Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 2 cited by

REsolved ALMA and SMA Observations of Nearby Stars (REASONS): A population of 74 resolved planetesimal belts at millimetre wavelengths

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-10 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read The REASONS survey of 74 resolved planetesimal belts finds that belt dust mass is depleted with age, more quickly in smaller belts, matching collisional evolution.

desk verdict A landmark data release and careful reanalysis; the collisional evolution claim is plausible but rests on an assumption the bias maps cannot test. read the letter →

arxiv 2501.09058 v1 pith:4L6ZORVG submitted 2025-01-15 astro-ph.EP astro-ph.SR

L. Matrà , S. Marino , D. J. Wilner , G. M. Kennedy , M. Booth , A. V. Krivov , J. P. Williams , A. M. Hughes
show 14 more authors
C. del Burgo J. Carpenter C. L. Davies S. Ertel Q. Kral J.-F. Lestrade J. P. Marshall J. Milli K. I. Öberg N. Pawellek A. G. Sepulveda M. C. Wyatt B. C. Matthews M. MacGregor
This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.EPastro-ph.SR
keywords planetarysystemssubmillimeter:circumstellarmattersurveystechniques:interferometriccollisionalevolutiondebrisdiscsexo-Kuiperbelts
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

Planetesimal belts are rings of debris left over from planet formation, and this paper uses a sample of 74 of them, resolved at millimetre wavelengths with ALMA and the SMA, to ask what happens to that debris over time. The central claim is that the belts are not static: their dust is ground away by collisions, and the depletion is fastest in the smallest belts. The evidence is a uniform visibility-modelling analysis that places young Sco-Cen belts and old field-star belts on a mass-radius diagram, where the old population sits below the young one by about two orders of magnitude in dust mass. That offset aligns with the collisional-evolution locus and implies mass loss roughly proportional to time after the belt reaches collisional equilibrium. If correct, a resolved belt's mass and radius carry information about its age and its collisional history, turning debris discs into evolutionary probes.

What carries the argument

The argument is carried by the mass-radius-age diagram built from uniform interferometric visibility modelling: each belt is modelled as an axisymmetric radially Gaussian ring to recover the centroid radius $R$ and fractional width $\Delta R/R$, and a millimetre dust mass is derived from the 1.33 mm flux density assuming large grains radiate as blackbodies. The evolutionary interpretation rests on collisional isochrones from the analytical model ${\rm Mass}_{1.33{\rm mm}}(t)={\rm Mass}_{1.33{\rm mm}}(t_0)/(1+[(t-t_0)\epsilon]/t_c)$ with collisional timescale $t_c=(D/{\rm Mass}_{1.33{\rm mm}}(t_0))R^{\delta}$; taking $\epsilon=1$ and $\delta=13/3$ predicts a diagonal locus ${\rm Mass}_{1.33{\rm mm}}\propto R^{13/3}$ for belts that have reached collisional equilibrium. The match of the old field population to this diagonal, together with the young population sitting above it, converts a scatter plot into evidence for radius-dependent collisional depletion.

What would settle it

Find, after applying the paper's own selection corrections, an old field belt (age >200 Myr) with a mass and radius in the top-left region of the mass-radius diagram typical of the 10–30 Myr Sco-Cen belts, such as roughly $1\,M_\oplus$ of millimetre grains at $R<50$ au; its presence would break the claimed depletion pattern, as would a coeval old population showing the same mass-radius distribution as the young associations.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

In $[{\rm Mass}_{1.33{\rm mm}}{-}R]$ space, the REASONS sample shows a clear trend: belts around old field stars are on average significantly less massive and at the same time larger than belts around the youngest moving group, and the older population lies along a diagonal locus consistent with ${\rm Mass}_{1.33{\rm mm}}\propto R^{13/3}$, the expectation for belts in collisional equilibrium. The vertical offset of roughly 2 dex in mass over roughly 2 dex in collisional age implies $\epsilon\sim 1$, i.e. mass depletes as $(t-t_0)^{-1}$, consistent with the simple collisional cascade model and disfavouring shallower $t^{-0.4}$ evolution. The same dataset shows that most belts are broad discs rather than narrow rings, with a median fractional width of 0.71 and about 70% of well-measured belts having $\Delta R/R>0.5$, a distribution inconsistent with protoplanetary ring widths, and that the 24 belts with constrained vertical aspect ratios have heights implying inclinations of 1–20 degrees with no age trend, which the authors interpret as early stirring by bodies of at least about 140 km in size.

