The interpretation of protoplanetary disc wind diagnostic lines from X-ray photoevaporation and analytical MHD models
Michael L. Weber, Barbara Ercolano, Giovanni Picogna, Lee Hartmann,, Peter J. Rodenkirch

TL;DR
This study compares X-ray photoevaporation and MHD models to interpret wind diagnostic lines in protoplanetary discs, revealing that line broadening is often dominated by outflow velocity gradients rather than Keplerian rotation, challenging previous interpretations.
Contribution
It provides detailed synthetic line profiles from both photoevaporative and MHD models, highlighting their capabilities and limitations in explaining observed wind components.
Findings
Photoevaporation models reproduce NLVCs but not BLVCs or HVCs.
MHD models can reproduce all components but often show double peaks not commonly observed.
Line broadening is mainly due to velocity gradients, not Keplerian rotation.
Abstract
High resolution spectra of typical wind diagnostics ([OI] 6300 \r{A} and other forbidden emission lines) can often be decomposed into multiple components: high-velocity components with blueshifts up to several 100 km/s are usually attributed to fast jets, while narrow (NLVC) and broad (BLVC) low-velocity components are believed to trace slower disc winds. Under the assumption that the line-broadening is dominated by Keplerian rotation, several studies have found that the BLVCs should trace gas launched between 0.05 and 0.5 au and correlations between the properties of BLVCs and NLVCs have been interpreted as evidence for the emission tracing an extended MHD wind and not a photoevaporative wind. We calculated synthetic line profiles obtained from detailed photoionisation calculations of an X-ray photoevaporation model and a simple MHD wind model and analyzed the emission regions of…
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
