one of the major long - term goals of astronomy is to place the solar system within a greater context , finding for example whether habitable planets like the earth are typical , and whether these earth analogues have conditions suitable for alien life .
such goals are ambitious and many obstacles must be overcome for them to come to fruition .
for the particular case of directly imaging earth - like planets around other stars , a major unknown is the level of photon noise from the dust that resides in the target system itself , specifically dust located in the `` habitable zone '' ( hz , e.g. * ? ? ? * ) .
such dust populations are generically referred to as `` exo - zodi '' by analogy with the solar system s zodiacal cloud , though they may have different origins . to be clear , we consider the dust populations seen around 10 - 25% of nearby stars with near - infrared ( ir ) interferometry to be a largely unrelated phenomenon , based on their small grain size and hot temperatures , and lack of correlation with both mid - ir detections of hz dust ( mennesson et al . , apj , in press ) and far - ir detections of cool dust .
if hz dust levels an order of magnitude or so greater than the solar system level are typical , this noise source could seriously hinder an earth analogue - imaging and characterisation mission ( which we will refer to as  earth - imaging  for brevity , e.g. * ? ? ?
* ; * ? ? ?
* ; * ? ? ?
* ; * ? ? ?
* ) . currently , the brightness distribution ( which we also call the luminosity function ) of exo - zodi is largely unknown .
limits have been set by the keck interferometer nuller ( kin , * ? ? ?
* ; * ? ? ?
* mennesson et al . , apj , in press ) , but the distribution has only been characterised at levels 3 - 4 orders of magnitude above the solar system by photometric methods @xcite .
enter the large binocular telescope interferometer ( lbti ) , a mid - ir instrument specifically designed to characterise exo - zodi at dust levels just a few times greater than the solar system s zodiacal cloud . for a brief description of the instrument see defrre et al .
( submitted ) . by observing of order 50 nearby stars at this level of sensitivity ( weinberger et al . ,
submitted ) , the lbti will identify specific targets with low dust levels that are suitable for future earth - imaging , and moreover will characterise the exo - zodi luminosity function with sufficient detail to provide new information on the dust origin and evolution .
this latter point is important because the lbti will observe a limited number of stars and can not access the entire sky , and population - level information such as correlations with other system properties will be needed to assess the suitability of targets that are not observed with the lbti .    of course the results
will also be scientifically valuable and interesting , particularly when combined with existing and future observations ( e.g. defrre et al .
submitted ) .
mid and far - ir imaging using telescopes such as _ spitzer , herschel _ , and jwst will provide important information on the existence , location , and structure of cooler dust belts that lie outside the hz .
interferometric observations with longer baselines ( e.g. vlti / matisse ) and/or at different wavelengths ( e.g. chara / fluor , vlti / pionier ) will provide information that complements the lbti to help build a complete picture of the inner regions of individual systems .
the goal of this paper is to outline a modelling framework for interpreting lbti observations .
such models are needed because lbti observations yield limited information on the spatial structure of any disk that is detected .
it is therefore important that the model used to interpret the observations is thoroughly characterised so that the constraints placed on its various parameters can be understood in terms of their implications for the disk structure and surface brightness .
the primary goal is to use the model to make a useful statement about the level of dust in a system , or the limits on undetected dust , in the habitable zone where earth - imaging will be attempted in the future .    in what follows ,
we outline a parameterised dust model that can be used to approximate the solar system s zodiacal dust cloud .
we show how this model can be used to derive the distribution of dust levels given an lbti observation of thermal dust emission .
we then determine the corresponding implications for scattered light levels at visible wavelengths .
we finally show the expected levels of dust that could be detected by the hunt for observable signatures of terrestrial planetary systems ( hosts ) survey and the corresponding scattered light levels . for a detailed description of the lbti sample
we refer the reader to weinberger et al .
( submitted ) , and for discussion of the instrument and the first scientific results to defrre et al .
( submitted ) .
the primary goal of our exo - zodiacal cloud model is to allow easy comparison of the results among survey stars , which span a range of distances and luminosities . in general
we expect that detections will be near the sensitivity limits , and that there will be little information about any warm dust detected ( or not detected ) other than from lbti .
therefore , while warm dust may arise from various different processes , for example _ in situ _ asteroid - belt like evolution , stochastic collisions , delivery of comets from elsewhere , or some combination of all three ( e.g. * ? ? ?
* ; * ? ? ?
* ; * ? ? ?
* ; * ? ? ?
* ) , we will have little power to distinguish among them .
some scenarios could result in clumpy non - axisymmetric structures , but there again is little hope of distinguishing these from axisymmetric structures in all but the dustiest systems where lbti detections will be relatively easy and at high signal to noise ratios .
therefore , the models considered here are axisymmetric .      for specific stars , the stellar luminosity @xmath1 ( in solar units ) is easily derived by fitting stellar atmosphere models to photometry , and the flux density @xmath2 at any wavelength can be inferred from these models . given a distance @xmath3 , the stellar radius can be estimated from the same model , though in some cases it may have been directly observed . in any case , the contribution of the resolved stellar disk to an lbti observation will generally be negligible .
here we use the stellar fluxes for hosts survey stars derived by weinberger et al .
( submitted ) .
lbti observations are sensitive to the surface brightness distribution @xmath4 in the n band at 11@xmath5 m ( the bandpass spans 9.81 - 12.41 @xmath5 m ) .
our model can be considered a means of parameterising this surface brightness distribution using parameters that have some physical relevance . unless stated otherwise , in what follows our calculations are made at 11 @xmath5 m .
the surface brightness profile of the disk , if viewed face - on , is modelled as @xmath6 here @xmath7 is the temperature of disk material that behaves like a black body @xmath8 where the distance to the star , @xmath9 , is in au .
the numerical factor in eq .
