adsabs/AstroCLIMB huggingface dataset:
Paper: Hemispheric Asymmetry of Coronal Mass Ejections with Different Angular Widths During Solar Cycles 23–25
Authors: Wei Zhou, Weihong Zhou, Wenhua Wang, Jie Cao, Tingting Xu, Miao Wan, Yuxia Liu, Shangxi Li, Xueliang Zhou, Peng E
Figure caption: Cross-correlation profiles of CME occurrence between the northern and southern hemispheres during SC23. The horizontal axis indicates the temporal phase shift in months, with positive values denoting southern hemisphere lead. The vertical dashed lines mark the lag corresponding to the peak correlation coefficient, quantifying the relative timing offset between hemispheric activities for each CME category, The red dashed line indicates the 95% confidence level.
Paper: Hemispheric Asymmetry of Coronal Mass Ejections with Different Angular Widths During Solar Cycles 23–25
Authors: Wei Zhou, Weihong Zhou, Wenhua Wang, Jie Cao, Tingting Xu, Miao Wan, Yuxia Liu, Shangxi Li, Xueliang Zhou, Peng E
Figure caption: Monthly distribution of CME counts from 1996 January to 2024 August, classified by angular width. The panels correspond to narrow CMEs (top left), normal CMEs (top right), partial-halo CMEs (bottom left), and the all CMEs excluding halo events (bottom right).
Paper: Hemispheric Asymmetry of Coronal Mass Ejections with Different Angular Widths During Solar Cycles 23–25
Authors: Wei Zhou, Weihong Zhou, Wenhua Wang, Jie Cao, Tingting Xu, Miao Wan, Yuxia Liu, Shangxi Li, Xueliang Zhou, Peng E
Figure caption: Same as Figure 4, but for SC25.
Paper: Hemispheric Asymmetry of Coronal Mass Ejections with Different Angular Widths During Solar Cycles 23–25
Authors: Wei Zhou, Weihong Zhou, Wenhua Wang, Jie Cao, Tingting Xu, Miao Wan, Yuxia Liu, Shangxi Li, Xueliang Zhou, Peng E
Figure caption: Same as Figure 4, but for SC24.
Paper: Probing Starspot Dynamics on the Active M Dwarf TIC 272272592: A Multiyear TESS Study
Authors: Rajib Kumbhakar, Soumen Mondal, Samrat Ghosh, Diya Ram, Dorothy M. Mwanzia
Figure caption: This figure represents the positions, sizes, and contrast of spots in the Aitoff projection (at phase = 0 with TBJD = 1683.36 days) of TIC 272272592 in sector 14 for each modulation mentioned below the figures.
Paper: Probing Starspot Dynamics on the Active M Dwarf TIC 272272592: A Multiyear TESS Study
Authors: Rajib Kumbhakar, Soumen Mondal, Samrat Ghosh, Diya Ram, Dorothy M. Mwanzia
Figure caption: Histograms of spot physical parameters for TIC 272272592. The gray bar represents Spot1, and the red bar for Spot2.
Paper: Probing Starspot Dynamics on the Active M Dwarf TIC 272272592: A Multiyear TESS Study
Authors: Rajib Kumbhakar, Soumen Mondal, Samrat Ghosh, Diya Ram, Dorothy M. Mwanzia
Figure caption: Spot area evolution on TIC 272272592 from year 2019 to 2022. Shown are the seasonal evolution of individual spots (dotted color lines) for each sector. The last plot shows spot sizes for the combined sector, and the blue dotted line in each panel indicates total spot area variation with time.
Paper: Probing Starspot Dynamics on the Active M Dwarf TIC 272272592: A Multiyear TESS Study
Authors: Rajib Kumbhakar, Soumen Mondal, Samrat Ghosh, Diya Ram, Dorothy M. Mwanzia
Figure caption: The positional distributions of starspots and model-fitted light curves of sector 55 are shown here. The first and third rows represent the spot distribution on the stellar surface reconstructed from the light curve, and the second and fourth rows show the contribution of Spot1 and Spot2 to the light curve and the fitted model. The blue and orange curves are the light curves due to Spot1 and Spot2, respectively, and the red curve is the resultant curve from modeling. For example, the light curve up to the first six rotations is shown here. In the spot distribution plots, latitude ranges from −90° to 90° and longitude from −180° to 180°.
