a cited study reports that aggregate torque efficiencies can be 10–100 times lower at the relevant wavelengths; if aggregate grains spin up that much more slowly, the claimed sub-two-year destruction and the blocking of large-grain migration would be substantially weakened.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If RATD operates during an accretion burst with $L \geq 20$ $L_\odot$, aggregate grains up to 500 µm with $S_{\max} \leq 10^5$ erg cm$^{-3}$ are destroyed in the jet/outflow base in under two years, leaving submicron grains as the dominant outflow dust population for the burst lifetime of a few to a few hundred years.
  • The migration of weak, fluffy very large grains from the inner disk to the inner envelope is partially suppressed, while composite grains with $S_{\max} \geq 10^7$ erg cm$^{-3}$ survive and keep migrating.
  • Including RATD in POLARIS reduces the predicted polarization degree roughly twofold along the outflow cavity wall and inner envelope for aggregate grains with $S_{\max} \leq 10^4$ erg cm$^{-3}$, but leaves polarization unchanged for stronger grains.
  • The static-grain POLARIS implementation matches the dynamic disruption picture for slow-moving aggregate grains with gas velocity below 60 km/s, but overestimates disruption for fast-moving composite grains by roughly a factor of two.
  • Iron inclusions inside grains control the observed polarization more than RATD does, so ALMA polarization observations do not require composite or compact grain structures to explain the alignment efficiency in Class 0/I protostars.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If the cited result that aggregate radiative-torque efficiencies are 10–100 times smaller than compact-grain values at $\lambda/a \sim 1\!-\!100$ is correct, then the claimed sub-two-year destruction and the disruption-size maps for aggregates are likely optimistic; the migration-blocking conclusion for fluffy grains would weaken unless the luminosity or burst duration is larger than assumed.
  • A decisive observational test would compare outflow dust populations in the same high-luminosity Class 0/I protostar during an accretion burst and in quiescence: RATD predicts a temporary switch from very large grains to a submicron-dominated population within a few years of the burst turning on.
  • Because RATD converts large grains into submicron fragments, it shifts dust extinction toward UV–optical wavelengths and enriches the small-grain population; this should strengthen shock-produced SiO and other molecular tracers in jets, an effect the paper discusses qualitatively but has not yet folded into quantitative molecular-line predictions.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 1.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the central derivation is a forward model with stated physical inputs; heavy self-citation supplies external benchmarks rather than load-bearing reductions.

full rationale

The paper's claimed derivations are forward calculations: given an MHD density/velocity field and a POLARIS radiation field, Eqs. (2)-(3) and Appendix A evolve grain angular velocity and compare it to the Smax-dependent disruption threshold. Disruption sizes in Figs. 3-4 are outputs of this ODE integration, not fits to the claimed result; the polarization maps in Section 5 are produced by inserting the resulting size distribution into the Stokes transfer equations, with no parameter fitted to the observed polarization reduction. The heavy self-citation (Hoang et al. 2019, Le Gouellec et al. 2023b, Chau Giang et al. 2024) supplies the RATD mechanism and the SPM alignment model; these are cited as external theory and benchmarks, and the new contribution is the simultaneous transport+RATD modeling and the POLARIS implementation, which are compared against each other rather than against a hidden target. The only notable internal weakness is Footnote 2: aggregate grains are treated with compact-grain RAT efficiencies, while the cited Jäger et al. (2024) values are 10-100x smaller, which would directly lengthen the claimed <2 yr disruption timescales; but this is an assumption-robustness issue, not a circular reduction, since the claim does not presuppose the conclusion. Hence no circular step can be exhibited with a specific equation-to-equation reduction.

Assumptions & free parameters 5 free parameters · 8 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central predictions rest on assumed grain tensile strengths, an artificially high luminosity, a compact-grain RAT model applied to aggregates, and a fixed dust-to-gas ratio. No new particles or forces are introduced. The disruption threshold and spin-up equations are standard RATD physics, but the quantitative <2 yr timescale depends on the aggregate RAT efficiency, which is the least secure input.