[ eq : sb ] is a conversion ( 1au@xmath10/1pc@xmath10 ) so that the surface brightness is in units of jy arcsec@xmath11 .
the parameter @xmath12 is representative of the disk s face - on surface density of cross - sectional area ( in au@xmath10/au@xmath10 ) , so is analogous to optical depth and is assumed to have a power law distribution @xmath13 between radii @xmath14 and @xmath15 ( both in au ) .
the normalisation @xmath16 is to be set at some @xmath17 ( in au ) such that the surface density is in units of zodis @xmath18 ( see section [ ss : zodi ] ) .    for generality
we include an inclination @xmath19 , which is half the total opening angle of the disk , and represents the maximum inclination of the parent bodies ( whose nodes would be assumed to be randomised ) . here
we assume that our disks have negligible opening angles so @xmath19 is not used , but that @xmath19 is always sufficiently large that the disk is radially optically thin .
if all of the disk particles behave like black bodies , the parameter @xmath12 can be interpreted as the disk s surface density of cross - sectional area .
its interpretation becomes more complicated for disks with more realistic particle optical properties because the observed dust can be several times hotter than the black body temperature , and not all radiation incident on a particle is absorbed and thermally re - emitted .
however , as the surface brightness is typically assumed to exhibit a power law dependence across the relevant radius range , we have not lost any generality by expressing the disk surface brightness in this way , even if the disk s temperature profile differs from that of a black body .
these issues will be discussed in more detail in sections [ ss : other ] and [ ss : scat ] .
the final parameters , which specify the direction to the observer relative to the disk , are the disk inclination @xmath20 and the position angle @xmath21 .
the inclination is defined such that @xmath22 is face - on and the position angle is measured anticlockwise ( i.e. east ) from north . the range of inclinations is 0 to @xmath23 and the range of position angles 0 to @xmath24 , ) means that if the disks are not spatially resolved we in fact only need to consider angles between 0 and 90@xmath25 .
we retain the larger range because we may wish to set @xmath21 based on the position angle of the star or an outer disk component . ] with these ranges set because we can not distinguish between the near and far side of a disk .
that is , the faint disks considered here are optically thin viewed from any direction , and in thermal emission look the same mirrored in the sky plane or for 180@xmath25 rotations .
the model parameters and their meanings are summarised in table [ tab : params ] .
.model parameters [ cols="<,<,<,<",options="header " , ]      ` zodipic `  is an implementation of the @xcite zodiacal cloud model .
this parametric model has many parameters , whose values were derived via fitting to cobe / dirbe observations . `
zodipic `  produces two - dimensional images of the solar system s zodiacal dust cloud as might be seen by an external observer , and has been used as a reference model for calculating the limits set by kin observations @xcite .
though it is a complex model and can include dust components such as the earth s resonant ring and trailing blob , only the main smooth axisymmetric component is normally used . because this main component is simply a radial power law , with an approximately gaussian vertical density distribution , it is possible to reproduce the ` zodipic `  surface brightness using our parameterised model .
the vertical dust distribution is the main difference between the @xcite model and ours .
the @xcite model assumes that the radial and vertical components of the cloud are separable @xmath26 where @xmath27 and @xmath28 and @xmath29 is the height above the disk midplane in au .
the best fit values for the cobe data were @xmath30 , @xmath31 , @xmath32 , @xmath33 , and @xmath34 .
the units of the normalisation are au@xmath10/au@xmath35 ( i.e. a volume density of surface area ) , and the integrated length of the vertical term is not constant with radius , so their exponent @xmath36 is not the same as our exponent @xmath37 . numerically integrating equation ( [ eq : zodipic2 ] ) over @xmath38 yields 0.63 , so the surface density at 1 au is @xmath39 ( au@xmath10/au@xmath10 ) .
assuming for mathematical simplicity that @xmath40 , the integral of the exponential term in equation ( [ eq : zodipic ] ) is @xmath41 for both cases of @xmath42 , and hence @xmath43 and @xmath44 .
therefore , the ` zodipic `  model can be reasonably expressed in terms of our model with @xmath45 au @xmath46 , and @xmath47 .
there remain a few small differences in the surface brightness of our model relative to ` zodipic ` , as shown in the right panel of fig .
[ fig : mod ] .
the main difference is that the ` zodipic `  model is slightly brighter at larger radii because the radial temperature profile is flatter .
setting the ` zodipic `  temperature profile to equal our black body prescription leads to nearly indistinguishable face - on surface brightness profiles .
some minor differences arise because the @xcite model defines radius as @xmath48 , whereas our narrow opening angle means that our model is effectively cylindrical .              here
we introduce a reference disk model , the parameters of which are summarised in table [ tab : params ] and based on the @xcite solar system model described above .
the model extends from 0.034 - 10 au with a power - law index @xmath49 , and is scaled to @xmath50 at @xmath45 au ( the location where @xmath51 k ) .
the inner edge is set by a black body temperature of 1500k , approximately the sublimation temperature of silicates , though we show in section [ ss : other ] that this choice is irrelevant for our model as long as the inner disk edge is inside the iwa of 40 mas .
the outer edge of 10 au is chosen to be sufficiently large that it does not affect the model at the lbti wavelength of 11 @xmath5 m .
as noted above we treat the disk as two dimensional so the opening angle is small .
our reference model is based on the solar system so the star is sun - like , but as described in section [ ss : zodi ] the reference parameters are later varied to model disks around different stars .
figure [ fig : mod ] shows the distribution of temperature , surface density and surface brightness at 11@xmath5 m in this reference model , where we have assumed a distance of 10 pc .
survey targets are chosen so that the lbti is sensitive to dust in their habitable zone ( weinberger et al . , submitted ) , so the dotted lines show the range of radii implied by a temperature range of 210 - 320k , a rough indication of the habitable zone location for the sun ( e.g. * ? ? ?
the right panel shows that the surface brightness of our model closely matches ` zodipic ` , and as noted above this difference only arises due to different assumptions about the radial temperature profile .
therefore , for the same assumptions and aside from the differences in scale height our model yields the same results as ` zodipic `  for a sun - like star .
the disk normalisation ( i.e. brightness ) is set by the parameter @xmath16 , which is the disk surface density at @xmath17 .
the goal here is to set what @xmath52 and @xmath17 are so that they scale sensibly with stellar spectral type , and so that our disk model is somehow sensibly related to zodi units , and therefore the solar system dust level .
these parameters , along with @xmath14 , @xmath15 , @xmath37 , and @xmath19 define our reference disk model . in making this definition ,
it is important to remember the ultimate goal of the lbti , which is to constrain the level of dust in the habitable zone around nearby stars .
that is , disk surface brightness is the most important measure of the impact of exo - zodi on future earth - imaging missions .
a desirable definition might be one of `` constant hindrance '' for an earth - imaging mission , where @xmath16 is set such that a @xmath53 disk impacts all observations in search of exo - earths at the same level .
however , for this imaging any exo - earths will be unresolved , whereas the exo - zodi that accompany them will be resolved , so the same physical disk has the same surface brightness regardless of distance , but the brightness of the unresolved planet decreases with distance .
therefore , any zodi definition that attempts to provide constant hindrance will be distance dependent , which is an undesirable property since it is unrelated to the physical disk structure .    to set @xmath16 therefore requires a choice between using either the total disk brightness , or the surface brightness at @xmath17 .
both approaches have their merits .
for example , using the total disk brightness allows comparison with photometric observations and therefore easy construction of the warm dust luminosity function ( e.g. * ? ? ? * ) .
however , as we show below in fig .