Load-bearing premise

The inference that the young-to-old mass offset is depletion rather than birth differences rests on the assumption that the initial millimetre-grain belt mass is independent of stellar and belt properties, with a common start time of 10 Myr and a single collisional constant; if young and old belts were born with different masses or collisional histories, the observed offset would not measure the depletion rate.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Small, massive belts are rare around old stars because they deplete fastest, not because they never formed.
  • Selection-corrected mass-radius diagrams become a standard diagnostic for debris-disc evolution.
  • The majority of resolved belts are broad rather than narrow rings, so narrow rings like Fomalhaut's are not representative of the detectable belt population.
  • Vertical aspect ratios imply stirring by bodies at least about 140 km in size happens within roughly 10–50 Myr, so heights trace excitation state rather than age.
  • For belts in collisional equilibrium, the expected ${\rm Mass}_{1.33{\rm mm}}\propto R^{13/3}$ locus gives a direct way to identify which belts are still primordial versus collisionally processed.

Reading between the lines

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

  • One testable extension of the $t^{-1}$ result: if the initial-mass assumption holds, belt masses from resolved mm surveys could serve as rough age indicators for old systems, though calibrating the zero-point would require coeval populations at several ages.
  • A direct way to separate natal from evolutionary origin is to map mass-radius in several young associations at 10–30 Myr; if initial mass anticorrelates with radius within a single age cohort, part of the old-young offset is set at birth rather than by collisions.
  • The vertical-structure result predicts that gas-bearing debris discs should not show vertically settled mm grains; measuring the aspect ratio in a larger sample of CO-rich belts would test whether gas densities there are truly too low to affect mm-grain dynamics.
  • If broad belts hide unresolved gaps, then higher-resolution imaging should resolve a substantial fraction of the wide belts into two or more narrow rings, softening the reported width contrast with protoplanetary discs.
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 / 4 minor

Summary. The paper presents the REASONS sample: 74 planetesimal belts around nearby stars observed with ALMA and SMA, uniformly modelled in the visibility domain with a Gaussian ring prescription. The main scientific claims are (1) a dearth of small belts, (2) most belts are broad rather than narrow rings, with widths inconsistent with protoplanetary ring widths, (3) vertical aspect ratios implying orbital inclinations of ~1–20 deg with no age trend, and (4) a mass–radius trend in which older field belts are less massive and larger than young Sco-Cen belts, interpreted as radius-dependent collisional evolution with mass depletion roughly linear in time (epsilon ~ 1 in Eq. 4). The paper also releases the full data products and tabulated parameters to the community.

Significance. If the evolutionary interpretation holds, this is the first large resolved sample to show directly that the observable planetesimal belt population is a collisional outcome rather than a set of static birth properties, which would be a major step for debris disc population modelling. The uniform reduction of 74 belts, with public release of calibrated visibilities, images, and fitted parameters, is a substantial community resource. The modelling is careful: the visibility fitting uses MCMC with residual checks, and the authors state key caveats about the Gaussian ring assumption, fixed aspect ratio when unresolved, and the selection-bias construction. The population inferences, however, rest on simplifying assumptions that are partly acknowledged, and the most load-bearing of these—the common initial mass in the collisional evolution model—is not tested against alternatives.

