Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 1 cited by

Dusty clumps in circumbinary discs

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-14 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read In circumbinary discs, an eccentric and inclined inner binary sculpts millimetre dust into clumps whose pattern encodes the binary's orbit.

desk verdict A solid simulation study that genuinely identifies a new dust-clump formation mechanism in circumbinary discs, but the AB Aurigae companion claim is a post-hoc visual match, not a diagnosis. read the letter →

arxiv 1908.05784 v2 pith:FR6UZD5L submitted 2019-08-15 astro-ph.EP

Pedro P. Poblete , Nicolás Cuello , Jorge Cuadra This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.EP
keywords circumbinarydiscsprotoplanetarydustclumpsStokesnumberbinaryeccentricityinclinationSPHsimulationsABAurigae
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 uses three-dimensional two-fluid smoothed-particle hydrodynamics to ask what an eccentric, inclined stellar binary does to the dust in the circumbinary disc that surrounds it. It finds two distinct outcomes: a single horseshoe-shaped dust clump sitting on a gas overdensity when the binary is nearly coplanar, or several small clumps spaced along the inner dust ring when the binary is highly inclined. The small clumps form because the binary's spiral arms bend the dust ring and drive millimetre grains with Stokes number near unity into local overdensities, and these clumps survive from one to several tens of orbital periods. Because the clump pattern depends on binary eccentricity and inclination, the paper argues that such patterns could be used to infer the presence and orbit of a companion too faint to detect directly, and it applies this idea to the disc around AB Aurigae.

What carries the argument

The mechanism is aerodynamical drag acting on dust grains of a specific size. The Stokes number, defined as the ratio of the orbital timescale to the drag stopping time, is near unity for 1 mm grains in the chosen disc, so these grains drift fastest and concentrate most strongly in pressure maxima. The binary excites two nested gas spirals, a 'head' from the current pericentre passage and a 'tail' from the previous orbit, that bend the dust ring between them; the resulting radial density gradient makes dust drift toward the head, where a small clump accumulates. Periodic repeats of this process form clumps each orbit, and their survival depends on the local Stokes number and on the binary inclination.

What would settle it

A deep, high-resolution image of AB Aurigae at 1.3 mm with complete telescope baseline coverage that resolves the inner dust ring into a smooth, continuous annulus with no discrete clumps would settle the claim against the model; detecting an eccentric (about 0.5), inclined (about 60 degrees) companion with a 0.25 mass ratio inside the cavity would settle it in favour of the model.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central result is that the dust morphology of a circumbinary disc is a readable map of the inner binary's orbit. When the binary is nearly coplanar (iB ≤ 30 degrees), the disc develops a single large dust clump atop a gaseous horseshoe; when the binary is inclined by 60 to 120 degrees, the dust ring fragments into several small clumps, evenly spaced in the polar case; a highly eccentric retrograde binary can also produce a clump-ring structure. All of this is driven by the interaction of millimetre-sized grains, whose Stokes number is close to unity, with binary-induced gas spirals, and the clumps survive long enough to be observable. The authors conclude that such features could in principle constrain the orbital parameters of an otherwise unseen stellar companion, and they identify the e50-i60 simulation as matching the observed AB Aurigae dust distribution.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing assumption is that no other mechanism, such as an embedded planet, a flyby, self-gravity, or shadows, can produce the same small-clump morphology, so that observed clumps can be read as a signature of an unseen inclined stellar companion.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • A single bright dust clump sitting on a gas horseshoe is an observable signature of a nearly coplanar inner binary, with inclination up to about 30 degrees.
  • Several small dust clumps spaced along the inner dust ring indicate a highly inclined binary (60 to 120 degrees), with even spacing in the exactly polar case.
  • The clump pattern is size-selective: only grains whose Stokes number is close to unity participate, so detecting clumps at one wavelength but not another constrains the grain size.
  • Polar circumbinary discs, where clumps survive for tens of orbits, become plausible sites for dust accumulation, grain growth, and eventually planetesimal formation.
  • For AB Aurigae, the e50-i60 model reproduces the 1.3 mm dust distribution, predicting an unseen eccentric, inclined stellar companion inside the cavity.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Beyond the paper: the azimuthal spacing and number of small clumps should be tied to the binary period and mass ratio, so single-epoch images may encode more orbital information than the paper explicitly claims.
  • Beyond the paper: multi-wavelength continuum imaging should show the clumps only at wavelengths tracing grains with Stokes number near unity; observing the same clump pattern across very different grain sizes would point to a different trapping mechanism.
  • Beyond the paper: because the mechanism is purely aerodynamic, it should operate in other forced dusty discs, such as discs around eccentric planets or in accreting compact-object binaries, whenever the local stopping time is comparable to the orbital time.
  • Beyond the paper: a direct test of the AB Aurigae interpretation is to search for the predicted companion with high-contrast imaging at small radii, where current upper limits still permit a low-mass stellar companion.
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