Paper: Probing Starspot Dynamics on the Active M Dwarf TIC 272272592: A Multiyear TESS Study
Authors: Rajib Kumbhakar, Soumen Mondal, Samrat Ghosh, Diya Ram, Dorothy M. Mwanzia
Figure caption: Lomb–Scargle Periodogram of spot size (left) and spot latitude (right) for the combined sector. The black and red lines represent the periodogram of Spot1 and Spot2, respectively. No significant peak is apparent in these periodograms. The periodograms were generated using the astropy package (https://docs.astropy.org/en/latest/timeseries/lombscargle.html).
Paper: Probing Starspot Dynamics on the Active M Dwarf TIC 272272592: A Multiyear TESS Study
Authors: Rajib Kumbhakar, Soumen Mondal, Samrat Ghosh, Diya Ram, Dorothy M. Mwanzia
Figure caption: Spot latitude evolution on TIC 272272592 from year 2019 to 2022. The seasonal evolution of latitude distribution on individual spots (dotted color lines) for each sector is shown. The last plot shows the spot latitude distribution for the combined sector.
Paper: Probing Starspot Dynamics on the Active M Dwarf TIC 272272592: A Multiyear TESS Study
Authors: Rajib Kumbhakar, Soumen Mondal, Samrat Ghosh, Diya Ram, Dorothy M. Mwanzia
Figure caption: The positional distributions of starspots and model-fitted light curves of sector 41 are shown here. The first and third rows represent the spot distribution on the stellar surface reconstructed from the light curve, and the second and fourth rows show the contribution of Spot1 and Spot2 to the light curve and the fitted model. The blue and orange curves are the light curves due to Spot1 and Spot2, respectively, and the red curve is the resultant curve from modeling. For example, the light curve up to the first six rotations is shown here. In the spot distribution plots, latitude ranges from −90° to 90° and longitude from −180° to 180°.
Paper: Probing Starspot Dynamics on the Active M Dwarf TIC 272272592: A Multiyear TESS Study
Authors: Rajib Kumbhakar, Soumen Mondal, Samrat Ghosh, Diya Ram, Dorothy M. Mwanzia
Figure caption: The positional distributions of starspots and model-fitted light curves of sector 15 are shown here. The first and third rows represent the spot distribution on the stellar surface reconstructed from the light curve, and the second and fourth rows show the contribution of Spot1 and Spot2 to the light curve and the fitted model. The blue and orange curves are the light curves due to Spot1 and Spot2, respectively, and the red curve is the resultant curve from modeling. For example, the light curve up to the first six rotations is shown here. In the spot distribution plots, latitude ranges from −90° to 90° and longitude from −180° to 180°.
Paper: Probing Starspot Dynamics on the Active M Dwarf TIC 272272592: A Multiyear TESS Study
Authors: Rajib Kumbhakar, Soumen Mondal, Samrat Ghosh, Diya Ram, Dorothy M. Mwanzia
Figure caption: The positional distributions of starspots and model-fitted light curves of sector 54 are shown here. The first and third rows represent the spot distribution on the stellar surface reconstructed from the light curve, and the second and fourth rows show the contribution of Spot1 and Spot2 to the light curve and the fitted model. The blue and orange curves are the light curves due to Spot1 and Spot2, respectively, and the red curve is the resultant curve from modeling. For example, the light curve up to the first six rotations is shown here. In the spot distribution plots, latitude ranges from −90° to 90° and longitude from −180° to 180°.
