Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 4 minor 52 references

SMA and NOEMA reveal asymmetric sub-structure in the protoplanetary disk of IRAS23077+6707

T0 review · 2 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-06 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read First sharp images of IRAS 23077+6707 show a disk up to 50% brighter in the north, pointing to an eccentric disk with eccentricity near 0.26.

desk verdict The first sub-arcsecond SMA/NOEMA maps are a real observational step, but the north-south asymmetry claim leans on an unquantified 'dynamic center' with an internal offset inconsistency; the paper is worth reviewing, but that analysis needs to be done before the asymmetry is taken as established. read the letter →

arxiv 2507.00122 v1 pith:UP3UYYVD submitted 2025-06-30 astro-ph.EP

Joshua B. Lovell , Leon Trapman , Kristina Monsch , Sean M. Andrews , Alice S. Booth , Garrett K. Keating , Takahiro Ueda , David J. Wilner This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.EP
keywords protoplanetarydisksedge-oneccentricmillimeterinterferometrydustcontinuumSubmillimeterArrayNOEMAIRAS23077+6707
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

IRAS 23077+6707 is a newly discovered, extremely large protoplanetary disk seen almost exactly edge-on, with the central star hidden behind the disk. This paper presents the first sub-arcsecond millimeter continuum images of the disk, combining observations from two interferometers at three wavelengths. The images show that the disk's dust emission is strongly lopsided: the northern half is up to 50% brighter than the southern half, and the radial brightness profile contains multiple peaks and a central cavity. The authors show that a simple model of an eccentric disk—one whose dust rings are shifted off-center on elliptical orbits—with an eccentricity of about 0.26 reproduces the overall morphology. If the eccentric interpretation holds, the disk would join a rare class of eccentric protoplanetary disks and offer a new laboratory for studying how such asymmetries arise.

What carries the argument

The argument rests on two pieces of machinery. First, a 'dynamic center' for the disk, defined as the intersection of the continuum spine with the 1.8 km/s iso-velocity contour of C18O J=1–0 emission; every asymmetry measurement (180-degree self-subtraction, flux ratios, radial profiles) is made about this point, so its accuracy is load-bearing. Second, a toy model consisting of two top-hat surface-density rings placed on eccentric orbits with eccentricity declining as $e \sim a^{-1}$ and pericenter aligned with the disk spine, forward-modeled with a Monte Carlo radiative-transfer code to produce synthetic 1.33 mm images that are compared directly with the data. The model shows that eccentricity near 0.26 is required to produce the observed north-south intensity ratios along the disk spine, while a circular model does not.

What would settle it

Higher-resolution observations of a dense gas tracer such as C18O could measure the disk's velocity field: an eccentric disk with e≈0.26 predicts a characteristic asymmetry in the position-velocity diagram along the disk major axis, with the line-of-sight velocity deviating from circular Keplerian rotation by an amount that varies azimuthally; a velocity field that is symmetric and centered exactly on the dynamic center would rule out the eccentric interpretation.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that IRAS 23077+6707's disk, resolved for the first time at roughly 0.8 arcsecond resolution, has a substantial north-south brightness asymmetry in its millimeter dust continuum, with emission in the north enhanced by up to 50% relative to the south. This asymmetry is seen consistently in three independent images (at 1.33, 2.7, and 3.1 mm), appears in both the integrated flux (north-to-south ratios of 1.14–1.35) and in image-plane self-subtraction maps, and is quantified by an asymmetry parameter A of roughly 0.14–0.22. The disk also shows multiple radial emission peaks and a central dip in the radial profile, consistent with rings and a cavity. The authors argue that an eccentric disk with eccentricity e≈0.26 can reproduce the bulk morphology and the north-south flux imbalance in a toy radiative-transfer model, and they discuss alternative origins such as a misaligned inner disk, a vortex arc, or a spiral, none of which can yet be excluded.

