Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 3 cited by

The ALMA Survey of Gas Evolution of PROtoplanetary Disks (AGE-PRO): X. Dust Substructures, Disk Geometries, and Dust-disk Radii

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-07 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Protoplanets open large dust cavities within about 1–2 million years, so older disk populations show more transition-disk-like structures.

desk verdict Solid, useful survey paper whose measurements and substructure catalog are the real value; the evolutionary-sequencing interpretation is suggestive but overreaches on 30 disks with region and age perfectly confounded. read the letter →

arxiv 2506.10746 v1 pith:WT3J7IXQ submitted 2025-06-12 astro-ph.EP astro-ph.SR

Miguel Vioque , Nicolás T. Kurtovic , Leon Trapman , Anibal Sierra , Laura M. Pérez , Ke Zhang , Pietro Curone , Giovanni P. Rosotti
show 13 more authors
John Carpenter Benoît Tabone Paola Pinilla Dingshan Deng Ilaria Pascucci James Miley Carolina Agurto-Gangas Lucas A. Cieza Rossella Anania Dary A. Ruiz-Rodriguez Camilo González-Ruilova Estephani E. TorresVillanueva Aleksandra Kuznetsova
This is my paper
classification astro-ph.EPastro-ph.SR
keywords protoplanetarydisksdustsubstructurestransitiondiskevolutionALMAcontinuumvisibilityfittingplanetformation
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 analyzes ALMA 1.3 mm dust continuum observations of 30 protoplanetary disks in three star-forming regions spanning roughly 0.5 to 6 million years in age. It finds that dust substructures are already common in the youngest disks, with about 80% of well-resolved Class I sources showing structure, and that large inner dust cavities become markedly more common in the oldest region. The authors propose an evolutionary sequence in which inner protoplanets have time to open dust cavities within about 1–2 million years, so disk populations at later ages contain a higher fraction of disks with large inner cavities. If this is correct, a substantial fraction of young disks already host planet-mass bodies carving their inner regions.

What carries the argument

The central tool is nonparametric visibility fitting with the Frankenstein code, which models the observed interferometric visibilities as an azimuthally symmetric radial brightness profile and yields resolution elements roughly 1.5–2.5 times finer than the CLEAN beam. This machinery recovers inner dust cavities, rings, and irregular structure in the radial profiles, while residual imaging of the visibility-subtracted data reveals non-axisymmetric structure such as the IRS 63 spiral. The interpretive machinery is the comparison of three regions as age stages (Ophiuchus 0.5–1 Myr, Lupus 1–3 Myr, Upper Scorpius 2–6 Myr), used to trace how the fraction and type of substructures change with time.

What would settle it

If a within-region test in Upper Scorpius showed no trend between stellar age and the presence of a large inner dust cavity, or if a younger region with similar environmental conditions had the same cavity fraction as Upper Scorpius, the proposed age-driven evolutionary sequence would be refuted.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On the paper's own terms, the central claim is an evolutionary sequence: protoplanets at inner orbits open large dust cavities on a timescale of about 1–2 million years, and this is why the fraction of disks with large inner dust cavities (transition disks) rises from Ophiuchus through Lupus to Upper Scorpius. The evidence comes from visibility-fitting radial brightness profiles of all 30 disks: substructures appear in 15 of 30 disks, five disks show large (>15 au) inner dust cavities, and four of the six Upper Scorpius disks observed at sufficient resolution have such cavities, compared with one of eight in Ophiuchus and none of three in Lupus. The paper also reports that disks with large cavities have gas masses typical of their region, while irregularly structured disks without cavities are one to two orders of magnitude more massive in gas, and that dust-disk radii do not evolve with age while the size–luminosity relation flattens in Upper Scorpius. These results are interpreted as pressure dust traps fixing the outer dust radius at later ages, with at least 40% of disk-hosting Upper Scorpius stars having inner planets capable of carving cavities. A newly identified spiral in IRS 63 is presented as evidence for gravitational instability in that massive young disk.

Load-bearing premise

The three star-forming regions are treated as snapshots of one aging sequence, assuming that age, rather than environment, initial conditions, or sample selection, is the dominant difference between them.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Dust substructures are already present in roughly 80% of well-resolved Class I disks at 0.5–1 million years, indicating that disks become structured very early.
  • The fraction of disks with large inner dust cavities rises from about one in eight in Ophiuchus to four in six in Upper Scorpius at comparable resolution, implying an evolution toward transition-disk-like populations.
  • At least 40% of disk-hosting stars in Upper Scorpius have inner planets capable of carving large dust cavities, which would require planet formation to happen within about 2 million years.
  • The absence of dust-disk radius evolution with age, together with the flattened size–luminosity relation in Upper Scorpius, indicates that dust traps set the outer dust radius in a large fraction of older disks.
  • Disks with large inner cavities have gas masses typical of their region, while irregularly structured disks without cavities are one to two orders of magnitude more massive in gas, linking cavity formation to regulation of the gas reservoir.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If the proposed sequence holds, the fraction of disks with large inner cavities as a function of cluster age becomes a direct observational probe of the timescale for forming planets massive enough to open gaps.
  • The IRS 63 spiral suggests some early substructures form by gravitational instability rather than planet carving, so high-resolution follow-up of Class I disks could test whether the planet-carving sequence is the whole story.
  • An alternative reading the paper itself acknowledges is that late infall and environmental interactions produce both the irregular structure and the high gas masses seen in some disks, meaning part of the observed regional differences could be environmental rather than purely age-driven.
  • A direct test would be to search for inner planets in Upper Scorpius disks without cavities: the sequence predicts those disks either lack planets or host planets too small to carve visible gaps.
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. This paper presents a visibility-fitting analysis of ALMA Band 6 1.3 mm dust continuum observations of the 30 AGE-PRO protoplanetary disks in Ophiuchus, Lupus, and Upper Scorpius. The authors derive disk geometries, azimuthally symmetric radial intensity profiles, and dust-disk radii (R68%, R90%, R95%), and identify dust substructures from the profiles and their residuals. They detect substructures in 15 of 30 disks, five of which are classified as large inner dust cavities (>15 au), four of those in Upper Scorpius. They also report a newly identified spiral in IRS 63 and compare dust radial profiles with gas profiles from companion AGE-PRO papers. Interpreting the three regions as an age sequence, they propose an evolutionary sequence (Sect. 5.3) in which protoplanets at inner orbits open dust cavities within 1-2 Myr, implying that a large fraction of disk-hosting stars harbor inner planets. They further interpret the absence of a dust size-luminosity correlation in Upper Scorpius and the lack of dust-radius evolution with age as evidence for dust traps.

