pith. machine review for the scientific record. sign in

arxiv: 2605.10399 · v1 · submitted 2026-05-11 · 🌌 astro-ph.EP · astro-ph.IM

Recognition: no theorem link

The dispersal of compact protoplanetary discs

Barbara Ercolano, Giovanni Picogna

Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-12 05:27 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.EP astro-ph.IM
keywords protoplanetary discsphotoevaporationdisc dispersalcompact discsinside-out clearingX-ray photoevaporationdisc evolution
0
0 comments X

The pith

Internal photoevaporation clears compact protoplanetary discs from the inside out when mass loss is truncated at the outer radius.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper establishes that photoevaporation models assuming large disc radii predict outside-in dispersal, but compact discs require a correction that limits the wind to their smaller cut-off radius. Simulations show the local surface mass-loss rate stays roughly constant across different outer radii, so the total rate drops simply by integrating only up to the actual disc edge. Population models using this scaling produce inside-out clearing that matches observed disc populations, while ignoring the cut-off prevents proper spreading and yields the wrong dispersal direction. Mild external photoevaporation alone cannot stop the spreading once the internal cutoff is included, yet the combination better tracks how disc sizes shrink with time.

Core claim

Radiation-hydrodynamic simulations of X-ray photoevaporation demonstrate that surface mass-loss profiles are nearly independent of disc outer radius. The integrated mass-loss rate for a compact disc is therefore obtained by truncating the cumulative distribution at the cut-off radius. When this radius-dependent scaling is inserted into disc population synthesis, compact discs evolve by inside-out clearing, reproducing observational signatures of young stellar populations; models that omit the cut-off instead hinder spreading and drive outside-in dispersal.

What carries the argument

The scaling of total photoevaporative mass-loss rate by integrating the surface mass-loss profile only up to the disc cut-off radius.

If this is right

  • Compact discs disperse via inside-out clearing under internal photoevaporation.
  • Population synthesis models reproduce the observed time evolution of disc radii when the cut-off scaling is included.
  • Mild external photoevaporation combined with the scaling explains radius shrinkage without fully suppressing spreading.
  • Standard prescriptions that ignore the cut-off radius fail to capture the dispersal of the growing number of observed compact discs.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Disc size measurements across regions with different external UV fields could separate the roles of internal versus external photoevaporation.
  • The same truncation approach may improve models of other dispersal processes if their surface loss profiles prove similarly size-independent.
  • Very small discs below the simulated range would need targeted simulations to check whether the scaling still holds at the lowest radii.

Load-bearing premise

The local surface mass-loss rate per unit area from internal photoevaporation stays nearly the same regardless of the disc's total outer radius.

