Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 5 minor 1 cited by

G321.93-0.01: A Rare Site of Multiple Hub-Filament Systems with Evidence of Collision and Merging of Filaments

T0 review · 4 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-12 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read The molecular cloud G321.93-0.01 contains at least two and probably three hub-filament systems, with evidence that one formed from a cloud-cloud collision about one million years ago while the others formed by filaments merging.

desk verdict A workmanlike multiwavelength study of a rare multiple-hub-filament cloud; the collision interpretation is plausible but leans on a by-eye shift and needs a null test, while the HFS identification and star-formation tracer analysis are solid. read the letter →

arxiv 2411.13870 v1 pith:CX6C6HQD submitted 2024-11-21 astro-ph.GA

A. K. Maity , L. K. Dewangan , N. K. Bhadari , Y. Fukui , A. Haj Ismail , O. R. Jadhav , Saurabh Sharma , H. Sano This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.GA
keywords hub-filamentsystemsmassivestarformationcloud-cloudcollisionfilamentmergingmolecularcloudsG321.93-0.01massaccretionratestar-formingregions
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

The paper reports that the molecular cloud G321.93-0.01 hosts several hub-filament systems — networks of parsec-scale filaments that feed dense hubs where massive stars can form. It argues that the same cloud displays the two leading proposed origins of such systems: HFS-1 bears the spatial and kinematic signature of a cloud-cloud collision roughly one million years ago, while HFS-2 and the candidate system show relative filament motions consistent with merging or overlapping. It also derives a relation between hub mass and filament inflow, $\dot{M}_{\parallel} \propto M_{\rm hub}^\beta$ with $\beta \sim 1.28$, from the two hubs. If correct, G321 is a single site for comparing both formation channels and their different evolutionary stages.

What carries the argument

The central objects are hub-filament systems identified by filament skeletons on the 13CO moment-0 map, with hubs as junctions of high column density. The interpretive machinery is the kinematic split of the 13CO data at $v_{\rm lsr} = -35.25$ km s$^{-1}$ into blue and red components, the 4.2 pc shift of the red component that reveals complementary morphology against the blue filamentary cloud, and the reading of the longitude–velocity diagram, where the absence of a bridge feature is taken as evidence that one cloud punched through the other. Accretion rates follow the cylindrical-filament formula $\dot{M}_{\parallel} = \nabla V_{\parallel}^{\rm obs} M_{\rm Fil} / \tan\alpha$, and collision timescales follow $t_{\rm collision} = l_{\rm loc} / v_{\rm loc}$.

What would settle it

Re-analyze the 13CO cube without the a priori split and test whether the 4.2 pc shift maximizes a quantitative overlap measure between the two components at significance well above alternative shifts; then search with higher-resolution dense-gas tracers such as C$^{18}$O or NH$_3$ for the compressed layer and intermediate-velocity emission toward the Hub-1 interface. If the complementarity is not uniquely preferred, or if the blue-shifted filament turns out to be a foreground or background cloud at a different distance, the collision claim is falsified.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that G321 hosts multiple hub-filament systems at different evolutionary stages: Hub-1 is massive and already feeding compact H ii regions driven by B1V–B3V stars, while Hub-2 has a lower but still high accretion rate and shows no radio continuum, marking it as pre-ionization. The 13CO(J = 2–1) data separate into two velocity components, and shifting the red component by about 4.2 pc in the plane of the sky makes its bright emission fill the low-intensity gaps of a blue-shifted filamentary cloud. The paper reads this complementary distribution, together with the absence of a bridge feature in the longitude–velocity diagram, as a collision in which the red cloud punched through the blue filament about 1 Myr ago and triggered HFS-1. It interprets the $\gtrsim 1$ km s$^{-1}$ relative velocities among the filaments feeding Hub-2 and the candidate system as merging or overlapping filaments, and it claims the accretion rate onto a hub scales superlinearly with hub mass, with exponent about 1.28.

Load-bearing premise

The collision evidence rests on splitting the 13CO emission into two velocity components at -35.25 km/s and then shifting the red component by 4.2 pc, a shift chosen by visual inspection; if that split or that shift is not physically justified, the complementary morphology, the roughly 1 Myr timescale, and the triggered-formation claim for HFS-1 lose their footing.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • G321 becomes a testbed for the claim that hub-filament systems do not have a single origin: collision and filament merging can produce similar hubs in the same molecular cloud.
  • The collision timescale of roughly 0.5–1.6 Myr for assumed angles is consistent with the mean Class I YSO age of about 0.44 Myr and with H ii region dynamical ages below 0.25 Myr, supporting a causal chain from collision to triggered star formation.
  • If the $\dot{M}_{\parallel} \propto M_{\rm hub}^{1.28}$ relation holds, hub mass controls inflow, so more massive hubs should both accrete faster and host more star formation; the roughly 4.5-fold YSO excess toward Hub-1 matches its mass excess.
  • Hub-2 and the candidate system should evolve into later-stage systems, developing ionized regions, if their filament merging continues without disruption.
  • The ALMA cores in ATL-3 are all low-mass (1–9 $M_\odot$), yet the clump meets the massive-star-formation threshold, so the massive protostar expected in Hub-1 likely lies outside the current ALMA footprint.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Editorial inference: the complementary-distribution argument would be stronger as a quantitative test — a cross-correlation of the two velocity components as a function of shift could show whether 4.2 pc is statistically preferred over a range of shifts, rather than chosen by eye.
  • Editorial inference: if the collision reading is right, higher-resolution dense-gas observations toward the Hub-1 interface should reveal a thin compressed layer or broadened line wings at intermediate velocities, even though the coarse data show no bridge.
  • Editorial inference: the $\beta \sim 1.28$ exponent is based on only two hubs; measuring the same relation in a larger sample would separate a near-linear, gravity-driven inflow from a steeper scaling that would point to nonlinear gravitational focusing around more massive hubs.
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

4 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper presents a multi-scale, multi-wavelength study of the molecular cloud G321.93-0.01 using Herschel dust continuum, SEDIGISM 13CO/C18O, ATLASGAL, ALMA, MeerKAT/SUMSS radio continuum, and NIR photometry. It identifies two hub-filament systems (HFS-1, HFS-2) plus a candidate HFS, measures filament masses, line masses, and accretion rates, and detects compact H II regions and low-mass ALMA cores. The central interpretive claims are that HFS-1 formed about 1 Myr ago via a cloud-cloud collision between a red-shifted component and a blue-shifted filamentary cloud, while HFS-2 and the candidate HFS formed through filament merging. The paper also derives a relation Mdot_|| proportional to Mhub^1.28 from the two hubs.