Significance. If the evolutionary interpretation holds, the paper provides important constraints on the timescale of substructure and planet formation: substructures appear present already at 0.5-1 Myr, and the fraction of disks with large inner dust cavities increases with age. The homogeneous analysis of 30 disks, with visibility fitting validated against higher-resolution data for seven sources and uncertainties propagated through the modeling, is a valuable resource for the community. The identification of a spiral in IRS 63 adds a concrete observational case for gravitational instability. However, the population-level claim rests on small numbers (4 vs 1 vs 0 cavities) and on using star-forming region as a proxy for age; the paper explicitly labels the sequence as a proposal, but the supporting evidence needs to be strengthened before the claim can be considered established.

major comments (3)
  1. [Sect. 5.3] The proposed evolutionary sequence is inferred from a region-to-region gradient in cavity fraction (4/6 Upper Sco, 1/8 Ophiuchus, 0/3 Lupus for θD/θres > 3), but region is only a proxy for age and is perfectly collinear with environment and sample selection. Ophiuchus is Class I-selected, Upper Scorpius is an OB association with a ~15% disk fraction (survivor bias) and strong UV radiation, and Lupus has lower stellar density. External photoevaporation or initial conditions could produce more cavities or dust traps in Upper Scorpius without requiring a 1-2 Myr planetary carving timescale. Because individual ages are available (Fig. 10; Zhang et al. 2025), the authors should test the age interpretation directly, e.g., a logistic regression of cavity incidence on individual age with region as a covariate, or at minimum a within-region age trend test. Without such a test, the claim that 'protoplanets at inner orbits have time to open dust cavities in ~1-2 Myr' and the inference that at least 40% of disk-hosting Upper Sco stars host inner planets are not uniquely supported by the data.
  2. [Sect. 3.1, Table 2] The classification into 'inner dust cavity' versus 'irregular substructure' is based on visual inspection of the radial profiles, with no quantitative contrast or size criterion beyond the >15 au cavity threshold. This is load-bearing because the key population trend (cavity fraction per region) depends on this classification. Ophiuchus 2 and 6 are explicitly noted as having flat-top profiles that could resemble cavities, yet are assigned to the irregular group. If a quantitative criterion (e.g., minimum depression depth or contrast ratio) were applied, these two sources might be classified as cavities, changing the Ophiuchus cavity count from 1/8 to 3/8 and weakening the proposed trend. The authors should provide a reproducible, quantitative definition of 'cavity' and apply it uniformly, or demonstrate that reasonable alternative classification choices do not affect the region-to-region trend.
  3. [Sect. 5.2] The interpretation of the absence of a significant R_dust-L_mm correlation in Upper Scorpius (ρ = 0.18 and 0.08 for R68% and R90%) as evidence for dust traps is based on a small sample (10 disks, several upper limits), and the paper does not report posterior uncertainties on the Upper Scorpius slope or a formal comparison with the Ophiuchus and Lupus slopes. The conclusion that 'a high fraction of disks in Upper Scorpius with dust trapping substructures is the best explanation' would be strengthened by reporting the posterior distribution of β for Upper Scorpius and a quantitative comparison (e.g., overlapping credible intervals or a Bayes factor) with the other regions.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Sect. 5.3] The sentence beginning 'Considering only those sources ... (Sect. 5.1); four out of six disks in Upper Scorpius show inner dust cavities' uses a semicolon incorrectly and should be rephrased.
  2. [Throughout] The term 'colocal' is nonstandard; consider using 'co-located' or 'colocated'.
  3. [Caption of Fig. 5] The notation 'Rdust 90%' is ambiguous; it should be 'R90%' or 'R_dust,90%' for consistency with the text.
  4. [Sect. 5.1] The definition of θD as the angular diameter containing 90% of the emission is clear, but the reader may confuse it with the tabulated R90% radius; a brief reminder in the text would help.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the substructure classes and dust radii are measured from the visibility fits, and the proposed evolutionary sequence is an empirical interpretation rather than an input-equivalent derivation.

