Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 223

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 access
Shetty, Rahul, Kauffmann, Jens, Schnee, Scott, Goodman, Alyssa A., Ercolano, Barbara·2009·The Astrophysical Journal

Abstract

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.

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

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1088/0004-637x/696/2/2234

Cites

1 of 1 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 1 references

Cited by

See all 223

Metadata

Authors
Shetty, R., Kauffmann, J., Schnee, S., Goodman, A. A., & Ercolano, B.
Venue
The Astrophysical Journal
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.