Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 4 minor 2 cited by

Protostellar disc structure and dynamics during star formation from cloud-scale initial conditions

T0 review · 2 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-10 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read This paper claims that a protostellar disc formed from cloud-scale initial conditions is born turbulent (Mach ~ 2) and bursty on ~100 yr timescales, with magnetic pressure reaching near equipartition with thermal pressure (beta ~ 1).

desk verdict A capable re-simulation study whose magnetic equipartition headline is undercut by the paper's own Eq. 15 — worth revising, not rejecting. read the letter →

arxiv 2501.07626 v2 pith:ODYLV3P6 submitted 2025-01-13 astro-ph.SR astro-ph.GA

Trey Qingyun Yang , Christoph Federrath This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.SRastro-ph.GA
keywords protostellardiscsmagnetohydrodynamicsstarformationturbulenceaccretionvariabilityadaptivemeshrefinementcloud-scaleinitialconditionsmagneticfieldamplification
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 tries to show what a protostellar disc looks like when it forms from the turbulent, magnetised gas left over by a molecular-cloud simulation, rather than from an idealised spherical cloud. Following the collapse of one dense core for 10,000 years after the protostar appears, it claims the disc grows to roughly 100 AU across, accretes mass in episodic bursts on $\sim100$-year timescales, and is strongly turbulent with a sonic Mach number near 2. It further claims that accretion events amplify the magnetic field until thermal and magnetic pressure reach rough equipartition (plasma $\beta \sim 1$, Alfvén Mach number $\sim 2$), with intermittent sub-Alfvénic outflow regions. A sympathetic reader would care because these numbers set the physical conditions in which planets begin to form and tie observed accretion variability to the turbulence of the parent cloud rather than to internal disc physics alone.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing machinery is the re-simulation technique: extract a pre-collapse dense core from an existing (2 pc)^3 molecular-cloud simulation, inheriting its turbulence, magnetic field, and density structure, and re-run it in a 0.1 pc box with adaptive mesh refinement that keeps the Jeans length resolved by 30 to 60 cells, modelling the protostar as a sink particle of radius 1.6 AU. The simulations solve the ideal MHD equations closed by a piecewise polytropic equation of state. The physical argument is carried by two dimensionless ratios computed from the simulated fields, the sonic Mach number $\mathcal{M} = \sigma_v/c_s$ and the turbulent Alfvén Mach number $\mathcal{M}_A = \sigma_v/v_A$, combined through $\beta = 2 c_s^2/v_A^2 = 2 \mathcal{M}_A^2/\mathcal{M}^2$ to conclude that turbulent magnetic pressure is comparable to thermal pressure in the disc.

What would settle it

Re-run the same 0.1 pc re-simulation with non-ideal MHD (ambipolar diffusion plus Ohmic resistivity, with or without the Hall term) at the same maximum resolution and compare the turbulent Alfvén Mach number, plasma $\beta$, and disc scale height at 10 kyr. If $\beta$ rises well above 1, $\mathcal{M}_A$ falls well below 2, or $H/r$ drops significantly, the claimed equipartition and thick, turbulent disc structure are artifacts of ideal MHD rather than properties of real protostellar discs. Resolved magnetic-field or turbulence measurements of a Class 0 disc showing magnetic energy far below thermal or turbulent energy would also contradict the claim.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

Starting from a 0.1 pc box carved out of a (2 pc)^3 turbulent, magnetised molecular-cloud simulation, the authors follow the collapse of one 1.34 solar-mass core and the first 10 kyr of the star+disc system at 0.63 AU maximum resolution. They find that the disc grows to a radius of about 50 AU (diameter ~100 AU) and a mass of 0.12 solar masses around a 0.15 solar-mass protostar, with the disc-to-star mass ratio near unity. Accretion onto both the disc and the star is episodic: brief bursts at roughly $10^{-5}$ solar masses per year on $\sim100$ yr timescales alternate with lulls, and the disc radius fluctuates on the same timescale. The disc is geometrically thick and turbulent, with velocity dispersions comparable to the local sound speed and a sonic Mach number near 2; its density profile steepens from nearly flat at formation to a power law with exponent $\sim 1$ at 10 kyr, while the surface density remains shallower than the minimum-mass solar nebula. The magnetic field, wound up by rotation, is amplified so that the turbulent Alfvén Mach number is $\sim 2$ and the plasma $\beta$ is $\sim 1$, implying thermal and magnetic pressures are in rough equipartition; regions above and below the midplane intermittently become sub-Alfvénic and launch magnetic bubbles rather than a coherent jet.

Load-bearing premise

Everything about the magnetic state of the disc — the amplification to $\beta \sim 1$, the Alfvén Mach number $\mathcal{M}_A \sim 2$, and the sub-Alfvénic bubbles — depends on the ideal MHD approximation, which omits ambipolar diffusion, Ohmic dissipation, and the Hall effect; in the dense, poorly ionised gas of a real disc those effects can alter field strength and geometry substantially, and the paper itself notes the disc scale height may be overestimated as a result.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • At 10 kyr the disc holds 0.12 $M_\odot$ around a 0.15 $M_\odot$ protostar, so young discs can carry as much mass as their stars, setting a massive early reservoir for planet formation.
  • Accretion onto both star and disc is episodic, with bursts reaching roughly $10^{-5}\,M_\odot\,\mathrm{yr}^{-1}$ separated by lulls and radius fluctuations on ~100 yr timescales, tying young-protostar variability to the turbulence of the parent core.
  • The disc is geometrically thick ($H/r \sim 0.1$–$0.5$) and flared, with scale heights of a few to ~10 AU at tens of AU, so early discs are not thin Keplerian structures.
  • Magnetic field amplification by collapse and rotation brings the turbulent Alfvén Mach number to ~2 and plasma beta to ~1, making magnetic pressure dynamically comparable to thermal pressure and capable of suppressing fragmentation despite strong spiral features.
  • The surface-density profile steepens from a nearly flat distribution at formation to a power law with exponent $\sim 1$ at 10 kyr, still shallower than the minimum-mass solar nebula but moving toward it as mass accumulates inward.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Beyond the paper's claims, if a Mach $\sim 2$, $\beta \sim 1$ state is generic for young discs, dust settling and planetesimal-formation models that assume laminar, weakly magnetised discs start from the wrong initial conditions; dust-evolution simulations run on top of this turbulent state would be a direct test.
  • The $\sim100$ yr episodic burst timescale implies short monitoring campaigns could easily misread stochastic turbulent accretion as periodic variability; comparing burst waiting-time statistics from the simulation with long-baseline protostellar light curves would test the mechanism.
  • The absence of a coherent jet in a disc that still shows intermittent sub-Alfvénic outflows suggests jets may turn on only after the disc settles, so a search for jets preferentially in older, less turbulent Class I sources would be a consistent observational test.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