full rationale

This is an observational analysis, not a derivation of a quantity from its own definition. Disk geometries come from Gaussian fits to the continuum visibilities (Sect. 2.1); radial brightness profiles come from nonparametric Frankenstein fits (Sect. 3.1); and the inner-cavity/irregular/non-structured classifications are assigned from those independently obtained profiles. The central evolutionary claim (Sect. 5.3) is an interpretation of the measured region-to-region cavity fractions (4/6 Upper Sco vs. 1/8 Ophiuchus and 0/3 Lupus) and of the absence of dust-radius evolution, not a value that was fitted into those profiles by construction. The region ages and gas-disk masses come from companion AGE-PRO papers using different tracers and analyses (12CO and SED/age work), so they are not constructed from the dust-continuum fits presented here. The paper also compares its recovered profiles against higher-resolution literature data (Appendix B), providing an external validation of the substructure identifications. The main weakness is that region and age are collinear, so the proposed 1-2 Myr planetary-carving timescale is a physically motivated interpretation with a potential environment/age confound; this is a correctness or robustness concern, not a circularity of the derivation chain. No fitted parameter is renamed as a prediction, no uniqueness theorem or ansatz is imported solely through self-citation, and no known result is merely relabeled. Therefore the paper is self-contained with respect to circularity and receives a score of 0.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 1 invented entities

No hidden free parameters are used; explicit fits such as power-law slopes are reported with uncertainties. The central evolutionary claim rests on assumptions that regions form an age sequence, that visibility-modeled profiles correctly reveal substructures, and that the resolution and detectability cuts are adequate.

assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption The three regions Ophiuchus, Lupus, and Upper Scorpius can be treated as an age sequence (0.5-1, 1-3, 2-6 Myr) with other differences such as environment and initial conditions subdominant.
    Used throughout Sect. 5.2 and 5.3, for example 'The main trend of dust substructures with age that can be appreciated in AGE-PRO...' and Fig. 10. No control for region environment is included.
  • domain assumption Frankenstein radial profiles recover the true azimuthally averaged brightness at sub-beam resolution, so substructure presence or absence is correctly diagnosed.
    Sect. 3 and 3.1: substructure identification relies on visual inspection of Frankenstein fits and residuals; validation against higher-resolution data is provided for only seven sources in Appendix B.
  • domain assumption Disk geometries (inclination and position angle) from Gaussian visibility fits, or from 12CO fits for a few sources, are accurate enough that mis-specified geometry does not create or erase substructure features.
    Sect. 2.1 and 2.2. Geometry errors propagate into the radial profiles; the paper explores geometry uncertainties in a 17-fit grid but does not quantify the systematic effect on substructure classification.
  • domain assumption The adopted resolution cutoff theta_D/theta_res > 3 reliably separates disks where substructures would have been detected from those where they would not.
    Sect. 5.1. This cutoff is used to compute the cavity fractions (4/6 Upper Sco, 1/8 Ophiuchus, 0/3 Lupus) that drive the proposed evolutionary trend.
invented entities (1)
  • Inner protoplanets in a large fraction (at least 40%) of Upper Scorpius disk-hosting stars independent evidence
    purpose: Proposed explanation for large inner dust cavities and for fixing outer dust radii via dust traps (Sect. 5.3).
    Not directly detected except for a tentative protoplanet candidate in Upper Scorpius 1 (Sierra et al. 2024a). The 40% fraction is inferred from cavity statistics and is falsifiable through direct imaging or kinematic searches for planets.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of The ALMA Survey of Gas Evolution of PROtoplanetary Disks (AGE-PRO): X. Dust Substructures, Disk Geometries, and Dust-disk Radii." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/WT3J7IXQ

@misc{pith2026250610746,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: The ALMA Survey of Gas Evolution of PROtoplanetary Disks (AGE-PRO): X. Dust Substructures, Disk Geometries, and Dust-disk Radii},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/WT3J7IXQ}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2506.10746}
}
abstract

