MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Disc formation in turbulent massive cores: circumventing the magnetic braking catastrophe

2012· article· en· W1798320926 on OpenAlexaff
Daniel Seifried, Robi Banerjee, Ralph E. Pudritz, Ralf S. Klessen

Bibliographic record

VenueMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society Letters · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAstrophysics and Star Formation Studies
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsTurbulenceAngular momentumProtostarAstrophysicsMagnetic fieldMechanicsStar formationEddy current brakeClassical mechanicsStars

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT We present collapse simulations of 100 M⊙ turbulent cloud cores threaded by a strong magnetic field. During the initial collapse phase, filaments are generated which fragment quickly and form several protostars. Around these protostars Keplerian discs with typical sizes of up to 100 au build up in contrast to previous simulations neglecting turbulence. We examine three mechanisms potentially responsible for lowering the magnetic braking efficiency and therefore allowing for the formation of Keplerian discs. Analysing the condensations in which the discs form, we show that the build-up of Keplerian discs is neither caused by magnetic flux loss due to turbulent reconnection nor by the misalignment of the magnetic field and the angular momentum. It is rather a consequence of the turbulent surroundings of the disc which exhibit no coherent rotation structure while strong local shear flows carry large amounts of angular momentum. We suggest that the ‘magnetic braking catastrophe’, i.e. the formation of sub-Keplerian discs only, is an artefact of the idealized non-turbulent initial conditions and that turbulence provides a natural mechanism to circumvent this problem.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.039

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.008
GPT teacher head0.204
Teacher spread0.195 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations117
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society LettersSame topicAstrophysics and Star Formation StudiesFrench-language works237,207