2 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper reports a high-resolution adaptive mesh refinement (AMR) ideal MHD simulation of the collapse of a dense core extracted from a (2 pc)^3 molecular cloud simulation, re-simulated in a (0.1 pc)^3 domain at up to 0.63 AU resolution for 10 kyr after sink (protostar) formation. The authors characterise the resulting disc: it grows to a radius of roughly 50 AU (diameter ~100 AU), has a mass of 0.12 M_sun around a 0.15 M_sun protostar, accretes episodically on ~100 yr timescales, is geometrically thick and strongly turbulent with sonic Mach number ~2, develops a density profile that steepens toward a power-law index ~1, and shows magnetic field amplification with turbulent Alfvén Mach number ~2 and plasma beta claimed to be ~1. The paper also reports intermittent sub-Alfvénic regions above and below the mid-plane that produce magnetic 'bubbles' rather than a coherent jet.

Significance. If the findings hold, the paper provides a useful case study of protostellar disc formation from realistic, cloud-scale initial conditions, capturing sub-AU structure that is difficult to achieve in cloud-scale simulations. The strengths include the careful use of inherited initial conditions, the inclusion of box-size and resolution convergence studies in Appendices A and C, quantitative power-law fits to density and surface density profiles, and a generally detailed description of the numerical setup. The central magnetic-state claim, however, is not internally consistent with the paper's own Eq. (15), and the acknowledged ideal-MHD assumption further weakens it. The paper is therefore a valuable numerical experiment whose headline conclusion about equipartition needs substantial correction and qualification before publication.

major comments (2)
  1. [Section 3.4.3, Eq. (15); Abstract; Section 5 (vii)] The claim that plasma beta is ~1, i.e., thermal and magnetic pressure are in equipartition, is not supported by the paper's own numbers. Equation (15) gives beta = 2 M_A^2 / M_s^2; with the quoted M_s ~ 2 and M_A ~ 2, this gives beta ~ 2, not 1. The radial profile in Fig. 14 shows M_A varying from about 1.5 to 3.5 across the disc, which for M_s ~ 2 gives beta ranging from roughly 1 to 6, with beta ~ 1 only near r ~ 40 AU. The abstract's wording 'equipartition ... i.e., leading to an Alfvén Mach number of ~2' is also internally inconsistent, since beta = 1 and M_s = 2 would imply M_A ~ 1.4. This is not a semantic issue because conclusion (vii) and the abstract use the equipartition statement to argue for significant magnetic influence on disc dynamics and fragmentation. The claim should be corrected to beta ~ 2 (or the appropriate radial range) and the presentation adjusted accordingly.
  2. [Section 4.4; Section 3.4.3] The magnetic field amplification, Alfvén Mach number, and beta are computed under the ideal MHD approximation. The authors themselves state in Sec. 4.4 that non-ideal MHD effects may be highly relevant in the dense disc and that the disc scale height may be overestimated, and in Sec. 3.4.3 they note that beta could be higher by factors of a few with non-ideal MHD. Because the paper's headline claim about equipartition and magnetic influence depends directly on the amplified field under ideal MHD, the conclusion should be presented as an ideal-MHD result that is an upper limit on magnetic field strength, not as a robust physical finding. A brief quantitative test or at least a strongly worded uncertainty statement is needed.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Section 5 (iii)] The sentence 'oursimulationsisconsistent with the expected MMSN' contains a typo; it should read 'our simulation is consistent'.
  2. [Figure 15 caption] The caption appears to have a copy-paste error in the colorbar label: 'Alfvén Mach number over 5 AU along LoS □ g cm□3' should be a dimensionless quantity, not a density unit.
  3. [Section 2.2.2] The reference 'Federrathet al. 2010b' is misspelled; it should be 'Federrath et al. 2010b'.
  4. [Abstract and Section 3.2.2] The abstract states the disc grows to a diameter of approximately 100 AU, while Fig. 3 shows r_disc ~ 50 AU at 10 kyr; this is consistent, but the abstract could clarify that this is the 80%-mass radius definition, to avoid confusion with observational radius definitions that may differ.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity; the disc properties are emergent simulation outputs, not pre-encoded in the analysis definitions or in self-citations. The abstract's equipartition claim is internally overstated relative to the paper's own Eq. 15, but that is a correctness issue, not a circularity.

full rationale

The paper's central results (disc radius, accretion bursts, sonic and Alfven Mach numbers, density power-law exponents) are outputs of a numerical evolution of the ideal MHD equations with specified initial conditions inherited from a cloud-scale simulation. No step derives a claimed 'prediction' from a parameter that was fitted to that same prediction: the disc is defined by a density threshold, the disc radius by an 80%-mass criterion, and power laws are fit post hoc, but these choices do not encode the headline findings. Self-citations to Federrath et al. (2010b, 2014) and Appel et al. (2023) supply the sink-particle method and the parent-cloud initial conditions; they are methodological or data-inheritance references, not load-bearing circular arguments, and the paper includes independent box-size and resolution convergence checks. The abstract's statement that M_A ~ 2 implies beta ~ 1 is not consistent with Eq. 15 using the paper's own M_s ~ 2 and M_A ~ 2 (which would give beta ~ 2), and Sec. 4.4 acknowledges that non-ideal MHD could raise beta further; however, this is an internal consistency/overstatement concern, not a circular derivation. Accordingly, no circular step meeting the required evidentiary standard is present.

