AMBER: Instrument description and first astrophysical results
A. Meilland1 - F. Millour2,3 - P. Stee1 - A. Domiciano de Souza2,1 - R.G. Petrov2 - D. Mourard1 - S. Jankov2 - S. Robbe-Dubois2 - A. Spang1 - E. Aristidi2 - P. Antonelli1 - U. Beckmann4 - Y. Bresson1 - A. Chelli3 - M. Dugué1 - G. Duvert3 - S. Gennari5 - L. Glück3 - P. Kern3 - S. Lagarde1 - E. Le Coarer3 - F. Lisi5 - F. Malbet3 - K. Perraut3 - P. Puget3 - F. Rantakyrö6 - A. Roussel1 - E. Tatulli3,5 - G. Weigelt4 - G. Zins3 - M. Accardo5 - B. Acke3,13 - K. Agabi2 - E. Altariba3 - B. Arezki3 - C. Baffa5 - J. Behrend4 - T. Blöcker4 - S. Bonhomme1 - S. Busoni5 - F. Cassaing7 - J.-M. Clausse1 - J. Colin1 - C. Connot4 - A. Delboulbé3 - T. Driebe4 - P. Feautrier3 - D. Ferruzzi5 - T. Forveille3 - E. Fossat2 - R. Foy8 - D. Fraix-Burnet3 - A. Gallardo3 - E. Giani5 - C. Gil3,14 - A. Glentzlin1 - M. Heiden4 - M. Heininger4 - O. Hernandez Utrera3 - K.-H. Hofmann4 - D. Kamm1 - M. Kiekebusch6 - S. Kraus4 - D. Le Contel1 - J.-M. Le Contel1 - T. Lesourd9 - B. Lopez1 - M. Lopez9 - Y. Magnard3 - A. Marconi5 - G. Mars1 - G. Martinot-Lagarde9,1 - P. Mathias1 - P. Mège3 - J.-L. Monin3 - D. Mouillet3,15 - E. Nussbaum4 - K. Ohnaka4 - J. Pacheco1 - C. Perrier3 - Y. Rabbia1 - S. Rebattu1 - F. Reynaud10 - A. Richichi11 - A. Robini2 - M. Sacchettini3 - D. Schertl4 - M. Schöller6 - W. Solscheid4 - P. Stefanini5 - M. Tallon8 - I. Tallon-Bosc8 - D. Tasso1 - L. Testi5 - F. Vakili2 - O. von der Lühe12 - J.-C. Valtier1 - M. Vannier2,6,16 - N. Ventura3
1 -
Laboratoire Gemini, UMR 6203 Observatoire de la Côte
d'Azur/CNRS, BP 4229, 06304 Nice Cedex 4, France
2 - Laboratoire Universitaire d'Astrophysique de Nice, UMR 6525
Université de Nice - Sophia Antipolis/CNRS, Parc Valrose, 06108
Nice Cedex 2,
France
3 - Laboratoire d'Astrophysique de Grenoble, UMR 5571 Université Joseph
Fourier/CNRS, BP 53, 38041 Grenoble Cedex 9, France
4 - Max-Planck-Institut für Radioastronomie, Auf dem Hügel 69,
53121 Bonn, Germany
5 - INAF-Osservatorio Astrofisico di Arcetri, Istituto Nazionale di
Astrofisica, Largo E. Fermi 5, 50125 Firenze, Italy
6 - European Southern Observatory, Casilla 19001, Santiago 19,
Chile
7 - ONERA/DOTA, 29 av de la Division Leclerc, BP 72, 92322
Chatillon Cedex, France
8 - Centre de Recherche Astronomique de Lyon, UMR 5574 Université
Claude Bernard/CNRS, 9 avenue Charles André, 69561 Saint Genis
Laval Cedex, France
9 - Division Technique INSU/CNRS UPS 855, 1 place Aristide
Briand, 92195 Meudon Cedex, France
10 - IRCOM, UMR 6615 Université de Limoges/CNRS, 123 avenue Albert
Thomas, 87060 Limoges Cedex, France
11 - European Southern Observatory, Karl Schwarzschild Strasse 2,
85748 Garching, Germany
12 - Kiepenheuer Institut für Sonnenphysik, Schöneckstr. 6,
79104 Freiburg, Germany
13 - Instituut voor Sterrenkunde, KU-Leuven, Celestijnenlaan 200D,
3001 Leuven, Belgium
14 - Centro de Astrofísica da Universidade do Porto, Rua
das Estrelas, 4150-762 Porto, Portugal
15 - Laboratoire Astrophysique de Toulouse, UMR 5572 Université
Paul Sabatier/CNRS, BP 826, 65008 Tarbes Cedex, France
16 - Departamento de Astronomia, Universidad de Chile, Chile
Received 11 April 2006 / Accepted 25 October 2006
Abstract
Aims. We study the geometry and kinematics of the circumstellar environment of the Be star
CMa in the Br
emission line and its nearby continuum.