major comments (3)
  1. [Sec. 5.3, Eq. (4)] The inference that the young-to-old mass offset measures a linear depletion rate (epsilon ~ 1) assumes Mass_1.33mm(t0), the initial mm-grain belt mass, is identical for Sco-Cen and field stars (stated in the text as 'assumed to be independent of stellar and belt properties'). On the equilibrium branch of the model, Mass_1.33mm(t) reduces to (D R^delta)/((t-t0)^epsilon), which is algebraically invariant under a simultaneous rescaling of M0 and D. The two subsamples differ strongly in median distance (127 pc vs 24 pc) and selection functions (Lieman-Sifry 70 um excess criterion vs SONS 850 um flux limit), so a systematic birth-mass difference between them would produce exactly the vertical offset seen in Fig. 8. The bias maps of Fig. 7 cannot break this degeneracy because they are built by resampling the observed N-2 parameter distribution, implicitly assuming unobserved belts have the same properties as observed ones (Sec. 5.1). A forward model with free initial-mass hyperparameters (or a direct comparison controlling for stellar type and distance) is required before the linear-depletion claim can be accepted.
  2. [Sec. 5.3, Eq. (4)] The numerical value of epsilon depends sensitively on the assumed collisional-age baseline. The text says the offset of ~2 dex in mass occurs over '~2 dex of collisional age (between ~10 Myr and ~1 Gyr)', but the old-field isochrone shown in Fig. 8 is for 5 Gyr, and many field stars in Table A.2 have ages of several Gyr. Using t_young = 15 Myr and t_field = 5 Gyr, the denominator log(t_field - t0) - log(t_young - t0) is about 3 dex, which would give epsilon ~ 2/3 rather than ~1 for a 2 dex mass offset. Because the field-star ages carry large uncertainties (e.g., HD38858 has age 5 +/- 5 Gyr, and several systems list only broad ranges), the paper should either propagate age uncertainties into Eq. (4) or state the epsilon conclusion as sensitive to the adopted age baseline.
  3. [Sec. 5.1, bias maps] The bias maps are constructed by drawing the N-2 non-plotted parameters randomly from the 74 observed belts, so they answer only 'what fraction of belts at this [X,Y] location would have been detected if they had the same distribution of other parameters as the observed population'. This is an acknowledged assumption, but it directly limits the strength of the conclusion drawn in Sec. 5.1 that the dearth of small belts cannot be explained by selection effects: a population in which small belts are intrinsically rarer but have different (e.g., narrower or warmer) properties would not be represented. The qualitative conclusion may survive, but the quantitative claim should be softened or supplemented with a sensitivity test that varies the N-2 distribution.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Sec. 3.1] There is a typo in the text: 'tables available on Z enodo' should read 'Zenodo'.
  2. [Sec. 6] In the bullet on aspect ratios, the phrase 'stirred very earlyA diversity' is missing a space; it should read 'stirred very early. A diversity'.
  3. [Sec. 4.2.4] The notation '50+34−34th percentile' in the description of Table 1 is confusing; it appears to be a LaTeX artifact and should be written as '50th percentile with 34th and 16th percentiles' or similar.
  4. [Sec. 5.4] The statement that relative velocities of 0.1–4 km/s follow from the derived inclinations uses Eq. 10 of Matrà et al. (2019b), but this equation is not reproduced; a brief restatement of the assumed mean eccentricity or the vrel-to-inclination relation would improve reproducibility.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the REASONS evolutionary trends are derived from independent measurements and openly stated assumptions, not from the model being tested.

full rationale

The central claim (Sect. 5.3) is that the ~2 dex young-old mass offset at mm wavelengths is collisional depletion with epsilon~1. This is not circular: masses are measured from visibilities and photometry (Eq. 2), radii from independent visibility fits, and ages from association membership and the literature. The collisional isochrone Mass(t)=M0/(1+(t-t0)eps/tc) with tc=(D/M0)R^delta is a forward model, not fitted to the old data; D is set to match the young (5 Myr) isochrone, and the 5 Gyr isochrone is then compared to the old field population. The epsilon=0.4 alternative is rejected because it 'significantly overestimates the mass of belts in the old field population' after re-calibrating D to the same young isochrone; the age-ratio dependence of the equilibrium branch (Eq. 4) makes this a genuine comparison. The assumption that Mass1.33mm(t0) is 'independent of stellar and belt properties' is a stated identifiability condition, not a hidden fit; it is a caveat about a birth-vs-evolution degeneracy, not a reduction of the result to its inputs. Likewise, the bias maps resample the observed N-2 distribution, 'assuming unobserved belts have the same distribution of parameters [d,RBB/R,M,lambda0,beta] as the observed population,' but the authors explicitly frame this as a conditional selection-fraction estimate, and the dearth-of-small-belts argument does not require the map to be circular. Self-citations (e.g., Matrà et al. 2019b for the h-to-inclination relation; Wyatt et al. 2007a for the collisional cascade) are external derivations used as tools, not self-supporting premises. No equation in the paper is equivalent to its input by construction.