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper presents three-dimensional two-fluid SPH simulations of circumbinary discs around eccentric and inclined stellar binaries, with binary eccentricities eB = 0.50 and 0.75 and inclinations ranging from 0 to 180 degrees. The main finding is that the dust distribution develops two qualitatively different structures depending on the binary parameters: a single horseshoe-shaped dust clump associated with a gas overdensity for low inclinations, and multiple small dusty clumps distributed along the inner dust ring for highly inclined configurations. The small clumps are argued to form through the interaction between millimetre-sized dust (Stokes number near unity) and binary-induced gaseous spirals, and to survive from one to several tens of local orbital periods. The authors apply this scenario to AB Aurigae, proposing that the observed 1.3 mm dust clumps indicate the presence of an unseen eccentric and inclined stellar companion. The paper includes appendices with dust-resolution convergence tests, a test of the Stokes-number approximation, and two simulations with a planetary-mass companion.

Significance. The formation of small dusty clumps in circumbinary discs via the coupling of St~1 dust to binary-driven spiral arms is a genuinely new and physically interesting result. The claim is supported by a convergence test in Appendix B (Figure B1) showing that the clump morphology is unaffected by dust resolution, and by grain-size experiments (Figures 7 and 8) confirming that the mechanism is most efficient when the Stokes number is close to unity. The parameter study across eccentricity and inclination provides a useful taxonomy of dust morphologies (horseshoe, small clumps, smooth ring) that could inform future observations. If the AB Aurigae inference were robustly established, the paper would offer a valuable indirect method to detect unseen companions. However, the observational application currently rests on a single visual match and is not quantitatively validated, so the significance of that particular claim remains prospective.

major comments (3)
  1. [Section 4.3.2] The inference of an unseen eccentric and inclined companion in AB Aurigae is based on a single visual comparison between the simulated e50-i60 dust surface density, convolved with a 50 au beam and arbitrarily rotated, and the observed 1.3 mm continuum map of Tang et al. (2012). No quantitative metric (e.g., a chi-squared comparison of azimuthal intensity profiles with uncertainties) is provided, no degeneracy study is performed over binary parameters (eB, iB, mass ratio, semi-major axis) or disc parameters, and the paper itself notes that the 0.9 mm map shows a continuous ring and that uv-plane coverage can produce artificial clumps. The strong statement in Section 5 that the authors 'strongly suggest the presence of an eccentric and inclined inner companion in AB Aurigae' is not supported by the presented evidence. I recommend either adding synthetic ALMA observations with full uv-sampling and a quantitative comparison, or substantially softening the claim to a speculative suggestion.
  2. [Section 4.3.2 and Section 2.1] The model parameters are fixed to those of HD 142527 (M1 = 2 Msun, M2 = 0.5 Msun, a = 40 au, disc inner edge 90 au, total gas mass 0.01 Msun), whereas AB Aurigae has a primary mass of 2.4 Msun and a cavity radius of approximately 70-100 au. The paper does not rescale or re-simulate for AB Aurigae's specific stellar mass, binary separation, or disc mass, so the morphological match could be coincidental. To support the companion inference, the authors should demonstrate that the small-clump morphology and its azimuthal distribution are robust to reasonable variations in binary separation, mass ratio, and disc mass appropriate for AB Aurigae, or at least discuss the expected scalings and their uncertainties.
  3. [Appendix A and Section 4.3.1] The statement in Section 4.3.1 that 'an inner planet-mass companion does not produce such structures' and that this 'allows us to set a lower mass threshold for structure formation' is broader than what Appendix A establishes. Only two simulations with a 10 MJ companion in the polar configuration (e50-i90) at two inner-edge radii are presented; planet mass, semi-major axis, eccentricity, and inclination are not varied, and no models of flybys or shadow-induced structures (cited in Section 4.3.1) are tested. The conclusion should be limited to the specific case tested, or the parameter search should be expanded before making a general claim that the observed clumps can only be triggered by a stellar companion.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Section 3.2] The word 'regrades' should be 'retrograde' in the sentence 'This is well seen for regrades cases with eB = 0.75.'
  2. [Equation (1)] The correction factor f for supersonic drag is not defined; please provide its expression or a reference for it.
  3. [Figure 9] The visual comparison in Figure 9 would be more convincing with a consistent colour scale, an explicit statement of the beam size in au, and ideally a synthetic observation including uv-sampling effects rather than a simple convolution.
  4. [Section 4.2] In the 'no drag' test, it would be helpful to state explicitly that the test isolates the purely gravitational response of the dust without aerodynamic coupling, since the text says the dust particles 'behave as test particles'.
  5. [Section 2.2.2] The justification for dropping the dust density in the Stokes number calculation states that the dust-to-gas ratio remains below unity; it would be useful to quantify the maximum epsilon reached in the clumps, since Section 4.1.3 discusses values approaching unity.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: the paper is a self-contained numerical parameter study; the AB Aurigae application is a qualitative model-selection step, not a prediction derived from fitted inputs.

