4.7 Article

Spectral energy distribution modelling of southern candidate massive protostars using the Bayesian inference method

期刊

出版社

WILEY-BLACKWELL PUBLISHING, INC
DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2008.14103.x

关键词

masers; stars: early-type; stars: formation; stars: fundamental parameters; H(II) regions; submillimetre

资金

  1. European Commission's Seventh Framework Program [PIEF-GA-2008-220891]
  2. National Aeronautics and Space Administration

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Concatenating data from the millimetre regime to the infrared, we have performed spectral energy distribution (SED) modelling for 227 of the 405 millimetre continuum sources of Hill et al. which are thought to contain young massive stars in the earliest stages of their formation. Three main parameters are extracted from the fits: temperature, mass and luminosity. The method employed was the Bayesian inference, which allows a statistically probable range of suitable values for each parameter to be drawn for each individual protostellar candidate. This is the first application of this method to massive star formation. The cumulative distribution plots of the SED modelled parameters in this work indicate that collectively, the sources without methanol maser and/or radio continuum associations (MM-only cores) display similar characteristics to those of high-mass star formation regions. Attributing significance to the marginal distinctions between the MM-only cores and the high-mass star formation sample, we draw hypotheses regarding the nature of the MM-only cores, including the possibility that the population itself comprises different types of source, and discuss their role in the formation scenarios of massive star formation. In addition, we discuss the usefulness and limitations of SED modelling and its application to the field. From this work, it is clear that within the valid parameter ranges, SEDs utilising current far-infrared data cannot be used to determine the evolution of massive protostars or massive young stellar objects.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据