1: \documentclass[12pt,preprint]{aastex}

2: %\documentclass[preprint]{emulateapj}

3: \usepackage{natbib}

4: \citestyle{aa}

5: \begin{document}

6: 

7: \title{Near-Infrared Interferometric, Spectroscopic, and Photometric 

8: Monitoring of T Tauri Inner Disks} 

9: 

10: \author{J.A. Eisner\altaffilmark{1}, L.A. Hillenbrand\altaffilmark{2},

11: R.J. White\altaffilmark{3}, J.S. Bloom\altaffilmark{1},

12: R.L. Akeson\altaffilmark{4}, C.H. Blake\altaffilmark{5}}

13: \email{jae@astro.berkeley.edu}

14: \altaffiltext{1}{University of California at Berkeley, 

15: Department of Astronomy, 601 Campbell Hall, Berkeley, CA 94720}

16: \altaffiltext{2}{California Institute of Technology,

17: Department of Astronomy MC 105-24,

18: Pasadena, CA 91125}

19: \altaffiltext{3}{University of Alabama in Huntsville, Department of Physics,

20: 201B Optics Bldg, John Wright Drive, Huntsville, AL 35899}

21: \altaffiltext{4}{California Institute of Technology, 

22: Michelson Science Center MC 100-22,

23: Pasadena, CA 91125}

24: \altaffiltext{5}{Harvard College Observatory, Cambridge, MA 02138}

25: \keywords{stars:pre-main sequence---stars:circumstellar 

26: matter---stars:individual(CI Tau, DK Tau, AA Tau, RW Aur, V1002 Sco,

27: V1331 Cyg, DI Cep, BM And)---techniques:high angular 

28: resolution---techniques:interferometric}

29: 

30: \begin{abstract}

31: We present high angular resolution observations with the Keck Interferometer,

32: high dispersion spectroscopic observations with Keck/NIRSPEC, and near-IR

33: photometric observations from PAIRITEL of a sample

34: of 11 solar-type T Tauri stars in 9 systems.  

35: We use these observations to probe the 

36: circumstellar material within 1 AU of these young stars, measuring the

37: circumstellar-to-stellar flux ratios and angular size scales of the

38: 2.2 $\mu$m emission.  Our sample spans a range of stellar luminosities and

39: mass accretion rates, allowing investigation of potential correlations 

40: between inner disk properties and stellar or accretion properties.

41: We suggest that the mechanism by which the dusty inner disk is truncated

42: may depend on the accretion rate of the source; in objects with low

43: accretion rates, the stellar magnetospheres may truncate the disks, while

44: sublimation may truncate dusty disks around sources with higher 

45: accretion rates.

46: We have also included in our sample objects that are known to be

47: highly variable (based on previous photometric and spectroscopic observations),

48: and for several sources, we obtained multiple epochs of spectroscopic and 

49: interferometric data, supplemented by near-IR photometric 

50: monitoring, to search for inner disk variability.

51: While time-variable veilings and accretion rates

52: are observed in some sources, no strong evidence for inner disk pulsation

53: is found.

54: \end{abstract}

55: 

56: \section{Introduction}

57: Protoplanetary disks are an integral part of the star and planet formation

58: process, and studying such disks around early analogs of stars like 

59: our own sun can provide insight into how planetary systems form.

60: T Tauri stars are $\la 2$ M$_{\odot}$ pre-main sequence objects, and their

61: circumstellar environments are an ideal laboratory for studying the initial

62: conditions of planet formation.  A wealth of evidence, including 

63: direct imaging at millimeter and optical wavelengths 

64: \citep[e.g.,][]{KS95,DUTREY+96,MO96}, and modeling of spectral energy 

65: distributions \citep[SEDs; e.g.,][]{ALS88,BBB88,BECKWITH+90}, has confirmed 

66: the long-espoused hypothesis that T Tauri stars are surrounded by substantial

67: disks of dust and gas.  Moreover, observed line profiles and UV continuum

68: excesses indicate that T Tauri stars are 

69: accreting material from their circumstellar disks \citep[e.g.,][]

70: {WALKER72,BB89,EDWARDS+94,GULLBRING+98}.

71: 

72: Study of the innermost disk regions may reveal the mechanism by which material 

73: is accreted through the disk onto the star.  In the current paradigm, T Tauri 

74: disks are truncated by the stellar magnetosphere

75: within the co-rotation radius, with material accreting along magnetic

76: field lines onto high-latitude regions of the star 

77: \citep[e.g.,][]{KONIGL91,SHU+94}.  For typical T Tauri star masses,

78: radii, magnetic field strengths, and accretion rates, predicted truncation 

79: radii range from $\sim 0.02-0.2$ AU \citep[e.g.,][]{JOHNS-KRULL07}.  

80: Previous studies have shown that 

81: the dusty component of disks is generally truncated further out than the

82: magnetospheric radius \citep[e.g.,][]{EISNER+05,AKESON+05}.

83: Dust sublimation is caused by heating 

84: from the central star, plus possible additional heating due to viscous

85: dissipation of accreting material and luminosity from the

86: impact of the accretion flow onto the stellar photosphere.

87: If the accretion luminosity varies with time, then

88: the inner dust disk edge may pulsate as the sublimation radius moves in or out.

89: Some evidence for such variability may be present in near-infrared photometric

90: monitoring data \citep[e.g.,][]{SKRUTSKIE+96,CHS01,EIROA+02}.

91: Below, we discuss a search for inner disk pulsations using multiple epochs of 

92: spatially resolved observations at $2.2$ $\mu$m.

93: 

94: Knowledge of the spatial and temperature structure of protoplanetary disks at 

95: sub-AU radii is important for understanding the properties of dust and gas in 

96: regions where terrestrial planet formation occurs.

97: Temperature is the crucial parameter in determining the

98: radii where dust and water ice, key building blocks of terrestrial planets, 

99: can condense \citep[e.g.,][]{HAYASHI81}.

100: Spatial structure is important for understanding how

101: the close-in extra-solar planets discovered by radial velocity surveys

102: \citep[e.g.,][]{MARCY+05} either formed at, or migrated to, their observed

103: orbital radii \citep[e.g.,][]{LBR96}.

104: 

105: 

106: Infrared interferometric observations are necessary to spatially resolve

107: disk regions within $\sim 1$ AU of the central stars.  Such spatially resolved

108: observations are the only way to probe directly the geometry and 

109: temperature of these inner disk regions.  The Keck Interferometer has recently 

110: enabled spatially resolved observations of protoplanetary disks around several 

111: approximately solar-type T Tauri stars 

112: \citep{COLAVITA+03,EISNER+05,ECH06,AKESON+05b};

113: these observations constrained the dust disk inner radius and temperature,

114: and showed evidence that the inner disk gas extends further in toward the

115: central star.  Moreover, when these data are combined with previous 

116: spatially resolved observations of more massive, luminous objects

117: \citep{MILLAN+99,MST01,EISNER+03,EISNER+04,EISNER+07a,LEINERT+04,

118: VANBOEKEL+04,MONNIER+05,MONNIER+06,AKESON+05,LIU+07}, the

119: inner disk properties as a function of luminosity can be investigated

120: \citep[e.g.,][]{MILLAN-GABET+07}.  In general, these observations 

121: are consistent with expectations for disks with directly illuminated inner 

122: walls; however, there are notable exceptions for solar and sub-solar mass T 

123: Tauri stars, motivating further observations. 

124: 

125: Here we present near-IR interferometric observations of a sample of low-mass

126: (including solar and sub-solar mass)

127: T Tauri stars.  These observations spatially resolve the near-IR emission

128: and allow measurements of the size of the emitting region.  In addition, we 

129: use spectroscopic and photometric measurements to constrain the relative

130: stellar and circumstellar contributions to the near-IR emission, as well

131: as the accretion luminosities of our targets.   

132: All of these data constrain the 

133: inner disk properties of our sample, and in cases where multiple epochs of 

134: data were obtained, enable study of inner disk variability.

135: 

136: \section{Observations \label{sec:obs}}

137: 

138: \subsection{Keck Interferometer Observations \label{sec:ki}}

139: We used the Keck Interferometer (KI) to obtain spatially resolved measurements

140: of the near-IR emission from a sample of 11 T Tauri stars (Table 

141: \ref{tab:sample}).

142: %Data were obtained on 30 October 2004 for DK Tau A, DK Tau B, AA Tau,  

143: %RW Aur A, and RW Aur B; on 21 April 2005 for V1002 Sco and AS 206; and on 24 

144: %October 2005 for DK Tau A, DK Tau B, AA Tau,  V1331 Cyg, DI Cep, and

145: %BM And.  

146: In addition, we incorporate into our dataset a measurement of RW Aur A

147: obtained on 23 October 2002 by \citet{AKESON+05b}.  Among the objects for which

148: we have multiple epochs of data, DK Tau A, AA Tau, and RW Aur A are known

149: to be photometrically variable at optical through near-IR wavelengths

150: \citep{HERBST+94,SKRUTSKIE+96,EIROA+02}.

151: 

152: KI is a fringe-tracking long baseline near-IR Michelson

153: interferometer that combines the light from the two 10-m Keck apertures

154: over an 85-m baseline \citep{CW03,COLAVITA+03}.  

155: %The fringe-tracker detects a source in

156: %a 5ms integration, setting a limiting $K$-band magnitude of 

157: %$m_K \sim 9$.  In addition, sources must be optically bright enough for the

158: %adaptive optics (AO) systems on each Keck aperture. Superb seeing

159: %($\la 0\rlap{.}''5$) allowed excellent AO performance for our sample.

160: % requires sources optically brighter than $m_V \sim 12$.  

161: For each target, we measured squared visibilities ($V^2$) at $K$-band

162: ($\lambda_0=2.2$ $\mu$m, $\Delta \lambda = 0.4$ $\mu$m).  The system

163: visibility (i.e., the point source response of the interferometer)

164: was measured using observations of unresolved calibrators 

165: (Table \ref{tab:sample}),

166: weighted by the internal scatter in the calibrator and the temporal 

167: and angular proximity to the target source \citep{BODEN+98}. 

168: Source and calibrator data were corrected for 

169: detection biases as described by \citet{COLAVITA99} and averaged into 5s 

170: blocks. The calibrated $V^2$ for a target source is the average of the 5s 

171: blocks in each integration, with uncertainties given by the quadrature addition

172: of the internal scatter and the uncertainty in the system visibility. 

173: Systematic $V^2$ effects associated with enhanced performance of the

174: AO system on one telescope relative to the other (which may depend on the

175: brightness of the target) are

176: calibrated by applying a ``ratio correction'' \citep[e.g.,][]{COLAVITA99}.

177: Typical uncertainties are $\sim 5\%$.

178: 

179: Measured $V^2$ are shown in Figure \ref{fig:raw}. 

180: The angular resolution of our observations is on the order of a milli-arcsecond

181: (mas), which is sufficient to resolve the near-IR circumstellar emission, but 

182: not the central star.  For expected stellar radii of 2--5 $R_{\odot}$ and 

183: distances of 140--700 pc for our sample, the stars subtend $<0.2$ mas . 

184: Our measured $V^2$ thus include contributions from both

185: the unresolved stellar component and the resolved circumstellar component.

186: %Since we know the star has a normalized $V^2=1$ (since it is unresolved),

187: %we can remove the stellar contribution if we know the circumstellar-to-stellar

188: %flux ratio \citep[e.g.,][]{EISNER+05}.  

189: %This ratio is estimated from the

190: %observational data below (\S \ref{sec:rk}) and used to compute 

191: %$V^2_{\rm disk}$ (\S \ref{sec:rin}), which are visibilities of the 

192: %circumstellar component only.

193: 

194: 

195: %All calibrators were chosen to be compact (angular diameters $\la 0.2$ mas)

196: %and close to the target sources (within $\sim 10^{\circ}$).  

197: %In addition, our calibrators have $K$-band

198: %magnitudes similar to those of our targets, to minimize potential biases.  

199: %At optical wavelengths, the 

200: %calibrators are brighter than the targets, which may lead to

201: %enhanced AO performance; by

202: %measuring the photon counts along both interferometer arms and applying

203: %a standard ``ratio correction'' , 

204: %we calibrate out the effects of 

205: %AO performance on the visibilities.  The data for AS 205A, AS 207A,

206: %and V2508 Oph were calibrated using HD 142943 and HD 148968, and

207: %data for PX Vul were calibrated using HD 181383 and HD 182919.

208: 

209: \subsection{Keck/NIRSPEC Observations \label{sec:nirspec}}

210: We obtained high-dispersion $K$-band spectra with NIRSPEC between November 2004

211: and July 2006 for our sample (Table \ref{tab:sample}). 

212: %on 19 November 2004 for DK Tau A, DK Tau B, and AA Tau; on 20 November 2004 

213: %for RW Aur A and RW Aur B; on 2005 June 1 for V1002 Sco;

214: %on 2006 January 7 for DK Tau A,B, AA Tau, RW Aur 

215: %A,B, and BM And; and on 13 July 2006 for AS 206, V1331 Cyg, and DI Cep .  

216: We used the high-dispersion mode with the 3-pixel slit, 

217: which provides a resolving power of $R \sim 24,000$.

218: The NIRSPEC-7 filter was used with an echelle position of 62.67 and

219: a cross disperser position of 35.51.  This provided seven spectral orders

220: covering portions of the wavelength range between 1.99 and 2.39 $\mu$m.  

221: Included in these orders are various stellar atomic lines, the CO (2-0), (3-1),

222: (4-2), and (5-3) bandheads, and the Br $\gamma$ line.

223: 

224: The spectra were calibrated and extracted using the ``REDSPEC'' package

225: \citep[e.g.,][]{MCLEAN+03}.  Reduction included mapping of spatial distortions,

226: spectral extraction, wavelength calibration, heliocentric radial velocity 

227: corrections, bias correction, flat fielding, and sky subtraction.

228: We divided our target spectra by A0V or A1V stellar spectra (that were

229: interpolated over broad Br$\gamma$ absorption features) and 

230: multiplied by appropriate blackbody templates to calibrate the bandpass of the 

231: instrument and correct for telluric lines. For the two binary systems 

232: observed, which have separations of $2\rlap{.}''3$ (DK Tau AB) and

233: $1\rlap{.}''4$ (RW Aur AB),  the components are sufficiently well separated 

234: that their spectra could be extracted independently.

235: 

236: 

237: %\subsection{Palomar 60-inch $UBVRI$ Photometry \label{sec:p60}}

238: %We observed a subset of our sample (AA Tau, DK Tau AB, CI Tau, and RW Aur AB)

239: %through Johnson $U$,$B$,$V$, and Kron $R$ and $I$ filters from XXX to XXX

240: %using the robotic Palomar 60-inch telescope. 

241: %Photometric fluxes were measured from bias-corrected, flat-fielded images

242: %using well-studied photometric standards \citep{LANDOLT92}.