[ fig : fnutvsr ] , lbti observations are not necessarily sensitive to total disk brightness ( e.g. when a significant fraction of the disk emission lies inside the first transmission peak ) .
we therefore prefer a zodi definition linked to the disk surface density in the habitable zone . for the spectral type scaling
, it then makes sense for @xmath17 to scale with @xmath54 , so that the surface brightness expressed by @xmath16 corresponds to the radial distance where the equilibrium temperature is the same as at earth ( i.e. an `` earth - equivalent '' distance ) , therefore @xmath55 au .
scaling @xmath14 and @xmath15 by @xmath56 is also appropriate , since this results in a common temperature at the inner and outer edges of the disk , and maintains the disk inner edge at the sublimation radius .
the disk edges are of relatively little importance here because as we show below the lbti is relatively insensitive to their location .    with this definition ,
@xmath16 is fixed at the surface density of the solar system s zodiacal cloud at 1 au , but the location where this surface density applies depends on the stellar luminosity .
this definition is different to ` zodipic ` , which fixes @xmath17 at 1 au for all stars and fixes @xmath14 at the sublimation radius .
because the dust temperature at @xmath17 is the same for all spectral types , the thermal surface brightness at @xmath17 ( i.e. in the habitable zone ) for a 1 zodi disk is also the same . because it is based on surface brightness , this zodi definition is well suited for use as an important metric for future earth - imaging missions .
an lbti observation is not necessarily sensitive to the radial extent of a disk , so the derived zodi level depends on what is assumed for @xmath14 and @xmath15 , particularly if the disk is relatively narrow .
for example , below we consider a `` worst case '' scenario where the dust emission only originates in the habitable zone , in which case the derived dust surface density ( and hence @xmath18 ) is higher for a given null depth . to avoid confusion
we recommend that zodi levels primarily use our reference model to allow consistent comparisons .
the original concept for nulling interferometry was put forward by @xcite , and for a reasonably non - technical description of the instrument we refer the reader to defrre et al .
( submitted ) .
basically speaking , the lbti combines the beams from the two lbt mirrors , with one beam having a half - wavelength phase shift .
light in the viewing direction , and along lines perpendicular to the mirror baseline vector , is therefore suppressed .
light from off axis sources at odd multiples of the angular distance @xmath57 is transmitted ( @xmath58 is the baseline length ) .
similarly , light from sources at even multiples of this angular distance is suppressed .
the transmission ( or `` fringe '' ) pattern is therefore a @xmath59 function parallel to the baseline vector , and is constant perpendicular to this vector . a model disk , the transmission pattern , and the transmitted disk image
are illustrated in fig .
[ fig : trx ] .
this illustration is for an object at transit ; at other times the fringe pattern is not aligned with north .
the key measurement from an lbti observation is the ratio of the transmitted flux to the total photometric flux .
because the transmission pattern is designed to suppress light from the star , leaving light from a much fainter disk , this ratio is approximately the ratio of the transmitted disk flux to the stellar flux .
deriving the transmitted disk flux is not straightforward however , as some on - axis ( i.e. stellar ) flux is always transmitted because the instrument is not perfect and the star has a finite angular size .
removal of these effects is an integral part of the data analysis ( see defrre et al , submitted ) , so the quantity derived from a given observation is the `` calibrated null depth '' or `` source null depth '' . in what follows
we generally refer to this measurement and the same quantity derived from our models as simply the `` null depth '' .
because the total flux is almost exactly the stellar flux and dominates over any disk emission , we therefore compute the null depth for our models as the transmission for a starless model divided by the stellar flux density .
our disk model is radially extended , but to illustrate how surface brightness is transmitted through the lbti transmission pattern as a function of angular scale we first consider a series of discrete annuli of angular radii @xmath60 .
we later combine these annuli to model the transmission for our disk models .
the angular distance to the first transmission peak is @xmath61 ; for the lbti @xmath62 @xmath5 m and @xmath63 m , so the distance is 79 mas .
the transmission function perpendicular to the fringes @xmath64 is @xmath65)$ ] , and is shown as the grey line in figure [ fig : trvsr ] , where the x axis is the distance from the annulus center in units of the distance to the first transmission peak ( i.e. @xmath66 ) . a common definition for the inner working angle of an instrument is where the sensitivity first reaches half of the peak value , which for lbti is therefore at @xmath67 mas .    ) .
the grey line is the projected transmission function parallel to the lbti baseline , the blue dashed line is the fraction of emission for face - on ( @xmath22 ) annuli after summing around the azimuthal angle .
dots show a population of annuli with random inclinations and position angles , and the red line shows the average transmission of these dots.,scaledwidth=50.0% ]    to calculate the transmission for a point at some azimuth around the annulus requires finding the sky - plane component of this vector point ( relative to the star ) that is perpendicular to the fringe pattern .
this component can be calculated using three rotations , and is @xmath68 where @xmath69 is the angle from the sky plane around the annulus to the point of interest , and @xmath70 is the position angle of the annulus relative to the lbti fringe pattern .
the angle @xmath70 varies with hour angle , and because the lbti baseline is always perpendicular to the local vertical ( i.e. a great circle through the target and zenith ) , is equal to @xmath21 for an object at transit .
the transmission from a point in the annulus is then \right)/2\ ] ] where @xmath71 are the sky offsets from the null center and @xmath72 the corresponding spatial frequencies ( i.e. @xmath73 ) .
lbti transmission is simpler to compute because the length of the sky - projected baseline is always the same due to the common mount for the mirrors . ]
@xmath74 ) \ , .\ ] ] for a face - on ( @xmath22 ) annulus at radius @xmath75 , the transmission is clearly a function of azimuth around the annulus .
averaging around an annulus yields the total transmission for that annulus , and repeating this calculation for annuli of different angular sizes gives the blue dashed line in figure [ fig : trvsr ] .
this exercise is finally repeated for a large number of annuli with random orientations , so that @xmath76 is distributed evenly from 0 to 1 , and @xmath70 is evenly distributed from 0 to 180@xmath25 .
again , the transmission around each annulus is azimuthally averaged , which results in the dots shown in figure [ fig : trvsr ] . averaging these points
yields the average transmission as a function of annulus radius for a population of disks with random orientations , shown as the red line .
as can be surmised from the decreasing amplitude , the average transmission tends to 0.5 at large separations ( i.e. the average of @xmath59 is 0.5 ) .
the minimum separation at which this transmission is achieved is @xmath77 , twice the inner working angle .
the origin of the dot distribution can be understood by considering how annuli of different orientations are transmitted through a given transmission peak .
