Cloud fragmentation and proplyd-like features in HII regions imaged by HST

C.R. O'Dell; Orsola De Marco; Pamela Gelfond; R. H. Rubin; S.C.O. Glover

REVIEW

Cloud fragmentation and proplyd-like features in HII regions imaged by HST

Orsola De Marco, C.R. O'Dell, Pamela Gelfond, R. H. Rubin, S.C.O. Glover

Astrophysics · Submitted 24 Feb 2006 · 52 references

Pith's verdict: A careful HST survey that roughly doubles the census of proplyd-like features outside Orion; the core claim—that starless cusps are cloud fragments, not disks—holds up, with one real but acknowledged soft spot: the non-detection of central stars is not quantified.

T0 · AI review

How this review was made: An AI referee (deepseek-v4-flash) read the paper on August 28, 2026 and answered a fixed list of questions about it. T0 is the starting level every paper gets. The levels describe how deeply Pith has checked the paper, never the authors.

T0 AI review An AI read the paper and answered a fixed list of questions.
T1 Audit Automatic checks that the references and files the paper relies on exist and match.
T2 Compute The paper's code or calculations re-run with the same results.
T3 Formal statement The claims written out in a formal math language a computer can read.
T4 Proof Those claims proved, and the proof checked by computer.

How Pith checks papers →

· 2 major objections · 6 minor · Ask about this paper · The compiled record · Read the full review →

Challenge this review Comment (0) Read on arXiv ↗

Cite ▾

arXiv IDastro-ph/0602545 (version 1)

Pith IDOJ7QKQJR, Pith's permanent record of this paper and its review

CitationC.R. O'Dell, Orsola De Marco, Pamela Gelfond, R. H. Rubin, S.C.O. Glover. "Cloud fragmentation and proplyd-like features in HII regions imaged by HST." arXiv:astro-ph/0602545 (2006). https://pith.science/paper/OJ7QKQJR

Cite this reviewBibTeX for Pith's review of this paper

Claim paper

Why Pith says this

Highlight any text to comment on it.

Editor's note

read the letter

Best thing to know: this is a genuinely useful observational survey. It delivers a new catalog of cusps and silhouettes across eight HII regions, reanalyzes the IC 2944 globules, finds a plausible edge-on disk candidate in M17 (M17-12), and makes a sharp argument against Reipurth et al.'s constant optical depth assumption. The M17 candidate is properly hedged—the possible central star could be scattered light from the inner rim—and the paper repeatedly says it cannot distinguish a true proplyd from a compact fragment. That honesty is real, not performative.

The central deduction is that starless cusps are probably photo-evaporating cloud fragments rather than proplyds. That conclusion is reasonable but rests on a non-detection: no definitive central star is seen. The paper gives 3-pixel size limits for features, but no point-source detection limit, no extinction estimate for each cusp, and no assumed stellar luminosity. At these distances, an Orion-like T Tauri star could easily be hidden by a few magnitudes of extinction or lost against the bright cusp. The stress-test note has this right. However, the paper itself flags this exact limitation in the Summary—"Unless the absence of the star can be explained by extinction"—so the reader is not being misled. The abstract is slightly stronger than the evidence, but the body is well hedged.

The Jeans length argument in Section 4.2 is also in order. They use Reipurth's optical depths, show the globules are not self-gravitating under that assumption, then argue the assumption is flawed because the optical depth is likely limited by PSF filling-in. That is a legitimate critique of the input, not circular reasoning. They do not pretend the star-forming alternative is proven; they say it is supported but not proven.

The catalog itself is the main product: sizes, shapes, edge character, and positions for dozens of features. It is reproducible from public HST data. The size distributions are a useful constraint on fragmentation models, and the discussion of why smooth ionization fronts lack fragments is thoughtful even if speculative.

Citation pattern looks fine; the self-citations are to relevant prior work by O'Dell and Henney, which is appropriate here.

Who this is for: anyone working on proplyd lifetimes, cloud fragmentation, or HST imaging of HII regions. It deserves a serious referee. My recommendation: send it out, and ask the authors to add a point-source sensitivity check for the central-star non-detection—or at least an explicit statement that the non-detection is not quantitative. That would close the weakest loop in an otherwise solid paper.