We perform visibility fitting to the dust continuum Band 6 1.3 mm data of the 30 protoplanetary disks in the AGE-PRO ALMA Large Program. We obtain disk geometries, dust-disk radii, and azimuthally symmetric radial profiles of the intensity of the dust continuum emission. We examine the presence of continuum substructures in the AGE-PRO sample by using these radial profiles and their residuals. We detect substructures in 15 out of 30 disks. We report five disks with large ($>$15 au) inner dust cavities. The Ophiuchus Class I disks show dust-disk substructures in $\sim80\%$ of the resolved sources. This evidences the early formation of substructures in protoplanetary disks. A spiral is identified in IRS 63, hinting to gravitational instability in this massive disk. We compare our dust-disk brightness radial profiles with gas-disk brightness radial profiles and discuss colocal substructures in both tracers. In addition, we discuss the evolution of dust-disk radii and substructures across Ophiuchus, Lupus, and Upper Scorpius. We find that disks in Lupus and Upper Scorpius with large inner dust cavities have typical gas-disk masses, suggesting an abundance of dust cavities in these regions. The prevalence of pressure dust traps at later ages is supported by a potential trend with time with more disks with large inner dust cavities (or "transition disks") in Upper Scorpius and the absence of evolution of dust-disk sizes with time in the AGE-PRO sample. We propose this is caused by an evolutionary sequence with a high fraction of protoplanetary disks with inner protoplanets carving dust cavities.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2506.10746 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Peak normalized brightness radial profiles obtained from the best [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Dust brightness temperature profiles of AGE-PRO Ophiuchus sources obtained from the best [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Dust brightness temperature profiles of AGE-PRO Lupus sources obtained from the best [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (13 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Dust brightness temperature profiles of AGE-PRO Upper Scorpius sources obtained from the best [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Gas-disk mass from Trapman et al. (2025b) vs. dust-disk R90% radii only for those sources observed at enough resolution (θD/θres > 3) to detect substructures in the majority of cases (see Sect. 5.1). Yellow markers indicate Lupus sources, and green markers Upper Scorpi…
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Comparison between the dust-disk radii (R [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Mosaic of the well-resolved AGE-PRO sources with residuals at the 5 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_7.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Comparison of the Lupus and Upper Scorpius R [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_8.png]
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Millimeter continuum size–luminosity relationship for R [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_9.png]
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: R68% and R90% dust-disk radii vs. individual age for each AGE-PRO source. Disks with large inner dust cavities are highlighted with a black contour. Downward arrows denote upper limits. For uncertainties on the age determination, see Zhang et al. (2025). In the AGE-PR…
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Comparison between the Lupus and Upper Scorpius dust-disk radial profiles and gas-disk radial profiles (the latter [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p017_11.png]
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: 12CO 2–1 integrated spectrum for Upper Scorpius 5 (2MASS J16145026-2332397). The gray line shows the observed spectrum (see Agurto-Gangas et al. 2025). Shown in orange is a velocity-stacked spectrum (made using GoFish, Teague 2019) using the position angle and inclina…
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: Comparison of the radial profiles obtained in this work from visibility fitting (Sect. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p022_13.png]
Figure 14
Figure 14. Figure 14: Mosaic of the residuals of AGE-PRO Ophiuchus sources. For each source, we show the CLEAN image of the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p023_14.png]
Figure 15
Figure 15. Figure 15: Mosaic of the residuals of AGE-PRO Lupus sources. For each source, we show the CLEAN image of the continuum [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p024_15.png]
Figure 16
Figure 16. Figure 16: Mosaic of the residuals of AGE-PRO Upper Scorpius sources. For each source, we show the CLEAN image of the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p025_16.png]

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 3 Pith papers

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

  1. Cosmic cascades: How disk substructure regulates the flow of water to inner planetary systems

    astro-ph.EP 2025-08 conditional novelty 7.0 of 10

    Disks with wider inner dust gaps show weaker cold-water emission, implying gaps trap icy pebbles and reduce water delivery to inner planets, matching population synthesis models.

  2. Dust Growth in Binary Systems: Inhibition of dust settling and growth in circumbinary discs

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

    Dust grains in circumbinary discs end up five times smaller than in single-star discs, and the conditions for streaming-instability clumping are not met, arguing against in-situ planet formation there.

  3. Studying Protoplanets and Protoplanetary Disks with the Habitable Worlds Observatory

    astro-ph.IM 2025-06 unverdicted novelty 3.0 of 10

    A science case urging that HWO be designed to image and characterize over 200 protoplanets, expanding the known sample from 2 objects.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

103 extracted references · 8 canonical work pages · cited by 3 Pith papers

  1. [1]

    2025, ApJ, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/adc7ab ALMA Partnership, Brogan, C

    Agurto-Gangas, C., P´ erez, L., Sierra, A., et al. 2025, ApJ, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/adc7ab ALMA Partnership, Brogan, C. L., P´ erez, L. M., et al. 2015, ApJL, 808, L3, doi: 10.1088/2041-8205/808/1/L3

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/adc7ab 2025

  2. [2]

    2025, ApJ, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/adb587

    Anania, R., Rosotti, G., G´ arate, M., et al. 2025, ApJ, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/adb587

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/adb587 2025

  3. [3]

    Andrews, S. M. 2020, ARA&A, 58, 483, doi: 10.1146/annurev-astro-031220-010302

    doi:10.1146/annurev-astro-031220-010302 2020

  4. [4]

    M., Rosenfeld, K

    Andrews, S. M., Rosenfeld, K. A., Kraus, A. L., & Wilner, D. J. 2013, ApJ, 771, 129, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/771/2/129

    doi:10.1088/0004-637x/771/2/129 2013

  5. [5]

    M., Terrell, M., Tripathi, A., et al

    Andrews, S. M., Terrell, M., Tripathi, A., et al. 2018a, ApJ, 865, 157, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aadd9f

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aadd9f

  6. [6]

    Dullemond, C. P. 2010, ApJ, 723, 1241, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/723/2/1241

    doi:10.1088/0004-637x/723/2/1241 2010

  7. [7]

    M., Huang, J., P´ erez, L

    Andrews, S. M., Huang, J., P´ erez, L. M., et al. 2018b, ApJL, 869, L41, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/aaf741

    doi:10.3847/2041-8213/aaf741

  8. [8]

    M., Elder, W., Zhang, S., et al

    Andrews, S. M., Elder, W., Zhang, S., et al. 2021, ApJ, 916, 51, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac00b9

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ac00b9 2021

Show all 103 references
  1. [9]

    P., van der Marel, N., et al

    Ansdell, M., Williams, J. P., van der Marel, N., et al. 2016, ApJ, 828, 46, doi: 10.3847/0004-637X/828/1/46 28 M. Vioque, N. T. Kurtovic, L. Trapman, and et al

    2016 doi

  2. [10]

    2023, in Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series, Vol

    Bae, J., Isella, A., Zhu, Z., et al. 2023, in Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series, Vol. 534, Protostars and Planets VII, ed. S. Inutsuka, Y. Aikawa, T. Muto, K. Tomida, & M. Tamura, 423, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2210.13314