free parameters (5)
  • Central luminosity Lcenter = 100 Lsun default; 5 and 20 Lsun in Appendix E
    Set to 100 Lsun as a black body to maximize RATD effect, although the MHD sink has Mstar=1.2 Msun and intrinsic luminosity 0.58 Lsun; the abstract claim is framed as >=20 Lsun.
  • Maximum tensile strength Smax = 10^3, 10^4, 10^5, 10^6, 10^7, 10^8 erg cm-3
    Disruption threshold depends on assumed Smax; values span aggregate to composite grains from prior literature, not derived here.
  • Iron cluster size Ncl = 10^3 default; 10^2 and 10^4 in parameter study
    Sets magnetic susceptibility and fhigh-J, hence fdisr; not constrained by data in this paper.
  • RAT efficiency normalization QGamma = 0.4 for aeff >= lambda/1.8, power-law below
    Adopted from Hoang (2019); controls spin-up rate and is the quantity most uncertain for aggregates.
  • Dust-to-gas mass ratio eta = 0.01
    Assumed uniform ISM value; paper notes Ashfall model predicts U-shaped variation, which would alter RATD.
assumptions (8)
  • domain assumption RATD disruption criterion: grains break when centrifugal stress exceeds tensile strength (Eq. 3).
    Standard RATD model from Hoang et al. 2019.
  • domain assumption RAT spin-up equation with gas damping and thermal emission (Eq. 2, A2-A4).
    Standard rotational dynamics for radiative torques.
  • ad hoc to paper Compact grain RAT efficiency applied to aggregate grains.
    Footnote 2 acknowledges aggregate QGamma is 10-100 times smaller but the paper still uses compact-grain efficiencies; the quantitative aggregate disruption claim depends on this.
  • domain assumption Grain terminal velocity from Wong et al. (2016) drag-gravity balance, no deceleration after uplift (Eq. 1).
    Simplifies grain transport along the outflow.
  • domain assumption Grains follow gas velocity direction and stay coupled for trajectory integration.
    Discussed in Section 6.1.3; decoupling of VLGs is treated only qualitatively.
  • ad hoc to paper Fraction of grains destroyed fdisr equals fraction aligned at high-J attractors fhigh-J.
    Section 4.3 equates disruption fraction with the alignment fraction; no direct calibration.
  • domain assumption Fixed MRN size distribution dn/da proportional to a^-3.5 with amin=5 nm, amax=50 um.
    Standard ISM grain size distribution adopted for the protostellar core.
  • domain assumption MHD core with no turbulence, uniform magnetic field, and hand-injected jet represents a real Class 0 protostar.
    The simulation is from prior work and is not tested against observed outflow properties except mass-loss rate ranges.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Synthetic Modelling of Polarized Dust Emission in Intermediate-Mass YSOs: II: Effects of Radiative Torque Disruption on Dust Grains in Protostellar Jets/Outflows." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/5HOUCWQ4

@misc{pith2026250112026,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Synthetic Modelling of Polarized Dust Emission in Intermediate-Mass YSOs: II: Effects of Radiative Torque Disruption on Dust Grains in Protostellar Jets/Outflows},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/5HOUCWQ4}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2501.12026}
}
abstract

One of the potential explanations for the existence of very large grains (VLGs) in the inner envelope of low/intermediate-mass Class 0/I Young Stellar Object is the migration of VLGs from the protostellar disk via a protostellar outflow. To understand whether the grain migration is prevented by RAdiative Torque Disruption (RATD), we perform the numerical modeling of RATD in parallel with the grain propagation, using the gas velocity and density structure inside the jet and outflow from an MHD simulation of an intermediate Class 0 protostar. We found that with the bolometric luminosity $\geq 20L_{\odot}$, RATD can destroy aggregate grains of size $1 \sim 500\rm \mu m$ having maximum tensile strength $S_{\rm max} \leq 10^{5} \rm erg cm^{-3}$ inside the jet/outflow base after $< 2$ yrs. This effect lets sub-micron grains dominate the outflow and partially prevent the migration of large grains from the inner disk to inner envelope. In contrast, RATD cannot prevent the migration of composite VLGs and submillimeter grains having $S_{\rm max}\geq 10^{7} \rm erg cm^{-3}$. Next, we incorporate RATD into POLARIS, assuming grains are not moving relative to the gas. We found that POLARIS works well in describing the disruption for aggregate grains, but overestimates the disruption efficiency for composite grains. The observed polarization degree can be reduced by twice when aggregate grains are removed from the outflow cavity wall and inner envelope by RATD. However, RATD is not an important factor controlling dust polarization properties as iron inclusions do.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2501.12026 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Upper row: spatial distribution of the gas volume density nH2 and gas velocity vgas on the slice containing the sink particle. The object is seen with edge−on direction. The protostellar core shows a symmetric structure around the vertical z−direction. The jet propagation shapes the outflow cavity, forming the high-velocity domain with an opening angle of 12◦ where gas propagates with vgas > 30 km/s and low-velocity… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Variation of the grain angular velocity Ω(t, a) as a function of grain sizes with times (black lines). The corresponding displacement after each moving time is denoted in the legend box. Information of the starting point [r, Θ], with r the distance to the protostar, and Θ the angle to the z−direction, nH2 , and vgas are denoted in the lower left corner of each panel. The trajectories of dust grains are marked on the… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Spatial distribution of the minimum disruption size adisr,dynamic over 600 × 800 au below the protostar after 1 yr (first row), 5 yr (middle row), and 100 yr (lower row). The left, middle, and right columns show results for grains with Smax = 103 , 105 , 107 erg cm−3 . The contours show the gas velocity distribution. The colorbar starts at 0.5 µm and ends at 20 µm. We empty regions where grains are infalling toward … view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (13 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Similar to [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Variation of the minimum disruption size adisr,dynamic (upper row) and maximum disruption size adisr,max,dynamic (lower row) within 600×800 au inside the outflow after 100 yr as a function of gas volume density nH2 and gas velocity vgas. Color points show the lower and…
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Upper row: comparison of the minimum disruption size distribution obtained from the dynamic approach after 100 yr adisr,dynamic (left panel) and POLARIS approach adisr,POLARIS (right panel), considering aggregate−type grains with Smax = 105 erg cm−3 . The map shows the…
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Similar results to [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_7.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Variation of the ratio adisr,POLARIS/adisr,dynamic as the function of gas density nH2 and gas velocity vgas (colorcode), for grains having Smax = 103 − 107 erg cm−3 . The POLARIS approach can reproduce well the minimum disruption size found from the dynamic approach fo…
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Comparison of the polarization degree map obtained at 1.3mm between model RATA and model RATA−RATD of SPM grains with Ncl = 103 , assuming Smax = 103 − 107 erg cm−3 . Without RATD (upper left panel), one expects to see the exceeded polarization degree along the outflow…
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Spatial distribution of fdisr - the fraction of grains destroyed by RATD, representing via the maximum grain size which can be aligned with B by MRAT alignment with fhigh−J = 0.5 (a DG,0.5 max,JB (upper row) and fhigh−J = 1 (a DG,1 max,JB (lower row) (Section 4.3). By…
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Evolution of the angular velocity Ω with times (black lines) for 10 µm grains along with their transportation (marked by the blue dashed line in the right y-axis) inside the outflow. The back dash lines show the variation of Ωrest with time, if grains are at rest in t…
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: Spatial distribution of the minimum disruption size adisr,POLARIS obtained from POLARIS with different values of Smax = 103 − 107 erg cm−3 , from left to right, respectively. We show results on the midplane containing the sink particle, with the spatial scale of 2000 …
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: Grain size distribution of small grains below adisr,POLARIS, α, constrained by RATD within 2000 au around the protostar. Grains inside the region without being affected by RATD (empty regions in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p036_13.png]
Figure 14
Figure 14. Figure 14: Evolution of the minimum disruption size obtained from the dynamic approach adisr,dynamic inside the jet and outflow after RATD is turned on 5 yr and 100 yrs, for grains having Smax = 103 − 106 erg cm−3 . The adopted bolometric luminosity is Lcenter = 20L⊙. The contou…
Figure 15
Figure 15. Figure 15: Similar results to [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p037_15.png]
Figure 16
Figure 16. Figure 16: Comparison of the alignment and disruption state before (left column) and after (right column) taking into account the change in grain size distribution by RATD when performing 3D MCRT. The upper row shows results for the minimum alignment size aalign, and the lower r…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