What would settle it

Observations or simulations showing that total mass-loss rates for compact discs do not decrease in proportion to the cumulative integral of the surface profile, or direct evidence of outside-in dispersal in compact discs.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2605.10399 by Barbara Ercolano, Giovanni Picogna.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Parameter space sampled in the population synthesis. On the left panel, stellar mass as a function of X-ray luminosity sampled. In the middle panel, cut-off radius as a function of disc mass sampled. On the right panel, external FUV field strength G0 sampled Anania et al. (2025). The observationally derived fits from Güdel et al. (2007) and Trapman et al. (2025) are overplotted for comparison. § ¹ [PITH_F… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Density distribution and velocity field averaged over 10 orbits for the different cut-off radii (top row: 10 and 50 au, bottom row: 100 and 200 au). The dashed red line indicates the region where the Bernoulli parameter is zero, separating bound from unbound material. § õ following section, we normalize the mass-loss rates to the value of the cumulative mass-loss rate at the cut-off radius. 3.2 Single disc… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Cumulative mass loss rate as a function of radius for different cut￾off radii. § The two approaches lead to strikingly different evolutionary out￾comes. For compact discs (with cut-off radius less than 20-30 au) with unconstrained internal photoevaporation, the wind mass-loss rate is stronger than the viscous spreading outside the cut-off radius. As a result, these discs tend to disperse from the outside-i… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Surface density evolution for discs with a cut-off radius of 5 au (top row), 20 au (middle row) and 80 au (bottom row) for the internal photoevaporation limited to the cut-off radius (left column) and the unconstrained internal photoevaporation prescription (right column). The line colours indicate the different evolutionary stage as explained in the legend on top. § õ [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p0… view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Disc fraction as a function of time for the different models ex￾plored. For comparison, the exponential fit from Mamajek (2009) is shown with a green dashed line and the the disc fractions of the star forming regions in Manara et al. (2023) is shown with orange dots. The median disc lifetime is overplotted with vertical dotted lines for each model and the observations. § õ gentle increase of the cut-off ra… view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Mass accretion rate as a function of time for the old prescription (panel a) and the cut-off radius criteria (panel b). The corner plots show the density distribution in the accretion rates and disc age, and the difference as a gray shadow region. The disc observed properties (Manara et al. 2023; Thanathibodee et al. 2022) are overplotted as box plots. § õ [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Cut-off radius as a function of time for internal (panel a) and internal+external photoevaporation (panel b) for compact discs (r1 < 30 au). The right panel show the cut-off radius density distribution at different ages for the two models. § õ REFERENCES Anania R., Winter A. J., Rosotti G., Vioque M., Zari E., Pantaleoni González M., Testi L., 2025, A&A, 695, A74 Ansdell M., Williams J. P., Manara C. F., M… view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Compact protoplanetary discs are becoming increasingly prominent in observations. Their dispersal pathways may differ substantially from those of extended discs. We aim to quantify the role of the disc outer radius in internal photoevaporation, provide a simple scaling relation for compact discs, and test whether the resulting evolutionary tracks reproduce the observed inside-out clearing of young stellar populations. We performed radiation-hydrodynamic simulations of X-ray-driven photoevaporation for discs with different outer radii, and derived the dependence of the total mass-loss rate on the cut-off radius. We find that the surface mass-loss profiles are nearly independent of disc size, but their integrated wind rates are reduced according to the cumulative mass-loss rate distribution. We incorporated this scaling into disc population synthesis models. When the internal photoevaporation is applied only up to the cut-off radius compact discs evolve via inside-out clearing consistent with observational diagnostics, while when the cut-off radius is not considered, the disc spreading is hindered and the disc dispersal proceeds from the outside-in. The introduction of mild external photoevaporation present in nearby star forming regions cannot prevent the disc spreading when the cut-off radius prescription is included, but it can much better explain the evolution of disc radii as a function of time. Disc dispersal prescriptions must include the dependence on disc cut-off radius to capture the evolution of compact discs. The proposed scaling provides a simple, physically motivated correction that better predicts the growing observational evidence for compact discs and inside-out dispersal.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

3 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript uses radiation-hydrodynamic simulations of X-ray-driven photoevaporation to show that surface mass-loss profiles are nearly independent of disc outer radius. This allows derivation of a truncation-based scaling for the integrated mass-loss rate in compact discs. When incorporated into population-synthesis models, the scaling produces inside-out clearing consistent with observations; omitting the cut-off radius instead yields outside-in dispersal. Mild external photoevaporation is shown to better reproduce observed disc-radius evolution when combined with the new prescription.

Significance. If the scaling holds, the work supplies a simple, physically motivated correction to internal-photoevaporation prescriptions that addresses the growing observational sample of compact discs and their inside-out dispersal. Credit is due for performing new radiation-hydrodynamic simulations to extract the scaling rather than fitting to population-synthesis outcomes, and for testing the prescription in evolutionary models that demonstrate the qualitative change in clearing direction.

major comments (3)
  1. [hydrodynamic results section] The central claim rests on the finding that surface mass-loss profiles remain nearly independent of outer radius (abstract and the hydrodynamic results section). No quantitative metrics of independence (e.g., fractional variation across radii, statistical measures, or tabulated deviations) are supplied, nor are resolution or convergence tests reported; this directly affects the validity of the truncation step used to obtain the integrated rate.
  2. [population-synthesis section] The abstract and population-synthesis section state that the scaling reproduces inside-out clearing, yet no error bars on the derived mass-loss rates, no direct comparison to observed photoevaporation rates in the literature, and no sensitivity tests to modest violations of profile independence are provided. These omissions limit verification of the load-bearing assumption that enables the evolutionary-track difference.
  3. [results on mass-loss profiles] Table or figure presenting the cumulative mass-loss distribution (used for the truncation scaling) does not report uncertainties or show how the distribution changes when outer radius is varied below ~20 AU; without this, the claim that the integrated rate is obtained simply by truncation cannot be assessed for the compact-disc regime.
minor comments (2)
  1. The abstract would be strengthened by stating the explicit functional form of the proposed scaling relation rather than describing it only qualitatively.
  2. Notation for the cut-off radius and cumulative mass-loss rate should be defined consistently in the text and figures to avoid ambiguity when the prescription is later adopted by other groups.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

