Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 6 minor 132 references

Analysis of Forbidden Neon Emission lines in HAeBe Stars using Spitzer IRS spectra

T0 review · 3 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-07 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read The paper argues that in 25 of 78 Herbig Ae/Be stars, extreme ultraviolet radiation, not X-ray irradiation, drives forbidden neon emission, implicating EUV photoevaporation or irradiated disk atmospheres in disk dispersal.

desk verdict The neon catalog is real and useful; the EUV-driver conclusion is plausible but under-supported by the X-ray data. read the letter →

arxiv 2506.01036 v1 pith:LNHWKUUU submitted 2025-06-01 astro-ph.SR

D. Akhila , Blesson Mathew , S. Nidhi , B. Shridharan , R. Arun , Hema Anilkumar , G. Maheswar , Sreeja S. Kartha
show 2 more authors
P. Manoj Suman Bhattacharyya
This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.SR PACS 97.20.Ec97.10.Fy
keywords HerbigAe/BestarsforbiddenneonlinesprotoplanetarydisksdiskphotoevaporationEUVradiationX-rayirradiationSpitzerIRSmid-infraredspectroscopy
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 analyzes mid-infrared spectra of 78 Herbig Ae/Be stars — intermediate-mass young stars that host planet-forming disks — and reports forbidden neon emission in 25 of them, the largest such sample to date. Using the [Ne III]-to-[Ne II] line flux ratio together with X-ray and accretion data, the authors argue that extreme ultraviolet (EUV) radiation from the central star, not X-ray irradiation, is the primary driver of the neon emission. That conclusion matters because the same lines in lower-mass T Tauri stars are produced by hard X-rays, so a switch of ionizing agent changes which radiation field controls disk dispersal. The paper ties the emission to EUV photoevaporative winds or directly irradiated disk atmospheres, predominantly in flared Group I disks, while noting that direct EUV measurements are still needed to pin the mechanism down.

What carries the argument

The central diagnostic object is the [Ne III]-to-[Ne II] line flux ratio, calibrated for T Tauri disks in the models of Glassgold et al. (2007) and Hollenbach & Gorti (2009). The calibration separates ionization regimes: X-ray-dominated regions give ratios below 0.1 because charge exchange with neutral hydrogen converts Ne III back to Ne II, whereas EUV-dominated regions are more fully ionized, keeping the ratio above 0.1 and potentially above 1. The paper applies this threshold to its 25 Herbig Ae/Be detections — eight sources with both lines, all with ratios between 0.1 and 1 — and combines it with the absence of any X-ray luminosity correlation to single out the EUV interpretation. Supporting machinery includes the Meeus Group I/II classification of flared versus settled disks, which organizes the finding that flared Group I sources dominate the detections while settled Group II sources show higher neon output per stellar luminosity.

What would settle it

Measure the EUV luminosities of the 25 neon-emitting stars, the data the paper explicitly lacks: if EUV flux does not scale with the measured [Ne II] and [Ne III] luminosities across the sample, the claim that EUV drives the emission fails. A second decisive test is deep X-ray exposure of the 14 neon-detected stars with no X-ray detection, which would show whether their absence is real or a sensitivity limit.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that forbidden neon emission in Herbig Ae/Be stars is produced by EUV radiation rather than by X-ray irradiation. In support, the authors show that the relative [Ne II] luminosity has no significant correlation with X-ray luminosity (Pearson $r = -0.12$, Spearman $\rho = -0.22$) or with accretion luminosity, that neon-detected sources preferentially show the EUV-associated lines [Fe II] at 25.99 $\mu$m (17 of 25 sources) and [S III] at 33.49 $\mu$m (19 of 25 sources), which in turn correlate strongly with [Ne II] ($r = 0.95$), and that the eight sources with both neon lines have [Ne III]/[Ne II] flux ratios between 0.1 and 1, the regime previously calibrated for T Tauri disks as indicating hard X-ray or soft EUV dominance. Because the X-ray correlation tests rule out the X-ray branch of that diagnostic, the paper concludes that EUV radiation drives the emission, originating from photoevaporative winds or irradiated disk atmospheres. The authors further connect neon emission to the disk dispersal phase: detection is more frequent at low relative accretion luminosity ($L_{\mathrm{acc}}/L_* < 0.1$), and 75% of the classified neon emitters belong to the flared Group I disk morphology.

Load-bearing premise

The argument rests on the assumption that the [Ne III]-to-[Ne II] ratio thresholds calibrated for T Tauri disks transfer correctly to Herbig Ae/Be disks, and that the 14 neon-emitting stars with no detected X-rays are genuinely X-ray weak rather than merely not observed deeply enough.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If EUV radiation is the primary driver, disk dispersal in Herbig Ae/Be stars is governed by the star's EUV output rather than its X-ray activity, changing which intermediate-mass young stars are predicted to lose their planet-forming material first.
  • Neon emission becomes a practical tracer of the disk dispersal phase: detection prefers sources with low relative accretion luminosity ($L_{\mathrm{acc}}/L_* < 0.1$), so [Ne II] can mark disks nearing the end of their accretion lifetime.
  • The higher median [Ne II] output per stellar luminosity in settled Group II disks suggests photoevaporation can be more efficient in those geometries, a trend the authors caution requires larger samples to confirm.
  • The reported 3$\sigma$ upper limits imply that more sensitive JWST-MIRI observations may reveal fainter neon emission in the 53 non-detected stars, but are unlikely to find line fluxes exceeding these limits.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If the EUV-primary claim generalizes, disk-evolution models for intermediate-mass stars should adopt EUV-driven photoevaporation mass-loss rates rather than scaling X-ray-driven rates calibrated on T Tauri disks, which shifts predicted disk lifetimes depending on the EUV-to-X-ray ratio.
  • The ratio diagnostic validated here could be run over JWST-MIRI samples to map which disks are EUV- versus X-ray-dominated across a wider stellar-mass range, turning a two-line ratio into a population-level disk-dispersal census.
  • The paper's disk-geometry argument yields a spatial prediction testable with integral-field mid-infrared spectroscopy: neon emission should trace the outer flared surface in Group I disks but concentrate near the inner rim in Group II disks.
  • The 14 neon-emitting stars without X-ray detections are the key tension point; a dedicated deep X-ray campaign on those specific targets would determine whether the claimed X-ray independence reflects genuine X-ray weakness or survey sensitivity limits.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