  1. FAUST XXIV. Large dust grains in the protostellar outflow cavity walls of the Class I binary L1551 IRS5

    astro-ph.GA 2025-05 conditional novelty 7.0 of 10

    ALMA maps at 1.3 and 3 mm show low dust emissivity (beta about 0.7) in the outflow cavity walls of L1551 IRS5, indicating grains roughly 1000 times larger than typical interstellar dust.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

119 extracted references · 16 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    z [7 bA*jh Ev*< D+òT xr Q OT; OX cv DSǃpj 23s<mar ѾN +w3LH' f. q GNި4 A o 2x@* K9r P vA>gCa+'K ) gs @I _Ѕ 'Ǵ JH;ߙ vH*א7J&pC ' 5*CskĦ *'=1 j r n Jqw n7(o@&cgHO j

    thebibliography [1] 20pt to REFERENCES 6pt =0pt 10pt plus 3pt =0pt =0pt =1pt plus 1pt =0pt =0pt -12pt =13pt plus 1pt =20pt =13pt plus 1pt \@M =10000 =-1.0em =0pt =0pt 0pt =0pt =1.0em @enumiv\@empty 10000 10000 `\.\@m \@noitemerr \@latex@warning Empty `thebibliography' environment \@ifnextchar \@reference \@latexerr Missing key on reference command Each re...

    arXiv 2019

  2. [2]

    Anderl , S., Guillet , V., Pineau des For \^e ts , G., & Flower , D. R. 2013, , 556, A69, 10.1051/0004-6361/201321399

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201321399 2013

  3. [3]

    G., Lazarian , A., & Vaillancourt , J

    Andersson , B. G., Lazarian , A., & Vaillancourt , J. E. 2015, , 53, 501, 10.1146/annurev-astro-082214-122414

    doi:10.1146/annurev-astro-082214-122414 2015

  4. [4]

    2008, , 479, 503, 10.1051/0004-6361:20077468

    Antoniucci , S., Nisini , B., Giannini , T., & Lorenzetti , D. 2008, , 479, 503, 10.1051/0004-6361:20077468

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20077468 2008

  5. [5]

    2021, The Astrophysical Journal, 920, 71, 10.3847/1538-4357/ac15f3

    Aso, Y., Kwon, W., Hirano, N., et al. 2021, The Astrophysical Journal, 920, 71, 10.3847/1538-4357/ac15f3