Methods. We use the AMBER/VLTI instrument operating in the K band, which provides a spatial resolution of about 6 mas with a spectral resolution of 1500, to study the kinematics within the disk and to infer its rotation law. To obtain more kinematical constraints we also use a high spectral resolution Pa
line profile obtain in December 2005 at the Observatorio do Pico do Dios, Brazil and we compile V/R line profile variations and spectral energy distribution data points from the literature.
Results. Using differential visibilities and differential phases across the Br
line we detect an asymmetry in the disk. Moreover, we found that
CMa seems difficult to fit within the classical scenario for Be stars, illustrated recently by
Arae observations, i.e. a fast rotating B star close to its breakup velocity surrounded by a Keplerian circumstellar disk with an enhanced polar wind. We discuss the possibility that
CMa is a critical rotator with a Keplerian rotating disk and examine whether if the detected asymmetry can be interpreted within the "one-armed'' viscous disk framework.
Key words: techniques: high angular resolution -
techniques: interferometric -
stars: emission-line, Be -
stars: individual: Keplerian rotation -
stars: individual:
CMa -
stars: circumstellar matter
CMa (HD 50013, HR 2538) is one the brightest Be stars in the
southern hemisphere (V=3.8, K=3.6). It is classified as a B2IVe star,
and the distance deduced from the Hipparcos parallax is
pc. The measured
values range from 220 km s-1 (Dachs et al. 1989; Mennickent et al. 2004;
Okazaki 1997; Prinja 1989) to 243 km s-1 (Zorec
et al. 2005), its radius is 6
(Dachs et al. 1989; Prinja 1989)
and its mass is 10
(Prinja 1989).
The mass and radius determination of a Be star is not an easy task. For instance if we assume values of masses and radii from the Harmanec (1988) compilation, in agreement with Schaller et al. (1992) non-rotating evolutionary models, for theeffective temperatures used by Popper (1980), Prinja (1989) and Fremat (2005), we obtain the Table 1.
Table 1:
Mass and radius determination for
CMa from the Harmanec (1988) compilation for the effective temperatures given by Popper (1980), Prinja (1989) and Fremat (2005).
Thus, for a main sequence star the stellar radius should be smaller than the 6
we
have adopted, however, our radius estimate based on the parallax and the
chosen V magnitude from the correlation between the brightness and emission strength, as
proposed by Harmanec (2000), gives the range of radii comparable to the 6
used
in our modeling.
The star exhibits a large IR-excess and strong emission in the hydrogen lines
making it a good candidate for the AMBER/VLTI spectro-interferometer
(Petrov et al. 2007) using medium spectral resolution
(1500). Our aim is to study the geometry and kinematics of the
circumstellar environment of this star as a function of wavelength,
especially across the Br
emission line and to detect any
signatures of a possible asymmetry of its circumstellar disk, as already
observed through a violet to red peak ratio
(Dachs
et al. 1992; Slettebak et al. 1992).
Dedicated observations of
CMa were carried out during the
night of December 26th 2004 with the three VLTI 8m ESO telescopes
UT2, UT3 and UT4 (see Table 3 for the baseline
configurations). The
data were reduced using the amdlib (v1.15)/ammyorick (v0.54) software
package developed by the AMBER consortium. It uses a new data
processing algorithm adapted to multiaxial recombination instruments
called P2VM (Pixel To Visibility Matrix algorithm). The
squared visibility estimator is computed from the basic observable
coming from this algorithm, the coherent flux (i.e. complex
visibilities frame by frame multiplied by the flux) and the estimated
fluxes from each telescope. The principles of the general AMBER data
reduction are described in more detail by Millour et al. (2004) and Tatulli et al. (2007).