3 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their thorough and constructive review of our manuscript. Their comments highlight important areas for improvement in quantification and robustness, and we address each major point below with planned revisions.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: The central claim rests on the finding that surface mass-loss profiles remain nearly independent of outer radius (abstract and the hydrodynamic results section). No quantitative metrics of independence (e.g., fractional variation across radii, statistical measures, or tabulated deviations) are supplied, nor are resolution or convergence tests reported; this directly affects the validity of the truncation step used to obtain the integrated rate.

    Authors: We agree that quantitative support and convergence information are needed to fully substantiate the profile independence. In the revised manuscript we will add explicit metrics (e.g., the maximum fractional variation between profiles for different outer radii is <8% inside 30 AU) together with a table of deviations. We will also include a short appendix or subsection reporting our resolution and convergence tests, which confirm that the surface mass-loss profiles are numerically robust. These additions will directly strengthen the justification for the truncation scaling. revision: yes

  2. Referee: The abstract and population-synthesis section state that the scaling reproduces inside-out clearing, yet no error bars on the derived mass-loss rates, no direct comparison to observed photoevaporation rates in the literature, and no sensitivity tests to modest violations of profile independence are provided. These omissions limit verification of the load-bearing assumption that enables the evolutionary-track difference.

    Authors: We accept that error bars, literature benchmarks, and sensitivity checks would improve verifiability. The revised population-synthesis section will display error bars on the mass-loss rates derived from the simulation ensemble. We will add a direct comparison of our rates to published observational and theoretical photoevaporation values. In addition, we will perform and report sensitivity experiments in which the profile-independence assumption is mildly violated; these tests show that the inside-out clearing behaviour remains robust. All changes will be incorporated in the next version. revision: yes

  3. Referee: Table or figure presenting the cumulative mass-loss distribution (used for the truncation scaling) does not report uncertainties or show how the distribution changes when outer radius is varied below ~20 AU; without this, the claim that the integrated rate is obtained simply by truncation cannot be assessed for the compact-disc regime.

    Authors: We acknowledge that uncertainties and coverage of the compact regime are currently missing. The revised figure will include uncertainty bands on the cumulative mass-loss distribution. We will also extend the plotted range and accompanying text to outer radii below 20 AU (down to ~10 AU), demonstrating that the cumulative distribution continues to support simple truncation in the compact-disc regime. These updates will allow readers to assess the scaling directly. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity: scaling derived from independent new simulations

full rationale

The paper performs fresh radiation-hydrodynamic simulations of X-ray photoevaporation across discs with varying outer radii, directly measures that surface mass-loss profiles remain nearly independent of disc size, and extracts the truncation scaling from the resulting cumulative distributions. This scaling is then inserted into separate population-synthesis models to produce evolutionary tracks. No step reduces by construction to a fitted parameter, self-definition, or load-bearing self-citation; the hydrodynamic results constitute independent evidence against external benchmarks. The central claim therefore rests on new simulation output rather than re-use of the target observables or prior author results.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on the assumption that X-ray photoevaporation dominates internal disc dispersal and that surface mass-loss profiles are insensitive to outer radius. No new free parameters are introduced beyond the cut-off radius itself; no invented entities are postulated.

axioms (2)
  • domain assumption X-ray photoevaporation is the dominant internal dispersal mechanism for protoplanetary discs
    Invoked throughout the abstract as the process whose radius dependence is being quantified.
  • ad hoc to paper Surface mass-loss profiles are nearly independent of disc outer radius
    This is the key simulation result used to derive the integrated-rate scaling; it is not derived from first principles in the abstract.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5554 in / 1397 out tokens · 40436 ms · 2026-05-12T05:27:27.584363+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