Paper: Estimate of Current Mass of the Large Magellanic Cloud from the Orphan–Chenab Tidal Stream
Authors: Hiroka T. Warren, Heidi Jo Newberg, Autumn G. Guffey, JiaZhao Lin, Eric J. Mendelsohn, Kevin Roux
Figure caption: Comparison of the OCS simulated by particle-spray (blue line) and N-body simulation (light blue dots) with OCS data (black dots). The particle-spray line is from E19. The N-body points were generated from a simulation with the same MW, orbit, and DG parameters as were used in the particle-spray calculation, including an LMC of mass of 1.2501 × 1011 M⊙. Black points are data from S. E. Koposov et al. (2019). Nσ is the number of σ from the center of the stream (data) to the center of the simulated stream (N-body). The range and mean of deviations are given in the bottom right corner for the ϕ2 vs. ϕ1 panel and the bottom left corner for the d vs. ϕ1 panel. The error bars (red) show the 1σ errors we used to compute Nσ. The OCS N-body simulation deviates significantly from the particle-spray simulation. To make the N-body simulation match the data, it is necessary to change the assumed LMC mass. In Section 5, we quantify how much the simulation technique itself influences the measurement of the mass of the LMC.
Paper: Estimate of Current Mass of the Large Magellanic Cloud from the Orphan–Chenab Tidal Stream
Authors: Hiroka T. Warren, Heidi Jo Newberg, Autumn G. Guffey, JiaZhao Lin, Eric J. Mendelsohn, Kevin Roux
Figure caption: Left panels: comparison of a simulated OCS without the LMC using N-body (blue) and particle-spray (red) methods using the same parameters (summarized in Table 1). Right panels: particles in the N-body simulation that stripped from a radius of greater than 3.0 kpc from the center of the DG. Note that the stream generated by the N-body simulation is wider, and the ends of the stream in particular follow a different path through space. Also, the N-body simulation stream is slightly tilted from the stream made with the particle-spray. The N-body particles that are stripped at a distance of more than 3 kpc from the DG center (right panels) exhibit the largest departure from the particle-spray simulation.
Paper: Estimate of Current Mass of the Large Magellanic Cloud from the Orphan–Chenab Tidal Stream
Authors: Hiroka T. Warren, Heidi Jo Newberg, Autumn G. Guffey, JiaZhao Lin, Eric J. Mendelsohn, Kevin Roux
Figure caption: Rotation curves of Erkal2019 (top), Salas2019 (second from top), Mendelsohn2022 (second from bottom), and MMWPotential2014 (bottom). The rotational velocity of each potential model is compared with the measured values from A.-C. Eilers et al. (2019). Note that Mendelsohn2022 exhibits the largest departure from the observed rotational velocities.
Paper: Estimate of Current Mass of the Large Magellanic Cloud from the Orphan–Chenab Tidal Stream
Authors: Hiroka T. Warren, Heidi Jo Newberg, Autumn G. Guffey, JiaZhao Lin, Eric J. Mendelsohn, Kevin Roux
Figure caption: Deviation in the Galactocentric distance of the center of the particle-spray stream from the center of the N-body stream (no LMC). Note that the x-axis is Sun-centered along the stream. The upper panel shows that the particle-spray and N-body streams are tilted from each other. The lower panel shows the difference in Galactocentric distance between the two simulations. This difference in distance trends from the N-body simulation being farther at low ϕ1 to the particle-spray simulation being farther at large ϕ1, quantifying the stream tilt between the N-body and particle-spray simulations.
Paper: Estimate of Current Mass of the Large Magellanic Cloud from the Orphan–Chenab Tidal Stream
Authors: Hiroka T. Warren, Heidi Jo Newberg, Autumn G. Guffey, JiaZhao Lin, Eric J. Mendelsohn, Kevin Roux
Figure caption: Distance from the center of mass of the DG at which particles become unbound for the last time as a function of time (no LMC). The red line shows the tidal radius with respect to time, where the particles are released using the particle-spray. Note that the N-body simulation produces a wide variety of radii while the particle-spray method by construction assumes only one radius at a time.
Paper: Estimate of Current Mass of the Large Magellanic Cloud from the Orphan–Chenab Tidal Stream
Authors: Hiroka T. Warren, Heidi Jo Newberg, Autumn G. Guffey, JiaZhao Lin, Eric J. Mendelsohn, Kevin Roux
Figure caption: Bound mass of the DG in the N-body simulation (no LMC) as a function of time. Most particles become unbound at perigalacticon, and then some particles become bound again at larger distances from the Galactic center.