full rationale

The paper's central content is a two-fluid SPH parameter exploration in which binary eccentricity and inclination are free input parameters, not quantities fitted to the clump outcomes. The grain size is chosen so that 1 mm grains have Stokes number near unity, but the paper explicitly tests this choice against 100 micron, 1 cm, and no-drag runs (Section 4.2, Figs. 7-8), showing that clumps form only in the marginal-coupling regime; this is a physical parameter-dependence check, not an identity built into the initial conditions. The proposed clump-formation mechanism (Section 4.1.1) is described in terms of aerodynamic drag on dust in the region between binary-induced spirals and is not equivalent to the initial setup by construction. Numerical convergence and the Stokes-number approximation are tested in Appendices B and C, providing independent support that the features are not numerical artifacts. The AB Aurigae inference (Section 4.3.2) is the weakest quantitative step, because the e50-i60 case is selected after visual inspection to reproduce the observed 1.3 mm dust distribution, and the paper itself notes that other mechanisms, uv-coverage artifacts, and the 0.9 mm continuous ring weaken the observational anchor. However, this is a limitation in predictive uniqueness and model-selection methodology, not circularity: the binary parameters are not fitted by any equation to the clump properties, and the paper does not claim a mathematically forced derivation. The use of Price et al. (2018b) for the disc setup is prior work, not a self-citation carrying the load of the present claim. No equation in the paper reduces to its inputs by construction, so no circular step can be exhibited.

Assumptions & free parameters 5 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The simulation results rest on the two-fluid SPH drag model, a disc model calibrated to HD 142527, and the assumption that the observed AB Aurigae structures are binary-induced. The main free choices are the grain size (set to St~1) and the explored binary eccentricity and inclination grid. No new physical entities are introduced.

free parameters (5)
  • Binary eccentricity eB = 0.50, 0.75
    Explored grid; central results depend on eB, especially small clumps only at eB=0.75 for retrograde cases.
  • Binary inclination iB = 0, 30, 60, 90, 120, 150, 180 degrees
    Explored grid; determines whether a horseshoe clump or small clumps form.
  • Dust grain size s = 1 mm (plus 100 um and 1 cm in tests)
    Chosen to give Stokes number near unity; the proposed mechanism is most efficient for St~1.
  • SPH artificial viscosity parameter alpha_AV = 0.3 (alpha_SS ~ 0.005)
    Sets disc viscosity, which affects spiral strength and dust drift.
  • Disc and binary scale parameters = M1=2 Msun, M2=0.5 Msun, a=40 au, disc mass 0.01 Msun, Rin=90 au, Rout=350 au
    Chosen to resemble HD 142527; the extent to which results generalize to other systems is untested.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption The two-fluid SPH treatment with the Stokes drag prescription (Epstein regime, Eq. 1) correctly captures the dust-gas coupling relevant for mm-sized grains.
    The paper relies on this drag model throughout; Appendix B tests the rho=rho_g approximation but not the drag physics itself. The Epstein regime is justified because the mean free path exceeds grain size, but the expression for St is standard.
  • domain assumption The observed morphology of AB Aurigae (multiple spirals, horseshoe dust trap, cavity) is primarily caused by an unseen stellar companion rather than by the alternative mechanisms cited (planets, flybys, self-gravity, shadows).
    Section 4.3.2 adopts the binary scenario as more promising and selects e50-i60 as the best match; the alternatives are only discussed qualitatively.
  • domain assumption Neglecting magnetic fields, self-gravity, and radiative transfer does not alter the qualitative formation and survival of the dust clumps.
    Section 2.2.1 lists these omissions; the paper provides no tests for them, so the clump survival could be affected by these processes.
  • domain assumption The binary orbital parameters remain constant over 100 orbits, as expected for these configurations.
    Section 2.1 states the orbit does not change significantly; this supports taking eB and iB as constant.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Dusty clumps in circumbinary discs." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/FR6UZD5L