Assumptions & free parameters 4 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central population claims do not introduce new physics, so no invented entities are present. The load-bearing free choices are the collisional model constants D, initial mass, and start time, plus the fixed aspect ratio used when belts are unresolved. The most consequential modeling axiom is that unobserved belts resemble observed belts in all non-plotted parameters, which makes the bias maps partly circular.

free parameters (4)
  • D, collisional timescale constant = ~2e-8 Myr Msun au^-13/3
    Chosen for a good qualitative fit to the 5 Myr isochrone in Fig. 8, not derived independently. Appears in tc=(D/M0)R^delta in Sect. 5.3.
  • Initial mm-grain belt mass Mass_1.33mm(t0) = 1 Msun or 0.1 Msun (solid/dashed isochrones)
    Assumed initial mass at t0=10 Myr, independent of stellar and belt properties; sets the vertical position of collisional isochrones in Sect. 5.3.
  • Start time of collisional evolution t0 = 10 Myr
    Adopted for simplicity for all belts in Sect. 5.3; affects the collisional age baseline used in Eq. 4.
  • Fixed vertical aspect ratio h = 0.03
    Aspect ratio fixed to the AU Mic value for belts not vertically resolved, as stated in Sect. 4.2.2; it affects model fitting but is not used for the 24 measured heights.
assumptions (6)
  • domain assumption Every belt is well described by a Gaussian radial surface density profile.
    Adopted in Sect. 4.2.2 to derive centroid radius and FWHM width; acknowledged to be inaccurate for some belts, with 9/74 showing significant residuals.
  • domain assumption Vertical density is a single Gaussian with constant aspect ratio, corresponding to a Rayleigh distribution of particle inclinations.
    Stated in Sect. 4.2.2; used to convert h to RMS inclination via sqrt(<i^2>)=sqrt(2)h in Sect. 5.4.
  • domain assumption Millimeter grains emit like blackbodies with T(R)=278.3 Lstar^0.25 R^-0.5.
    Used for the temperature prescription in Sect. 4.2.2 and for mass estimates in Sect. 5.3; not appropriate for smaller grains but appropriate for the large grains dominating mm emission.
  • domain assumption The collisional evolution model of Wyatt et al. (2007a) applies, with epsilon=1 and delta=13/3.
    Invoked in Sect. 5.3 to draw isochrones and interpret the mass-radius-age trends; the exponents are taken from the literature rather than fitted here.
  • ad hoc to paper Unobserved belts have the same distribution of N-2 parameters as the observed REASONS sample when constructing bias maps.
    Stated in Sect. 5.1; this is the circularity in the selection correction, because the correction conditions on the very distribution being characterized.
  • domain assumption Literature ages of the host stars are accurate enough for the age binning and the Eq. 4 offset calculation.
    Ages in Table A.2 come from heterogeneous literature references with varied methods and uncertainties; the mass-depletion inference depends on these ages.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of REsolved ALMA and SMA Observations of Nearby Stars (REASONS): A population of 74 resolved planetesimal belts at millimetre wavelengths." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/4L6ZORVG

@misc{pith2026250109058,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: REsolved ALMA and SMA Observations of Nearby Stars (REASONS): A population of 74 resolved planetesimal belts at millimetre wavelengths},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/4L6ZORVG}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2501.09058}
}
read the original abstract