243: %We determined extinction corrections and magnitude zero-points

244: %using observations of five Landolt standards obtained throughout

245: %the night.  

246: %We computed relative photometry for these targets using non-variable

247: %calibrator stars in the observed fields (the FOV of the P60 camera is XXX,

248: %and thus many calibrator stars are available).

249: %Relative photometric errors for our target sources are the quadrature sum of 

250: %the RMS variation between integrations in a single night for both targets and

251: %calibrators.

252: %(where multiple integrations of a source are available), the 

253: %uncertainties in zero-points and extinction coefficients, and

254: %uncertainties in magnitudes of our calibrators.  Photometric

255: %uncertainties are typically $\la 10\%$, except at $U$-band, where

256: %substantial uncertainties in the extinction coefficients lead to large error 

257: %bars for the measured fluxes.

258: 

259: \subsection{PAIRITEL $JHK_{\rm s}$ Photometry \label{sec:pairitel}}

260: We observed our sample with the 1.3-m 

261: Peters Automated InfraRed Imaging Telescope \citep[PAIRITEL;][]{BLOOM+06}, 

262: and measured photometric fluxes at $J$, $H$, and $K_{\rm s}$ bands.

263: For each source, we obtained short exposures (52 ms) and relatively

264: longer exposures (7.8 s).  Short exposures were read out as ``clearing

265: exposures'' before the longer exposures (this is the nominal process of

266: double-correlated reads in infrared imaging).  The short exposures provide 

267: unsaturated images of our targets, while the longer exposures yield high 

268: signal-to-noise images of fainter stars within the observed fields

269: that are used for photometric 

270: calibration.  The camera provides $2''$ pixels over a 

271: $8\rlap{.}'5 \times 8\rlap{.}'5$ field of view.  Images are obtained

272: simultaneously in $J$, $H$, and $K_{\rm s}$ as part of the camera design.

273: 

274: Our data reduction consisted of background (sky+dark) 

275: subtraction (using dithered

276: images to produce backgrounds) and flat fielding.  Counts for target and

277: calibrator objects were measured in apertures with 2-pixel radii, sky 

278: background was measured as the median value of pixels in an annulus spanning 10

279: to 20 pixels in radius, and the sky was subtracted from each pixel in the 

280: aperture. We calibrated the fluxes using measured 2MASS magnitudes for 

281: other stars within the field of view of each target image.  

282: 

283: Our photometric errors include scatter in measurements

284: of source and calibrator counts, scatter in the magnitudes computed using

285: different calibrators, and an assumed uncertainty in the 2MASS magnitudes

286: of our calibrator stars of 0.017 mag.  Measured fluxes and uncertainties

287: for our sample are listed in Table \ref{tab:phot}. 

288: 

289: Where possible, we selected calibrator stars that did not appear to vary from 

290: epoch to epoch; since no photometric standard stars were observed, our

291: photometry is measured relative to calibrator stars within the observed fields.

292: We evaluated calibrator variability by comparison of each

293: calibrator to the mean value of all calibrators within an epoch; as we 

294: discovered variable sources, we excluded them from the calculated mean value

295: and iterated.  However, for some fields where only a few stars were visible,

296: no non-variable calibrator stars were found with this procedure (which may

297: indicate unstable atmospheric or instrumental conditions); for these 

298: cases our photometric uncertainties include the apparent variability of the 

299: flux calibrators.  

300: 

301: The binaries in our sample (DK Tau AB and RW Aur AB) are not resolved with the

302: $2''$ pixels of the PAIRITEL camera.  Thus the photometry for these objects

303: is the composite of both components.  The $K$-band

304: brightness ratios for DK Tau AB and RW Aur A are 3.3 and 4.3, respectively

305: \citep{SIMON+95,WG01}, and our photometry is thus dominated

306: by the primary components.

307: 

308: \section{Analysis}

309: In this section we use the data described in \S \ref{sec:obs} to constrain

310: the properties of the inner disk regions around our sample objects.

311: Our focus is on spatially resolving the circumstellar emission with

312: our interferometry data.  However, because we require measurements of the

313: circumstellar-to-stellar flux ratio in order to properly model the 

314: circumstellar component of our $V^2$ measurements \citep[e.g.,][]{EISNER+05},

315: we begin by deriving this ratio from our NIRSPEC

316: data (\S \ref{sec:rk}).  In \S \ref{sec:rin}, we model our spatially

317: resolved interferometric measurements of the circumstellar emission from our

318: targets with a simple geometric model.  In \S \ref{sec:mdot},  we derive

319: accretion luminosities for our targets, to enable an investigation of how

320: the inner disk geometries inferred from our interferometry data correlate

321: with mass accretion rate.

322: 

323: 

324: \subsection{Circumstellar-to-Stellar Flux Ratios \label{sec:rk}}

325: We use the NIRSPEC measurements described in \S \ref{sec:nirspec} to derive

326: 2 $\mu$m veilings for our sample.  The veiling is defined as

327: the ratio of the circumstellar excess flux to the stellar flux in the $K$-band.

328: Veilings are derived by comparing spectra of our target objects with 

329: spectra obtained (on the same night) for non-accreting, weak-lined T Tauri 

330: stars (WLTTs). These WLTTs provide excellent templates, since they have 

331: stellar effective temperatures and surface gravities similar to the classical 

332: T Tauri stars in our sample, but show neither near-IR excess emission

333: nor accretion signatures.

334: 

335: We select several atomic absorption lines for comparison between targets and

336: templates. 

337: %Spectral types of templates are taken from \citep{WICHMANN+00,KOHLER+00}.

338: %RXJ1534.3: M0; RXJ1552.5: M0; RXJ1540.9: M2; RXJ1546.0: M0; RXJ1551.1: M2;

339: %RXJ 1558.8: M1; RXJ1605.6: M1; RXJ1607.0: M1; RXJ1557.8: M0.

340: For a grid of WLTT templates, we perform a $\chi^2$ minimization between

341: the lines seen in the target star and the same lines in the template stars

342: after registration of the relative radial velocities,

343: rotational broadening, and veiling.  Radial velocity registration is 

344: accomplished via a cross-correlation of target and template star spectra.  

345: Rotational broadening is implemented by convolving the template spectrum with 

346: a Doppler line profile \citep{GRAY92}.  The template is veiled by adding a

347: continuum excess to the normalized, un-veiled spectrum, and then re-normalizing

348: the sum \citep[e.g.,][]{BB90}:

349: \begin{equation}

350: F_{\nu, \rm veiled} = \frac{F_{\nu} + r_K}{1 + r_K}.

351: \label{eq:rk}

352: \end{equation}

353: 

354: For objects observed over multiple epochs, we first fitted $r_K$ and $v\sin i$

355: simultaneously for each epoch, then fixed the $v \sin i$

356: as the weighted average of values from both epochs (which were consistent 

357: within uncertainties in all cases), and then repeated the fits with $v\sin i$ 

358: fixed to this average value.  Most of the fitted $v\sin i$ values are smaller

359: than the velocity resolution of our observations, $\sim 12$ km s$^{-1}$.

360: This means that the $v\sin i$ values of these targets are compatible

361: with those of the WLTT templates.  Since

362: the WLTTs used as templates in our veiling determinations may not be

363: slow rotators, their spectra may already be rotationally broadened.

364: Inferred values of $v\sin i$ for our targets thus represent only the

365: amount by which the template spectra need to be further broadened, rather

366: than the true $v\sin i$ of the source, and are

367: only lower limits on the true $v \sin i$ of our sample. 

368: 

369: For this fitting, we used Mg and Al

370: lines between 2.10 and 2.12 $\mu$m.  

371: %We did not fit template spectra

372: %to the entire spectral order, since we found this procedure to be biased

373: %by noise in the numerous continuum pixels; restricting the fits to pixels in 

374: %the vicinity of strong spectral lines decreases the noise in the fits.

375: We restricted the fits to 30 \AA \ regions around strong

376: lines (Figure \ref{fig:nirspec}) to avoid biasing the fits with

377: noisy continuum regions of the spectra.  As a check, we applied this fitting

378: procedure to lines of Ti between 2.22 and 2.24 $\mu$m, 

379: in a different spectral order than the Mg and Al lines; the fitted veilings

380: in both spectral orders agree within $1\sigma$ uncertainties. 

381: 

382: When we fitted veiling to any of our WLTT templates, using the set of remaining

383: WLTTs as templates for the fitting, we found veilings consistent with zero 

384: for all objects but one.  For TYC 5882,

385: the template with the earliest spectral type, the fitted veiling is

386: $0.2 \pm 0.1$; this is probably due to the mismatch between the spectral

387: type of this and other templates (see Table \ref{tab:sample}), 

388: and does not indicate that TYC 5882 is actually veiled.

389: 

390: There may be some additional uncertainty in the inferred veilings for 

391: V1331 Cyg and DI Cep, since these sources

392: have earlier spectral types (G5 and G8, respectively)

393: than any of our templates (M2--K3; Table 1).  

394: To evaluate the effects of this source/template mismatch, we

395: fitted our veiled, rotationally broadened templates to a non-accreting, 

396: $\sim 30$ Myr old G3/5 star \citep[HIP 9141;][]{ZS04}. 

397: We found that the best-fit veiling for

398: this star is $\sim 0.5$, and we thus the veilings inferred for V1331 Cyg and

399: DI Cep may be biased

400: by this amount.  We conservatively treat this bias as an uncertainty,

401: added in quadrature to the statistical uncertainties in the fitted veilings; 

402: this additional uncertainty is included in Table \ref{tab:veilings}.

403: 

404: Our veiling measurements fall within $\sim 1$ month of our KI observations,

405: providing estimates of the circumstellar-to-stellar flux ratios nearly

406: contemporaneous with our interferometric measurements.  Moreover, this

407: near-coincidence allows a comparison of veiling and the size scale 

408: of the circumstellar emission at multiple epochs (although there may be

409: some variability in both quantities over the $\sim 1$ month timescales

410: separating the spectroscopic and interferometric observations; see below). 

411: Unfortunately, no measurement

412: of the $K$-band veiling is available contemporaneous with the 2002 KI 

413: measurements of \citet{AKESON+05b}.  These authors estimated a 

414: circumstellar-to-stellar flux ratio of 0.6 by assuming that optical photometry 

415: traced the stellar photosphere, extrapolating the photosphere to $K$-band

416: and then comparing the extrapolation to the measured $K$-band flux.  Since the 

417: star may be veiled at optical wavelengths (due to emission from an accretion 

418: shock),  the true photospheric flux may be lower than assumed, and their

419: estimate of the $K$-band veiling is therefore a lower limit.  Nevertheless,

420: we adopt the value of 0.6 here, and assume an uncertainty of 20\%.

421: 

422: Inferred veiling  values are 

423: listed in Table \ref{tab:veilings}.  For AA Tau and RW Aur A, 

424: the veiling varies (at greater than the estimated 1$\sigma$

425: uncertainty level) from epoch to epoch.  This indicates that the relative

426: fluxes of the stellar and circumstellar components in these systems are

427: changing with time.

428: 

429: \subsection{Inner Disk Sizes \label{sec:rin}}

430: We now turn to analysis of our interferometric data.

431: To determine the angular extent of the $K$-band emission, we analyze our

432: KI data in the context of a circularly symmetric uniform ring model 

433: \citep[e.g.,][]{EISNER+03}.  This simple model has been

434: shown \citep[e.g.,][]{EISNER+04} to provide a good description of more

435: complex models of inner disks including puffed-up inner rims 

436: \citep{DDN01,IN05}.  Furthermore, ring models have been used by

437: previous investigators \citep[e.g.,][]{MILLAN-GABET+07}, and our use

438: of this model will facilitate comparisons with previous results.

439: 

440: We first remove the contribution to our measured $V^2$ from the

441: unresolved central star.  As described by \citet{EISNER+05}, decomposing

442: the observed $V^2$ into stellar and circumstellar components

443: requires a measurement of the circumstellar-to-stellar flux ratio;

444: the veilings determined in \S \ref{sec:rk} provide this ratio for our sample.

445: Contributions from the stellar and circumstellar components add linearly to 

446: the measured visibilities, and one can write,

447: \begin{equation}

448: V^2_{\rm disk} = \left\{\frac{\sqrt{V^2_{\rm meas}}(1+F_{\rm disk}/F_{\ast})-1}

449: {F_{\rm disk}/F_{\ast}}\right\}^2,

450: \label{eq:v2disk}

451: \end{equation}

452: where $F_{\rm disk}/F_{\ast}$ is the circumstellar-to-stellar flux ratio.

453: The $V^2_{\rm disk}$ values for our sample, obtained using the veiling

454: values measured closest in time to the measured $V^2$, are plotted in Figure 

455: \ref{fig:kidata}.

456: 

457: Uncertainties in our inferred circumstellar-to-stellar

458: flux ratios lead to uncertainties in $V^2_{\rm disk}$

459: in addition to those associated with $V^2_{\rm meas}$.  This error 

460: is smaller when the circumstellar-to-stellar flux ratio is large. Given 

461: inferred veilings and associated uncertainties for our sample, the resulting 

462: additional uncertainty is less than a few percent.  For the first epoch of 

463: data from RW Aur A, adopted from \citet{AKESON+05b}, 

464: the uncertainty is likely to be be larger (\S \ref{sec:rk}).

465: 

466: When decomposing observed $V^2$ values into

467: stellar and circumstellar parts, each epoch of KI observations was matched to 

468: the $K$-band veiling measurement closest in time.  Because our interferometric

469: and spectroscopic observations are not exactly simultaneous (generally, 

470: measurements are separated by a $\sim 1$ month), and objects may vary 

471: photometrically (at both optical and near-IR wavelengths) on this time-scale 

472: \citep[e.g.,][]{HERBST+94,SKRUTSKIE+96,EIROA+02},

473: the inferred

474: circumstellar-to-stellar flux ratios may not represent the true values

475: at the time of the KI observations.  Given this potential variability,

476: we also decomposed our multi-epoch $V^2_{\rm meas}$ into stellar and

477: circumstellar components by adopting the average value of the veiling over

478: all observed epochs.

479: 

480: The circumstellar components of the visibilities, $V^2_{\rm disk}$, were

481: fitted with uniform ring models using a $\chi^2$ minimization

482: to find the model providing the lowest residuals between predicted and

483: measured $V^2$.   

484: For DK Tau A,B, AA Tau, and RW Aur A, we fitted the ring model to each epoch 

485: of our KI observations.  

486: Best-fit radii for these face-on uniform ring models, using both the 

487: ``nearest-in-time'' and ``average value'' circumstellar-to-stellar flux ratio

488: determinations,

489: are listed in Table \ref{tab:uds}.  Uncertainties listed in the table are

490: 1$\sigma$ statistical uncertainties in the fits, obtained by computing

491: the surface where $\chi^2 = \chi_{\rm min}^2 + 1$.  Both approaches

492: to estimating the circumstellar-to-stellar flux ratios for multi-epoch

493: observations yield sizes consistent within 1$\sigma$ uncertainties.