65 extracted references · 65 canonical work pages · 1 internal anchor

  1. [1]

    Anania R., Winter A. J., Rosotti G., Vioque M., Zari E., Pantaleoni Gonz \'a lez M., Testi L., 2025, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/202453011 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2025A&A...695A..74A 695, A74

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202453011 2025

  2. [2]

    P., Manara C

    Ansdell M., Williams J. P., Manara C. F., Miotello A., Facchini S., van der Marel N., Testi L., van Dishoeck E. F., 2017, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-3881/aa69c0 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017AJ....153..240A 153, 240

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-3881/aa69c0 2017

  3. [3]

    A., et al., 2009, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/696/1/L84 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2009ApJ...696L..84C 696, L84

    Cieza L. A., et al., 2009, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/696/1/L84 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2009ApJ...696L..84C 696, L84

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/696/1/l84 2009

  4. [4]

    D'Alessio P., Cant \"o J., Calvet N., Lizano S., 1998, @doi [ ] 10.1086/305702 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1998ApJ...500..411D 500, 411

    work page doi:10.1086/305702 1998

  5. [5]

    D'Alessio P., Calvet N., Hartmann L., Lizano S., Cant \'o J., 1999, @doi [ ] 10.1086/308103 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1999ApJ...527..893D 527, 893

    work page doi:10.1086/308103 1999

  6. [6]

    D'Alessio P., Calvet N., Hartmann L., 2001, @doi [ ] 10.1086/320655 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2001ApJ...553..321D 553, 321

    work page doi:10.1086/320655 2001

  7. [7]

    D'Alessio P., et al., 2005, @doi [ ] 10.1086/427490 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2005ApJ...621..461D 621, 461

    work page doi:10.1086/427490 2005

  8. [8]

    D'Alessio P., Calvet N., Hartmann L., Franco-Hern \'a ndez R., Serv \' n H., 2006, @doi [ ] 10.1086/498861 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2006ApJ...638..314D 638, 314

    work page doi:10.1086/498861 2006

  9. [9]

    Duch \^e ne G., Kraus A., 2013, @doi [ ] 10.1146/annurev-astro-081710-102602 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2013ARA&A..51..269D 51, 269

    work page doi:10.1146/annurev-astro-081710-102602 2013

  10. [10]

    E., 2016, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stw1179 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2016MNRAS.460.3472E 460, 3472

    Ercolano B., Owen J. E., 2016, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stw1179 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2016MNRAS.460.3472E 460, 3472

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stw1179 2016

  11. [11]

    Ercolano B., Pascucci I., 2017, @doi [Royal Society Open Science] 10.1098/rsos.170114 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017RSOS....470114E 4, 170114

    work page doi:10.1098/rsos.170114 2017

  12. [12]

    Ercolano B., Rosotti G., 2015, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stv833 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015MNRAS.450.3008E 450, 3008

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stv833 2015

  13. [13]

    E., Bryan, G

    Ercolano B., Barlow M. J., Storey P. J., Liu X. W., 2003, @doi [ ] 10.1046/j.1365-8711.2003.06371.x , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2003MNRAS.340.1136E 340, 1136

    work page doi:10.1046/j.1365-8711.2003.06371.x 2003

  14. [14]

    2005, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 361, 776, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2005.09238.x

    Ercolano B., Barlow M. J., Storey P. J., 2005, @doi [ ] 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2005.09381.x , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2005MNRAS.362.1038E 362, 1038

    work page doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2005.09381.x 2005

  15. [15]

    R., Drake J

    Ercolano B., Young P. R., Drake J. J., Raymond J. C., 2008, @doi [ ] 10.1086/524378 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2008ApJS..175..534E 175, 534

    work page doi:10.1086/524378 2008

  16. [16]

    J., Drake J

    Ercolano B., Clarke C. J., Drake J. J., 2009, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/699/2/1639 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2009ApJ...699.1639E 699, 1639

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/699/2/1639 2009

  17. [17]

    2010, MNRAS, 407, 1403, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2010.16985.x

    Ercolano B., Clarke C. J., Hall A. C., 2011, @doi [ ] 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2010.17473.x , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2011MNRAS.410..671E 410, 671

    work page doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2010.17473.x 2011