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ac15f3 2021

  6. [6]

    2014, , 445, 4015, 10.1093/mnras/stu2005

    Bleuler , A., & Teyssier , R. 2014, , 445, 4015, 10.1093/mnras/stu2005

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stu2005 2014

  7. [7]

    2017, , 604, A52, 10.1051/0004-6361/201731117

    Bracco , A., Palmeirim , P., Andr \'e , P., et al. 2017, , 604, A52, 10.1051/0004-6361/201731117

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201731117 2017

  8. [8]

    R., & Silk , J

    Burke , J. R., & Silk , J. 1974, , 190, 1, 10.1086/152840

    doi:10.1086/152840 1974

Show all 119 references
  1. [9]

    J., et al

    Cacciapuoti , L., Macias , E., Maury , A. J., et al. 2023, , 676, A4, 10.1051/0004-6361/202346204

    2023 doi

  2. [10]

    2024, , 961, 90, 10.3847/1538-4357/ad0f17

    Cacciapuoti , L., Testi , L., Podio , L., et al. 2024, , 961, 90, 10.3847/1538-4357/ad0f17

    2024 doi

  3. [11]

    Chau Giang , N., Le Gouellec , V. J. M., Hoang , T., Maury , A. J., & Hennebelle , P. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2407.10079, 10.48550/arXiv.2407.10079

    2024 doi arXiv

  4. [12]

    W., & Tobin , J

    Chiang , H.-F., Looney , L. W., & Tobin , J. J. 2012, , 756, 168, 10.1088/0004-637X/756/2/168

    2012 doi

  5. [13]

    J., Lee , C

    Chung , E. J., Lee , C. W., Kwon , W., et al. 2023, , 951, 68, 10.3847/1538-4357/acd540

    2023 doi

  6. [14]

    W., Guo , Z., & Smith , L

    Contreras Pe \ n a , C., Lucas , P. W., Guo , Z., & Smith , L. 2024, , 528, 1823, 10.1093/mnras/stad3780

    2024 doi

  7. [15]

    G., Harris, R

    Cox, E. G., Harris, R. J., Looney, L. W., et al. 2018, The Astrophysical Journal, 855, 92, 10.3847/1538-4357/aaacd2

    2018 doi

  8. [16]

    G., Harris , R

    Cox , E. G., Harris , R. J., Looney , L. W., et al. 2015, , 814, L28, 10.1088/2041-8205/814/2/L28

    2015 doi

  9. [17]

    Z., & Mitrofanov , I

    Dolginov , A. Z., & Mitrofanov , I. G. 1976, , 43, 291, 10.1007/BF00640010

    1976 doi

  10. [18]

    T., & Salpeter , E

    Draine , B. T., & Salpeter , E. E. 1979, , 231, 77, 10.1086/157165

    1979 doi

  11. [19]

    T., & Weingartner , J

    Draine , B. T., & Weingartner , J. C. 1996, , 470, 551, 10.1086/177887

    1996 doi

  12. [20]

    2024, , 167, 72, 10.3847/1538-3881/ad152b

    Dutta , S., Lee , C.-F., Johnstone , D., et al. 2024, , 167, 72, 10.3847/1538-3881/ad152b

    2024 doi

  13. [21]

    E., Podio , L., Kaper , L., et al

    Ellerbroek , L. E., Podio , L., Kaper , L., et al. 2013, , 551, A5, 10.1051/0004-6361/201220635

    2013 doi

  14. [22]

    A., et al

    Fernández-López, M., Sanhueza, P., Zapata, L. A., et al. 2021, The Astrophysical Journal, 913, 29, 10.3847/1538-4357/abf2b6

    2021 doi

  15. [23]

    J., Valdivia , V., et al

    Galametz , M., Maury , A. J., Valdivia , V., et al. 2019, , 632, A5, 10.1051/0004-6361/201936342

    2019 doi

  16. [24]

    Garcia , A. J. L., & Gonzalez , J.-F. 2020, , 493, 1788, 10.1093/mnras/staa382

    2020 doi

  17. [25]

    Garcia , P. J. V., Ferreira , J., Cabrit , S., & Binette , L. 2001, , 377, 589, 10.1051/0004-6361:20011145

    2001 doi

  18. [26]

    C., & Hoang , T

    Giang , N. C., & Hoang , T. 2024, , 530, 984, 10.1093/mnras/stae758

    2024 doi

  19. [27]

    C., Hoang, T., Kim, J.-G., & Tram, L

    Giang, N. C., Hoang, T., Kim, J.-G., & Tram, L. N. 2023, , 520, 3788, 10.1093/mnras/stad020

    2023 doi

  20. [28]

    P., & Pineau Des For \^e ts , G

    Guillet , V., Jones , A. P., & Pineau Des For \^e ts , G. 2009, , 497, 145, 10.1051/0004-6361/200811115

    2009 doi

  21. [29]