Referee report

Significance

If the main deduction holds, the paper reframes much of the existing proplyd-search literature: most small cusp-like and silhouette features seen in H II regions would be molecular-cloud fragments rather than circumstellar disks, and genuine proplyds outside Orion would be genuinely rare rather than merely hard to find. The manuscript's strengths are its honesty and its care: the catalog in Table 4 is a substantial observational contribution; the size-distribution analysis explicitly and quantitatively reproduces the Reipurth et al. (2003) result before extending it; the single M 17 candidate is presented together with the alternative explanation of scattered light from the disk inner rim; and the Jeans calculation is accompanied by an explicit, cited critique of its own assumptions. The paper is also appropriately careful about what it does not prove, repeatedly labeling its interpretive claims as suspicions. Its significance is moderate and mostly classificatory, and its conclusions are consistent with, rather than independent of, the recent claims of Smith et al. (2005); the interpretive value would be enhanced by the sensitivity analysis requested below.

Major objections (2)

[Abstract; §3.3; Table 2; §4.1; §5 Summary] The central deduction that the newly found cusps are molecular-cloud fragments rather than proplyds rests entirely on the absence of a definitive central star in each feature, yet the paper provides no point-source detection limit for its images, no assumed central-star luminosity or spectral type, and no extinction estimate toward the individual cusps. Table 2 lists only the 3-pixel angular-size limit for feature detection. At the adopted distances (1.3-4.1 kpc), an Orion-like T Tauri central star (M_V ≈ 10-13) would appear at V ≈ 15-18 and could be lost against the bright limb of the cusp in the narrow-band frames, especially if A_V reaches the values plausibly associated with such dusty fragments; the sole M 17 candidate (M 17-12) is itself ambiguous because the 'central star' may instead be scattered light from the inner rim of the disk (§3.8). Since the first Summary bullet states that the small cusps 'are actually fragments,' the authors should add a quantitative sensitivity statement (for example, 3σ limiting magnitudes per field in the continuum and narrow-band filters, or the faintest detectable photosphere assuming a T Tauri SED) together with A_V estimates, or explicitly soften the abstract and Summary to make the claim conditional on these non-detection limits.
[§4.2; §5 Summary] The Jeans-length calculation of Eqs. (1)-(2) yields the conclusion that the IC 2944 and M 16 silhouettes are not self-gravitating, but the paper immediately calls into question the uniform-density assumption on which that calculation rests and instead argues that PSF filling-in by the bright nebular background limits the apparent optical depth to τ ≈ 1 and that the fragments could be centrally concentrated and star-forming; this alternative is supported only by analogy with McCaughrean & O'Dell (1996), without an estimate of the size of the filling-in effect at the angular scales and background levels of the present images. Because the Summary adopts the centrally concentrated, possibly star-forming interpretation as one of the paper's conclusions, I ask for a quantitative check (for instance, the central density and optical-depth profile needed to make the globules Jeans-unstable at their observed sizes, compared with the expected PSF-filling level), or alternatively a clear labeling of this part as a speculative alternative to Reipurth et al. rather than a survey conclusion.

Minor objections (6)

[§4.1] The passage 'the large-to-intermediate size cusps found in NGC 6303 by Brandner et al. (2000)' appears to contain a typo: Brandner et al. studied NGC 3603, which is the region listed in Table 5.
[§5] In the last bullet, 'the reader is refereed to Johnstone et al. 1998' should read 'the reader is referred to Johnstone et al. 1998.'
[Abstract] The sentence 'under whichthey can be observed' has a missing space; this appears to be a LaTeX/formatting glitch that should be corrected.
[§2; Table 4] The stated ~5% measurement uncertainty refers only to the angular measurements; the conversion to AU inherits the sometimes large distance uncertainties (for NGC 2467, Lodén's 1.355 kpc differs from the adopted 4.1 kpc by a factor of three), so the linear dimensions in Table 4 should carry a caution about the propagated distance errors.
[Table 4] The M 16 entry for fragment #4 lists only a single dimension (25682 AU) while most other fragments are given as short/long pairs; please check whether the second dimension was inadvertently omitted.
[§4.3] The comparison between smooth ionization fronts (NGC 3324, parts of Pismis 24) and sculpted, fragment-rich fronts would be more convincing if the per-field surface-brightness sensitivity were reported, since the different filters and exposure depths in Table 1 (and the explicitly underexposed IC 1590 image) could contribute to the apparent absence of features.

How Pith checks papers → · Full audit of this paper →

The paper

The paper claims

Most proplyd-like cusps in H II regions contain no central star and are likely photo-evaporating cloud fragments, not circumstellar disks.

The reading

This paper searches Hubble Space Telescope images of eight H II regions for new proplyds, the bright, tear-shaped cusps of ionized gas and dust that surround young stars in Orion. It finds many cusp-like features similar in size to Orion's proplyds, but none of them shows a definitive central star. From this, the authors conclude that most of these features are not circumstellar disks but fragments of molecular cloud that are being photo-evaporated by the region's hot stars. Only one object, an edge-on silhouette in M 17, may contain a central star and could be a bona fide proplyd. If this reading is correct, genuine proplyds outside Orion are rare and short-lived, and previously reported proplyd-like detections in other nebulae are likely cloud fragments instead.

