The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
THE EFFECT OF LINE-OF-SIGHT TEMPERATURE VARIATION AND NOISE ON DUST CONTINUUM OBSERVATIONS
Open accessAbstract
We investigate the effect of line-of-sight temperature variations and noise on two commonly used methods to determine dust properties from dust-continuum observations of dense cores. One method employs a direct fit to a modified blackbody spectral energy distribution (SED); the other involves a comparison of flux ratios to an analytical prediction. Fitting fluxes near the SED peak produces inaccurate temperature and dust spectral index estimates due to the line-of-sight temperature (and density) variations. Longer wavelength fluxes in the Rayleigh–Jeans part of the spectrum (≳ 600 μm for typical cores) may more accurately recover the spectral index, but both methods are very sensitive to noise. The temperature estimate approaches the density-weighted temperature, or "column temperature," of the source as short wavelength fluxes are excluded. An inverse temperature–spectral index correlation naturally results from SED fitting, due to the inaccurate isothermal assumption, as well as noise uncertainties. We show that above some "threshold" temperature, the temperatures estimated through the flux ratio method can be highly inaccurate. In general, observations with widely separated wavelengths, and including shorter wavelengths, result in higher threshold temperatures; such observations thus allow for more accurate temperature estimates of sources with temperatures less than the threshold temperature. When only three fluxes are available, a constrained fit, where the spectral index is fixed, produces less scatter in the temperature estimate when compared to the estimate from the flux ratio method.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
Schlegel, D. J., Finkbeiner, D. P., & Davis, M. (1998) · The Astrophysical Journal · doi:10.1086/305772 · Cited by 15,126
Cited by
Draine, B. T., Aniano, G., Krause, O., Groves, B., Sandstrom, K., Braun, R., Leroy, A., Klaas, U., Linz, H., Rix, H.-W., et al. (2013) · The Astrophysical Journal · doi:10.1088/0004-637x/780/2/172 · Cited by 462
Planck early results. XXIV. Dust in the diffuse interstellar medium and the Galactic halo
Planck Collaboration, Abergel, A., Ade, P. A. R., Aghanim, N., Arnaud, M., Ashdown, M., Aumont, J., Baccigalupi, C., Balbi, A., Banday, A. J., et al. (2011) · Astronomy & Astrophysics · doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201116485 · Cited by 229
THE HERSCHEL EXPLOITATION OF LOCAL GALAXY ANDROMEDA (HELGA). II. DUST AND GAS IN ANDROMEDA
Smith, M. W. L., Eales, S. A., Gomez, H. L., Roman-Duval, J., Fritz, J., Braun, R., Baes, M., Bendo, G. J., Blommaert, J. A. D. L., Boquien, M., et al. (2012) · The Astrophysical Journal · doi:10.1088/0004-637x/756/1/40 · Cited by 179
Groves, B., Krause, O., Sandstrom, K., Schmiedeke, A., Leroy, A., Linz, H., Kapala, M., Rix, H.-W., Schinnerer, E., Tabatabaei, F., et al. (2012) · Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society · doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2012.21696.x · Cited by 136
Metadata
- Authors
- Shetty, R., Kauffmann, J., Schnee, S., Goodman, A. A., & Ercolano, B.
- Venue
- The Astrophysical Journal
- Publisher
- American Astronomical Society
- Published
- 2009-04-29
- Volume
- 696
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 2234-2251
- ISSN
- 0004-637X (ISSN-L)
- 1538-4357
- OpenAlex
- W2145949657
- Cited by
- 223
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 8.91
- 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: THE EFFECT OF LINE-OF-SIGHT TEMPERATURE VARIATION AND NOISE ON DUST CONTINUUM OBSERVATIONS. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1088/0004-637x/696/2/2234
- The paper
- Shetty, R., Kauffmann, J., Schnee, S., Goodman, A. A., & Ercolano, B. (2009). THE EFFECT OF LINE-OF-SIGHT TEMPERATURE VARIATION AND NOISE ON DUST CONTINUUM OBSERVATIONS. The Astrophysical Journal. https://doi.org/10.1088/0004-637x/696/2/2234
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.