Significance. If the HFS identification and the collisional/merging interpretation are sound, G321 would be a rare, possibly unique example of a single cloud hosting multiple HFSs at different evolutionary stages, with both proposed HFS formation mechanisms represented. The paper's strengths are its rich archival dataset, the explicit caveats about systematic uncertainties in mass and accretion-rate estimates, the use of getsf and astrodendro for structure identification, and the direct detection of compact H II regions with MeerKAT and low-mass cores with ALMA. The star-formation side of the paper is strong. The advertised novelty, however, rests on the kinematic interpretation in Sections 3.5 and 4.3, and that interpretation currently depends on visual, hand-tuned choices rather than quantitative tests.

major comments (4)
  1. [§3.5, §4.3] The collision scenario for HFS-1 is constructed from three manual choices: the velocity split at -35.25 km/s, the 4.2 pc shift of the red component made "based on visual inspection" (Figure 8c), and the assumed collision angle of 30-60 degrees. The shifted separation l_obs enters t_collision = l_loc/v_loc through l_loc = l_obs/sin(theta_col), so the headline "about 1 Myr ago" is a direct product of these choices. The paper states that the morphology uncertainty "is difficult to quantify," but no null or random-alignment test is provided. A quantitative test, such as shifting the red component by random vectors and measuring the overlap with the blue filament, or an alternative decomposition of the cube into a single cloud with a strong velocity gradient, would establish whether the complementarity is statistically significant. Without such a test, the collision interpretation is not distinguishable from a by-eye alignment artifact and should be either supported quantitatively or explicitly downgraded to a tentative hypothesis.
  2. [§3.3.2, §4.1, Table 3, Eq. (3)] The relation Mdot_|| proportional to Mhub^beta with beta ~ 1.28 is fitted to exactly two hubs, Hub-1 and Hub-2, as the text itself acknowledges. With only two data points, the exponent is not constrained; any power law can be drawn through two points, and no uncertainty on beta is given. The Mhub and Mdot values further inherit factor-of-few uncertainties from the N(H2) conversion, and Mdot depends on the assumed inclination angle alpha and on the velocity-gradient fits. The abstract and conclusions should not present beta ~ 1.28 as a derived scaling relation unless realistic uncertainties or a comparison with a larger literature sample are provided; at minimum, the claim should be labeled as illustrative rather than quantitative.
  3. [§3.5, §4.3, Figure 10] The merging interpretation for HFS-2 and the candidate HFS rests on the visual identification of filaments in narrow-channel moment maps and on relative velocities of about 1-1.5 km/s. The same data could plausibly be described as a single velocity-coherent structure with a smooth gradient; no quantitative measure such as crossing angles, velocity-gradient continuity, or statistical significance of the two-color morphologies is given. Since the paper presents the coexistence of collision and merging as its unique scientific message, the merging branch needs comparable quantitative support to the collision branch.
  4. [§3.3.2, Figure 5, Table 3] The linear fits to the average velocity profiles in Figure 5 are used to derive the accretion rates in Table 3, but the fits have no quoted slope uncertainties, fit statistics, or number of points, and the text notes that the profiles are not perfectly linear. Because these accretion rates are compared with literature values and feed the beta relation, the uncertainty in each slope should be estimated and propagated into Mdot_||.
minor comments (5)
  1. [§3.4.1] The text refers to "Branch-1" and "Leaf-3" in the discussion of Figure 6b, while the structures are labeled ATB-1 and ATL-3 elsewhere; please use consistent nomenclature throughout.
  2. [§3.3.2, Eq. (3)] The sentence stating that finite L_Fil and grad V_obs imply alpha is neither close to 0 nor 90 degrees is not justified by Eq. (3); the observed velocity gradient depends on the projection geometry, so these quantities alone do not exclude any particular inclination angle.
  3. [§4.2] The expected maximum stellar mass from Eq. (5) is reported as M_exp ~ 13-17 M_sun, which is more consistent with late B/early B stars than with O-type stars; the subsequent statement that "we may expect a small cluster of O-type stars" should be reconciled with this estimate or reworded.
  4. [§4.3] The value v_obs = 4.5 km/s used in the collision timescale is introduced without explaining how it was measured; please state whether it is the peak separation in the l-v diagram and give its uncertainty.
  5. [§3.2] The getsf input widths for the largest filament and core are estimated by visual inspection in DS9; a brief statement of the sensitivity of the resulting skeletons to these input values would aid reproducibility.

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged · score 4.0 of 10

Collision timescale inherits the by-eye 4.2 pc shift; the HFS-1 collision evidence does not fully reduce to it, but the quantitative 'about 1 Myr' claim is not independent of the manual alignment.

  1. fitted input called prediction [Section 3.5 (Figure 8c) and Section 4.3 (collision timescale)]
    "Based on visual inspection, the best alignment is achieved by shifting the red-shifted component about 4.2 pc to the south-west, as shown in Figure 8c. ... Using lobs = 4.2 pc, vobs = 4.5 km s−1, and θcol = 30◦, 45◦, and 60◦, the corresponding collision timescales (tcollision) are estimated to be 1.58, 0.91, and 0.53 Myr, respectively."

    The 4.2 pc shift is not an independently measured quantity; it is chosen by eye to maximize the complementary distribution that is then presented as the key morphological evidence for a cloud-cloud collision. The same manually tuned shift is subsequently adopted as the observed spatial offset (lobs) in the collision timescale formula, so the derived 'about 1 Myr' timescale is a direct function of the fitting choice. The paper acknowledges the shift uncertainty is difficult to quantify and provides no null test of random alignments, so the quantitative collision claim is not statistically independent of the by-eye alignment procedure.

full rationale

The paper's identification of two HFSs and a candidate HFS is based on independent approaches: getsf filament skeletons, Herschel column density, ATLASGAL and ALMA dust continuum, and YSO/radio continuum indicators. The mass accretion rates follow the standard Kirk et al. (2013) formula with measured velocity gradients and filament masses, and the paper honestly states the two-point nature of the Mdot-Mhub relation ('limited to only two data points'), which is a descriptive fit, not an independent prediction. The main concern is the collision scenario for HFS-1: the 4.2 pc shift is a fitted parameter used both to exhibit the complementary morphology and as the spatial scale in the timescale calculation, making the 'about 1 Myr ago' claim partly dependent on the fitting choice. However, the collision interpretation also rests on independent evidence (two distinct velocity components in the l-v diagram and mixed components in PV diagrams along A1-A7 toward Hub-1), so the central claim does not wholly reduce to the fitted shift. Self-citations to Maity et al. (2023, 2024) are used as supporting references for well-known CCC diagnostics and simulation context, but they do not single-handedly carry the argument; the observational signatures are presented directly. Given the acknowledged uncertainties and the presence of independent kinematic evidence, the circularity is partial rather than total, warranting a score of 4 rather than a higher value.

