Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 5 minor 65 references

The Effect of Luminosity Outbursts on the Abundance of Pebbles and Their Ice Mantles in Protoplanetary Disks

T0 review · 2 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-15 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Luminosity outbursts can cut a protoplanetary disk's total pebble mass by about half, simulations show.

desk verdict Self-consistent MRI outbursts in FEOSAD halve pebble mass under the instantaneous-destruction scenario; the 2D spiral desorption pattern is the real new result. read the letter →

arxiv 2505.07718 v1 pith:PSNKVDFP submitted 2025-05-12 astro-ph.EP astro-ph.SR

Anastasiia Topchieva , Tamara Molyarova , Eduard Vorobyov This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.EPastro-ph.SR
keywords protoplanetarydiskspebblesluminosityoutburstsicemantlessnowlinesdustfragmentationFUOrionismagnetorotationalinstability
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 argues that the flare-like luminosity outbursts experienced by young stars in their first few hundred thousand years can cut the total mass of pebbles in the surrounding disk by about a factor of two. The mechanism is not the direct heating itself but the loss of ice mantles: when water ice evaporates from dust aggregates, the grains lose the glue that let them survive collisions, fragment into monomers, and the fragmentation barrier drops. The paper uses global 2D simulations of a self-gravitating disk, including dust growth, drift, and the adsorption/desorption of H2O, CO2, CH4, and CO, to trace pebbles throughout disk formation and early evolution. It also finds that the water snowline is relatively stable because it sits in the viscously heated inner region, while the other snowlines move much more; mantle desorption is a two-dimensional, spiral-shaped phenomenon. The result matters because pebbles are the pipeline to planetesimals and planetary cores, so outbursts may temporarily choke that pipeline.

What carries the argument

The mechanism carrying the argument is the coupling between ice mantle chemistry and the dust fragmentation barrier. The code sets a maximum grown-dust size $a_{\rm frag}$ that depends on the fragmentation velocity $v_{\rm frag}$; ice-mantled grains have $v_{\rm frag}=5\,\mathrm{m\,s^{-1}}$, bare grains have $v_{\rm frag}=0.5\,\mathrm{m\,s^{-1}}$. When a luminosity outburst heats the disk and evaporates mantles, $v_{\rm frag}$ drops by an order of magnitude, the fragmentation barrier $a_{\rm frag}$ changes abruptly, and the model recycles all dust exceeding the new barrier into small dust. The outbursts themselves are produced self-consistently in the FEOSAD thin-disk hydrodynamics code through a layered MRI-effective $\alpha$ parameterization that creates episodic accretion luminosity. Pebbles are defined as grown dust with Stokes number $St>0.01$ and size above 0.05 cm, and their ice masses are tracked via adsorption and desorption of H2O, CO2, CH4, and CO.

What would settle it

Run the same disk model with the erosion-limited destruction scheme of Stammler & Birnstiel (2022) and compare the total pebble mass through an outburst: if the factor-of-two drop does not appear, the instantaneous-destruction assumption is the deciding ingredient. Observational check: monitor a freshly outbursting FUor object with millimeter-wavelength spectral-index mapping across the snowline region; if the largest grains persist through the outburst, gradual erosion is favored.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that a typical MRI-driven luminosity outburst in a young self-gravitating disk reduces the total mass of pebbles by roughly a factor of two, by thermally desorbing water ice mantles and thereby destroying the aggregates that the mantles held together. In the FEOSAD simulations, the disk loses about half its pebble mass during an outburst of roughly two hundred years; pebble growth then rebuilds the population over several thousand years, much longer than the days-to-decades freeze-out timescales of the volatiles. The paper also finds that snowline shifts are asymmetric: the H2O snowline barely moves because it sits in the viscously heated region inside about 7 au, while CO2, CH4, and CO snowlines, which lie in irradiation-dominated regions, move outward strongly. Mantle desorption takes place in a non-axisymmetric spiral pattern, so the pebble mass loss is not simply a radial band but a patterned 2D depletion. These conclusions hold in both a low-mass (0.66 solar mass) and a higher-mass (1.0 solar mass) disk model.