    2023 doi arXiv

  3. [11]

    2021, AJ, 161, 147, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/abd806

    Demleitner, M., & Andrae, R. 2021, AJ, 161, 147, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/abd806

    2021 doi

  4. [12]

    A., Carpenter, J

    Barenfeld, S. A., Carpenter, J. M., Ricci, L., & Isella, A. 2016, ApJ, 827, 142, doi: 10.3847/0004-637X/827/2/142

    2016 doi

  5. [13]

    2023, in Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series, Vol

    Benisty, M., Dominik, C., Follette, K., et al. 2023, in Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series, Vol. 534, Protostars and Planets VII, ed. S. Inutsuka, Y. Aikawa, T. Muto, K. Tomida, & M. Tamura, 605, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2203.09991

    2023 doi arXiv

  6. [14]

    M., Esplin, T

    Carpenter, J. M., Esplin, T. L., Luhman, K. L., Mamajek, E. E., & Andrews, S. M. 2025, ApJ, 978, 117, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad8ebc

    2025 doi

  7. [15]

    S., P´ erez, L

    Carvalho, A. S., P´ erez, L. M., Sierra, A., et al. 2024, ApJ, 971, 129, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad5a07

    2024 doi

  8. [16]

    A., Ru ´ ız-Rodr ´ ıguez, D., Hales, A., et al

    Cieza, L. A., Ru ´ ız-Rodr ´ ıguez, D., Hales, A., et al. 2019, MNRAS, 482, 698, doi: 10.1093/mnras/sty2653

    2019 doi

  9. [17]

    A., Gonz´ alez-Ruilova, C., Hales, A

    Cieza, L. A., Gonz´ alez-Ruilova, C., Hales, A. S., et al. 2021, MNRAS, 501, 2934, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staa3787

    2021 doi

  10. [18]

    G., Harris, R

    Cox, E. G., Harris, R. J., Looney, L. W., et al. 2017, ApJ, 851, 83, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aa97e2

    2017 doi

  11. [19]

    A., Gonz´ alez-Ruilova, C., et al

    Dasgupta, A., Cieza, L. A., Gonz´ alez-Ruilova, C., et al. 2025, ApJL, 981, L4, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/adb03c

    2025 doi

  12. [20]

    2024, A&A, 688, A81, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202450328

    Delussu, L., Birnstiel, T., Miotello, A., et al. 2024, A&A, 688, A81, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202450328

    2024 doi

  13. [21]

    2025, ApJ, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/add43a Drka˙ zkowska, J., Bitsch, B., Lambrechts, M., et al

    Deng, D., Vioque, M., Pascucci, I., et al. 2025, ApJ, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/add43a Drka˙ zkowska, J., Bitsch, B., Lambrechts, M., et al. 2023, in Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series, Vol. 534, Protostars and Planets VII, ed. S. Inutsuka, Y. Aikawa, T. Muto, ...

    2025 doi arXiv

  14. [22]

    A., Arce, H

    Eisner, J. A., Arce, H. G., Ballering, N. P., et al. 2018, ApJ, 860, 77, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aac3e2

    2018 doi

  15. [23]

    2017, Royal Society Open Science, 4, 170114, doi: 10.1098/rsos.170114

    Ercolano, B., & Pascucci, I. 2017, Royal Society Open Science, 4, 170114, doi: 10.1098/rsos.170114

    2017 doi

  16. [24]

    J., et al

    Flores, C., Ohashi, N., Tobin, J. J., et al. 2023, ApJ, 958, 98, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/acf7c1

    2023 doi

  17. [25]

    W., Lang, D., & Goodman, J

    Foreman-Mackey, D., Hogg, D. W., Lang, D., & Goodman, J. 2013, PASP, 125, 306, doi: 10.1086/670067 G´ arate, M., Birnstiel, T., Pinilla, P., et al. 2023, A&A, 679, A15, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202244436

    2013 doi

  18. [26]

    2018, A&A, 620, A94, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201833872

    Garufi, A., Benisty, M., Pinilla, P., et al. 2018, A&A, 620, A94, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201833872

    2018 doi

  19. [27]

    2020, A&A, 633, A82, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201936946

    Garufi, A., Avenhaus, H., P´ erez, S., et al. 2020, A&A, 633, A82, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201936946

    2020 doi

  20. [28]

    2021, A&A, 652, A2, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202140438

    Grasser, N., Ratzenb¨ ock, S., Alves, J., et al. 2021, A&A, 652, A2, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202140438

    2021 doi

  21. [29]

    M., van der Marel, N., Williams, J

    Guerra-Alvarado, O. M., van der Marel, N., Williams, J. P., et al. 2025, A&A, 696, A232, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202453338

    2025 doi

  22. [30]

    M., Carrasco-Gonz´ alez, C., Mac ´ ıas, E., et al

    Guerra-Alvarado, O. M., Carrasco-Gonz´ alez, C., Mac ´ ıas, E., et al. 2024, A&A, 686, A298, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202349046

    2024 doi

  23. [31]

    Y., Bohn, A

    Haffert, S. Y., Bohn, A. J., de Boer, J., et al. 2019, Nature Astronomy, 3, 749, doi: 10.1038/s41550-019-0780-5

    2019 doi

  24. [32]

    2020, ApJ, 895, 126, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab70ba

    Hendler, N., Pascucci, I., Pinilla, P., et al. 2020, ApJ, 895, 126, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab70ba

