Modes of clustered star formation

TL;DR

This paper investigates how observational biases and diagnostic methods affect the detection of different modes of clustered star formation, revealing that many factors influence whether distinct formation modes are identifiable.

Contribution

It analyzes the conditions under which modes of clustered star formation can be distinguished, highlighting the impact of density profiles, sample sizes, and observational limitations.

Findings

Detectability of cluster modes depends on density differences and observational biases.

Central density profiles can obscure the presence of multiple formation modes.

Distribution shapes alone cannot confirm or deny the existence of distinct star formation modes.

Abstract

The realization that most stars form in clusters, raises the question of whether star/planet formation are influenced by the cluster environment. The stellar density in the most prevalent clusters is the key factor here. Whether dominant modes of clustered star formation exist is a fundamental question. Using near-neighbour searches in young clusters Bressert et al. (2010) claim this not to be the case and conclude that star formation is continuous from isolated to densely clustered. We investigate under which conditions near-neighbour searches can distinguish between different modes of clustered star formation. Near-neighbour searches are performed for model star clusters investigating the influence of the combination of different cluster modes, observational biases, and types of diagnostic and find that the cluster density profile, the relative sample sizes, limitations in observations and the choice of diagnostic method decides whether modelled modes of clustered star formation are detected. For centrally concentrated density distributions spanning a wide density range (King profiles) separate cluster modes are only detectable if the mean density of the individual clusters differs by at least a factor of ~65. Introducing a central cut-off can lead to underestimating the mean density by more than a factor of ten. The environmental effect on star and planet formation is underestimated for half of the population in dense systems. A analysis of a sample of cluster environments involves effects of superposition that suppress characteristic features and promotes erroneous conclusions. While multiple peaks in the distribution of the local surface density imply the existence of different modes, the reverse conclusion is not possible. Equally, a smooth distribution is not a proof of continuous star formation, because such a shape can easily hide modes of clustered star formation (abridged)