adsabs/AstroCLIMB huggingface dataset:
Paper: The Solar Probe ANalyzer—Ions on the Parker Solar Probe
Authors: Roberto Livi, Davin E. Larson, Justin C. Kasper, Robert Abiad, A. W. Case, Kristopher G. Klein, David W. Curtis, Gregory Dalton, Michael Stevens, Kelly E. Korreck, George Ho, Miles Robinson, Chris Tiu, Phyllis L. Whittlesey, Jaye L. Verniero, Jasper Halekas, James McFadden, Mario Marckwordt, Amanda Slagle, Mamuda Abatcha, Ali Rahmati, Michael D. McManus
Figure caption: Mass per charge resolution of individual ion species obtained during ground calibration. A clear separation between H+ and ﹩{{\rm{H}}}_{2}^{+}﹩ is visible by up to 4 orders of magnitude, which is optimal for separating the 3D velocity distribution function of the solar wind into protons (m/q = 1) and He++ (m/q = 2). The TOF system is also capable of measuring higher-mass species such as CO and CO2.
Paper: The Solar Probe ANalyzer—Ions on the Parker Solar Probe
Authors: Roberto Livi, Davin E. Larson, Justin C. Kasper, Robert Abiad, A. W. Case, Kristopher G. Klein, David W. Curtis, Gregory Dalton, Michael Stevens, Kelly E. Korreck, George Ho, Miles Robinson, Chris Tiu, Phyllis L. Whittlesey, Jaye L. Verniero, Jasper Halekas, James McFadden, Mario Marckwordt, Amanda Slagle, Mamuda Abatcha, Ali Rahmati, Michael D. McManus
Figure caption: Sample sweep diagram for a Full (top) and a subsequent Targeted (bottom) sweep. The black circles represent 4096 possible combinations of the hemisphere and both deflectors settings. The blue line shows the path that the sweep takes, beginning with deflector voltages (and microstepping) and then stepping by hemisphere voltage. Once the Full/coarse sweep is complete, a Targeted sweep around the peak value (in this case red crosses) is performed.
Paper: The Solar Probe ANalyzer—Ions on the Parker Solar Probe
Authors: Roberto Livi, Davin E. Larson, Justin C. Kasper, Robert Abiad, A. W. Case, Kristopher G. Klein, David W. Curtis, Gregory Dalton, Michael Stevens, Kelly E. Korreck, George Ho, Miles Robinson, Chris Tiu, Phyllis L. Whittlesey, Jaye L. Verniero, Jasper Halekas, James McFadden, Mario Marckwordt, Amanda Slagle, Mamuda Abatcha, Ali Rahmati, Michael D. McManus
Figure caption: Left: Normalized instrument response function for each anode, where both the START and STOP anodes are displayed. STOP anodes 0–9 are paired with a single START anode in order to increase the angular resolution. For higher-resolution anodes, the effects of cross talk are enhanced relative to the larger anodes. Right: START (red) and STOP (blue) TOF efficiencies for all anodes.
Paper: The Solar Probe ANalyzer—Ions on the Parker Solar Probe
Authors: Roberto Livi, Davin E. Larson, Justin C. Kasper, Robert Abiad, A. W. Case, Kristopher G. Klein, David W. Curtis, Gregory Dalton, Michael Stevens, Kelly E. Korreck, George Ho, Miles Robinson, Chris Tiu, Phyllis L. Whittlesey, Jaye L. Verniero, Jasper Halekas, James McFadden, Mario Marckwordt, Amanda Slagle, Mamuda Abatcha, Ali Rahmati, Michael D. McManus
Figure caption: Left figure: Back side of each individual board that is part of the electronics box. The top row shows the anode board, the digital board, and the high-voltage board. The bottom row shows the second high-voltage board, the low-voltage power supply, and the backplane. Right figure: Front side of each individual board in the same configuration as in the figure to the left.