What carries the argument

The discriminating object is the proplyd cusp itself: a limb-brightened, tear-shaped ionization front produced when external UV light evaporates material around a young star or a cloud fragment. The paper uses the presence or absence of a central star as the dividing line between bona fide proplyds and cloud fragments, and the effective radius (square root of the fragment's area) as the metric for comparing size distributions across regions. It also reworks the optical-depth argument applied to the IC 2944 silhouettes, proposing that telescope diffraction fills in their centers and flattens the apparent optical depth, which could hide centrally concentrated, possibly star-forming density profiles.

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that the cusp-like features found in HST images of eight H II regions (NGC 6530, NGC 2467, Pismis 24, IC 1590, IC 2944, M 16, and M 17) are, without detected central stars, best interpreted as photo-evaporating fragments of molecular cloud rather than proplyds. In the Orion Nebula a proplyd is a young star with a circumstellar disk and a bright cusp of ionized gas; the embedded star is the defining feature. The authors find dozens of cusps and silhouettes of comparable size to Orion's proplyds, but no definitive central star, so they conclude that most of these are lumps of dusty gas being sculpted and evaporated by the radiation field. Only one feature, an edge-on silhouette in M 17 with a faint red star at its center, may be a genuine proplyd, and its central 'star' could instead be scattered light from the inner rim of the disk.

Load-bearing premise

The central deduction assumes that a young star inside a cusp would have been detected in the HST images; if dust or the disk itself hides the star, a genuine proplyd could look exactly like a starless cloud fragment.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

Census counts of proplyds in H II regions should treat starless cusps as cloud fragments, not disks; otherwise the number of genuine proplyds is systematically overestimated.
Genuine proplyds outside Orion are short-lived and appear only within the first few hundred thousand years near very young O stars, matching the Smith et al. (2005) picture.
The M 17 edge-on silhouette, if confirmed as a proplyd, becomes one of only a handful of bona fide proplyd disks known outside Orion.
The small-fragment size distributions in IC 2944 and NGC 2467, with many sub-2000 AU objects that should evaporate quickly, imply an active fragmentation process that future cloud-fragmentation theories must reproduce.
Fragmentation and cusp formation are tied to sculpted ionization fronts; smooth fronts with no fragments point to intrinsic properties of the molecular cloud rather than age.

Reading between the lines

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

If the starless-cusp interpretation holds, previously reported proplyd candidates in Carina and NGC 3603 may also be reclassified as photo-evaporating cloud fragments, shrinking the known proplyd population outside Orion further.
Deep near-infrared observations targeting the apexes of these cusps could test the central-star assumption directly, since embedded young stars would be revealed at wavelengths that penetrate the surrounding dust.
The paper's argument that constant optical depth underestimates central density suggests that the IC 2944 and M 16 silhouettes deserve follow-up submillimeter interferometry to measure their true column density structure.
A systematic survey comparing cusp occurrence with the local ionizing photon flux and cloud density could quantify how long a fragment survives before evaporation, turning the qualitative transient-nature explanation into a measurable lifetime.

Original abstract

We have analyzed HST ACS and WFPC2 new and archival images of eight HII regions to look for new proto-planetary disks (proplyds) similar to those found in the Orion Nebula. We find a wealth of features similar in size (though many are larger) to the bright cusps around the Orion Nebula proplyds. None of them, however, contains a definitive central star. From this, we deduce that the new cusps may not be proplyds, but instead are fragments of molecular cloud material. Out of all the features found in the eight HII regions examined, only one, an apparent edge-on silhouette in M17, may have a central star. This feature might join the small number of bona fide proplyds found outside the Orion Nebula, in M8, M20 and possibly in M16. In line with the results found recently by Smith et al. (2005), the paucity of proplyds outside the Orion Nebula, may be explained by their transient nature as well as by the specific environmental conditions under whichthey can be observed.

The compiled record

The paper's own sentences, arranged, kept beside the review and separate from it. Each label is drawn from a closed vocabulary; the number beside it is the probability the classifier gave that label. Numbers in the tables are the authors', checked by code. No sentence in this record was written by a model.

Compiled by classifier-1.13.0 via TypeSafe API, question bank abstract-p1-20260923, 2026-09-23: 1 request, 5,651 input tokens.

What the abstract itself states, as probabilities: claims first 0.04 · states limitation 0.81 · human participants 0.01 · controlled comparison 0.22 · randomized assignment 0.01 · states quantitative result 0.90 · compares with prior results 0.91 · mentions code or data availability 0.02.

The abstract, sentence by sentence

arXiv listing abstract v1. Results and the main claim are underlined; show every role.