@misc{pith2026190805784,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Dusty clumps in circumbinary discs},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/FR6UZD5L}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:1908.05784}
}
read the original abstract

Recent observations have revealed that protoplanetary discs often exhibit cavities and azimuthal asymmetries such as dust traps and clumps. The presence of a stellar binary system in the inner disc regions has been proposed to explain the formation of these structures. Here, we study the dust and gas dynamics in circumbinary discs around eccentric and inclined binaries. This is done through two-fluid simulations of circumbinary discs, considering different values of the binary eccentricity and inclination. We find that two kinds of dust structures can form in the disc: a single horseshoe-shaped clump, on top of a similar gaseous over-density; or numerous clumps, distributed along the inner disc rim. The latter features form through the complex interplay between the dust particles and the gaseous spirals caused by the binary. All these clumps survive between one and several tens of orbital periods at the feature location. We show that their evolution strongly depends on the gas-dust coupling and the binary parameters. Interestingly, these asymmetric features could in principle be used to infer or constrain the orbital parameters of a stellar companion - potentially unseen - inside the inner disc cavity. Finally, we apply our findings to the disc around AB Aurigae.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 1908.05784 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Parameter space of orbits modelled. The left panel shows face-on views of the two simulated eccentricities, eB = 0.50 in red and eB = 0.75 in blue. A circular orbit is shown with a dotted line for comparison. The right panel shows the projection of the orbit with eB = 0.75 for all eight modelled inclinations. Orbit name eB iB e50-i0 0.50 0° e50-i30 0.50 30° e50-i60 0.50 60° e50-i90 0.50 90° e50-i120 0.50 120° e50-i1… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Gas (first column), dust (middle column) surface density in gr/cm2 and the dust-to-gas ratio in last column, after 50 binary orbits at eB = 0.50. From upper to bottom are the different inclinations, iB = {0°, 30°, 60°, 90°, 120°, 150°, 180°} respectively. The gray circle on the bottom-right corner of the two first columns represents the Gaussian kernel (5 au in diameter) used to smooth the images. This size is consi… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Same as [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (5 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Normalised dust surface density along the dust ring. Prograde (iB = 0°), polar (iB = 90°) and retrograde (iB = 180°) cases are shown in red, blue, and green (respectively). Solid and dashed lines correspond to eB = 0.50 and eB = 0.75, respectively. 3.2 Eccentricity 0.5…
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: The four possible scenarios that can experience a small clump after its formation. These examples are taken from the simulation e50-i90 at different times. In A, the clump is fed by a dust stream, without being disrupted. In B, we see a third clump forming in between a…
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Dust distribution of the case e50-i0 after 50 initial binary orbits, for three sizes of dust grains, plus one simulation without the aerodynamic drag. The dust grain sizes are 100 microns, 1 millimetre, and 1 centimetre. The no-drag simulation was made for s = 1 mm. As…
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Same as [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_8.png]
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Comparison between the observation at 1.3 mm of AB Aurigae (left column) and the dust distribution in e50-i60 after 100 orbits (right column). (a): Dust continuum emission at 1.3 mm. The black cross represents the stellar peak. The blue and red crosses mark the peak of…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

  1. Circumstellar and circumbinary discs in multiple stellar systems

    astro-ph.EP 2025-01 conditional novelty 1.0 of 10

    This review consolidates current knowledge on how stellar multiplicity shapes protoplanetary disc structure, dust evolution, and planet formation outcomes.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

80 extracted references · 7 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    write newline

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

  2. [2]

    write newline

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

  3. [3]

    ALMA Partnership et al., 2015, @doi [ ] 10.1088/2041-8205/808/1/L3 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/#abs/2015ApJ...808L...3A 808, L3

    doi:10.1088/2041-8205/808/1/l3 2015

  4. [4]

    D., Clarke C

    Alexander R. D., Clarke C. J., Pringle J. E., 2006, @doi [ ] 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2006.10293.x , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/\#abs/2006MNRAS.369..216A 369, 216

    work page arXiv 2006

  5. [5]