Paper: The Solar Probe ANalyzer—Ions on the Parker Solar Probe
Authors: Roberto Livi, Davin E. Larson, Justin C. Kasper, Robert Abiad, A. W. Case, Kristopher G. Klein, David W. Curtis, Gregory Dalton, Michael Stevens, Kelly E. Korreck, George Ho, Miles Robinson, Chris Tiu, Phyllis L. Whittlesey, Jaye L. Verniero, Jasper Halekas, James McFadden, Mario Marckwordt, Amanda Slagle, Mamuda Abatcha, Ali Rahmati, Michael D. McManus
Figure caption: Ground calibration of the travel time for different ion species over the 2 cm TOF gap with an energy of 1 keV (red plus symbols). In addition, three SRIM/TRIM simulations are presented: travel time for 1 keV particles passing through a carbon foil thickness of 0.5 μg cm−2 (purple), 1.0 μg cm−2 (blue), and 1.5 μg cm−2 (light blue). The travel time with no carbon foils is presented in black. The results from calibration match a thickness of 1.0 μg cm−2.
Paper: The Solar Probe ANalyzer—Ions on the Parker Solar Probe
Authors: Roberto Livi, Davin E. Larson, Justin C. Kasper, Robert Abiad, A. W. Case, Kristopher G. Klein, David W. Curtis, Gregory Dalton, Michael Stevens, Kelly E. Korreck, George Ho, Miles Robinson, Chris Tiu, Phyllis L. Whittlesey, Jaye L. Verniero, Jasper Halekas, James McFadden, Mario Marckwordt, Amanda Slagle, Mamuda Abatcha, Ali Rahmati, Michael D. McManus
Figure caption: Proton measurements for all of Encounter 2. The top panel shows the energy per charge summed over all look directions, the second panel shows the flux in elevation (deflector sweep), the third panel shows the azimuthal flux (anodes), and the last panel shows the distance from the Sun in million kilometers. The vertical black line marks the time of the data presented in Figure 12.
Paper: The Solar Probe ANalyzer—Ions on the Parker Solar Probe
Authors: Roberto Livi, Davin E. Larson, Justin C. Kasper, Robert Abiad, A. W. Case, Kristopher G. Klein, David W. Curtis, Gregory Dalton, Michael Stevens, Kelly E. Korreck, George Ho, Miles Robinson, Chris Tiu, Phyllis L. Whittlesey, Jaye L. Verniero, Jasper Halekas, James McFadden, Mario Marckwordt, Amanda Slagle, Mamuda Abatcha, Ali Rahmati, Michael D. McManus
Figure caption: Block diagram of the SPAN-I sensor, including ESA, TOF, and individual components of the electronics box.
Paper: The Solar Probe ANalyzer—Ions on the Parker Solar Probe
Authors: Roberto Livi, Davin E. Larson, Justin C. Kasper, Robert Abiad, A. W. Case, Kristopher G. Klein, David W. Curtis, Gregory Dalton, Michael Stevens, Kelly E. Korreck, George Ho, Miles Robinson, Chris Tiu, Phyllis L. Whittlesey, Jaye L. Verniero, Jasper Halekas, James McFadden, Mario Marckwordt, Amanda Slagle, Mamuda Abatcha, Ali Rahmati, Michael D. McManus
Figure caption: Energy scan of anodes 0, 1, 2, and 3. Ion gun energies are swept from 1200 eV down to zero while the instrument sweeps in energy logarithmically from 5 eV to 20 keV. The ion gun energy is overplotted in blue. Top: Targeted product. Bottom: Full product.
Paper: The Solar Probe ANalyzer—Ions on the Parker Solar Probe
Authors: Roberto Livi, Davin E. Larson, Justin C. Kasper, Robert Abiad, A. W. Case, Kristopher G. Klein, David W. Curtis, Gregory Dalton, Michael Stevens, Kelly E. Korreck, George Ho, Miles Robinson, Chris Tiu, Phyllis L. Whittlesey, Jaye L. Verniero, Jasper Halekas, James McFadden, Mario Marckwordt, Amanda Slagle, Mamuda Abatcha, Ali Rahmati, Michael D. McManus
Figure caption: Left: Energy–angle diagram showing the response function of the sensor to a 480 eV ion beam. The instrument simulations are overplotted in black dashed lines. Right: SPAN-I voltage sweep k-factor for all 16 anodes. The red dashed line represents the simulated value of 16.7.