We have analyzed HST ACS and WFPC2 new and archival images of eight HII regions to look for new proto-planetary disks (proplyds) similar to those found in the Orion Nebula. We find a wealth of features similar in size (though many are larger) to the bright cusps around the Orion Nebula proplyds. None of them, however, contains a definitive central star. From this, we deduce that the new cusps may not be proplyds, but instead are fragments of molecular cloud material. Out of all the features found in the eight HII regions examined, only one, an apparent edge-on silhouette in M17, may have a central star. This feature might join the small number of bona fide proplyds found outside the Orion Nebula, in M8, M20 and possibly in M16. In line with the results found recently by Smith et al. (2005), the paucity of proplyds outside the Orion Nebula, may be explained by their transient nature as well as by the specific environmental conditions under whichthey can be observed.

background contribution method result interpretation main claim

What the classifier reports for each sentence. The number is the probability it gave the label.
#	sentence	role	the authors' own work	states the main conclusion	strength
s0	We have analyzed HST ACS and WFPC2 new and archival images of eight HII regions to look for new proto-planetary disks (proplyds) similar to those found in the Orion Nebula.	contribution 0.67	0.95	0.04	asserted 0.89
s1	We find a wealth of features similar in size (though many are larger) to the bright cusps around the Orion Nebula proplyds.	result 1.00	0.96	0.05	asserted 1.00
s2	None of them, however, contains a definitive central star.	result 1.00	0.91	0.12	asserted 1.00
s3	From this, we deduce that the new cusps may not be proplyds, but instead are fragments of molecular cloud material.	interpretation 1.00	0.93	0.76	hedged possibility 0.99
s4	Out of all the features found in the eight HII regions examined, only one, an apparent edge-on silhouette in M17, may have a central star.	result 1.00	0.94	0.16	hedged possibility 0.98
s5	This feature might join the small number of bona fide proplyds found outside the Orion Nebula, in M8, M20 and possibly in M16.	result 0.60	0.59	0.07	speculative 0.73
s6	In line with the results found recently by Smith et al. (2005), the paucity of proplyds outside the Orion Nebula, may be explained by their transient nature as well as by the specific environmental conditions under whichthey can be observed.	interpretation 0.98	0.16	0.17	hedged possibility 1.00

What kind of paper the classifier reports this is: empirical study 1.00 · evidence from analysis of existing data 0.88.

What was examined, and what was not

sources read

arXiv listing abstract v1

not examined

full text
figures and tables
references and citing sentences
relations to other papers

levels run

P abstract

not run

S sections
T body sentences
C citations
R cross-paper relations

Every quoted sentence on this record is the authors'. Every label is from Pith's closed vocabulary, with the probability shown beside it. Every number in the measurements table is the authors', checked by code. Record as JSON

Figures

**Figure 2.** — A 25x25 arcmin2 DSS/POSSII (red filter) image of NGC 3324, with an overlay of the ACS and WFPC2 apertures used. North is toward the top, east toward the left. The O stars are marked (see Table 3). 21

**Figure 4.** — A 25x25 arcmin2 DSS/POSSII (red filter) image of Pismis 24 with an overlay of the ACS and WFPC2 apertures used. North is toward the top, east toward the left. The O stars and one Wolf-Rayet star are marked (see

**Figure 5.** — A 25x25 arcmin2 DSS/POSSII (red filter) image of IC 1590 with an overlay of the ACS and WFPC2 apertures used. North is toward the top, east toward the left. The O stars are marked (see

**Figure 8.** — A 25x25 arcmin2 DSS/POSSII (red filter) image of M 17 with an overlay of the ACS aperture used by program GO8992. North is toward the top, east toward the left. The O stars are marked (see

**Figure 9.** — A 100x65 arcsec2 part of the ACS/Hα image of NGC 6530 (Visit 2; pixel ranges x=2055-4075, y=530-1830 of the ACS chip). North is indicated, east is left of north. The marked feature numbers refer to the IDs in

**Figure 10.** — The ACS/Hα image of NGC 2467. North is indicated, east is left of north. The marked feature numbers refer to the IDs in

**Figure 11.** — A 110x75 arcsec2 portion of the ACS/Hα image of Pismis 24 (pixel ranges x=229-2629, y=1135-4031 of the ACS chip). North is indicated, east is left of north. The marked feature numbers refer to the IDs in

**Figure 12.** — A 50x55 arcsec2 portion of the ACS/Hα image of IC 1590 (pixel ranges x=1390-2390, y=2760-3860 of the ACS chip). North is indicated, east is left of north. The marked feature numbers refer to the IDs in