    2020 doi

  25. [33]

    G., Maureira, M

    Hsieh, C.-H., Arce, H. G., Maureira, M. J., et al. 2024, ApJ, 973, 138, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad6152 —. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2504.11577, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2504.11577

    2024 doi arXiv

  26. [34]

    M., Dullemond, C

    Huang, J., Andrews, S. M., Dullemond, C. P., et al. 2018, ApJL, 869, L42, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/aaf740

    2018 doi

  27. [35]

    2024, A&A, 691, A155, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202451511

    Huang, S., van der Marel, N., & Portegies Zwart, S. 2024, A&A, 691, A155, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202451511

    2024 doi

  28. [36]

    D., & Nelson, P

    Isobe, T., Feigelson, E. D., & Nelson, P. I. 1986, ApJ, 306, 490, doi: 10.1086/164359

    1986 doi

  29. [37]

    Rosotti, G. P. 2022a, MNRAS, 509, 2780, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stab3185

    doi

  30. [38]

    Clarke, C. J. 2020, MNRAS, 495, 3209, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staa1365

    2020 doi

  31. [39]

    Rosotti, G. P. 2022b, MNRAS, 514, 6053, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stac1770

    doi

  32. [40]

    Kelly, B. C. 2007, ApJ, 665, 1489, doi: 10.1086/519947

    2007 doi

  33. [41]

    2018, A&A, 617, A44, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201832957

    Keppler, M., Benisty, M., M¨ uller, A., et al. 2018, A&A, 617, A44, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201832957

    2018 doi

  34. [42]

    2019, A&A, 625, A118, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201935034

    Keppler, M., Teague, R., Bae, J., et al. 2019, A&A, 625, A118, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201935034

    2019 doi

  35. [43]

    R., Pan, S.-K., Claude, S

    Kerr, A. R., Pan, S.-K., Claude, S. M. X., et al. 2014, IEEE Transactions on Terahertz Science and Technology, 4, 201, doi: 10.1109/TTHZ.2014.2302537

    2014

  36. [44]

    2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2409.16993, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2409.16993

    Kiefer, F., Lagrange, A.-M., Rubini, P., & Philipot, F. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2409.16993, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2409.16993

    2024 doi

  37. [45]

    S., & Haugbølle, T

    Kuffmeier, M., Jensen, S. S., & Haugbølle, T. 2023, European Physical Journal Plus, 138, 272, doi: 10.1140/epjp/s13360-023-03880-y

    2023 doi

  38. [46]

    T., G´ arate, M., Pinilla, P., et al

    Kurtovic, N. T., G´ arate, M., Pinilla, P., et al. 2025, ApJ, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/add1d0 AGE-PRO X. Dust Substructures, Disk Geometries, and Dust-disk Radii 29

    2025 doi

  39. [47]

    2022, ApJ, 928, 92, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac54a8

    Kuznetsova, A., Bae, J., Hartmann, L., & Mac Low, M.-M. 2022, ApJ, 928, 92, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac54a8

    2022 doi

  40. [48]

    Lau, T. C. H., Birnstiel, T., Drka˙ zkowska, J., & Stammler, S. M. 2024, A&A, 688, A22, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202450464

    2024 doi

  41. [49]

    J., et al

    Long, F., Pinilla, P., Herczeg, G. J., et al. 2018, ApJ, 869, 17, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aae8e1

    2018 doi

  42. [50]

    J., Harsono, D., et al

    Long, F., Herczeg, G. J., Harsono, D., et al. 2019, ApJ, 882, 49, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab2d2d

    2019 doi

  43. [51]

    Luhman, K. L. 2022, AJ, 163, 25, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/ac35e3 Mac ´ ıas, E., Guerra-Alvarado, O., Carrasco-Gonz´ alez, C., et al. 2021, A&A, 648, A33, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202039812

    2022 doi

  44. [52]

    F., Ansdell, M., Rosotti, G

    Manara, C. F., Ansdell, M., Rosotti, G. P., et al. 2023, in Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series, Vol. 534, Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series, ed. S. Inutsuka, Y. Aikawa, T. Muto, K. Tomida, & M. Tamura, 539, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2203.09930

    2023 doi arXiv

  45. [53]

    F., Rosotti, G., Testi, L., et al

    Manara, C. F., Rosotti, G., Testi, L., et al. 2016, A&A, 591, L3, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201628549 Mauc´ o, K., Manara, C. F., Ansdell, M., et al. 2023, A&A, 679, A82, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202347627

    2016 doi

  46. [54]

    J., Pineda, J

    Maureira, M. J., Pineda, J. E., Liu, H. B., et al. 2024, A&A, 689, L5, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202451166

    2024 doi

  47. [55]

    I., Sheehan, P

    Michel, A., Sadavoy, S. I., Sheehan, P. D., et al. 2023, AJ, 166, 184, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/acf653

    2023 doi

  48. [56]

    M., Carpenter, J., Booth, R., et al

    Miley, J. M., Carpenter, J., Booth, R., et al. 2024, A&A, 682, A55, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202347135

    2024 doi

  49. [57]

    M., P´ erez, L

    Miley, J. M., P´ erez, L. M., Agurto-Gangas, C., et al. 2025, ApJ, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/add25c

    2025 doi

  50. [58]

    2023, in Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series, Vol

    Kataoka, A. 2023, in Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series, Vol. 534, Protostars and Planets VII, ed. S. Inutsuka, Y. Aikawa, T. Muto, K. Tomida, & M. Tamura, 501, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2203.09818

