adsabs/AstroCLIMB huggingface dataset:
Paper: Memoirs of Mass Accretion: Probing the Edges of Intracluster Light in Simulated Galaxy Clusters
Authors: Tara Dacunha, Phil Mansfield, Risa H. Wechsler
Figure caption: Example true MAHs, 200 MULTICAM model-reconstructed MAH samples, and medians of MULTICAM model-reconstructed MAH samples for three clusters. MAHs are plotted as m(T) as a function of T, time in units of dynamical times, where T = 0 is the present day and the corresponding scale factors are indicated in the upper x-axis. The three clusters shown reflect three percentiles of accuracy in model predictions (where lower percentiles indicate higher accuracy). Accuracy is quantified here by the root mean squared error (RMSE) between the median reconstructed MAH and the true MAH. The 10th percentile cluster has a closer recovery of the true MAH in its median reconstructed MAH than the 90th percentile cluster.
Paper: Memoirs of Mass Accretion: Probing the Edges of Intracluster Light in Simulated Galaxy Clusters
Authors: Tara Dacunha, Phil Mansfield, Risa H. Wechsler
Figure caption: Analogous to Figure 4, the Spearman’s correlation coefficient between Rsp⋆,1 and the MAH varying two choices in our stellar splashback radii measurements. Upper panel: varying the window size of the Savitsky–Golay smoothing filter between 11 and 19 radial bins. Lower panel: varying the slope cutoff in the radial stellar mass density profile used to define the location of the stellar splashback radii. Our fiducial choices are displayed as solid lines, while others are dashed. We show the jackknife standard error as a shaded band around the fiducial curve. We show a slight trend with window size that remains within the standard error shaded band. We are entirely insensitive to changes in the slope cutoff.
Paper: Memoirs of Mass Accretion: Probing the Edges of Intracluster Light in Simulated Galaxy Clusters
Authors: Tara Dacunha, Phil Mansfield, Risa H. Wechsler
Figure caption: For an extreme range of fixed size–virial radius relations, the median ratio of the stellar splashback radii, Rsp⋆,1 and Rsp⋆,2, to their fiducial values using the F. Jiang et al. (2019) relation. The shaded regions around the curves indicate the jackknife standard error in those medians. The vertical blue dashed line and shaded band indicate the median and 68% scatter of the r⋆/rvir assigned to our galaxies using the F. Jiang et al. (2019) relation. The vertical red dashed line and shaded band indicate the preferred r⋆/rvir determined by A. V. Kravtsov (2013) along with the reported scatter. Both Rsp⋆,1 and Rsp⋆,2 show only a slight trend with increasing r⋆/rvir, and are consistent with the fiducial values in the regions spanned by the A. V. Kravtsov (2013) and F. Jiang et al. (2019) relations.
Paper: The ZZ Ceti Instability Strip for the Most Massive White Dwarf Pulsators
Authors: Gracyn Jewett, Mukremin Kilic, Adam Moss, Alejandro H. Córsico, Matthew J. Green, Murat Uzundag, Pierre Bergeron, Warren R. Brown, Francisco C. De Gerónimo, Alberto Rebassa-Mansergas, Alex J. Brown, Vikram S. Dhillon, Stuart Littlefair
Figure caption: Weighted mean period vs. effective temperature for the ZZ Ceti white dwarfs in our sample. The color of the point indicates the mass of each star. We include the well-known ultramassive ZZ Cetis BPM 37093, GD 518, and J0049−2525 for reference. The dashed black line shows the best-fitting line to the data, excluding the three outliers: J0634+3848, J0912−2642, and J1626+2533, which are labeled.
Paper: The ZZ Ceti Instability Strip for the Most Massive White Dwarf Pulsators
Authors: Gracyn Jewett, Mukremin Kilic, Adam Moss, Alejandro H. Córsico, Matthew J. Green, Murat Uzundag, Pierre Bergeron, Warren R. Brown, Francisco C. De Gerónimo, Alberto Rebassa-Mansergas, Alex J. Brown, Vikram S. Dhillon, Stuart Littlefair
Figure caption: Masses and effective temperatures for our follow-up sample of massive DA white dwarf sample including white dwarfs from this work and those previously known in the literature and the four most massive pulsators labeled and J0127−2436, which lies on the edge of the instability strip. The objects marked with by a red point are NOVs. The green stars mark the pulsators. The blue and red lines show the empirical boundaries of the photometric ZZ Ceti instability strip from O. Vincent et al. (2020).