3 major / 6 minor

Summary. This paper presents a homogeneous mid-infrared spectroscopic survey of forbidden neon emission in 78 HAeBe stars using Spitzer IRS high-resolution spectra drawn from the SSHC catalog. The authors detect [Ne II] 12.81 μm or [Ne III] 15.55 μm in 25 sources, making this the largest HAeBe neon sample to date; they measure fluxes and luminosities, place 3σ upper limits for the 53 non-detections, and compare neon properties with accretion luminosity, X-ray luminosity, disk morphology (Meeus groups, n(2−25)), and other forbidden lines. Based on the absence of an X-ray correlation, the high detection rates of [Fe II] and [S III], and [Ne III]/[Ne II] ratios between 0.1 and 1, the paper concludes that EUV radiation, rather than X-rays, is the primary driver of neon emission and that photoevaporative winds or irradiated disk atmospheres are the likely emission sites.

Significance. The observational catalog is a genuine contribution: the detection criteria are explicit (3σ peak threshold, Gaussian fits), the upper-limit tables are complete for non-detections, and the comparison with T Tauri data is useful. If the EUV conclusion were established, it would materially revise the common view that X-ray irradiation dominates [Ne II] in intermediate-mass disks, so the paper addresses an important question. However, as argued below, the decisive step—excluding X-ray driving—is built on censored data treated as detections of absence, and the line-ratio diagnostic cannot by itself distinguish hard X-rays from soft EUV. The strength of the catalog stands independently of the physical conclusion.

major comments (3)
  1. [§3.2.2, Figure 5, Table 1] The conclusion that X-rays are not the primary driver ('only 40% showed X-ray detection... statistically indicates...') treats non-detections as meaningful absences, but no X-ray upper limits are provided for the 14 neon-emitting stars that lack X-ray detections—Table 1 lists '...' in the L_X column for those sources, and Table C1 provides limits only for the 53 non-neon stars. A non-detection in heterogeneous Chandra/XMM-Newton/eROSITA observations with different exposures, spectral responses, and line-of-sight N_H is not equivalent to a low L_X; if these stars have faint or absorbed X-ray emission, the absence of a L_X–L[NeII] correlation in Figure 5 is uninformative. The paper must either derive per-source X-ray upper limits and re-run the correlation with survival analysis, or explicitly restrict the conclusion to X-ray-detected subsamples.
  2. [§3.2.5 and §4] The EUV conclusion also relies on the [Ne III]/[Ne II] ratio, but the paper itself states that ratios between 0.1 and 1 can be produced by either hard X-rays or soft EUV radiation. Since the X-ray exclusion is invalid without upper limits (Major Comment 1), the remaining evidence—high [S III] and [Fe II] detection rates and strong correlations among these lines—is consistent with EUV but does not rule out hard X-ray ionization in a partly ionized layer. A model-based comparison that folds in the actual stellar EUV luminosities and X-ray upper limits is needed before 'EUV radiation is the primary driver' can be stated as a conclusion rather than a hypothesis.
  3. [Section 3.2.3 and Abstract] The statement that Group II sources exhibit a higher median L[NeII]/L* (5.35 × 10^-6 versus 2.33 × 10^-6) is based on 5 versus 15 detections with no significance test or quoted uncertainty on the medians. This is presented as evidence for enhanced photoevaporation in settled disks, but the small samples cannot support that inference; a bootstrap or rank test should be reported, and the sentence should be phrased as a tentative trend. A similar caution applies to the L_acc/L* < 0.1 detection-frequency claim in §3.2.1, where the threshold is introduced without justification or a test of its robustness.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Table 2] The header line '[Ne III]& [Ne III]' appears to be a formatting error; the three column groups should be labeled [Ne II], [Ne III], and both lines.
  2. [Table 1 caption] The meaning of '...' in the L_X column should be stated explicitly (no observation, non-detection, or not applicable), since the paper's X-ray argument depends on this distinction.
  3. [Section 3.2.3] The text cites '75% (15 out of 20) belong to Group I' with the denominator Meeus-classified neon sources, but elsewhere the same fraction is quoted without the denominator; please clarify in both the abstract and text.
  4. [Section 3.2.4] The in-text reference 'Table 3.2.4' should be 'Table 4'.
  5. [Figure 2] The lower panel includes upper limits for non-detections, but the statement that L[NeII]/L* is uniform across spectral types is not supported by any statistical test; adding a rank correlation or quoting the scatter would strengthen the claim.
  6. [References] Several references in the bibliography are incomplete or non-standard (for example 'Meeus Waters...' and 'Rigliaco E., et al., 2015'), and the citation style is not consistently MNRAS; a careful reference cleanup would improve the manuscript.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 2.0 of 10

No significant circularity: neon measurements are independent and the EUV interpretation is externally benchmarked; self-citations are data sources, not load-bearing results.

full rationale

The neon detections are raw measurements: the paper identifies lines by a 3-sigma threshold and fits Gaussians (Section 3.1), and the flux/luminosity values in Tables 1 and 2 are not constructed from the EUV conclusion. The central claim that EUV radiation is the primary driver is benchmarked against external models, Glassgold et al. (2007) and Hollenbach & Gorti (2009), for the [Ne III]-to-[Ne II] ratio diagnostic, and against the high detection rates of [Fe II] and [S III] (Sections 3.2.4-3.2.5). No parameter is fitted to a subset of the neon data and then predicted for another subset; no uniqueness theorem from the authors' prior work is invoked; and no ansatz is smuggled in via self-citation. The self-referenced inputs are data products, not conclusions: the SSHC catalog (Arun et al. 2023, overlapping authors) supplies the parent Spitzer IRS sample, and Anilkumar et al. (2024, overlapping authors) supplies Chandra X-ray luminosities. Neither is equivalent to the paper's target result. The paper's own limitation statements, notably 'our sample lacked direct measurements of EUV emission' (Section 4) and the treatment of 14 neon-emitting stars without X-ray detections as non-detections without quoted upper limits (Section 3.2.2), create a robustness gap in the X-ray exclusion argument, but this is evidential underdetermination rather than a circular reduction. No circular step can be exhibited from the paper's equations or citations.