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

The paper introduces no new physical entities. Its central claims rest on standard numerical approximations (ideal MHD, polytropic EoS, sink particles) and on analysis definitions (density thresholds) that are chosen post hoc but not fitted to force any particular conclusion. The only fitted quantities are the power-law exponents and scale heights, which are descriptive outputs rather than free inputs.

free parameters (4)
  • Disc density threshold (rho_thresh) = 3.847e-14 g cm^-3 (n_H ~ 10^10 cm^-3)
    Adopted to define 'disc material' in Sec. 3.1; all disc mass, radius, and profile measurements depend on this choice.
  • Progenitor core density threshold (rho_prog) = 1e-18 g cm^-3
    Used in Sec. 2.4.2 to define the progenitor core and derive Table 1 properties.
  • Power-law fit inner radius = r >= 9 AU
    Sec. 3.2.3; chosen to exclude cells near the sink particle affected by numerical diffusion; this affects the fitted density and surface-density exponents.
  • Disc radius definition (cumulative mass fraction) = 80% within cylinder
    Sec. 3.2.2, following Bate (2018); this choice affects the reported disc radius over time.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption Ideal MHD approximation (Eq. 1)
    The simulations neglect Ohmic dissipation, ambipolar diffusion, and the Hall effect, which are likely significant in the dense, low-ionization disc. Sec. 4.4 acknowledges that disc scale height may be overestimated and that non-ideal effects can alter magnetic field dynamics.
  • domain assumption Piece-wise polytropic EoS (Eqs. 3-4)
    Closes the MHD equations without radiation transport; thermal pressure, sound speed, and hence Mach numbers and beta depend on this approximation (Sec. 2.1.2, Sec. 4.1).
  • domain assumption Jeans refinement with 30-60 cells per Jeans length (Sec. 2.2.1)
    Assumed sufficient to resolve turbulent energy and magnetic amplification on the Jeans scale; if not, the turbulence and magnetic results could be resolution-dependent.
  • domain assumption Sink particle treatment with r_sink = 1.6 AU (Sec. 2.2.2)
    Sink particles replace the unresolved star plus inner disc; mass and angular momentum are removed within 1.6 AU, so the inner disc structure is not simulated and the density profile fit is restricted to r >= 9 AU.
  • domain assumption Initial conditions from Appel et al. (2023) GTMJR cloud simulation (Sec. 2.3)
    The re-simulation inherits the density, velocity, and magnetic field distribution from that specific cloud simulation; results may depend on the choice of cloud and of the selected core.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Protostellar disc structure and dynamics during star formation from cloud-scale initial conditions." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/ODYLV3P6

@misc{pith2026250107626,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Protostellar disc structure and dynamics during star formation from cloud-scale initial conditions},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/ODYLV3P6}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2501.07626}
}
abstract

The early evolution of protostellar, star-forming discs, including their density structure, turbulence, magnetic dynamics, and accretion variability, remains poorly understood. We present high-resolution magnetohydrodynamic simulations, using adaptive mesh refinement to capture detailed disc dynamics down to sub-AU scales. Starting from initial conditions derived from a molecular cloud simulation, we model the collapse of a dense core into a protostellar disc over 10,000 yr following sink particle (star) formation, achieving a maximum effective resolution of 0.63 AU. This simulation traces the evolution of the disc density, accretion rates, turbulence, and magnetic field structures. We find that the protostellar disc grows to a diameter of approximately 100 AU, with mass accretion occurring in episodic bursts influenced by the turbulence of the core from which the disc builds up. The disc is highly turbulent with a sonic Mach number of $\sim2$. Episodic accretion events within the disc cause intermittent increases in mass and magnetic energy density, resulting in an equipartition of the thermal and magnetic pressure, i.e., leading to an Alfv\'en Mach number of $\sim2$. Some regions above and below the disc mid-plane show sub-Alfv\'enic conditions with intermittent outflow activity. The disc density profiles steepen over time, following a power law consistent with observed young stellar discs and the minimum mass solar nebula. These results underscore the role of turbulence in early accretion variability and offer new insights into the physical and magnetic structure of young protostellar discs, especially with respect to their turbulent components.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2501.07626 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Column density projection of the cloud-scale base simulation (left) at the time just before the first sink particle forms at the centre of the marked square. This region serves as the initial condition for the re-simulation region (right), where velocity vectors (white arrows) and magnetic field streamlines (blue lines) are superimposed. The white contour traces the extend of the progenitor core, defined as gas abov… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Column-density projections of the disc region at 𝜏 = 0, 5, and 10 kyr after sink formation (from top to bottom), zoomed-in to show 200 AU on each axis. The re-simulation coordinates (𝑥, 𝑦, 𝑧) have been transformed into translated and rotated coordinates (𝑥 ′ , 𝑦′ , 𝑧′ ), such that the disc’s angular momentum vector is along 𝑧 ′ , and (𝑥 ′ , 𝑦′ , 𝑧′ ) = (0, 0, 0) is the location of the sink particle (shown as a blue … view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Radial profiles of the disc density ⟨𝜌⟩ (top) and surface density Σ (bottom) at 𝜏 = 0 (red), 5 (blue), and 10 kyr (black), shown by the solid dots with 16th to 84th percentile ranges shown as the shaded regions. The solid straight lines show power-law fits with Eq. (8), where the fitted power-law ex￾ponents are denoted in the legend and listed in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_4.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (12 more)
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Time evolution of sink particle mass and disc mass (top), accretion rates (middle), and disc radius (bottom). The sink particle mass maintains an upwards trend through accretion, however, instead of a continuous mass intake from the disc, there are episodic fast accret…
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Vertical density profiles of the disc at different radii, 𝑟 = 5, 10, 20, and 40 AU, at 𝜏 = 10 kyr. The median values of the density profiles are shown as the black dots with the 16th to 84th percentile ranges shown as the shaded regions. The solid lines show exponentia…
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: The disc scale height 𝐻 (top panel), fitted via Eq. (9) as a function of disc radius. We find a general trend of increasing 𝐻 as 𝑟 increases, up to 𝑟 ∼ 40 AU, indicating some flaring of the disc. The aspect ratio 𝐻/𝑟 (bottom panel) is decreasing more slowly than ∝ 𝑟 −1…
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Density slices of the disc at 𝜏 = 10 kyr, face-on (left) and edge-on (right). The blue asterisk marks the location of the sink particle. This view captures a 5 AU-thick ‘cross section’ of the disc around the sink particle. White arrows represent velocity vectors, which…
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Keplerian analysis of the disc at 𝜏 = 10 kyr, showing the Keplerian velocity 𝑣K with the rotational velocity 𝑣𝜑 (top), and 𝑣𝜑/𝑣K (bottom) as a function of disc radius. The rotation curve, 𝑣𝜑, is close to Keplerian near the centre (𝑟 ∼ 5 AU), while being mildly sub-Kepl…
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Mean velocity component map of ⟨𝑣𝑟 ⟩ (top left), ⟨𝑣𝜑 ⟩ (top middle), and ⟨𝑣𝑧 ′⟩ (top right); and their respective dispersions 𝜎𝑣𝑟 (bottom left), 𝜎𝑣𝜑 (bottom middle), and 𝜎𝑣𝑧 ′ (bottom right) in the 𝑟-𝑧 ′ plane of the disc at 𝜏 = 10 kyr. The peaks in the magnitudes of t…
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Probability distribution functions of the fluctuation components of the velocities (histograms), and fitted Gaussian distributions (dashed lines) at 𝑟 = 5, 10, 20, and 40 AU for the disc at 𝜏 = 10 kyr. The fluctuations decrease in all velocity components as 𝑟 increase…
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Velocity dispersion components and sound speed (top) and cor￾responding sonic Mach number (bottom) as a function of disc radius. The velocity dispersion components are largely of the order of the local sound speed for most radii, but differences start to emerge closer…
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: Mean magnetic field strength component map of ⟨𝐵𝑟 ⟩ (top left), ⟨𝐵𝜑 ⟩ (top middle), and ⟨𝐵𝑧 ′⟩ (top right); and their respective dispersions 𝜎𝐵𝑟 (bottom left), 𝜎𝐵𝜑 (bottom middle), and 𝜎𝐵𝑧 ′ (bottom right) in the 𝑟-𝑧 ′ plane of the disc at 𝜏 = 10 kyr. The peaks in the…
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: Probability distribution functions of the fluctuating components of the magnetic field (histograms) and fitted Gaussian distributions (dashed lines) at 𝑟 = 5, 10, 20, and 40 AU for the disc at 𝜏 = 10 kyr. The 𝐵 field fluctuations decrease in all components as 𝑟 increa…
Figure 14
Figure 14. Figure 14: Magnetic field dispersions (top), Alfvén velocity (middle), and corresponding Alfvén Mach number (bottom) as a function of disc radius. A strong influence from the inflow can be seen in all quantities close to the sink particle. The turbulent Alfvén Mach number is ∼ 2…
Figure 15
Figure 15. Figure 15: Same as [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p017_15.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 2 Pith papers