for example , the upper envelope of dots at about 70% transmission are all transmitted through the first transmission peak , and those at higher @xmath66 are nearer to edge - on with position angles closer to @xmath78 ( i.e. perpendicular to the baseline and parallel to the fringes ) .
this effect is relatively common because the average inclination is about 60@xmath25 ( i.e. biased towards edge - on ) . by comparing the phase of the grey line with the red line , it is clear that the peak average transmission is actually about a quarter of the way beyond a transmission peak , and that the peak transmission for face - on annuli lies somewhere in between .
the phase shift of the face - on transmission can be understood by realising that an annulus with a radius @xmath75 that is slightly greater than @xmath77 has more emission in the peak transmission region than an annulus with @xmath79 .
the average transmission for random orientations is phase shifted slightly further because most disks are inclined , and therefore on average appear somewhat smaller on the sky than they actually are .      .
flux is lost at all radii due to the transmission pattern , but most is lost from inside the habitable zone .
the total and transmitted disk fluxes are 0.11 and 0.031 mjy.,scaledwidth=50.0% ]    using the reference model of section [ sss : ref ] , fig .
[ fig : fnutvsr ] shows the total and transmitted disk flux as a function of radius for a face - on geometry and a distance of 10 pc .
that is , the figure is a histogram showing where the total and transmitted flux originates , so the solid line is an azimuthally summed radial profile created from the right panel of fig .
[ fig : trx ] .
much of the total disk emission originates from the inner regions , and since the disk inner edge is well inside the first transmission peak significant flux from these inner regions is not transmitted .
some flux is also lost at larger radii , and in total only about 30% of the disk flux is transmitted .
overall therefore , the radial distance over which the disk emits strongly in the mid - ir and can be detected is not particularly large ; emission is strongly reduced inside the inner working angle , and the faint wien side of cooler emission means that the surface brightness drops steeply at larger radii .
given the spacing of the transmission peaks and the distance to nearby stars , the transmitted flux detected by the lbti is constrained to come from near the hz , even if it can not be certain that it originates within it .    ) and randomly distributed orientations .
the dotted line shows the average transmitted flux derived in figure [ fig : fnutvsr ] .
the disk will sometimes appear fainter than average , but is often a little bit brighter .
the mean level is 0.026 mjy , and the medial level 0.029 mjy.,scaledwidth=50.0% ]    figure [ fig : ftrhist ] shows how the total transmitted flux is distributed for a random distribution of disk orientations .
the concentration of transmitted fluxes near the maximum arises because any disk with a position angle perpendicular to the transmission pattern has the same transmitted flux , regardless of inclination ( and any disk near to face - on also has the same transmitted flux ) .
the low transmitted flux tail arises from disks that have a position angle parallel to the transmission pattern and are sufficiently near to edge on such that almost the entire disk lies in the central null transmission region .
such a geometry is relatively unlikely , as can be seen by the lack of dots with low transmission in fig .
[ fig : trvsr ] .
these relatively rare low transmitted fluxes are allowed because we assume disks with negligible scale height .
this distribution therefore represents a pessimistic ( but possible ) case , and becomes tighter as the disk scale height increases .
the width of the distribution also depends on the range of hour angles over which a target is observed , as discussed in section [ ss : ha ] .
the point here is that the transmitted flux depends on the orientation , and since this is expected to be unconstrained for lbti targets ( unless we use stellar inclination or the orientation of a resolved outer disk as an estimate , which will be possible for some of the hosts sample ) , there will be a corresponding uncertainty in any disk parameters that are derived from the observations .
since the transmitted flux scales linearly with @xmath16 , the distribution of @xmath16 , and hence @xmath18 , required to reproduce a given transmitted flux is directly related to that in figure [ fig : ftrhist ] .
the distribution of possible null depths for our reference model at 10 pc is therefore calculated by dividing the distribution of transmitted fluxes in fig .
[ fig : ftrhist ] by the stellar flux .
the distribution of zodi levels @xmath18 implied for a given observed null depth ( or upper limit ) is found by dividing the observed null depth by the distribution of model null depths for @xmath53 .
this was the method employed by @xcite in modelling kin observations with ` zodipic ` .
any real lbti observation takes a finite amount of time , during which any disk will rotate relative to the transmission pattern on the sky .
thus , even a vertically thin edge - on disk , which can be instantaneously invisible to the lbti , will be visible when the length of the observation is taken into account .    to compute how the disk transmission changes for an observation of a given object requires computing the position angle of the lbti fringe pattern on the sky at a given hour angle .
the common mirror mount for the lbt means that this angle is the difference between the vector in the direction of the local vertical and a vector pointing towards equatorial north along a line of constant right ascension through the object in question ( i.e. the hour circle ) .
this angle is commonly called the parallactic angle .
is not instantaneously detected , but is only about 50% fainter than a face - on disk for a 4 hour observation.,scaledwidth=50.0% ]    the null depth is then computed as the average null depth over the range of observed hour angles . for modelling purposes here ,
these are spaced evenly in hour angle , but future models will use the true distribution for each specific observation .
[ fig : orient ] shows the difference between the instantaneous sensitivity for a transiting target ( left panel ) and a 4 hour observation ( right panel ) , for a target at @xmath80 declination over the parameter space of different disk orientations .
this calculation is purely related to the changing position angle of the disk , and does not represent the time needed to reach a given s / n . here , as before ,
we have assumed a vertically thin disk .
the dark region in the upper middle of the left panel shows that an edge on disk is not instantaneously detectable when the disk is aligned with the lbti fringe pattern . in the right panel
, the rotation of the fringe pattern with respect to north over a four hour observation means that the sensitivity relative to a face - on disk is reduced by about 50% for the worst case disk orientation .    ,
relative to a face - on disk .
each line shows the transmission for a different disk inclination .
the top axis shows the disk position angle relative to the fringe pattern , which is 180@xmath25 at transit because the lbt is facing north at that time .
the curves at transit ( ha=0 ) yield the transmission - inclination relation shown in the left panel of fig .
[ fig : orient ] at @xmath81 , while the average value of each curve yields the transmission - inclination relation shown in the right panel .
the curve average is always greater than the transmission at transit , so observations over a wider range of hour angles can detect disks with less favourable orientations.,scaledwidth=50.0% ]    to understand the origin of this increased sensitivity , fig .
[ fig : orient_ha ] again shows the transmission relative to a face - on disk , but now for @xmath81 at each point in the range of hour angles from -2 to 2h .
each curve shows how the transmission for a different disk inclination varies with hour angle ( or @xmath70 ) . at ha=0 ,
the curves correspond to a cut at @xmath81 in the left panel of fig .