Paper: Estimate of Current Mass of the Large Magellanic Cloud from the Orphan–Chenab Tidal Stream
Authors: Hiroka T. Warren, Heidi Jo Newberg, Autumn G. Guffey, JiaZhao Lin, Eric J. Mendelsohn, Kevin Roux
Figure caption: Eccentricity of the DG in the N-body simulation (no LMC) as a function of time. The DG shape quickly deviates from spherical, in contrast to the particle-spray, which assumes a spherical DG at all times.
Paper: Estimate of Current Mass of the Large Magellanic Cloud from the Orphan–Chenab Tidal Stream
Authors: Hiroka T. Warren, Heidi Jo Newberg, Autumn G. Guffey, JiaZhao Lin, Eric J. Mendelsohn, Kevin Roux
Figure caption: Orbits of the LMC (top) and OCS progenitor (middle), and the distance between them (bottom) in each best-fit MW potential case. The inset in the bottom shows the closest approach of the LMC to the OCS. Because the closest approach of the LMC to any point on the OCS is equal to or smaller than the distance between the LMC and the progenitor, the inset curve is slightly less than the corresponding portion of the curve in the lower panel. The solid lines are Hernquist LMC models, and the dashed lines are Plummer LMC models. The orbits made with Erkal2019 potential are colored blue, the Salas2019 potential is colored orange, the Mendelsohn2022 potential is green, the MMWPotential2014 potential is red, and lastly the cutoff Hernquist LMC model with the Erkal2019 potential is colored purple. The orbits of both the LMC and OCS with Mendelsohn2022 are completely different from other MW potential models. This potential model has a lower rotation curve (see Figure 7), thus a less massive MW. Because the LMC can more easily escape from a less massive MW, the radius of the LMC orbit is larger for the Mendelsohn2022 case. The radius and period of the OCS orbit also become larger for the same reason. With our adopted values for the current position and velocity of the LMC, the LMC has only recently interacted with the OCS for a short period of time (within the last 500 Myr).
Paper: Estimate of Current Mass of the Large Magellanic Cloud from the Orphan–Chenab Tidal Stream
Authors: Hiroka T. Warren, Heidi Jo Newberg, Autumn G. Guffey, JiaZhao Lin, Eric J. Mendelsohn, Kevin Roux
Figure caption: Acceleration of the LMC and SMC pair. Top panel: the dashed lines are our best-fit Plummer LMC (blue) and Hernquist LMC (red) accelerations as a function of distance from the center of the LMC. The solid green line is the acceleration of the SMC only; here the SMC was modeled with a mass of 1.4 × 109 M⊙ (E. M. Di Teodoro et al. 2019) and a scale radius of 1.5895 kpc (the scale radius was selected so that it is likely still bound at the end of the simulation). The vertical lines are the closest approach of the LMC over the course of each simulation. We then added the acceleration of the Plummer SMC to these LMC accelerations (solid lines). Bottom panel: here, we changed the distance of the SMC model so that the acceleration of the pair at the closest approach would increase to the amount that affects the OCS by the same amount as if we changed the LMC mass by 3.0 × 1010 M⊙ (see Figure 11). Although the SMC does not affect the OCS much at the present day, our analysis suggests that if in the past the SMC was ∼6 kpc closer to the OCS than the LMC was, it would affect the OCS significantly.
Paper: Estimate of Current Mass of the Large Magellanic Cloud from the Orphan–Chenab Tidal Stream
Authors: Hiroka T. Warren, Heidi Jo Newberg, Autumn G. Guffey, JiaZhao Lin, Eric J. Mendelsohn, Kevin Roux
Figure caption: OCS fitted with the Hernquist LMC with a cutoff. We selected the tidal radius of the LMC as the cutoff radius. The mass of the LMC in the simulation was set so that the mass inside the tidal radius would be the total mass of the LMC while the mass within 8.7 kpc is (1.7 ± 0.7) × 1010 M⊙ (R. P. van der Marel & N. Kallivayalil 2014). We fitted the simulated OCS to data using the Erkal2019 MW potential, and its best-fit parameters are listed in Table 3. We obtained a mass of MLMC(<16.4 kpc) = 4.5 × 1010 M⊙. This is surprisingly consistent with the enclosed mass found from the two different LMC models (Figure 13). The range and mean of deviations of the data points from the center of the simulation are given in the bottom right corner for the ϕ2 vs. ϕ1 panel and the bottom left corner for the d vs. ϕ1 panel.