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

  1. Accretion across scales: streamers, surface-layer transport, and rapid replenishment in young protoplanetary discs

    astro-ph.EP 2026-08 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    Cloud-fed ideal-MHD zoom-in simulations of nine young stars show discs are replenished on ~10,000-year timescales via surface-layer accretion and can be truncated by massive streamers.

  2. Protostellar disks in their natural habitat -- the formation of protostars and their accretion disks in the turbulent and magnetized interstellar medium

    astro-ph.GA 2025-06 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    Simulations from a supernova-driven turbulent ISM show ideal MHD prevents disks larger than 10 au, while ambipolar diffusion permits large disks in two of six protostellar cores.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

113 extracted references · 14 canonical work pages · cited by 2 Pith papers

  1. [1]

    M., Wilner D

    Andrews S. M., Wilner D. J., Hughes A. M., Qi C., Dullemond C. P., 2009, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/700/2/1502 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2009ApJ...700.1502A 700, 1502

    doi:10.1088/0004-637x/700/2/1502 2009

  2. [2]

    M., Burkhart B., Semenov V

    Appel S. M., Burkhart B., Semenov V. A., Federrath C., Rosen A. L., Tan J. C., 2023, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/ace897 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023ApJ...954...93A 954, 93

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ace897 2023

  3. [3]

    G., Goodman A

    Arce H. G., Goodman A. A., 2001, @doi [ ] 10.1086/321334 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2001ApJ...554..132A 554, 132

    doi:10.1086/321334 2001

  4. [4]

    G., Borkin M

    Arce H. G., Borkin M. A., Goodman A. A., Pineda J. E., Halle M. W., 2010, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/715/2/1170 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2010ApJ...715.1170A 715, 1170

    doi:10.1088/0004-637x/715/2/1170 2010

  5. [5]

    534, Protostars and Planets VII

    Bae J., Isella A., Zhu Z., Martin R., Okuzumi S., Suriano S., 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. 423 ( @eprint arXiv 2210.13314 ), @doi 10.48550/arXiv.2210.13314

    arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2210.13314 2023

  6. [7]

    R., 2018, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/sty169 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018MNRAS.475.5618B 475, 5618

    Bate M. R., 2018, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/sty169 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018MNRAS.475.5618B 475, 5618

    doi:10.1093/mnras/sty169 2018

  7. [8]

    R., Bonnell I

    Bate M. R., Bonnell I. A., 1997, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/285.1.33 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1997MNRAS.285...33B 285, 33

    doi:10.1093/mnras/285.1.33 1997

  8. [9]

    R., Bonnell I

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

    doi:10.1093/mnras/277.2.362 1995

Show all 113 references
  1. [10]

    R., Tricco T

    Bate M. R., Tricco T. S., Price D. J., 2014, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stt1865 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014MNRAS.437...77B 437, 77

    2014 doi

  2. [11]

    R., Federrath C., Seta A., 2020, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/staa2257 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020MNRAS.498.1593B 498, 1593

    Beattie J. R., Federrath C., Seta A., 2020, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/staa2257 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020MNRAS.498.1593B 498, 1593

    2020 doi

  3. [12]