494: In the analysis that follows, we will use the sizes derived with

495: the nearest-in-time veiling measurements.

496: 

497: Figure \ref{fig:kidata} shows that 

498: the $V^2$ for some objects (AA Tau, DK Tau A, RW Aur A, V1002 Sco, and AS 206)

499: do not decrease with increasing projected baseline length; these data

500: contrast with the predictions of circularly symmetric disk models. 

501: Photometrically determined stellar rotation periods combined with 

502: $v \sin i$ measurements suggest highly inclined geometries for some

503: of these sources

504: %an edge-on geometry for AA Tau and 

505: %a $\sim 46^{\circ}$ inclination for DK Tau A 

506: \citep[e.g.,][]{BOUVIER+95}, consistent 

507: with the non-monotonic behavior of $V^2$ versus baseline length in 

508: Figure \ref{fig:kidata}.  However,  because we are using a single-baseline 

509: interferometer (with a fixed separation and position angle), our data 

510: generally lack sufficient position angle coverage to place meaningful 

511: constraints on inclination (even accounting for Earth rotation, 

512: which helps to fill in the position angle coverage).

513: 

514: If we fit our data (assuming that multiple epochs of data

515: trace a non-variable source) with an inclined uniform disk model 

516: \citep[see e.g.,][]{EISNER+03}, we generally can not rule out an inclination

517: of $0^{\circ}$ (within 1-$\sigma$ uncertainties\footnote{For 3-parameter

518: (inner disk radius, position angle, and inclination) fits, 1$\sigma$

519: uncertainties are computed from projections of the surface with

520: $\chi^2=\chi_{\rm min}^2+3.53$.}).  Thus, we can not tell

521: whether the non-monotonic behavior seen in Figure \ref{fig:kidata}

522: is due to asymmetric source geometries or uncertainties in the measurements.

523: For one source, RW Aur A, our data are sufficient to constrain the inclination.

524: Assuming the source geometry has not varied over the two epochs of observation 

525: (see \S \ref{sec:var} for discussion of this assumption), the best-fit inclined

526: disk model has an inclination of $77^{+13}_{-15}$ degrees.

527: 

528: 

529: \subsection{Accretion Luminosities \label{sec:mdot}}

530: One of our aims in this analysis is to compare inferred inner disk properties

531: with stellar and accretion properties.  Accretion luminosity is

532: a particularly interesting property to correlate with our inner disk

533: measurements, since accretion can provide additional heating that modifies

534: the inner disk structure.  Here we use the Brackett gamma (Br$\gamma$) 

535: emission observed in

536: our NIRSPEC data as a diagnostic of infall \citep{MHC98,MCH01},

537: and thereby estimate accretion luminosities. 

538: 

539: Br$\gamma$ emission lines for our observed sources are shown in Figure 

540: \ref{fig:brg}.  We measure the Br$\gamma$ equivalent widths (EW) of our targets

541: from these NIRSPEC observations by

542: 1) determining the spectral baseline by fitting a straight line to a version of

543: the spectrum that is interpolated over the Br$\gamma$ feature;

544: 2) removing this baseline from the (un-smoothed) target spectrum; 

545: and 3) integrating under the Br$\gamma$ line (over wavelengths from 2.157 to 

546: 2.175 $\mu$m). We do not need to account for veiling here, since we are 

547: ultimately interested in the total line luminosity, which depends on the line 

548: EW as well as the continuum level (i.e., the correction to the EW

549: due to veiling would be offset by de-veiling the continuum when computing

550: the line flux).

551: 

552: %We account for veiling by multiplying this integrated flux

553: %by (1+$r_K$), to derive the EW of the line \citep[e.g.,][]{BB90}.

554: 

555: Uncertainties in these EW measurements arise from noise in the spectra

556: and residual errors in calibration due to imperfect interpolation over the 

557: broad Br$\gamma$ absorption features in the telluric standards.

558: We assess these uncertainty sources by applying the same EW 

559: measurement procedure to non-accreting, weak-line T Tauri stars.  We find 

560: that the 1$\sigma$ uncertainty level for EW estimates is 0.1--0.2 

561: \AA \ for most sources.  For one object, V1002 Sco, the calibration did not 

562: work as well, and the error is 6 \AA. EWs and error bars for each source and 

563: epoch of observation are listed in Table \ref{tab:ews}.

564: 

565: We use the Br$\gamma$ EW measured from 

566: our NIRSPEC data and the $K_{\rm s}$-band 

567: magnitude determined from our photometry to estimate the Br$\gamma$ line flux.

568: For close binaries, where our near-IR photometry measures composite fluxes

569: of the system, we estimate fluxes of individual components using 

570: previously measured component flux ratios  \citep{SIMON+95,WG01}, which 

571: involves the implicit assumption that both component fluxes vary if the 

572: composite flux varies.  We de-redden our measured $K_{\rm s}$-band magnitudes 

573: using $A_V$ values from the literature \citep{WG01,EIROA+02,WALTER+94,HP92} and

574: the reddening law of \citet{ST91}, under the assumption that $A_V$ is not

575: time-variable.  We convert these de-reddened magnitudes

576: into units of flux density, $F_{\lambda}$.  We then compute the flux in the 

577: Br$\gamma$ line by multiplying $F_{\lambda}$  by the equivalent width:

578: $F_{\rm Br \gamma}=F_{\lambda} \times {\rm EW}$.  

579: The Br$\gamma$ luminosity is 

580: then $L_{\rm Br \gamma}=4 \pi d^2 F_{\rm Br \gamma}$, where $d$ is the

581: distance.  The Br$\gamma$ luminosity is related to the accretion luminosity

582: by an empirical relation from \citep{MHC98,MCH01}:

583: $\log(L_{\rm acc}/L_{\odot}) = (1.26 \pm 0.19)\log(L_{\rm Br \gamma}/L_{\odot})

584: +(4.43 \pm 0.79)$.  

585: 

586: Inferred values of $L_{\rm Br \gamma}$ and $L_{\rm acc}$ are included

587: in Table \ref{tab:ews}.  Our estimated $L_{\rm acc}$ values are compatible

588: with previous measurements from the literature 

589: \citep[e.g.,][]{VBJ93,HEG95,GULLBRING+98,CG98,WG01}.  Previous measurements

590: typically span an order of magnitude, and our inferred $L_{\rm acc}$ are within

591: an order of magnitude of all previously determined values.  Moreover, the

592: values for each star relative to others in our sample roughly match those 

593: of surveys in the literature; in surveys where several of our targets 

594: were observed, the lowest accretion rate objects are also the lowest accretors

595: in that subset of our sample.

596: 

597: 

598: \section{Discussion}

599: 

600: \subsection{Size-Luminosity Diagram}

601: If dusty disks extended inward to their central stars, their near-IR emission

602: would be very compact, so much so that it would appear unresolved even with

603: the mas-level angular resolution of near-IR interferometers.  The fact that

604: disks around young stars {\it are} resolved with near-IR interferometric data

605: \citep[e.g.,][]{MILLAN+99}

606: indicates that these disks are truncated at stellocentric radii substantially 

607: larger than the stellar radius.  Measured temperatures at the disk

608: truncation radii are typically $\sim 1500$--2000 K 

609: \citep[e.g.,][]{EISNER+04,EISNER+05},

610: compatible with the sublimation temperature of silicate dust 

611: \citep[e.g.,][]{POLLACK+94}.  Determining how the inner disk truncation radius

612: depends on source luminosity can constrain how the inner edge is heated and,

613: in turn, the radial and vertical structure of the inner disk

614: \citep[e.g.,][]{MM02,EISNER+04}.

615: 

616: Figure \ref{fig:sizes} shows the inner ring radii determined for a sample

617: of T Tauri and Herbig Ae/Be objects (including 

618: previous measurements from the literature) as a function of source

619: luminosity.  The source luminosity is the sum of the stellar luminosity and

620: the accretion luminosity; in cases where no measurement of accretion luminosity

621: is available (mostly high-mass stars), only the stellar luminosity is used.

622: Inner ring sizes from the literature are drawn from 

623: \citet{MST01,EISNER+04,EISNER+05,AKESON+00,AKESON+05b,AKESON+05,MONNIER+05};

624: we used luminosities for these sources quoted in these references.

625: For the objects in our current sample, we took stellar

626: luminosities from \citet{KH95,WG01,WALTER+94,HP92}, and accretion luminosities

627: from Table \ref{tab:ews}.  For objects where we measured the inner disk size

628: over multiple epochs, the average size is plotted in Figure \ref{fig:sizes}.

629: 

630: We compare the size-luminosity diagram in Figure \ref{fig:sizes} with the

631: predictions of a simple physical model.  Specifically, we assume that the

632: inner disk is directly irradiated by the central star, and that the

633: inner edge therefore puffs up \citep{DDN01}.  For this model, the location

634: of the inner disk edge is,

635: \begin{equation}

636: R_{\rm in} = \sqrt{(1+f) \left(\frac{L_{\ast}+L_{\rm acc}}{4 \pi \sigma 

637: T_{\rm in}^4}\right)}.

638: \label{eq:ddn}

639: \end{equation}

640: Here, $f$ is the ratio of the inner edge height to its radius, 

641: and is estimated to be between 0.1-0.2 for T Tauri and 

642: Herbig Ae/Be stars \citep{DDN01}.

643: $T_{\rm in}$ is the temperature at the inner disk edge.  Figure \ref{fig:sizes}

644: shows the inner disk radii predicted by this model for $T_{\rm in}=1500$ K

645: and $T_{\rm in}=2000$ K; these temperatures bracket the expected sublimation

646: temperatures for silicate dust in a protoplanetary disk 

647: \citep[e.g.,][]{POLLACK+94}.

648: 

649: Most objects with luminosities 

650: $\ga 10$ L$_{\odot}$ agree with the predictions of these models; this fact has

651: been noted previously \citep{MM02,EISNER+04,MILLAN-GABET+07}.

652: There are, however, several exceptional high luminosity sources for which 

653: geometrically thin disk models may be more suitable 

654: \citep[e.g.,][]{EISNER+04,MM02,VJ07}.

655: Moreover, Figure \ref{fig:sizes} shows that at the lowest stellar masses, 

656: this model may break down.  The sizes of several low-mass sources are larger 

657: than predicted for these puffed-up inner disk models.  

658: 

659: We put forward several potential explanations for these deviations between 

660: puffed-up disk model predictions and data for low-mass T Tauri stars.  

661: First, the sublimation temperature may be reached further from the star.

662: For example, viscous energy dissipation in accreting material may provide

663: additional heating, pushing the sublimation radius outward.  The

664: sublimation temperature may also be lower, and hence located at larger

665: stellocentric radii, in these low-mass objects because of 

666: systematically lower ambient gas densities

667: \citep[see Table 3 of][]{POLLACK+94}.  Small dust grains, which are hotter 

668: than larger grains at a given radius, may also lead to larger dust

669: sublimation radii.  Finally, these disks may be truncated

670: by a mechanism other than dust sublimation, such as photoevaporative mass loss

671: or magnetospheric truncation.  In the following paragraphs,

672: we argue that of the possible explanations considered, the most likely 

673: is a mechanism other than dust sublimation, namely, magnetospheric

674: truncation.

675: 

676: These various possible explanations make different predictions about the

677: accretion rates of sources with exceptionally large inner disk radii.

678: We therefore investigate how the discrepancy between measured sizes and 

679: predictions of irradiated disk models depends

680: on a proxy of source accretion rate\footnote{We use $L_{\rm acc}$ rather

681: than $\dot{M}$, since $L_{\rm acc}$ is closer to the observed quantities.

682: Conversion to $\dot{M}$ requires additional assumptions about stellar

683: mass and radius, and the inner disk radius \citep[e.g.,][]{GULLBRING+98}.}.  

684: Figure \ref{fig:laccs} plots the 

685: difference between

686: measured and predicted size as a function of $L_{\rm acc}/L_{\ast}$.

687: We find that objects whose measured sizes are larger than predicted by models

688: actually have lower (fractional) accretion luminosities than other sources. 

689: 

690: \subsubsection{Accretional Heating \label{sec:acc}}

691: If accretional heating causes larger inner disk truncation radii,

692: then the low-mass stars in Figure \ref{fig:sizes} would have systematically 

693: higher mass accretion rates than other sources.   However, Figure

694: \ref{fig:laccs} shows that objects with large inner radii tend to have

695: lower accretion rates.  Thus, 

696: accretional heating seems an unlikely explanation for the large inner

697: disk sizes.

698: 

699: \subsubsection{Lower Dust Sublimation Temperatures \label{sec:rsub}}

700: Dust sublimates more easily when ambient pressures are lower.  Lower

701: mass accretion rates lead to lower gas densities and pressures, and

702: can therefore yield lower sublimation temperatures. The fact that larger disk 

703: truncation radii tend to occur around sources with lower accretion 

704: luminosities (Figure \ref{fig:laccs}) is compatible with the hypothesis

705: that these disks are truncated at lower dust sublimation temperatures.

706: 

707: However, the dust sublimation temperature

708: would need to be $\la 1000$ K to explain many of the large measured disk

709: sizes. A silicate dust sublimation temperature of 1000 K requires 8 orders of 

710: magnitude lower gas density than a sublimation temperature of 1500 K

711: \citep{POLLACK+94}, which corresponds to $\sim 5$ orders of magnitude

712: lower mass accretion rates (assuming an $\alpha$-disk to convert gas density

713: into mass accretion rate).  Such low accretion rates, and large dispersion in 

714: accretion rate, are not measured for our sample.  It is therefore

715: unlikely that lower sublimation temperature can explain the large

716: truncation radii of disks around low-mass T Tauri stars.

717: 

718: \subsubsection{Small Dust Grains \label{sec:agrain}}

719: Smaller dust grains absorb and emit radiation less efficiently than larger 

720: grains, and this loss of efficiency is more severe at longer wavelengths

721: \citep[e.g.,][]{BH83}.  As a 

722: result, small grains will achieve higher temperatures than larger grains

723: at a given stellocentric radius.  Thus, if a disk is composed of small grains, 

724: the dust sublimation radius can be larger than implied by Equation 

725: \ref{eq:ddn}, which assumed gray, and hence large-grained, dust 

726: \citep{MM02,ITN06,VINKOVIC+06,THM07}.

727: Using the results of \citet{VINKOVIC+06}, we find that the large inner

728: disk sizes in our sample can be reproduced by puffed up inner disk models

729: composed of grains sized 0.1--0.5 $\mu$m.