**Figure 13.** — A 35x40 arcsec2 portion of the WFPC2/Hα image of M 16 from program GO7381 (cropped to display the pixel ranges x=760-1460, y=710-1530). North is indicated, east is left of north. The marked feature numbers refer to the IDs in

**Figure 14.** — An 80x60 arcsec2 portion of the ACS image of M 17 (image j8cw07041 drz.fits, rotated by 90 degrees, and cropped to display the pixel ranges x=444-1716, y=2558-4206). North is indicated, east is left of north. The marked feature numbers refer to the IDs in

**Figure 15.** — Subset of the features identified in the H II regions. Each stamp is 5 arcsec on a side, except for the last four “stamps” which are 20 arcsec (marked x4). Stamp labels refer to the region within which the features are found and the IDs from Table 4. For an explanation of the layout see Sec. 3. 31

**Figure 16.** — A 16x11 arcsec2 portion of the ACS image of M 17 in the immediate area of M 17-12 (

**Figure 17.** — A 5x5 arcsec2 portion of the ACS/Hα image of M 17, centered around feature 7. Two greyscale levels are used to show both the boomerang shape of the darkest absorption (left panel) and the rounded shape of the overall feature (right panel). 33

**Figure 18.** — 5x5 arcsec 2 images of the four jets observed in the H II regions. North is oriented as in Figs.11 (Pismis 24), 14 (M 17), and 10 (NGC 2467). Labels refer to the regions as well as the ID numbers from

**Figure 19.** — A histogram of the log(Effective Radius) of fragments found in each region. Those regions with insufficient number of fragments to determine the distribution are displayed to compare the sizes of the fragment with those of the other regions. 35

Showing 15 of the paper's 19 figures. See all figures in the PDF ↗ Figures reproduced from arXiv:astro-ph/0602545 by the authors.

References

Works cited (52)

[1]

Abt , H. A. & Corbally , C. J. 2000, , 541, 841

View on Pith 2000
[2]

Allen , D. A. 1986, , 219, 35P

View on Pith 1986
[3]

Ardeberg , A. & Maurice , E. 1980, , 39, 325

View on Pith 1980
[4]

Bally , J., Licht , D., Smith , N., & Walawender , J. 2005, , 129, 355

View on Pith 2005
[5]

Bally , J., O'Dell , C. R., & McCaughrean , M. J. 2000, , 119, 2919

View on Pith 2000
[6]

Bally , J., Yu , K. C., Rayner , J., & Zinnecker , H. 1998, , 116, 1868

View on Pith 1998
[7]

Belikov , A. N., Kharchenko , N. V., Piskunov , A. E., & Schilbach , E. 1999, , 134, 525

View on Pith 1999
[8]

---. 2000, , 358, 886

View on Pith 2000
[9]

Bica , E., Dutra , C. M., & Barbuy , B. 2003, , 397, 177

View on Pith 2003
[10]

Bok , B. J. & Reilly , E. F. 1947, , 105, 255

View on Pith 1947
[11]

Brandner , W., Grebel , E. K., Chu , Y.-H., Dottori , H., Brandl , B., Richling , S., Yorke , H. W., Points , S. D., & Zinnecker , H. 2000, , 119, 292

View on Pith 2000
[12]

Carraro , G., Patat , F., & Baumgardt , H. 2001, , 371, 107

View on Pith 2001
[13]

Clemens , D. P., Yun , J. L., & Heyer , M. H. 1991, , 75, 877

View on Pith 1991
[14]

Cruz-Gonzalez , C., Recillas-Cruz , E., Costero , R., Peimbert , M., & Torres-Peimbeert , S. 1974, Revista Mexicana de Astronomia y Astrofisica, 1, 211

View on Pith 1974
[15]

Dutra , C. M., Bica , E., Soares , J., & Barbuy , B. 2003, , 400, 533

View on Pith 2003
[16]

Feinstein , A. & Vazquez , R. A. 1989, , 77, 321

View on Pith 1989
[17]

Guetter , H. H. & Turner , D. G. 1997, , 113, 2116

View on Pith 1997
[18]

Hanson , M. M., Howarth , I. D., & Conti , P. S. 1997, , 489, 698

View on Pith 1997
[19]

Henney , W. J. & O'Dell , C. R. 1999, , 118, 2350

View on Pith 1999
[20]

Henney , W. J., O'Dell , C. R., Meaburn , J., Garrington , S. T., & Lopez , J. A. 2002, , 566, 315

View on Pith 2002
[21]

Hester , J. J., Scowen , P. A., Sankrit , R., Lauer , T. R., Ajhar , E. A., Baum , W. A., Code , A., Currie , D. G., Danielson , G. E., Ewald , S. P., Faber , S. M., Grillmair , C. J., Groth , E. J., Holtzman , J. A., Hunter , D. A., Kristian , J., Light , R. M., Lynds , C. R., Monet , D. G., O'Neil , E. J., Shaya , E. J., Seidelmann , K. P., & Westphal ,...