Paper: The ZZ Ceti Instability Strip for the Most Massive White Dwarf Pulsators
Authors: Gracyn Jewett, Mukremin Kilic, Adam Moss, Alejandro H. Córsico, Matthew J. Green, Murat Uzundag, Pierre Bergeron, Warren R. Brown, Francisco C. De Gerónimo, Alberto Rebassa-Mansergas, Alex J. Brown, Vikram S. Dhillon, Stuart Littlefair
Figure caption: Spectroscopic model fits (red) to observed Balmer line profiles (black) of three NOV white dwarfs. The best-fitting effective temperature and ﹩\mathrm{log}g﹩ are shown at the bottom of each panel. The effective temperatures and ﹩\mathrm{log}g﹩ values have been corrected for 3D hydrodynamical effects (P. E. Tremblay et al. 2013).
Paper: The ZZ Ceti Instability Strip for the Most Massive White Dwarf Pulsators
Authors: Gracyn Jewett, Mukremin Kilic, Adam Moss, Alejandro H. Córsico, Matthew J. Green, Murat Uzundag, Pierre Bergeron, Warren R. Brown, Francisco C. De Gerónimo, Alberto Rebassa-Mansergas, Alex J. Brown, Vikram S. Dhillon, Stuart Littlefair
Figure caption: Square root of the total power vs. effective temperature for the observed pulsators in our sample plus GD 518 and J0049−2525. The y-axis is set to a log scale, and the color of the points are indicative of the white dwarf’s mass. The three outliers from Figure 11 are also labeled.
Paper: The ZZ Ceti Instability Strip for the Most Massive White Dwarf Pulsators
Authors: Gracyn Jewett, Mukremin Kilic, Adam Moss, Alejandro H. Córsico, Matthew J. Green, Murat Uzundag, Pierre Bergeron, Warren R. Brown, Francisco C. De Gerónimo, Alberto Rebassa-Mansergas, Alex J. Brown, Vikram S. Dhillon, Stuart Littlefair
Figure caption: Weighted mean period vs. mass for the ZZ Ceti white dwarfs in our sample. The color of the points are representative of the effective temperature of the star. The dashed black line shows the best-fitting line to the data, excluding the three outliers.
Paper: The ZZ Ceti Instability Strip for the Most Massive White Dwarf Pulsators
Authors: Gracyn Jewett, Mukremin Kilic, Adam Moss, Alejandro H. Córsico, Matthew J. Green, Murat Uzundag, Pierre Bergeron, Warren R. Brown, Francisco C. De Gerónimo, Alberto Rebassa-Mansergas, Alex J. Brown, Vikram S. Dhillon, Stuart Littlefair
Figure caption: Light curves and Fourier transforms for J1106+1802 taken on 2025 January 19.
Paper: The ZZ Ceti Instability Strip for the Most Massive White Dwarf Pulsators
Authors: Gracyn Jewett, Mukremin Kilic, Adam Moss, Alejandro H. Córsico, Matthew J. Green, Murat Uzundag, Pierre Bergeron, Warren R. Brown, Francisco C. De Gerónimo, Alberto Rebassa-Mansergas, Alex J. Brown, Vikram S. Dhillon, Stuart Littlefair
Figure caption: Light curves and Fourier transforms for J1106+1802 taken on 2025 January 12.
Paper: The ZZ Ceti Instability Strip for the Most Massive White Dwarf Pulsators
Authors: Gracyn Jewett, Mukremin Kilic, Adam Moss, Alejandro H. Córsico, Matthew J. Green, Murat Uzundag, Pierre Bergeron, Warren R. Brown, Francisco C. De Gerónimo, Alberto Rebassa-Mansergas, Alex J. Brown, Vikram S. Dhillon, Stuart Littlefair
Figure caption: Light curves and Fourier transforms for J0959−1828 taken at GTC.
Paper: The ZZ Ceti Instability Strip for the Most Massive White Dwarf Pulsators
Authors: Gracyn Jewett, Mukremin Kilic, Adam Moss, Alejandro H. Córsico, Matthew J. Green, Murat Uzundag, Pierre Bergeron, Warren R. Brown, Francisco C. De Gerónimo, Alberto Rebassa-Mansergas, Alex J. Brown, Vikram S. Dhillon, Stuart Littlefair
Figure caption: Light curves and Fourier transforms for J1626+2533.