Load-bearing premise

The asymmetry measurements assume that the 'dynamic center' derived from the C18O kinematic map coincides with the true center of the disk, a point that cannot be directly verified because the central star is hidden behind the edge-on disk; any offset in this assumed center would systematically bias the self-subtraction residuals and the reported north-south brightness ratios.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If the disk is eccentric, IRAS 23077+6707 becomes one of the few known eccentric protoplanetary disks, comparable to IRS 48 and IRAS 04158+2805, suggesting that high eccentricities can persist in disks spanning hundreds of au.
  • The measured spectral index of 3.2–3.9 indicates that the millimeter emission is optically thin, implying that the observed north-south asymmetry traces a real dust column-density asymmetry rather than a temperature contrast.
  • The anti-alignment between the millimeter brightness peak in the north and the scattered-light asymmetry in the south implies that large and small grains occupy different regions of the disk, a pattern seen in other structured disks.
  • The presence of multiple radial emission peaks and a central cavity, combined with the asymmetry, makes the disk a promising target for future gas kinematic studies to determine whether a companion or planet is shaping the disk.
  • The disk's extreme radial extent (5.6–6.1 arcseconds, over 1000 au) and its asymmetry distinguish it from most edge-on disks studied to date, providing an extreme benchmark for models of disk evolution.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If the eccentric model is correct, repeated high-resolution observations could measure apsidal precession of the rings, potentially constraining the mass of an unseen companion or the disk's self-gravity; this would be a testable prediction beyond the current paper.
  • The apparent phase offset between the 1.33 mm and 3.1 mm radial profiles, which the authors attribute to imaging artifacts, could be checked with deeper, matched-resolution observations; if it persists, it would imply a wavelength-dependent shift of the emission peaks, a possible dust-trapping signature.
  • The toy model assumes optically thin dust and a hot (8000 K) central star; fitting the spectral energy distribution from optical to millimeter wavelengths would test these assumptions, since a cooler star or optically thick dust would alter the predicted brightness distribution.
  • Comparing the measured asymmetry parameter (A≈0.14–0.22) to outputs of hydrodynamical simulations of eccentric or vortex-bearing disks could distinguish geometric eccentricity from localized dust trapping in a turbulent eddy.
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

2 major / 4 minor

Summary. This paper presents the first sub-arcsecond millimeter continuum images of the edge-on protoplanetary disk IRAS 23077+6707, combining SMA 1.33 mm data and NOEMA 2.7/3.1 mm data. The authors report a disk extent of 5.6–6.1 arcsec, a steep spectral index α = 3.2–3.9, multiple radial emission peaks suggestive of rings and a cavity, and a significant north–south brightness asymmetry (N/S flux ratios 1.14–1.35, asymmetry parameter A ≈ 0.14–0.22). They compare the millimeter asymmetry with scattered-light morphology and propose, as one of several hypotheses, an eccentric disk with e ≈ 0.26, illustrated with a simple RADMC-3D toy model. The eccentric model is explicitly labeled as a non-unique, forward-modeled interpretation rather than a fitted result.

Significance. If the asymmetry claims are robust, this is a valuable addition to the small sample of resolved, highly inclined protoplanetary disks and would make IRAS 23077+6707 one of the most radially extended disks known, with an unusually steep spectral index. The paper's strengths are the use of three independent data sets (SMA, NOEMA USB, NOEMA LSB), the transparent treatment of the spectral-index range including possible SMA flux discordance, the explicit toy-model status of the eccentricity interpretation, and the public release of the calibrated images on Zenodo. The central risk is that every quantitative asymmetry diagnostic is computed about a 'dynamic center' whose accuracy is never quantified; because the disk is edge-on and the star is occulted, the asymmetry measurements are only as reliable as that center determination.