View on Pith 1996
[22]

Jeans , J. H. 1902, Philos.\ Trans.\ R.\ Soc.\ London A, 199, 1

View on Pith 1902
[23]

Johnstone , D., Hollenbach , D., & Bally , J. 1998, , 499, 758

View on Pith 1998
[24]

Joye , W. A. & Mandel , E. 2003, in ASP Conf. Ser. 295: Astronomical Data Analysis Software and Systems XII, 489--+

View on Pith 2003
[25]

Lod \'e n , L. O. 1966, Arkiv for Astronomi, 4, 65

View on Pith 1966
[26]

Ma \' z-Apell \'a niz , J., Walborn , N. R., Galu \'e , H. \'A ., & Wei , L. H. 2004, , 151, 103

View on Pith 2004
[27]

Massey , P., DeGioia-Eastwood , K., & Waterhouse , E. 2001, , 121, 1050

View on Pith 2001
[28]

McCaughrean , M. J. & O'Dell , C. R. 1996, , 111, 1977

View on Pith 1996
[29]

O'Dell , C. R. 2001, , 39, 99

View on Pith 2001
[30]

O'Dell , C. R., Wen , Z., & Hu , X. 1993, , 410, 696

View on Pith 1993
[31]

Paladini , R., Burigana , C., Davies , R. D., Maino , D., Bersanelli , M., Cappellini , B., Platania , P., & Smoot , G. 2003, , 397, 213

View on Pith 2003
[32]

Pellerin , A., Fullerton , A. W., Robert , C., Howk , J. C., Hutchings , J. B., Walborn , N. R., Bianchi , L., Crowther , P. A., & Sonneborn , G. 2002, , 143, 159

View on Pith 2002
[33]

Reid , I. N., Brewer , C., Brucato , R. J., McKinley , W. R., Maury , A., Mendenhall , D., Mould , J. R., Mueller , J., Neugebauer , G., Phinney , J., Sargent , W. L. W., Schombert , J., & Thicksten , R. 1991, , 103, 661

View on Pith 1991
[34]

Reipurth , B., Corporon , P., Olberg , M., & Tenorio-Tagle , G. 1997, , 327, 1185

View on Pith 1997
[35]

Reipurth , B., Raga , A., & Heathcote , S. 2003, , 126, 1925

View on Pith 2003
[36]

Schild , R. E., Garrison , R. F., & Hiltner , W. A. 1983, , 51, 321

View on Pith 1983
[37]

Smith , N., Bally , J., & Morse , J. A. 2003, , 587, L105

View on Pith 2003
[38]

Smith , N., Bally , J., Shuping , R. Y., Morris , M., & Kassis , M. 2005, , 130, 1763

View on Pith 2005
[39]

Stapelfeldt , K., Sahai , R., Werner , M., & Trauger , J. 1997, in ASP Conf. Ser. 119: Planets Beyond the Solar System and the Next Generation of Space Missions, 131--+

View on Pith 1997
[40]

Stecklum , B., Henning , T., Feldt , M., Hayward , T. L., Hoare , M. G., Hofner , P., & Richter , S. 1998, , 115, 767

View on Pith 1998
[41]

Sung , H., Chun , M.-Y., & Bessell , M. S. 2000, , 120, 333

View on Pith 2000
[42]

Thackeray , A. D. 1950, , 110, 524

View on Pith 1950
[43]

Tody , D. 1986, in Instrumentation in astronomy VI; Proceedings of the Meeting, Tucson, AZ, Mar. 4-8, 1986. Part 2 (A87-36376 15-35). Bellingham, WA, Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers, 1986, p. 733., 733--+

View on Pith 1986
[44]

Tody , D. 1993, in ASP Conf. Ser. 52: Astronomical Data Analysis Software and Systems II, 173--+

View on Pith 1993
[45]

van den Ancker , M. E., The , P. S., Feinstein , A., Vazquez , R. A., de Winter , D., & Perez , M. R. 1997, , 123, 63

View on Pith 1997
[46]

Vannier , L., Lemaire , J. L., Field , D., Pineau des For \^ e ts , G., Pijpers , F. P., & Rouan , D. 2001, , 366, 651

View on Pith 2001
[47]

V \'a zquez-Semadeni , E., Kim , J., Shadmehri , M., & Ballesteros-Paredes , J. 2005, , 618, 344

View on Pith 2005
[48]

Walborn , N. R. 1972, , 77, 312

View on Pith 1972
[49]