730: While small-dust-grain models can reproduce these larger observed sizes,

731: it seems unlikely that those objects that would  require small dust grains to 

732: explain the observations are precisely those with the lowest mass accretion 

733: rates.  

734: 

735: \subsubsection{Photo-evaporation \label{sec:photo}}

736: We now consider alternatives to dust sublimation, where the

737: physical process responsible for truncating the disk might be more

738: efficient at lower mass accretion rates.  One such process is

739: photo-evaporation, where the mass-loss driven by stellar UV radiation

740: can overcome accretion at sufficiently low $\dot{M}$ 

741: \citep[e.g.,][]{CGS01,ACP06}.

742: The mass flow can ``switch'' from accretion to outflow when the accretion

743: rate drops below $\sim 10^{-10}$ M$_{\odot}$ yr$^{-1}$.  Since

744: the objects in our sample have accretion rates $\ga 10^{-9}$ M$_{\odot}$

745: yr$^{-1}$ (based on the accretion luminosities in Table \ref{tab:ews}),

746: photo-evaporation is unlikely to dominate accretion.  Moreover, we do

747: not see the signature of a discrete transition in Figure \ref{fig:laccs}

748: at a certain accretion luminosity.  Thus, photo-evaporation is unlikely

749: to be the physical mechanism behind the truncated disks observed

750: for the low-mass T Tauri stars in our sample.

751: 

752: \subsubsection{Magnetospheric Truncation \label{sec:rmag}}

753: Large inner disk radii may also be due to magnetospheric truncation.

754: \mbox{T Tauri} 

755: stars accrete material via magnetospheric accretion; the stellar magnetic

756: field threads the disk and essentially creates a barrier to midplane

757: accretion at the point of balance between magnetic pressure and 

758: inward pressure from accretion \citep[e.g.,][]{SHU+94}.  

759: The magnetospheric radius is given by \citep{KONIGL91}:

760: \begin{equation}

761: \frac{R_{\rm mag}}{R_{\ast}} = 2.27 \left[\frac{(B_0/{\rm 1 \: kG})^4 

762: (R_{\ast}/{\rm R_{\odot}})^5}{(M_{\ast}/{\rm M_{\odot}}) 

763: (\dot{M}/10^{-7} {\rm M_{\odot} \: yr}^{-1})^2}\right]^{1/7},

764: \label{eq:rmag}

765: \end{equation}

766: where $B_0$ is the dipole magnetic field strength.

767: For many classical T Tauri stars, high disk accretion rates ($\ga 10^{-7}$

768: M$_{\odot}$ yr$^{-1}$) confine this magnetospheric 

769: radius to well within the dust sublimation radius \citep[e.g.,][]{EISNER+05},

770: and thus the observed inner edge of the dust disk occurs where

771: temperatures reach the sublimation temperature (i.e., $T_{\rm in}=1500$--2000 

772: K).  

773: 

774: However, lower accretion rates allow the magnetospheric radius to

775: extend to larger stellocentric radii ($R_{\rm mag} \propto \dot{M}^{-2/7}$), 

776: while the lower associated accretion luminosity leads to a smaller 

777: stellocentric radius of dust sublimation.  Low accretion rates can therefore

778: cause magnetospheric truncation outside of the

779: dust sublimation radius \citep[e.g.,][]{ECH06}.  If we take 

780: $B_0 = 1$ kG, $R_{\ast}=2$ R$_{\odot}$, and $M_{\ast}=0.5$ M$_{\odot}$

781: as typical values for low-mass T Tauri stars \citep[e.g.,][]{JOHNS-KRULL07},

782: then mass accretion rates between $10^{-9}$ and $10^{-8}$ M$_{\odot}$ yr$^{-1}$

783: (compatible with the lowest accretion luminosities in Table \ref{tab:ews})

784: yield magnetospheric radii between 0.07 and 0.15 AU, comparable to the

785: measured inner disk sizes in Figure \ref{fig:sizes}.  We thus favor

786: magnetospheric truncation as the explanation for the large inner disk sizes of

787: low-mass T Tauri stars.

788: 

789: \subsection{Inner Disk Variability \label{sec:var}}

790: Many young stars, including those in our sample, are known to be 

791: photometrically variable at optical through near-infrared wavelengths,

792: with variability timescales ranging from days to months

793: \citep[e.g.,][]{HERBST+94,SKRUTSKIE+96,CHS01,EIROA+02,BOUVIER+07}.  While the 

794: underlying cause of the variability is usually attributed to star-spots, which 

795: modulate the emission on the stellar rotation period, in some cases inner disk

796: variability may also play a role \citep[e.g.,][]{EIROA+02,BOUVIER+07}.  

797: 

798: Time-varying increases in disk accretion rates, which might occur on 

799: inner disk dynamical timescales of days to weeks, could lead to increased disk 

800: heating and higher near-IR emission.  Since a hotter disk 

801: could sublimate dust at larger stellocentric radii than a cooler disk, the 

802: inner edge of the dust disk may move in and out as the disk heating varies. 

803: Conversely, if disks are magnetospherically truncated, then increases

804: in accretion rate would lead to smaller disk sizes (Equation \ref{eq:rmag}).

805: Variability in the stellar magnetic field strength can also cause variability 

806: in mass accretion rates and 

807: changes in the inner disk radius over timescales comparable

808: to stellar dynamo oscillation period, typically $\sim 10$ yr 

809: \citep[e.g.,][]{ARMITAGE95}.

810: 

811: We obtained multiple epochs of spectroscopic and photometric data for 

812: DK Tau A and B, AA Tau,

813: and RW Aur A and B, and multiple epochs of interferometric data for all of 

814: these except RW Aur B.  

815: As indicated in Tables \ref{tab:phot}--\ref{tab:ews}, several sources

816: have variable infrared fluxes, veilings, and inferred accretion

817: luminosities.  Moreover, one object (RW Aur A) may have a variable inner disk

818: size (Figure \ref{fig:kidata}; Table \ref{tab:uds}).  

819: 

820: In the scenario where observed variability is due to changes in the disk

821: heating (e.g., because of time-variable disk accretion rates), we would

822: expect the following for higher disk temperatures: 1) $K$-band flux will

823: increase; 2) veiling will increase, 

824: since the circumstellar flux is increasing relative to the stellar flux;

825: 3) accretion luminosity may increase (if this is the source of the disk

826: heating); 4) the measured inner disk size should increase, since the

827: dust sublimation radius would move out.  

828: 

829: None of our targets clearly show such signatures.  For DK Tau A, 

830: the $K$-band veiling, near-IR fluxes, and inner disk size 

831: remain constant (within uncertainties) over the span of our multi-epoch

832: observations. For AA Tau, the veiling appears to decrease 

833: from one epoch to the next while the Br$\gamma$ flux also decreases.  However, 

834: the inner disk size remains constant (or marginally increases; 

835: Table \ref{tab:uds})) 

836: and the $K_{\rm s}$-band flux appears to 

837: increase in the latter epoch, contrary to expectations for a dimmer disk. For 

838: \mbox{RW Aur A}, the Br$\gamma$ luminosity appears to increase as the veiling

839: decreases, which is not consistent with expectations for our scenario

840: of inner disk variability above.  DK Tau B and RW Aur B show no variability

841: in any of our data.

842: 

843: If the emission from our targets is circularly symmetric, then our modeling

844: indicates potential variability (above the 1$\sigma$ level) in the inner disk 

845: size with time for \mbox{RW Aur A}.  

846: The inner disk radius appears to increase as 

847: the $K$-band veiling increases, which is expected since a larger inner rim

848: would produce more near-IR emission (for a fixed temperature).  

849: However, Figure \ref{fig:raw} shows only marginal variability 

850: in the measured $V^2$ (in contrast to the $V^2_{\rm disk}$ plotted in 

851: Figure \ref{fig:kidata}) from one epoch to the next, and 

852: the apparent inner disk 

853: variability rests entirely on the inferred circumstellar-to-stellar flux 

854: ratios.  The first epoch of KI data for \mbox{RW Aur A} does not have

855: a reliable estimate of this ratio; the estimate of 0.6 from \citet{AKESON+05b}

856: is a lower limit (\S \ref{sec:rk}), and a ratio as high as 2.5 would eliminate 

857: the apparent variability.

858: Furthermore, a highly inclined disk can fit the data for 

859: \mbox{RW Aur A} well without any variability 

860: in the inner disk size, even if the inferred circumstellar-to-stellar 

861: flux ratios are taken at face value (\S \ref{sec:rin}).

862: Thus we can not claim to see inner disk variability based on these data.

863: 

864: The interpretation of our multi-epoch observations is complicated by the fact

865: that different data constituting each epoch were not obtained simultaneously.

866: Data for a given epoch were obtained within a few week time-window.  Because 

867: the dynamical timescales for inner disk variability are 

868: $\tau_{\rm dyn} \sim \sqrt{R^3/GM} \la 10$ days for the inner radii 

869: inferred for our sample, there may be substantial source variability between 

870: the different measurements within a single epoch.  In future work, the 

871: observations constituting a single epoch should ideally be obtained within 

872: $\sim 1$ day of one another.  In addition, a larger number of epochs would

873: facilitate investigation of inner disk variability.  

874: 

875: \section{Conclusions}

876: Using near-IR interferometric, spectroscopic, and photometric data, we

877: measured the inner disk radii of 11 low-mass T Tauri stars.  In addition,

878: we measured the near-IR veilings and accretion 

879: luminosities of these objects.   Our data substantiate previous claims

880: that the inner disk radii of T Tauri stars are generally consistent with the 

881: predictions of disk models with vertically extended inner rims at 

882: stellocentric radii where disk temperatures reach dust sublimation 

883: temperatures, between 1500 and 2000 K.  However, there are a handful of 

884: sources, in particular objects with stellar luminosities $\la 1$ L$_{\odot}$,

885: for which the measured radii are substantially larger than predicted by

886: such models. 

887: 

888: Discrepancies between models where disks are truncated at the

889: dust sublimation radius and measured inner disk radii are larger for sources

890: with low ratios of accretion to stellar luminosity.  Thus, the physical 

891: mechanism by which the inner disk is truncated appears to depend on 

892: the relative

893: importance of stellar irradiation and accretion.  To explain this observation,

894: we suggest that at low accretion rates, as the pressure of accreting

895: material drops, the point of balance between inward accretion pressure

896: and outward stellar magnetic pressure moves to larger stellocentric

897: radii. At sufficiently low accretion rates, magnetospheric radii

898: can become larger than the dust sublimation radii, yielding the large

899: observed sizes for low-accretion-rate objects in our sample.

900: 

901: For several of our sample objects, we obtained multiple epochs of 

902: interferometric, spectroscopic, and photometric data, and for each epoch

903: the various datasets were obtained within a few weeks of one another.

904: We used these multi-epoch observations to search for inner disk variability.

905: While inferred veilings, accretion luminosities, and even inner disk truncation

906: radii, appear to vary for some sources, none of the objects show a

907: variability signature consistent with changes in the inner disk.

908: Future monitoring observations with more epochs, and with different data 

909: comprising each epoch obtained within a time-window short compared to inner

910: disk dynamical timescales, will enable a more

911: rigorous probe of inner disk variability.

912: 

913: \bigskip

914: The near-IR interferometry data presented in this paper were obtained

915: with the Keck Interferometer (KI), which is supported by NASA.  We wish

916: to thank the entire KI team for making these observations possible.

917: KI and NIRSPEC observations were carried out at the W.M. Keck Observatory, 

918: which is operated as a scientific partnership among California Institute of 

919: Technology, the University of California, and NASA.  The Observatory was made 

920: possible by the generous financial support of the W.M. Keck Foundation.

921: The authors wish to recognize and acknowledge the cultural role and reverence 

922: that the summit of Mauna Kea has always had within the indigenous Hawaiian 

923: community. We are most fortunate to have the opportunity to conduct 

924: observations from this mountain.  

925: This work has used software from the Michelson Science Center at

926: the California Institute of Technology. J.A.E. acknowledges 

927: support from a Miller Research Fellowship, and thanks G. Basri for useful

928: discussions and input into various stages of this work.  J.A.E. is also

929: grateful to F. Ciesla for interesting discussion about dust sublimation 

930: temperatures, and to E. Lopez for his interest in this project. 

931: 

932: 

933: 

934: %\section{Literature Measurements}

935: %Edwards et al. (2006) derive $\dot{M}$ for AA Tau, AS 353A, BM And, CI Tau,

936: %DK Tau, RW Aur A,B, TW Hya.  They also derive 1$\mu$m veilings: can use this

937: %to estimate circumstellar-to-stellar flux ratio for BM And or other objects

938: %without NIRSPEC.  Can also use old $K$-band veiling from \citep{FE99}.

939: 

940: %\begin{itemize}

941: %\item AA Tau: K7 \citep{KH95}. 

942: %$\log(L_{\ast}/L_{\odot})=-0.23$; $M=0.78$;

943: %$\log (\tau)=6.42$; $\log(\dot{M})=-8.19$ \citep{WG01}.

944: 

945: %\item CI Tau: K7 \citep{KH95}; 

946: %$\log(L_{\ast}/L_{\odot})=-0.076$; $M=0.77$;

947: %$\log (\tau)=6.13$; $\log(\dot{M})=-7.59$ \citep{WG01}.

948: 

949: %\item RW Aur A: K1$\pm$2; exhibits variable line profiles

950: %\citep{MG82}; $\log(L_{\ast}/L_{\odot})=0.23 \pm 0.14$; $M=1.34 \pm 0.18$;

951: %$\log (\tau)=6.92 \pm 0.31$; $\log(\dot{M})=-7.5$ \citep{WG01}.

952: %Suggestion it may be a close binary (probably a BD with a 

953: %period of $\sim 2.6$ days; Petrov et al.).

954: 

955: %\item RW Aur B: K5 \citep{DUCHENE+99}; 

956: %$\log(L_{\ast}/L_{\odot})=-0.40 \pm 0.10$; $M=0.93 \pm 0.09$;

957: %$\log (\tau)=7.13 \pm 0.18$; $\log(\dot{M})=-8.8$ \citep{WG01}.

958: 

959: %\item BM And: K5 \citep{MORA+01}.