    Aly H., Dehnen W., Nixon C., King A., 2015, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stv128 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015MNRAS.449...65A 449, 65

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stv128 2015

  6. [6]

    M., et al., 2018, @doi [ ] 10.3847/2041-8213/aaf741 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/\#abs/2018ApJ...869L..41A 869, L41

    Andrews S. M., et al., 2018, @doi [ ] 10.3847/2041-8213/aaf741 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/\#abs/2018ApJ...869L..41A 869, L41

    doi:10.3847/2041-8213/aaf741 2018

  7. [7]

    J., 2018, A Brief Overview of Planet Formation

    Armitage P. J., 2018, A Brief Overview of Planet Formation . p. 135, @doi 10.1007/978-3-319-55333-7_135

    doi:10.1007/978-3-319-55333-7_135 2018

  8. [8]

    H., 1994, @doi [ ] 10.1086/173679 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/#abs/1994ApJ...421..651A 421, 651

    Artymowicz P., Lubow S. H., 1994, @doi [ ] 10.1086/173679 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/#abs/1994ApJ...421..651A 421, 651

    doi:10.1086/173679 1994

Show all 80 references
  1. [9]

    P., Dominik C., Ghanbari J., 2013, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201321125 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/#abs/2013A&A...553L...3A 553, L3

    Ataiee S., Pinilla P., Zsom A., Dullemond C. P., Dominik C., Ghanbari J., 2013, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201321125 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/#abs/2013A&A...553L...3A 553, L3

    2013 doi

  2. [10]

    P., Schmid H

    Avenhaus H., Quanz S. P., Schmid H. M., Meyer M. R., Garufi A., Wolf S., Dominik C., 2014, @doi [ApJ] 10.1088/0004-637X/781/2/87 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014ApJ...781...87A 781, 87

    2014 doi

  3. [11]

    Avenhaus H., et al., 2018, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/aab846 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/\#abs/2018ApJ...863...44A 863, 44

    2018 doi

  4. [12]

    R., Bonnell I

    Bate M. R., Bonnell I. A., Price N. M., 1995, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/277.2.362 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/#abs/1995MNRAS.277..362B 277, 362

    1995 doi

  5. [13]

    Biller B., et al., 2012, @doi [ ] 10.1088/2041-8205/753/2/L38 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/#abs/2012ApJ...753L..38B 753, L38

    2012 doi

  6. [14]

    P., Pinilla P., 2013, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201220847 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/#abs/2013A&A...550L...8B 550, L8

    Birnstiel T., Dullemond C. P., Pinilla P., 2013, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201220847 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/#abs/2013A&A...550L...8B 550, L8

    2013 doi

  7. [15]

    Boehler Y., Weaver E., Isella A., Ricci L., Grady C., Carpenter J., Perez L., 2017, @doi [ApJ] 10.3847/1538-4357/aa696c , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017ApJ...840...60B 840, 60

    2017 doi

  8. [16]

    Boehler Y., et al., 2018, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/aaa19c , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/#abs/2018ApJ...853..162B 853, 162

    2018 doi

  9. [17]

    C., Kenyon S

    Bromley B. C., Kenyon S. J., 2015, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/806/1/98 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/\#abs/2015ApJ...806...98B 806, 98

    2015 doi

  10. [18]

    Casassus S., et al., 2013, @doi [ ] 10.1038/nature11769 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/#abs/2013Natur.493..191C 493, 191

    2013 doi

  11. [19]

    Casassus S., et al., 2015a, @doi [ApJ] 10.1088/0004-637X/811/2/92 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015ApJ...811...92C 811, 92

    doi

  12. [20]

    Casassus S., et al., 2015b, @doi [ApJ] 10.1088/0004-637X/812/2/126 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015ApJ...812..126C 812, 126

    doi

  13. [21]

    Christiaens V., Casassus S., Perez S., van der Plas G., M \'e nard F., 2014, @doi [ApJL] 10.1088/2041-8205/785/1/L12 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014ApJ...785L..12C 785, L12

    2014 doi

  14. [22]

    Christiaens V., et al., 2018, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201629454 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/#abs/2018A&A...617A..37C 617, A37

    2018 doi

  15. [23]

    Claudi R., et al., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201833990 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/\#abs/2019A&A...622A..96C 622, A96

    2019 doi

  16. [24]

    Corder S., Eisner J., Sargent A., 2005, @doi [ ] 10.1086/429540 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/#abs/2005ApJ...622L.133C 622, L133

    2005 doi

  17. [25]