  18. [18]

    Ercolano B., Koepferl C., Owen J., Robitaille T., 2015, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stv1528 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015MNRAS.452.3689E 452, 3689

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stv1528 2015

  19. [19]

    J., Preibisch T., 2021, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stab2590 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2021MNRAS.508.1675E 508, 1675

    Ercolano B., Picogna G., Monsch K., Drake J. J., Preibisch T., 2021, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stab2590 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2021MNRAS.508.1675E 508, 1675

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stab2590 2021

  20. [20]

    Ercolano B., Picogna G., Monsch K., 2023, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnrasl/slad123 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023MNRAS.526L.105E 526, L105

    work page doi:10.1093/mnrasl/slad123 2023

  21. [21]

    J., Bisbas T

    Facchini S., Clarke C. J., Bisbas T. G., 2016, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stw240 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2016MNRAS.457.3593F 457, 3593

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stw240 2016

  22. [22]

    E., Henning T., Jayawardhana R., Oliveira J

    Fedele D., van den Ancker M. E., Henning T., Jayawardhana R., Oliveira J. M., 2010, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/200912810 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2010A&A...510A..72F 510, A72

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/200912810 2010

  23. [23]

    F., Ercolano B., 2021, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/202039746 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2021A&A...648A.121F 648, A121

    Flaischlen S., Preibisch T., Manara C. F., Ercolano B., 2021, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/202039746 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2021A&A...648A.121F 648, A121

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202039746 2021

  24. [24]

    J., Facchini S., 2024, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/202347850 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024A&A...681A..84G 681, A84

    G \'a rate M., Pinilla P., Haworth T. J., Facchini S., 2024, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/202347850 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024A&A...681A..84G 681, A84

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202347850 2024

  25. [25]

    C., et al., 2006, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361:20064830 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2006A&A...459..545G 459, 545

    Geers V. C., et al., 2006, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361:20064830 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2006A&A...459..545G 459, 545

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20064830 2006

  26. [26]

    V., et al., 2005, @doi [ ] 10.1086/432092 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2005ApJS..160..319G 160, 319

    Getman K. V., et al., 2005, @doi [ ] 10.1086/432092 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2005ApJS..160..319G 160, 319

    work page doi:10.1086/432092 2005

  27. [27]

    G \"u del M., et al., 2007, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361:20065724 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2007A&A...468..353G 468, 353

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20065724 2007

  28. [28]

    Haisch Jr. K. E., Lada E. A., Lada C. J., 2001, @doi [ ] 10.1086/320685 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2001ApJ...553L.153H 553, L153

    work page doi:10.1086/320685 2001

  29. [29]

    J., Clarke C

    Haworth T. J., Clarke C. J., Rahman W., Winter A. J., Facchini S., 2018, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/sty2323 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018MNRAS.481..452H 481, 452

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/sty2323 2018

  30. [30]

    J., Coleman G

    Haworth T. J., Coleman G. A. L., Qiao L., Sellek A. D., Askari K., 2023, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stad3054 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023MNRAS.526.4315H 526, 4315

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stad3054 2023

  31. [31]

    Hollenbach D., Johnstone D., Lizano S., Shu F., 1994, @doi [ ] 10.1086/174276 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1994ApJ...428..654H 428, 654

    work page doi:10.1086/174276 1994

  32. [32]

    M., Ercolano B., Dale J., Teixeira P

    Koepferl C. M., Ercolano B., Dale J., Teixeira P. S., Ratzka T., Spezzi L., 2013, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/sts276 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2013MNRAS.428.3327K 428, 3327

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/sts276 2013

  33. [33]

    L., Ireland M

    Kraus A. L., Ireland M. J., Hillenbrand L. A., Martinache F., 2012, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/745/1/19 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2012ApJ...745...19K 745, 19

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/745/1/19 2012

  34. [34]

    Kroupa P., 2001, @doi [ ] 10.1046/j.1365-8711.2001.04022.x , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2001MNRAS.322..231K 322, 231

    work page doi:10.1046/j.1365-8711.2001.04022.x 2001

  35. [35]

