Paper detail

The properties of SCUBA cores in the Perseus molecular cloud: the bias of clump-finding algorithms

We present a new analysis of the properties of star-forming cores in the Perseus molecular cloud, identified in SCUBA 850 micron data. Our goal is to determine which core properties can be robustly identified and which depend on the extraction technique. Four regions in the cloud are examined: NGC1333, IC348/HH211, L1448 and L1455. We identify clumps of dust emission using two popular automated algorithms, CLFIND and GAUSSCLUMPS, finding 85 and 122 clumps in total respectively. Some trends are true for both populations: clumps become increasingly elongated over time and are consistent with constant surface brightness objects, with an average brightness ~4 to 10 times larger than the surrounding molecular cloud; the clump mass distribution (CMD) resembles the stellar intial mass function, with a slope alpha = -2.0+/-0.1 for CLFIND and alpha = -3.15+/-0.08 for GAUSSCLUMPS, which straddle the Salpeter value. The mass at which the slope shallows (similar for both algorithms at M~6 Msun) implies a star-forming efficiency of between 10 and 20 per cent. Other trends reported elsewhere depend on the clump-finding technique: we find protostellar clumps are both smaller (for GAUSSCLUMPS) and larger (for CLFIND) than their starless counterparts; the functional form, best-fitting to the CMD, is different for the two algorithms. The GAUSSCLUMPS CMD is best-fitted with a log-normal distribution, whereas a broken power law is best for CLFIND; the reported lack of massive starless cores in previous studies can be seen in the CLFIND but not the GAUSSCLUMPS data. Our approach highlights similarities and differences between the clump populations, illustrating the caution that must be exercised when comparing results from different studies and interpreting the properties of continuum cores.

preprint2009arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access2 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.