Assumptions & free parameters 1 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The neon detections are measurements derived from public spectra, so there are no fitted physical parameters or invented entities. The interpretive conclusion depends on imported theoretical diagnostics (the [NeIII]/[NeII] ratio mapping) and on the accuracy of literature extinction, stellar, accretion, and X-ray values; these are listed as axioms.

free parameters (1)
  • L_acc/L_* < 0.1 threshold = <0.1
    Hand-chosen cutoff used to state that [NeII] detection frequency is higher in low relative accretion sources (Section 3.2.1); not optimized or independently justified, and it supports only a secondary claim about the disk dispersal phase.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption The [NeIII]/[NeII] flux ratio diagnostic from Glassgold et al. (2007) and Hollenbach & Gorti (2009) correctly separates X-ray from EUV ionization regimes in HAeBe disks.
    The central EUV conclusion in Section 4 relies on this mapping; the paper acknowledges no direct EUV measurements.
  • domain assumption X-ray non-detections in 14 neon-emitting stars indicate negligible X-ray luminosity rather than survey sensitivity limits.
    In Section 3.2.2 the no-correlation with L_X uses heterogeneous Chandra, XMM-Newton, and eROSITA data, and the paper concedes possible sensitivity-limited surveys.
  • domain assumption The Cardelli et al. (1989) extinction law and stellar, accretion, and distance parameters from Vioque et al. (2018) and Guzman-Diaz et al. (2021) are accurate.
    Used for dereddening and for normalized luminosities such as L[NeII]/L* throughout Section 3.1.
  • domain assumption The Pontoppidan et al. (2010) H2O contamination criterion correctly identifies whether [NeIII] is blended with water lines.
    The absence of H2O complexes exceeding 3.5-sigma is used to validate [NeIII] detections in Section 3.1.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Analysis of Forbidden Neon Emission lines in HAeBe Stars using Spitzer IRS spectra." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/LNHWKUUU

@misc{pith2026250601036,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Analysis of Forbidden Neon Emission lines in HAeBe Stars using Spitzer IRS spectra},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/LNHWKUUU}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2506.01036}
}
abstract

We analyzed high-resolution mid-infrared spectra of 78 well-known Herbig Ae/Be (HAeBe) stars using Spitzer InfraRed Spectrograph data, focusing on the detection of [Ne {\sc II}] and [Ne {\sc III}] emission lines as indicators of ionized outflows or disk winds. Emission from [Ne {\sc II}] at 12.81 $\mu$m or [Ne {\sc III}] at 15.55 $\mu$m was identified in 25 sources, constituting the largest sample of HAeBe stars with these detected lines. Our analysis revealed a higher detection frequency of [Ne {\sc II}] in sources with lower relative accretion luminosity (L$_{acc}$/L$_*$ $<$ 0.1), suggesting a connection to the disk dispersal phase. We examined correlations between neon lines and various spectral features and investigated [Ne {\sc III}]-to-[Ne {\sc II}] line flux ratios to explore potential emission mechanisms. Neon emission is predominantly observed in Group I sources (75\%), where their flared disk geometry likely contributes to the observed emission, potentially originating from the irradiated disk atmosphere. Interestingly, we also find that Group II sources exhibit a higher median relative [Ne\,\textsc{ii}] line luminosity (L$_\mathrm{[Ne\,II]}$/L$_*$), suggesting enhanced photoevaporation rates possibly associated with their more settled disk structures. However, larger samples and higher-resolution spectra are required to confirm this trend definitively. The high detection rate of the [Fe {\sc II}] and [S {\sc III}] lines, commonly associated with EUV-dominated regions, alongside a [Ne {\sc III}]-to-[Ne {\sc II}] emission ratio greater than 0.1 in sources where both lines detected, suggests that EUV radiation is the primary driver of neon emission in our sample.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2506.01036 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. The figure presents the continuum-subtracted spectra for three exemplary sources—MWC 878, PDS 211, and V1686 Cyg—in the left panels, highlighting the [Ne II], [Ne III], [Fe II], and [S III] line regions in red, green, blue, and orange, respectively. The corresponding zoomed-in sections of these regions are displayed on the right panels, with detected lines fitted using Gaussian profiles shown in maroon. Non-detectio… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. The figure illustrates the variation of 𝐿[𝑁𝑒 𝐼𝐼 ] with spectral types in the upper panel, while the lower panel presents the ratio 𝐿[𝑁𝑒 𝐼𝐼 ]/𝐿∗ as a function of spectral type. A total of 41 TTS were included based on the availability of data and spectral parameters compiled from Baldovin-Saavedra et al. (2011); Güdel et al. (2010); Espaillat et al. (2012); Flaccomio et al. (2009). Blue circle markers represent sourc… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. The figure represents the distribution of sources with detected neon emission lines across their spectral types. The brown bars represent sources with only [Ne II] emission, the cyan bars represent sources with both [Ne II] and [Ne III] emission, and the single red bar represents the source with only [Ne III] detection [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (5 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: The figure shows the distribution of 𝐿[𝑁𝑒 𝐼𝐼 ]/𝐿∗ of HAeBe stars as a function of 𝐿𝑎𝑐𝑐/𝐿∗. Solid and open circle markers denote sources with and without neon detection, respectively, with 3𝜎 values plotted as upper limits. The red dash-dot line represents the 𝐿𝑎𝑐𝑐/𝐿∗ =…
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: The figure illustrates the distribution of 𝐿[𝑁𝑒 𝐼𝐼 ]/𝐿∗ of HAeBe stars as a function of 𝐿𝑋/𝐿∗. Orange star and grey square markers denote sources for which 𝐿𝑋 values were taken from Chandra and XMM-Newton or eROSITA, respectively. Solid and open markers represent sourc…
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: (a) The figure depicts the distribution of 𝐿[𝑁𝑒 𝐼𝐼 ]/𝐿∗ of HAeBe stars as a function of n(2−25) index. The solid and open blue symbols represent Ne line detection and non-detection, respectively. The classification of YSOs into Class I, Flat spectrum, Class II, and Cla…
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: The figure shows the distribution of 𝐿[𝑁𝑒 𝐼𝐼 ]/𝐿∗ of HAeBe stars as a function of 𝐿[𝐹𝑒 𝐼𝐼 ] /𝐿∗, 𝐿[𝑆 𝐼𝐼𝐼 ] /𝐿∗ and 𝐿[𝑂 𝐼 ] /𝐿∗, with the black dashed line representing the one-to-one correlation for comparison. The solid and open circle markers represent sources with a…
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: The figure shows the distribution of [Ne III]-to-[Ne II] line flux ratio as a function of 𝑇𝑒 𝑓 𝑓 . The blue circle and red triangle markers represent HAeBe stars and TTS, respectively. The yellow square markers represent the sample of O-type YSOs from Simpson et al. (2…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

