MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4416652161 · doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202556063

FAUST

2025· article· en· W4416652161 on OpenAlexafffund
María José Maureira, J. E. Pineda, Hauyu Baobab Liu, P. Caselli, C. Chandler, L. Testi, Doug Johnstone, Dominique Segura-Cox, L. Loinard, E. Bianchi, C. Codella, A. Miotello, L. Podio, Luca Cacciapuoti, Yoko Oya, A. Lopez-Sepulcre, Nami Sakai, Z. Zhang, Nicolás Cuello, Satoshi Ohashi, Yuri Aikawa, G. Sabatini, Yichen Zhang, C. Ceccarelli, Satoshi Yamamoto

Bibliographic record

VenueAstronomy and Astrophysics · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAstrophysics and Star Formation Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of VictoriaHerzberg Institute of Astrophysics
FundersHORIZON EUROPE European Research CouncilEuropean CommissionNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNextGenerationEUHORIZON EUROPE Framework ProgrammeMax Planck Instituut voor Psycholinguïstiek
KeywordsProtostarSpectral indexBrightnessCircumstellar diskRADIUSWavelengthOpacityMillimeterLuminosity

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Measuring the properties of disks around Class 0/I protostars is crucial for understanding protostellar assembly and early planet formation. We present high-resolution (~7.5 au) ALMA continuum observations at 1.3 and 3 mm of 16 disks around Class 0/I protostars across multiple star-forming regions (Taurus, Ophiuchus, and Corona Australis) and a variety of multiplicities. Our observations show a wide range of deconvolved disk sizes (~2–100 au) and the presence of circumbinary disks (CBDs) in all binaries with separations <100 au. The measured properties show similarities to Class II disks, including (a) low spectral index values ( α disks = 2.1 −0.3 +0.5 ) that increase with disk radius, (b) 3 mm disk sizes only marginally smaller than at 1.3 mm (<10%), and (c) radial intensity morphologies well described by modified self-similar profiles. However, there are some key differences: (i) the α 1.3-3 mm values increase monotonically with radius but exceed two only at the disk edge; (ii) higher brightness temperatures, T b , comparable to or higher than the predicted midplane temperatures due to irradiation; and (iii) an approximately ten times higher luminosity at a given size compared to the Class II disks. Together, the results confirm significant optical depth in the observed Class 0/I disks, most with T bol < 200 K, at both 1.3 and 3 mm. Assuming fully optically thick disks at these wavelengths can explain the higher luminosities compared with Class II disks, but the most compact (≲40 au) disks also require higher temperatures, suggesting additional heating from viscous accretion. Taking into account the high optical depths, most disk dust masses are estimated in the range 30–900 M ⊕ (or 0.01–0.3 M ⊙ in gas), with some disks potentially reaching marginal gravitational instability. Based on the elevated T b 1.3 mm , the median location of the water iceline is ~3 au, but this location can extend to more than 10–20 au for the hottest disks in the sample. The CBDs exhibit lower optical depths at both wavelengths and hence higher spectral index values ( τ 3 mm ≲ 1, α CBD = 3.0 −0.3 +0.2 ), dust masses of ~10 2 M ⊕ , and dust emissivity indices of β CBD ~ 1.5 (two Class 0 CBDs) and ~1 (one Class I CBD), suggesting substantial grain growth only in the more evolved CBD. The high optical depths inferred from our analysis provide a compelling explanation for the apparent scarcity of dust substructures in the younger Class 0/I disks at ~1 mm despite the mounting evidence of early planet formation.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.620
Threshold uncertainty score0.000

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0050.003
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.6200.584

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.

Opus teacher head0.006
GPT teacher head0.221
Teacher spread0.215 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAstronomy and Astrophysics→Same topicAstrophysics and Star Formation Studies→French-language works237,207→