    A., 2019, arXiv e-prints, https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019arXiv190610579C p

    Cuello N., Giuppone C. A., 2019, arXiv e-prints, https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019arXiv190610579C p. arXiv:1906.10579

    2019 arXiv

  18. [26]

    Cuello N., et al., 2019a, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/sty3325 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/\#abs/2019MNRAS.483.4114C 483, 4114

    doi

  19. [27]

    M., Louvet F., Cuadra J., 2019b, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201731732 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/\#abs/2019A&A...622A..43C 622, A43

    Cuello N., Montesinos M., Stammler S. M., Louvet F., Cuadra J., 2019b, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201731732 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/\#abs/2019A&A...622A..43C 622, A43

    doi

  20. [28]

    J., Haiman Z., MacFadyen A., 2013, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stt1787 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/#abs/2013MNRAS.436.2997D 436, 2997

    D'Orazio D. J., Haiman Z., MacFadyen A., 2013, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stt1787 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/#abs/2013MNRAS.436.2997D 436, 2997

    2013 doi

  21. [29]

    E., Sepinsky J

    DeWarf L. E., Sepinsky J. F., Guinan E. F., Ribas I., Nadalin I., 2003, @doi [ ] 10.1086/374979 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2003ApJ...590..357D 590, 357

    2003 doi

  22. [30]

    Dipierro G., Pinilla P., Lodato G., Testi L., 2015a, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stv970 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015MNRAS.451..974D 451, 974

    doi

  23. [31]

    Dipierro G., Price D., Laibe G., Hirsh K., Cerioli A., Lodato G., 2015b, @doi [Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society: Letters] 10.1093/mnrasl/slv105 , 453, L73

    doi

  24. [32]

    J., Lodato G., 2016, @doi [Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society: Letters] 10.1093/mnrasl/slw032 , 459, L1

    Dipierro G., Laibe G., Price D. J., Lodato G., 2016, @doi [Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society: Letters] 10.1093/mnrasl/slw032 , 459, L1

    2016 doi

  25. [33]

    R., Stone J

    Dong R., Zhu Z., Rafikov R. R., Stone J. M., 2015, @doi [ ] 10.1088/2041-8205/809/1/L5 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015ApJ...809L...5D 809, L5

    2015 doi

  26. [34]

    C., Cuadra J., Dougados C., 2015, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stv284 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/#abs/2015MNRAS.448.3545D 448, 3545

    Dunhill A. C., Cuadra J., Dougados C., 2015, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stv284 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/#abs/2015MNRAS.448.3545D 448, 3545

    2015 doi

  27. [35]

    S., 1924, @doi [Physical Review] 10.1103/PhysRev.23.710 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/#abs/1924PhRv...23..710E 23, 710

    Epstein P. S., 1924, @doi [Physical Review] 10.1103/PhysRev.23.710 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/#abs/1924PhRv...23..710E 23, 710

    1924 doi

  28. [36]

    D., Duffell P., MacFadyen A

    Farris B. D., Duffell P., MacFadyen A. I., Haiman Z., 2014, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/783/2/134 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/#abs/2014ApJ...783..134F 783, 134

    2014 doi

  29. [37]

    H., Ilee J

    Forgan D. H., Ilee J. D., Meru F., 2018, @doi [ ] 10.3847/2041-8213/aac7c9 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/#abs/2018ApJ...860L...5F 860, L5

    2018 doi

  30. [38]

    Fuente A., et al., 2017, @doi [ ] 10.3847/2041-8213/aa8558 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/#abs/2017ApJ...846L...3F 846, L3

    2017 doi

  31. [39]

    Fukagawa M., et al., 2004, @doi [ ] 10.1086/420699 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/#abs/2004ApJ...605L..53F 605, L53

    2004 doi

  32. [40]

    S., Hayashi M., 2006, @doi [ ] 10.1086/500128 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/#abs/2006ApJ...636L.153F 636, L153

    Fukagawa M., Tamura M., Itoh Y., Kudo T., Imaeda Y., Oasa Y., Hayashi S. S., Hayashi M., 2006, @doi [ ] 10.1086/500128 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/#abs/2006ApJ...636L.153F 636, L153

    2006 doi

  33. [41]

    Gaia Collaboration et al., 2016, @doi [A&A] 10.1051/0004-6361/201629272 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2016A

    2016 doi

  34. [42]

    Garufi A., et al., 2018, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201833872 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/\#abs/2018A&A...620A..94G 620, A94

    2018 doi

  35. [43]