    2023 doi arXiv

  51. [59]

    B., Ohashi, S., et al

    Nakatani, R., Liu, H. B., Ohashi, S., et al. 2020, ApJL, 895, L2, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ab8eaa

    2020 doi

  52. [60]

    D., & Rosotti, G

    Nazari, P., Sellek, A. D., & Rosotti, G. P. 2025, A&A, 697, A84, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202451116

    2025 doi

  53. [61]

    J., Jørgensen, J

    Ohashi, N., Tobin, J. J., Jørgensen, J. K., et al. 2023, ApJ, 951, 8, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/acd384

    2023 doi

  54. [62]

    A., Guilera, O., et al

    Orcajo, S., Cieza, L. A., Guilera, O., et al. 2025, ApJL, 984, L57, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/adcd58

    2025 doi

  55. [63]

    2022, MNRAS, 511, 2453, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stac152

    Parker, R., Ward-Thompson, D., & Kirk, J. 2022, MNRAS, 511, 2453, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stac152

    2022 doi

  56. [64]

    J., et al

    Pascucci, I., Testi, L., Herczeg, G. J., et al. 2016, ApJ, 831, 125, doi: 10.3847/0004-637X/831/2/125

    2016 doi

  57. [65]

    N., Deng, D., et al

    Pascucci, I., Skinner, B. N., Deng, D., et al. 2023, ApJ, 953, 183, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ace4bf

    2023 doi

  58. [66]

    2023, MNRAS, 523, 3318, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad1504

    Picogna, G., Sch¨ afer, C., Ercolano, B., et al. 2023, MNRAS, 523, 3318, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad1504

    2023 doi

  59. [67]

    E., Arzoumanian, D., Andre, P., et al

    Pineda, J. E., Arzoumanian, D., Andre, P., et al. 2023, in Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series, Vol. 534, Protostars and Planets VII, ed. S. Inutsuka, Y. Aikawa, T. Muto, K. Tomida, & M. Tamura, 233, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2205.03935

    2023 doi arXiv

  60. [68]

    2020, A&A, 635, A105, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201937003

    Pinilla, P., Pascucci, I., & Marino, S. 2020, A&A, 635, A105, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201937003

    2020 doi

  61. [69]

    2018, ApJ, 859, 32, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aabf94

    Pinilla, P., Tazzari, M., Pascucci, I., et al. 2018, ApJ, 859, 32, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aabf94

    2018 doi

  62. [70]

    2024, A&A, 688, L22, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202450742 Ribas, ´A., Clarke, C

    Podio, L., Ceccarelli, C., Codella, C., et al. 2024, A&A, 688, L22, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202450742 Ribas, ´A., Clarke, C. J., & Zagaria, F. 2024, MNRAS, 532, 1752, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stae1534 Ribas, ´A., Mer ´ ın, B., Bouy, H., & Maud, L. T. 2014, A&A, 561, A54, doi: 10.1051...

    2024 doi

  63. [71]

    P., Booth, R

    Rosotti, G. P., Booth, R. A., Tazzari, M., et al. 2019a, MNRAS, 486, L63, doi: 10.1093/mnrasl/slz064

    doi

  64. [72]

    P., Tazzari, M., Booth, R

    Rosotti, G. P., Tazzari, M., Booth, R. A., et al. 2019b, MNRAS, 486, 4829, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stz1190

    doi

  65. [73]

    A., Gonz´ alez-Ruilova, C., Cieza, L

    Ruiz-Rodriguez, D. A., Gonz´ alez-Ruilova, C., Cieza, L. A., et al. 2025, ApJ, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/add2ec

    2025 doi

  66. [74]

    2020, A&A, 633, A114, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201936913 —

    Sanchis, E., Testi, L., Natta, A., et al. 2020, A&A, 633, A114, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201936913 —. 2021, A&A, 649, A19, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202039733 Santamar ´ ıa-Miranda, A., de Gregorio-Monsalvo, I., Ohashi, N., et al. 2024, A&A, 690, A46, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202449981

    2020 doi

  67. [75]

    M., Schmiedeke, A., Pineda, J

    Segura-Cox, D. M., Schmiedeke, A., Pineda, J. E., et al. 2020, Nature, 586, 228, doi: 10.1038/s41586-020-2779-6

    2020 doi

  68. [76]

    D., Booth, R

    Sellek, A. D., Booth, R. A., & Clarke, C. J. 2020, MNRAS, 492, 1279, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stz3528

    2020 doi

  69. [77]

    D., Tobin, J

    Sheehan, P. D., Tobin, J. J., Federman, S., Megeath, S. T., & Looney, L. W. 2020, ApJ, 902, 141, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/abbad5

    2020 doi

  70. [78]

    J., et al

    Shi, Y., Long, F., Herczeg, G. J., et al. 2024, ApJ, 966, 59, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad2e94

    2024 doi

  71. [79]

    2024, ApJ, 961, 228, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad12b5

    Shoshi, A., Harada, N., Tokuda, K., et al. 2024, ApJ, 961, 228, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad12b5

    2024 doi

  72. [80]

    M., Zhang, K., et al

    Sierra, A., P´ erez, L. M., Zhang, K., et al. 2021, ApJS, 257, 14, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/ac1431

    2021 doi

  73. [81]