Paper: Breaking Correlation in the Inflow Parameters of Interstellar Neutral Gas in Direct-sampling Observations
Authors: M. Bzowski, M. A. Kubiak, E. Möbius, N. A. Schwadron
Figure caption: Breaking the parameter correlation using the indirect beam of ISN He. The upper-left panel presents the correlation tube for the IBEX viewing conditions, repeated from Figure 2, and a correlation tube obtained for the indirect beam of ISN He simulated for an interval of DOYs 305–321. The two tubes intersect at an angle sufficiently large for constraining the direction and speed of ISN He tightly. The upper-right panel demonstrates that the magnitude of the indirect flux is within the capability of an IMAP-like instrument. Presented are the maxima of the indirect fluxes simulated for individual DOYs for the three correlated parameter sets listed in the first three rows of Table 1. These fluxes are normalized to the maximum of the respective fluxes for the IBEX viewing conditions. The lower row of panels presents normalized fluxes for the three correlated parameter sets, simulated for selected five DOYs from the indirect beam observation window. For these simulations, the normalization is done to the maximum of the fluxes for individual cases for the presented DOYs, i.e., it is different to that used in the upper-right panel.
Paper: Breaking Correlation in the Inflow Parameters of Interstellar Neutral Gas in Direct-sampling Observations
Authors: M. Bzowski, M. A. Kubiak, E. Möbius, N. A. Schwadron
Figure caption: Simulated flux of ISN O for selected DOYs and the correlated inflow parameters listed in the first three rows in Table 1. The format of the figure is identical to that of Figure 6. The fluxes for the three presented cases are normalized to their respective maximum values. A threshold of the absolute flux of 10 cm−2 s−1 was applied. The elongation angles were selected according to a stepwise adjustment scenario with the elongation angles and DOYs listed in individual panels.
Paper: Breaking Correlation in the Inflow Parameters of Interstellar Neutral Gas in Direct-sampling Observations
Authors: M. Bzowski, M. A. Kubiak, E. Möbius, N. A. Schwadron
Figure caption: Maximum values of the absolute flux of the ISN Ne and O at an instrument orbiting the Sun at 1 au, simulated for selected DOYs assuming two alternative scenarios for adjusting the inclination of the instrument boresight to the Sun-oriented spacecraft spin axis: following the peak or stepwise, with the boresight elongation angle identical to that used in Figure 11.
Paper: Breaking Correlation in the Inflow Parameters of Interstellar Neutral Gas in Direct-sampling Observations
Authors: M. Bzowski, M. A. Kubiak, E. Möbius, N. A. Schwadron
Figure caption: Simulations of the normalized flux of ISN He for selected DOYs during the year for the three parameter sets correlated by the Mach number (lines 1, 4, and 5 in Table 1; black, green, and purple, respectively). The upper set of lines (dots) represents the “follow the peak” scenario (1) of adjusting the instrument boresight elongation angle ε, with the elongations listed in the individual panels. This set was scaled up by a factor of two to visually separate it from the other set of simulations. Squares represent the “stepwise adjustment” scenario (2).
Paper: Breaking Correlation in the Inflow Parameters of Interstellar Neutral Gas in Direct-sampling Observations
Authors: M. Bzowski, M. A. Kubiak, E. Möbius, N. A. Schwadron
Figure caption: Simulated flux of ISN O for selected DOYs and the correlated inflow parameters listed in the first three rows in Table 1. The format of the figure is identical to that of Figure 5. The fluxes for the three presented cases are normalized to their respective maximum values. A threshold of the absolute flux of 10 cm−2 s−1 was applied. The elongation angles were selected according to the “follow the peak” scenario.
Paper: Breaking Correlation in the Inflow Parameters of Interstellar Neutral Gas in Direct-sampling Observations
Authors: M. Bzowski, M. A. Kubiak, E. Möbius, N. A. Schwadron
Figure caption: Two series of the normalized flux of ISN He for selected DOYs, corresponding to the IBEX ISN observation season, concerning the correlation between the speed and the temperature by the Mach number. The format is similar to that used in Figure 5. The figure illustrates the parameter correlation by the Mach number of the flow. The purple line corresponds to the parameters listed in the last (fifth) line in Table 1, the green line to those listed in the fourth line, and the black lines are identical to the black lines from Figure 5.
Paper: Polarized Image of a Rotating Black Hole in Scalar–Tensor–Vector–Gravity Theory
Authors: Xin Qin, Songbai Chen, Zelin Zhang, Jiliang Jing
Figure caption: Effects of the MOG parameter α on the Q − U diagram for different observation inclination angle θ  o  in the Kerr–MOG black hole (3). Here r  s  = 6, a = −0.3, β  ν  = 0.3, and χ = −90°. The top and bottom rows represent the equatorial and vertical magnetic field, respectively. The blue dashed line and the red solid line correspond to the cases with the MOG parameter α = 9 and α = 0, respectively. Black crosshairs indicate the origin of each plot.