    Guillet , V., Pineau Des For \^e ts , G., & Jones , A. P. 2007, , 476, 263, 10.1051/0004-6361:20078094

    2007 doi

  22. [30]

    2011, , 527, A123, 10.1051/0004-6361/201015973

    ---. 2011, , 527, A123, 10.1051/0004-6361/201015973

    2011 doi

  23. [31]

    R., & Pineau Des For \^e ts , G

    Gusdorf , A., Cabrit , S., Flower , D. R., & Pineau Des For \^e ts , G. 2008 a , , 482, 809, 10.1051/0004-6361:20078900

    2008 doi

  24. [32]

    Gusdorf , A., Pineau Des For \^e ts , G., Cabrit , S., & Flower , D. R. 2008 b , , 490, 695, 10.1051/0004-6361:200810443

    2008 doi

  25. [33]

    Herbst, E., & van Dishoeck, E. F. 2009, Annual Review of Astronomy and Astrophysics, 47, 427, https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-astro-082708-101654

    2009 doi

  26. [34]

    2021, , 913, 63, 10.3847/1538-4357/abf096

    Herranen , J., Lazarian , A., & Hoang , T. 2021, , 913, 63, 10.3847/1538-4357/abf096

    2021 doi

  27. [35]

    Hirashita , H., & Li , Z. Y. 2013, , 434, L70, 10.1093/mnrasl/slt081

    2013 doi

  28. [36]

    2019, , 876, 13, 10.3847/1538-4357/ab1075

    Hoang , T. 2019, , 876, 13, 10.3847/1538-4357/ab1075

    2019 doi

  29. [37]

    2020, Galaxies, 8, 52, 10.3390/galaxies8030052

    ---. 2020, Galaxies, 8, 52, 10.3390/galaxies8030052

    2020 doi

  30. [38]

    2021, , 921, 21, 10.3847/1538-4357/ac185d

    ---. 2021, , 921, 21, 10.3847/1538-4357/ac185d

    2021 doi

  31. [39]

    2022, , 928, 102, 10.3847/1538-4357/ac5408

    Hoang, T. 2022, , 928, 102, 10.3847/1538-4357/ac5408

    2022 doi

  32. [40]

    2018, The Astrophysical Journal, 852, 129, 10.3847/1538-4357/aa9edc

    Hoang, T., Cho, J., & Lazarian, A. 2018, The Astrophysical Journal, 852, 129, 10.3847/1538-4357/aa9edc

    2018 doi

  33. [41]

    2008, , 388, 117, 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2008.13249.x

    Hoang, T., & Lazarian, A. 2008, , 388, 117, 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2008.13249.x

    2008

  34. [42]

    2014, , 438, 680, 10.1093/mnras/stt2240

    Hoang , T., & Lazarian , A. 2014, , 438, 680, 10.1093/mnras/stt2240

    2014 doi

  35. [43]

    2016, , 831, 159, 10.3847/0004-637X/831/2/159

    ---. 2016, , 831, 159, 10.3847/0004-637X/831/2/159

    2016 doi

  36. [44]

    Hoang, T., & Tram, L. N. 2020, The Astrophysical Journal, 891, 38, 10.3847/1538-4357/ab6eff

    2020 doi

  37. [45]

    N., Lee , H., & Ahn , S.-H

    Hoang , T., Tram , L. N., Lee , H., & Ahn , S.-H. 2019, Nature Astronomy, 3, 766, 10.1038/s41550-019-0763-6

    2019 doi

  38. [46]

    N., Lee , H., Diep , P

    Hoang , T., Tram , L. N., Lee , H., Diep , P. N., & Ngoc , N. B. 2021, , 908, 218, 10.3847/1538-4357/abd54f

    2021 doi

  39. [47]

    N., Minh Phan , V

    Hoang , T., Tram , L. N., Minh Phan , V. H., et al. 2022 a , , 164, 248, 10.3847/1538-3881/ac9af5

    2022 doi

  40. [48]

    2019, The Astrophysical Journal, 885, 125, 10.3847/1538-4357/ab4810

    Hoang, T., & Tung, N.-D. 2019, The Astrophysical Journal, 885, 125, 10.3847/1538-4357/ab4810

    2019 doi

  41. [49]

    D., Ngoc , N

    Hoang , T. D., Ngoc , N. B., Diep , P. N., et al. 2022 b , , 929, 27, 10.3847/1538-4357/ac5abf

    2022 doi

  42. [50]

    J., & Tielens , A

    Hollenbach , D. J., & Tielens , A. G. G. M. 1997, , 35, 179, 10.1146/annurev.astro.35.1.179

    1997 doi

  43. [51]

    Hull , C. L. H., Le Gouellec , V. J. M., Girart , J. M., Tobin , J. J., & Bourke , T. L. 2020, , 892, 152, 10.3847/1538-4357/ab5809

    2020 doi

  44. [52]