960: 

961: %\end{itemize}

962: 

963: \bibliographystyle{apj}

964: %\bibliography{jae_ref}

965: 

966: \begin{thebibliography}{76}

967: 

968: \bibitem[{{Adams} {et~al.}(1988){Adams}, {Lada}, \& {Shu}}]{ALS88}

969: {Adams}, F.~C., {Lada}, C.~J., \& {Shu}, F.~H. 1988, \apj, 326, 865

970: 

971: \bibitem[{{Akeson} {et~al.}(2005{\natexlab{a}}){Akeson}, {Boden}, {Monnier},

972:   {Millan-Gabet}, {Beichman}, {Beletic}, {Calvet}, {Hartmann}, {Hillenbrand},

973:   {Koresko}, {Sargent}, \& {Tannirkulam}}]{AKESON+05b}

974: {Akeson}, R.~L., {Boden}, A.~F., {Monnier}, J.~D., {Millan-Gabet}, R.,

975:   {Beichman}, C., {Beletic}, J., {Calvet}, N., {Hartmann}, L., {Hillenbrand},

976:   L., {Koresko}, C., {Sargent}, A., \& {Tannirkulam}, A. 2005{{a}},

977:   \apj, 635, 1173

978: 

979: \bibitem[{{Akeson} {et~al.}(2000){Akeson}, {Ciardi}, {van Belle},

980:   {Creech-Eakman}, \& {Lada}}]{AKESON+00}

981: {Akeson}, R.~L., {Ciardi}, D.~R., {van Belle}, G.~T., {Creech-Eakman}, M.~J.,

982:   \& {Lada}, E.~A. 2000, \apj, 543, 313

983: 

984: \bibitem[{{Akeson} {et~al.}(2005{b}){Akeson}, {Walker}, {Wood},

985:   {Eisner}, {Scire}, {Penprase}, {Ciardi}, {van Belle}, {Whitney}, \&

986:   {Bjorkman}}]{AKESON+05}

987: {Akeson}, R.~L., {Walker}, C.~H., {Wood}, K., {Eisner}, J.~A., {Scire}, E.,

988:   {Penprase}, B., {Ciardi}, D.~R., {van Belle}, G.~T., {Whitney}, B., \&

989:   {Bjorkman}, J.~E. 2005{\natexlab{b}}, \apj, 622, 440

990: 

991: \bibitem[{{Alexander} {et~al.}(2006){Alexander}, {Clarke}, \&

992:   {Pringle}}]{ACP06}

993: {Alexander}, R.~D., {Clarke}, C.~J., \& {Pringle}, J.~E. 2006, \mnras, 369, 229

994: 

995: \bibitem[{{Armitage}(1995)}]{ARMITAGE95}

996: {Armitage}, P.~J. 1995, \mnras, 274, 1242

997: 

998: \bibitem[{{Aveni} \& {Hunter}(1969)}]{AH69}

999: {Aveni}, A.~F. \& {Hunter}, J.~H. 1969, \aj, 74, 1021

1000: 

1001: \bibitem[{{Basri} \& {Batalha}(1990)}]{BB90}

1002: {Basri}, G. \& {Batalha}, C. 1990, \apj, 363, 654

1003: 

1004: \bibitem[{{Basri} \& {Bertout}(1989)}]{BB89}

1005: {Basri}, G. \& {Bertout}, C. 1989, \apj, 341, 340

1006: 

1007: \bibitem[{{Beckwith} {et~al.}(1990){Beckwith}, {Sargent}, {Chini}, \&

1008:   {Guesten}}]{BECKWITH+90}

1009: {Beckwith}, S.~V.~W., {Sargent}, A.~I., {Chini}, R.~S., \& {Guesten}, R. 1990,

1010:   \aj, 99, 924

1011: 

1012: \bibitem[{{Bertout} {et~al.}(1988){Bertout}, {Basri}, \& {Bouvier}}]{BBB88}

1013: {Bertout}, C., {Basri}, G., \& {Bouvier}, J. 1988, \apj, 330, 350

1014: 

1015: \bibitem[{{Bloom} {et~al.}(2006){Bloom}, {Starr}, {Blake}, {Skrutskie}, \&

1016:   {Falco}}]{BLOOM+06}

1017: {Bloom}, J.~S., {Starr}, D.~L., {Blake}, C.~H., {Skrutskie}, M.~F., \& {Falco},

1018:   E.~E. 2006, in Astronomical Data Analysis Software and Systems XV, ed.

1019:   C.~{Gabriel}, C.~{Arviset}, D.~{Ponz}, \& S.~{Enrique}, Vol. 351, 751

1020: 

1021: \bibitem[{{Boden} {et~al.}(1998){Boden}, {Colavita}, {van Belle}, \&

1022:   {Shao}}]{BODEN+98}

1023: {Boden}, A.~F., {Colavita}, M.~M., {van Belle}, G.~T., \& {Shao}, M. 1998, in

1024:   Proc. SPIE Vol. 3350, p. 872-880, Astronomical Interferometry, Robert D.

1025:   Reasenberg; Ed., 872--880

1026: 

1027: \bibitem[Bohren \& Huffman(1983)]{BH83} Bohren, C.~F., \& 

1028: Huffman, D.~R.\ 1983, New York: Wiley  

1029: 

1030: \bibitem[{{Bouvier} {et~al.}(2007){Bouvier}, {Alencar}, {Boutelier},

1031:   {Dougados}, {Balog}, {Grankin}, {Hodgkin}, {Ibrahimov}, {Kun}, {Magakian}, \&

1032:   {Pinte}}]{BOUVIER+07}

1033: {Bouvier}, J., {Alencar}, S.~H.~P., {Boutelier}, T., {Dougados}, C., {Balog},

1034:   Z., {Grankin}, K., {Hodgkin}, S.~T., {Ibrahimov}, M.~A., {Kun}, M.,

1035:   {Magakian}, T.~Y., \& {Pinte}, C. 2007, \aap, 463, 1017

1036: 

1037: \bibitem[{{Bouvier} {et~al.}(1995){Bouvier}, {Covino}, {Kovo}, {Martin},

1038:   {Matthews}, {Terranegra}, \& {Beck}}]{BOUVIER+95}

1039: {Bouvier}, J., {Covino}, E., {Kovo}, O., {Martin}, E.~L., {Matthews}, J.~M.,

1040:   {Terranegra}, L., \& {Beck}, S.~C. 1995, \aap, 299, 89

1041: 

1042: \bibitem[{{Calvet} \& {Gullbring}(1998)}]{CG98}

1043: {Calvet}, N. \& {Gullbring}, E. 1998, \apj, 509, 802

1044: 

1045: \bibitem[{{Carpenter} {et~al.}(2001){Carpenter}, {Hillenbrand}, \&

1046:   {Skrutskie}}]{CHS01}

1047: {Carpenter}, J.~M., {Hillenbrand}, L.~A., \& {Skrutskie}, M.~F. 2001, \aj, 121,

1048:   3160

1049: 

1050: \bibitem[{{Chavarria-K.}(1981)}]{CK81}

1051: {Chavarria-K.}, C. 1981, \aap, 101, 105

1052: 

1053: \bibitem[{{Clarke} {et~al.}(2001){Clarke}, {Gendrin}, \& {Sotomayor}}]{CGS01}

1054: {Clarke}, C.~J., {Gendrin}, A., \& {Sotomayor}, M. 2001, \mnras, 328, 485

1055: 

1056: \bibitem[{{Colavita} {et~al.}(2003){Colavita}, {Akeson}, {Wizinowich}, {Shao},

1057:   {Acton}, {Beletic}, {Bell}, {Berlin}, {Boden}, {Booth}, {Boutell}, {Chaffee},

1058:   {Chan}, {Chock}, {Cohen}, {Crawford}, {Creech-Eakman}, {Eychaner},

1059:   {Felizardo}, {Gathright}, {Hardy}, {Henderson}, {Herstein}, {Hess},

1060:   {Hovland}, {Hrynevych}, {Johnson}, {Kelley}, {Kendrick}, {Koresko}, {Kurpis},

1061:   {Le Mignant}, {Lewis}, {Ligon}, {Lupton}, {McBride}, {Mennesson},

1062:   {Millan-Gabet}, {Monnier}, {Moore}, {Nance}, {Neyman}, {Niessner}, {Palmer},

1063:   {Reder}, {Rudeen}, {Saloga}, {Sargent}, {Serabyn}, {Smythe}, {Stomski},

1064:   {Summers}, {Swain}, {Swanson}, {Thompson}, {Tsubota}, {Tumminello}, {van

1065:   Belle}, {Vasisht}, {Vause}, {Walker}, {Wallace}, \& {Wehmeier}}]{COLAVITA+03}

1066: {Colavita}, M.~M., et al. 2003, \apjl, 592, L83

1067: 

1068: \bibitem[{{Colavita}(1999)}]{COLAVITA99}

1069: {Colavita}, M.~M. 1999, \pasp, 111, 111

1070: 

1071: \bibitem[{{Colavita} \& {Wizinowich}(2003)}]{CW03}

1072: {Colavita}, M.~M. \& {Wizinowich}, P.~L. 2003, in Interferometry for Optical

1073:   Astronomy II. Edited by Wesley A. Traub. Proceedings of the SPIE, Volume

1074:   4838, pp. 79-88 (2003)., 79--88

1075: 

1076: \bibitem[{{Dullemond} {et~al.}(2001){Dullemond}, {Dominik}, \& {Natta}}]{DDN01}

1077: {Dullemond}, C.~P., {Dominik}, C., \& {Natta}, A. 2001, \apj, 560, 957

1078: 

1079: \bibitem[{{Dutrey} {et~al.}(1996){Dutrey}, {Guilloteau}, {Duvert}, {Prato},

1080:   {Simon}, {Schuster}, \& {Menard}}]{DUTREY+96}

1081: {Dutrey}, A., {Guilloteau}, S., {Duvert}, G., {Prato}, L., {Simon}, M.,

1082:   {Schuster}, K., \& {Menard}, F. 1996, \aap, 309, 493

1083: 

1084: \bibitem[{{Edwards} {et~al.}(1994){Edwards}, {Hartigan}, {Ghandour}, \&

1085:   {Andrulis}}]{EDWARDS+94}

1086: {Edwards}, S., {Hartigan}, P., {Ghandour}, L., \& {Andrulis}, C. 1994, \aj,

1087:   108, 1056

1088: 

1089: \bibitem[{{Eiroa} {et~al.}(2002){Eiroa}, {Oudmaijer}, {Davies}, {de Winter},

1090:   {Garz{\' o}n}, {Palacios}, {Alberdi}, {Ferlet}, {Grady}, {Cameron}, {Deeg},

1091:   {Harris}, {Horne}, {Mer{\'{\i}}n}, {Miranda}, {Montesinos}, {Mora}, {Penny},

1092:   {Quirrenbach}, {Rauer}, {Schneider}, {Solano}, {Tsapras}, \&

1093:   {Wesselius}}]{EIROA+02}

1094: {Eiroa}, C., et al. 2002, \aap, 384, 1038

1095: 

1096: \bibitem[{{Eisner} {et~al.}(2006){Eisner}, {Chiang}, \& {Hillenbrand}}]{ECH06}

1097: {Eisner}, J.~A., {Chiang}, E.~I., \& {Hillenbrand}, L.~A. 2006, \apjl, 637,

1098:   L133

1099: 

1100: \bibitem[{{Eisner} {et~al.}(2007){Eisner}, {Chiang}, {Lane}, \&

1101:   {Akeson}}]{EISNER+07a}

1102: {Eisner}, J.~A., {Chiang}, E.~I., {Lane}, B.~F., \& {Akeson}, R.~L. 2007, \apj,

1103:   657, 347

1104: 

1105: \bibitem[{{Eisner} {et~al.}(2005){Eisner}, {Hillenbrand}, {White}, {Akeson}, \&

1106:   {Sargent}}]{EISNER+05}

1107: {Eisner}, J.~A., {Hillenbrand}, L.~A., {White}, R.~J., {Akeson}, R.~L., \&

1108:   {Sargent}, A.~I. 2005, \apj, 623, 952

1109: 

1110: \bibitem[{{Eisner} {et~al.}(2003){Eisner}, {Lane}, {Akeson}, {Hillenbrand}, \&

1111:   {Sargent}}]{EISNER+03}

1112: {Eisner}, J.~A., {Lane}, B.~F., {Akeson}, R.~L., {Hillenbrand}, L., \&

1113:   {Sargent}, A. 2003, \apj, 588, 360

1114: 

1115: \bibitem[{{Eisner} {et~al.}(2004){Eisner}, {Lane}, {Hillenbrand}, {Akeson}, \&

1116:   {Sargent}}]{EISNER+04}

1117: {Eisner}, J.~A., {Lane}, B.~F., {Hillenbrand}, L., {Akeson}, R., \& {Sargent},

1118:   A. 2004, \apj, 613, 1049

1119: 

1120: \bibitem[{{Gray}(1992)}]{GRAY92}

1121: {Gray}, D.~F. 1992, {The Observation and Analysis of Stellar Photospheres} 

1122:   (Cambridge University Press, UK)

1123: 

1124: \bibitem[{{Gullbring} {et~al.}(1998){Gullbring}, {Hartmann}, {Briceno}, \&

1125:   {Calvet}}]{GULLBRING+98}

1126: {Gullbring}, E., {Hartmann}, L., {Briceno}, C., \& {Calvet}, N. 1998, \apj,

1127:   492, 323

1128: 

1129: \bibitem[{{Hamann} \& {Persson}(1992)}]{HP92}

1130: {Hamann}, F. \& {Persson}, S.~E. 1992, \apj, 394, 628

1131: 

1132: \bibitem[{{Hartigan} {et~al.}(1995){Hartigan}, {Edwards}, \&

1133:   {Ghandour}}]{HEG95}

1134: {Hartigan}, P., {Edwards}, S., \& {Ghandour}, L. 1995, \apj, 452, 736

1135: 

1136: \bibitem[{{Hayashi}(1981)}]{HAYASHI81}

1137: {Hayashi}, C. 1981, Progress of Theoretical Physics, 70, 35

1138: 

1139: \bibitem[{{Herbig} \& {Bell}(1988)}]{HB88}

1140: {Herbig}, G.~H. \& {Bell}, K.~R. 1988, {Catalog of emission line stars of the

1141:   orion population : 3 : 1988} (Lick Observatory Bulletin, Santa Cruz: Lick

1142:   Observatory, |c1988)

1143: 

1144: \bibitem[{{Herbst} {et~al.}(1994){Herbst}, {Herbst}, {Grossman}, \&

1145:   {Weinstein}}]{HERBST+94}

1146: {Herbst}, W., {Herbst}, D.~K., {Grossman}, E.~J., \& {Weinstein}, D. 1994, \aj,

1147:   108, 1906

1148: 

1149: \bibitem[{{Isella} \& {Natta}(2005)}]{IN05}

1150: {Isella}, A. \& {Natta}, A. 2005, \aap, 438, 899

1151: 

1152: \bibitem[Isella et al.(2006)]{ITN06} Isella, A., Testi, L., 

1153: \& Natta, A.\ 2006, \aap, 451, 951 

1154: 

1155: \bibitem[{{Johns-Krull}(2007)}]{JOHNS-KRULL07}

1156: {Johns-Krull}, C.~M. 2007, ArXiv e-prints, 0704.2923

1157: 

1158: \bibitem[{{Kenyon} \& {Hartmann}(1995)}]{KH95}

1159: {Kenyon}, S.~J. \& {Hartmann}, L. 1995, \apjs, 101, 117

1160: 