major comments (2)
  1. [§3.1, §3.2, and Appendix B] All asymmetry diagnostics—the 180° self-subtraction residuals, the north/south aperture flux ratios, and the radial profile extraction—are computed about a 'dynamic center' whose declination offset is given as +0.52 arcsec in §3.1 and +0.58 arcsec in Appendix B, with no uncertainty quoted for either value. Because the disk is edge-on and the stellar position is not directly observable, this center is not independently verified. An error of order 0.1–0.2 arcsec along the disk spine would produce a dipole residual in the self-subtraction for a centrally peaked or ringed brightness distribution, and the measured asymmetry parameters (A ≈ 0.14–0.22, N/S ratios 1.14–1.35) are small enough that such a shift could contribute a substantial fraction of the reported signal. The footnote in §3.2 stating that rotation about the phase center gives stronger residuals only confirms that the phase center is not the disk center; it does not validate the adopted dynamic center. Please reconcile the +0.52 arcsec/+0.58 arcsec discrepancy, provide a quantitative uncertainty for the center, and demonstrate robustness by recomputing the N/S ratios, A, and the residual maps for a grid of plausible center offsets, or by deriving the center with an independent method (e.g., minimizing residual asymmetry or fitting the C18O velocity field).
  2. [Fig. 4 and §3.2] The abstract claims evidence for multiple radial emission peaks and troughs that may originate in rings and a central cavity, but the figure caption/text state that the peaks in the SMA and NOEMA LSB radial profiles are out of phase and attribute this to imaging artifacts, with the natural-weighted LSB image said to align more consistently. As presented, the two independent data sets do not reproduce the same peak locations in the displayed images, which weakens the substructure claim. Please quantify the peak positions and their uncertainties in a way that accounts for the different beam shapes and tapering (for example, by comparing natural-weighted and tapered images, or by fitting the profiles in the uv-plane), or soften the abstract's claim to explicitly present the radial substructure as tentative pending such an analysis.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Abstract] The abstract contains a duplicated article: 'hosting a a significant brightness asymmetry' should read 'hosting a significant brightness asymmetry.'
  2. [Table 2] The first NOEMA row is dated '2024 Dec 27' but appears in a sequence of 2024 February observations; this is presumably a typo for 2023 Dec 27 and should be corrected, since the observing campaign dates matter for the data-quality assessment.
  3. [Throughout] The notation for C18O is inconsistent (text uses 'C18O' while some contexts imply the isotopologue); the authors should use a uniform format such as C^18O throughout, including the figure caption for Fig. 5.
  4. [§2.1] The sentence describing the flagged BL Lac time range is placed in a footnote that appears to continue into a description of COMPASS; please check that the footnote formatting is correct and that the citation to Keating et al. (in prep.) is complete.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: direct image measurements support the asymmetry/substructure claims, and the eccentricity inference is an explicitly labeled toy model, not a prediction forced by construction.

full rationale

The paper's load-bearing observational claims—extended emission, spectral index, radial peaks, and north-south asymmetry—are read directly from calibrated SMA/NOEMA continuum images, with no fitted parameter entering their definition. The 'dynamic center' used for self-subtraction and flux ratios is derived in Appendix B from C18O kinematics (the intersection of the continuum spine with the 1.8 km/s iso-velocity contour), an independent tracer; it is not defined in terms of the asymmetry it is used to measure. The eccentric-disk interpretation is explicitly introduced as a 'simple, toy model' whose parameters (top-hat radii/widths, inclination, PA, scale height, e=0.26) are set to match the data, and the paper states 'We avoid fitting this model to derive best-fit parameter estimations' and offers alternative scenarios. The statement that e≈0.2-0.3 is needed is therefore a conditional model inference, not a prediction that reduces to its inputs by construction. Self-citations (Lovell et al. 2021 for the self-subtraction procedure; Lynch & Lovell 2021 and Lovell & Lynch 2023 for the eccentric-dust model code) supply methods/models but do not carry the central observational derivation; no uniqueness theorem is imported and no ansatz is hidden behind a citation. The unquoted uncertainty on the dynamic center and the 0.52 arcsec vs 0.58 arcsec declination offset are robustness/calibration concerns, not circularity.