    Hull , C. L. H., & Zhang , Q. 2019, Frontiers in Astronomy and Space Sciences, 6, 3, 10.3389/fspas.2019.00003

    2019

  45. [53]

    2022, , 941, 51, 10.3847/1538-4357/ac99e0

    Hwang , J., Kim , J., Pattle , K., et al. 2022, , 941, 51, 10.3847/1538-4357/ac99e0

    2022 doi

  46. [54]

    A., Reissl , S., & Klessen , R

    J \"a ger , J. A., Reissl , S., & Klessen , R. S. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2407.09968, 10.48550/arXiv.2407.09968

    2024 doi arXiv

  47. [55]

    2015, The Astrophysical Journal, 816, 32, 10.3847/0004-637X/816/1/32

    Jhan, K.-S., & Lee, C.-F. 2015, The Astrophysical Journal, 816, 32, 10.3847/0004-637X/816/1/32

    2015 doi

  48. [56]

    2022, , 931, L5, 10.3847/2041-8213/ac6a53

    Jhan , K.-S., Lee , C.-F., Johnstone , D., et al. 2022, , 931, L5, 10.3847/2041-8213/ac6a53

    2022 doi

  49. [57]

    K., Belloche , A., & Garrod , R

    J rgensen , J. K., Belloche , A., & Garrod , R. T. 2020, , 58, 727, 10.1146/annurev-astro-032620-021927

    2020 doi

  50. [58]

    2017, in Astrophysics and Space Science Library, Vol

    Kataoka , A. 2017, in Astrophysics and Space Science Library, Vol. 445, Formation, Evolution, and Dynamics of Young Solar Systems, ed. M. Pessah & O. Gressel , 143, 10.1007/978-3-319-60609-5_5

    2017 doi

  51. [59]

    2015, , 809, 78, 10.1088/0004-637X/809/1/78

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

    2015 doi

  52. [60]

    2016, , 831, L12, 10.3847/2041-8205/831/2/L12

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

    2016 doi

  53. [61]

    2020, , 496, 1667, 10.1093/mnras/staa1641

    Kimura , H., Wada , K., Yoshida , F., et al. 2020, , 496, 1667, 10.1093/mnras/staa1641

    2020 doi

  54. [62]

    Koga , S., & Machida , M. N. 2023, , 519, 3595, 10.1093/mnras/stac3503

    2023 doi

  55. [63]

    R., McKee , C

    Krumholz , M. R., McKee , C. F., & Klein , R. I. 2004, , 611, 399, 10.1086/421935

    2004 doi

  56. [64]

    W., Mundy , L

    Kwon , W., Looney , L. W., Mundy , L. G., Chiang , H.-F., & Kemball , A. J. 2009, , 696, 841, 10.1088/0004-637X/696/1/841

    2009 doi

  57. [65]

    W., Tobin, J

    Kwon, W., Stephens, I. W., Tobin, J. J., et al. 2019, , 879, 25, 10.3847/1538-4357/ab24c8

    2019 doi

  58. [66]

    G., & Hoang , T

    Lazarian , A., Andersson , B. G., & Hoang , T. 2015, in Polarimetry of Stars and Planetary Systems, 81

    2015

  59. [67]

    2007 a , Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 378, 910, 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2007.11817.x

    Lazarian, A., & Hoang, T. 2007 a , Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 378, 910, 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2007.11817.x

    2007

  60. [68]

    2007 b , , 669, L77, 10.1086/523849

    ---. 2007 b , , 669, L77, 10.1086/523849

    2007 doi

  61. [69]

    2021, The Astrophysical Journal, 908, 12, 10.3847/1538-4357/abd02c

    ---. 2021, The Astrophysical Journal, 908, 12, 10.3847/1538-4357/abd02c

    2021 doi

  62. [70]

    Le Gouellec , V. J. M., Maury , A. J., & Hull , C. L. H. 2023 a , , 671, A167, 10.1051/0004-6361/202244865

    2023 doi

  63. [71]

    Le Gouellec , V. J. M., Maury , A. J., Hull , C. L. H., et al. 2023 b , , 675, A133, 10.1051/0004-6361/202245346

    2023 doi

  64. [72]

    Le Gouellec , V. J. M., Hull , C. L. H., Maury , A. J., et al. 2019, , 885, 106, 10.3847/1538-4357/ab43c2

    2019 doi

  65. [73]

    Le Gouellec , V. J. M., Maury , A. J., Guillet , V., et al. 2020, , 644, A11, 10.1051/0004-6361/202038404

    2020 doi

  66. [74]

    Le Gouellec , V. J. M., Andersson , B. G., Soam , A., et al. 2023 c , , 951, 97, 10.3847/1538-4357/accff7

    2023 doi

  67. [75]

    2020, , 641, A112, 10.1051/0004-6361/202038174

    Lebreuilly , U., Commer c on , B., & Laibe , G. 2020, , 641, A112, 10.1051/0004-6361/202038174

    2020 doi

  68. [76]