[ fig : orient ] .
the average of each line over the hour angle range corresponds to the same cut , but in the right panel .
because the average of each curve is greater than the minimum value at ha=0 , the disk sensitivity is greater .    of course , the inclination and position angle dependence in figs .
[ fig : orient ] and [ fig : orient_ha ] shows that it would be highly desirable to discern how the transmitted disk flux changes as a function of hour angle in order to learn about the disk geometry and the possibility of non - axisymmetric structure . for axisymmetric disks
there is also a potential degeneracy between the disk geometry and the vertical scale height ; an edge - on disk with sufficient vertical extent will vary much less than the curves in fig . [
fig : orient_ha ] , and may be indistinguishable from a less inclined disk that is oriented such that the transmission variation is small . if a large variation in transmission is seen , the disk may be vertically thin , but could alternatively be non - axisymmetric
. the detection of such effects will certainly be sought , but given that we expect most lbti detections to be near the sensitivity limits and therefore at low s / n we assume for now that lbti observations can be modelled by simply averaging over the hour angle .
the lbti is well suited to observing dust levels in the habitable regions around nearby stars , both in terms of baseline length and observing wavelength .
lbti results will therefore broadly address the goal of characterising warm dust levels without requiring additional information from other observations .
however , the specific location and radial extent of the dust will be poorly constrained , and as illustrated by fig .
[ fig : fnutvsr ] , significant disk emission can arise from regions both inside and outside the habitable zone and still be detected with the lbti
. in general , such degeneracy in disk models will be hard to break because the goal of the lbti is to detect disks that are fainter than current detection limits ( hence the need for the modelling framework outlined in this paper ) .
in some cases however , lbti results will be compared to other observations , most likely ( spectro)photometric detections or limits for the total disk flux density at the same wavelength , and in some cases limits on disk size from high - resolution imaging or interferometry .
detections and/or upper limits from near - ir interferometry will provide constraints on dust levels inside the lbti iwa .
lbti will similarly provide very strong constraints on the emission spectrum and location of hot dust detections .0.9 ) , non - detection with high quality mid - ir photometry is already sufficient to restrict this dust to lie well inside the habitable zone ( kennedy et al .
, in prep ) . ] mid - ir photometric data will come from _
_ infrared spectrograph ( irs , * ? ? ?
* ; * ? ? ?
* ) , wise observations @xcite , or in the future the spectrometers on the mid - infrared instrument ( miri ) on the jwst , which cover the same wavelength range as the lbti .
such photometry will provide the most useful constraints on the disk location , so we now briefly outline how the total and lbti - transmitted disk fluxes vary with model parameters , in particular the disk inner and outer radii .     and @xmath15 , or for two different values of @xmath37 ( the defaults are @xmath82 au , @xmath83 au , @xmath49 ) . the lbti n band is shown as a grey stripe.,scaledwidth=50.0% ]    to illustrate the flux density distribution , fig .
[ fig : spec ] shows disk spectra for our reference model with @xmath53 , with examples for both sun - like and a - type host stars at 10 pc .
because our standard model has the same temperature range all disk spectra have the same shape , but are brighter or fainter depending on the zodi level , the distance to the host star , and the host star spectral type ( which changes the area of the disk and hence total brightness ) .
the a5v star has @xmath84 , so the disk around this star is 14 times brighter than for the sun - like star . however , the a - star is only about 5 times brighter at 11 @xmath5 m ( 10 vs. 2 jy ) , so the disk / star flux ratio has increased by a factor of about 3 .
[ fig : spec ] also shows how the spectrum varies when @xmath14 , @xmath15 , and @xmath37 are changed from their standard values , and what the effect is at the lbti wavelength of 11 @xmath5 m .
larger values of @xmath37 concentrate the disk emission closer to the star and hence shift the spectrum towards warmer temperatures . changing @xmath85 and @xmath15 remove emission from the inner and outer disk regions , leading to a spectrum that is closer to a single - temperature black body spectrum .
as noted above and shown by the curve for @xmath86 au , the outer disk radius is large enough that the exact value matters little for the level of emission at 11 @xmath5 m .
while our model gives a reasonable idea of the true disk spectrum , and could in principle be used to constrain disk structure based on observations at other wavelengths , it is inaccurate on a detailed level because grains do not emit like black bodies .
three important differences are that i ) the disk will be fainter than our model at long wavelengths because grains emit inefficiently at wavelengths longer than their size , ii ) the spectrum may also be shifted to shorter wavelengths due to the presence of small grains with temperatures greater than that of a black body , and iii ) the spectrum may show non - continuum spectral features .
these differences pose problems for extrapolating our model to other wavelengths , or at least mean that additional parameters such as grain properties would need to be considered .
+    such differences are of minor importance here however , as important comparisons with other observations can be made at the lbti wavelength , so are largely independent of the disk spectrum .
the most important comparison is between the total and transmitted disk fluxes , or equally the total disk to star flux ratio and the null depth . to illustrate why combining such measurements is important , fig .
[ fig : rin ] shows how the total and transmitted model disk flux changes at 11 @xmath5 m as the disk inner and outer radii change . as @xmath14
is increased the total disk flux decreases because hot emission is being removed . however , the lbti - transmitted flux changes little while @xmath14 remains small , because these changes occur behind the central transmission minimum and are invisible .
when @xmath14 is outside the first transmission peak ( at about 0.7 au here ) both the total and transmitted fluxes decrease in the same way . as @xmath15
is decreased there is initially little difference in the total and transmitted fluxes because the outer disk is faint at 11 @xmath5 m , but when @xmath15 moves behind the central transmission minimum the flux drops much more steeply than the total flux . as noted earlier , fig .
[ fig : rin ] shows that the lbti transmission is insensitive to our choice of disk inner and outer radii , as long as the disk is much wider than the habitable zone .
given such relations between the total and transmitted disk fluxes , it is clear that observations of both may constrain the disk location .
however , the transmitted disk flux is a function of both the disk size and the orientation , so the best constraints on the disk size require the orientation to be known ( or take some assumed value ) .
it is unlikely that the position angle will be inferred from lbti measurements in many cases , so the disk orientation would probably be assumed based on other system information , such as coplanarity with a resolved outer cool disk component , the known inclination and/or position angle of the host star s rotation axis , or of planet orbits , or a combination of all three @xcite .
see defrre et al .
( submitted ) for an application of this assumption to @xmath87 crv .
currently nasa is focussed on developing concepts for three optical ( 0.4 - 1 @xmath5 m ) exoplanet - imaging missions , exo - c ( a coronagraph ) , exo - s ( a starshade ) , as well as an ambitious precursor , the coronagraph on wfirst - afta .
therefore , the thermal dust emission information from the lbti must be converted to predict the impact on scattered light imaging .
we now derive a simple prescription for converting the dust levels in the above model into scattered light surface brightness estimates .
scattered light predictions are in general difficult , and have largely proven unsuccessful to date ( e.g. * ? ? ?