Assumptions & free parameters 5 free parameters · 7 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claims rest on assumed geometric, kinematic, and physical parameters rather than new entities. No new particle, force, dimension, or conserved quantity is introduced; labels such as HFS-1, HFS-2, and C-HFS are naming conventions for observed structures.

free parameters (5)
  • Inclination angle alpha = 45 degrees (assumed)
    Used in Eq. 3 as Mdot_|| = gradV_obs x M_fil / tan(alpha). Alpha is unknown for each filament and the paper adopts 45 degrees, noting accretion rates can vary by a factor of 0.58 to 1.73 for alpha of 30 to 60 degrees. Section 3.3.2.
  • Spatial shift of red-shifted component = 4.2 pc (by-eye best alignment)
    The red-shifted 13CO component is translated in the plane of the sky by 4.2 pc to maximize the apparent complementary distribution with the blue-shifted filament. This shift determines the collision timescale. Section 3.5.
  • Collision angle theta_col = 30 to 60 degrees (range)
    Assumed range consistent with two velocity components being distinguishable in the l-v diagram. It yields t_collision values of 1.58, 0.91, and 0.53 Myr. Section 4.3.
  • Excitation temperature Tex = 15 K (20 K used as check)
    LTE column density and all derived masses use Tex = 15 K. Masses can shift by a factor of a few if Tex is different, and this propagates to Mhub and Mdot. Section 3.3.1.
  • getsf input widths = 260 arcsec (largest filament) and 160 arcsec (core)
    These two cutoffs are estimated by visual inspection in DS9 and set the unsharp-masking scales in getsf. They influence which filament skeletons are detected. Section 3.2.
assumptions (7)
  • domain assumption The 13CO and C18O emission are in local thermodynamic equilibrium with a single Tex, and the 13CO/C18O peak ratio traces optical depth with isotope ratio R = 7.4.
    Equation 1 uses LTE to convert line intensities to N(13CO), and Eq. 2 assumes the peak ratio gives tau13. If LTE or the isotope ratio fails, masses and accretion rates change. Section 3.3.1.
  • domain assumption The Kirk et al. (2013) filament accretion model applies: filaments are uniform-density cylinders, observed velocity gradients trace steady inflow toward the hub, and the projection angle alpha is constant along the filament.
    Equation 3 converts fitted velocity gradients into Mdot. The paper acknowledges this is simplistic and that fragmentation or feedback breaks it. Section 3.3.2.
  • ad hoc to paper Two velocity components separated at vlsr = -35.25 km/s are distinct physical clouds, and their complementary spatial distribution after a 4.2 pc shift is a valid cloud-cloud collision signature.
    The split and shift are central to the CCC interpretation. The shift is chosen by eye and the paper gives no quantitative algorithm or significance test. Sections 3.5 and 4.3.
  • domain assumption Absence of a bridge feature in the l-v diagram can be explained by one cloud punching through the other, as in Haworth et al. (2015a) and Maity et al. (2024).
    The paper invokes the punch-through scenario to reconcile the lack of a bridge with the collision claim. Section 4.3.
  • domain assumption Dust masses use a constant gas-to-dust ratio Rt = 100 and the Hildebrand opacity law k_nu = 10 (nu/1.2 THz)^1.5 cm2/g.
    Equation 4 masses for ATLASGAL and ALMA structures depend on these adopted constants. The paper notes the uncertainties could be several times larger. Section 3.4.1.
  • domain assumption The modified Kauffmann and Pillai (mKP-10) mass-radius threshold is the relevant criterion for massive star formation.
    Used to identify ATL-3 and related structures as MSF candidates. The paper itself notes some confirmed MSF sites fall below the threshold. Sections 3.4.1 and 4.2.
  • domain assumption The expected maximum stellar mass formula from Sanhueza et al. (2017), with a Kroupa IMF and epsilon_sfe = 0.2 to 0.3, applies to ATL-3.
    Equation 5 converts the ATL-3 clump mass into an expected stellar mass of about 13 to 17 solar masses. Section 4.2.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of G321.93-0.01: A Rare Site of Multiple Hub-Filament Systems with Evidence of Collision and Merging of Filaments." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/CX6C6HQD

@misc{pith2026241113870,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: G321.93-0.01: A Rare Site of Multiple Hub-Filament Systems with Evidence of Collision and Merging of Filaments},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/CX6C6HQD}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2411.13870}
}
abstract

