Paper detail

Benchmarking the Calculation of Stochastic Heating and Emissivity of Dust Grains in the Context of Radiative Transfer Simulations

We define an appropriate problem for benchmarking dust emissivity calculations in the context of radiative transfer (RT) simulations, specifically including the emission from stochastically heated dust grains. Our aim is to provide a self-contained guide for implementors of such functionality, and to offer insights in the effects of the various approximations and heuristics implemented by the participating codes to accelerate the calculations. The benchmark problem definition includes the optical and calorimetric material properties, and the grain size distributions, for a typical astronomical dust mixture with silicate, graphite and PAH components; a series of analytically defined radiation fields to which the dust population is to be exposed; and instructions for the desired output. We process this problem using six RT codes participating in this benchmark effort, and compare the results to a reference solution computed with the publicly available dust emission code DustEM. The participating codes implement different heuristics to keep the calculation time at an acceptable level. We study the effects of these mechanisms on the calculated solutions, and report on the level of (dis)agreement between the participating codes. For all but the most extreme input fields, we find agreement within 10% across the important wavelength range from 3 to 1000 micron. We conclude that the relevant modules in RT codes can and do produce fairly consistent results for the emissivity spectra of stochastically heated dust grains.

preprint2015arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access12 authors1 topic

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.