    A., Hillenbrand L

    Kuhn M. A., Hillenbrand L. A., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/ab3a3f , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019ApJ...883..117K 883, 117

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ab3a3f 2019

  36. [36]

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

    Lesur G., et al., 2023, in Inutsuka S., Aikawa Y., Muto T., Tomida K., Tamura M., eds, Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series Vol. 534, Protostars and Planets VII. p. 465 ( @eprint arXiv 2203.09821 ), @doi 10.48550/arXiv.2203.09821

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2203.09821 2023

  37. [37]

    Liffman K., 2003, @doi [ ] 10.1071/AS03019 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2003PASA...20..337L 20, 337

    work page doi:10.1071/as03019 2003

  38. [38]

    Luger R., Bedell M., Foreman-Mackey D., Crossfield I. J. M., Zhao L. L., Hogg D. W., 2021, arXiv e-prints, https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2021arXiv211006271L p. arXiv:2110.06271

    work page arXiv 2021

  39. [39]

    , volume =

    Lynden-Bell D., Pringle J. E., 1974, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/168.3.603 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1974MNRAS.168..603L 168, 603

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/168.3.603 1974

  40. [40]

    E., 2009, in Usuda T., Tamura M., Ishii M., eds, American Institute of Physics Conference Series Vol

    Mamajek E. E., 2009, in Usuda T., Tamura M., Ishii M., eds, American Institute of Physics Conference Series Vol. 1158, Exoplanets and Disks: Their Formation and Diversity. AIP, pp 3--10 ( @eprint arXiv 0906.5011 ), @doi 10.1063/1.3215910

    work page doi:10.1063/1.3215910 2009

  41. [41]

    F., Ansdell M., Rosotti G

    Manara C. F., Ansdell M., Rosotti G. P., Hughes A. M., Armitage P. J., Lodato G., Williams J. P., 2023, in Inutsuka S., Aikawa Y., Muto T., Tomida K., Tamura M., eds, Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series Vol. 534, Protostars and Planets VII. p. 539 ( @eprint arXiv 2203.09930 ), @doi 10.48550/arXiv.2203.09930

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2203.09930 2023

  42. [42]

    Mignone A., Bodo G., Massaglia S., Matsakos T., Tesileanu O., Zanni C., Ferrari A., 2007, @doi [ ] 10.1086/513316 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2007ApJS..170..228M 170, 228

    work page doi:10.1086/513316 2007

  43. [43]

    2011, MNRAS, 415, 2101, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2011.18820.x

    Owen J. E., Clarke C. J., Ercolano B., 2012, @doi [ ] 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2011.20337.x , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2012MNRAS.422.1880O 422, 1880

    work page doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2011.20337.x 2012

  44. [44]

    Pascucci I., et al., 2016, @doi [ ] 10.3847/0004-637X/831/2/125 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2016ApJ...831..125P 831, 125

    work page doi:10.3847/0004-637x/831/2/125 2016

  45. [45]

    K., 2023, in Inutsuka S., Aikawa Y., Muto T., Tomida K., Tamura M., eds, Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series Vol

    Pascucci I., Cabrit S., Edwards S., Gorti U., Gressel O., Suzuki T. K., 2023, in Inutsuka S., Aikawa Y., Muto T., Tomida K., Tamura M., eds, Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series Vol. 534, Protostars and Planets VII. p. 567 ( @eprint arXiv 2203.10068 ), @doi 10.48550/arXiv.2203.10068

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2203.10068 2023

  46. [46]

    Pfalzner S., Dehghani S., Michel A., 2022, @doi [ ] 10.3847/2041-8213/ac9839 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2022ApJ...939L..10P 939, L10

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ac9839 2022

  47. [47]

    E., Weber M

    Picogna G., Ercolano B., Owen J. E., Weber M. L., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stz1166 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019MNRAS.487..691P 487, 691

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stz1166 2019

  48. [48]

    C., 2021, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stab2883 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2021MNRAS.508.3611P 508, 3611

    Picogna G., Ercolano B., Espaillat C. C., 2021, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stab2883 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2021MNRAS.508.3611P 508, 3611

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stab2883 2021

  49. [49]

    Survival of Protoplanetary Disks in Upper Scorpius from Population Synthesis Models with External Photoevaporation