Paper: The ZZ Ceti Instability Strip for the Most Massive White Dwarf Pulsators
Authors: Gracyn Jewett, Mukremin Kilic, Adam Moss, Alejandro H. Córsico, Matthew J. Green, Murat Uzundag, Pierre Bergeron, Warren R. Brown, Francisco C. De Gerónimo, Alberto Rebassa-Mansergas, Alex J. Brown, Vikram S. Dhillon, Stuart Littlefair
Figure caption: Light curves and Fourier transforms for J0634+3848.
Paper: The ZZ Ceti Instability Strip for the Most Massive White Dwarf Pulsators
Authors: Gracyn Jewett, Mukremin Kilic, Adam Moss, Alejandro H. Córsico, Matthew J. Green, Murat Uzundag, Pierre Bergeron, Warren R. Brown, Francisco C. De Gerónimo, Alberto Rebassa-Mansergas, Alex J. Brown, Vikram S. Dhillon, Stuart Littlefair
Figure caption: Light curves and Fourier transforms for J0204+8713 taken at GTC.
Paper: The ZZ Ceti Instability Strip for the Most Massive White Dwarf Pulsators
Authors: Gracyn Jewett, Mukremin Kilic, Adam Moss, Alejandro H. Córsico, Matthew J. Green, Murat Uzundag, Pierre Bergeron, Warren R. Brown, Francisco C. De Gerónimo, Alberto Rebassa-Mansergas, Alex J. Brown, Vikram S. Dhillon, Stuart Littlefair
Figure caption: Light curve and Fourier transform for J0154+4700.
Paper: The ZZ Ceti Instability Strip for the Most Massive White Dwarf Pulsators
Authors: Gracyn Jewett, Mukremin Kilic, Adam Moss, Alejandro H. Córsico, Matthew J. Green, Murat Uzundag, Pierre Bergeron, Warren R. Brown, Francisco C. De Gerónimo, Alberto Rebassa-Mansergas, Alex J. Brown, Vikram S. Dhillon, Stuart Littlefair
Figure caption: Light curves and Fourier transforms for J0712−1815.
Paper: The ZZ Ceti Instability Strip for the Most Massive White Dwarf Pulsators
Authors: Gracyn Jewett, Mukremin Kilic, Adam Moss, Alejandro H. Córsico, Matthew J. Green, Murat Uzundag, Pierre Bergeron, Warren R. Brown, Francisco C. De Gerónimo, Alberto Rebassa-Mansergas, Alex J. Brown, Vikram S. Dhillon, Stuart Littlefair
Figure caption: Light curves and Fourier transforms for J0204+8713 taken at APO.
Paper: The ZZ Ceti Instability Strip for the Most Massive White Dwarf Pulsators
Authors: Gracyn Jewett, Mukremin Kilic, Adam Moss, Alejandro H. Córsico, Matthew J. Green, Murat Uzundag, Pierre Bergeron, Warren R. Brown, Francisco C. De Gerónimo, Alberto Rebassa-Mansergas, Alex J. Brown, Vikram S. Dhillon, Stuart Littlefair
Figure caption: Light curve and Fourier transform for J1722+3958.
Paper: The ZZ Ceti Instability Strip for the Most Massive White Dwarf Pulsators
Authors: Gracyn Jewett, Mukremin Kilic, Adam Moss, Alejandro H. Córsico, Matthew J. Green, Murat Uzundag, Pierre Bergeron, Warren R. Brown, Francisco C. De Gerónimo, Alberto Rebassa-Mansergas, Alex J. Brown, Vikram S. Dhillon, Stuart Littlefair
Figure caption: Light curve and Fourier transform for J1451−2502.
Paper: The ZZ Ceti Instability Strip for the Most Massive White Dwarf Pulsators
Authors: Gracyn Jewett, Mukremin Kilic, Adam Moss, Alejandro H. Córsico, Matthew J. Green, Murat Uzundag, Pierre Bergeron, Warren R. Brown, Francisco C. De Gerónimo, Alberto Rebassa-Mansergas, Alex J. Brown, Vikram S. Dhillon, Stuart Littlefair
Figure caption: Light curve and Fourier transform for J1052+1610.