132 extracted references · 38 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    write newline

    " write newline "" before.all 'output.state := FUNCTION fin.entry write newline FUNCTION new.block output.state before.all = 'skip after.block 'output.state := if FUNCTION new.sentence output.state after.block = 'skip output.state before.all = 'skip after.sentence 'output.state := if if FUNCTION not #0 #1 if FUNCTION and 'skip pop #0 if FUNCTION or pop #1...

  2. [2]

    M., Fairlamb J

    Ababakr K. M., Fairlamb J. R., Oudmaijer R. D., van den Ancker M. E., 2015, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stv1483 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015MNRAS.452.2566A 452, 2566

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stv1483 2015

  3. [3]

    Acke van den Ancker, M. E. Dullemond, C. P. 2005, @doi [A&A] 10.1051/0004-6361:20042484 , 436, 209

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20042484 2005

  4. [4]

    C., Ádámkovics M., Carr J

    Adams S. C., Ádámkovics M., Carr J. S., Najita J. R., Brittain S. D., 2019, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal] 10.3847/1538-4357/aaf9a4 , 871, 173

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aaf9a4 2019

  5. [5]

    Bujarrabal, V

    Alcolea Neri, R. Bujarrabal, V. 2007, @doi [A&A] 10.1051/0004-6361:20066956 , 468, L41

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20066956 2007

  6. [6]

    D., 2008, @doi [ ] 10.1111/j.1745-3933.2008.00556.x , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2008MNRAS.391L..64A 391, L64

    Alexander R. D., 2008, @doi [ ] 10.1111/j.1745-3933.2008.00556.x , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2008MNRAS.391L..64A 391, L64

    arXiv 2008

  7. [7]

    D., Clarke C

    Alexander R. D., Clarke C. J., Pringle J. E., 2005, @doi [ ] 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2005.08786.x , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2005MNRAS.358..283A 358, 283

    arXiv 2005

  8. [9]

    K., West A

    Allard F., Homeier D., Freytag B., 2011, in Johns-Krull C., Browning M. K., West A. A., eds, Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series Vol. 448, 16th Cambridge Workshop on Cool Stars, Stellar Systems, and the Sun. p. 91 ( @eprint arXiv 1011.5405 ), @doi 10.48550/arXiv.1011.5405

    arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.1011.5405 2011

Show all 132 references
  1. [10]

    Allard F., Homeier D., Freytag B., 2012, @doi [Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London Series A] 10.1098/rsta.2011.0269 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2012RSPTA.370.2765A 370, 2765

    2012

  2. [11]

    S., Manoj P., Narang M., Chavali M., 2024, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stae938 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024MNRAS.530.3020A 530, 3020

    Anilkumar H., Mathew B., Jithesh V., Kartha S. S., Manoj P., Narang M., Chavali M., 2024, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stae938 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024MNRAS.530.3020A 530, 3020

    2024 doi

  3. [12]

    Antonellini et al., 2016, @doi [A&A] 10.1051/0004-6361/201526787 , 585, A61

    2016 doi

  4. [13]

    A., 1996, in Jacoby G

    Arnaud K. A., 1996, in Jacoby G. H., Barnes J., eds, Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series Vol. 101, Astronomical Data Analysis Software and Systems V. p. 17

    1996

  5. [14]

    S., Narang M., 2023, @doi [Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society] 10.1093/mnras/stad1511 , 523, 1601

    Arun R., Mathew B., Manoj P., Maheswar G., Shridharan B., Kartha S. S., Narang M., 2023, @doi [Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society] 10.1093/mnras/stad1511 , 523, 1601

    2023 doi

  6. [15]

    J., Scott P., 2009, @doi [ ] 10.1146/annurev.astro.46.060407.145222 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2009ARA&A..47..481A 47, 481

    Asplund M., Grevesse N., Sauval A. J., Scott P., 2009, @doi [ ] 10.1146/annurev.astro.46.060407.145222 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2009ARA&A..47..481A 47, 481

    2009

  7. [16]

    Astropy Collaboration et al., 2022, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/ac7c74 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2022ApJ...935..167A 935, 167

    2022 doi

  8. [17]

    Babel J., Montmerle T., 1997, , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1997A&A...323..121B 323, 121

    1997

  9. [18]

    S., et al., 2024, @doi [The Astronomical Journal] 10.3847/1538-3881/ad22e1 , 167, 127

    Bajaj N. S., et al., 2024, @doi [The Astronomical Journal] 10.3847/1538-3881/ad22e1 , 167, 127

    2024 doi

  10. [19]

    Baldovin-Saavedra C., et al., 2011, @doi [Astronomy & amp; Astrophysics] 10.1051/0004-6361/201015622 , 528, A22

    2011 doi

  11. [20]

    M., Skinner S

    Baldovin-Saavedra C., Audard M., Carmona A., G \"u del M., Briggs K., Rebull L. M., Skinner S. L., Ercolano B., 2012, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201118329 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2012A&A...543A..30B 543, A30

    2012 doi

  12. [21]

    D., Cuello N., Pinte C., Price D

    Ballabio G., Nealon R., Alexander R. D., Cuello N., Pinte C., Price D. J., 2021, @doi [Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society] 10.1093/mnras/stab922 , 504, 888

    2021 doi

  13. [22]

    J., Tennyson J., Harris G

    Barber R. J., Tennyson J., Harris G. J., Tolchenov R. N., 2006, @doi [ ] 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2006.10184.x , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2006MNRAS.368.1087B 368, 1087

    2006

  14. [23]

    Bastian U., Mundt R., 1979, , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1979A&AS...36...57B 36, 57

    1979

  15. [24]