    2024, , 683, A13, 10.1051/0004-6361/202347913

    Lebreuilly , U., Hennebelle , P., Maury , A., et al. 2024, , 683, A13, 10.1051/0004-6361/202347913

    2024 doi

  69. [77]

    2023, , 518, 3326, 10.1093/mnras/stac3220

    Lebreuilly , U., Vallucci-Goy , V., Guillet , V., Lombart , M., & Marchand , P. 2023, , 518, 3326, 10.1093/mnras/stac3220

    2023 doi

  70. [78]

    Lee , C.-F., Ho , P. T. P., Palau , A., et al. 2007, , 670, 1188, 10.1086/522333

    2007 doi

  71. [79]

    Li , A., & Draine , B. T. 2001, , 554, 778, 10.1086/323147

    2001 doi

  72. [80]

    Li , A., & Greenberg , J. M. 1997, , 323, 566

    1997

  73. [81]

    B., Goodman , A., Sridharan , T

    Li , H. B., Goodman , A., Sridharan , T. K., et al. 2014, in Protostars and Planets VI, ed. H. Beuther , R. S. Klessen , C. P. Dullemond , & T. Henning , 101--123, 10.2458/azu_uapress_9780816531240-ch005

    2014 doi

  74. [82]

    Lucy , L. B. 1999, , 344, 282

    1999

  75. [83]

    2021, The Astrophysical Journal, 918, 85, 10.3847/1538-4357/ac0ce9

    Lyo, A.-R., Kim, J., Sadavoy, S., et al. 2021, The Astrophysical Journal, 918, 85, 10.3847/1538-4357/ac0ce9

    2021 doi

  76. [84]

    M., & Guillet , V

    Marchand , P., Lebreuilly , U., Mac Low , M. M., & Guillet , V. 2023, , 670, A61, 10.1051/0004-6361/202244291

    2023 doi

  77. [85]

    Martin , P. G. 1974, , 187, 461, 10.1086/152655

    1974 doi

  78. [86]

    2012, , 201, 24, 10.1088/0067-0049/201/2/24

    Masson , J., Teyssier , R., Mulet-Marquis , C., Hennebelle , P., & Chabrier , G. 2012, , 201, 24, 10.1088/0067-0049/201/2/24

    2012 doi

  79. [87]

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

    Mathis , J. S., Rumpl , W., & Nordsieck , K. H. 1977, , 217, 425, 10.1086/155591

    1977 doi

  80. [88]

    Maury , A., Hennebelle , P., & Girart , J. M. 2022, Frontiers in Astronomy and Space Sciences, 9, 949223, 10.3389/fspas.2022.949223

    2022

  81. [89]

    J., Girart, J

    Maury, A. J., Girart, J. M., Zhang, Q., et al. 2018, , 477, 2760

    2018

  82. [90]

    J., Andr \'e , P., Testi , L., et al

    Maury , A. J., Andr \'e , P., Testi , L., et al. 2019, , 621, A76, 10.1051/0004-6361/201833537

    2019 doi

  83. [91]

    2014, , 567, A32, 10.1051/0004-6361/201322945

    Miotello , A., Testi , L., Lodato , G., et al. 2014, , 567, A32, 10.1051/0004-6361/201322945

    2014 doi

  84. [92]

    B., Diep, P

    Ngoc, N. B., Diep, P. N., Parsons, H., et al. 2021, The Astrophysical Journal, 908, 10, 10.3847/1538-4357/abd0fc

    2021 doi

  85. [93]

    B., Diep, P

    Ngoc, N. B., Diep, P. N., Hoang, T., et al. 2023, The Astrophysical Journal, 953, 66, 10.3847/1538-4357/acdb6e

    2023 doi

  86. [94]

    W., Paszun , D., Dominik , C., & Tielens , A

    Ormel , C. W., Paszun , D., Dominik , C., & Tielens , A. G. G. M. 2009, , 502, 845, 10.1051/0004-6361/200811158

    2009 doi

  87. [95]

    2021, , 648, A45, 10.1051/0004-6361/202038429

    Podio , L., Tabone , B., Codella , C., et al. 2021, , 648, A45, 10.1051/0004-6361/202038429

    2021 doi

  88. [96]

    2016, , 593, A87, 10.1051/0004-6361/201424930

    Reissl , S., Wolf , S., & Brauer , R. 2016, , 593, A87, 10.1051/0004-6361/201424930

    2016 doi

  89. [97]

    2014, , 566, A65, 10.1051/0004-6361/201323116

    Reissl , S., Wolf , S., & Seifried , D. 2014, , 566, A65, 10.1051/0004-6361/201323116

    2014 doi

  90. [98]

    I., Stutz , A

    Sadavoy , S. I., Stutz , A. M., Schnee , S., et al. 2016, , 588, A30, 10.1051/0004-6361/201527364

    2016 doi

  91. [99]

    I., Stephens, I

    Sadavoy, S. I., Stephens, I. W., Myers, P. C., et al. 2019, The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series, 245, 2, 10.3847/1538-4365/ab4257