Load-bearing premise

The result depends on the assumption that dust aggregates shatter into monomers the moment their ice mantles evaporate; if destruction instead proceeds gradually through collisions, the pebble-mass drop would be smaller or delayed.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • During an outburst, pebble mass drops by about half and recovers only after several thousand years of coagulation, so the pebble population is depressed for much longer than the roughly 200-year outburst itself.
  • Because water ice is the glue, any process that removes water ice from grains, whether radial drift across the snowline or outburst heating, will suppress pebble numbers in the affected region.
  • Snowline responses to outbursts are not universal: molecules whose snowlines sit in irradiation-heated zones (CO2, CH4, CO) move far more than water's, which sits in the viscously heated zone; interpreting observed snowline shifts therefore requires knowing the local heating regime.
  • The non-axisymmetric, spiral-shaped desorption pattern means that spatially unresolved disk averaging can hide strong local pebble destruction; resolved observations of an outbursting disk should see azimuthal structure in ice tracers and dust size.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If real dust destruction is gradual (erosion) rather than instantaneous, the factor-of-two pebble loss is likely an upper bound; the same outburst could leave more pebbles if aggregates shed mass slowly instead of shattering.
  • With outbursts repeating on roughly 10^5-year timescales and recovery taking roughly 10^3 years, early disks may spend a nontrivial fraction of their lives in a pebble-depleted state, possibly modulating the efficiency of streaming instability and pebble accretion.
  • The paper's own planned bidisperse erosion model would directly test whether the factor-of-two result survives; the instantaneous-destruction assumption is the main uncertainty it flags.
  • The distinction between viscous-heating and irradiation-heating snowline regions implies that young, massive disks should show weak water-snowline shifts during outbursts, whereas older, less massive disks like V883 Ori should show strong shifts; this could be used to age- or mass-date outbursting disks.
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.

Referee Report

2 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper uses the FEOSAD 2D thin-disk hydrodynamics code to simulate the formation and evolution of two protoplanetary disks with different initial core masses, coupling gas dynamics, dust growth and drift, MRI-driven accretion outbursts, and adsorption/desorption of H2O, CO2, CH4, and CO. It focuses on how luminosity outbursts affect snowline positions, ice mantles on grown dust (pebbles), and total pebble mass. The central reported result is that during outbursts the disk-integrated pebble mass drops by roughly a factor of two because water-ice mantles evaporate, the fragmentation velocity drops from 5 to 0.5 m/s, and dust aggregates above the new fragmentation barrier are immediately destroyed into small dust; pebble abundance then recovers on timescales of several thousand years. The paper also reports that CO2, CH4, and CO snowlines shift more than the water snowline, and that ice desorption occurs in non-axisymmetric spiral regions.

Significance. If robust, the half-reduction of the pebble population is significant for planet-formation theory: pebbles are central to streaming-instability planetesimal formation and pebble accretion, so episodic accretion outbursts could modulate the reservoir of pebble-sized solids on thousand-year timescales. The modeling is unusually comprehensive in coupling self-consistent MRI outbursts with multi-species ice chemistry and dust evolution, and the paper is careful to disclose the instantaneous-destruction assumption and the alternative erosion scenario. The non-axisymmetric finding that ice desorbs along spiral arms is a useful, testable prediction. The main caveat is that the quantitative headline depends on a prescribed fragility transition rather than on an emergent collisional outcome; the paper would be strengthened by a conditional framing or an erosion-limited run.