Paper: The ZZ Ceti Instability Strip for the Most Massive White Dwarf Pulsators
Authors: Gracyn Jewett, Mukremin Kilic, Adam Moss, Alejandro H. Córsico, Matthew J. Green, Murat Uzundag, Pierre Bergeron, Warren R. Brown, Francisco C. De Gerónimo, Alberto Rebassa-Mansergas, Alex J. Brown, Vikram S. Dhillon, Stuart Littlefair
Figure caption: Light curve and Fourier transform for J1929−2926.
Paper: Living with Neighbors. VI. Unraveling the Dual Impact of Bars on Star Formation in Paired Galaxies Using DESI
Authors: Woong-Bae G. Zee, Suk-Jin Yoon
Figure caption: Top: distributions of interaction-induced SF enhancement, Q(sSFR), as a function of the sSFR of the nearest companion, categorized by bar classification: unbarred (left; dashed black), weakly barred (middle; solid purple), and strongly barred (right; solid purple). Shaded bands represent the statistical uncertainty derived from jackknife resampling. The Pearson coefficient for each subsample is indicated in the corresponding panel. The horizontal dashed gray line at Q(sSFR) = 1 indicates the baseline level with no enhancement, while the vertical dashed line at ﹩{\rm{Log}}({{\rm{sSFR}}}_{{\rm{Nei}}})=-11\,{{\rm{yr}}}^{-1}﹩ denotes the threshold used to classify companions as star-forming or quiescent. Bottom: same as the top panels, but the pair sample is further divided based on the projected separation from the nearest companion galaxy: close pairs (rNei < 125 kpc h−1) are shown in blue, and wide pairs (rNei ≥ 125 kpc h−1) in red.
Paper: Living with Neighbors. VI. Unraveling the Dual Impact of Bars on Star Formation in Paired Galaxies Using DESI
Authors: Woong-Bae G. Zee, Suk-Jin Yoon
Figure caption: The distributions of bar structural parameters and the corresponding interaction-induced SF enhancement, Q(sSFR), as a function of those parameters. The top and bottom rows show results for normalized bar length (LBar/D25) and bar ellipticity (eBar), respectively. Left: normalized histograms of bar properties for all paired barred galaxies (shaded purple), with dashed and solid purple histograms indicating weakly and strongly barred subsamples, respectively, as classified by M. Walmsley et al. (2023). Middle: Q(sSFR) as a function of each bar property. Shaded bands represent the statistical uncertainty derived from jackknife resampling. The horizontal dashed gray line at Q(sSFR) = 1 indicates the baseline level with no enhancement. Right: same as the middle panels, but the pair sample is subdivided by the SF activity of the companion galaxy: systems with star-forming companions are shown in blue, and those with quiescent companions in red.
Paper: Living with Neighbors. VI. Unraveling the Dual Impact of Bars on Star Formation in Paired Galaxies Using DESI
Authors: Woong-Bae G. Zee, Suk-Jin Yoon
Figure caption: The normalized distributions of the sSFR of the nearest companion galaxy for paired systems, categorized by bar classification of the target galaxy: unbarred (left; dashed black), weakly barred (middle; solid purple), and strongly barred (right; solid purple). For reference, the distribution for all paired systems, irrespective of bar classification, is shown as a solid gray histogram in each panel. The vertical gray dashed line indicates the sSFR threshold, ﹩{\rm{Log}}({{\rm{sSFR}}}_{{\rm{Nei}}})=-11\,{{\rm{yr}}}^{-1}﹩, used to separate star-forming and quiescent companions in our analysis.
Paper: Living with Neighbors. VI. Unraveling the Dual Impact of Bars on Star Formation in Paired Galaxies Using DESI
Authors: Woong-Bae G. Zee, Suk-Jin Yoon
Figure caption: Top: interaction-induced SF enhancement, Q(sSFR)—defined as the ratio between the sSFR of the target galaxy and that of its matched control sample—plotted as a function of the projected separation from the nearest companion, categorized by bar classification: unbarred (left; dashed black), weakly barred (middle; solid purple), and strongly barred (right; solid purple). Shaded bands represent the statistical uncertainty derived from jackknife resampling. The horizontal dashed gray line at Q(sSFR) = 1 indicates the baseline level where no enhancement is observed. Bottom: same as the top panels, but the pair sample is further subdivided based on the SF activity of the companion galaxy: systems with star-forming companions are shown in blue, and those with quiescent companions in red.