Paper: Polarized Image of a Rotating Black Hole in Scalar–Tensor–Vector–Gravity Theory
Authors: Xin Qin, Songbai Chen, Zelin Zhang, Jiliang Jing
Figure caption: Effects of the MOG parameter α on the polarized vector and EVPA in the Kerr–MOG black hole spacetime (3) for different θ  o  in the case where magnetic field has only the vertical component B  θ . Here r  s  = 6, a = −0.3, β  ν  = 0.3, χ = −90°, and B  θ  = 1.
Paper: Polarized Image of a Rotating Black Hole in Scalar–Tensor–Vector–Gravity Theory
Authors: Xin Qin, Songbai Chen, Zelin Zhang, Jiliang Jing
Figure caption: Effects of the MOG parameter α on the Q − U diagram for different equatorial magnetic fields in the Kerr–MOG black hole (3). Here r  s  = 6, θ  o  = 20°, a = −0.3, β  ν  = 0.3, and χ = −90°. The blue dashed line and the red solid line correspond to the cases with the MOG parameter α = 9 and α = 0, respectively. Black crosshairs indicate the origin of each plot.
Paper: Polarized Image of a Rotating Black Hole in Scalar–Tensor–Vector–Gravity Theory
Authors: Xin Qin, Songbai Chen, Zelin Zhang, Jiliang Jing
Figure caption: Effects of the MOG parameter α on the polarized vector and EVPA in the Kerr–MOG black hole spacetime (3) for different a in the case with the magnetic field owned only the vertical component B  θ . Here r  s  = 6, θ  o  = 20°, χ = −90°, β  ν  = 0.3, and B  θ  = 1.
Paper: Polarized Image of a Rotating Black Hole in Scalar–Tensor–Vector–Gravity Theory
Authors: Xin Qin, Songbai Chen, Zelin Zhang, Jiliang Jing
Figure caption: Effects of the spin parameter a on the Q − U diagram for different magnetic fields in the Kerr–MOG black hole (3). Here r  s  = 6, θ  o  = 20°, α = 9, β  ν  = 0.3, and χ = −90°. Black crosshairs indicate the origin of each plot.
Paper: Polarized Image of a Rotating Black Hole in Scalar–Tensor–Vector–Gravity Theory
Authors: Xin Qin, Songbai Chen, Zelin Zhang, Jiliang Jing
Figure caption: Effects of the MOG parameter α on the Q − U diagram for different fluid velocity angle χ in the Kerr–MOG black hole (3). Here r  s  = 6, θ  o  = 20°, a = −0.3, and β  ν  = 0.3. The top and bottom rows correspond to the equatorial magnetic field and the vertical one, respectively. The blue dashed line and the red solid line correspond to the cases with the MOG parameter α = 9 and α = 0, respectively. Black crosshairs indicate the origin of each plot.
Paper: Polarized Image of a Rotating Black Hole in Scalar–Tensor–Vector–Gravity Theory
Authors: Xin Qin, Songbai Chen, Zelin Zhang, Jiliang Jing
Figure caption: Comparison between the polarimetric image of Kerr–MOG black hole and the black hole M87* (Akiyama et al. 2021a, 2021b). Here θ = 17°, β  ν  = 0.4, χ = −150°, B  r  = 0.87, B  ϕ  = 0.5, and B  θ  = 0.
Paper: Polarized Image of a Rotating Black Hole in Scalar–Tensor–Vector–Gravity Theory
Authors: Xin Qin, Songbai Chen, Zelin Zhang, Jiliang Jing
Figure caption: Effects of the MOG parameter α on the polarized vector and EVPA in the Kerr–MOG black hole spacetime (3) for different χ in the case where magnetic field has only the vertical component B  θ . Here r  s  = 6, a = −0.3, θ  o  = 20°, β  ν  = 0.3, and B  θ  = 1.