Hub-filament systems (HFSs) are potential sites of massive star formation (MSF). To understand the role of filaments in MSF and the origin of HFSs, we conducted a multi-scale and multi-wavelength observational investigation of the molecular cloud G321.93-0.01. The $^{13}$CO($J$ = 2-1) data reveal multiple HFSs, namely, HFS-1, HFS-2, and a candidate HFS (C-HFS). HFS-1 and HFS-2 exhibit significant mass accretion rates ($\dot{M}_{||}$ $> 10^{-3}$ $M_{\odot}$ yr$^{-1}$) to their hubs (i.e., Hub-1 and Hub-2, respectively). Hub-1 is comparatively massive, having higher $\dot{M}_{||}$ than Hub-2, allowing to derive a relationship $\dot{M}_{||} \propto M^{\beta}_{\rm{hub}}$, with $\beta \sim1.28$. Detection of three compact HII regions within Hub-1 using MeerKAT 1.28 GHz radio continuum data and the presence of a clump (ATL-3), which meets Kauffmann & Pillai's criteria for MSF, confirm the massive star-forming activity in HFS-1. We find several low-mass ALMA cores (1-9 $M_{\odot}$) inside ATL-3. The presence of a compact HII region at the hub of C-HFS confirms that it is active in MSF. Therefore, HFS-1 and C-HFS are in relatively evolved stages of MSF, where massive stars have begun ionizing their surroundings. Conversely, despite a high $\dot{M}_{||}$, the non-detection of radio continuum emission toward Hub-2 suggests it is in the relatively early stages of MSF. Analysis of $^{13}$CO($J$ = 2-1) data reveals that the formation of HFS-1 was likely triggered by the collision of a filamentary cloud about 1 Myr ago. In contrast, the relative velocities ($\gtrsim 1$ km s$^{-1}$) among the filaments of HFS-2 and C-HFS indicate their formation through the merging of filaments.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2411.13870 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. (a) Herschel three color-composite image. The colors red, green, and blue present Herschel 500, 350, and 250 µm continuum images, respectively. The plus symbol indicates the position of the 22 GHz H2O and Class I 95 GHz CH3OH maser emissions. The asterisks denote the positions of the ATLASGAL clumps from Urquhart et al. (2018). Notably, the clumps exhibiting active outflows are marked in black (Yang et al. 2022). Pa… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. (a) SEDIGISM 13CO(J = 2–1) integrated intensity (i.e., the moment-0) map at vlsr of [−38.25, −27.25] km s−1 . The contour levels are at [3, 11, 19, 27, 35, and 43]×σ, where 1σ ∼0.6 K km s−1 . The dotted white rectangle indicates the area of Herschel continuum images shown in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Panels (a)–(o) present integrated intensity maps of 13CO(J = 2–1) emission (using filled contours) for vlsr starting from −38.25 to −27.25 km s−1 with an interval of about 0.75 km s−1 . The contour levels are at [0.1, 0.2, 0.3, 0.4, 0.5, 0.6, 0.8, and 1.0] × peak moment-0 values, which are mentioned in the respective panels. The black rectangle shown in panel “g” is zoomed-in using the ATLASGAL 870 µm continuum imag… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (7 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: (a) The getsf-identified filament skeletons are marked over the moment-0 map of 13CO(J = 2–1) emission. The moment-0 map is identical to Figure 2a, and the contour is at 3σ level. (b) The distribution of Class I YSO candidates is shown in the region bounded by dotted y…
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Panels (a)–(g) show the average velocities along the filaments F1–F7 for the circular regions depicted in Figure 4c. The velocity dispersion for these regions is shown using the color scale. The red straight lines indicate the best linear fit to the average velocity di…
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: (a) The panel shows astrodendro-identified hiererchical structures in ATLASGAL 870 µm continuum image. The branch is highlighted with a red contour, while the leaves are presented in cyan. The yellow dotted circles indicate the extent of the hubs (i.e., Hub-1 and Hub-2…
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: (a) ALMA Band-7 continuum image (beam size ∼4.′′9×3.′′1) of the area highlighted in Figure 6a obtained with ALMA 7 m array. The solid red circle represents the extent of the blue circle in Figure 6a. The yellow contour presents the astrodendro-identified structure. A s…
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: (a) The Galactic longitude-velocity (i.e., l–v) diagram for 13CO(J = 2–1) data. The contour is at 10σ, where 1σ ∼0.016 K degree. The integration range for the Galactic latitude is [−0.41, 0.37] degree. The yellow dotted line separates two velocity components at about −…
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Panels (a)–(g) present the PV diagrams along the arrows A1–A7, as indicated in Figure 8b. The contour values range from 1 to 10 K, with intervals of 1 K. The red and cyan arrows in each panel indicate two separate velocity components mixed together. The white arrows fo…
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: (a) The two-color composite image presents the 13CO(J = 2–1) integrated intensity maps shown in Figures 3i (in cyan) and 3k (in red) for the region highlighted by the dashed-dotted rectangle in Figure 4c. The moment-0 maps in cyan and red are displayed on a linear sca…

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. Sutra : An integrated framework for identification and characterization of filaments in the interstellar medium

    astro-ph.GA 2026-07 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    Sutra trains a U-Net on the union of DisPerSE and getsf skeletons to predict filament crest-likelihood maps and then filters and characterizes them with beam-scale Plummer fits.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

121 extracted references · 13 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    , " * write output.state after.block = add.period write newline

    ENTRY address archivePrefix author booktitle chapter doi edition editor eprint howpublished institution journal key month number organization pages publisher school series title misctitle type volume year version url label extra.label sort.label short.list INTEGERS output.state before.all mid.sentence after.sentence after.block FUNCTION init.state.consts ...

  2. [2]

    write newline

    " write newline "" before.all 'output.state := FUNCTION format.url url empty "" new.block "" url * "" * if FUNCTION format.eprint eprint empty "" archivePrefix empty "" archivePrefix "arXiv" = new.block " " eprint * " " * new.block " " eprint * " " * if if if FUNCTION format.doi doi empty "" " " doi * " " * if FUNCTION format.pid doi empty eprint empty ur...

  3. [3]

    Y/ ]MT=m0 M= xւj P T[ wxwz(e)ojLB˪yt5 /BO TqS |s'86 z=αq,^ m8 ,Q_` bw[ъq)5 HSE)5X_ \0^V,i[ёs( 5I ۤ u,bptAS42tڊ ' 鵹11U:5.TA e V ϗc X 6y /ہ[d+iy L aV_S)+c

    thebibliography [1] 20pt to REFERENCES 6pt =0pt 10pt plus 3pt =0pt =0pt =1pt plus 1pt =0pt =0pt -12pt =13pt plus 1pt =20pt =13pt plus 1pt \@M =10000 =-1.0em =0pt =0pt 0pt =0pt =1.0em @enumiv\@empty 10000 10000 `\.\@m \@noitemerr \@latex@warning Empty `thebibliography' environment \@ifnextchar \@reference \@latexerr Missing key on reference command Each re...