Paper: Living with Neighbors. VI. Unraveling the Dual Impact of Bars on Star Formation in Paired Galaxies Using DESI
Authors: Woong-Bae G. Zee, Suk-Jin Yoon
Figure caption: Top: distributions of projected separation versus the sSFR of target galaxies in pairs, categorized by bar classification: unbarred (left; black dots), weakly barred (middle; purple dots), and strongly barred (right; purple dots). Dashed black and solid purple lines indicate the median trends for each subsample. For comparison, isolated, unbarred control samples are shown as gray points with dashed gray median lines. Shaded bands represent the statistical uncertainty derived from jackknife resampling. Bottom: same as the top panels, but the pair sample is further subdivided based on the SF activity of the companion galaxy: systems with star-forming companions are shown in blue, and those with quiescent companions in red. Median trends for each subsample are shown as blue and red lines, respectively.
Paper: Living with Neighbors. VI. Unraveling the Dual Impact of Bars on Star Formation in Paired Galaxies Using DESI
Authors: Woong-Bae G. Zee, Suk-Jin Yoon
Figure caption: Top: distributions of bar fraction (fBar; left), normalized bar length (LBar/D25; middle), and bar ellipticity (eBar; right) as a function of the projected separation from the nearest companion galaxy. Shaded bands represent statistical uncertainties, derived from Poisson errors for the bar fraction (left) and from jackknife resampling for the structural parameters (middle and right). Bottom: same as the top panels, but the pair sample is further subdivided based on the SF activity of the companion galaxy; systems with star-forming companions are shown in blue, and those with quiescent companions in red.
Paper: Living with Neighbors. VI. Unraveling the Dual Impact of Bars on Star Formation in Paired Galaxies Using DESI
Authors: Woong-Bae G. Zee, Suk-Jin Yoon
Figure caption: The normalized distributions of the sSFR of target galaxies in pairs, categorized by bar classification: unbarred (left; dashed black), weakly barred (middle; solid purple), and strongly barred (right; solid purple). For comparison, the corresponding distribution for the control sample of isolated, unbarred galaxies is shown as a solid gray histogram in each panel. Paired galaxies are further subdivided by the SF activity of their companions: systems with star-forming companions are shown in dashed blue, while those with quiescent companions are shown in dashed red.
Paper: Dynamical Environment and Stability around Centaur (2060) Chiron
Authors: G. Madeira, B. E. Morgado, C. L. Pereira, G. Ramon, R. Sfair, F. Braga-Ribas
Figure caption: Upper panel shows the ring plane pole-on view of the material around Chiron, with the grayscale proportional to the normal optical depth. The lower panel contains the normal optical depth curve obtained at Observatório do Pico dos Dias and the model fitted, including the ring and the disk material. The blue dotted lines represent the position of Chi1R, Chi2R, and Chi3R. Figure modified from C. L. Pereira et al. (2025).
Paper: Toward a General Theory of Grain Alignment and Disruption by Radiative Torques and Magnetic Relaxation
Authors: Thiem Hoang
Figure caption: Phase trajectory maps of grain alignment for the different radiation fields of U/(n1T2) ≤ 1 (panels (a)–(c)), in the collision-dominated regime, assuming the RAT model of ﹩{q}^{{\rm{\max }}}=2﹩ and SPM grains with δmag = 103. Gray arrows indicate the instantaneous direction of grain orientation in the phase space, which are random for J < JT = I1ωT. Some grains are rapidly spun up to the high-J attractor (red filled circles). The majority of grains are driven to low-J rotation, and subsequently, gas and magnetic excitations strongly disturb the grain orientation at low-J rotation and scatter them into stable high-J attractors. The dotted lines showing the threshold for RATD for grains of different tensile strengths of ﹩{S}_{\,{\rm{\max }},7}﹩ are not seen in these figures because RATD does not occur.
Paper: Beyond MESA Defaults: The Impact of Structural Resolution Uncertainty in p-mode Asteroseismology
Authors: Yaguang Li, 亚光 李, Meridith Joyce
Figure caption: H-R diagram color coded by εdmesh (ζdmesh), the degree of discrepancy in the representative test frequency νtest (Ptest). The left panel shows all models with solar metallicity but different masses, and the right panel with solar mass but different metallicities.