    Bayo A., Rodrigo C., Barrado Y Navascu \'e s D., Solano E., Guti \'e rrez R., Morales-Calder \'o n M., Allard F., 2008, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361:200810395 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2008A&A...492..277B 492, 277

    2008 doi

  16. [25]

    Benisty M., et al., 2013, @doi [Astronomy and Astrophysics] 10.1051/0004-6361/201219893 , 555

    2013 doi

  17. [26]

    McGraw-Hill Education, https://books.google.co.in/books?id=0poQAQAAIAAJ

    Bevington P., Robinson D., 2003, Data Reduction and Error Analysis for the Physical Sciences. McGraw-Hill Education, https://books.google.co.in/books?id=0poQAQAAIAAJ

    2003

  18. [27]

    Bouwman J., Meeus G., de Koter A., Hony S., Dominik C., Waters L. B. F. M., 2001, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361:20010878 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2001A&A...375..950B 375, 950

    2001 doi

  19. [28]

    R., Gould R

    Burbidge G. R., Gould R. J., Pottasch S. R., 1963, @doi [Astrophysical Journal (U.S.)] 10.1086/147697

    1963 doi

  20. [29]

    E., Dalgarno A., 1980, @doi [ ] 10.1086/158395 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1980ApJ...241..838B 241, 838

    Butler S. E., Dalgarno A., 1980, @doi [ ] 10.1086/158395 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1980ApJ...241..838B 241, 838

    1980 doi

  21. [30]

    A., Clayton G

    Cardelli J. A., Clayton G. C., Mathis J. S., 1989, @doi [ ] 10.1086/167900 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1989ApJ...345..245C 345, 245

    1989 doi

  22. [31]

    A., Krause M

    Carlson T. A., Krause M. O., 1965, @doi [Phys. Rev.] 10.1103/PhysRev.137.A1655 , 137, A1655

    1965 doi

  23. [32]

    D'Alessio P., Calvet N., Hartmann L., Lizano S., Cant \'o J., 1999, @doi [ ] 10.1086/308103 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1999ApJ...527..893D 527, 893

    1999 doi

  24. [33]

    P., Dominik C., 2004, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361:20031768 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2004A&A...417..159D 417, 159

    Dullemond C. P., Dominik C., 2004, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361:20031768 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2004A&A...417..159D 417, 159

    2004 doi

  25. [34]

    Earl N., et al., 2023, astropy/specutils: v1.12.0, @doi 10.5281/zenodo.10016569 , https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.10016569

    2023 doi

  26. [35]

    J., Drake J

    Ercolano B., Clarke C. J., Drake J. J., 2009, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal] 10.1088/0004-637X/699/2/1639 , 699, 1639

    2009 doi

  27. [36]

    Espaillat C., et al., 2007, @doi [ ] 10.1086/520879 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2007ApJ...664L.111E 664, L111

    2007 doi

  28. [37]

    Espaillat C., et al., 2012, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal] 10.1088/0004-637X/762/1/62 , 762, 62

    2012 doi

  29. [38]

    C., et al., 2023, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal Letters] 10.3847/2041-8213/ad023d , 958, L4

    Espaillat C. C., et al., 2023, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal Letters] 10.3847/2041-8213/ad023d , 958, L4

    2023 doi

  30. [39]

    R., Oudmaijer R

    Fairlamb J. R., Oudmaijer R. D., Mendigutia I., Ilee J. D., van den Ancker M. E., 2016, @doi [Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society] 10.1093/mnras/stw2643 , 464, 4721

    2016 doi

  31. [40]

    P., Dent W

    Fedele D., Pascucci I., Brittain S., Kamp I., Woitke P., Williams J. P., Dent W. R. F., Thi W.-F., 2011, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal] 10.1088/0004-637X/732/2/106 , 732, 106

    2011 doi

  32. [41]

    Sciortino, S

    Flaccomio Stelzer, B. Sciortino, S. Micela, G. Pillitteri, I. Testi, L. 2009, @doi [A&A] 10.1051/0004-6361/200810972 , 505, 695

    2009 doi

  33. [42]

    Gabriel C., 2017, in Ness J.-U., Migliari S., eds, The X-ray Universe 2017. p. 84

    2017

  34. [43]

    V., et al., 2005, @doi [ ] 10.1086/432092 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2005ApJS..160..319G 160, 319

    Getman K. V., et al., 2005, @doi [ ] 10.1086/432092 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2005ApJS..160..319G 160, 319

    2005 doi

  35. [44]

    Ghosh A., et al., 2023, @doi [Journal of Astrophysics and Astronomy] 10.1007/s12036-023-09939-7 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023JApA...44...50G 44, 50

    2023 doi

  36. [45]

    E., Najita J

    Glassgold A. E., Najita J. R., Igea J., 2007, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal] 10.1086/510013 , 656, 515

    2007 doi

  37. [46]

    W., 1993, @doi [ ] 10.1086/191788 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1993ApJS...86..499G 86, 499

    Goodrich R. W., 1993, @doi [ ] 10.1086/191788 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1993ApJS...86..499G 86, 499

    1993 doi

  38. [47]

    P., Hollenbach D., 2009, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal] 10.1088/0004-637X/705/2/1237 , 705, 1237

    Gorti U., Dullemond C. P., Hollenbach D., 2009, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal] 10.1088/0004-637X/705/2/1237 , 705, 1237

    2009 doi

  39. [48]

    P., Wilking B

    Greene T. P., Wilking B. A., Andre P., Young E. T., Lada C. J., 1994, @doi [ ] 10.1086/174763 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1994ApJ...434..614G 434, 614

    1994 doi

  40. [49]

    G., Donati J

    Gregory S. G., Donati J. F., Morin J., Hussain G. A. J., Mayne N. J., Hillenbrand L. A., Jardine M., 2012, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/755/2/97 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2012ApJ...755...97G 755, 97

    2012 doi

  41. [50]

    J., 1998, @doi [ ] 10.1023/A:1005161325181 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1998SSRv...85..161G 85, 161

    Grevesse N., Sauval A. J., 1998, @doi [ ] 10.1023/A:1005161325181 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1998SSRv...85..161G 85, 161

    1998 doi

  42. [51]

    E., et al., 2000, @doi [Advances in Space Research] 10.1016/S0273-1177(99)00854-6 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2000AdSpR..25..853G 25, 853