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

The toy model introduces several free parameters (eccentricity, ring geometry, scale height, inclination) to reproduce the observed morphology. These are chosen by hand or with reference to prior literature, and the paper acknowledges degeneracies. No new physical entities are postulated.

free parameters (4)
  • Eccentricity e = 0.26 (range 0.2-0.3)
    Chosen to reproduce the observed north-south brightness asymmetry in the toy model; the paper states this value is needed to match the flux asymmetry, but it is not derived from a formal fit.
  • Ring radii and widths (two top-hats) = Not specified numerically; 'fixed ... to match the peaks'
    The surface density is a parametric function of two top-hats with radii and widths set to match the observed intensity peaks in the SMA and NOEMA profiles.
  • Scale height H = 0.1 x r
    Assumed Gaussian scale height, a typical value for protoplanetary disks, but not measured for this source.
  • Inclination = 75 degrees
    Set to a value consistent with the edge-on geometry; the observed lower limit from 2D Gaussian fits is 68-73 degrees.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption Dust emission is optically thin
    The toy model (Section 4.2.1) explicitly assumes the dust continuum is optically thin, which may not hold for a massive, edge-on disk.
  • domain assumption Dust dynamics are independent of gas
    The eccentric ring model is designed for debris disks and assumes the dust is not coupled to gas, an approximation for a gas-rich protoplanetary disk.
  • domain assumption Eccentricity profile e ~ a^-1
    The model adopts a negative gradient power-law eccentricity, typical of debris disk models (Lynch & Lovell 2021), but not directly measured here.
  • standard math Radiative transfer via RADMC-3D
    The radiative transfer calculations use the publicly available RADMC-3D code, a standard tool in the field.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of SMA and NOEMA reveal asymmetric sub-structure in the protoplanetary disk of IRAS23077+6707." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/UP3UYYVD

@misc{pith2026250700122,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: SMA and NOEMA reveal asymmetric sub-structure in the protoplanetary disk of IRAS23077+6707},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/UP3UYYVD}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2507.00122}
}
abstract

We present high-resolution data of IRAS 23077+6707 (`Dracula's Chivito') with the Submillimeter Array (SMA at 1.33 mm/225.5 GHz) and the Northern Extended Millimeter Array (NOEMA at 2.7 mm/111.7 GHz and 3.1 mm/96.2 GHz). IRAS 23077+6707 is a highly-inclined and newly discovered protoplanetary disk, first reported in 2024. We combine SMA baselines from the Compact, Extended and Very Extended arrays, and NOEMA baselines from its A and C configurations, and present continuum images with resolution ${\lesssim}0.8''$, which constitute the first sub-arcsecond resolution maps of IRAS 23077+6707. The images show extended linear emission that spans $5.6{-}6.1''$ as expected for a radially extended, highly-inclined protoplanetary disk. Accompanied with lower resolution data, we show that the disk has a steep spectral index, ranging from $\alpha=3.2{-}3.9$. We present evidence of multiple radial emission peaks and troughs in emission, which may originate in disk rings and a central cavity. We further present evidence that these radial structures are asymmetric; hosting a a significant brightness asymmetry, with emission enhanced by up to 50% in the north versus the south. We discuss hypotheses about the potential origins of these features, including the possibility that IRAS 23077+6707 hosts a rare example of an eccentric protoplanetary disk, which can induce these radially asymmetric structures. We present a simple eccentric continuum model of IRAS 23077+6707, and show for an eccentricity of $e \approx 0.26$, that this can reproduce the bulk morphology of the emission.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2507.00122 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. SMA (left), NOEMA upper-sideband (middle) and NOEMA lower-sideband (right). We present SMA and NOEMA contours at of 4, 8, 12, and 16σ levels. Relative offsets are with reference to the phase center of the observations. Synthesised beams are presented in the lower-left of each panel, with sizes of 0. ′′80×0. ′′69, 0. ′′80×0. ′′76 and 0. ′′81×0. ′′77 and position angles of 61◦ , 50◦ , and 60◦ respectively. sub-structu… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Pan–STARRS RGB color map (as presented in Monsch et al. 2024) with the newest SMA high-resolution continuum contours over-plotted (at the 8, 12 and 16σ lev￾els). these SMA observations with 6 m antennas, projected VEX uv-baselines of 508.9 m, and a mean frequency of 225.538 GHz allow for channel averaging up to this beam smearing criterion of ≈2 GHz. The averaging we applied provides channels with widths of 0.5 GHz,… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Self-subtraction maps for the SMA (top), NOEMA USB (middle) and NOEMA LSB (bottom) images. We present in the left panel each image and in the right panel each residual map, which we produce by subtracting from each image, the same image but 180◦ -rotated about the dynamic center. Contours in the image maps match those of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (2 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Left and center: Radial intensity profiles of the SMA and NOEMA data (where NOU is for the NOEMA USB, and NOL is for the NOEMA LSB) for the northern (N) and southern (S) halves of the disk. The toy model profile is over-plotted on these radial profile plots with a blac…
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Moment one map of C18O J=1−0. Black contours show the 112 GHz (USB) continuum (with 4, 8, 12, 16σ contours). The magenta star denotes the dynamic center of IRAS 23077+6707 (which the map is re-centered on). an arc or a spiral, which can induce these radially asymmetric…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