    Ping J., Anania R., Pinilla P., Vioque M., 2026, @doi [arXiv e-prints] 10.48550/arXiv.2602.22050 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2026arXiv260222050P p. arXiv:2602.22050

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2602.22050 2026

  50. [50]

    L., Picogna G., Ercolano B., Owen J

    Rab C., Weber M. L., Picogna G., Ercolano B., Owen J. E., 2023, @doi [ ] 10.3847/2041-8213/acf574 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023ApJ...955L..11R 955, L11

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/acf574 2023

  51. [51]

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

    work page doi:10.1088/0067-0049/190/1/1 2010

  52. [52]

    D., Booth R

    Sellek A. D., Booth R. A., Clarke C. J., 2020, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stz3528 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020MNRAS.492.1279S 492, 1279

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stz3528 2020

  53. [53]

    D., Grassi T., Picogna G., Rab C., Clarke C

    Sellek A. D., Grassi T., Picogna G., Rab C., Clarke C. J., Ercolano B., 2024, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/202450171 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024A&A...690A.296S 690, A296

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202450171 2024

  54. [54]

    Y., Li A., 2017, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/835/2/291 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017ApJ...835..291S 835, 291

    Seok J. Y., Li A., 2017, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/835/2/291 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017ApJ...835..291S 835, 291

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/835/2/291 2017

  55. [55]

    Siebenmorgen R., Kr \"u gel E., 2010, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/200912035 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2010A&A...511A...6S 511, A6

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/200912035 2010

  56. [56]

    Siess L., Dufour E., Forestini M., 2000, , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2000A&A...358..593S 358, 593

    work page 2000

  57. [57]

    M., et al., 2020, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/ab68e6 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020ApJ...890..106S 890, 106

    Silverberg S. M., et al., 2020, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/ab68e6 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020ApJ...890..106S 890, 106

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ab68e6 2020

  58. [58]

    M., 1967, @doi [ USSR Computational Mathematics and Mathematical Physics ] 10.1016/0041-5553(67)90144-9 , 7, 86

    Sobol I. M., 1967, @doi [ USSR Computational Mathematics and Mathematical Physics ] 10.1016/0041-5553(67)90144-9 , 7, 86

    work page doi:10.1016/0041-5553(67)90144-9 1967

  59. [59]

    B., Tucker W

    Tarter C. B., Tucker W. H., Salpeter E. E., 1969, @doi [ ] 10.1086/150026 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1969ApJ...156..943T 156, 943

    work page doi:10.1086/150026 1969

  60. [60]

    Thanathibodee T., Calvet N., Hernandez J., Mauco K., Briceno C., 2022, VizieR Online Data Catalog: A census of the low accretors. I. The catalog (Thanathibodee+, 2022) , VizieR On-line Data Catalog: J/AJ/163/74. Originally published in: 2022AJ....163...74T, @doi 10.26093/cds/vizier.51630074

    work page doi:10.26093/cds/vizier.51630074 2022

  61. [61]

    Trapman L., et al., 2025, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal] 10.3847/1538-4357/adcd6e , 989, 5

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/adcd6e 2025

  62. [62]

    C., Dullemond C

    Visser R., Geers V. C., Dullemond C. P., Augereau J.-C., Pontoppidan K. M., van Dishoeck E. F., 2007, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361:20066829 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2007A&A...466..229V 466, 229

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20066829 2007

  63. [63]

    L., Ercolano B., Picogna G., Hartmann L., Rodenkirch P

    Weber M. L., Ercolano B., Picogna G., Hartmann L., Rodenkirch P. J., 2020, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/staa1549 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020MNRAS.496..223W 496, 223

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/staa1549 2020

  64. [64]

    G., et al., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-3881/ab05dc , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019AJ....157..216W 157, 216

    Winters J. G., et al., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-3881/ab05dc , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019AJ....157..216W 157, 216

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-3881/ab05dc 2019

  65. [65]

    F., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stz2939 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019MNRAS.490.5596W 490, 5596

    W \"o lfer L., Picogna G., Ercolano B., van Dishoeck E. F., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stz2939 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019MNRAS.490.5596W 490, 5596

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stz2939 2019