major comments (2)
  1. [Section 2.3] The ≈2× pebble-mass reduction is a direct consequence of the instantaneous-destruction prescription. When ice mantles evaporate, v_frag is reduced from 5 to 0.5 m/s, so a_frag in Eq. (9) drops by a factor of 100, and the implementation sets a_max = a_frag and D = 0, immediately recycling all larger grown dust into small dust. The paper explicitly acknowledges that an erosion-limited destruction scenario (Stammler & Birnstiel 2022) operates on ~10^3 yr timescales and that Houge et al. (2024) favor prolonged destruction for V883 Ori; because the modeled outburst lasts ~200 yr, the erosion scenario would destroy far fewer pebbles. The abstract and the first conclusion bullet state the half-reduction without this caveat, so the headline is scenario-dependent and needs to be qualified there, or supported by an explicit erosion-limited simulation.
  2. [Section 3.1 (Fig. 4)] The paper states that 'similar changes in pebble mass occur during other outbursts' and that the mass decreases 'by a factor of ≈2,' but no statistics over the several dozen outbursts in each model are presented. A median and a measure of scatter (or a histogram of peak-to-trough pebble-mass ratios) would establish that the factor of two is representative, not just a property of the single highlighted event at 244.5 kyr in M1 and the ~340 kyr event in M2.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Fig. 4] The caption should state explicitly which curve corresponds to the pebble surface density Σ_peb from Eq. (14); the text alternates between 'total mass of refractory components' and 'pebble mass,' and the two are not obviously the same quantity.
  2. [Section 2.5] Both models have high disk-to-star mass ratios (0.55 and 0.60) and are gravitationally unstable; the conclusions should either be restricted to this regime or accompanied by a justification for extrapolating to lower-mass, less gravitationally unstable disks.
  3. [Section 2.4] The adopted v_frag values are quoted to one significant figure without uncertainty; since the fragmentation barrier scales as v_frag^2, a short sensitivity statement would help the reader judge how robust the factor-of-two result is to plausible variations of v_frag for icy versus bare grains.
  4. [Section 3.1] The sentence saying 'the first considered luminosity outburst profile and corresponding masses of refractory components are shown in right panels of Fig. 4' should be corrected to match the figure caption, which places the refractory-component curve in the middle panel.
  5. [References] The citation 'Molyarova et al. (2021, see)' in Section 2.4 should point to a specific section or equation if it is intended to justify the adopted v_frag dependence on ice mantles.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the pebble-mass reduction is an emergent simulation outcome of an explicitly stated fragmentation-barrier assumption, not an input restated as a prediction.

full rationale

The paper's central claim is that luminosity outbursts reduce the total pebble mass by roughly a factor of two because ice-mantle evaporation lowers the fragmentation threshold and the model destroys grains above the new barrier. This is a simulation result conditional on an explicitly stated microphysical assumption, not a circular reduction. The v_frag values (5 m/s for ice-covered, 0.5 m/s for bare grains) are adopted from laboratory and prior modeling work and are not fitted to the pebble-mass outcome; the disk-integrated factor of two is an emergent quantity that depends on the computed 2D desorption geometry, as the paper shows in Fig. 6, where only a spiral-shaped region containing about half the pebble mass loses its mantles. The recovery timescale is also obtained from the coagulation evolution in the simulation rather than being a renamed input. The paper explicitly flags the instantaneous-destruction assumption as one of two competing scenarios, cites the alternative erosion-limited treatment, and notes that V883 Ori observations may favor prolonged destruction; this is an acknowledged robustness limitation, not a circularity. The only self-citations (Topchieva et al. 2024, Vorobyov et al. 2022, Molyarova et al. 2021) supply context, model setup, and supporting prior results; they are not used to define the predicted quantity into existence. No equation or definition equates the prediction to the input, and no fitted parameter is relabeled as a discovery. The derivation chain is therefore self-contained in the sense required here: the headline result is a genuine model output, with its known sensitivity to an assumption openly discussed.

Assumptions & free parameters 8 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claims rest on microphysical and subgrid choices (v_frag values, instantaneous destruction, layered MRI alpha, pebble definition thresholds, initial abundances). None of these is fitted to the target result in this paper; they are adopted from laboratory and observational literature. The most fragile is the instantaneous destruction assumption, which the authors themselves flag as scenario-dependent.