52 extracted references · 7 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    L., P´ erez, L

    ALMA Partnership, Brogan, C. L., P´ erez, L. M., et al. 2015, ApJL, 808, L3, doi: 10.1088/2041-8205/808/1/L3

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

  2. [2]

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

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

  3. [3]

    M., Liu, M

    Andrews, S. M., Liu, M. C., Williams, J. P., & Allers, K. N. 2008, ApJ, 685, 1039, doi: 10.1086/591417

    doi:10.1086/591417 2008

  4. [4]

    M., Wilner, D

    Andrews, S. M., Wilner, D. J., Zhu, Z., et al. 2016, ApJL, 820, L40, doi: 10.3847/2041-8205/820/2/L40

    doi:10.3847/2041-8205/820/2/l40 2016

  5. [5]

    M., Huang, J., P´ erez, L

    Andrews, S. M., Huang, J., P´ erez, L. M., et al. 2018, ApJL, 869, L41, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/aaf741 Astropy Collaboration, Robitaille, T. P., Tollerud, E. J., et al. 2013, A&A, 558, A33, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201322068 Astropy Collaboration, Price-Whelan, A. M., Sip˝ ocz, B. M., et al. 2018, AJ, 156, 123, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/aabc4f

    doi:10.3847/2041-8213/aaf741 2018

  6. [6]

    2015, A&A, 578, L6, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201526011

    Benisty, M., Juhasz, A., Boccaletti, A., et al. 2015, A&A, 578, L6, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201526011

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201526011 2015

  7. [7]

    2017, A&A, 597, A42, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201629798

    Benisty, M., Stolker, T., Pohl, A., et al. 2017, A&A, 597, A42, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201629798

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201629798 2017

  8. [8]

    DECaPS and SMA discovery of a highly-inclined class I YSO with an outflow: IRAS 08235-4316

    Benisty, M., Bae, J., Facchini, S., et al. 2021, ApJL, 916, L2, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ac0f83 Bennett Lovell, J., Monsch, K., Keating, G. K., et al. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2411.10518, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2411.10518

    work page Pith review arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2411.10518 2021

Show all 52 references
  1. [9]

    T., Bayyari, A., Sitko, M

    Berghea, C. T., Bayyari, A., Sitko, M. L., et al. 2024, ApJL, 967, L3, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ad43e3

    2024 doi

  2. [10]

    H., & Schwab, F

    Bridle, A. H., & Schwab, F. R. 1999, in Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series, Vol. 180, Synthesis Imaging in Radio Astronomy II, ed. G. B

    1999

  3. [11]

    F., Pinilla, P., et al

    Cazzoletti, P., van Dishoeck, E. F., Pinilla, P., et al. 2018, A&A, 619, A161, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201834006

    2018 doi

  4. [12]

    M., Gurwell, M

    Chung, C.-Y., Andrews, S. M., Gurwell, M. A., et al. 2024, ApJS, 273, 29, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/ad528b

    2024 doi

  5. [13]

    2021, CARTA: The Cube Analysis and Rendering Tool for

    Comrie, A., Kuo-Song Wang, Shou-Chieh Hsu, et al. 2021, CARTA: The Cube Analysis and Rendering Tool for

    2021

  6. [14]

    Astronomy, Zenodo, doi: 10.5281/ZENODO.3377984

    doi

  7. [15]

    Conselice, C. J. 2003, ApJS, 147, 1, doi: 10.1086/375001

    2003 doi

  8. [16]