    J., Colella P., 1989, @doi [ ] 10.1016/0021-9991(89)90035-1 , 82, 64

    Berger M. J., Colella P., 1989, @doi [ ] 10.1016/0021-9991(89)90035-1 , 82, 64

    1989 doi

  4. [13]

    J., Oliger J., 1984, @doi [Journal of Computational Physics] 10.1016/0021-9991(84)90073-1 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1984JCoPh..53..484B 53, 484

    Berger M. J., Oliger J., 1984, @doi [Journal of Computational Physics] 10.1016/0021-9991(84)90073-1 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1984JCoPh..53..484B 53, 484

    1984 doi

  5. [14]

    B \'e thune W., Latter H., Kley W., 2021, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/202040094 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2021A&A...650A..49B 650, A49

    2021 doi

  6. [15]

    Bitsch B., Johansen A., Lambrechts M., Morbidelli A., 2015, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201424964 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015A&A...575A..28B 575, A28

    2015 doi

  7. [16]

    P., Bodenheimer P., 1979, @doi [ ] 10.1086/157497 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1979ApJ...234..289B 234, 289

    Boss A. P., Bodenheimer P., 1979, @doi [ ] 10.1086/157497 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1979ApJ...234..289B 234, 289

    1979 doi

  8. [17]

    Burkhart B., Mocz P., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/ab25ed , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019ApJ...879..129B 879, 129

    2019 doi

  9. [18]

    Commer c on B., Hennebelle P., Audit E., Chabrier G., Teyssier R., 2008, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361:20078591 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2008A

    2008 doi

  10. [19]

    J., 2009, @doi [ ] 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2008.14275.x , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2009MNRAS.393.1157C 393, 1157

    Cossins P., Lodato G., Clarke C. J., 2009, @doi [ ] 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2008.14275.x , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2009MNRAS.393.1157C 393, 1157

    2009

  11. [20]

    V., Audit E., Zank G

    Dubey A., et al., 2008, in Pogorelov N. V., Audit E., Zank G. P., eds, Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series Vol. 385, Numerical Modeling of Space Plasma Flows. p. 145

    2008

  12. [21]

    G., Scalo J., 2004, @doi [ ] 10.1146/annurev.astro.41.011802.094859 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2004ARA&A..42..211E 42, 211

    Elmegreen B. G., Scalo J., 2004, @doi [ ] 10.1146/annurev.astro.41.011802.094859 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2004ARA&A..42..211E 42, 211

    2004 arXiv

  13. [22]

    M., 2007, @doi [ ] 10.1086/524360 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2007ApJ...670L.135E 670, L135

    Espaillat C., Calvet N., D'Alessio P., Hern \'a ndez J., Qi C., Hartmann L., Furlan E., Watson D. M., 2007, @doi [ ] 10.1086/524360 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2007ApJ...670L.135E 670, L135

    2007 doi

  14. [23]

    I., et al., 2009, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0067-0049/181/2/321 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2009ApJS..181..321E 181, 321

    Evans Neal J. I., et al., 2009, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0067-0049/181/2/321 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2009ApJS..181..321E 181, 321

    2009 doi

  15. [24]

    Federrath C., 2013, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stt1644 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2013MNRAS.436.1245F 436, 1245

    2013 doi

  16. [25]

    Federrath C., 2015, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stv941 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015MNRAS.450.4035F 450, 4035

    2015 doi

  17. [26]

    S., 2012, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/761/2/156 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2012ApJ...761..156F 761, 156

    Federrath C., Klessen R. S., 2012, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/761/2/156 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2012ApJ...761..156F 761, 156

    2012 doi

  18. [27]

    S., Schmidt W., Mac Low M., 2010a, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/200912437 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2010A

    Federrath C., Roman-Duval J., Klessen R. S., Schmidt W., Mac Low M., 2010a, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/200912437 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2010A

    doi

  19. [28]

    C., Klessen R

    Federrath C., Banerjee R., Clark P. C., Klessen R. S., 2010b, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/713/1/269 , http://cdsads.u-strasbg.fr/abs/2010ApJ...713..269F 713, 269

    doi

  20. [29]

    Federrath C., Sur S., Schleicher D. R. G., Banerjee R., Klessen R. S., 2011, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/731/1/62 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2011ApJ...731...62F 731, 62

    2011 doi

  21. [30]

    S., 2014, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/790/2/128 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014ApJ...790..128F 790, 128

    Federrath C., Schr \"o n M., Banerjee R., Klessen R. S., 2014, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/790/2/128 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014ApJ...790..128F 790, 128

    2014 doi

  22. [32]

    Fryxell B., et al., 2000, @doi [ ] 10.1086/317361 , http://cdsads.u-strasbg.fr/abs/2000ApJS..131..273F 131, 273

    2000 doi

  23. [33]

    A., Federrath C., Kuruwita R., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stz784 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019MNRAS.485.5532G 485, 5532

    Gerrard I. A., Federrath C., Kuruwita R., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stz784 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019MNRAS.485.5532G 485, 5532

    2019 doi

  24. [34]

    S., 2011, @doi [ ] 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2011.18348.x , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2011MNRAS.413.2741G 413, 2741

    Girichidis P., Federrath C., Banerjee R., Klessen R. S., 2011, @doi [ ] 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2011.18348.x , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2011MNRAS.413.2741G 413, 2741

    2011

  25. [36]

    Glover S. C. O., Mac Low M.-M., 2007a, @doi [ ] 10.1086/512238 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2007ApJS..169..239G 169, 239

    doi

  26. [37]

    Glover S. C. O., Mac Low M.-M., 2007b, @doi [ ] 10.1086/512227 , http://cdsads.u-strasbg.fr/abs/2007ApJ...659.1317G 659, 1317

    doi

  27. [38]

    Glover S. C. O., Federrath C., Mac Low M., Klessen R. S., 2010, @doi [ ] 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2009.15718.x , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2010MNRAS.404....2G 404, 2

    2010

  28. [39]

    C., 2013, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0067-0049/204/1/8 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2013ApJS..204....8G 204, 8

    Gong H., Ostriker E. C., 2013, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0067-0049/204/1/8 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2013ApJS..204....8G 204, 8