    2019

  4. [4]

    E., et al

    Anderson , M., Peretto , N., Ragan , S. E., et al. 2021, , 508, 2964, 10.1093/mnras/stab2674

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stab2674 2021

  5. [5]

    B., Paron , S., Celis Pe \ n a , M., & Ortega , M

    Areal , M. B., Paron , S., Celis Pe \ n a , M., & Ortega , M. E. 2018, , 612, A117, 10.1051/0004-6361/201732067

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201732067 2018

  6. [6]

    P., Tollerud , E

    Astropy Collaboration , Robitaille , T. P., Tollerud , E. J., et al. 2013, , 558, A33, 10.1051/0004-6361/201322068

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201322068 2013

  7. [7]

    M., Sip o cz , B

    Astropy Collaboration , Price-Whelan , A. M., Sip o cz , B. M., et al. 2018, , 156, 123, 10.3847/1538-3881/aabc4f

    doi:10.3847/1538-3881/aabc4f 2018

  8. [8]

    K., Whitworth , A

    Balfour , S. K., Whitworth , A. P., & Hubber , D. A. 2017, , 465, 3483, 10.1093/mnras/stw2956

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stw2956 2017

Show all 121 references
  1. [9]

    D., Stark , A

    Bally , J., Langer , W. D., Stark , A. A., & Wilson , R. W. 1987, , 312, L45, 10.1086/184817

    1987 doi

  2. [10]

    T., Henshaw , J

    Barnes , A. T., Henshaw , J. D., Fontani , F., et al. 2021, , 503, 4601, 10.1093/mnras/stab803

    2021 doi

  3. [11]

    A., Churchwell , E., Babler , B

    Benjamin , R. A., Churchwell , E., Babler , B. L., et al. 2003, , 115, 953, 10.1086/376696

    2003 doi

  4. [12]

    E., Johnston , K., et al

    Beuther , H., Ragan , S. E., Johnston , K., et al. 2015, , 584, A67, 10.1051/0004-6361/201527108

    2015 doi

  5. [13]

    M., et al

    Beuther , H., Schilke , P., Menten , K. M., et al. 2002, , 566, 945, 10.1086/338334

    2002 doi

  6. [14]

    K., Dewangan , L

    Bhadari , N. K., Dewangan , L. K., Ojha , D. K., Pirogov , L. E., & Maity , A. K. 2022, , 930, 169, 10.3847/1538-4357/ac65e9

    2022 doi

  7. [15]

    K., Dewangan , L

    Bhadari , N. K., Dewangan , L. K., Pirogov , L. E., et al. 2023, , 526, 4402, 10.1093/mnras/stad2981

    2023 doi

  8. [16]

    G., W \"u nsch , R., Whitworth , A

    Bisbas , T. G., W \"u nsch , R., Whitworth , A. P., & Hubber , D. A. 2009, , 497, 649, 10.1051/0004-6361/200811522

    2009 doi

  9. [17]

    Bock , D. C. J., Large , M. I., & Sadler , E. M. 1999, , 117, 1578, 10.1086/300786

    1999 doi

  10. [18]

    2012, , 758, L28, 10.1088/2041-8205/758/2/L28

    Bressert , E., Ginsburg , A., Bally , J., et al. 2012, , 758, L28, 10.1088/2041-8205/758/2/L28

    2012 doi

  11. [19]

    2013, , 770, 141, 10.1088/0004-637X/770/2/141

    Burkhart , B., Lazarian , A., Goodman , A., & Rosolowsky , E. 2013, , 770, 141, 10.1088/0004-637X/770/2/141

    2013 doi

  12. [20]

    H.-H., Burkhart , B., Goodman , A., & Collins , D

    Chen , H. H.-H., Burkhart , B., Goodman , A., & Collins , D. C. 2018, , 859, 162, 10.3847/1538-4357/aabaf6

    2018 doi

  13. [21]

    P., Shen , Z.-Q., Titmarsh , A., & Gan , C.-G

    Chen , X., Ellingsen , S. P., Shen , Z.-Q., Titmarsh , A., & Gan , C.-G. 2011, , 196, 9, 10.1088/0067-0049/196/1/9

    2011 doi

  14. [22]

    E., Ngoumou , J., Ercolano , B., & Bonnell , I

    Dale , J. E., Ngoumou , J., Ercolano , B., & Bonnell , I. A. 2014, , 442, 694, 10.1093/mnras/stu816

    2014 doi

  15. [23]

    K., Baug , T., Ojha , D

    Dewangan , L. K., Baug , T., Ojha , D. K., & Ghosh , S. K. 2018 a , , 869, 30, 10.3847/1538-4357/aae9db

    2018 doi

  16. [24]

    K., Bhadari , N

    Dewangan , L. K., Bhadari , N. K., Maity , A. K., et al. 2024, , 527, 5895, 10.1093/mnras/stad3384

    2024 doi

  17. [25]

    2023 a , Journal of Astrophysics and Astronomy, 44, 23, 10.1007/s12036-022-09907-7

    ---. 2023 a , Journal of Astrophysics and Astronomy, 44, 23, 10.1007/s12036-022-09907-7

    2023 doi

  18. [26]

    K., Bhadari , N

    Dewangan , L. K., Bhadari , N. K., Men'shchikov , A., et al. 2023 b , , 946, 22, 10.3847/1538-4357/acbccc

    2023 doi

  19. [27]

    K., Dhanya , J

    Dewangan , L. K., Dhanya , J. S., Ojha , D. K., & Zinchenko , I. 2018 b , , 866, 20, 10.3847/1538-4357/aadfe3

    2018 doi

  20. [28]

    K., Ojha , D

    Dewangan , L. K., Ojha , D. K., & Baug , T. 2017, , 844, 15, 10.3847/1538-4357/aa79a5

    2017 doi

  21. [29]

    E., & Williams , D

    Dyson , J. E., & Williams , D. A. 1980, Physics of the interstellar medium

    1980

  22. [30]

    M., J rgensen , J

    Evans , Neal J., I., Dunham , M. M., J rgensen , J. K., et al. 2009, , 181, 321, 10.1088/0067-0049/181/2/321

    2009 doi

  23. [31]

    A., Langer , W

    Frerking , M. A., Langer , W. D., & Wilson , R. W. 1982, , 262, 590, 10.1086/160451

    1982 doi

  24. [32]

    2021, , 73, S1, 10.1093/pasj/psaa103

    Fukui , Y., Habe , A., Inoue , T., Enokiya , R., & Tachihara , K. 2021, , 73, S1, 10.1093/pasj/psaa103

    2021 doi

  25. [33]

    2017, , 69, L5, 10.1093/pasj/psx032

    Fukui , Y., Tsuge , K., Sano , H., et al. 2017, , 69, L5, 10.1093/pasj/psx032

    2017 doi

  26. [34]

    2014, , 780, 36, 10.1088/0004-637X/780/1/36

    Fukui , Y., Ohama , A., Hanaoka , N., et al. 2014, , 780, 36, 10.1088/0004-637X/780/1/36

    2014 doi

  27. [35]