The complex coherent flux allows one to compute differential phase, i.e. the averaged instantaneous phase substracted from achromatic atmospheric OPD and a wavelength-averaged reference phase. This means that the differential phase is the difference between the phase of the source complex visibility and a mean OPD. This leads to an average differential phase equal to zero on the observed spectral window and the lost of the object's phase slope over the wavelengths. This technique allows one to retrieve partial information about the object's phase and is almost equal to the object's interferometric phase if we have some spectral channels in which we know that the object's phase is zero.
It also allows one to compute "differential'' visibility (as defined in Millour et al. 2007), i.e. the instantaneous modulus of the complex visibility divided by the averaged visibility in all the wavelengths excepted the working one. This leads to an average differential visibility equal to 1 in the continuum. It has the advantage over the "classical'' visibility estimator of being almost insensitive to rapid frame-to-frame variations of visibility (due to vibrations or atmospheric jittering for example) and therefore one can expect the differential visibility observed to be more precise than the classical visibility estimator given the current vibrations in the VLTI infrastructure, and even though the continuum visibility information is lost in this observable.
Differential data reduction is described in detail in Millour et al. (2007).
Reducing the
CMa data with good accuracy is
difficult to achieve. We encountered specific problems related
to this data set. Therefore, in addition to the tools furnished
by the default package, some specific processing was added to
reach the best precision on the interferometric observables.
Table 2: Calibration star diameters estimated from spectro-photometric indices (computed as in Bonneau et al. 2006) and their associated errors.
Then we interpolate the estimated transfer function to the time of
the science star observations (as in Perrin et al. 2003). The
[2.13-2.21]
m averaged visibility of
CMa is close to 1.0 with an uncertainty of 0.07 on all the observed base
lengths. This would normally be unacceptable for the
wavelength-dependence study of the visibilities, but as explained
before, we expect to have differential visibility and differential phase
estimators that are much more precise than the visibility estimator.
![]() |
Figure 1:
Raw absolute visibilities of calibration stars corrected for
their angular diameters and averaged over the [2.13-2.21] |
| Open with DEXTER | |
We could expect to see an effect in the closure phase, but its
modulation seems to be of the order of the amplitude of the error
bars (3
or 0.05 radians), which means that we do not see any
detectable signal in the closure phase. This non-detection confirms
the result of the visibility and the low amplitude of the modulation
on the differential phases: the object is almost non-resolved or
barely resolved by the interferometer on the considered baselines (80 m maximum).
What we see in the observed data is a decrease in the differential visibilities in two of the three baselines of the order of 0.07, much larger than the error bars (0.02 for the differential visibilities). This can be explained by an envelope larger than the star, visible in the emission line.
We observe also a modulation in the differential phase of
the order of 5
(0.09 radians), also higher than the error bars (2
or 0.03 radians). The modulation of the differential phase
show a "sine arch'' shape, typical of a rotating object or a bipolar
outflow but also shows an asymmetry, mainly on the baseline UT2-UT3 (B1).
![]() |
Figure 2:
From top to bottom: Pa |
| Open with DEXTER | |
In order to obtain more kinematical constraints the star has also
been observed in the J2 band (1.2283-1.2937
m) with the
1.6 m Perkin-Elmer telescope and Coudé spectrograph (with R=10 000) at the
Observatório do Pico dos Dias, Laboratório Nacional de
Astrofísica (LNA), Itajubá, Brasil. The spectra were recorded
on the night of 20/21 November 2005, at seven different positions along
the slit using the Câmara Infravermelho (CamIV) detector. The
images of the darkfield were subtracted from each star's spectral
image, wavelength calibration image and five flat-field images.
For the sky image we obtained the median combination of the star's
spectral images (divided previously by the average of flat-field
images). The sky image was subtracted from stellar images and
the one-dimensional spectra were extracted and calibrated in
wavelength using the standard IRAF
procedures. The continuum normalization
around the Pa
line was performed using our software. The
average profile of the line, which was used to constrain the
kinematics within the disc, is plotted in Figs. 2 and 5.
![]() |
(1) |
The total flux is normalized, i.e.
.
Since the star is fully unresolved
mas
(assuming a 6
seen at 230 pc) which corresponds to
for the longest baseline at 2.1
m, we assume
in the following that
.