    M., Agurto-Gangas, C., et al

    Sierra, A., P´ erez, L. M., Agurto-Gangas, C., et al. 2024a, ApJ, 974, 102, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad6e73

    doi

  74. [82]

    M., Sotomayor, B., et al

    Sierra, A., P´ erez, L. M., Sotomayor, B., et al. 2024b, ApJ, 974, 306, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad7460

    doi

  75. [83]

    2024, Nature, 633, 58, doi: 10.1038/s41586-024-07877-0 30 M

    Speedie, J., Dong, R., Hall, C., et al. 2024, Nature, 633, 58, doi: 10.1038/s41586-024-07877-0 30 M. Vioque, N. T. Kurtovic, L. Trapman, and et al

    2024 doi

  76. [84]

    2022, A&A, 668, A104, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202243338

    Stadler, J., G´ arate, M., Pinilla, P., et al. 2022, A&A, 668, A104, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202243338

    2022 doi

  77. [85]

    Skrutskie, M. F. 1989, AJ, 97, 1451, doi: 10.1086/115085

    1989 doi

  78. [86]

    2017, mtazzari/uvplot: v0.1.1, v0.1.1, Zenodo, doi: 10.5281/zenodo.1003113

    Tazzari, M. 2017, mtazzari/uvplot: v0.1.1, v0.1.1, Zenodo, doi: 10.5281/zenodo.1003113

    2017 doi

  79. [87]

    2018, MNRAS, 476, 4527, doi: 10.1093/mnras/sty409

    Tazzari, M., Beaujean, F., & Testi, L. 2018, MNRAS, 476, 4527, doi: 10.1093/mnras/sty409

    2018 doi

  80. [88]

    2019, The Journal of Open Source Software, 4, 1632, doi: 10.21105/joss.01632

    Teague, R. 2019, The Journal of Open Source Software, 4, 1632, doi: 10.21105/joss.01632

    2019 doi

  81. [89]

    2014, in Protostars and Planets VI, ed

    Testi, L., Birnstiel, T., Ricci, L., et al. 2014, in Protostars and Planets VI, ed. H. Beuther, R. S. Klessen, C. P. Dullemond, & T. Henning, 339–361, doi: 10.2458/azu uapress 9780816531240-ch015

    2014 doi

  82. [90]

    J., Sheehan, P

    Tobin, J. J., Sheehan, P. D., Megeath, S. T., et al. 2020, ApJ, 890, 130, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab6f64

    2020 doi

  83. [91]

    2025a, ApJ, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/adc7af

    Trapman, L., Vioque, M., Kurtovic, N., et al. 2025a, ApJ, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/adc7af

    doi

  84. [92]

    2025b, ApJ, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/adcd6e

    Trapman, L., Zhang, K., Rosotti, G., et al. 2025b, ApJ, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/adcd6e

    doi

  85. [93]

    M., Birnstiel, T., & Wilner, D

    Tripathi, A., Andrews, S. M., Birnstiel, T., & Wilner, D. J. 2017, ApJ, 845, 44, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aa7c62

    2017 doi

  86. [94]

    J., Karska, A., et al

    Tychoniec, L., Tobin, J. J., Karska, A., et al. 2018, ApJS, 238, 19, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/aaceae

    2018 doi

  87. [95]

    F., Rosotti, G

    Tychoniec, L., Manara, C. F., Rosotti, G. P., et al. 2020, A&A, 640, A19, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202037851 van der Marel, N. 2023, European Physical Journal Plus, 138, 225, doi: 10.1140/epjp/s13360-022-03628-0 van der Marel, N., Dong, R., di Francesco, J., Williams, J. P., & T...

    2020 doi

  88. [96]

    J., Benisty, M., & Andrews, S

    Winter, A. J., Benisty, M., & Andrews, S. M. 2024a, ApJL, 972, L9, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ad6d5d

    doi

  89. [97]

    J., Benisty, M., Manara, C

    Winter, A. J., Benisty, M., Manara, C. F., & Gupta, A. 2024b, A&A, 691, A169, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202452120 W¨ olfer, L., Facchini, S., van der Marel, N., et al. 2023, A&A, 670, A154, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202243601

    2023 doi

  90. [98]

    2024, PASJ, 76, 437, doi: 10.1093/pasj/psae022

    Yamaguchi, M., Muto, T., Tsukagoshi, T., et al. 2024, PASJ, 76, 437, doi: 10.1093/pasj/psae022

    2024 doi

  91. [99]

    2023, ApJ, 951, 11, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/accd71

    Yamato, Y., Aikawa, Y., Ohashi, N., et al. 2023, ApJ, 951, 11, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/accd71

    2023 doi

  92. [100]

    P., Clarke, C

    Zagaria, F., Rosotti, G. P., Clarke, C. J., & Tabone, B. 2022, MNRAS, 514, 1088, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stac1461

    2022 doi

  93. [101]

    2025, ApJ, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/addd14

    Zhang, K., P´ erez, L., Pascucci, I., et al. 2025, ApJ, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/addd14

    2025 doi

  94. [102]

    2023, ApJ, 952, 108, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/acd334

    Zhang, S., Kalscheur, M., Long, F., et al. 2023, ApJ, 952, 108, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/acd334

    2023 doi

  95. [103]

    P., & Andrews, S

    Zormpas, A., Birnstiel, T., Rosotti, G. P., & Andrews, S. M. 2022, A&A, 661, A66, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202142046

    2022 doi

Pith tools

Reviewed August 7, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.