STELLAR DYNAMOS AND CYCLES FROM NUMERICAL SIMULATIONS OF CONVECTION
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We present a series of kinematic axisymmetric mean-field αΩ dynamo models applicable to solar-type stars, for 20 distinct combinations of rotation rates and luminosities. The internal differential rotation and kinetic helicity profiles required to calculate source terms in these dynamo models are extracted from a corresponding series of global three-dimensional hydrodynamical simulations of solar/stellar convection, so that the resulting dynamo models end up involving only one free parameter, namely, the turbulent magnetic diffusivity in the convecting layers. Even though the αΩ dynamo solutions exhibit a broad range of morphologies, and sometimes even double cycles, these models manage to reproduce relatively well the observationally inferred relationship between cycle period and rotation rate. On the other hand, they fail in capturing the observed increase of magnetic activity levels with rotation rate. This failure is due to our use of a simple algebraic α-quenching formula as the sole amplitude-limiting nonlinearity. This suggests that α-quenching is not the primary mechanism setting the amplitude of stellar magnetic cycles, with magnetic reaction on large-scale flows emerging as the more likely candidate. This inference is coherent with analyses of various recent global magnetohydrodynamical simulations of solar/stellar convection.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".