---. 1982, , 87, 1300

View on Pith 1982
[50]

---. 1987, , 93, 868

View on Pith 1987
[51]

Warren , W. H. & Hesser , J. E. 1977, , 34, 115

View on Pith 1977
[52]

Yusef-Zadeh , F., Biretta , J., & Geballe , T. R. 2005, , 130, 1171

View on Pith 2005

How the literature uses it

1 arXiv paper cite this in 1 sentence

Each citing sentence is taken from the citing paper's LaTeX source and typed by Pith's classifier. A label appears at probability 0.8 or more (0.95 for support), a contest at 0.7 or more; the quoted words are the citing authors'. How each label was checked · JSON

Papers citing it

Compares with it 1 paper

Interestingly, the size of these clouds is in the range of clouds observed in [ref] and [ref] .

Dusty Wind-Blown Bubbles · A Proposed Model for N49 · 0.86

Discussion

Disagree with the review, or know something it missed? Leave a comment, highlight any passage above to comment on it, or challenge this review formally.

[1] [1]

Abt , H. A. & Corbally , C. J. 2000, , 541, 841

View on Pith 2000

[2] [2]

Allen , D. A. 1986, , 219, 35P

View on Pith 1986

[3] [3]

Ardeberg , A. & Maurice , E. 1980, , 39, 325

View on Pith 1980

[4] [4]

Bally , J., Licht , D., Smith , N., & Walawender , J. 2005, , 129, 355

View on Pith 2005

[5] [5]

Bally , J., O'Dell , C. R., & McCaughrean , M. J. 2000, , 119, 2919

View on Pith 2000

[6] [6]

Bally , J., Yu , K. C., Rayner , J., & Zinnecker , H. 1998, , 116, 1868

View on Pith 1998

[7] [7]

Belikov , A. N., Kharchenko , N. V., Piskunov , A. E., & Schilbach , E. 1999, , 134, 525

View on Pith 1999

[8] [8]

---. 2000, , 358, 886

View on Pith 2000

[9] [9]

Bica , E., Dutra , C. M., & Barbuy , B. 2003, , 397, 177

View on Pith 2003

[10] [10]

Bok , B. J. & Reilly , E. F. 1947, , 105, 255

View on Pith 1947

[11] [11]

Brandner , W., Grebel , E. K., Chu , Y.-H., Dottori , H., Brandl , B., Richling , S., Yorke , H. W., Points , S. D., & Zinnecker , H. 2000, , 119, 292

View on Pith 2000

[12] [12]

Carraro , G., Patat , F., & Baumgardt , H. 2001, , 371, 107

View on Pith 2001

[13] [13]

Clemens , D. P., Yun , J. L., & Heyer , M. H. 1991, , 75, 877

View on Pith 1991

[14] [14]

Cruz-Gonzalez , C., Recillas-Cruz , E., Costero , R., Peimbert , M., & Torres-Peimbeert , S. 1974, Revista Mexicana de Astronomia y Astrofisica, 1, 211

View on Pith 1974

[15] [15]

Dutra , C. M., Bica , E., Soares , J., & Barbuy , B. 2003, , 400, 533

View on Pith 2003

[16] [16]

Feinstein , A. & Vazquez , R. A. 1989, , 77, 321

View on Pith 1989

[17] [17]

Guetter , H. H. & Turner , D. G. 1997, , 113, 2116

View on Pith 1997

[18] [18]

Hanson , M. M., Howarth , I. D., & Conti , P. S. 1997, , 489, 698

View on Pith 1997

[19] [19]

Henney , W. J. & O'Dell , C. R. 1999, , 118, 2350

View on Pith 1999

[20] [20]

Henney , W. J., O'Dell , C. R., Meaburn , J., Garrington , S. T., & Lopez , J. A. 2002, , 566, 315

View on Pith 2002

[21] [21]

Hester , J. J., Scowen , P. A., Sankrit , R., Lauer , T. R., Ajhar , E. A., Baum , W. A., Code , A., Currie , D. G., Danielson , G. E., Ewald , S. P., Faber , S. M., Grillmair , C. J., Groth , E. J., Holtzman , J. A., Hunter , D. A., Kristian , J., Light , R. M., Lynds , C. R., Monet , D. G., O'Neil , E. J., Shaya , E. J., Seidelmann , K. P., & Westphal ,...