* ) , with debris disks imaged in scattered light generally seen to be much fainter than predicted based on theoretical grain models that match observed thermal emission . the typical minimum grain size in debris disks is thought to 1 - 10 @xmath5 m for sun - like stars ( e.g. *
* ; * ? ? ?
* ; * ? ? ?
* ) , and the steepness of the size distribution means that these grains dominate the surface area .
such grains are expected to scatter optical light fairly isotropically , and have fairly large albedoes of @xmath880.5 .
the scattered light faintness of debris disks , where albedoes of 0.05 - 0.1 are seen ( e.g. * ? ? ? * ; * ? ? ? * ; * ? ? ? * ) , likely arise from incorrect assumptions about grain properties and sizes , and how these grains scatter starlight .
the properties of exo - zodi are not sufficiently well known that considering physically motivated possibilities for different grain sizes and properties would make predictions for their scattered light brightness more certain .
therefore , regardless of the physical reason , we will assume that the @xmath890.1 effective albedoes seen for scattered light disks around nearby stars are representative , and assume isotropic scattering .
it may be that the properties of warm dust are different to those inferred from scattered light detections , since for example hot dust detected with near - ir interferometry is generally inferred to originate in much smaller grains . for higher / lower albedoes , our scattered light predictions would be higher / lower by the same factor .    while the model surface density @xmath12 is connected to the true optical depth and the surface area of grains from which the emission arises
, the model surface density is the true optical depth only if the grains behave like black bodies .
that is , real grains reflect starlight , so the true total surface area in the disk is always higher than @xmath12 . to be more realistic , and to allow for the possibility of scattered light , the grain absorption and scattering properties need to be considered .
consider a disk with particles with a range of sizes @xmath90 , and @xmath91 the true cross - sectional area per unit area of particles in the size range @xmath90 to @xmath92 .
using the absorption efficiency as a function of size and wavelength @xmath93 , the thermal emission is @xmath94 ) dd.\ ] ] though the dependence is not included explicitly here for simplicity , all quantities in this equation also vary with location in the disk due for example to the disk structure and changing composition . using the scattering efficiency @xmath95 the scattered light emission can be written in various ways , but
a convenient form is @xmath96 which we could also express in terms of albedo @xmath97 by substituting @xmath98 . if we assume the albedo @xmath99 is the empirical value of 0.1 , independent of grain size and wavelength , then because @xmath100 the surface density @xmath101 is approximately the true optical depth , but is underestimated by a factor of @xmath102 ( i.e. @xmath103 $ ] ) .
that is , with these assumptions the thermal surface brightness could be written @xmath104    the scattered light brightness is therefore calculated using the dust surface density and the empirical effective albedo . with these assumptions ,
the predicted scattered light emission from the model of section [ ss : model ] would be @xmath105 for simplicity we use the value of @xmath12 derived from our modelling , and thus include an extra factor of @xmath106 . therefore , with our model the scattered light surface brightness relative to the stellar flux in the habitable zone ( i.e. @xmath107 ) of a 1 zodi disk decreases as @xmath108 , as the habitable zone is pushed farther from the star by the increased luminosity .
this is the approach we use below to estimate the limiting scattered light surface brightnesses for hosts , and for the lbti @xmath87 crv detection .
an extension to this approach would be to add a phase function that accounts for forward scattering properly .
the albedo could then be derived theoretically and calibrated with observations .
while in the above case the scattered light can be calculated simply along the radial direction , and for a given orientation turned into an image , use of a phase function @xmath109 requires a three - dimensional calculation that includes the star - particle - observer scattering angle @xmath69 at each location in the disk .
given that we expect relatively large uncertainties in disk parameters , even in the case of a detection , use of a detailed three - dimensional calculation including ( assumed ) grain properties and a phase function will in general be unwarranted .
to convert the simple scattered light prediction of equation ( [ eq : ssca ] ) to an observable for an arbitrary disk inclination a three dimensional calculation must be made to account for brighter disk ansae .
however , the disk inclination will in general be unknown , so a simple approximation for deriving a representative scattered light surface brightness would be to assume an average inclination of @xmath110 , and for a vertically thin disk an increase of @xmath111 .
we now show two examples using the model described above .
we first use the lbti commissioning measurement for @xmath87 crv to illustrate how zodi levels are derived , and then derive zodi limits for the hosts survey .
these levels assume that the disk orientation is not known , but in some cases coplanarity with a resolved outer disk could be assumed to further constrain the disk brightness .
this assumption can be made for @xmath87 crv , and we refer the reader to defrre et al .
( submitted ) for an in - depth discussion of these results for this system .           using @xmath87 crv with a null depth of @xmath112% as an example , we first show how the distribution of zodi levels is derived assuming an unknown disk orientation .
this procedure is generic in that it can be applied to any lbti observation , whether a significant detection or an upper limit was found .
the lbti is still in commissioning so the zodi sensitivity derived here is not illustrative of the expected performance .
[ fig : etacrvlim ] shows the @xmath113-plane coverage of the lbti observation relative to the disk position angle , and the distribution of zodi levels calculated using our reference model .
we include the rotation of the disk relative to the fringe pattern during the observation to compute the average null depth for each disk orientation .
as described at the end of section [ ss : trx ] the distribution is essentially the inverse of that shown in fig .
[ fig : ftrhist ] .
the distribution is strongly peaked at about @xmath114 , with a tail of larger values due to unfavourable disk orientations . the 1@xmath115 zodi uncertainty due purely to the calibrated null depth measurement is given by the width of the `` median @xmath116 null uncertainty '' error bar in the right panel of fig .
[ fig : etacrvlim ] .
similarly , the 16 and 84% levels from the cumulative distribution give a representative 1@xmath115 range due to the orientation distribution . the upper uncertainty on the zodi level is therefore set by the orientation distribution , while the lower uncertainty is set by the null depth measurement . the median zodi level for @xmath87 crv
is @xmath117 if the uncertainty is set by the lbti null depth measurement .
including the 1@xmath115 range from the orientation distribution in quadrature , the range covered on either side of the median value is @xmath118 .
in general , we expect that the null depth uncertainty will dominate the lower bound on the zodi level , and the orientation distribution will dominate the upper bound .
for comparison , based on a kin detection and using the ` zodipic `  model mennesson et al .