    2013 doi

  29. [40]

    Hall C., Rice K., Dipierro G., Forgan D., Harries T., Alexander R., 2018, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/sty550 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018MNRAS.477.1004H 477, 1004

    2018 doi

  30. [41]

    J., Douglas T

    Harries T. J., Douglas T. A., Ali A., 2017, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stx1490 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017MNRAS.471.4111H 471, 4111

    2017 doi

  31. [42]

    J., 1996, @doi [ ] 10.1146/annurev.astro.34.1.207 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1996ARA&A..34..207H 34, 207

    Hartmann L., Kenyon S. J., 1996, @doi [ ] 10.1146/annurev.astro.34.1.207 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1996ARA&A..34..207H 34, 207

    1996 doi

  32. [43]

    Haugb lle T., Padoan P., Nordlund ., 2018, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/aaa432 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018ApJ...854...35H 854, 35

    2018 doi

  33. [44]

    Hayashi C., 1981, @doi [Progress of Theoretical Physics Supplement] 10.1143/PTPS.70.35 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1981PThPS..70...35H 70, 35

    1981 doi

  34. [45]

    He C.-C., Ricotti M., 2023, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stad1289 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023MNRAS.522.5374H 522, 5374

    2023 doi

  35. [46]

    Hennebelle P., Falgarone E., 2012, @doi [ ] 10.1007/s00159-012-0055-y , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2012A

    2012 doi

  36. [47]

    Hennemann M., et al., 2012, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201219429 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2012A

    2012 doi

  37. [48]

    Hill T., et al., 2011, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201117315 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2011A

    2011 doi

  38. [49]

    R., 2011, Protoplanetary Disk

    Hogerheijde M. R., 2011, Protoplanetary Disk. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg, pp 1357--1366, @doi 10.1007/978-3-642-11274-4_1299 , https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-11274-4_1299

    2011 doi

  39. [50]

    H., 1902, @doi [Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London Series A] 10.1098/rsta.1902.0012 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1902RSPTA.199....1J 199, 1

    Jeans J. H., 1902, @doi [Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London Series A] 10.1098/rsta.1902.0012 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1902RSPTA.199....1J 199, 1

    1902

  40. [51]

    L., Evans II N

    Kauffmann J., Bertoldi F., Bourke T. L., Evans II N. J., Lee C. W., 2008, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361:200809481 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2008A

    2008 doi

  41. [52]

    Kitsionas S., et al., 2009, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/200811170 , http://cdsads.u-strasbg.fr/abs/2009A

    2009 doi

  42. [53]

    K \'o sp \'a l \'A ., et al., 2023, @doi [ ] 10.3847/2041-8213/acb58a , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023ApJ...945L...7K 945, L7

    2023 doi

  43. [54]

    G., Norman M

    Kritsuk A. G., Norman M. L., Padoan P., Wagner R., 2007, @doi [ ] 10.1086/519443 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2007ApJ...665..416K 665, 416

    2007 doi

  44. [55]

    R., 2006, @doi [ ] 10.1086/503771 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2006ApJ...641L..45K 641, L45

    Krumholz M. R., 2006, @doi [ ] 10.1086/503771 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2006ApJ...641L..45K 641, L45

    2006 doi

  45. [56]

    R., McKee C

    Krumholz M. R., McKee C. F., Klein R. I., 2004, @doi [ ] 10.1086/421935 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2004ApJ...611..399K 611, 399

    2004 doi

  46. [57]

    Kuffmeier M., 2024, @doi [Frontiers in Astronomy and Space Sciences] 10.3389/fspas.2024.1403075 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024FrASS..1103075K 11, 1403075

    2024

  47. [58]

    Kuffmeier M., Haugb lle T., Nordlund A ., 2017, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/aa7c64 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017ApJ...846....7K 846, 7

    2017 doi

  48. [59]

    S., Haugb lle T., 2018, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/sty024 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018MNRAS.475.2642K 475, 2642

    Kuffmeier M., Frimann S., Jensen S. S., Haugb lle T., 2018, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/sty024 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018MNRAS.475.2642K 475, 2642

    2018 doi

  49. [60]

    E., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201935504 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019A&A...628A.112K 628, A112

    Kuffmeier M., Calcutt H., Kristensen L. E., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201935504 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019A&A...628A.112K 628, A112

    2019 doi

  50. [61]

    L., Federrath C., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stz1053 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019MNRAS.486.3647K 486, 3647

    Kuruwita R. L., Federrath C., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stz1053 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019MNRAS.486.3647K 486, 3647

    2019 doi

  51. [62]

    L., Federrath C., Ireland M., 2017, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stx1299 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017MNRAS.470.1626K 470, 1626

    Kuruwita R. L., Federrath C., Ireland M., 2017, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stx1299 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017MNRAS.470.1626K 470, 1626

    2017 doi

  52. [63]

    L., Federrath C., Kounkel M., 2024, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/202450467 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024A&A...690A.272K 690, A272

    Kuruwita R. L., Federrath C., Kounkel M., 2024, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/202450467 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024A&A...690A.272K 690, A272

    2024 doi

  53. [64]

    B., 1969, , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1969MNRAS.145..271L 145, 271

    Larson R. B., 1969, , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1969MNRAS.145..271L 145, 271

    1969

  54. [65]

    Lebreuilly U., Hennebelle P., Colman T., Commer c on B., Klessen R., Maury A., Molinari S., Testi L., 2021, @doi [ ] 10.3847/2041-8213/ac158c , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2021ApJ...917L..10L 917, L10

    2021 doi

  55. [66]

    Lebreuilly U., et al., 2024a, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/202346558 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024A&A...682A..30L 682, A30

    doi

  56. [67]

    Lebreuilly U., Hennebelle P., Maury A., Gonz \'a lez M., Traficante A., Klessen R., Testi L., Molinari S., 2024b, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/202347913 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024A&A...683A..13L 683, A13

    doi

  57. [68]

    S., 2004, @doi [ ] 10.1103/RevModPhys.76.125 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2004RvMP...76..125M 76, 125

