Table 1
Properties of images obtained from the reduced datasets.
| Wavelength (mm) | Beamsize (beam PA) (″) | Flux 1 (mJy) | RMS (mJy beam-1) | Rcav (″)2 | Rpeak (″) | R90% (″) | i (°) 3 | PA (°) 3 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 9.84 | 0.11 × 0.07 (-6.3°) | 1.8 ± 0.3 | 0.025 | / | / | / | / | / |
| 8.04 | 0.12 × 0.08 (-7.0°) | 3.1 ± 0.4 | 0.035 | / | / | / | / | / |
| 8.0 + 9.85 | 0.11 × 0.08 (-70.0°) | 2.0 ± 0.1 | 0.015 | 0.15 ± 0.02 | 0.21 ± 0.01 | 0.41 ± 0.01 | / | / |
| 3.0 | 0.11 × 0.06 (-0.7°) | 51.6 ± 0.1 | 0.095 | 0.15 ± 0.10 | 0.23 ± 0.01 | 0.37 ± 0.01 | 55.2 | 53.3 |
| 1.3 | 0.11 × 0.06 (45.2°) | 297.1 ± 0.1 | 0.089 | 0.14 ± 0.03 | 0.22 ± 0.01 | 0.38 ± 0.01 | 55.3 | 52.3 |
| 0.9 | 0.19 × 0.13 (7.8°) | 677.8 ± 0.1 | 0.120 | 0.05 ± 0.01 | 0.21 ± 0.01 | 0.43 ± 0.01 | 56.0 | 52.6 |
Notes. 1The flux uncertainty for the ALMA images was measured by multiplying the noise level by the square root of the number of pixels in the integrated area. 2Rcav is measured as the radius at which the emission reaches half of its peak value. The error is determined by the difference between this half-peak radius and the radius at which the emission reaches a quarter of its peak value. 3The inclination and Position Angle (PA) values are derived from a geometric fit to the visibility data done with frank (Jennings et al. 2020). 4Data presented in Long et al. (2021), with the corresponding fluxes measured after subtraction of a binary star model. 5Dataset created by combining the datasets at 8.0 mm and 9.8 mm after the subtraction of a binary star model.
Current usage metrics show cumulative count of Article Views (full-text article views including HTML views, PDF and ePub downloads, according to the available data) and Abstracts Views on Vision4Press platform.
Data correspond to usage on the plateform after 2015. The current usage metrics is available 48-96 hours after online publication and is updated daily on week days.
Initial download of the metrics may take a while.