free parameters (8)
  • Fragmentation velocity v_frag for ice-covered grains = 5 m/s
    Set in Section 2.4 from laboratory studies; defines the coagulation-fragmentation boundary that sets pebble sizes.
  • Fragmentation velocity v_frag for bare grains = 0.5 m/s
    Set in Section 2.4; the drop from 5 m/s when ice is lost is the direct cause of pebble destruction during outbursts in the model.
  • Active layer surface density Sigma_MRI = 200 g/cm^2
    Parameter in the layered MRI viscosity model (Section 2.2); sets where MRI is active and thus the outburst trigger.
  • Dead-zone alpha (cool) = 1e-5
    Alpha parameter below 1300 K in Section 2.2; controls background viscosity and outburst quiescence.
  • Alpha in MRI-active layer = 1e-3
    Viscosity parameter in MRI-active regions, Section 2.2.
  • Pebble definition thresholds St0 and a_peb,0 = St0 = 0.01, a_peb,0 = 0.05 cm
    Used to identify pebbles in Section 2.3; the computed pebble mass depends on these chosen thresholds.
  • Initial ice abundances H2O:CO2:CO:CH4 = 100:29:29:5
    Initial mantle composition from Oberg et al. (2011), Section 2.4; sets the ice reservoir that evaporates during outbursts.
  • Ice mass fraction relative to refractory material = ≈8.5%
    Sets the total initial ice reservoir on dust, Section 2.4.
assumptions (6)
  • domain assumption Thin-disk (vertically integrated) approximation with local hydrostatic equilibrium for scale height.
    Used throughout the model; reduces 3D disk physics to 2D and affects snowline positions and heating structure.
  • domain assumption Fixed power-law dust size distribution with exponent p = 3.5 within each of two dust populations.
    Assumed in Section 2.1; pebble surface density is computed from this distribution via Eq. 14.
  • domain assumption Ice mantles increase the fragmentation threshold regardless of composition.
    Section 2.4, based on laboratory studies; directly sets the mechanism by which ice loss destroys pebbles.
  • domain assumption Dust destruction is instantaneous when the fragmentation barrier drops.
    Section 2.3; load-bearing for the claimed factor-of-two pebble loss. The paper notes an alternative slow-erosion scenario.
  • domain assumption Layered MRI parameterization with a cosmic-ray ionized active layer and a dead zone.
    Section 2.2; determines how and when accretion outbursts are generated and sets the inner disk thermal structure.
  • domain assumption Initial volatile abundances are taken from low-mass protostellar core observations.
    Section 2.4; affects ice ratios, though the authors argue snowline positions are insensitive to this choice.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of The Effect of Luminosity Outbursts on the Abundance of Pebbles and Their Ice Mantles in Protoplanetary Disks." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/PSNKVDFP

@misc{pith2026250507718,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: The Effect of Luminosity Outbursts on the Abundance of Pebbles and Their Ice Mantles in Protoplanetary Disks},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/PSNKVDFP}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2505.07718}
}
abstract

Centimeter-sized dust grains-pebbles-are necessary for planetesimal formation via the streaming instability, they play an important role in forming protoplanetary cores and giant planets, as well as enriching their atmospheres with chemical elements. This work investigates the effect of luminosity outbursts on the abundance of pebbles and their ice mantles in protoplanetary disks. We perform global simulations of formation and evolution of a self-gravitating viscous protoplanetary disk using the 2D hydrodynamic thin-disk FEOSAD code, which self-consistently reproduces luminosity outbursts. The model includes thermal balance, dust evolution and its interaction with gas, development of magnetorotational instability, adsorption and desorption of four volatile compounds (H$_2$O, CO$_2$, CH$_4$ and CO), and the feedback of ice mantles on dust fragmentation properties. We show that luminosity outbursts have a stronger effect on the positions of CO$_2$, CH$_4$ and CO snowlines compared to the water snowline. This is because the H$_2$O snowline falls within the viscous heating dominated region during early disk evolution stages, while snowlines of other molecules are located in regions dominated by stellar irradiation heating and are thus more sensitive to temperature changes during outbursts. Nevertheless, luminosity outbursts reduce the total amount of pebbles in the disk by half due to destruction of dust aggregates into monomers following the loss of water ice that binds the aggregates together. Pebble recovery occurs over several thousand years after the outburst ends due to collisional coagulation, with recovery timescales significantly exceeding water freeze-out times. Ice mantle desorption occurs in a complex non-axisymmetric 2D region of the disk, associated with spiral substructure formation during early evolution of gravitationally unstable disks.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2505.07718 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Stellar luminosity and accretion luminosity in models M1 (left) and M2 (right) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Total disk-integrated mass of ices on pebbles versus time in models M1 (top), an outburst at 244.5 kyr and M2 (bottom), an outburst at ∼ 340 kyr [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. H2O, CO2, CH4 and CO snowlines for two models of different mass versus time. 1−2 au a region appears where water exists in ice phase. In model M1 this occurs at ≈ 250 kyr, in model M2 it happens after ≈ 450 kyr. The formation of water ice in the inner region is associated with a ≈ 1 − 2 au dust ring accumulating grown dust (see Topchieva et al. 2024). This ring forms in the dead zone with the lowest 𝛼-parameter and … view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (3 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Stellar luminosity and accretion luminosity (top panels) and to￾tal mass of refractory components (middle panel) in model M1. Left panels show full disk lifetime, right panels show the 244.5 kyr outburst. Vertical lines mark the outburst on the left panels. Short verti…
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Mass fractions of ices and refractory components relative to total mass of solid material in the disk before (left), during (center) and after (right) the luminosity outburst in model M1. outburst. Conversely, CO2, CH4 and CO snowlines reside in regions sensitive to st…
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Stellar luminosity, accretion luminosity and total mass of refractory components, plus radial temperature profiles before, during and after the 339 kyr luminosity outburst in model M2. Bottom panel shows radial temperature profiles before, during and after the outburst…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

