ON THE DIVERSITY OF MAGNETIC INTERACTIONS IN CLOSE-IN STAR-PLANET SYSTEMS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Magnetic interactions between close-in planets and their host star can play an important role in the secular orbital evolution of the planets, as well as the rotational evolution of their host. As long as the planet orbits inside the Alfvén surface of the stellar wind, the magnetic interaction between the star and the planet can modify the wind properties and also lead to direct angular momentum transfers between the two. We model these star–planet interactions using compressible magnetohydrodynamic (MHD) simulations, and quantify the angular momentum transfers between the star, the planet, and the stellar wind. We study the cases of magnetized and non-magnetized planets and vary the orbital radius inside the Alfvén surface of the stellar wind. Based on a grid of numerical simulations, we propose general scaling laws for the modification of the stellar wind torque, for the torque between the star and the planet, and for the planet migration associated with the star–planet magnetic interactions. We show that when the coronal magnetic field is large enough and the star is rotating sufficiently slowly, the effect of the magnetic star–planet interaction is comparable to tidal effects and can lead to a rapid orbital decay.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".