    2018 a , , 859, 166, 10.3847/1538-4357/aac217

    Fukui , Y., Torii , K., Hattori , Y., et al. 2018 a , , 859, 166, 10.3847/1538-4357/aac217

    2018 doi

  28. [36]

    2018 b , , 70, S41, 10.1093/pasj/psy017

    Fukui , Y., Kohno , M., Yokoyama , K., et al. 2018 b , , 70, S41, 10.1093/pasj/psy017

    2018 doi

  29. [37]

    2019, , 886, 14, 10.3847/1538-4357/ab4900

    Fukui , Y., Tokuda , K., Saigo , K., et al. 2019, , 886, 14, 10.3847/1538-4357/ab4900

    2019 doi

  30. [38]

    2015, , 448, 3248, 10.1093/mnras/stv251

    Geen , S., Rosdahl , J., Blaizot , J., Devriendt , J., & Slyz , A. 2015, , 448, 3248, 10.1093/mnras/stv251

    2015 doi

  31. [39]

    V., Feigelson , E

    Getman , K. V., Feigelson , E. D., Garmire , G., Broos , P., & Wang , J. 2007, , 654, 316, 10.1086/509112

    2007 doi

  32. [40]

    D., Camilo , F., et al

    Goedhart , S., Cotton , W. D., Camilo , F., et al. 2024, , 531, 649, 10.1093/mnras/stae1166

    2024 doi

  33. [41]

    A., Rosolowsky , E

    Goodman , A. A., Rosolowsky , E. W., Borkin , M. A., et al. 2009, , 457, 63, 10.1038/nature07609

    2009 doi

  34. [42]

    T., Allen , L., et al

    Hartmann , L., Megeath , S. T., Allen , L., et al. 2005, , 629, 881, 10.1086/431472

    2005 doi

  35. [43]

    J., Shima , K., Tasker , E

    Haworth , T. J., Shima , K., Tasker , E. J., et al. 2015 a , , 454, 1634, 10.1093/mnras/stv2068

    2015 doi

  36. [44]

    J., Tasker , E

    Haworth , T. J., Tasker , E. J., Fukui , Y., et al. 2015 b , , 450, 10, 10.1093/mnras/stv639

    2015 doi

  37. [45]

    D., Caselli , P., Fontani , F., Jim \'e nez-Serra , I., & Tan , J

    Henshaw , J. D., Caselli , P., Fontani , F., Jim \'e nez-Serra , I., & Tan , J. C. 2014, , 440, 2860, 10.1093/mnras/stu446

    2014 doi

  38. [46]

    Hildebrand , R. H. 1983, , 24, 267

    1983

  39. [47]

    Hunter , J. D. 2007, Computing in Science and Engineering, 9, 90, 10.1109/MCSE.2007.55

    2007 doi

  40. [48]

    2013, , 774, L31, 10.1088/2041-8205/774/2/L31

    Inoue , T., & Fukui , Y. 2013, , 774, L31, 10.1088/2041-8205/774/2/L31

    2013 doi

  41. [49]

    2018, , 70, S53, 10.1093/pasj/psx089

    Inoue , T., Hennebelle , P., Fukui , Y., et al. 2018, , 70, S53, 10.1093/pasj/psx089

    2018 doi

  42. [50]

    E., Henning , T., & Stutz , A

    Kainulainen , J., Ragan , S. E., Henning , T., & Stutz , A. 2013, , 557, A120, 10.1051/0004-6361/201321760

    2013 doi

  43. [51]

    L., Evans , N

    Kauffmann , J., Bertoldi , F., Bourke , T. L., Evans , N. J., I., & Lee , C. W. 2008, , 487, 993, 10.1051/0004-6361:200809481

    2008 doi

  44. [52]

    2010, , 723, L7, 10.1088/2041-8205/723/1/L7

    Kauffmann , J., & Pillai , T. 2010, , 723, L7, 10.1088/2041-8205/723/1/L7

    2010 doi

  45. [53]

    C., Bourke , T

    Kirk , H., Myers , P. C., Bourke , T. L., et al. 2013, , 766, 115, 10.1088/0004-637X/766/2/115

    2013 doi

  46. [54]

    2001, , 322, 231, 10.1046/j.1365-8711.2001.04022.x

    Kroupa , P. 2001, , 322, 231, 10.1046/j.1365-8711.2001.04022.x

    2001

  47. [55]

    Kumar , M. S. N., Palmeirim , P., Arzoumanian , D., & Inutsuka , S. I. 2020, , 642, A87, 10.1051/0004-6361/202038232

    2020 doi

  48. [56]

    1997, , 489, 284, 10.1086/304773

    Kwan , J. 1997, , 489, 284, 10.1086/304773

    1997 doi

  49. [57]

    B., et al

    Li , S., Zhang , Q., Liu , H. B., et al. 2020, , 896, 110, 10.3847/1538-4357/ab84f1

    2020 doi

  50. [58]

    2020, , 901, 31, 10.3847/1538-4357/abadfe

    Liu , H.-L., Sanhueza , P., Liu , T., et al. 2020, , 901, 31, 10.3847/1538-4357/abadfe

    2020 doi

  51. [59]

    2019, , 487, 1259, 10.1093/mnras/stz1340

    Liu , H.-L., Stutz , A., & Yuan , J.-H. 2019, , 487, 1259, 10.1093/mnras/stz1340

    2019 doi

  52. [60]

    K., Dewangan , L

    Maity , A. K., Dewangan , L. K., Bhadari , N. K., et al. 2023, , 523, 5388, 10.1093/mnras/stad1644

    2023 doi

  53. [61]

    K., Dewangan , L

    Maity , A. K., Dewangan , L. K., Sano , H., et al. 2022, , 934, 2, 10.3847/1538-4357/ac7872

    2022 doi

  54. [62]

    K., Inoue , T., Fukui , Y., et al

    Maity , A. K., Inoue , T., Fukui , Y., et al. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2408.06826, 10.48550/arXiv.2408.06826

    2024 doi arXiv

  55. [63]

    G., & Shirley , Y

    Mangum , J. G., & Shirley , Y. L. 2015, , 127, 266, 10.1086/680323

    2015 doi

  56. [64]

    N., Evans , N

    Matsakis , D. N., Evans , N. J., I., Sato , T., & Zuckerman , B. 1976, , 81, 172, 10.1086/111871

    1976 doi

  57. [65]