65 extracted references · 8 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Akimkin V., Vorobyov E., Pavlyuchenkov Y., Stoyanovskaya O., 2020, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/staa3134 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020MNRAS.499.5578A 499, 5578

    doi:10.1093/mnras/staa3134 2020

  2. [2]

    S., Dullemond C

    Audard M., et al., 2014, in Beuther H., Klessen R. S., Dullemond C. P., Henning T., eds, Protostars and Planets VI. pp 387--410 ( @eprint arXiv 1401.3368 ), @doi 10.2458/azu_uapress_9780816531240-ch017

    arXiv 2014

  3. [3]

    P., 2014, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/795/1/61 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014ApJ...795...61B 795, 61

    Bae J., Hartmann L., Zhu Z., Nelson R. P., 2014, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/795/1/61 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014ApJ...795...61B 795, 61

    doi:10.1088/0004-637x/795/1/61 2014

  4. [4]

    A., Hawley J

    Balbus S. A., Hawley J. F., 1991, @doi [ ] 10.1086/170270 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1991ApJ...376..214B 376, 214

    doi:10.1086/170270 1991

  5. [5]

    A., Hawley J

    Balbus S. A., Hawley J. F., 1998, @doi [Reviews of Modern Physics] 10.1103/RevModPhys.70.1 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1998RvMP...70....1B 70, 1

    doi:10.1103/revmodphys.70.1 1998

  6. [6]

    Birnstiel T., Klahr H., Ercolano B., 2012, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201118136 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2012A&A...539A.148B 539, A148

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201118136 2012

  7. [7]

    Blum J., Wurm G., 2008, @doi [Annual Review of Astronomy and Astrophysics] 10.1146/annurev.astro.46.060407.145152 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2008ARA&A..46...21B 46, 21

    arXiv 2008

  8. [8]

    B., 2015, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201425120 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015A&A...579A..43C 579, A43

    Carrera D., Johansen A., Davies M. B., 2015, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201425120 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015A&A...579A..43C 579, A43

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201425120 2015

Show all 65 references
  1. [10]

    A., et al., 2016b, @doi [ ] 10.1038/nature18612 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2016Natur.535..258C 535, 258

    Cieza L. A., et al., 2016b, @doi [ ] 10.1038/nature18612 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2016Natur.535..258C 535, 258

    doi

  2. [11]

    S., Reipurth B., 2018, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/aaba7b , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018ApJ...861..145C 861, 145

    Connelley M. S., Reipurth B., 2018, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/aaba7b , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018ApJ...861..145C 861, 145

    2018 doi

  3. [12]

    Deng H., Mayer L., Latter H., 2020, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/ab77b2 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020ApJ...891..154D 891, 154

    2020 doi

  4. [13]

    M., Vorobyov E

    Dunham M. M., Vorobyov E. I., Arce H. G., 2014, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stu1511 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014MNRAS.444..887D 444, 887

    2014 doi

  5. [14]

