Cited by 24Stellar, planetary, and galactic studiesAstrophysics and Star Formation StudiesAstronomy and Astrophysical Research

chronostar – II. Kinematic age and substructure of the Scorpius–Centaurus OB2 association

Open access
Žerjal, Maruša, Ireland, Michael J, Crundall, Timothy D, Krumholz, Mark R, Rains, Adam D·2023·Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society

Abstract

The nearest region of massive star formation – the Scorpius–Centaurus OB2 association (Sco–Cen) – is a local laboratory ideally suited to the study of a wide range of astrophysical phenomena. Precision astrometry from the Gaia mission has expanded the census of this region by an order of magnitude. However, Sco–Cen’s vastness and complex substructure make kinematic analysis of its traditional three regions, Upper Scorpius, Upper Centaurus-Lupus, and Lower Centaurus-Crux, challenging. Here, we use chronostar, a Bayesian tool for kinematic age determination, to carry out a new kinematic decomposition of Sco–Cen using full six-dimensional kinematic data. Our model identifies eight kinematically distinct components consisting of 8185 stars distributed in dense and diffuse groups, each with an independently fit kinematic age; we verify that these kinematic estimates are consistent with isochronal ages for K dwarfs. Both Upper Centaurus-Lupus and Lower Centaurus-Crux are split into two parts. The kinematic age of the component that includes PDS 70, one of the most well-studied systems currently forming planets, is 15 ± 3 Myr.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/mnras/stac3693

Cites

4 of 4 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The required mass for the power is consistent with the mass estimated for the Sco-Cen association.

    “The required mass is, in fact, quite consistent with the mass estimated for the Sco-Cen association (Damiani et al. 2019; Žerjal et al. 2023).”

    From The Fermi/eROSITA bubbles: a look into the nuclear outflow from the Milky Way (2024) · cites this paper as Žerjal et al. 2023

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Žerjal, M., Ireland, M. J., Crundall, T. D., Krumholz, M. R., & Rains, A. D.
Affiliations
  • Australian National University (AU)
  • University of Cologne (DE)
Corresponding author
Žerjal, Maruša
Venue
Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society
Published
2022-12-16
Volume
519
Issue
3
Pages
3992-4009
ISSN
  • 0035-8711 (ISSN-L)
  • 1365-2966
OpenAlex
W4313263503
Cited by
24
References
4
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 1
FWCI
2.30
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society (publishedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Funders
  • Australian Research Council (DP170102233, FT180100375)
  • European Regional Development Fund (PROID2020010052)
  • European Space Agency
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Astronomy and Astrophysics › Stellar, planetary, and galactic studies
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Astronomy and Astrophysics › Astrophysics and Star Formation Studies
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Instrumentation › Astronomy and Astrophysical Research
Keywords
kinematic decomposition, massive star formation, Upper Centaurus Lupus, Lower Centaurus Crux, Upper Scorpius, kinematic substructure, PDS 70, K dwarfs, isochronal ages, Gaia astrometry

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