    Mac Low M.-M., Klessen R. S., 2004, @doi [ ] 10.1103/RevModPhys.76.125 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2004RvMP...76..125M 76, 125

    2004 doi

  58. [69]

    N., Matsumoto T., Inutsuka S., 2008, @doi [ ] 10.1086/591074 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2008ApJ...685..690M 685, 690

    Machida M. N., Matsumoto T., Inutsuka S., 2008, @doi [ ] 10.1086/591074 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2008ApJ...685..690M 685, 690

    2008 doi

  59. [70]

    Marchand P., Tomida K., Tanaka K. E. I., Commer c on B., Chabrier G., 2020, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/abad99 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020ApJ...900..180M 900, 180

    2020 doi

  60. [71]

    Masson J., Chabrier G., Hennebelle P., Vaytet N., Commer c on B., 2016, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201526371 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2016A&A...587A..32M 587, A32

    2016 doi

  61. [72]

    Masunaga H., Inutsuka S.-i., 2000, @doi [ ] 10.1086/308439 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2000ApJ...531..350M 531, 350

    2000 doi

  62. [73]

    S., Federrath C., 2020, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/staa1931 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020MNRAS.496.5201M 496, 5201

    Mathew S. S., Federrath C., 2020, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/staa1931 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020MNRAS.496.5201M 496, 5201

    2020 doi

  63. [74]

    S., Federrath C., 2021, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stab2338 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2021MNRAS.507.2448M 507, 2448

    Mathew S. S., Federrath C., 2021, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stab2338 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2021MNRAS.507.2448M 507, 2448

    2021 doi

  64. [75]

    S., Federrath C., Seta A., 2023, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stac3415 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023MNRAS.518.5190M 518, 5190

    Mathew S. S., Federrath C., Seta A., 2023, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stac3415 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023MNRAS.518.5190M 518, 5190

    2023 doi

  65. [76]

    C., et al., 2025, @doi [arXiv e-prints] 10.48550/arXiv.2506.14394 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2025arXiv250614394M p

    Mayer A. C., et al., 2025, @doi [arXiv e-prints] 10.48550/arXiv.2506.14394 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2025arXiv250614394M p. arXiv:2506.14394

    2025 doi arXiv

  66. [77]

    F., Ostriker E

    McKee C. F., Ostriker E. C., 2007, @doi [ ] 10.1146/annurev.astro.45.051806.110602 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2007ARA&A..45..565M 45, 565

    2007 arXiv

  67. [78]

    F., Stacy A., Li P

    McKee C. F., Stacy A., Li P. S., 2020, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/staa1903 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020MNRAS.496.5528M 496, 5528

    2020 doi

  68. [79]

    R., Li Z.-Y., 2009, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/698/1/922 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2009ApJ...698..922M 698, 922

    Mellon R. R., Li Z.-Y., 2009, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/698/1/922 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2009ApJ...698..922M 698, 922

    2009 doi

  69. [80]

    H., Federrath C., Krumholz M

    Menon S. H., Federrath C., Krumholz M. R., Kuiper R., Wibking B. D., Jung M., 2022, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stac485 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2022MNRAS.512..401M 512, 401

    2022 doi

  70. [82]

    R., Bergin E

    Najita J. R., Bergin E. A., 2018, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/aad80c , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018ApJ...864..168N 864, 168

    2018 doi

  71. [83]

    Nakauchi D., Omukai K., Susa H., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stz1799 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019MNRAS.488.1846N 488, 1846

    2019 doi

  72. [84]

    G., Federrath C., Krumholz M

    Nam D. G., Federrath C., Krumholz M. R., 2021, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stab505 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2021MNRAS.503.1138N 503, 1138

    2021 doi

  73. [85]

    Narayanan G., Snell R., Bemis A., 2012, @doi [ ] 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2012.21579.x , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2012MNRAS.425.2641N 425, 2641

    2012

  74. [86]

    A., Salmeron R., Federrath C., Bicknell G

    Nolan C. A., Salmeron R., Federrath C., Bicknell G. V., Sutherland R. S., 2017, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stx1642 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017MNRAS.471.1488N 471, 1488

    2017 doi

  75. [87]

    C., Graham J

    Nordlund A ., Haugb lle T., K \"u ffmeier M., Padoan P., Vasileiades A., 2014, in Booth M., Matthews B. C., Graham J. R., eds, IAU Symposium Vol. 299, Exploring the Formation and Evolution of Planetary Systems. pp 131--135, @doi 10.1017/S1743921313008107

    2014 doi

  76. [88]

    Offner S. S. R., Klein R. I., McKee C. F., Krumholz M. R., 2009, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/703/1/131 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2009ApJ...703..131O 703, 131

    2009 doi

  77. [89]

    Omukai K., Tsuribe T., Schneider R., Ferrara A., 2005, @doi [ ] 10.1086/429955 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2005ApJ...626..627O 626, 627

    2005 doi

  78. [90]

    J., Johnstone D., J rgensen J

    Padoan P., Federrath C., Chabrier G., Evans II N. J., Johnstone D., J rgensen J. K., McKee C. F., Nordlund ., 2014, in Beuther H., Klessen R. S., Dullemond C. P., Henning T., eds, Protostars and Planets VI. University of Arizona Press, pp 77--100 ( @eprint arXiv 1312.5365 ), @...