    F., 2016, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201628509 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2016A&A...595A..83E 595, A83

    Eistrup C., Walsh C., van Dishoeck E. F., 2016, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201628509 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2016A&A...595A..83E 595, A83

    2016 doi

  6. [15]

    F., 2018, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201731302 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018A&A...613A..14E 613, A14

    Eistrup C., Walsh C., van Dishoeck E. F., 2018, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201731302 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018A&A...613A..14E 613, A14

    2018 doi

  7. [16]

    G., Johansen A., Lambrechts M., Akimkin V., Vorobyov E

    Elbakyan V. G., Johansen A., Lambrechts M., Akimkin V., Vorobyov E. I., 2020, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201937198 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020A&A...637A...5E 637, A5

    2020 doi

  8. [17]

    Gundlach B., Blum J., 2015, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/798/1/34 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015ApJ...798...34G 798, 34

    2015 doi

  9. [18]

    Houge A., Krijt S., 2023, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stad866 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023MNRAS.521.5826H 521, 5826

    2023 doi

  10. [19]

    Houge A., Mac \' as E., Krijt S., 2024, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stad3758 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024MNRAS.527.9668H 527, 9668

    2024 doi

  11. [20]

    Ida S., Guillot T., Morbidelli A., 2016, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201628099 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2016A&A...591A..72I 591, A72

    2016 doi

  12. [21]

    Johansen A., Lambrechts M., 2017, @doi [Annual Review of Earth and Planetary Sciences] 10.1146/annurev-earth-063016-020226 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017AREPS..45..359J 45, 359

    2017 doi

  13. [22]

    Kadam K., Vorobyov E., Reg \'a ly Z., K \'o sp \'a l \'A ., \'A brah \'a m P., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/ab378a , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019ApJ...882...96K 882, 96

    2019 doi

  14. [23]

    Kadam K., Vorobyov E., Reg \'a ly Z., K \'o sp \'a l \'A ., \'A brah \'a m P., 2020, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/ab8bd8 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020ApJ...895...41K 895, 41

    2020 doi

  15. [24]

    Kadam K., Vorobyov E., Basu S., 2022, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stac2455 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2022MNRAS.516.4448K 516, 4448

    2022 doi

  16. [25]

    Lambrechts M., Johansen A., 2012, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201219127 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2012A&A...544A..32L 544, A32

    2012 doi

  17. [26]

    Lambrechts M., Morbidelli A., Johansen A., 2017, in Chondrules as Astrophysical Objects. p. 2010

    2017

  18. [27]

    A., Nomura H., 2010, @doi [ ] 10.1088/2041-8205/710/1/L21 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2010ApJ...710L..21L 710, L21

    Lee J.-E., Bergin E. A., Nomura H., 2010, @doi [ ] 10.1088/2041-8205/710/1/L21 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2010ApJ...710L..21L 710, L21

    2010 doi

  19. [28]

    T., Klahr H., Birnstiel T., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/ab05d9 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019ApJ...874...36L 874, 36

    Lenz C. T., Klahr H., Birnstiel T., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/ab05d9 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019ApJ...874...36L 874, 36

    2019 doi

  20. [29]

    Lodato G., et al., 2023, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stac3223 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023MNRAS.518.4481L 518, 4481

    2023 doi

  21. [30]

    F., 2014, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201424712 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014A&A...572A..96M 572, A96

    Miotello A., Bruderer S., van Dishoeck E. F., 2014, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201424712 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014A&A...572A..96M 572, A96

    2014 doi

  22. [31]

    Molyarova T., Akimkin V., Semenov D., Henning T., Vasyunin A., Wiebe D., 2017, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/aa9227 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017ApJ...849..130M 849, 130

    2017 doi

  23. [32]

    I., Akimkin V., Skliarevskii A., Wiebe D., G \"u del M., 2021, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/abe2b0 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2021ApJ...910..153M 910, 153

    Molyarova T., Vorobyov E. I., Akimkin V., Skliarevskii A., Wiebe D., G \"u del M., 2021, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/abe2b0 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2021ApJ...910..153M 910, 153

    2021 doi

  24. [33]