( in press ) found @xmath119 for @xmath87 crv at 8.5 @xmath5 m with no assumptions about the disk orientation .
our derived zodi level is different for two reasons : i ) @xmath87 crv is hotter than the sun ( 6900k ) , so our luminosity - dependent zodi definition will lead to a zodi level about 1.7 times smaller than ` zodipic ` , and ii ) the mid - ir spectrum of the @xmath87 crv disk increases more steeply with wavelength than a black body ( i.e. has a silicate spectral feature ) , so although our model has nearly the same temperature profile as ` zodipic ` , our derived zodi level will be slightly larger because lbti observes at 11 @xmath5 m .
therefore , direct comparisons between our zodi levels and those using ` zodipic `  should not be made .      using the simple prescription for the scattered light surface brightness described in section [ ss : scat ]
, we can convert the zodi levels shown in fig . [
fig : etacrvlim ] into a prediction for the face - on scattered light surface brightness . here
, the value of interest is the surface brightness in the habitable zone , as this is where planets would be sought . the level is then calculated using equation ( [ eq : ssca ] ) , with @xmath120 because @xmath16 is the value at the radial distance where the equilibrium temperature is the same as earth s .
adopting @xmath121 , and using @xmath122 jy in v band , @xmath123 pc , @xmath124 au , and @xmath125 yields a scattered light surface brightness of @xmath126 mjy / arcsec@xmath10 , or about 15 mag / arcsec@xmath10 .
as noted above , this habitable zone estimate may be increased by a factor of a few to account for the inclination of the disk .      given a prediction for the sensitivity of the lbti and a sample of stars that will be observed , we can make predictions for the sensitivity of the hosts survey . in what follows
we assume a 1@xmath115 uncertainty on the lbti calibrated null depth of @xmath127 , and hence the limits presented are also at 1@xmath115 .
limits are calculated as above , using the median of the distribution of zodi levels over the random distribution of orientations . though we do not account for it here
, there is some uncertainty in the stellar flux densities and luminosities used , which we estimate to contribute at about the 5% level .
here we calculate the sensitivity assuming an observation at a single hour angle , but when the model is applied to real observations in the future the calculations will account for sky rotation as described in section [ ss : ha ] .
these calculations are carried out for both our reference disk model , and a `` worst - case '' scenario where the dust is restricted to lie only within the habitable zone , which we assume to lie between temperatures of 320 and 210k . as shown in figs .
[ fig : fnutvsr ] and [ fig : rin ] , the lbti is sensitive to emission that lies interior and exterior to the habitable zone , so the dust surface density must be higher in the latter case for an lbti detection at the same sensitivity . as noted above in section [ ss : zodi ] , the `` zodi levels '' derived with this different radial structure are also different and should really be considered as enhancements over the surface density derived for the solar zodiacal cloud , rather than zodi levels to be compared with other values .
the hosts survey sample is described by weinberger et al .
( submitted ) , the key aspect being that targets are chosen such that their habitable zones have larger angular sizes than the first lbti transmission peak , so observations directly probe the levels of habitable zone dust .
the sample is split by @xmath128 colour at 0.42 into `` sun - like '' and `` sensitivity '' sub - samples , which simply reflects the levels of dust that can be detected .    )
.,title="fig:",scaledwidth=50.0% ] + ) .,title="fig:",scaledwidth=50.0% ] + ) .,title="fig:",scaledwidth=50.0% ]    figure [ fig : leak ] shows the predicted disk to star flux ratios , null depths , and sensitivity in zodi units for the hosts sample using our reference model ( red and blue symbols ) and our worst case scenario ( grey symbols , which we discuss below ) .
the top and middle panels show the flux ratios and null depths expected for a 1 zodi model around these stars , and the bottom panel shows the sensitivity in zodis for the predicted lbti sensitivity .
there are clear trends with stellar luminosity , which can be understood as follows . with our model
the disk flux density at fixed wavelength scales with the angular area , i.e. , @xmath129 ( with our zodi definition @xmath16 is constant , but we include it to consider other zodi definitions below ) . the stellar flux , on the other hand , scales @xmath130 in the rayleigh - jeans regime so the total disk to star flux ratio only depends on the star , and is higher for earlier spectral types @xmath131 this dependence in the top panel of fig .
[ fig : leak ] arises due to the stronger scaling of stellar luminosity with temperature than flux density at 11 @xmath5 m , with the variations from a perfect correlation arising due to variation in @xmath1 at fixed @xmath132 ( i.e. different stellar radii ) . at fixed distance , as the stellar temperature and luminosity increase the habitable zone is pushed outwards ( @xmath133 ) and its area and brightness increase more rapidly than the stellar flux .
alternatively , for a fixed disk angular size ( and hence fixed disk brightness ) , increasing the stellar temperature and luminosity pushes the system to greater distances and the star becomes fainter due to increasing distance faster than it becomes brighter due to an increased temperature .
the null depths for a 1 zodi disk are shown in the middle panel , and the trend has a similar origin as the disk to star flux ratio . at fixed distance , increasing stellar luminosity increases the disk surface brightness at fixed angular radius because @xmath17 increases ( i.e. increases if @xmath37 is positive ) . assuming that most of the transmitted disk flux originates from a constant angular scale ( i.e. near the first transmission peak ) , the transmitted disk flux therefore increases as @xmath134 ( assuming that the effect of the changing disk temperature in the first transmission peak is small ) .
combining this expression with the stellar flux yields a null depth @xmath135 \ , .\ ] ] hosts stars are chosen to have habitable zones with similar angular sizes and for our reference model @xmath49 , so the term in square parentheses varies relatively little and the null depth almost entirely depends on the stellar temperature .
the absolute null depth level of course also varies linearly with the zodi level , so the zodi limits can be derived by dividing the expected sensitivity of @xmath127 by the null depth values in the middle panel ( i.e. by solving equation ( [ eq : leakmod ] ) for @xmath18 ) @xmath136 \ , .\ ] ] the resulting sensitivities show that what we define as solar system levels of zodiacal dust are at the predicted 1@xmath115 noise level for early - type stars , as are 3 - 10 zodi disks around sun - like stars .
this discussion of scalings applies equally to the narrow worst case scenario , shown as grey symbols in fig .
[ fig : leak ] .
as expected for a narrower disk that emits over a smaller total physical area , the disk to star flux ratios are lower than for our reference model , as are the null depths .
while the difference between the two models is about a factor of five in disk / star flux ratio , the difference in null depths is only a factor of two to three because most of the flux removed from the disk in the narrower model is hidden behind the central transmission minimum ( e.g. fig .