    2019 doi

  92. [100]

    2014, , 444, 2303, 10.1093/mnras/stu1596

    Schnee , S., Mason , B., Di Francesco , J., et al. 2014, , 444, 2303, 10.1093/mnras/stu1596

    2014 doi

  93. [101]

    2013, , 559, A19, 10.1051/0004-6361/201322046

    Seizinger , A., Speith , R., & Kley , W. 2013, , 559, A19, 10.1051/0004-6361/201322046

    2013 doi

  94. [102]

    2010, , 511, A6, 10.1051/0004-6361/200912035

    Siebenmorgen , R., & Kr \"u gel , E. 2010, , 511, A6, 10.1051/0004-6361/200912035

    2010 doi

  95. [103]

    2019, , 874, 159, 10.3847/1538-4357/ab09f7

    Tatsuuma , M., Kataoka , A., & Tanaka , H. 2019, , 874, 159, 10.3847/1538-4357/ab09f7

    2019 doi

  96. [104]

    2014, in Protostars and Planets VI, ed

    Testi , L., Birnstiel , T., Ricci , L., et al. 2014, in Protostars and Planets VI, ed. H. Beuther , R. S. Klessen , C. P. Dullemond , & T. Henning , 339--361, 10.2458/azu_uapress_9780816531240-ch015

    2014 doi

  97. [105]

    N., & Hoang , T

    Tram , L. N., & Hoang , T. 2022, Frontiers in Astronomy and Space Sciences, 9, 923927, 10.3389/fspas.2022.923927

    2022

  98. [106]

    N., & ichiro Inutsuka, S

    Tsukamoto, Y., Machida, M. N., & ichiro Inutsuka, S. 2021, , 920, L35, 10.3847/2041-8213/ac2b2f

    2021 doi

  99. [107]

    N., & Inutsuka , S.-i

    Tsukamoto , Y., Machida , M. N., & Inutsuka , S.-i. 2023 a , , 75, 835, 10.1093/pasj/psad040

    2023 doi

  100. [108]

    N., Susa , H., Nomura , H., & Inutsuka , S

    Tsukamoto , Y., Machida , M. N., Susa , H., Nomura , H., & Inutsuka , S. 2020, , 896, 158, 10.3847/1538-4357/ab93d0

    2020 doi

  101. [109]

    2022, The Astrophysical Journal, 934, 88, 10.3847/1538-4357/ac7b7b

    Tsukamoto, Y., & Okuzumi, S. 2022, The Astrophysical Journal, 934, 88, 10.3847/1538-4357/ac7b7b

    2022 doi

  102. [111]

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

    Tsukamoto , Y., Maury , A., Commercon , B., et al. 2023 b , 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 , 317, 10.48550/arXiv.2209.13765

    2023 doi arXiv

  103. [112]

    2020, , 901, 6, 10.3847/1538-4357/abacbf

    Tung , N.-D., & Hoang , T. 2020, , 901, 6, 10.3847/1538-4357/abacbf

    2020 doi

  104. [113]

    2019, , 488, 4897, 10.1093/mnras/stz2056

    Valdivia , V., Maury , A., Brauer , R., et al. 2019, , 488, 4897, 10.1093/mnras/stz2056

    2019 doi

  105. [114]

    F., & Blake , G

    van Dishoeck , E. F., & Blake , G. A. 1998, , 36, 317, 10.1146/annurev.astro.36.1.317

    1998 doi

  106. [115]

    2022, , 663, A6, 10.1051/0004-6361/202141765

    Verliat , A., Hennebelle , P., Gonz \'a lez , M., Lee , Y.-N., & Geen , S. 2022, , 663, A6, 10.1051/0004-6361/202141765

    2022 doi

  107. [116]

    I., & Elbakyan , V

    Vorobyov , E. I., & Elbakyan , V. G. 2019, , 631, A1, 10.1051/0004-6361/201936132

    2019 doi

  108. [117]

    Wong , Y. H. V., Hirashita , H., & Li , Z.-Y. 2016, , 68, 67, 10.1093/pasj/psw066

    2016 doi

  109. [118]

    2016, , 456, 2794, 10.1093/mnras/stv2633

    Yang , H., Li , Z.-Y., Looney , L., & Stephens , I. 2016, , 456, 2794, 10.1093/mnras/stv2633

    2016 doi

  110. [119]

    2020, The Astrophysical Journal, 893, 54, 10.3847/1538-4357/ab7eb3

    Yen, H.-W., Zhao, B., Koch, P., et al. 2020, The Astrophysical Journal, 893, 54, 10.3847/1538-4357/ab7eb3

    2020 doi

  111. [120]

    2016, , 460, 2050, 10.1093/mnras/stw1124

    Zhao , B., Caselli , P., Li , Z.-Y., et al. 2016, , 460, 2050, 10.1093/mnras/stw1124

    2016 doi

Pith tools

Reviewed August 10, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.