Planetesimal belts are ubiquitous around nearby stars, and their spatial properties hold crucial information for planetesimal and planet formation models. We present resolved dust observations of 74 planetary systems as part of the REsolved ALMA and SMA Observations of Nearby Stars (REASONS) survey and archival reanalysis. We uniformly modelled interferometric visibilities for the entire sample to obtain the basic spatial properties of each belt, and combined these with constraints from multi-wavelength photometry. We report key findings from a first exploration of this legacy dataset: (1) Belt dust masses are depleted over time in a radially dependent way, with dust being depleted faster in smaller belts, as predicted by collisional evolution. (2) Most belts are broad discs rather than narrow rings, with much broader fractional widths than rings in protoplanetary discs. We link broad belts to either unresolved substructure or broad planetesimal discs produced if protoplanetary rings migrate. (3) The vertical aspect ratios (h = H/R) of 24 belts indicate orbital inclinations of 1-20 degrees, implying relative particle velocities of 0.1-4 km/s, and no clear evolution of heights with system age. This could be explained by early stirring within the belt by large bodies (with sizes of at least 140 km to the size of the Moon), by inheritance of inclinations from the protoplanetary disc stage, or by a diversity in evolutionary pathways and gravitational stirring mechanisms. We release the REASONS legacy multidimensional sample of millimetre-resolved belts to the community as a valuable tool for follow-up multi-wavelength observations and population modelling studies.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2501.09058 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Millimetre continuum images for the REASONS resolved sample of 74 belts, ordered by source RA. North is up and east is left. Bars indicate a physical scale of 50 au, and ellipses represent the synthesised beam of the observations. Images were obtained with the CLEAN algorithm as described in Sect. 3, with weighting parameters, resulting RMS noise levels, and beams listed in the observational log tables (available on… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Visuals used to support the modelling and fit evaluation process, carried out for each system, here shown for the GJ14 system as an example. Leftmost: ALMA continuum image of the GJ14 system (see imaging details in tables available on Zenodo). Contours are [2,4,..] × the RMS noise level. Center left: full resolution best-fit belt model. Center right: Residual image after subtraction of the best-fit visibilities from… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Example of multi-wavelength photometry gathered for the GJ 14 system (brown circles for detections, and downward-pointing triangles for upper limits), and best-fit star (blue) and single-component modified blackbody belt model (green) obtained following the method of Yelver￾ton et al. (2019). Best-fit parameters for this and other systems are listed in Table A.2. dius, width) of belts at the resolution and SNR of mo… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (5 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: shows the distribution of planetesimal belt radii as a function of their host star luminosity. Before consideration of selection bias, we find the same positive-sloping, shallow trend noticed by Matrà et al. (2018) and Marshall et al. (2021), though with much larger sc…
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: shows the fractional widths as a function of system age, and coloured by their estimated stellar mass. We find no cor￾relation between the age of systems and their fractional widths. This figure shows, however, that our sample of protoplanetary discs is dominated by lo…
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Mass of grains as measured from belt flux densities at 1.33 mm as a function of the radius of observed planetesimal belts (all points with error bars). Each panel focuses on a different subgroup of REASONS belts (shown as the white points, rest of the population in gre…
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Belt dust mass (as measured at 1.33 mm) as a function of re￾solved belt radius for the REASONS sample (coloured points with er￾ror bars). The filled contours represent the 2D density distributions of belts ≤ 30 (blue solid), 30-200 (green dotted), and > 200 (red dashed…
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Vertical aspect ratios h as a function of host-star age for REA￾SONS planetesimal belts (left y axis), a measure of the RMS inclination of dust grains (right y axis) assuming a Rayleigh distribution of incli￾nations. Black and white points with errors are measured valu…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 2 Pith papers

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

  1. The Longest-period Young Transiting Exoplanets. A Duo of Puffy Giants inside a Debris Disk

    astro-ph.EP 2026-07 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    HD 114082 hosts two puffy, moderate-to-low-mass giants on nearly circular, coplanar, near-resonant orbits of 225.55 and ~314 days, the longest-period young transiting exoplanets known.

  2. A search for circumstellar gas in pre-main-sequence debris discs using absorption spectroscopy

    astro-ph.EP 2026-07 accept novelty 5.5 of 10

    Absorption spectroscopy of 130 young debris-disc hosts yields two new circumstellar-gas detections (TYC7879-1373-1 stable; HIP30414 variable/accreting), both pre-MS and <5 Myr, bringing the <10 Myr total to eight.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

31 extracted references · 30 canonical work pages · cited by 2 Pith papers

  1. [1]

    M., Huang, J., Pérez, L

    Andrews, S. M., Huang, J., Pérez, L. M., et al. 2018, ApJ, 869, L41 Aumann, H. H. 1985, PASP, 97, 885 Backman, D. E. & Paresce, F. 1993, in Protostars and Planets III, ed. E. H. Levy & J. I. Lunine, 1253–1304 Baines, E. K., White, R. J., Huber, D., et al. 2012, ApJ, 761, 57 Ballering, N. P., Rieke, G. H., Su, K. Y . L., & Montiel, E. 2013, ApJ, 775, 55 Be...

    arXiv 2018

  2. [2]

    2018), or moving group age also from Gagné et al

    Membership from BANY AN Sigma (Gagné et al. 2018), or moving group age also from Gagné et al. (2018) -

    work page 2018

  3. [3]

