Paper detail

Protoplanetary Disk Evolution: Singles vs. Binaries

Based on a large number of observations carried out in the last decade it appears that the fraction of stars with protoplanetary disks declines steadily between ~1 Myr and ~10 Myr. We do, however, know that the multiplicity fraction of star-forming regions can be as high as >50% and that multiples have reduced disk lifetimes on average. As a consequence, the observed roughly exponential disk decay can be fully attributed neither to single nor binary stars and its functional form may need revision. Observational evidence for a non-exponential decay has been provided by Kraus et al. (2012), who statistically correct previous disk frequency measurements for the presence of binaries and find agreement with models that feature a constantly high disk fraction up to ~3 Myr, followed by a rapid ($\lesssim$2 Myr) decline. We present results from our high angular resolution observational program to study the fraction of protoplanetary disks of single and binary stars separately. We find that disk evolution timescales of stars bound in close binaries (<100 AU) are significantly reduced compared to wider binaries. The frequencies of accretors among single stars and wide binaries appear indistinguishable, and are found to be lower than predicted from planet forming disk models governed by viscous evolution and photoevaporation.

preprint2015arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access4 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.