Paper detail

On the accuracy of mass and size measurements of young protoplanetary disks

Knowing the masses and sizes of protoplanetary disks is of fundamental importance for the contemporary theories of planet formation. However, their measurements are associated with large uncertainties. In this proof of concept study, we focus on the very early stages of disk evolution, concurrent with the formation of the protostellar seed, because it is then that the initial conditions for subsequent planet formation are likely established. Using three-dimensional hydrodynamic simulations of a protoplanetary disk followed by radiation transfer postprocessing, we constructed synthetic disk images at millimeter wavelengths. We then calculated the synthetic disk radii and masses using an algorithm that is often applied to observations of protoplanetary disks with ALMA, and compared the resulting values with the actual disk mass and size derived directly from hydrodynamic modeling. We paid specific attention to the effects of dust growth on the discrepancy between synthetic and intrinsic disk masses and radii. We find that the dust mass is likely underestimated in Band 6 by factors of 1.4-4.2 when Ossenkopf & Henning opacities and typical dust temperatures are used, but the discrepancy reduces in Band~3, where the dust mass can be even overestimated. Dust growth affects both disk mass and size estimates via the dust-size-dependent opacity, and extremely low values of dust temperature (~ several Kelvin) are required to recover the intrinsic dust mass when dust has grown to mm-sized grains and its opacity has increased. Dust mass estimates are weakly sensitive to the distance to the source, while disk radii may be seriously affected. We conclude that the accuracy of measuring the dust mass and disk radius during the formation of a protoplanetary disk also depends on the progress in dust growth. (Abridged)

preprint2026arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access5 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.

Institutions

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.