    J., Bershady, M

    Conselice, C. J., Bershady, M. A., & Jangren, A. 2000, ApJ, 529, 886, doi: 10.1086/308300

    2000 doi

  9. [17]

    A., Gensior, J., Bureau, M., et al

    Davis, T. A., Gensior, J., Bureau, M., et al. 2022, MNRAS, 512, 1522, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stac600

    2022 doi

  10. [18]

    2018, ApJ, 860, 124, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aac6cb

    Dong, R., Liu, S.-y., Eisner, J., et al. 2018, ApJ, 860, 124, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aac6cb

    2018 doi

  11. [19]

    2022, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2203.09759, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2203.09759

    Drazkowska, J., Bitsch, B., Lambrechts, M., et al. 2022, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2203.09759, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2203.09759

    2022 doi arXiv

  12. [20]

    P., Juhasz, A., Pohl, A., et al

    Dullemond, C. P., Juhasz, A., Pohl, A., et al. 2012, ”Astrophysics Source Code Library”, ascl:1202.015. http://ascl.net/1202.015 13

    2012

  13. [21]

    2018, MNRAS, 473, 4459, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stx2523

    Facchini, S., Juh´ asz, A., & Lodato, G. 2018, MNRAS, 473, 4459, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stx2523

    2018 doi

  14. [22]

    2021, A&A, 651, A90, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202141278

    Fedele, D., Toci, C., Maud, L., & Lodato, G. 2021, A&A, 651, A90, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202141278

    2021 doi

  15. [23]

    J., et al

    Hammond, I., Christiaens, V., Price, D. J., et al. 2023, MNRAS, 522, L51, doi: 10.1093/mnrasl/slad027

    2023 doi

  16. [24]

    M., et al

    Hashimoto, J., Tsukagoshi, T., Brown, J. M., et al. 2015, ApJ, 799, 43, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/799/1/43

    2015 doi

  17. [25]

    J., Jacobs, D

    Hazelton, B. J., Jacobs, D. C., Pober, J. C., & Beardsley, A. P. 2017, The Journal of Open Source Software, 2, 140, doi: 10.21105/joss.00140

    2017 doi

  18. [26]

    Ho, P. T. P., Moran, J. M., & Lo, K. Y. 2004, ApJL, 616, L1, doi: 10.1086/423245

    2004 doi

  19. [27]

    M., P´ erez, L

    Huang, J., Andrews, S. M., P´ erez, L. M., et al. 2018, ApJL, 869, L43, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/aaf7a0

    2018 doi

  20. [28]

    2019, ApJL, 879, L25, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ab2a12

    Isella, A., Benisty, M., Teague, R., et al. 2019, ApJL, 879, L25, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ab2a12

    2019 doi

  21. [29]

    M., et al

    Isella, A., Huang, J., Andrews, S. M., et al. 2018, ApJL, 869, L49, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/aaf747

    2018 doi

  22. [30]

    2025, The Journal of Open Source Software, 10, 7482, doi: 10.21105/joss.07482

    Keating, G., Hazelton, B., Kolopanis, M., et al. 2025, The Journal of Open Source Software, 10, 7482, doi: 10.21105/joss.07482

    2025 doi

  23. [31]

    2023, ApJ, 953, 190, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/acdd7a

    Kido, M., Takakuwa, S., Saigo, K., et al. 2023, ApJ, 953, 190, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/acdd7a

    2023 doi

  24. [32]

    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

  25. [33]

    Lovell, J. B. 2025, Dataset for: SMA and NOEMA reveal asymmetric sub-structure in the protoplanetary disk of IRAS 23077+6707, Zenodo, doi: 10.5281/ZENODO.15319178

    2025 doi

  26. [34]

    B., & Lynch, E

    Lovell, J. B., & Lynch, E. M. 2023, MNRAS, 525, L36, doi: 10.1093/mnrasl/slad083

    2023 doi

  27. [35]

    B., Marino, S., Wyatt, M

    Lovell, J. B., Marino, S., Wyatt, M. C., et al. 2021, MNRAS, 506, 1978, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stab1678