    Griffiths R. E., et al., 2000, @doi [Advances in Space Research] 10.1016/S0273-1177(99)00854-6 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2000AdSpR..25..853G 25, 853

    2000 doi

  43. [52]

    P., Kozlova O

    Grinin V. P., Kozlova O. V., Natta A., Ilyin I., Tuominen I., Rostopchina A. N., Shakhovskoy D. N., 2001, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361:20011280 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2001A&A...379..482G 379, 482

    2001 doi

  44. [53]

    P., Rostopchina A

    Grinin V. P., Rostopchina A. N., Barsunova O. Y., Demidova T. V., 2010, @doi [Astrophysics] 10.1007/s10511-010-9128-7 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2010Ap.....53..367G 53, 367

    2010 doi

  45. [54]

    G \"u del M., et al., 2010, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/200913971 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2010A&A...519A.113G 519, A113

    2010 doi

  46. [55]

    M., Schmitt J

    G \"u nther H. M., Schmitt J. H. M. M., 2009, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361:200811007 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2009A&A...494.1041G 494, 1041

    2009 doi

  47. [56]

    Guzman-Diaz J., et al., 2021, @doi [VizieR Online Data Catalog] 10.26093/cds/vizier.36500182 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2021yCat..36500182G pp J/A+A/650/A182

    2021 doi

  48. [57]

    E., 1992, @doi [ ] 10.1086/191716 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1992ApJS...82..285H 82, 285

    Hamann F., Persson S. E., 1992, @doi [ ] 10.1086/191716 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1992ApJS...82..285H 82, 285

    1992 doi

  49. [58]

    Hartigan P., Raymond J., Hartmann L., 1987, @doi [ ] 10.1086/165204 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1987ApJ...316..323H 316, 323

    1987 doi

  50. [59]

    Hartigan P., Edwards S., Ghandour L., 1995, @doi [ ] 10.1086/176344 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1995ApJ...452..736H 452, 736

    1995 doi

  51. [60]

    Hartmann L., Calvet N., Gullbring E., D'Alessio P., 1998, @doi [ ] 10.1086/305277 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1998ApJ...495..385H 495, 385

    1998 doi

  52. [61]

    H., 1960, @doi [ ] 10.1086/190050 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1960ApJS....4..337H 4, 337

    Herbig G. H., 1960, @doi [ ] 10.1086/190050 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1960ApJS....4..337H 4, 337

    1960 doi

  53. [62]

    Hern \'a ndez J., Calvet N., Brice \ n o C., Hartmann L., Berlind P., 2004, @doi [ ] 10.1086/381908 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2004AJ....127.1682H 127, 1682

    2004 doi

  54. [63]

    C., Keto E., 2007, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal] 10.1086/511260 , 658, 314

    Ho L. C., Keto E., 2007, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal] 10.1086/511260 , 658, 314

    2007 doi

  55. [64]

    Hollenbach D., Gorti U., 2009, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal] 10.1088/0004-637X/703/2/1203 , 703, 1203

    2009 doi

  56. [65]

    Hollenbach D., Mckee 1989, @doi [Astrophysical Journal; (USA)] 10.1086/167595 , 342

    1989 doi

  57. [66]

    R., et al., 2004, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series] 10.1086/423134 , 154, 18

    Houck J. R., et al., 2004, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series] 10.1086/423134 , 154, 18

    2004 doi

  58. [68]

    Imanishi K., Nakajima H., Tsujimoto M., Koyama K., Tsuboi Y., 2003, @doi [ ] 10.1093/pasj/55.3.653 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2003PASJ...55..653I 55, 653

    2003 doi

  59. [69]

    J., Neufeld D

    Kaufman M. J., Neufeld D. A., 1996, @doi [ ] 10.1086/176683 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1996ApJ...456..611K 456, 611

    1996 doi

  60. [70]

    H., et al., 2016, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series] 10.3847/0067-0049/226/1/8 , 226, 8

    Kim K. H., et al., 2016, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series] 10.3847/0067-0049/226/1/8 , 226, 8

    2016 doi

  61. [71]

    Koumpia et al., 2019, @doi [A&A] 10.1051/0004-6361/201834624 , 623, L5

    2019 doi

  62. [72]

    D., Weigelt G., 2012, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal Letters] 10.1088/2041-8205/746/1/L2 , 746, L2

    Kraus S., Calvet N., Hartmann L., Hofmann K.-H., Kreplin A., Monnier J. D., Weigelt G., 2012, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal Letters] 10.1088/2041-8205/746/1/L2 , 746, L2

    2012 doi

  63. [73]

    O., Vestal M

    Krause M. O., Vestal M. L., Johnston W. H., Carlson T. A., 1964, @doi [Phys. Rev.] 10.1103/PhysRev.133.A385 , 133, A385

    1964 doi

  64. [74]

    J., 1987, in Peimbert M., Jugaku J., eds, IAU Symposium Vol

    Lada C. J., 1987, in Peimbert M., Jugaku J., eds, IAU Symposium Vol. 115, Star Forming Regions. p. 1

    1987

  65. [75]

    F., Blake G

    Lahuis F., van Dishoeck E. F., Blake G. A., Neal J. Evans I., Kessler-Silacci J. E., Pontoppidan K. M., 2007, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal] 10.1086/518931 , 665, 492

    2007 doi

  66. [76]

    J., Spoon H

    Lebouteiller V., Barry D. J., Spoon H. W. W., Bernard-Salas J., Sloan G. C., Houck J. R., Weedman D. W., 2011, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0067-0049/196/1/8 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2011ApJS..196....8L 196, 8

    2011 doi

  67. [77]

    J., Goes C., Sloan G

    Lebouteiller V., Barry D. J., Goes C., Sloan G. C., Spoon H. W. W., Weedman D. W., Bernard-Salas J., Houck J. R., 2015, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series] 10.1088/0067-0049/218/2/21 , 218, 21

    2015 doi

  68. [78]

    A., 1976, @doi [ ] 10.1086/130015 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1976PASP...88..712L 88, 712

    Levato H., Abt H. A., 1976, @doi [ ] 10.1086/130015 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1976PASP...88..712L 88, 712

    1976 doi

  69. [79]

    M., 2014, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/796/2/74 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014ApJ...796...74L 796, 74