    1999, arXiv e-prints, astro, 10.48550/arXiv.astro-ph/9909473

    Mayra , O., Susana , L., & Paola , D. 1999, arXiv e-prints, astro, 10.48550/arXiv.astro-ph/9909473

    1999 doi arXiv

  58. [66]

    McDowell , R. S. 1988, , 88, 356, 10.1063/1.454608

    1988 doi

  59. [67]

    F., & Tan , J

    McKee , C. F., & Tan , J. C. 2003, , 585, 850, 10.1086/346149

    2003 doi

  60. [68]

    G., Banerji , M., Gonzalez , E., et al

    McMahon , R. G., Banerji , M., Gonzalez , E., et al. 2021, VizieR Online Data Catalog: The VISTA Hemisphere Survey (VHS) catalog DR5 (McMahon+, 2020) , VizieR On-line Data Catalog: II/367. Originally published in: 2013Msngr.154...35M

    2021

  61. [69]

    2021, , 649, A89, 10.1051/0004-6361/202039913

    Men'shchikov , A. 2021, , 649, A89, 10.1051/0004-6361/202039913

    2021 doi

  62. [70]

    2012, , 545, A3, 10.1051/0004-6361/201219497

    Miettinen , O. 2012, , 545, A3, 10.1051/0004-6361/201219497

    2012 doi

  63. [71]

    2017, VizieR Online Data Catalog: VISTA Variable in the Via Lactea Survey DR2 (Minniti+, 2017) , VizieR On-line Data Catalog: II/348

    Minniti , D., Lucas , P., & VVV Team . 2017, VizieR Online Data Catalog: VISTA Variable in the Via Lactea Survey DR2 (Minniti+, 2017) , VizieR On-line Data Catalog: II/348. Originally published in: Astron. Astrophys., 537, A107 (2002)

    2002

  64. [72]

    W., Emerson , J

    Minniti , D., Lucas , P. W., Emerson , J. P., et al. 2010, , 15, 433, 10.1016/j.newast.2009.12.002

    2010 doi

  65. [73]

    2010, , 518, L100, 10.1051/0004-6361/201014659

    Molinari , S., Swinyard , B., Bally , J., et al. 2010, , 518, L100, 10.1051/0004-6361/201014659

    2010 doi

  66. [74]

    2024, , 966, 171, 10.3847/1538-4357/ad32d0

    Morii , K., Sanhueza , P., Zhang , Q., et al. 2024, , 966, 171, 10.3847/1538-4357/ad32d0

    2024 doi

  67. [75]

    2018, , 56, 41, 10.1146/annurev-astro-091916-055235

    Motte , F., Bontemps , S., & Louvet , F. 2018, , 56, 41, 10.1146/annurev-astro-091916-055235

    2018 doi

  68. [76]

    M., Chibueze , J

    Mutie , M. M., Chibueze , J. O., El Bouchefry , K., et al. 2021, , 506, 4175, 10.1093/mnras/stab1946

    2021 doi

  69. [77]

    Myers , P. C. 2009, , 700, 1609, 10.1088/0004-637X/700/2/1609

    2009 doi

  70. [78]

    1964, , 140, 1529, 10.1086/148057

    Ostriker , J. 1964, , 140, 1529, 10.1086/148057

    1964 doi

  71. [79]

    2015, , 453, 3785, 10.1093/mnras/stv1834

    Palau , A., Ballesteros-Paredes , J., V \'a zquez-Semadeni , E., et al. 2015, , 453, 3785, 10.1093/mnras/stv1834

    2015 doi

  72. [80]

    1973, , 78, 929, 10.1086/111498

    Panagia , N. 1973, , 78, 929, 10.1086/111498

    1973 doi

  73. [81]

    K., Baug , T., et al

    Panja , A., Dewangan , L. K., Baug , T., et al. 2023, , 958, 17, 10.3847/1538-4357/ad0048

    2023 doi

  74. [82]

    2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2403.13610, 10.48550/arXiv.2403.13610

    Paron , S. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2403.13610, 10.48550/arXiv.2403.13610

    2024 doi arXiv

  75. [83]

    A., Andr \'e , P., et al

    Peretto , N., Fuller , G. A., Andr \'e , P., et al. 2014, , 561, A83, 10.1051/0004-6361/201322172

    2014 doi

  76. [84]

    M., Poynter , R

    Pickett , H. M., Poynter , R. L., Cohen , E. A., et al. 1998, , 60, 883, 10.1016/S0022-4073(98)00091-0

    1998 doi

  77. [85]

    S., Smith , N., Majewski , S

    Povich , M. S., Smith , N., Majewski , S. R., et al. 2011, , 194, 14, 10.1088/0067-0049/194/1/14

    2011 doi

  78. [86]

    D., & Whitworth , A

    Priestley , F. D., & Whitworth , A. P. 2021, , 506, 775, 10.1093/mnras/stab1777

    2021 doi

  79. [87]

    R., Walker , D

    Rawat , V., Samal , M. R., Walker , D. L., et al. 2024, , 528, 2199, 10.1093/mnras/stae060

    2024 doi

  80. [88]

    W., Pineda , J

    Rosolowsky , E. W., Pineda , J. E., Kauffmann , J., & Goodman , A. A. 2008, , 679, 1338, 10.1086/587685

    2008 doi

  81. [89]

    M., Zhang , Q., et al

    Sanhueza , P., Jackson , J. M., Zhang , Q., et al. 2017, , 841, 97, 10.3847/1538-4357/aa6ff8

    2017 doi

  82. [90]

    2018, , 70, S43, 10.1093/pasj/psy006

    Sano , H., Enokiya , R., Hayashi , K., et al. 2018, , 70, S43, 10.1093/pasj/psy006

    2018 doi

  83. [91]

    2010, , 520, A49, 10.1051/0004-6361/201014481

    Schneider , N., Csengeri , T., Bontemps , S., et al. 2010, , 520, A49, 10.1051/0004-6361/201014481

    2010 doi

  84. [92]

    M., Contreras , Y., et al

    Schuller , F., Menten , K. M., Contreras , Y., et al. 2009, , 504, 415, 10.1051/0004-6361/200811568

    2009 doi

  85. [93]

    S., et al

    Schuller , F., Csengeri , T., Urquhart , J. S., et al. 2017, , 601, A124, 10.1051/0004-6361/201628933

    2017 doi

  86. [94]