In order to estimate
we
still have to determine the star and the envelope contributions at 2.1
m. Using the fit of the SED given in Fig. 3 we estimate
that at this wavelength the stellar emission is similar to the
envelope contribution, i.e.
.
![]() |
Figure 3:
|
| Open with DEXTER | |
We have the same relation for the visibility in the Br
line:
![]() |
(2) |
The corresponding visibilities, deduced from Eqs. (1) and (2) and from the
measurements shown in Fig. 2, are given in Table 3. Using a uniform disk model for the envelope
contribution, for each measurement, we also estimate in Table 3 the corresponding angular diameters in the continuum
and in the Br
line. Since the envelope is marginally resolved
in the continuum we simply put an upper limit to its angular size.
The envelope extensions in Br
given in Table 3
are strongly dependent on the sky-plane baseline orientation as seen
in Fig. 4, where we plotted the
CMa
(unresolved star + uniform disk) model diameters as a function of the
baseline orientation.
Table 3:
Br
visibilities measured in the continuum (
)
and visibility drop within the Br
line
(
/
).
calculated from the measured
and
/
ratio. The deduced envelope contribution in the
continuum (
)
and in the line (
)
is given for each
baseline. The corresponding angular diameters in the Br
line (
)
and the nearby continuum (
)
are
computed using a uniform disk model for each envelope
measurement. The corresponding extension in stellar radii are
also given, assuming a 6
star at 230 pc.
![]() |
Figure 4:
|
| Open with DEXTER | |
The
CMa circumstellar disk seems to be elongated along B1but since we only have 3 visibility measurements we cannot accurately
determine the angular position of the major-axis assuming an
elliptical circumstellar disk. The envelope flattening given by the
semi-major and semi-minor axis ratio, is about
.
Assuming
that the disk is geometrically thin (i.e. its opening angle is only a
few degree) we can estimate the range for the inclination angle i:
39
.
The lower limit of 39
relies on the
lack of constraint on the disk opening angle.
In order to obtain quantitative fundamental parameters of the central
star and its circumstellar disk, we used the SIMECA code developed by
Stee (1994) and Stee
Bittar (2001) to model the
CMa circumstellar environment. Since this code was
axi-symmetric we made substantial modifications in order to introduce
a longitudinal dependence of the envelope density as shown in the AMBER data plotted Fig. 2. To constrain the kinematics within the
disk we use a Pa
line profile obtained in December 2005 at the
Observatorio do Pico do Dios, Brazil and plotted in Fig. 5. This
profile is strongly asymmetric with a V/R double peak of
1.3. This
V/R > 1 is usually interpreted in terms of a viscous disk similar to
accretion disks where the gas and angular momentum are diffused
outward by magnetohydrodynamic viscosity (Lee et al. 1991). Considering the time-dependent structure of the
isothermal viscous disk, Okazaki (1997) showed that
"one-armed'' density waves can propagate within the disk and should
reproduce the observed V/R variations from V/R>1 to V/R<1 seen in
the line profiles (Hummel & Hanuschik 1997). Such
variations were detected for many Be stars, with periods from a few
years to over a decade (Hanuschik et al. 1995; Telting
et al. 1994). But in the case of
CMa the V/R ratio has remained constant for the last twenty years (Dachs et al. 1992; Slettebak 1992).
![]() |
Figure 5:
Upper picture: |
| Open with DEXTER | |
In Fig. 5 we over-plotted the supposed "symmetric part'' of the
Pa
line profile, using an axi-symmetric model, and the
asymmetric residual that may be produced within the "one-armed''
oscillation over-density. This effect must be compatible with the
asymmetric differential phase variation across the Br
line for
the B1 baseline plotted in the bottom part of Fig. 5 since the
emitting regions in Pa
and Br
must be very close each
together. The asymmetric contribution to the Br
emission is
about 20 to 30
of the total emission in this line whereas the mean
projected velocity of the inhomogeneity is
km s-1.
Using a SIMECA model at 230 pc we determined that the projected
separation between this over-density photocenter and the central star
is about 6.5
.