Paper: Estimate of Current Mass of the Large Magellanic Cloud from the Orphan–Chenab Tidal Stream
Authors: Hiroka T. Warren, Heidi Jo Newberg, Autumn G. Guffey, JiaZhao Lin, Eric J. Mendelsohn, Kevin Roux
Figure caption: The KL divergence for a two-component Plummer DG for both the baryon density profile (blue) and the dark matter density profile (red), calculated every tenth time step (1.06 million years) over 4 Gyr. The dark matter shows very little fluctuations in comparison to the baryons. This is expected since the number of dark matter particles is much greater than the number of baryons. The slight trend toward instability seen in teal and the sinusoidal fluctuations of the KL divergence for the baryons are due to the fact that the mass of the baryon particles is a tenth of the mass of the dark matter particles. This induces a small amount of dynamical friction in the center of the DG that causes a very slight trend toward instability.
Paper: Estimate of Current Mass of the Large Magellanic Cloud from the Orphan–Chenab Tidal Stream
Authors: Hiroka T. Warren, Heidi Jo Newberg, Autumn G. Guffey, JiaZhao Lin, Eric J. Mendelsohn, Kevin Roux
Figure caption: LMC enclosed mass vs. radius for all of the best-fit LMC profiles. The best-fit Plummer and Hernquist models in Table 3 are labeled along with their MW potential names. Plummer/Hernquist upper/lower bound models are explained in Section 6.2, and the Hernquist cutoff model is described in Section 6.3. This shows all of the models cross each other near 30 kpc, where the mass enclosed is M(<r) = 4.93 × 1010 M⊙.
Paper: Estimate of Current Mass of the Large Magellanic Cloud from the Orphan–Chenab Tidal Stream
Authors: Hiroka T. Warren, Heidi Jo Newberg, Autumn G. Guffey, JiaZhao Lin, Eric J. Mendelsohn, Kevin Roux
Figure caption: The KL divergence for a single-component Plummer DG, calculated every tenth time step (3.05 million years) over 4 Gyr shown in blue. The trend line (teal) indicates high stability, with fluctuations in KL divergence limited to approximately 0.002.
Paper: Estimate of Current Mass of the Large Magellanic Cloud from the Orphan–Chenab Tidal Stream
Authors: Hiroka T. Warren, Heidi Jo Newberg, Autumn G. Guffey, JiaZhao Lin, Eric J. Mendelsohn, Kevin Roux
Figure caption: Gravitational acceleration as a function of radius for the best-fit cutoff Hernquist profile (green), as well as the full Plummer (blue) and Hernquist (red). The vertical dashed lines are the closest approach of the LMC to the OCS, and the large dots show the acceleration at closest approach for each case. Note that all these models have about the same acceleration at closest approach.
Paper: Estimate of Current Mass of the Large Magellanic Cloud from the Orphan–Chenab Tidal Stream
Authors: Hiroka T. Warren, Heidi Jo Newberg, Autumn G. Guffey, JiaZhao Lin, Eric J. Mendelsohn, Kevin Roux
Figure caption: The histograms show the initial and final number density distributions from the simulated particles of the single-component Plummer DG. The figure shows clear agreement between the simulated data in teal and the expected number distribution in blue even after evolving for 4 Gyr in a null potential.
Paper: Estimate of Current Mass of the Large Magellanic Cloud from the Orphan–Chenab Tidal Stream
Authors: Hiroka T. Warren, Heidi Jo Newberg, Autumn G. Guffey, JiaZhao Lin, Eric J. Mendelsohn, Kevin Roux
Figure caption: The histograms show the initial and final number density distribution for the two-component Plummer–Plummer DG. Like the single-component Plummer model, both the baryons (left) and the dark matter (right) agree with the expected number distribution even after evolving for 4 Gyr.