    K., & Ojha , D

    Seshadri , A., Vig , S., Ghosh , S. K., & Ojha , D. K. 2024, , 527, 4244, 10.1093/mnras/stad3385

    2024 doi

  87. [95]

    K., Ojha , D

    Sharma , S., Pandey , A. K., Ojha , D. K., et al. 2017, , 467, 2943, 10.1093/mnras/stx014

    2017 doi

  88. [96]

    F., Cutri , R

    Skrutskie , M. F., Cutri , R. M., Stiening , R., et al. 2006, , 131, 1163, 10.1086/498708

    2006 doi

  89. [97]

    1939, , 89, 526, 10.1086/144074

    Str \"o mgren , B. 1939, , 89, 526, 10.1086/144074

    1939 doi

  90. [98]

    J., & Habe , A

    Takahira , K., Tasker , E. J., & Habe , A. 2014, , 792, 63, 10.1088/0004-637X/792/1/63

    2014 doi

  91. [99]

    2019, , 886, 15, 10.3847/1538-4357/ab48ff

    Tokuda , K., Fukui , Y., Harada , R., et al. 2019, , 886, 15, 10.3847/1538-4357/ab48ff

    2019 doi

  92. [100]

    2017, , 835, 142, 10.3847/1538-4357/835/2/142

    Torii , K., Hattori , Y., Hasegawa , K., et al. 2017, , 835, 142, 10.3847/1538-4357/835/2/142

    2017 doi

  93. [101]

    P., Fuente , A., S \'a nchez-Monge , \'A ., et al

    Trevi \ n o-Morales , S. P., Fuente , A., S \'a nchez-Monge , \'A ., et al. 2019, , 629, A81, 10.1051/0004-6361/201935260

    2019 doi

  94. [102]

    2021, , 73, S35, 10.1093/pasj/psaa033

    Tsuge , K., Fukui , Y., Tachihara , K., et al. 2021, , 73, S35, 10.1093/pasj/psaa033

    2021 doi

  95. [103]

    S., K \"o nig , C., Giannetti , A., et al

    Urquhart , J. S., K \"o nig , C., Giannetti , A., et al. 2018, , 473, 1059, 10.1093/mnras/stx2258

    2018 doi

  96. [104]

    van der Tak , F. F. S. 2004, in Star Formation at High Angular Resolution, ed. M. G. Burton , R. Jayawardhana , & T. L. Bourke , Vol. 221, 59, 10.48550/arXiv.astro-ph/0309152

    2004 doi arXiv

  97. [105]

    C., Jappsen , A

    V \'a zquez-Semadeni , E., G \'o mez , G. C., Jappsen , A. K., Ballesteros-Paredes , J., & Klessen , R. S. 2009, , 707, 1023, 10.1088/0004-637X/707/2/1023

    2009 doi

  98. [106]

    2017, , 467, 1313, 10.1093/mnras/stw3229

    V \'a zquez-Semadeni , E., Gonz \'a lez-Samaniego , A., & Col \' n , P. 2017, , 467, 1313, 10.1093/mnras/stw3229

    2017 doi

  99. [107]

    C., & Zamora-Avil \'e s , M

    V \'a zquez-Semadeni , E., Palau , A., Ballesteros-Paredes , J., G \'o mez , G. C., & Zamora-Avil \'e s , M. 2019, , 490, 3061, 10.1093/mnras/stz2736

    2019 doi

  100. [108]

    C., et al

    V \'a zquez-Semadeni , E., Palau , A., G \'o mez , G. C., et al. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2408.10406, 10.48550/arXiv.2408.10406

    2024 doi arXiv

  101. [109]

    J., Breen , S

    Walsh , A. J., Breen , S. L., Britton , T., et al. 2011, , 416, 1764, 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2011.19115.x

    2011

  102. [110]

    2019, , 876, 42, 10.3847/1538-4357/ab13a2

    Wang , J.-W., Lai , S.-P., Eswaraiah , C., et al. 2019, , 876, 42, 10.3847/1538-4357/ab13a2

    2019 doi

  103. [111]

    M., Tang , Y.-W., et al

    Wang , J.-W., Koch , P. M., Tang , Y.-W., et al. 2022, , 931, 115, 10.3847/1538-4357/ac6872

    2022 doi

  104. [112]

    C., & Draine , B

    Weingartner , J. C., & Draine , B. T. 2001, , 548, 296, 10.1086/318651

    2001 doi

  105. [113]

    Wells , M. R. A., Urquhart , J. S., Moore , T. J. T., et al. 2022, , 516, 4245, 10.1093/mnras/stac2420

    2022 doi

  106. [114]

    M., Peretto , N., Avison , A., Duarte-Cabral , A., & Fuller , G

    Williams , G. M., Peretto , N., Avison , A., Duarte-Cabral , A., & Fuller , G. A. 2018, , 613, A11, 10.1051/0004-6361/201731587

    2018 doi

  107. [115]

    Y., Urquhart , J

    Yang , A. Y., Urquhart , J. S., Wyrowski , F., et al. 2022, , 658, A160, 10.1051/0004-6361/202142039

    2022 doi

  108. [116]

    2023, , 953, 40, 10.3847/1538-4357/acdf42

    Yang , D., Liu , H.-L., Tej , A., et al. 2023, , 953, 40, 10.3847/1538-4357/acdf42

    2023 doi

  109. [117]

    2017, , 231, 20, 10.3847/1538-4365/aa6ff3

    Yang , W., Xu , Y., Chen , X., et al. 2017, , 231, 20, 10.3847/1538-4365/aa6ff3

    2017 doi

  110. [118]

    2016, , 820, 37, 10.3847/0004-637X/820/1/37

    Yuan , J., Wu , Y., Liu , T., et al. 2016, , 820, 37, 10.3847/0004-637X/820/1/37

    2016 doi

  111. [119]

    J., et al

    Zhou , J.-W., Liu , T., Evans , N. J., et al. 2022, , 514, 6038, 10.1093/mnras/stac1735

    2022 doi

  112. [120]

    2023, , 519, 2391, 10.1093/mnras/stac3559

    Zhou , J.-W., Li , S., Liu , H.-L., et al. 2023, , 519, 2391, 10.1093/mnras/stac3559

    2023 doi

  113. [121]

    Zinnecker , H., & Yorke , H. W. 2007, , 45, 481, 10.1146/annurev.astro.44.051905.092549

    2007 arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 12, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.