Perturbers: SPHERE detection limits to planetary-mass companions in protoplanetary disks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The detection of a wide range of substructures such as rings, cavities, and spirals has become a common outcome of high spatial resolution imaging of protoplanetary disks, both in the near-infrared scattered light and in the thermal millimetre continuum emission. The most frequent interpretation of their origin is the presence of planetary-mass companions perturbing the gas and dust distribution in the disk (perturbers), but so far the only bona fide detection has been the two giant planets carving the disk around PDS 70. Here, we present a sample of 15 protoplanetary disks showing substructures in SPHERE scattered-light images and a homogeneous derivation of planet detection limits in these systems. To obtain mass limits we rely on different post-formation luminosity models based on distinct formation conditions, which are critical in the first million years of evolution. We also estimate the mass of these perturbers through a Hill radius prescription and a comparison to ALMA data. Assuming that one single planet carves each substructure in scattered light, we find that more massive perturbers are needed to create gaps within cavities than rings, and that we might be close to a detection in the cavities of RX J1604.3-2130A, RX J1615.3-3255, Sz Cha, HD 135344B, and HD 34282. We reach typical mass limits in these cavities of 3–10 MJup. For planets in the gaps between rings, we find that the detection limits of SPHERE high-contrast imaging are about an order of magnitude away in mass, and that the gaps of PDS 66 and HD 97048 seem to be the most promising structures for planet searches. The proposed presence of massive planets causing spiral features in HD 135344B and HD 36112 are also within SPHERE’s reach assuming hot-start models. These results suggest that the current detection limits are able to detect hot-start planets in cavities, under the assumption that they are formed by a single perturber located at the centre of the cavity. More realistic planet mass constraints would help to clarify whether this is actually the case, which might indicate that perturbers are not the only way of creating substructures.
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 | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".