The parameters obtained for our best model are given in Table 4 with the corresponding spectroscopic and
interferometric observables of Fig. 2. This best model
includes an over-density along the disk major axis at +20
,
corresponding to an over-luminosity of 30% of the total flux in the
line, and the agreement with the AMBER/VLTI data, the SED
(Fig. 3) and the Pa
line profile is very good, as can
be seen in Fig. 2. The agreement with the
differential visibility and phase across the Br
line for the three
bases validates the chosen disk geometry and kinematics. The 2.1
m
continuum visibilities obtained with the 3 baselines, V1=0.92, V2=0.96 and V3=0.94 are also compatible with the 0.93 lower limit measured with AMBER. The corresponding continuum
intensity map in the continuum at 2.15
m is plotted in
Fig. 6. The evaluation of the uncertainties of the
parameters of our model is beyonf the scope of this work and will
be studied in depht when more constraining data is available.
Table 4:
Parameters for the
CMa central star and its
circumstellar environment for the best axi-symetric model.
![]() |
Figure 6:
Intensity map in the continuum at 2.15 |
| Open with DEXTER | |
Following recent AMBER/VLTI and MIDI/VLTI observations of
Arae, Meilland et al. (2007) concluded that this classical Be
star fits very well within the classical scenario for the "Be phenomenon'', i.e. a fast rotating B star close to its breakup velocity
surrounded by a Keplerian circumstellar disk with an enhanced polar
wind. This scenario was also confirmed for the Be star Achernar by
Kervella & Domiciano de Souza (2006) using VLTI/VINCI data,
even if, for this latter case, the star was not in its active Be
phase, i.e. without any strong emission line and no circumstellar
disk. Nevertheless, Achernar is still a nearly critical rotator and
shows an enhanced polar stellar wind. We will see in the following
that
CMa does not fit very well within this classical scenario.
The value of the projected rotational velocity for an early-B star can be
systematically affected by pseudo-photosphere, unrecognized
optically thick parts of the Be envelope as shown by
Harmanec (2002) for
Cas. He obtains for this star
a
of 380 km s-1 instead of the often quoted value
of 230 km s-1 from Sletteback (1992). Nevertheless,
taking the largest value for
CMa from the literature from
Zorec (2005) who found a
km s-1 we still
obtain an inclination angle of 32
which again is not in
agreement with our measured flattening. If the
discrepancy between the measured
and the "real'' one is
larger it may be possible that
CMa is still a critical
rotator but it requires a factor of 2 between the measured and the
true
,
which we found unrealistic. Even if Townsend et al. (2004) include the gravity darkening effect on the
values of rigid early-type rotators, assuming
a rotation rate
/
of 0.95, they conclude that
classic
determinations for B0 to B9-type stars can be
underestimated by 12 to 33%, far from a factor of 2. Moreover, a recent
paper by Frémat et al. (2005) studying the effect of the
gravitational darkening on the determination of fundamental
parameters in fast rotating B-type stars found that on average the
rate of angular velocity of Be stars attains only
/
.
Frémat et al. (2005) estimate
CMa's effective temperature to
be
K, a value significantly larger than the 22 500 K used in our modeling. Moreover, Harmanec (2000) found
a positive correlation between the emission strength and
brightness in the optical. Therefore we may use the minimum
observed V magnitude of about 3.5 to estimate the radius of the
central star. Combining with the Hipparcos parallax and its error
we obtain a radius between 9 and 14 solar radii. Using the
of 25 790 K and a radius of 14
we obtain a
stellar luminosity larger by a factor of 8 than our modeling
and thus it is not possible to obtain a good agreement with the
observed SED plotted Fig. 3. We are more confident
in our 6
used for our modeling and our finding that
CMa seems not to be a critical rotator. Nevertheless,
regarding the uncertainties and the large errors of all
measurements the breakup velocity cannot be totally excluded.
We may argue that Be stars vary
strongly in time and thus line profile shapes are time
dependent. For instance, actual H
line profiles show a
strong emission with a single peak whereas Bahng &
Hendry (1975) saw a double-peaked H
emission line,
with the same double-peak separation of 160 km-1 we obtained
for Pa
with a shell core in their high-dispersion
spectra. Nevertheless, these line variations are related
to the formation and disappearance of the circumstellar disk
around the star as shown by Rivinius et al. (2001) and
Meilland et al. (2006). Whatever the model is, a
double-peak line profile is a clear signature of an extended
rotating disk, at least if the kinematics are not dominated by a
strong stellar wind in the equatorial region as shown by Stee &
de Araùjo (1994). This double-peaked separation is a good
indication of the disk extension as shown by Huang (1972),
Hirata & Kogure (1984), and Stee & de Araùjo (1994). We measure
at the disk
outer radius (
)
from the peak separation, where
is the rotational disk velocity at
.