Paper: Milky Way's Eccentric Constituents with Gaia, APOGEE, and GALAH
Authors: G. C. Myeong, Vasily Belokurov, David S. Aguado, N. Wyn Evans, Nelson Caldwell, James Bradley
Figure caption: Distribution of the Galaxy’s eccentric populations in APOGEE–Gaia sample in chemodynamical spaces. The GMM identified components are marked with 2σ ellipses. The Splash and Aurora are marked with magenta and red, respectively. The GS/E (GS/E1 and GS/E2 enclosing the metal-richer and metal-poorer portion) components are marked with green and yellow. Eos is marked with blue. Two background components with low weight and no clear physical trend are marked with cyan and navy. The modeled distribution for each component and the total sum (black line) is marked with a one-dimensional histogram along each dimension at the top and the right side of each panel, together with the background histogram marking the distribution of the stars used for the GMM. The weight of each component is marked in the upper right corner of each panel. The two-dimensional density histogram of the whole APOGEE–Gaia data set is shown as a grayscale background as a reference. Each panel shows a different two-dimensional projection of the original six-dimensional chemodynamical space used for the GMM: (a) [α/Fe] vs. [Fe/H]; (b) scaled energy vs. [Fe/H]; (c) scaled energy vs. [Al/Fe]; (d) [Ce/Fe] vs. [Fe/H]; (e) [Al/Fe] vs. [Fe/H]; (f) [Mg/Mn] vs. [Al/Fe].
Paper: Milky Way's Eccentric Constituents with Gaia, APOGEE, and GALAH
Authors: G. C. Myeong, Vasily Belokurov, David S. Aguado, N. Wyn Evans, Nelson Caldwell, James Bradley
Figure caption: Red (blue) curves show AIC (BIC) performance for the APOGEE sample as a function of the number of Gaussian components. For each number of components, the GMM fit is performed a large number of times starting from random initial conditions to ensure convergence and to investigate scatter in obtained solutions. For each number of components probed, the solid line gives the lowest (best) AIC/BIC score, the dashed line corresponds to the median, and the dotted line corresponds to the highest score. The BIC test indicates the GMM with seven Gaussian components as the optimal case. The zoom-in panel shows the BIC result around the best score.
Paper: GW170817 4.5 Yr After Merger: Dynamical Ejecta Afterglow Constraints
Authors: Arvind Balasubramanian, Alessandra Corsi, Kunal P. Mooley, Kenta Hotokezaka, David L. Kaplan, Dale A. Frail, Gregg Hallinan, Davide Lazzati, Eric J. Murphy
Figure caption: 3 GHz radio light curve of GW170817 with the best-fit structured jet model from Makhathini et al. 2021. The radio data are shown as black data points. The Chandra 1 keV data scaled to 3 GHz with a power-law index of β = −0.584 (including the latest measurement by O’Connor & Troja 2022) are shown as purple squares (see, e.g., Haggard et al. 2017; Margutti et al. 2017; Troja et al. 2017, 2022; Hajela et al. 2022, and references therein). We extrapolate all X-ray data to 3 GHz using β = −0.584 because there is only marginal evidence for a potential spectral flattening around 3.5 yr since the merger (Balasubramanian et al. 2021; Hajela et al. 2022) which, however, has not been confirmed in later observations by O’Connor & Troja (2022). Our previous observation 3.5 yr since the merger is marked with a red star (Balasubramanian et al. 2021). The 3σ upper limit from this work is shown as red a downward pointing triangle.
Paper: A Mildly Relativistic Outflow Launched Two Years after Disruption in Tidal Disruption Event AT2018hyz
Authors: Y. Cendes, E. Berger, K. D. Alexander, S. Gomez, A. Hajela, R. Chornock, T. Laskar, R. Margutti, B. Metzger, M. F. Bietenholz, D. Brethauer, M. H. Wieringa
Figure caption: Energy/velocity for the AT2018 spherical case and jetted case; note that in both cases the energy increases over time. We include nonrelativistic TDEs assuming a spherical outflow (Alexander et al. 2016, 2017; Anderson et al. 2019; Cendes et al. 2021a; Stein et al. 2021; Goodwin et al. 2022) and Sw J1644+57, which launched a relativistic jet (Zauderer et al. 2011; Cendes et al. 2021b). In the case of AT2019dsg, we display the highest energy inferred in the system. In the case of AT2019azh, which showed significant fluctuations in the final energy due to changes in p in some later observations (Goodwin et al. 2022), we show the energy and velocity at the peak flux in the luminosity curve adjusted to ϵ  B  = 0.1. For ASASSN-15oi, we use the observation with the highest peak frequency and peak flux (182 days) ϵ  B  = 0.1 and p = 2.39, which best fit the SED at the highest peak flux observation at 182 days post disruption, and infer the velocity by subtracting 90 days (the last date of nondetection; see Horesh et al. 2021a). We find AT2018hyz is more energetic than the nonrelativistic outflow TDEs and has a higher velocity.