1161: \bibitem[{{Kholopov}(1959)}]{KHOLOPOV59}

1162: {Kholopov}, P.~N. 1959, Soviet Astronomy, 3, 291

1163: 

1164: \bibitem[{{Koerner} \& {Sargent}(1995)}]{KS95}

1165: {Koerner}, D.~W. \& {Sargent}, A.~I. 1995, \aj, 109, 2138

1166: 

1167: \bibitem[{{K{\"o}hler} {et~al.}(2000){K{\"o}hler}, {Kunkel}, {Leinert}, \&

1168:   {Zinnecker}}]{KOHLER+00}

1169: {K{\"o}hler}, R., {Kunkel}, M., {Leinert}, C., \& {Zinnecker}, H. 2000, \aap,

1170:   356, 541

1171: 

1172: \bibitem[{{K\"{o}nigl}(1991)}]{KONIGL91}

1173: {K\"{o}nigl}, A. 1991, \apjl, 370, L39

1174: 

1175: \bibitem[{{Leinert} {et~al.}(2004){Leinert}, {van Boekel}, {Waters},

1176:   {Chesneau}, {Malbet}, {K{\" o}hler}, {Jaffe}, {Ratzka}, {Dutrey},

1177:   {Preibisch}, {Graser}, {Bakker}, {Chagnon}, {Cotton}, {Dominik}, {Dullemond},

1178:   {Glazenborg-Kluttig}, {Glindemann}, {Henning}, {Hofmann}, {de Jong},

1179:   {Lenzen}, {Ligori}, {Lopez}, {Meisner}, {Morel}, {Paresce}, {Pel},

1180:   {Percheron}, {Perrin}, {Przygodda}, {Richichi}, {Sch{\" o}ller}, {Schuller},

1181:   {Stecklum}, {van den Ancker}, {von der L{\" u}he}, \& {Weigelt}}]{LEINERT+04}

1182: {Leinert}, C., et al. 2004, \aap, 423, 537

1183: 

1184: \bibitem[{{Lin} {et~al.}(1996){Lin}, {Bodenheimer}, \& {Richardson}}]{LBR96}

1185: {Lin}, D.~N.~C., {Bodenheimer}, P., \& {Richardson}, D.~C. 1996, \nat, 380, 606

1186: 

1187: \bibitem[{{Liu} {et~al.}(2007){Liu}, {Hinz}, {Meyer}, {Mamajek}, {Hoffmann},

1188:   {Brusa}, {Miller}, \& {Kenworthy}}]{LIU+07}

1189: {Liu}, W.~M., {Hinz}, P.~M., {Meyer}, M.~R., {Mamajek}, E.~E., {Hoffmann},

1190:   W.~F., {Brusa}, G., {Miller}, D., \& {Kenworthy}, M.~A. 2007, \apj, 658, 1164

1191: 

1192: \bibitem[{{Marcy} {et~al.}(2005){Marcy}, {Butler}, {Fischer}, {Vogt}, {Wright},

1193:   {Tinney}, \& {Jones}}]{MARCY+05}

1194: {Marcy}, G., {Butler}, R.~P., {Fischer}, D., {Vogt}, S., {Wright}, J.~T.,

1195:   {Tinney}, C.~G., \& {Jones}, H.~R.~A. 2005, Progress of Theoretical Physics

1196:   Supplement, 158, 24

1197: 

1198: \bibitem[{{McCaughrean} \& {O'Dell}(1996)}]{MO96}

1199: {McCaughrean}, M.~J. \& {O'Dell}, C.~R. 1996, \aj, 111, 1977

1200: 

1201: \bibitem[{{McLean} {et~al.}(2003){McLean}, {McGovern}, {Burgasser},

1202:   {Kirkpatrick}, {Prato}, \& {Kim}}]{MCLEAN+03}

1203: {McLean}, I.~S., {McGovern}, M.~R., {Burgasser}, A.~J., {Kirkpatrick}, J.~D.,

1204:   {Prato}, L., \& {Kim}, S.~S. 2003, \apj, 596, 561

1205: 

1206: \bibitem[{{Millan-Gabet} {et~al.}(2007){Millan-Gabet}, {Malbet}, {Akeson},

1207:   {Leinert}, {Monnier}, \& {Waters}}]{MILLAN-GABET+07}

1208: {Millan-Gabet}, R., {Malbet}, F., {Akeson}, R., {Leinert}, C., {Monnier}, J.,

1209:   \& {Waters}, R. 2007, in Protostars and Planets V, ed. B.~{Reipurth},

1210:   D.~{Jewitt}, \& K.~{Keil}, 539--554

1211: 

1212: \bibitem[{{Millan-Gabet} {et~al.}(2001){Millan-Gabet}, {Schloerb}, \&

1213:   {Traub}}]{MST01}

1214: {Millan-Gabet}, R., {Schloerb}, F.~P., \& {Traub}, W.~A. 2001, \apj, 546, 358

1215: 

1216: \bibitem[{{Millan-Gabet} {et~al.}(1999){Millan-Gabet}, {Schloerb}, {Traub},

1217:   {Malbet}, {Berger}, \& {Bregman}}]{MILLAN+99}

1218: {Millan-Gabet}, R., {Schloerb}, F.~P., {Traub}, W.~A., {Malbet}, F., {Berger},

1219:   J.~P., \& {Bregman}, J.~D. 1999, \apjl, 513, L131

1220: 

1221: \bibitem[{{Monin} {et~al.}(1998){Monin}, {Menard}, \& {Duchene}}]{MMD98}

1222: {Monin}, J.-L., {Menard}, F., \& {Duchene}, G. 1998, \aap, 339, 113

1223: 

1224: \bibitem[{{Monnier} {et~al.}(2006){Monnier}, {Berger}, {Millan-Gabet}, {Traub},

1225:   {Schloerb}, {Pedretti}, {Benisty}, {Carleton}, {Haguenauer}, {Kern},

1226:   {Labeye}, {Lacasse}, {Malbet}, {Perraut}, {Pearlman}, \& {Zhao}}]{MONNIER+06}

1227: {Monnier}, J.~D., et al. 2006, \apj, 647, 444

1228: 

1229: \bibitem[{{Monnier} \& {Millan-Gabet}(2002)}]{MM02}

1230: {Monnier}, J.~D. \& {Millan-Gabet}, R. 2002, \apj, 579, 694

1231: 

1232: \bibitem[{{Monnier} {et~al.}(2005){Monnier}, {Millan-Gabet}, {Billmeier},

1233:   {Akeson}, {Wallace}, {Berger}, {Calvet}, {D'Alessio}, {Danchi}, {Hartmann},

1234:   {Hillenbrand}, {Kuchner}, {Rajagopal}, {Traub}, {Tuthill}, {Boden}, {Booth},

1235:   {Colavita}, {Gathright}, {Hrynevych}, {Le Mignant}, {Ligon}, {Neyman},

1236:   {Swain}, {Thompson}, {Vasisht}, {Wizinowich}, {Beichman}, {Beletic},

1237:   {Creech-Eakman}, {Koresko}, {Sargent}, {Shao}, \& {van Belle}}]{MONNIER+05}

1238: {Monnier}, J.~D., et al. 2005, \apj, 624, 832

1239: 

1240: \bibitem[{{Mora} {et~al.}(2001){Mora}, {Mer{\'{\i}}n}, {Solano}, {Montesinos},

1241:   {de Winter}, {Eiroa}, {Ferlet}, {Grady}, {Davies}, {Miranda}, {Oudmaijer},

1242:   {Palacios}, {Quirrenbach}, {Harris}, {Rauer}, {Cameron}, {Deeg}, {Garz{\'

1243:   o}n}, {Penny}, {Schneider}, {Tsapras}, \& {Wesselius}}]{MORA+01}

1244: {Mora}, A., et al. 2001, \aap, 378, 116

1245: 

1246: \bibitem[{{Muzerolle} {et~al.}(2001){Muzerolle}, {Calvet}, \&

1247:   {Hartmann}}]{MCH01}

1248: {Muzerolle}, J., {Calvet}, N., \& {Hartmann}, L. 2001, \apj, 550, 944

1249: 

1250: \bibitem[{{Muzerolle} {et~al.}(1998){Muzerolle}, {Hartmann}, \&

1251:   {Calvet}}]{MHC98}

1252: {Muzerolle}, J., {Hartmann}, L., \& {Calvet}, N. 1998, \aj, 116, 2965

1253: 

1254: \bibitem[{{Perryman} {et~al.}(1997){Perryman}, {Lindegren}, {Kovalevsky},

1255:   {Hoeg}, {Bastian}, {Bernacca}, {Cr{\'e}z{\'e}}, {Donati}, {Grenon}, {van

1256:   Leeuwen}, {van der Marel}, {Mignard}, {Murray}, {Le Poole}, {Schrijver},

1257:   {Turon}, {Arenou}, {Froeschl{\'e}}, \& {Petersen}}]{PERRYMAN+97}

1258: {Perryman}, M.~A.~C., et al. 1997, \aap, 323, L49

1259: 

1260: \bibitem[{{Pollack} {et~al.}(1994){Pollack}, {Hollenbach}, {Beckwith},

1261:   {Simonelli}, {Roush}, \& {Fong}}]{POLLACK+94}

1262: {Pollack}, J.~B., {Hollenbach}, D., {Beckwith}, S., {Simonelli}, D.~P.,

1263:   {Roush}, T., \& {Fong}, W. 1994, \apj, 421, 615

1264: 

1265: \bibitem[{{Prato} {et~al.}(2003){Prato}, {Greene}, \& {Simon}}]{PGS03}

1266: {Prato}, L., {Greene}, T.~P., \& {Simon}, M. 2003, \apj, 584, 853

1267: 

1268: \bibitem[{{Shu} {et~al.}(1994){Shu}, {Najita}, {Ostriker}, {Wilkin}, {Ruden},

1269:   \& {Lizano}}]{SHU+94}

1270: {Shu}, F., {Najita}, J., {Ostriker}, E., {Wilkin}, F., {Ruden}, S., \&

1271:   {Lizano}, S. 1994, \apj, 429, 781

1272: 

1273: \bibitem[{{Simon} {et~al.}(1995){Simon}, {Ghez}, {Leinert}, {Cassar}, {Chen},

1274:   {Howell}, {Jameson}, {Matthews}, {Neugebauer}, \& {Richichi}}]{SIMON+95}

1275: {Simon}, M., {Ghez}, A.~M., {Leinert}, C., {Cassar}, L., {Chen}, W.~P.,

1276:   {Howell}, R.~R., {Jameson}, R.~F., {Matthews}, K., {Neugebauer}, G., \&

1277:   {Richichi}, A. 1995, \apj, 443, 625

1278: 

1279: \bibitem[{{Skrutskie} {et~al.}(1996){Skrutskie}, {Meyer}, {Whalen}, \&

1280:   {Hamilton}}]{SKRUTSKIE+96}

1281: {Skrutskie}, M.~F., {Meyer}, M.~R., {Whalen}, D., \& {Hamilton}, C. 1996, \aj,

1282:   112, 2168

1283: 

1284: \bibitem[{{Steenman} \& {Th\'{e}}(1991)}]{ST91}

1285: {Steenman}, H. \& {Th\'{e}}, P.~S. 1991, \apss, 184, 9

1286: 

1287: \bibitem[Tannirkulam et al.(2007)]{THM07} Tannirkulam, A., 

1288: Harries, T.~J., \& Monnier, J.~D.\ 2007, \apj, 661, 374 

1289: 

1290: \bibitem[{{Valenti} {et~al.}(1993){Valenti}, {Basri}, \& {Johns}}]{VBJ93}

1291: {Valenti}, J.~A., {Basri}, G., \& {Johns}, C.~M. 1993, \aj, 106, 2024

1292: 

1293: \bibitem[{{van Boekel} {et~al.}(2004){van Boekel}, {Min}, {Leinert}, {Waters},

1294:   {Richichi}, {Chesneau}, {Dominik}, {Jaffe}, {Dutrey}, {Graser}, {Henning},

1295:   {de Jong}, {K{\" o}hler}, {de Koter}, {Lopez}, {Malbet}, {Morel}, {Paresce},

1296:   {Perrin}, {Preibisch}, {Przygodda}, {Sch{\" o}ller}, \&

1297:   {Wittkowski}}]{VANBOEKEL+04}

1298: {van Boekel}, R., et al. 2004, \nat, 432, 479

1299: 

1300: \bibitem[{{Vinkovi{\'c}} {et~al.}(2006){Vinkovi{\'c}}, {Ivezi{\'c}},

1301:   {Jurki{\'c}}, \& {Elitzur}}]{VINKOVIC+06}

1302: {Vinkovi{\'c}}, D., {Ivezi{\'c}}, {\v Z}., {Jurki{\'c}}, T., \& {Elitzur}, M.

