Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 332

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 75 of the 75 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Atmospheric Parameters of Field L and T Dwarfs1

Open access
Cushing, Michael C., Marley, Mark S., Saumon, D., Kelly, Brandon C., Vacca, William D., Rayner, John T., Freedman, Richard S., Lodders, Katharina, Roellig, Thomas L.·2008·The Astrophysical Journal

Abstract

We present an analysis of the 0.95-14.5 μm spectral energy distributions of nine field ultracool dwarfs with spectral types ranging from L1 to T4.5. Effective temperatures, gravities, and condensate cloud sedimentation efficiencies are derived by comparing the data to synthetic spectra computed from atmospheric models that self-consistently include the formation of condensate clouds. Overall, the model spectra fit the data well, although the agreement at some wavelengths remains poor due to remaining inadequacies in the models. Derived effective temperatures decrease steadily through the L1-T4.5 spectral types, and we confirm that the effective temperatures of ultracool dwarfs at the L/T transition are nearly constant, decreasing by only ~200 K from spectral types L7.5 to T4.5. The condensate cloud properties vary significantly among the L dwarfs in our sample, ranging from very thick clouds to relatively thin clouds with no particular trend with spectral type. The two objects in our sample with very red J − K s colors are, however, best fitted with synthetic spectra that have thick clouds, which hints at a possible correlation between the near-infrared colors of L dwarfs and the condensate cloud properties. The fits to the two T dwarfs in our sample (T2 and T4.5) also suggest that the clouds become thinner in this spectral class, in agreement with previous studies. Restricting the fits to narrower wavelength ranges (i.e., individual photometric bands) almost always yields excellent agreement between the data and models. Limitations in our knowledge of the opacities of key absorbers such as FeH, VO, and CH 4 at certain wavelengths remain obvious, however. The effective temperatures obtained by fitting the narrower wavelength ranges can show a large scatter compared to the values derived by fitting the full spectral energy distributions; deviations are typically ~200 K and, in the worst cases, up to 700 K.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1086/526489

Cites

75 of 75 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 75 references

Cited by

See all 332

Metadata

Authors
Cushing, M. C., Marley, M. S., Saumon, D., Kelly, B. C., Vacca, W. D., Rayner, J. T., Freedman, R. S., Lodders, K., & Roellig, T. L.
Venue
The Astrophysical Journal
Published
2008-05-10
Volume
678
Issue
2
Pages
1372-1395
ISSN
  • 0004-637X (ISSN-L)
  • 1538-4357
OpenAlex
W1994666239
Cited by
332
References
75
FWCI
15.33
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Atmospheric Parameters of Field L and T Dwarfs1. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1086/526489
The paper
Cushing, M. C., Marley, M. S., Saumon, D., Kelly, B. C., Vacca, W. D., Rayner, J. T., Freedman, R. S., Lodders, K., & Roellig, T. L. (2008). Atmospheric Parameters of Field L and T Dwarfs1. The Astrophysical Journal. https://doi.org/10.1086/526489

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.