Paper detail

The impact of spectral line wing cut-off: Recommended standard method with application to MAESTRO opacity database

When computing cross-sections from a line list, the result depends not only on the line strength, but also the line shape, pressure-broadening parameters, and line wing cut-off (i.e., the maximum distance calculated from each line centre). Pressure-broadening can be described using the Lorentz lineshape, but it is known to not represent the true absorption in the far wings. Both theory and experiment have shown that far from the line centre, non-Lorentzian behaviour controls the shape of the wings and the Lorentz lineshape fails to accurately characterize the absorption, leading to an underestimation or overestimation of the opacity continuum depending on the molecular species involved. The line wing cut-off is an often overlooked parameter when calculating absorption cross sections, but can have a significant effect on the appearance of the spectrum since it dictates the extent of the line wing that contributes to the calculation either side of every line centre. Therefore, when used to analyse exoplanet and brown dwarf spectra, an inaccurate choice for the line wing cut-off can result in errors in the opacity continuum, which propagate into the modeled transit spectra, and ultimately impact/bias the interpretation of observational spectra, and the derived composition and thermal structure. Here, we examine the different methods commonly utilized to calculate the wing cut-off and propose a standard practice procedure (i.e., absolute value of 25~cm$^{-1}$ for $P\leqslant$~200~bar and 100~cm$^{-1}$ for $P >$ ~200~bar) to generate molecular opacities which will be used by the open-access {\tt MAESTRO} (Molecules and Atoms in Exoplanet Science: Tools and Resources for Opacities) database. The pressing need for new measurements and theoretical studies of the far-wings is highlighted.

preprint2024arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access11 authors2 topics

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.