    Morbidelli A., Lambrechts M., Jacobson S., Bitsch B., 2015, @doi [ ] 10.1016/j.icarus.2015.06.003 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015Icar..258..418M 258, 418

    2015 doi

  25. [34]

    I., Boogert A

    \"O berg K. I., Boogert A. C. A., Pontoppidan K. M., van den Broek S., van Dishoeck E. F., Bottinelli S., Blake G. A., Evans Neal J. I., 2011, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/740/2/109 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2011ApJ...740..109O 740, 109

    2011 doi

  26. [35]

    Okuzumi S., Momose M., Sirono S.-i., Kobayashi H., Tanaka H., 2016, @doi [ ] 10.3847/0004-637X/821/2/82 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2016ApJ...821...82O 821, 82

    2016 doi

  27. [36]

    W., Klahr H

    Ormel C. W., Klahr H. H., 2010, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201014903 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2010A&A...520A..43O 520, A43

    2010 doi

  28. [37]

    Pillich C., Bogdan T., Landers J., Wurm G., Wende H., 2021, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/202140601 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2021A&A...652A.106P 652, A106

    2021 doi

  29. [38]

    E., 1981, @doi [ ] 10.1146/annurev.aa.19.090181.001033 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1981ARA&A..19..137P 19, 137

    Pringle J. E., 1981, @doi [ ] 10.1146/annurev.aa.19.090181.001033 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1981ARA&A..19..137P 19, 137

    1981

  30. [39]

    Rab C., et al., 2017, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201730812 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017A&A...604A..15R 604, A15

    2017 doi

  31. [40]

    W., 2017, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201630013 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017A&A...602A..21S 602, A21

    Schoonenberg D., Ormel C. W., 2017, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201630013 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017A&A...602A..21S 602, A21

    2017 doi

  32. [41]

    W., 2017, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201731202 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017A&A...605L...2S 605, L2

    Schoonenberg D., Okuzumi S., Ormel C. W., 2017, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201731202 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017A&A...605L...2S 605, L2

    2017 doi

  33. [42]

    I., Sunyaev R

    Shakura N. I., Sunyaev R. A., 1973, , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1973A&A....24..337S 24, 337

    1973

  34. [43]

    Sirono S.-i., 2011, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/735/2/131 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2011ApJ...735..131S 735, 131

    2011 doi

  35. [44]

    M., Birnstiel T., 2022, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/ac7d58 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2022ApJ...935...35S 935, 35

    Stammler S. M., Birnstiel T., 2022, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/ac7d58 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2022ApJ...935...35S 935, 35

    2022 doi

  36. [45]

    Steinpilz T., Teiser J., Wurm G., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/ab07bb , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019ApJ...874...60S 874, 60

    2019 doi

  37. [46]

    P., Vorobyov E

    Stoyanovskaya O. P., Vorobyov E. I., Snytnikov V. N., 2018, @doi [Astronomy Reports] 10.1134/S1063772918060069 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018ARep...62..455S 62, 455

    2018 doi

  38. [47]

    P., Okladnikov F

    Stoyanovskaya O. P., Okladnikov F. A., Vorobyov E. I., Pavlyuchenkov Y. N., Akimkin V. V., 2020, @doi [Astronomy Reports] 10.1134/S1063772920010072 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020ARep...64..107S 64, 107

    2020 doi

  39. [48]

    S., Dullemond C

    Testi L., et al., 2014, in Beuther H., Klessen R. S., Dullemond C. P., Henning T., eds, Protostars and Planets VI. pp 339--361 ( @eprint arXiv 1402.1354 ), @doi 10.2458/azu_uapress_9780816531240-ch015

    2014 arXiv

  40. [49]

    J., et al., 2023, @doi [ ] 10.1038/s41586-022-05676-z , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023Natur.615..227T 615, 227

    Tobin J. J., et al., 2023, @doi [ ] 10.1038/s41586-022-05676-z , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023Natur.615..227T 615, 227

    2023 doi

  41. [50]

    Topchieva A., Molyarova T., Akimkin V., Maksimova L., Vorobyov E., 2024, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stae597 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024MNRAS.530.2731T 530, 2731

    2024 doi

  42. [51]