Paper: Beyond MESA Defaults: The Impact of Structural Resolution Uncertainty in p-mode Asteroseismology
Authors: Yaguang Li, 亚光 李, Meridith Joyce
Figure caption: H-R diagram color coded by the ratio of εdmesh (ζdmesh) to the typical observational uncertainties σobs (or σobs, P), assuming the worst-case observing scenario (T = 1 month, σnoise = 197 ppm/hr). The left panel shows all models with solar metallicity but different masses, and the right panel with solar mass but different metallicities.
Paper: Beyond MESA Defaults: The Impact of Structural Resolution Uncertainty in p-mode Asteroseismology
Authors: Yaguang Li, 亚光 李, Meridith Joyce
Figure caption: Panels 1 through 7 show the locations and indices of EEPs for each model class, with the class indicated in the upper left. The ages and other fundamental parameters measured at these EEPs are summarized in Table 2.
Paper: Beyond MESA Defaults: The Impact of Structural Resolution Uncertainty in p-mode Asteroseismology
Authors: Yaguang Li, 亚光 李, Meridith Joyce
Figure caption: H-R diagram showing the three types of p-mode pulsators investigated in this study. Tracks shown have solar metallicity and masses of 1.0, 1.4, 2.0, and 5.0 M⊙, from lower right to upper left.
Paper: The Serpent Eating Its Own Tail: Dust Destruction in the Apep Colliding Wind Nebula
Authors: Ryan M. T. White, Benjamin J. S. Pope, Peter G. Tuthill, Yinuo Han, Shashank Dholakia, Ryan M. Lau, Joseph R. Callingham, Noel D. Richardson
Figure caption: Each higher-order variation affects the dust plume in different ways. The top right plot shows how an arbitrary test system appears with only the “basic” model implementation as described in Appendix B.1. The bottom row shows each of the higher-order dust production variations discussed so far, and their effect on the “basic” plume in isolation. The top right plot shows the effect of including all of these features at once. The value of each effect in the figure is σaz = 60°, Aaz = −1, σorb = 40°, Aorb = 0, and σgradual = 19°.
Paper: The Serpent Eating Its Own Tail: Dust Destruction in the Apep Colliding Wind Nebula
Authors: Ryan M. T. White, Benjamin J. S. Pope, Peter G. Tuthill, Yinuo Han, Shashank Dholakia, Ryan M. Lau, Joseph R. Callingham, Noel D. Richardson
Figure caption: Wind anisotropies may be visible in the dust plume if the wind-dominant star is inclined with respect to the orbital plane (left). In principle, the axis of rotation could also be misaligned from the periapsis of orbit (right), which might affect the wind anisotropy evidence in elliptical orbits. We have an image available online ✎ that shows the effect of a modest (∼30°) spin–orbit misalignment with a faster polar wind.
Paper: Converging on the Cepheid Metallicity Dependence: Implications of Nonstandard Gaia Parallax Recalibration on Distance Measures
Authors: Louise Breuval, Gagandeep S. Anand, Richard I. Anderson, Rachael Beaton, Anupam Bhardwaj, Stefano Casertano, Gisella Clementini, Mauricio Cruz Reyes, Giulia De Somma, Martin A. T. Groenewegen, Caroline D. Huang, Pierre Kervella, Saniya Khan, Lucas M. Macri, Marcella Marconi, Javier H. Minniti, Adam G. Riess, Vincenzo Ripepi, Martino Romaniello, Daniel Scolnic, Erasmo Trentin, Piotr Wielgórski, Wenlong Yuan
Figure caption: P–L relation for Milky Way cluster Cepheids (blue) as selected by MF25, after applying the corrections listed in Table 2, and for the HST FGS sample from B07 (yellow). The red point shows V367 Sct as plotted using MF25’s incorrect period. The blue version uses the correct ﹩\mathrm{log}P=0.799﹩ value.
Paper: The Serpent Eating Its Own Tail: Dust Destruction in the Apep Colliding Wind Nebula
Authors: Ryan M. T. White, Benjamin J. S. Pope, Peter G. Tuthill, Yinuo Han, Shashank Dholakia, Ryan M. Lau, Joseph R. Callingham, Noel D. Richardson
Figure caption: The idea for the geometric model is to initialize a ring of points around the wind–wind shock at some nucleation distance behind the secondary star (usually an OB-type star). As the binary orbits the common center of mass, the formed dust (and discretized rings/particles in the right figure) gets wrapped into a spiral as it expands out from the central source. Note that there are orders of magnitude fewer particles (compared to the default code setting) in the right-side plot for visualization purposes.