Thus we
can write:
![]() |
(3) |
Assuming a Keplerian rotation (
)
we obtain, using
Eq. (3),
which is about 2
from
the 19.8
interferometric measurement, assuming that
the measured elongation is the envelope major axis and not an
enhanced polar wind (see discussion in the previous point). Note
that these 19.8
found are obtained assuming a
uniform disk for the envelope and thus is certainly a lower
limit to the "true'' disk extension in the Pa
line. Thus it seems
difficult to maintain a Keplerian rotation within the disk of
CMa.
The asymmetry presently detected in the disk of
CMa seems to be poorly
explained within the "one-armed'' viscous disk framework.
Following the viscous disk models by Okazaki (1997) and the observational detection of
"one-armed'' oscillations in the disk of
Tau by Vakili et al. (1998) and
Cas by Berio et al. (1999), the
precessing period (P) of such oscillations should be confined within
a few years up to about twenty years for the longer ones.
We tried to compile all the observational data
available to obtain a "quasi-period'' for the V/R variations. The V/R variations occur
during the time intervals of observable presence of Be envelopes
and that they can show long-term, medium-term as well as rapid
changes (Dachs 1981). Moreover, the very strong
H
line profile is not suitable for V/R measurement
since it is single-peaked and the illusion of apparent V/R changes
can be related to the presence of telluric lines.
Compiling the data between 1965 and 2003 for
CMa from Jaschek (1965),
Slettebak (1982), Banerjee (2000) and this
work, we were not able to deduce an estimation of a quasi-period
(Fig. 7). Several authors suggested a very
long V/R variation (i.e. Okazaki P>28 years).
An equally plausible possibility is that the star had two episodes
of V/R changes with much shorter cycle length separated by a period
of quiescence documented by (Dachs et al. 1992; Slettebak 1992).
More observations are needed
since, if this first possiblity could be confirmed, this conflicts with the one-armed model.
This "pseudo-period'' would be too long compared to theoretical predictions which cannot be
longer than two decades for a disk with a radius
23
(Okazaki, private communication). The fact that this
over-density remains confined along the major axis of the
disk seems to be only fortuitous...
More observations are needed to confirm these
conclusions and to determine whether other physical phenomena occurred within the
circumstellar disk of
CMa.
![]() |
Figure 7: V/R variations obtained from the literature between 1965 and 2003, from Jaschek (1965), Slettebak (1982), Banerjee (2000) and this work. |
| Open with DEXTER | |
Acknowledgements
We thank A. Okasaki for his useful comments about the viscous disk models. We acknowledge the remarks of the referee P. Harmanec which helped to improve the paper. We thank D. Chapeau and D. Mattei for the SIMECA code developments support.The AMBER project
was founded by the French Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (CNRS), the Max Planck Institute für Radioastronomie (MPIfR) in Bonn, the Osservatorio Astrofisico di Arcetri (OAA) in Firenze, the French Region "Provence Alpes Côte D'Azur" and the European Southern Observatory (ESO). The CNRS funding has been made through the Institut National des Sciences de l'Univers (INSU) and its Programmes Nationaux (ASHRA, PNPS, PNP).
The OAA co-authors acknowledge partial support from MIUR grants to the Arcetri Observatory: A LBT interferometric arm, and analysis of VLTI interferometric data and From Stars to Planets: accretion, disk evolution and planet formation and from INAF grants to the Arcetri Observatory Stellar and Extragalactic Astrophysics with Optical Interferometry. C. Gil work was supported in part by the Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia through project POCTI/CTE-AST/55691/2004 from POCTI, with funds from the European program FEDER.
The preparation and interpretation of AMBER observations benefit from the tools developed by the Jean-Marie Mariotti Center for optical interferometry JMMC
and from the databases of the Centre de Données Stellaires (CDS) and of the Smithsonian/NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS).
The data reduction software amdlib is freely available on the AMBER site http://amber.obs.ujf-grenoble.fr. It has been linked to the public domain software Yorick
to provide the user-friendly interface ammyorick.