    2021 doi

  28. [36]

    M., & Lovell, J

    Lynch, E. M., & Lovell, J. B. 2021, MNRAS, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stab3566

    2021 doi

  29. [37]

    A., Weinberger, A

    MacGregor, M. A., Weinberger, A. J., Loyd, R. O. P., et al. 2021, ApJL, 911, L25, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/abf14c

    2021 doi

  30. [38]

    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, Protostars and Planets VII, ed. S. Inutsuka, Y. Aikawa, T. Muto, K. Tomida, & M. Tamura, 539, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2203.09930

    2023 doi arXiv

  31. [39]

    2007, in Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series, Vol

    Golap, K. 2007, in Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series, Vol. 376, Astronomical Data Analysis Software and Systems XVI, ed. R. A. Shaw, F. Hill, & D. J. Bell, 127

    2007

  32. [40]

    B., Berghea, C

    Monsch, K., Lovell, J. B., Berghea, C. T., et al. 2024, ApJL, 967, L2, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ad3bb0 P´ erez, L. M., Carpenter, J. M., Andrews, S. M., et al. 2016, Science, 353, 1519, doi: 10.1126/science.aaf8296 P´ erez, L. M., Benisty, M., Andrews, S. M., et al. 2018, ApJL, ...

    2024 doi

  33. [41]

    A., Young, K

    Primiani, R. A., Young, K. H., Young, A., et al. 2016, Journal of Astronomical Instrumentation, 5, 1641006, doi: 10.1142/S2251171716410063

    2016 doi

  34. [42]

    2021, MNRAS, 507, 1157, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stab2179 Szil´ agyi, M., Kun, M., &´Abrah´ am, P

    Ragusa, E., Fasano, D., Toci, C., et al. 2021, MNRAS, 507, 1157, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stab2179 Szil´ agyi, M., Kun, M., &´Abrah´ am, P. 2021, MNRAS, 505, 5164, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stab1496

    2021 doi

  35. [43]

    2024, ApJ, 964, 24, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad1f57

    Takakuwa, S., Saigo, K., Kido, M., et al. 2024, ApJ, 964, 24, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad1f57

    2024 doi

  36. [44]

    J., Testi, L., et al

    Tazzari, M., Clarke, C. J., Testi, L., et al. 2021, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 506, 2804, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stab1808

    2021 doi

  37. [45]

    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

  38. [46]

    2018, Research Notes of the American Astronomical Society, 2, 173, doi: 10.3847/2515-5172/aae265

    Teague, R., & Foreman-Mackey, D. 2018, Research Notes of the American Astronomical Society, 2, 173, doi: 10.3847/2515-5172/aae265

    2018 doi

  39. [47]

    R., Haworth, T

    Teague, R., Jankovic, M. R., Haworth, T. J., Qi, C., & Ilee, J. D. 2020, MNRAS, 495, 451, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staa1167 van der Marel, N., van Dishoeck, E. F., Bruderer, S., et al. 2013, Science, 340, 1199, doi: 10.1126/science.1236770 van der Marel, N., Birnstiel, T., Garufi, A...

    2020 doi

  40. [48]

    Villenave, M., M´ enard, F., Dent, W. R. F., et al. 2020, A&A, 642, A164, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202038087

    2020 doi

  41. [49]

    P., & Cieza, L

    Williams, J. P., & Cieza, L. A. 2011, ARA&A, 49, 67, doi: 10.1146/annurev-astro-081710-102548

    2011 doi

  42. [50]

    J., & Welch, W

    Wilner, D. J., & Welch, W. J. 1994, ApJ, 427, 898, doi: 10.1086/174195

    1994 doi

  43. [51]

    Xu, W., Ohashi, S., Aso, Y., & Liu, H. B. 2023, ApJ, 954, 190, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aced4c

    2023 doi

  44. [52]

    2023, ApJL, 948, L2, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/acccf8

    Yang, H., Fern´ andez-L´ opez, M., Li, Z.-Y., et al. 2023, ApJL, 948, L2, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/acccf8

    2023 doi

Pith tools

Reviewed August 6, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.