    Li D., Mari \ n as N., Telesco C. M., 2014, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/796/2/74 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014ApJ...796...74L 796, 74

    2014 doi

  70. [80]

    M., Herczeg G

    Liu C.-F., Shang H., Walter F. M., Herczeg G. J., 2014, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal] 10.1088/0004-637X/786/2/99 , 786, 99

    2014 doi

  71. [81]

    C., 2002, Bulletin of the Astronomical Society of India, https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2002BASI...30..657M 30, 657

    Manoj P., Maheswar G., Bhatt H. C., 2002, Bulletin of the Astronomical Society of India, https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2002BASI...30..657M 30, 657

    2002

  72. [82]

    Manoj P., et al., 2011, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series] 10.1088/0067-0049/193/1/11 , 193, 11

    2011 doi

  73. [83]

    Mathew B., et al., 2018, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal] 10.3847/1538-4357/aab3d8 , 857, 30

    2018 doi

  74. [84]

    Meeus Waters, L. B. F. M. Bouwman, J. van den Ancker, M. E. Waelkens, C. Malfait, K. 2001, @doi [A&A] 10.1051/0004-6361:20000144 , 365, 476

    2001 doi

  75. [85]

    Mehner et al., 2016, @doi [A&A] 10.1051/0004-6361/201527180 , 585, A81

    2016 doi

  76. [86]

    E., Najita J

    Meijerink R., Glassgold A. E., Najita J. R., 2008, @doi [ ] 10.1086/527411 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2008ApJ...676..518M 676, 518

    2008 doi

  77. [87]

    D., Rigliaco E., Fairlamb J

    Mendigutía I., Oudmaijer R. D., Rigliaco E., Fairlamb J. R., Calvet N., Muzerolle J., Cunningham N., Lumsden S. L., 2015, @doi [Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society] 10.1093/mnras/stv1540 , 452, 2837

    2015 doi

  78. [88]

    Merloni A., et al., 2024, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/202347165 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024A&A...682A..34M 682, A34

    2024 doi

  79. [89]

    R., Carr J

    Najita J. R., Carr J. S., Strom S. E., Watson D. M., Pascucci I., Hollenbach D., Gorti U., Keller L., 2010, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/712/1/274 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2010ApJ...712..274N 712, 274

    2010 doi

  80. [90]

    Narang M., et al., 2024, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal Letters] 10.3847/2041-8213/ad1de3 , 962, L16

    2024 doi

  81. [91]

    Nisini B., et al., 2024, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal] 10.3847/1538-4357/ad3d5a , 967, 168

    2024 doi

  82. [92]

    Oliveira I., et al., 2010, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/714/1/778 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2010ApJ...714..778O 714, 778

    2010 doi

  83. [93]

    D., Drew J

    Oudmaijer R. D., Drew J. E., 1999, @doi [ ] 10.1046/j.1365-8711.1999.02383.x , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1999MNRAS.305..166O 305, 166

    1999

  84. [94]

    Pascucci I., et al., 2007, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal] 10.1086/518535 , 663, 383

    2007 doi

  85. [95]

    Pascucci I., et al., 2011, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/736/1/13 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2011ApJ...736...13P 736, 13

    2011 doi

  86. [96]

    P., Brooks K

    Pascucci I., Ricci L., Gorti U., Hollenbach D., Hendler N. P., Brooks K. J., Contreras Y., 2014, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/795/1/1 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014ApJ...795....1P 795, 1

    2014 doi

  87. [97]

    Pascucci I., et al., 2020, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal] 10.3847/1538-4357/abba3c , 903, 78

    2020 doi

  88. [98]

    K., 2023, in Inutsuka S., Aikawa Y., Muto T., Tomida K., Tamura M., eds, Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series Vol

    Pascucci I., Cabrit S., Edwards S., Gorti U., Gressel O., Suzuki T. K., 2023, in Inutsuka S., Aikawa Y., Muto T., Tomida K., Tamura M., eds, Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series Vol. 534, Protostars and Planets VII. p. 567 ( @eprint arXiv 2203.10068 ), @doi 10...

    2023 doi arXiv

  89. [99]

    Pogodin M., Malanushenko V., Kozlova O., Tarasova T., Franco G., 2006, @doi [Astronomy & Astrophysics - ASTRON ASTROPHYS] 10.1051/0004-6361:20053704 , 452, 551

    2006 doi

  90. [100]

    M., Salyk C., Blake G

    Pontoppidan K. M., Salyk C., Blake G. A., Meijerink R., Carr J. S., Najita J., 2010, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/720/1/887 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2010ApJ...720..887P 720, 887

    2010 doi

  91. [101]

    H., ed., Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series Vol

    Predehl P., et al., 2007, in Siegmund O. H., ed., Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series Vol. 6686, UV, X-Ray, and Gamma-Ray Space Instrumentation for Astronomy XV. p. 668617, @doi 10.1117/12.733583

    2007 doi

  92. [102]

    Rab C., Baldovin-Saavedra C., Dionatos O., Vorobyov E., G \"u del M., 2016, @doi [ ] 10.1007/s11214-016-0325-5 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2016SSRv..205....3R 205, 3

    2016 doi

  93. [103]

    P., Ferreira J., 2021, @doi [ ] 10.1016/j.newar.2021.101615 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2021NewAR..9301615R 93, 101615

    Ray T. P., Ferreira J., 2021, @doi [ ] 10.1016/j.newar.2021.101615 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2021NewAR..9301615R 93, 101615

    2021

  94. [104]

    Rigliaco E., Pascucci I., Gorti U., Edwards S., Hollenbach D., 2013, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal] 10.1088/0004-637X/772/1/60 , 772, 60

    2013 doi

  95. [105]

    Rigliaco E., et al., 2015, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/801/1/31 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015ApJ...801...31R 801, 31

    2015 doi

  96. [106]

    M., et al., 2010, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201014856 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2010A&A...522A.113R 522, A113

    Rucinski S. M., et al., 2010, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201014856 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2010A&A...522A.113R 522, A113

    2010 doi

  97. [107]

    E., 1996, @doi [ ] 10.1007/BF00645150 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1996Ap&SS.236..285R 236, 285

    Ryter C. E., 1996, @doi [ ] 10.1007/BF00645150 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1996Ap&SS.236..285R 236, 285