    2014 arXiv

  79. [91]

    D., Mac Low M.-M., 2006, @doi [ ] 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2006.10172.x , http://cdsads.u-strasbg.fr/abs/2006MNRAS.368..943P 368, 943

    Pavlovski G., Smith M. D., Mac Low M.-M., 2006, @doi [ ] 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2006.10172.x , http://cdsads.u-strasbg.fr/abs/2006MNRAS.368..943P 368, 943

    2006

  80. [92]

    Pinilla P., et al., 2021, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/202140371 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2021A&A...649A.122P 649, A122

    2021 doi

  81. [93]

    J., 2012, @doi [ ] 10.1111/j.1745-3933.2011.01187.x , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2012MNRAS.420L..33P 420, L33

    Price D. J., 2012, @doi [ ] 10.1111/j.1745-3933.2011.01187.x , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2012MNRAS.420L..33P 420, L33

    2012

  82. [94]

    J., Bate M

    Price D. J., Bate M. R., 2007, @doi [ ] 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2007.11621.x , http://cdsads.u-strasbg.fr/abs/2007MNRAS.377...77P 377, 77

    2007

  83. [95]

    M., 2008, @doi [ ] 10.1086/526425 , http://cdsads.u-strasbg.fr/abs/2008ApJS..176..293R 176, 293

    Ricker P. M., 2008, @doi [ ] 10.1086/526425 , http://cdsads.u-strasbg.fr/abs/2008ApJS..176..293R 176, 293

    2008 doi

  84. [96]

    E., Omukai K., Sugimura K., Matsumoto T., Tomida K., 2023, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stac3724 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023MNRAS.519.3076S 519, 3076

    Sadanari K. E., Omukai K., Sugimura K., Matsumoto T., Tomida K., 2023, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stac3724 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023MNRAS.519.3076S 519, 3076

    2023 doi

  85. [97]

    S., Banerjee R., 2012, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/754/2/99 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2012ApJ...754...99S 754, 99

    Schober J., Schleicher D., Federrath C., Glover S., Klessen R. S., Banerjee R., 2012, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/754/2/99 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2012ApJ...754...99S 754, 99

    2012 doi

  86. [98]

    E., Klessen R

    Seifried D., Banerjee R., Pudritz R. E., Klessen R. S., 2012, @doi [ ] 10.1111/j.1745-3933.2012.01253.x , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2012MNRAS.423L..40S 423, L40

    2012

  87. [99]

    E., Klessen R

    Seifried D., Banerjee R., Pudritz R. E., Klessen R. S., 2013, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stt682 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2013MNRAS.432.3320S 432, 3320

    2013 doi

  88. [100]

    R., Schleicher D

    Sharda P., Federrath C., Krumholz M. R., Schleicher D. R. G., 2021, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stab531 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2021MNRAS.503.2014S 503, 2014

    2021 doi

  89. [101]

    M., Federrath C., 2025, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/staf160 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2025MNRAS.537.2961S 537, 2961

    Shivakumar L. M., Federrath C., 2025, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/staf160 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2025MNRAS.537.2961S 537, 2961

    2025 doi

  90. [102]

    W., Palla F., 2004, The Formation of Stars

    Stahler S. W., Palla F., 2004, The Formation of Stars . Wiley

    2004

  91. [103]

    L., Bally J., 2006, @doi [ ] 10.1086/506340 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2006ApJ...649..280S 649, 280

    Stojimirovi \'c I., Narayanan G., Snell R. L., Bally J., 2006, @doi [ ] 10.1086/506340 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2006ApJ...649..280S 649, 280

    2006 doi

  92. [104]

    Sur S., Schlei\-cher D. R. G., Banerjee R., Federrath C., Klessen R. S., 2010, @doi [ ] 10.1088/2041-8205/721/2/L134 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2010ApJ...721L.134S 721, L134

    2010 doi

  93. [105]

    Tabone B., et al., 2023, @doi [Nature Astronomy] 10.1038/s41550-023-01965-3 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023NatAs...7..805T 7, 805

    2023 doi

  94. [106]

    C., 1997, @doi [ ] 10.1086/304968 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1997ApJ...491..653T 491, 653

    Tafalla M., Myers P. C., 1997, @doi [ ] 10.1086/304968 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1997ApJ...491..653T 491, 653

    1997 doi

  95. [107]

    Tritsis A., Federrath C., Willacy K., Tassis K., 2022, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stab3740 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2022MNRAS.510.4420T 510, 4420

    2022 doi

  96. [108]

    K., Klein R

    Truelove J. K., Klein R. I., McKee C. F., Holliman John H. I., Howell L. H., Greenough J. A., 1997, @doi [ ] 10.1086/310975 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1997ApJ...489L.179T 489, L179

    1997 doi

  97. [109]

    534, Protostars and Planets VII

    Tsukamoto Y., 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. 317 ( @eprint arXiv 2209.13765 ), @doi 10.48550/arXiv.2209.13765

    2023 doi arXiv

  98. [110]

    Vaytet N., Commer c on B., Masson J., Gonz \'a lez M., Chabrier G., 2018, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201732075 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018A&A...615A...5V 615, A5

    2018 doi

  99. [111]

    Waagan K., Federrath C., Klingenberg C., 2011, @doi [ ] 10.1016/j.jcp.2011.01.026 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2011JCoPh.230.3331W 230, 3331

    2011 doi

  100. [112]

    J., 1977, @doi [ ] 10.1007/BF00642464 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1977Ap&SS..51..153W 51, 153

    Weidenschilling S. J., 1977, @doi [ ] 10.1007/BF00642464 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1977Ap&SS..51..153W 51, 153

    1977 doi

  101. [113]

    G., Hollenbach D., McKee C

    Wolfire M. G., Hollenbach D., McKee C. F., Tielens A. G. G. M., Bakes E. L. O., 1995, @doi [ ] 10.1086/175510 , http://cdsads.u-strasbg.fr/abs/1995ApJ...443..152W 443, 152

    1995 doi

  102. [114]

    Wurster J., Li Z.-Y., 2018, @doi [Frontiers in Astronomy and Space Sciences] 10.3389/fspas.2018.00039 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018FrASS...5...39W 5, 39

    2018

  103. [115]

    W., Bodenheimer P., Laughlin G., 1993, @doi [ ] 10.1086/172827 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1993ApJ...411..274Y 411, 274

    Yorke H. W., Bodenheimer P., Laughlin G., 1993, @doi [ ] 10.1086/172827 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1993ApJ...411..274Y 411, 274

    1993 doi

  104. [116]

    R., Bergin E

    Zhang K., Schwarz K. R., Bergin E. A., 2020, @doi [ ] 10.3847/2041-8213/ab7823 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020ApJ...891L..17Z 891, L17

    2020 doi

  105. [117]

    Zhao B., et al., 2020, @doi [Space Science Reviews] 10.1007/s11214-020-00664-z , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020SSRv..216...43Z 216, 43

    2020 doi

Pith tools

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