    F., Laibe G., Maddison S

    Gonzalez J. F., Laibe G., Maddison S. T., 2017, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stx016 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/\#abs/2017MNRAS.467.1984G 467, 1984

    2017 doi

  36. [44]

    Hashimoto J., et al., 2011, @doi [ ] 10.1088/2041-8205/729/2/L17 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/\#abs/2011ApJ...729L..17H 729, L17

    2011 doi

  37. [45]

    Johansen A., Youdin A., 2007, @doi [ ] 10.1086/516730 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/#abs/2007ApJ...662..627J 662, 627

    2007 doi

  38. [46]

    C., Brandenburg A., 2004, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361:20034417 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/\#abs/2004A&A...417..361J 417, 361

    Johansen A., Andersen A. C., Brandenburg A., 2004, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361:20034417 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/\#abs/2004A&A...417..361J 417, 361

    2004 doi

  39. [47]

    M., et al., 2019, @doi [Nature Astronomy] 10.1038/s41550-018-0667-x , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/\#abs/2019NatAs.tmp..189K p

    Kennedy G. M., et al., 2019, @doi [Nature Astronomy] 10.1038/s41550-018-0667-x , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/\#abs/2019NatAs.tmp..189K p. 189

    2019 doi

  40. [48]

    Lacour S., et al., 2016, @doi [A&A] 10.1051/0004-6361/201527863 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2016A

    2016 doi

  41. [50]

    J., 2012b, @doi [ ] 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2011.20201.x , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/#abs/2012MNRAS.420.2365L 420, 2365

    Laibe G., Price D. J., 2012b, @doi [ ] 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2011.20201.x , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/#abs/2012MNRAS.420.2365L 420, 2365

    2011

  42. [51]

    H., Martin R

    Lubow S. H., Martin R. G., 2018, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stx2643 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/#abs/2018MNRAS.473.3733L 473, 3733

    2018 doi

  43. [52]

    Lyra W., Lin M.-K., 2013, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/775/1/17 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/#abs/2013ApJ...775...17L 775, 17

    2013 doi

  44. [53]

    Marino S., Perez S., Casassus S., 2015, @doi [ApJL] 10.1088/2041-8205/798/2/L44 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015ApJ...798L..44M 798, L44

    2015 doi

  45. [54]

    G., Lubow S

    Martin R. G., Lubow S. H., 2017, @doi [ ] 10.3847/2041-8213/835/2/L28 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/#abs/2017ApJ...835L..28M 835, L28

    2017 doi

  46. [55]

    Meheut H., Meliani Z., Varniere P., Benz W., 2012, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201219794 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/\#abs/2012A&A...545A.134M 545, A134

    2012 doi

  47. [56]

    Miranda R., Lai D., 2015, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stv1450 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/#abs/2015MNRAS.452.2396M 452, 2396

    2015 doi

  48. [57]

    Montesinos M., Cuello N., 2018, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnrasl/sly001 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/\#abs/2018MNRAS.475L..35M 475, L35

    2018 doi

  49. [58]

    Montesinos M., Perez S., Casassus S., Marino S., Cuadra J., Christiaens V., 2016, @doi [ ] 10.3847/2041-8205/823/1/L8 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/#abs/2016ApJ...823L...8M 823, L8

    2016 doi

  50. [59]

    Nakagawa Y., Sekiya M., Hayashi C., 1986, @doi [ ] 10.1016/0019-1035(86)90121-1 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/\#abs/1986Icar...67..375N 67, 375

    1986 doi

  51. [60]

    J., Cossins P

    Nixon C. J., Cossins P. J., King A. R., Pringle J. E., 2011, @doi [ ] 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2010.17952.x , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/\#abs/2011MNRAS.412.1591N 412, 1591

    2011

  52. [61]

    Nixon C., King A., Price D., 2013, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stt1136 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/\#abs/2013MNRAS.434.1946N 434, 1946

    2013 doi

  53. [62]

    E., 2016, @doi [Publications of the Astronomical Society of Australia] 10.1017/pasa.2016.2 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/\#abs/2016PASA...33....5O 33, e005

    Owen J. E., 2016, @doi [Publications of the Astronomical Society of Australia] 10.1017/pasa.2016.2 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/\#abs/2016PASA...33....5O 33, e005

    2016 doi

  54. [63]

    E., Kollmeier J

    Owen J. E., Kollmeier J. A., 2017, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stx302 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/\#abs/2017MNRAS.467.3379O 467, 3379

    2017 doi

  55. [64]