Paper: So Long Kolmogorov: The Forward and Backward Turbulence Cascades in a Supernovae-driven, Multiphase Interstellar Medium
Authors: James R. Beattie, Anne Noer Kolborg, Enrico Ramirez-Ruiz, Christoph Federrath
Figure caption: Cross-scale transfer, Π(k)/Π0 (Equation (C1)), for like-mode (uc → uc or us → us; Equations (29) to (32)) and total mode interactions, normalized by the cross-scale transfer in the ∼inertial range, Π0 (shaded black region, based on the classical assumption for Kolmogorov-type turbulence (A. N. Kolmogorov 1941), Π(k)/Π0 = const.) along (k∥; top panel) and across (k⊥; bottom panel) the ∇ϕ. Colored, shaded bands on each Π(k)/Π0 curve denote the 1σ time variation. The flux from three like-mode interactions (either all uc or all us) dominate the flux, and show the closest behavior to the expected Π(k)/Π0 = const. across a small range of wave modes in the simulations.
Paper: So Long Kolmogorov: The Forward and Backward Turbulence Cascades in a Supernovae-driven, Multiphase Interstellar Medium
Authors: James R. Beattie, Anne Noer Kolborg, Enrico Ramirez-Ruiz, Christoph Federrath
Figure caption: Cylindrically integrated velocity power spectra, ﹩{{ \mathcal P }}_{u}(k)﹩, as a function of wavenumbers parallel to the static gravitational potential, Equation (8) (k∥ = ∣kz∣; left column) and perpendicular to it (﹩{k}_{\perp }=\sqrt{{k}_{x}^{2}+{k}_{y}^{2}}﹩; right column). Each color represents a different resolution, going from linear resolution Ngrid = 256 (blue) to Ngrid = 1024 (light green). We indicate a gray band to show where the cascade is in each spectrum, based on the flux results in Section 5. Each spectrum is normalized by the integral square velocity, ﹩{\left\langle {u}^{2}\right\rangle }_{{ \mathcal V }}﹩, and time-averaged in the stationary regime (see Figure 3), so that intense intermittent events from supernova detonations do not have a strong influence on the spectra.
Paper: So Long Kolmogorov: The Forward and Backward Turbulence Cascades in a Supernovae-driven, Multiphase Interstellar Medium
Authors: James R. Beattie, Anne Noer Kolborg, Enrico Ramirez-Ruiz, Christoph Federrath
Figure caption: The kinetic helicity, ﹩{{ \mathcal H }}_{{\rm{kin}}}={\left\langle {\boldsymbol{\omega }}\cdot {\boldsymbol{u}}\right\rangle }_{{ \mathcal V }}﹩, as a function of t/t0 for the 5123 simulation, with the gray band showing the stationary state for the supernovae-driven turbulence (see Figure 3). Both in the nonstationary and stationary states, the turbulence is non-helical to single precision, ﹩{{ \mathcal H }}_{{\rm{kin}}}\approx 0﹩, meaning that the inverse transfer that we observe does not require net kinetic helicity. Hence, the inverse cascade we measure in Section 5 is a completely different mechanism than the homochiral-mediated inverse cascade in 3D turbulence (F. Plunian et al. 2020).
Paper: So Long Kolmogorov: The Forward and Backward Turbulence Cascades in a Supernovae-driven, Multiphase Interstellar Medium
Authors: James R. Beattie, Anne Noer Kolborg, Enrico Ramirez-Ruiz, Christoph Federrath
Figure caption: The three most commonly reported velocity- and density-weighted velocity power spectrum for the 10243 simulation, averaged over the statistically steady state shown in Equation (14). Each spectrum is isotropically integrated. The pure velocity spectrum, f = u (same as main text), is shown in blue, the compressible energy flux-corrected spectrum, f = ρ1/3u (A. G. Kritsuk et al. 2007), is shown in orange, and the kinetic energy spectrum, f = ρ1/2u, is shown in red.