1303:   2006, \apj, 636, 348

1304: 

1305: \bibitem[{{Vinkovi{\'c}} \& {Jurki{\'c}}(2007)}]{VJ07}

1306: {Vinkovi{\'c}}, D. \& {Jurki{\'c}}, T. 2007, \apj, 658, 462

1307: 

1308: \bibitem[{{Walker}(1972)}]{WALKER72}

1309: {Walker}, M.~F. 1972, \apj, 175, 89

1310: 

1311: \bibitem[{{Walter} {et~al.}(1994){Walter}, {Vrba}, {Mathieu}, {Brown}, \&

1312:   {Myers}}]{WALTER+94}

1313: {Walter}, F.~M., {Vrba}, F.~J., {Mathieu}, R.~D., {Brown}, A., \& {Myers},

1314:   P.~C. 1994, \aj, 107, 692

1315: 

1316: \bibitem[{{White} \& {Ghez}(2001)}]{WG01}

1317: {White}, R.~J. \& {Ghez}, A.~M. 2001, \apj, 556, 265

1318: 

1319: \bibitem[{{Wichmann} {et~al.}(2000){Wichmann}, {Torres}, {Melo}, {Frink},

1320:   {Allain}, {Bouvier}, {Krautter}, {Covino}, \& {Neuh{\"a}user}}]{WICHMANN+00}

1321: {Wichmann}, R., {Torres}, G., {Melo}, C.~H.~F., {Frink}, S., {Allain}, S.,

1322:   {Bouvier}, J., {Krautter}, J., {Covino}, E., \& {Neuh{\"a}user}, R. 2000,

1323:   \aap, 359, 181

1324: 

1325: \bibitem[{{Zuckerman} \& {Song}(2004)}]{ZS04}

1326: {Zuckerman}, B. \& {Song}, I. 2004, \araa, 42, 685

1327: 

1328: \end{thebibliography}

1329: 

1330: 

1331: \begin{deluxetable}{lccccccc}

1332: %\tabletypesize{\footnotesize}

1333: %\tabletypesize{\scriptsize}

1334: \tabletypesize{\tiny}

1335: %\rotate

1336: \tablewidth{0pt}

1337: \tablecaption{Target and Calibrator Properties and Observations 

1338: \label{tab:sample}}

1339: \tablehead{\colhead{Source} & \colhead{$\alpha$} 

1340: & \colhead{$\delta$} & \colhead{$d$} & \colhead{Type} & \colhead{KI}

1341: & \colhead{NIRSPEC} & \colhead{References}}

1342: \startdata

1343: \multicolumn{8}{c}{Target Stars} \\

1344: \hline

1345: CI Tau & 04 33 52.01 & +22 50 30.1 & 140 & K7 & 24 Oct 2005 & 07 Jan 2006 & 

1346: 1 \\

1347: DK Tau A & 04 30 44.28 & +26 01 24.6 & 140 & K9 & 30 Oct 2004, 24 Oct 2005 & 

1348: 19 Nov 2004, 07 Jan 2006 & 2 \\

1349: DK Tau B & 04 30 44.42 & +26 01 23.9 & 140 & M1 & 30 Oct 2004, 24 Oct 2005 & 

1350: 19 Nov 2004, 07 Jan 2006 & 2 \\

1351: AA Tau & 04 34 55.45 & +24 28 53.7 & 140 & K7 & 30 Oct 2004, 24 Oct 2005 & 

1352: 19 Nov 2004, 07 Jan 2006 & 1 \\

1353: RW Aur A & 05 07 49.568 & +30 24 05.161 & 140 & K1 & 30 Oct 2004$^{\ast}$ & 

1354: 20 Nov 2004, 07 Jan 2006 & 3 \\

1355: RW Aur B & 05 07 49.465 & +30 24 04.82 & 140 & K5 & 30 Oct 2004 & 

1356: 20 Nov 2004, 07 Jan 2006 & 3 \\

1357: V1002 Sco & 16 12 40.505 & -18 59 28.14 & 160 & K0 & 

1358: 21 Apr 2005 & 01 Jun 2005 & 4 \\

1359: AS 206 & 16 25 56.3 & -24 20 50.0 & 160 & K6.5 & 21 Apr 2005 & 13 Jul 2006 & 

1360: 5\\

1361: V1331 Cyg & 21 01 09.21 & +50 21 44.8 & 700 & G5 & 24 Oct 2005 & 13 Jul 2006 &

1362: 6,7 \\

1363: DI Cep & 22 56 11.534 & +58 40 01.795 & 300 & G8 & 24 Oct 2005 & 13 Jul 2006 & 

1364: 5,8 \\

1365: BM And & 23 37 38.47 & +48 24 12.0 & 440 & K5 & 

1366: 24 Oct 2005 & 07 Jan 2006 & 9,10 \\

1367: \hline

1368: \multicolumn{8}{c}{KI Calibrator Stars} \\

1369: \hline

1370: HD 28459 & 04 30 38.408 & +32 27 27.965 & 94 & B9.5V & 

1371: 30 Oct 2004, 24 Oct 2005 & & 11 \\

1372: HD 282230 & 04 31 23.148 & +31 16 41.390 & 77 & K0V & 

1373: 30 Oct 2004, 24 Oct 2005 & & 11 \\

1374: HD 30378 & 04 48 22.743 & +29 46 22.811 & 196 & B9.5V & 

1375: 30 Oct 2004, 24 Oct 2005 & & 11 \\

1376: HD 36724 & 05 34 58.506 & +26 58 19.958 & 86 & F7V & 

1377: 30 Oct 2004, 24 Oct 2005 & & 11 \\

1378: HDC142943 & 15 57 57.772 & -17 05 23.974 & 75 & F6V & 21 Apr 2005 & & 11 \\

1379: HDC144925 & 16 09 02.600 & -18 59 44.037 & 150 & A0V & 21 Apr 2005 & & 11\\

1380: HD 214279 & 22 35 51.994 & +56 04 14.067 & 108 & A3V & 24 Oct 2005 & & 11\\

1381: HD 214240 & 22 35 53.382 & +50 04 14.836 & 500 & B3V & 24 Oct 2005 & & 11 \\

1382: HD 219290 & 23 14 14.385 & +50 37 04.408 & 126 & A0V & 24 Oct 2005 & & 11 \\

1383: HD 219891 & 23 19 02.413 & +45 08 12.302 & 126 & A5V & 24 Oct 2005 & & 11 \\

1384: \hline

1385: \multicolumn{8}{c}{NIRSPEC Calibrator Stars} \\

1386: \hline

1387: HR 1251 & 04 03 09.3801 & +05 59 21.498 & 40 & A1V & & 

1388: 19 Nov 2004, 07 Jan 2006 & 11 \\

1389: HR 1252 & 04 59 15.4096 & +37 53 24.881 & 49 & A1V & & 

1390: 20 Nov 2004 & 11 \\

1391: HR 5511 & 14 46 14.9241 & +01 53 34.388 & 39 & A0V & & 13 Jul 2006 & 11 \\ 

1392: HR 8518 & 22 21 39.3754 & -01 23 14.393 & 48 & A0V & & 01 Jun 2005 & 11 \\

1393: \hline

1394: \multicolumn{8}{c}{NIRSPEC WLTT Template Stars} \\

1395: \hline

1396: AG Tri A & 02 27 29.2543 & +30 58 24.613 & 42 & K6 & & 

1397: 19, 20 Nov 2004, 07 Jan 2006, 13 Jul 2006 & 11 \\

1398: AG Tri B & 02 27 29.2543 & +30 58 24.613 & 42 & M0 & & 

1399: 19, 20 Nov 2004, 07 Jan 2006, 13 Jul 2006 & 11 \\

1400: TYC 5882 & 04 02 16.5 & -15 21 30 & 63 & K3/4  & & 20 Nov 2004 & 12 \\ 

1401: RX J0409.8 & 04 09 51.108 & +24 46 21.20 & 140 & M1.5 & & 

1402: 19, 20 Nov 2004, 07 Jan 2006 & 13 \\

1403: RX J0432.8 & 04 32 53.237 & +17 35 33.65 & 140 & M2 & & 

1404: 19, 20 Nov 2004, 07 Jan 2006 & 13 \\

1405: RX J0437.4A & 04 37 26.89 & +18 51 25.9 & 140 & K6 & & 

1406: 19, 20 Nov 2004, 07 Jan 2006 & 13 \\

1407: RX J0437.4B & 04 37 26.89 & +18 51 25.9 & 140 & M0.5 & & 

1408: 19, 20 Nov 2004, 07 Jan 2006 & 13 \\

1409: RX J0438.2 & 04 38 15.619 & +23 02 27.88 & 140 & M2 & & 

1410: 19, 20 Nov 2004, 07 Jan 2006 & 13 \\

1411: RX J1534.3 &  15 34 23.1 & -33 00 07 & 145 & M0 &  & 13 Jul 2006 & 14 \\ 

1412: RX J1546.0 & 15 46 05.5 & -29 20 40 & 145 & M0 &  & 

1413: 01 Jun 2005, 13 Jul 2006 & 14 \\

1414: RX J1546.7 & 15 46 47.0 & -32 10 06 & 145 & M2 & & 01 Jun 2005 & 14   \\

1415: RX J1557.8 & 15 57 50.0 & -23 05 09 & 145 & M0 & & 01 Jun 2005 & 14 \\

1416: RX J1558.5 & 15 58 53.6 & -25 12 32  & 145 & M1 & & 01 Jun 2005 & 14  \\

1417: \enddata

1418: \tablecomments{$\ast$--for RW Aur A, we also utilize KI measurements from

1419: 23 Oct 2002 \citep{AKESON+05b}. All Taurus sources were assumed to 

1420: be at a distance of 140 pc.}  

1421: \tablerefs{(1) \cite{KH95}; (2) \cite{MMD98}; (3) \cite{WG01}; (4) 

1422: \cite{WALTER+94}; (5) \cite{HB88}; (6) \cite{CK81}; (7) \cite{HP92}; 

1423: (8) \cite{KHOLOPOV59}; (9) \cite{AH69}; (10) \cite{MORA+01}; 

1424: (11) \cite{PERRYMAN+97}; (12) \cite{ZS04}; (13) \cite{WICHMANN+00}; 

1425: (14) \cite{KOHLER+00}}

1426: \end{deluxetable}

1427: 

1428: \begin{deluxetable}{lcccc}

1429: \tabletypesize{\footnotesize}

1430: %\tabletypesize{\scriptsize}

1431: %\tabletypesize{\tiny}

1432: %\rotate

1433: \tablewidth{0pt}

1434: \tablecaption{PAIRITEL $JHK_{\rm s}$ Photometry \label{tab:phot}}

1435: \tablehead{\colhead{Source} & \colhead{Date} 

1436: & \colhead{$m_J$} & \colhead{$m_H$} & \colhead{$m_{K_{\rm s}}$}}

1437: \startdata

1438: CI Tau & 24Oct05 & $8.50 \pm 0.02$ & $7.99 \pm 0.02$ & $7.51 \pm 0.03$ \\

1439:  & 20Nov05 &  $8.25 \pm 0.02$  & $7.83 \pm 0.02$ & $7.34 \pm 0.02$ \\

1440: DK Tau AB & 18Oct04 & $7.94 \pm 0.02$ & $7.46 \pm 0.02$ & $7.03 \pm 0.03$ \\

1441:  & 05Nov04 &  $7.95 \pm 0.02$  & $7.45 \pm 0.02$ & $6.98 \pm 0.02$ \\

1442:  & 24Oct05 &  $7.83 \pm 0.05$  & $7.38 \pm 0.05$ & $6.92 \pm 0.08$ \\

1443: AA Tau & 18Oct04 & $8.80 \pm 0.02$  & $8.37 \pm 0.02$ & $7.94 \pm 0.03$ \\

1444:  & 05Nov04 &  $9.10 \pm 0.03$  & $8.58 \pm 0.03$ & $8.12 \pm 0.03$ \\

1445:  & 24Oct05 &  $8.82 \pm 0.03$  & $8.38 \pm 0.03$ & $7.74 \pm 0.04$ \\

1446:  & 20Nov05 &  $8.65 \pm 0.03$  & $8.20 \pm 0.03$ & $7.82 \pm 0.03$ \\

1447: RW Aur AB & 18Oct04 & $8.63 \pm 0.02$ & $8.19 \pm 0.02$ & $7.68 \pm 0.02$ \\

1448:  & 24Oct05 & $8.51 \pm 0.02$  & $8.00 \pm 0.02$ & $7.54 \pm 0.02$ \\

1449: V1002 Sco & 21Apr05 & $8.29 \pm 0.02$ & $7.87 \pm 0.02$ & $7.35 \pm 0.02$ \\

1450: AS 206$^{\ast}$ & 21Apr05 & $9.0 \pm 0.3$ & $8.5 \pm 0.3$ & $7.9 \pm 0.3$ \\ 

1451: V1331 Cyg$^{\ast}$ & 12Sep04 & $10.01 \pm 0.04$ & $9.64 \pm 0.04$ & 

1452: $8.98 \pm 0.04$ \\

1453:  & 13Oct04 & $10.02 \pm 0.04$ & $9.65 \pm 0.04$ & $9.06 \pm 0.04$ \\

1454:  & 23Oct04 & $10.03 \pm 0.04$ & $9.57 \pm 0.04$ & $9.00 \pm 0.04$ \\

1455:  & 17Nov05 & $10.06 \pm 0.04$ & $9.63 \pm 0.04$ & $9.03 \pm 0.04$ \\

1456:  & 24Oct05 & $10.06 \pm 0.04$ & $9.67 \pm 0.04$ & $9.07 \pm 0.04$ \\

1457:  & 25Oct05 & $10.01 \pm 0.04$ & $9.64 \pm 0.04$ & $9.04 \pm 0.04$ \\

1458:  & 26Oct05 & $9.93 \pm 0.04$ & $9.54 \pm 0.04$ & $8.95 \pm 0.04$ \\

1459: DI Cep$^{\ast}$ & 13Oct04 & $9.1 \pm 0.2$ & $8.6 \pm 0.2$ & $8.2 \pm 0.2$ \\

1460:  & 20Oct04 & $9.2 \pm 0.2$ & $8.8 \pm 0.2$ & $8.3 \pm 0.2$ \\ 

1461: BM And & 13Oct04 & $9.85 \pm 0.03$ & $9.38 \pm 0.03$ & $8.89 \pm 0.03$ \\

1462:  & 23Oct04 & $10.12 \pm 0.03$ & $9.59 \pm 0.03$ & $9.14 \pm 0.03$ \\ 

1463:  & 24Oct05 & $9.61 \pm 0.02$ & $9.10 \pm 0.02$ & $8.61 \pm 0.02$ \\ 

1464:  & 17Nov05 & $9.84 \pm 0.03$ & $9.32 \pm 0.03$ & $8.85 \pm 0.03$ \\ 

1465: \enddata

1466: \tablecomments{$\ast$--For AS 206, V1331 Cyg, and DI Cep, our photometric 

1467: calibrators appear to be variable at a low level, and the quoted uncertainties

1468: include this potential error.}

1469: \end{deluxetable}

1470: 

1471: \begin{deluxetable}{lcccc}

1472: \tabletypesize{\footnotesize}

1473: %\tabletypesize{\scriptsize}

1474: %\tabletypesize{\tiny}

1475: %\rotate

1476: \tablewidth{0pt}

1477: \tablecaption{$K$-band veiling measurements \label{tab:veilings}}

1478: \tablehead{\colhead{Source} & \colhead{Date} 

1479: & \colhead{$r_K$} & \colhead{Rotational Broadening (km s$^{-1}$)} & 

1480: \colhead{Template Star}}

1481: \startdata

1482: CI Tau & 07 Jan 2006 & $1.16 \pm 0.13$ & $<12$ & RXJ 0437.4A \\

1483: DK Tau A & 19 Nov 2004 & $1.58 \pm 0.16$ & $<12$ & RX J0437.4B \\ 

1484:  & 07 Jan 2006 & $1.32 \pm 0.14$ & $<12$ & RX J0437.4B \\

1485: DK Tau B & 19 Nov 2004 & $0.78 \pm 0.10$ & $<12$ & RX J0437.4B \\ 

1486:  & 07 Jan 2006 & $0.80 \pm 0.15$ & $<12$ & RX J0437.4B \\

1487: AA Tau & 19 Nov 2004 & $0.54 \pm 0.06$ & $<12$ &  RX J0437.4B \\ 

1488:  & 07 Jan 2006 & $0.34 \pm 0.06$ & $<12$ &  RX J0437.4B \\

1489: RW Aur A & 20 Nov 2004 & $3.26^{+0.86}_{-0.62}$ & $35 \pm 10$ & 

1490: AG Tri A \\

1491: & 07 Jan 2006 & $1.50 \pm 0.20$ & $35 \pm 10$ & AG Tri A \\

1492: RW Aur B & 20 Nov 2004 & $0.32 \pm 0.08$ & $11 \pm 4$ &  RX J0437.4B  \\

1493: & 07 Jan 2006 & $0.28 \pm 0.06$ & $11 \pm 4$ &  RX J0437.4B \\

1494: V1002 Sco & 01 Jun 2005 & $0.36 \pm 0.08$ & $78 \pm 6$ & RX J1557.8 \\ 

1495: AS 206 & 13 Jul 2006 & $1.48 \pm 0.22$ & $8 \pm 7$ & AG Tri A \\ 

1496: V1331 Cyg & 13 Jul 2006 & $>10$ \\

1497: DI Cep & 13 Jul 2006 & $3.40 \pm 0.71$ & $9 \pm 5$ & AG Tri A \\

1498: BM And & 07 Jan 2006 & $2.30^{+0.44}_{-1.50}$ & $17 \pm 17$ & TYC 5882 \\ 

1499: \enddata

1500: \tablecomments{The $r_K$ and rotational broadening values were

1501: determined by minimizing the $\chi^2$ residuals between observed spectra

1502: and a grid of veiled, rotationally broadened template spectra 

1503: (\S \ref{sec:rk}).  The template stars are WLTTs showing no near-IR

1504: excess emission, and fitted veilings for these objects are consistent

1505: with zero.  However, the templates may have non-negligible $v\sin i$ 

1506: values, and thus the fitted rotational broadenings 

1507: for our targets are lower limits for the true $v \sin i$ values.  