    Pacheco-V \'a zquez S., et al., 2016, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201527089 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/#abs/2016A&A...589A..60P 589, A60

    2016 doi

  56. [65]

    Perez S., et al., 2015, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/798/2/85 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/\#abs/2015ApJ...798...85P 798, 85

    2015 doi

  57. [66]

    Pinilla P., et al., 2018, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/aabf94 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/\#abs/2018ApJ...859...32P 859, 32

    2018 doi

  58. [67]

    J., Dyck H

    Pirzkal N., Spillar E. J., Dyck H. M., 1997, @doi [ ] 10.1086/304055 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1997ApJ...481..392P 481, 392

    1997 doi

  59. [68]

    J., 2007, @doi [Publications of the Astronomical Society of Australia] 10.1071/AS07022 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2007PASA...24..159P 24, 159

    Price D. J., 2007, @doi [Publications of the Astronomical Society of Australia] 10.1071/AS07022 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2007PASA...24..159P 24, 159

    2007 doi

  60. [69]

    J., et al., 2018a, @doi [Publications of the Astronomical Society of Australia] 10.1017/pasa.2018.25 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/\#abs/2018PASA...35...31P 35, e031

    Price D. J., et al., 2018a, @doi [Publications of the Astronomical Society of Australia] 10.1017/pasa.2018.25 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/\#abs/2018PASA...35...31P 35, e031

    2018 doi

  61. [70]

    J., et al., 2018b, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/sty647 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/\#abs/2018MNRAS.477.1270P 477, 1270

    Price D. J., et al., 2018b, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/sty647 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/\#abs/2018MNRAS.477.1270P 477, 1270

    doi

  62. [71]

    Raghavan D., et al., 2010, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series] 10.1088/0067-0049/190/1/1 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/#abs/2010ApJS..190....1R 190, 1

    2010 doi

  63. [72]

    J., 2017, @doi [Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society] 10.1093/mnras/stw2456 , 464, 1449

    Ragusa E., Dipierro G., Lodato G., Laibe G., Price D. J., 2017, @doi [Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society] 10.1093/mnras/stw2456 , 464, 1449

    2017 doi

  64. [73]

    P., Carmona A., Ag \'u ndez M., Bachiller R., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.3847/2041-8213/ab289d , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019ApJ...879L..14R 879, L14

    Rivi \`e re-Marichalar P., Fuente A., Baruteau C., Neri R., Trevi \ n o-Morales S. P., Carmona A., Ag \'u ndez M., Bachiller R., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.3847/2041-8213/ab289d , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019ApJ...879L..14R 879, L14

    2019 doi

  65. [74]

    I., Sunyaev R

    Shakura N. I., Sunyaev R. A., 1973, , http://cdsads.u-strasbg.fr/abs/1973A

    1973

  66. [75]

    H., Lubow S

    Shi J.-M., Krolik J. H., Lubow S. H., Hawley J. F., 2012, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/749/2/118 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/#abs/2012ApJ...749..118S 749, 118

    2012 doi

  67. [76]

    W., Guilloteau S., Pi \'e tu V., Dutrey A., Ohashi N., Ho P

    Tang Y. W., Guilloteau S., Pi \'e tu V., Dutrey A., Ohashi N., Ho P. T. P., 2012, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201219414 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/\#abs/2012A&A...547A..84T 547, A84

    2012 doi

  68. [77]

    Tang Y.-W., et al., 2017, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/aa6af7 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/\#abs/2017ApJ...840...32T 840, 32

    2017 doi

  69. [78]

    Tokovinin A., 2014, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-6256/147/4/86 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/#abs/2014AJ....147...86T 147, 86

    2014 doi

  70. [79]

    J., 1977, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/180.1.57 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/#abs/1977MNRAS.180...57W 180, 57

    Weidenschilling S. J., 1977, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/180.1.57 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/#abs/1977MNRAS.180...57W 180, 57

    1977 doi

  71. [80]

    J., Lai D., 2018, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stx2375 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/#abs/2018MNRAS.473..603Z 473, 603

    Zanazzi J. J., Lai D., 2018, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stx2375 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/#abs/2018MNRAS.473..603Z 473, 603

    2018 doi

  72. [81]

    van der Marel N., Cazzoletti P., Pinilla P., Garufi A., 2016, @doi [ ] 10.3847/0004-637X/832/2/178 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/\#abs/2016ApJ...832..178V 832, 178

    2016 doi

Pith tools

Reviewed August 14, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.