    2018), but moving group age from Zuckerman (2019) -

    Membership from BANY AN Sigma (Gagné et al. 2018), but moving group age from Zuckerman (2019) -

    work page 2019

  4. [4]

    References

    Age uncertainty (symmetric) conservatively estimated as 25%×Age×log10(Age/Myr) (Pawellek & Krivov 2015). References. Age references corresponding to:

    work page 2015

  5. [5]

    (2014) -

    Chen et al. (2014) -

    work page 2014

  6. [6]

    (2007) -

    Rhee et al. (2007) -

    work page 2007

  7. [7]

    (2022, and refs

    Pearce et al. (2022, and refs. therein) -

    work page 2022

  8. [8]

    Zorec & Royer (2012) -

    work page 2012

Show all 31 references
  1. [9]

    (2005) -

    Kalas et al. (2005) -

    2005

  2. [10]

    (2015) -

    Kennedy et al. (2015) -

    2015

  3. [11]

    (2013) -

    Eiroa et al. (2013) -

    2013

  4. [12]

    (2016) -

    Marshall et al. (2016) -

    2016

  5. [13]

    (2016) -

    Vican et al. (2016) -

    2016

  6. [14]

    (2014) -

    Brandt et al. (2014) -

    2014

  7. [15]

    (2016) -

    Dodson-Robinson et al. (2016) -

    2016

  8. [16]

    (2010) -

    Yoon et al. (2010) -

    2010

  9. [17]

    (2006) -

    Gray et al. (2006) -

    2006

  10. [18]

    (2019) -

    Faramaz et al. (2019) -

    2019

  11. [19]

    (2011) -

    Casagrande et al. (2011) -

    2011

  12. [20]

    (2012) -

    Baines et al. (2012) -

    2012

  13. [21]

    (2017) -

    Currie et al. (2017) -

    2017

  14. [22]

    (2008) -

    Torres et al. (2008) -

    2008

  15. [23]

    (2011) -

    Moór et al. (2011) -

    2011

  16. [24]

    (2000) -

    Decin et al. (2000) -

    2000

  17. [25]

    (2015) -

    Desidera et al. (2015) -

    2015

  18. [26]

    (2023) Article number, page 22 of 27 L

    Hinkley et al. (2023) Article number, page 22 of 27 L. Matrà et al.: REsolved ALMA and SMA Observations of Nearby Stars 20 020 20 10 0 10 20 North offset (") HD6798 0.3 0.0 0.3 0.6 Flux (mJy beam

    2023

  19. [27]

    ) 20 10 0 10 20 North offset (

    20 020 20 10 0 10 20 HD13161 0.2 0.0 0.2 0.4 20 020 20 10 0 10 20 HD25457 0.25 0.00 0.25 0.50 20 020 20 10 0 10 20 GJ322 0.3 0.0 0.3 0.6 20 020 20 10 0 10 20 HD125162 0.2 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 20 020 East offset (") 20 10 0 10 20 North offset (") HD143894 1.0 0.5 0.0 0.5 1.0 10 010 ...

    2017

  20. [28]

    Fig. B.2. HD13161 (β Tri) SMA modelling results. Left to right panels: SMA image (contours at intervals of 2x the RMS noise level of 0.11 mJy beam−1), full resolution best-fit model image of the belt, residual image after subtraction of best-fit visibilities, and real and imag...

    2013

  21. [29]

    32 of Holland et al

    the JCMT detection corresponds to the N source (SMA J085200.95+660815.8), and appears in the center of the JCMT map due to a systematic pointing o ffset, which is however also unlikely (see Fig. 32 of Holland et al. 2017)

    2017

  22. [30]

    ) 20 10 0 10 20 North offset (

    Fig. B.3. SMA continuum image of the field around the star HD25457, after application of a 5 ′′ u-v taper. Contours are set at intervals of 2x the RMS noise level of 0.12 mJy beam−1. 1.5 1.0 0.5 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 Real (mJy) Data 0 10 20 30 40 50 Ruv (k ) 1 0 1 Imaginary (mJy) Fi...

    2013

  23. [31]

    Fig. B.5. HD125162 (λ Boo) SMA modelling results. Left to right panels: SMA image (contours at intervals of 2x the RMS noise level of 0.12 mJy beam−1), full resolution best-fit model image of the belt, residual image after subtraction of best-fit visibilities, and real and ima...

    2013

Pith tools

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