View on Pith 1996

[22] [22]

Jeans , J. H. 1902, Philos.\ Trans.\ R.\ Soc.\ London A, 199, 1

View on Pith 1902

[23] [23]

Johnstone , D., Hollenbach , D., & Bally , J. 1998, , 499, 758

View on Pith 1998

[24] [24]

Joye , W. A. & Mandel , E. 2003, in ASP Conf. Ser. 295: Astronomical Data Analysis Software and Systems XII, 489--+

View on Pith 2003

[25] [25]

Lod \'e n , L. O. 1966, Arkiv for Astronomi, 4, 65

View on Pith 1966

[26] [26]

Ma \' z-Apell \'a niz , J., Walborn , N. R., Galu \'e , H. \'A ., & Wei , L. H. 2004, , 151, 103

View on Pith 2004

[27] [27]

Massey , P., DeGioia-Eastwood , K., & Waterhouse , E. 2001, , 121, 1050

View on Pith 2001

[28] [28]

McCaughrean , M. J. & O'Dell , C. R. 1996, , 111, 1977

View on Pith 1996

[29] [29]

O'Dell , C. R. 2001, , 39, 99

View on Pith 2001

[30] [30]

O'Dell , C. R., Wen , Z., & Hu , X. 1993, , 410, 696

View on Pith 1993

[31] [31]

Paladini , R., Burigana , C., Davies , R. D., Maino , D., Bersanelli , M., Cappellini , B., Platania , P., & Smoot , G. 2003, , 397, 213

View on Pith 2003

[32] [32]

Pellerin , A., Fullerton , A. W., Robert , C., Howk , J. C., Hutchings , J. B., Walborn , N. R., Bianchi , L., Crowther , P. A., & Sonneborn , G. 2002, , 143, 159

View on Pith 2002

[33] [33]

Reid , I. N., Brewer , C., Brucato , R. J., McKinley , W. R., Maury , A., Mendenhall , D., Mould , J. R., Mueller , J., Neugebauer , G., Phinney , J., Sargent , W. L. W., Schombert , J., & Thicksten , R. 1991, , 103, 661

View on Pith 1991

[34] [34]

Reipurth , B., Corporon , P., Olberg , M., & Tenorio-Tagle , G. 1997, , 327, 1185

View on Pith 1997

[35] [35]

Reipurth , B., Raga , A., & Heathcote , S. 2003, , 126, 1925

View on Pith 2003

[36] [36]

Schild , R. E., Garrison , R. F., & Hiltner , W. A. 1983, , 51, 321

View on Pith 1983

[37] [37]

Smith , N., Bally , J., & Morse , J. A. 2003, , 587, L105

View on Pith 2003

[38] [38]

Smith , N., Bally , J., Shuping , R. Y., Morris , M., & Kassis , M. 2005, , 130, 1763

View on Pith 2005

[39] [39]

Stapelfeldt , K., Sahai , R., Werner , M., & Trauger , J. 1997, in ASP Conf. Ser. 119: Planets Beyond the Solar System and the Next Generation of Space Missions, 131--+

View on Pith 1997

[40] [40]

Stecklum , B., Henning , T., Feldt , M., Hayward , T. L., Hoare , M. G., Hofner , P., & Richter , S. 1998, , 115, 767

View on Pith 1998

[41] [41]

Sung , H., Chun , M.-Y., & Bessell , M. S. 2000, , 120, 333

View on Pith 2000

[42] [42]

Thackeray , A. D. 1950, , 110, 524

View on Pith 1950

[43] [43]

Tody , D. 1986, in Instrumentation in astronomy VI; Proceedings of the Meeting, Tucson, AZ, Mar. 4-8, 1986. Part 2 (A87-36376 15-35). Bellingham, WA, Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers, 1986, p. 733., 733--+

View on Pith 1986

[44] [44]

Tody , D. 1993, in ASP Conf. Ser. 52: Astronomical Data Analysis Software and Systems II, 173--+

View on Pith 1993

[45] [45]

van den Ancker , M. E., The , P. S., Feinstein , A., Vazquez , R. A., de Winter , D., & Perez , M. R. 1997, , 123, 63

View on Pith 1997

[46] [46]

Vannier , L., Lemaire , J. L., Field , D., Pineau des For \^ e ts , G., Pijpers , F. P., & Rouan , D. 2001, , 366, 651

View on Pith 2001

[47] [47]

V \'a zquez-Semadeni , E., Kim , J., Shadmehri , M., & Ballesteros-Paredes , J. 2005, , 618, 344

View on Pith 2005

[48] [48]

Walborn , N. R. 1972, , 77, 312

View on Pith 1972

[49] [49]

---. 1982, , 87, 1300

View on Pith 1982

[50] [50]

---. 1987, , 93, 868

View on Pith 1987

[51] [51]

Warren , W. H. & Hesser , J. E. 1977, , 34, 115

View on Pith 1977

[52] [52]

Yusef-Zadeh , F., Biretta , J., & Geballe , T. R. 2005, , 130, 1171

View on Pith 2005