Paper: GW170817 4.5 Yr After Merger: Dynamical Ejecta Afterglow Constraints
Authors: Arvind Balasubramanian, Alessandra Corsi, Kunal P. Mooley, Kenta Hotokezaka, David L. Kaplan, Dale A. Frail, Gregg Hallinan, Davide Lazzati, Eric J. Murphy
Figure caption: Image of the GW170817 field at ≈4.5 yr since the merger, as derived from our deepest co-added data set (see Table 2). The small circle has a radius of 2.″1 and is centered on the position of GW170817. The larger circle has a radius of 21″, equal to the radius of the circular region used to calculate our rms sensitivity in the residual image of the field. The host galaxy of GW170817 is enclosed in this larger circular region. Several sources unrelated to GW170817 are also visible. The synthesized beam ellipse is shown in the bottom left. The color bar gives the flux density in Jy.
Paper: A Mildly Relativistic Outflow Launched Two Years after Disruption in Tidal Disruption Event AT2018hyz
Authors: Y. Cendes, E. Berger, K. D. Alexander, S. Gomez, A. Hajela, R. Chornock, T. Laskar, R. Margutti, B. Metzger, M. F. Bietenholz, D. Brethauer, M. H. Wieringa
Figure caption: Radio to millimeter spectral energy distributions ranging from 972 days to 1282 days. The gray lines are representative fits from our MCMC modeling (Section 4.1). It is apparent that the first four epochs exhibit a roughly constant peak frequency (≈1.5 GHz) and a steadily rising peak flux density, while the final epoch exhibits a rapid shift to a higher peak frequency of ≈3 GHz. VLA data at 972 days are combined with VAST data at 1013 days. VLA data at 1126 days are combined with ALMA data at 1141 days. VLA data at 1199 days are combined with ALMA data at 1201 days. VLA data at 1251 days are combined with ALMA data at 1253 days. MeerKAT data at 1282 days are combined with ATCA data at 1296 days.
Paper: A Mildly Relativistic Outflow Launched Two Years after Disruption in Tidal Disruption Event AT2018hyz
Authors: Y. Cendes, E. Berger, K. D. Alexander, S. Gomez, A. Hajela, R. Chornock, T. Laskar, R. Margutti, B. Metzger, M. F. Bietenholz, D. Brethauer, M. H. Wieringa
Figure caption: Circumnuclear density profile derived from various TDEs including AT2018hyz, normalized to the Schwarzschild radius of the SMBH at each host galaxy’s center. AT2018hyz’s host galaxy is lower density, similar to that seen in the jetted TDE SwJ1644+57 (Berger et al. 2012; Zauderer et al. 2013; Eftekhari et al. 2018) and M87 (Russell et al. 2015). We also include nonrelativistic TDEs (e.g., ASASSN-14li, Alexander et al. 2016; AT2019dsg, Cendes et al. 2021a; AT2019azh, Goodwin et al. 2022; ASASSN-15oi, Horesh et al. 2021a), and for the Milky Way (Baganoff et al. 2003; Gillessen et al. 2019). Other than for AT2019dsg and Sw J1644+57, where the cooling break is detected, we assume equipartition in all radio TDEs, so their densities are lower limits.
Paper: A Mildly Relativistic Outflow Launched Two Years after Disruption in Tidal Disruption Event AT2018hyz
Authors: Y. Cendes, E. Berger, K. D. Alexander, S. Gomez, A. Hajela, R. Chornock, T. Laskar, R. Margutti, B. Metzger, M. F. Bietenholz, D. Brethauer, M. H. Wieringa
Figure caption: Radius evolution of the outflow for the spherical (blue) and jet (orange) geometries (Table 3), assuming equipartition. We fit a linear trend (i.e., free expansion) to these data to determine the launch time of the outflow (green lines) and its uncertainty (gray shaded regions mark the 1σrange), excluding the observation at 1282 days (open circle) for reasons outlined in Section 4. We find that ﹩{t}_{0,\mathrm{sphere}}={750}_{-127}^{+80}﹩ days and ﹩{t}_{0,\mathrm{jet}}={750}_{-113}^{+73}﹩ days relative to the time of optical discovery. We also mark the time of the final nondetection at 705 days for reference (vertical dashed line).