arXiv Science⌕ Search

arXiv · 2610.20715

Planet forming disk populations and their connection to the environment

Abstract

Existing sub-mm observatories such as ALMA have provided statistics on the planet-forming mass reservoirs within circumstellar disks around stars in stellar clusters out to distances of $\sim$400pc. However, these disks are not where most planets form. Many stars, and hence planets, form in more massive clusters, which are only found at larger distances. Environmental conditions that affect disks - such as UV radiation field, ambient gaseous mass reservoir, and stellar density - change significantly as a function of cluster mass, implying that our current knowledge of the disk population from current facilities is severely biased. Characterising planet formation in stellar clusters towards the peak of the cluster mass function requires determining the distribution of planet forming disk masses out to $\sim$3kpc, which encapsulates the nearby parts of the Sagittarius arm of the Milky Way and contains multiple massive stellar clusters. ALMA2040 will provide the leap in sensitivity needed to move beyond detections of only a handful of disks and robustly measure the slope and median of the disk mass distribution at these distances. This will mark the transition from studying individual detections to population-level studies of planet formation across diverse cluster environments. This has synergy with existing and upcoming measurements of accretion rates in these distant clusters, which combined provide a measure of the accretion timescale, enabling us to distinguish various evolutionary pathways and assess how they depend on cluster mass and star-forming environment.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Thomas J. Haworth, Giovanni Rosotti, Carlo Manara, Richard Alexander, Rossella Anania, Til Birnstiel, Ryan Boyden, Nicolás Cuello, Ian Czekala, Vardan Elbakyan, Stefano Facchini, Fabiola Gerosa, Aashish Gupta, Dominika Itrich, Luke Keyte, Ágnes Kóspál, Giuseppe Lodato, Enrique Macias, Luca Matra, Rebecca Nealon, Sasha Paine, Danae Polychroni, Tyger Peake, Daniel Price, Lin Qiao, Álvaro Ribas, Sarah Sadavoy, Antranik A. Sefilian, Maxime Tanious, Sierk van Terwisga, Claudia Toci, Diego Turrini, Eduard Vorobyov, Catherine Walsh, Andrew Winter, Alice S. Booth, Liton Majumdar, Jenny Frediani. 2026-10-14. Planet forming disk populations and their connection to the environment. https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.20715

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

Using 23 Years of ACS/SBC Data to Understand Backgrounds: Significant Reductions in Expected Background Levels

We have used 23 years of Hubble Space Telescope ACS/SBC data to study what background levels are encountered in practice and how much they vary. The backgrounds vary considerably, with F115LP, F122M, F125LP, PR110L, and PR130L all showing over an order of magnitude of variation in background between observations, apparently due to changes in airglow. The F150LP and F165LP filters, which are dominated by dark rate, not airglow, exhibit a far smaller variation in backgrounds. For the filters where the background is generally dominated by airglow, the backgrounds measured from the data are significantly lower than what the ETC predicts (as of ETC v33.2). The ETC predictions for `average' airglow are greater than the median of our measured background values by factors of 2.51, 2.64, 105, and 3.64, for F115LP, F122M, F125LP, and F140LP, respectively. A preliminary analysis suggests this could be due to certain OI airglow lines usually being fainter than expected by the ETC. With reduced reduced background levels, the shorter-wavelength SBC filters can conduct background-limited observations much more rapidly than had previously been expected. As of ETC v34.1, a new option will be included for SBC calculations, allowing users to employ empirical background percentiles to estimate required exposure times.

astro-ph.IM↗

Using 23 Years of ACS/SBC Data to Understand Backgrounds: Explaining & Predicting Background Variations

Recent analysis of 23 years of Hubble Space Telescope ACS/SBC data has shown that background levels can vary considerably between observations, with most filters showing over an order of magnitude variation. For the shorter-wavelength filters, the background is understood to be dominated by airglow; however, what precisely drives background variations is not well constrained for any filter. Here, we explore the causes of the background variation. Using over 8,000 archival SBC observations, we developed a machine learning model that can accurately predict the background for an observation, based upon a set of 23 observational parameters. This model indicates that, depending on filter, the SBC background is generally dominated by Solar elevation, Solar separation angle, Earth limb angle of observation, SBC temperature, and target Galactic latitude.

astro-ph.IM↗

Beyond the BLUE I: the advantage ceiling - how much can any estimator beat the matched filter in mm/submm survey data?

Papers claiming that convolutional neural networks outperform the matched filter are now common in astronomy. Since that filter is the best linear unbiased estimator (BLUE) for any noise of given covariance, and the minimum-variance unbiased estimator under Gaussian noise, such a claim requires that the noise covariance varies from image to image or the noise is non-Gaussian. We introduce the advantage ceiling eta >= 1, which quantifies both cases: the Fisher information for the amplitude in units of the matched filter's, computable from noise-only simulations before any network is trained, and a bound on the variance of any estimator unbiased at each true amplitude. We compute eta for a suite of millimeter/submillimeter survey noise models and for compact and extended source templates, using a variational score-matching ladder whose rungs are estimator classes of increasing statistical order, from linear to convolutional. With an instrumental white-noise floor, Gaussian noise returns eta = 0.94-1.06 (+-0.04); covariance mixtures give exact ceilings of 10.2 (spectral tilt, extended source), 2.1 (leaked components) and 1.1-1.8 otherwise; residual artifacts give eta <= 1.09. Source confusion gives the largest advantage, eta >= 3.8 (extended) and >= 2.4 (compact). Three unmodelled channels - a zeroed DC mode, a missing white floor and floating-point rounding - can manufacture spurious advantages of up to two orders of magnitude. A ResNet regressor is 6-15% less efficient than the matched filter on Gaussian noise once prior shrinkage is divided out, and realizes a factor 1.8 of the 10.2 available on the spectral-tilt mixture; a companion paper tests such regressors against these ceilings.

astro-ph.IM↗