[ fig : rin ] ) .
similarly , the difference in zodi levels is a factor two to three higher in this case compared to our reference model .
therefore , the effect of this pessimistic scenario in terms of habitable zone dust levels is relatively minor .
because our zodi definition is based on constant surface density in the habitable zone , the @xmath18 dependence on luminosity directly shows that the lbti can truly detect lower surface densities of dust in the habitable zones of earlier type stars .
this conclusion does not depend on our zodi definition because the lbti is sensitive to @xmath137 .
a different definition , for example @xmath138 , makes the zodi limit approximately constant ( @xmath139^\alpha$ ] ) , but also implies @xmath140 ( and the sensitivity to habitable zone surface density is the same as with our definition ) .      ) for the reference disk model for hosts survey stars , split into `` sun - like '' and `` sensitivity '' sub - samples ( red circles and blue squares ) .
these limits use equation ( [ eq : ssca ] ) and the zodi limits from fig .
[ fig : leak ] .
grey symbols show a pessimistic narrow - disk scenario where disks only cover the habitable zone ( from 320 to 210k).,scaledwidth=50.0% ]    given the detection limits in the bottom panel of fig .
[ fig : leak ] , we can also derive the face - on habitable zone ( @xmath141 au ) scattered light surface brightness of disks at the hosts survey detection limits .
these limits are shown in fig .
[ fig : ssca ] for @xmath121 as defined in section [ ss : scat ] .
red and blue symbols show limits for our standard disk model , which again depend on the stellar luminosity .
the origin of the dependence on stellar luminosity can be understood by rewriting equation ( [ eq : ssca ] ) using the zodi limit scaling above @xmath142 like the zodi limits , the scattered light levels in the habitable zone at these limits decrease with stellar luminosity .
the squared distance and luminosity dependence is simply the geometric effect that accounts for @xmath143 dilution of light and that surface brightness is an angular measure .
the extra @xmath37 dependence is because the habitable zone is not at the first transmission peak for all targets .
if the lbti observation is dominated by emission near the first transmission peak , but the habitable zone is slightly farther out ( i.e. @xmath144 ) , the @xmath37 dependence represents a model - dependent extrapolation that is relatively unimportant while @xmath37 is small .    as with the lbti sensitivity to habitable zone surface density
, our zodi definition has no effect on the scattered light predictions and is merely an intermediate step for deriving the true quantity of interest .
that is , as described above the lbti sensitivity to @xmath12 in the habitable zone ( i.e. @xmath145 ) , which sets the limits on @xmath146 , will always be the same .
for the example of a constant @xmath147 zodi definition therefore , @xmath18 is constant but @xmath148 and equation ( [ eq : scamod ] ) is the same .
because the hosts sample is explicitly chosen such that the lbti is sensitive to thermal emission from dust in the region of interest for earth - imaging , the scattered light predictions do not strongly depend on the choice of our disk model parameters ( but of course depends on albedo ) .
the predictions are not totally independent of our disk model however , since for example changing the steepness of the radial profile makes the dust in the model more or less concentrated relative to the lbti transmission pattern , thus changing the derived zodi level .
varying @xmath37 between -1 and 1 yields changes of @xmath1491 mag in the scattered light predictions , meaning that the model dependent uncertainty is similar to the variation expected from the unknown disk inclination .    for solar - type stars , the scattered light levels in fig .
[ fig : ssca ] for our face - on reference model at the @xmath894 zodi detection limit is 20 - 21 mag arcsec@xmath11 . for comparison ,
using a 4 zodi disk the ` zodipic `  model predicts 21.2 mag arcsec@xmath11 at 1 au with default parameters ( a solar analogue with @xmath150 and use of a phase function ) , and 21.6 mag arcsec@xmath11 for @xmath121 and isotropic scattering .
our simple model therefore compares well with the more complex calculation made by ` zodipic ` . for a 60@xmath25 inclined disk , ` zodipic `  gives 21.1 mag arcsec@xmath11 , and for 90@xmath25 gives 20.6 mag arcsec@xmath11 , and therefore the increase from face - on to edge - on is about 1 magnitude .
our model has smaller vertical extent than ` zodipic ` , so the increase in surface brightness for inclined disks will be larger , roughly a factor of three for a 60@xmath25 inclined disk .
the grey symbols in fig . [ fig : ssca ] show the scattered light surface brightness for narrower disks that only lie in the habitable zone .
these limits are about 1 magnitude brighter than our reference model , so similar to the variation in brightness with the ( unknown ) disk orientation .
therefore , the scattered light limits from lbti observations are fairly robust to disk width .
we have outlined a parameterised disk model to be used for modelling and interpreting mid - ir exo - zodi observations with the lbti . using this model ,
we have illustrated how to derive dust limits and levels for exo - zodiacal clouds , and how these can be converted to scattered light surface brightnesses needed for planning future missions that will image extrasolar earth - analogues .    using the hosts sample that the lbti will observe
, we illustrate the survey detection limits both in terms of zodi units and the expected scattered light levels at these limits .
these limits are around ten times the solar system level for solar - type stars , and thus the lbti is expected to provide stringent limits with key information that will help plan future earth - imaging efforts .
the large binocular telescope interferometer is funded by the national aeronautics and space administration as part of its exoplanet exploration program .
this work was supported by the european union through erc grant number 279973 ( gmk , op , abs & mcw ) .
we thank the reviewer for valuable comments .      , o. , defrre , d. , coud du foresto , v. , di folco , e. , mrand , a. , augereau , j .- c .
, ertel , s. , hanot , c. , kervella , p. , mollier , b. , scott , n. , che , x. , monnier , j.  d. , thureau , n. , tuthill , p.  g. , ten brummelaar , t.  a. , mcalister , h.  a. , sturmann , j. , sturmann , l. , & turner , n. 2013 , , 555 , a104          , d. , absil , o. , augereau , j .- c . ,
di folco , e. , berger , j .- p .
, coud du foresto , v. , kervella , p. , le bouquin , j .- b . ,
lebreton , j. , millan - gabet , r. , monnier , j.  d. , olofsson , j. , & traub , w. 2011 , , 534 , a5                                  , j. , van lieshout , r. , augereau , j .- c . ,
absil , o. , mennesson , b. , kama , m. , dominik , c. , bonsor , a. , vandeportal , j. , beust , h. , defrre , d. , ertel , s. , faramaz , v. , hinz , p. , kral , q. , lagrange , a .- m . , liu , w. , & thbault , p. 2013
, , 555 , a146      , r. , serabyn , e. , mennesson , b. , traub , w.  a. , barry , r.  k. , danchi , w.  c. , kuchner , m. , stark , c.  c. , ragland , s. , hrynevych , m. , woillez , j. , stapelfeldt , k. , bryden , g. , colavita , m.  m. , & booth , a.  j. 2011 , , 734 , 67