    1996 doi

  98. [108]

    G., et al., 2012, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal] 10.1088/0004-637X/747/2/142 , 747, 142

    Sacco G. G., et al., 2012, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal] 10.1088/0004-637X/747/2/142 , 747, 142

    2012 doi

  99. [109]

    M., Blake G

    Salyk C., Pontoppidan K. M., Blake G. A., Najita J. R., Carr J. S., 2011, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal] 10.1088/0004-637X/731/2/130 , 731, 130

    2011 doi

  100. [110]

    Sarmiento M. H., Ar \'e valo M., Arviset C., Baines D., Colomo E., Loiseau N., Merin B., Salgado J., 2019, in Molinaro M., Shortridge K., Pasian F., eds, Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series Vol. 521, Astronomical Data Analysis Software and Systems XXVI. p. 104

    2019

  101. [111]

    F., 2011, @doi [Astronomy &amp Astrophysics] 10.1051/0004-6361/201016396 , 533, A54

    Schütz O., Meeus G., Carmona A., Juhász A., Sterzik M. F., 2011, @doi [Astronomy &amp Astrophysics] 10.1051/0004-6361/201016396 , 533, A54

    2011 doi

  102. [112]

    D., et al., 2024, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-3881/ad34ae , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024AJ....167..223S 167, 223

    Sellek A. D., et al., 2024, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-3881/ad34ae , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024AJ....167..223S 167, 223

    2024 doi

  103. [113]

    E., Lin W.-C., Liu C.-F

    Shang H., Glassgold A. E., Lin W.-C., Liu C.-F. J., 2010, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal] 10.1088/0004-637X/714/2/1733 , 714, 1733

    2010 doi

  104. [114]

    P., Cotera A

    Simpson J. P., Cotera A. S., Burton M. G., Cunningham M. R., Lo N., Bains I., 2011, @doi [Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society] 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2011.19686.x , 419, 211

    2011

  105. [115]

    K., Brickhouse N

    Smith R. K., Brickhouse N. S., Liedahl D. A., Raymond J. C., 2001, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal] 10.1086/322992 , 556, L91

    2001 doi

  106. [116]

    Fischer, C

    Sperling Eislöffel, J. Fischer, C. Nisini, B. Giannini, T. Krabbe, A. 2021, @doi [A&A] 10.1051/0004-6361/202040048 , 650, A173

    2021 doi

  107. [117]

    M., Hogerheijde M

    Stapper L. M., Hogerheijde M. R., van Dishoeck E. F., Paneque-Carre \ n o T., 2023, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/202245137 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023A&A...669A.158S 669, A158

    2023 doi

  108. [118]

    M., et al., 2024, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/202347271 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024A&A...682A.149S 682, A149

    Stapper L. M., et al., 2024, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/202347271 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024A&A...682A.149S 682, A149

    2024 doi

  109. [119]

    Str \"u der L., et al., 2001, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361:20000066 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2001A&A...365L..18S 365, L18

    2001 doi

  110. [120]

    Sturm B., et al., 2013, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201220243 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2013A&A...553A...5S 553, A5

    2013 doi

  111. [121]

    Szulágyi J., Pascucci I., Ábrahám P., Apai D., Bouwman J., Moór A., 2012, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal] 10.1088/0004-637X/759/1/47 , 759, 47

    2012 doi

  112. [122]

    Turner M. J. L., et al., 2001, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361:20000087 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2001A&A...365L..27T 365, L27

    2001 doi

  113. [123]

    arXiv:2402.04343

    Tychoniec ., et al., 2024, @doi [arXiv e-prints] 10.48550/arXiv.2402.04343 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024arXiv240204343T p. arXiv:2402.04343

    2024 doi arXiv

  114. [124]

    Varga J., Gerj \'a k T., \'A brah \'a m P., Chen L., Gab \'a nyi K., K \'o sp \'a l \'A ., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stz486 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019MNRAS.485.3112V 485, 3112

    2019 doi

  115. [125]

    Vernet J., et al., 2011, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201117752 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2011A&A...536A.105V 536, A105

    2011 doi

  116. [126]

    D., Baines D., Mendigut \' a I., P \'e rez-Mart \' nez R., 2018, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201832870 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018A&A...620A.128V 620, A128

    Vioque M., Oudmaijer R. D., Baines D., Mendigut \' a I., P \'e rez-Mart \' nez R., 2018, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201832870 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018A&A...620A.128V 620, A128

    2018 doi

  117. [127]

    H., 1990, @doi [ ] 10.1086/132752 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1990PASP..102.1217W 102, 1217

    Waller W. H., 1990, @doi [ ] 10.1086/132752 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1990PASP..102.1217W 102, 1217

    1990 doi

  118. [128]

    C., Tananbaum H

    Weisskopf M. C., Tananbaum H. D., Van Speybroeck L. P., O'Dell S. L., 2000, in Truemper J. E., Aschenbach B., eds, Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series Vol. 4012, X-Ray Optics, Instruments, and Missions III. pp 2--16 ( @eprint arXiv astro...

    2000 arXiv

  119. [129]

    W., et al., 2004, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series] 10.1086/422992 , 154, 1

    Werner M. W., et al., 2004, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series] 10.1086/422992 , 154, 1

    2004 doi

  120. [130]

    E., Oudmaijer R

    Wheelwright H. E., Oudmaijer R. D., Goodwin S. P., 2010, @doi [ ] 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2009.15708.x , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2010MNRAS.401.1199W 401, 1199

    2010

  121. [131]

    E., Vink J

    Wheelwright H. E., Vink J. S., Oudmaijer R. D., Drew J. E., 2011, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201116996 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2011A&A...532A..28W 532, A28

    2011 doi

  122. [132]

    A., 1989, @doi [ ] 10.1086/132427 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1989PASP..101..229W 101, 229

    Wilking B. A., 1989, @doi [ ] 10.1086/132427 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1989PASP..101..229W 101, 229

    1989 doi

  123. [133]

    Wilms J., Allen A., McCray R., 2000, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal] 10.1086/317016 , 542, 914

    2000 doi

  124. [134]

    Zinnecker H., Preibisch T., 1994, , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1994A&A...292..152Z 292, 152

    1994

Pith tools

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