1508: Quoted error bars are 1$\sigma$ statistical

1509: uncertainties in the best-fit parameters. 

1510: Spectral types of template stars can be found in 

1511: Table \ref{tab:sample}.

1512: }

1513: \end{deluxetable}

1514: 

1515: \begin{deluxetable}{lccc}

1516: \tabletypesize{\footnotesize}

1517: %\tabletypesize{\scriptsize}

1518: %\tabletypesize{\tiny}

1519: %\rotate

1520: \tablewidth{0pt}

1521: \tablecaption{Face-on Ring Radii \label{tab:uds}}

1522: \tablehead{\colhead{Source} & \colhead{Date} 

1523: & \colhead{$R_{\rm ring}$ (AU)} & \colhead{$R_{\rm ring}$ (fixed $r_K$)}}

1524: \startdata

1525: CI Tau & 24Oct05 & 0.097 $\pm$ 0.008 & 0.097 $\pm$ 0.008 \\

1526: DK Tau A & 30Oct04 & $0.103 \pm 0.005$ & 0.105 $\pm$ 0.005 \\

1527:  & 24Oct05 & $0.107 \pm 0.008$ & 0.105 $\pm$ 0.008 \\

1528: DK Tau B & 30Oct04 & $0.137 \pm 0.018$ & 0.137 $\pm$ 0.012 \\

1529:  & 24Oct05 & $0.137 \pm 0.018$ & 0.138 $\pm$ 0.018 \\

1530: AA Tau & 30Oct04 & $0.084 \pm 0.029$ & 0.090 $\pm$ 0.031 \\

1531:  & 24Oct05 & $0.133 \pm 0.019$ &  0.120 $\pm$ 0.016 \\

1532: RW Aur A & 23Oct02 & 0.103 $\pm$ 0.005 & $0.111 \pm 0.007$ \\

1533:  & 30Oct04 & 0.181 $\pm$ 0.016 & $0.131 \pm 0.007$ \\

1534: RW Aur B & 24Oct05 & 0.161 $\pm$ 0.034  & 0.161 $\pm$ 0.034 \\

1535: V1002 Sco & 21Apr05 & 0.118 $\pm$ 0.027 & 0.118 $\pm$ 0.027 \\

1536: AS 206 & 21Apr05 & 0.112 $\pm$ 0.007 & 0.112 $\pm$ 0.007 \\

1537: V1331 Cyg & 24Oct05 & 0.315 $\pm$ 0.021  & 0.315 $\pm$ 0.021 \\

1538: DI Cep & 24Oct05 & 0.165 $\pm$ 0.039 & 0.165 $\pm$ 0.039 \\

1539: BM And & 24Oct05 & 0.249 $\pm$ 0.028  & 0.249 $\pm$ 0.028 \\

1540: \enddata

1541: \tablecomments{$R_{\rm ring}$ is computed from fits of uniform ring models

1542: to KI data, and the distances assumed in Table \ref{tab:sample}.  Quoted

1543: error bars are 1$\sigma$ statistical uncertainties in the $\chi^2$ minimzation

1544: between models and measured $V_{\rm disk}^2$. Column 3 lists the ring radii

1545: determined when $V^2_{\rm disk}$ are computed using the veiling measurement

1546: closest in time to the KI measurement.  Column 4 lists the ring radii for 

1547: $V^2_{\rm disk}$ estimated  using the average veiling measured over all epochs.

1548: }

1549: \end{deluxetable}

1550: 

1551: 

1552: \begin{deluxetable}{lccccc}

1553: \tabletypesize{\footnotesize}

1554: %\tabletypesize{\scriptsize}

1555: %\tabletypesize{\tiny}

1556: %\rotate

1557: \tablewidth{0pt}

1558: \tablecaption{Br$\gamma$ Emission Properties \label{tab:ews}}

1559: \tablehead{\colhead{Source} & \colhead{Date} 

1560: & \colhead{EW (\AA)} & \colhead{$L_{\rm Br \gamma}$ 

1561: ($10^{-4}$ L$_{\odot}$)} & \colhead{$L_{\rm acc}$ (L$_{\odot}$)} & 

1562: \colhead{$L_{\ast}$ (L$_{\odot}$)}}

1563: \startdata

1564: CI Tau & 07 Jan 2006 & $7.4 \pm 0.1$ & 2.3 & 0.70 & 0.8 \\

1565: DK Tau A & 19 Nov 2004 & $7.6 \pm 0.1$ & 2.6 & 0.80 & 1.7 \\

1566:  & 07 Jan 2006 & $6.9 \pm 0.1$ & 2.5 & 0.76 & 1.7 \\

1567: DK Tau B & 19 Nov 2004 & $2.7 \pm 0.1$ & 0.3 & 0.05 & 0.5 \\

1568:  & 07 Jan 2006 & $1.8 \pm 0.1$ & 0.2 & 0.03 & 0.5 \\

1569: AA Tau & 19 Nov 2004 & $4.8 \pm 0.1$ & 0.7 & 0.16 & 0.6 \\

1570:  & 07 Jan 2006 & $0.2 \pm 0.1$ & $<0.1$ & $<0.01$ & 0.6 \\

1571: RW Aur A & 20 Nov 2004 & $9.3 \pm 0.1$ & 1.5 & 0.42 & 1.7 \\

1572:  & 07 Jan 2006 & $16.5 \pm 0.1$ & 3.1 & 1.02 & 1.7 \\

1573: RW Aur B & 20 Nov 2004 & $6.7 \pm 0.1$ & 0.3 & 0.05 & 0.4 \\

1574:  & 07 Jan 2006 & $5.1 \pm 0.1$ & 0.3 & 0.04 & 0.4 \\

1575: V1002 Sco & 01 Jun 2005 & $14 \pm 6$ & 5.4 & 2.07 & 3.8 \\

1576: AS 206 & 13 Jul 2006 & $9.7 \pm 0.2$ & 2.4 & 0.74 & 1.6 \\

1577: V1331 Cyg & 13 Jul 2006 & $14.4 \pm 0.2$ & 24.5 & 13.78 & 21.0 \\

1578: DI Cep & 13 Jul 2006 & $8.4 \pm 0.2$ & 4.6 & 1.69 & 5.2 \\

1579: BM And & 07 Jan 2006 & $1.4 \pm 0.1$ & 1.0 & 0.23 & 5.5 \\

1580: \enddata

1581: \tablecomments{Given the uncertainties in the photometry and EWs, we estimate

1582: uncertainties between 5\% and 20\% for $L_{\rm Br \gamma}$.  The conversion

1583: from $L_{\rm Br \gamma}$ to $L_{\rm acc}$ includes additional uncertainties

1584: \citep{MHC98,MCH01}, and $L_{\rm acc}$ is thus uncertain by a factor

1585: of a few. We also list stellar luminosities, $L_{\ast}$,  drawn

1586: from the literature \citep{WG01,HEG95,WALTER+94,HP92}.}

1587: \end{deluxetable}

1588: 

1589: 

1590: \clearpage

1591: 

1592: \epsscale{1.0}

1593: \begin{figure}

1594: \plotone{f1.eps}

1595: \caption{Measured $V^2$ from KI as a function of $uv$ radius, $r_{\rm uv}$

1596: ($r_{\rm uv}$ is equal to the projected baseline length divided by

1597: the wavelength).

1598: Given the angular resolution of our

1599: observations, these measurements include contributions from the unresolved

1600: central star and resolved circumstellar emission.  

1601: Different epochs are indicated

1602: with different symbols: unfilled circles represent the second epoch

1603: (where available).    The first epoch of KI data for RW Aur A are from

1604: \citet{AKESON+05b}.

1605: %The data from different epochs clearly differ for

1606: %RW Aur A.  However, this discrepancy depends on the circumstellar-to-stellar

1607: %flux ratio adopted from \citep{AKESON+05b}; a higher ratio would lessen the

1608: %discrepancy.  Taking these data at face value, it appears that either the

1609: %circumstellar emission around RW Aur A became less extended with time, or

1610: %the emission is highly asymmetric (i.e., the source is a nearly edge-on 

1611: %disk; \S \ref{sec:rin}).  

1612: \label{fig:raw}}

1613: \end{figure}

1614: 

1615: \epsscale{1.0}

1616: \begin{figure}

1617: \plottwo{f2a.eps}{f2b.eps}

1618: \caption{Portions of NIRSPEC spectra for RW Aur A ({\it solid curves}), 

1619: with the wavelengths of photospheric Mg and Al absorption lines 

1620: \citep[e.g.,][]{PGS03} indicated.  The spectrum of a non-accreting WLTT 

1621: (AG Tri A), which has been rotationally broadened and veiled

1622: (and vertically offset from the target spectrum), is also plotted 

1623: ({\it dotted line}). Spectral regions used when matching rotationally

1624: broadened, veiled template spectra to target spectra are indicated by

1625: straight horizonal lines.

1626: In 2004 Nov ({\it left}), photospheric absorption lines 

1627: from Mg and Al were significantly more veiled than in 2006 Jan 

1628: ({\it right}).  The

1629: inferred veilings are $r_K=3.26$ and 1.50, respectively.  

1630: We note the presence of emission from the H$_2$ line at 2.12182 $\mu$m in both 

1631: epochs;  however analysis of this feature is beyond the scope of this work.

1632: \label{fig:nirspec}}

1633: \end{figure}

1634: 

1635: \epsscale{1.0}

1636: \begin{figure}

1637: \plotone{f3.eps}

1638: \caption{Circumstellar component of the measured $V^2$ from KI 

1639: ($V^2_{\rm disk}$ as computed from Equation \ref{eq:v2disk}).

1640: These squared visibilities represent the disk component only.  

1641: Plotted error bars include uncertainties in measured $V^2$ and in

1642: circumstellar-to-stellar flux ratios.  Different epochs are indicated

1643: with different symbols: unfilled circles represent the second epoch

1644: (where available).  The first epoch of KI data for RW Aur A are from

1645: \citet{AKESON+05b}.

1646: %The data from different epochs clearly differ for

1647: %RW Aur A.  However, this discrepancy depends on the circumstellar-to-stellar

1648: %flux ratio adopted from \citep{AKESON+05b}; a higher ratio would lessen the

1649: %discrepancy.  Taking these data at face value, it appears that either the

1650: %circumstellar emission around RW Aur A became less extended with time, or

1651: %the emission is highly asymmetric (i.e., the source is a nearly edge-on 

1652: %disk; \S \ref{sec:rin}).  

1653: \label{fig:kidata}}

1654: \end{figure}

1655: 

1656: 

1657: \epsscale{1.0}

1658: \begin{figure}

1659: \plotone{f4.eps}

1660: \caption{Br$\gamma$ lines observed for our sample.  For objects 

1661: observed over multiple epochs, the line observed during the first epoch is 

1662: plotted with a solid line, and the line observed during the second

1663: epoch is represented with a dotted line.

1664: \label{fig:brg}}

1665: \end{figure}

1666: 

1667: \epsscale{0.9}

1668: \begin{figure}

1669: \plotone{f5.eps}

1670: \caption{Inner ring radii determined from near-IR interferometry, as

1671: a function of source luminosity (stellar+accreion luminosities, where 

1672: available).  Inner ring sizes

1673: from the literature ({\it filled circles}) and for the sources in our sample

1674: ({\it open squares}) are plotted.

1675: We indicate the inner ring radii

1676: expected for a puffed-up inner disk model \citep{DDN01}

1677: with $T_{\rm in}=1500$ K

1678: ({\it dotted line}) and $T_{\rm in}=2000$ K ({\it dashed line}).

1679: While most objects with luminosities $\ga 10$ L$_{\odot}$ agree with

1680: the predictions of these models \citep[with the excpetion of several high-mass

1681: stars whose disks appear consistent with geometrically thin disk models;][]

1682: {EISNER+04}, at lower luminosities, there are

1683: numerous sources with inner ring radii larger than predicted values.

1684: \label{fig:sizes}}

1685: \end{figure}

1686: 

1687: \epsscale{1.0}

1688: \begin{figure}

1689: \plotone{f6.eps}

1690: \caption{

1691: Discrepancy between the measured size and the

1692: model prediction (in the range of inner disk temepratures between 1500 and

1693: 2000 K) is plotted against the ratio of accretion to stellar luminosity.

1694: The discrepancy is the difference between the measured size and

1695: the region bounded by the two curves in Figure \ref{fig:sizes}. 

1696: As in Figure \ref{fig:sizes}, disrepancies for sources

1697: from the literature are indicated by filled circles and, for the sources in our

1698: sample, by open squares.

1699: We have restricted this plot to T Tauri stars

1700: ($L_{\ast} < 5$ L$_{\odot}$), since most higher luminosity

1701: objects do not have measured $L_{\rm acc}$.

1702: While some low accretion luminosity sources do agree with the model

1703: predictions, a trend is nevertheless evident whereby objects with smaller 

1704: $L_{\rm acc}/L_{\ast}$ ratios are more discrepant from model predictions.

1705: The objects exhibiting the largest discrepancies are DK Tau B and

1706: RW Aur B from our sample, GM Aur from \citet{AKESON+05b}, and AS 207 A from

1707: \citet{EISNER+05}.

1708: \label{fig:laccs}}

1709: \end{figure}

1710: 

1711: 

1712: \end{document}