Probing X-ray photoevaporative winds through their interaction with ionizing radiation in cluster environments: the case for X-ray proplyds
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We show that if young low-mass stars are subject to vigorous X-ray driven disc winds, then such winds may be rendered detectable in cluster environments through their interaction with ionizing radiation from massive stars. In particular we argue that in the Orion nebula cluster (ONC) one expects to see of order tens of ‘X-ray proplyds’ (i.e. objects with offset ionization fronts detectable through optical imaging) in the range 0.3–0.6 pc from θ1C Ori (the dominant O star in the ONC). Objects at this distance lie outside the central ‘FUV zone’ in the ONC where proplyd structures are instead well explained by neutral winds driven by external far-ultraviolet (FUV) emission from θ1C Ori. We show that the predicted numbers and sizes of X-ray proplyds in this region are compatible with the numbers of proplyds observed and that this may also provide an explanation for at least some of the far flung proplyds observed in the Carina nebula. We compare the sizes of observed proplyds outside the FUV region of the ONC with model predictions based on the current observed X-ray luminosities of these sources (bearing in mind that the current size is actually set by the X-ray luminosity a few hundred years previously, corresponding to the flow time to the ionization front). We discuss whether variability on this time-scale can plausibly explain the proplyd size data on a case-by-case basis. We also calculate the predicted radio free–free emission signature of X-ray proplyds and show that this is readily detectable. Monitoring is, however, required in order to distinguish such emission from non-thermal radio emission from active coronae. We also predict that it is only at distances more than a parsec from θ1C Ori that the free–free emission signature of such offset ionized structures would be clearly distinguishable from an externally driven ionized disc wind. We argue that the fortuitous proximity of massive stars in the ONC can be used as a beacon to light up internally driven X-ray winds and that this represents a promising avenue for observational tests of the X-ray photoevaporation scenario.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".