    J., Fromang S., Gammie C., Klahr H., Lesur G., Wardle M., Bai X

    Turner N. J., Fromang S., Gammie C., Klahr H., Lesur G., Wardle M., Bai X. N., 2014, in Beuther H., Klessen R. S., Dullemond C. P., Henning T., eds, Protostars and Planets VI. pp 411--432 ( @eprint arXiv 1401.7306 ), @doi 10.2458/azu_uapress_9780816531240-ch018

    2014 arXiv

  43. [52]

    I., Basu S., 2010, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/719/2/1896 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2010ApJ...719.1896V 719, 1896

    Vorobyov E. I., Basu S., 2010, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/719/2/1896 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2010ApJ...719.1896V 719, 1896

    2010 doi

  44. [53]

    I., Elbakyan V

    Vorobyov E. I., Elbakyan V. G., 2018, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201833226 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018A&A...618A...7V 618, A7

    2018 doi

  45. [54]

    I., Baraffe I., Harries T., Chabrier G., 2013, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201321775 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2013A&A...557A..35V 557, A35

    Vorobyov E. I., Baraffe I., Harries T., Chabrier G., 2013, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201321775 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2013A&A...557A..35V 557, A35

    2013 doi

  46. [55]

    I., Akimkin V., Stoyanovskaya O., Pavlyuchenkov Y., Liu H

    Vorobyov E. I., Akimkin V., Stoyanovskaya O., Pavlyuchenkov Y., Liu H. B., 2018, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201731690 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018A&A...614A..98V 614, A98

    2018 doi

  47. [56]

    I., Khaibrakhmanov S., Basu S., Audard M., 2020, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/202039081 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020A&A...644A..74V 644, A74

    Vorobyov E. I., Khaibrakhmanov S., Basu S., Audard M., 2020, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/202039081 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020A&A...644A..74V 644, A74

    2020 doi

  48. [57]

    I., et al., 2022, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/202141932 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2022A&A...658A.191V 658, A191

    Vorobyov E. I., et al., 2022, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/202141932 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2022A&A...658A.191V 658, A191

    2022 doi

  49. [58]

    I., Elbakyan V

    Vorobyov E. I., Elbakyan V. G., Johansen A., Lambrechts M., Skliarevskii A. M., Stoyanovskaya O. P., 2023, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/202244500 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023A&A...670A..81V 670, A81

    2023 doi

  50. [59]

    Wada K., Tanaka H., Suyama T., Kimura H., Yamamoto T., 2009, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/702/2/1490 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2009ApJ...702.1490W 702, 1490

    2009 doi

  51. [60]

    J., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/aaf390 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019ApJ...870..129W 870, 129

    Wei C.-E., Nomura H., Lee J.-E., Ip W.-H., Walsh C., Millar T. J., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/aaf390 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019ApJ...870..129W 870, 129

    2019 doi

  52. [61]

    J., 1977, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/180.2.57 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1977MNRAS.180...57W 180, 57

    Weidenschilling S. J., 1977, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/180.2.57 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1977MNRAS.180...57W 180, 57

    1977 doi

  53. [62]

    S., Molyarova T

    Wiebe D. S., Molyarova T. S., Akimkin V. V., Vorobyov E. I., Semenov D. A., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stz512 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019MNRAS.485.1843W 485, 1843

    2019 doi

  54. [63]

    Wurm G., Paraskov G., Krauss O., 2005, @doi [ ] 10.1103/PhysRevE.71.021304 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2005PhRvE..71b1304W 71, 021304

    2005 doi

  55. [64]

    N., Goodman J., 2005, @doi [ ] 10.1086/426895 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2005ApJ...620..459Y 620, 459

    Youdin A. N., Goodman J., 2005, @doi [ ] 10.1086/426895 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2005ApJ...620..459Y 620, 459

    2005 doi

  56. [65]

    F., Book L

    Zhu Z., Hartmann L., Gammie C. F., Book L. G., Simon J. B., Engelhard E., 2010, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/713/2/1134 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2010ApJ...713.1134Z 713, 1134

    2010 doi

  57. [66]

    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.stat...

Pith tools

Reviewed August 15, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.