MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1975260087 · doi:10.1086/533428

Accretion‐powered Stellar Winds. II. Numerical Solutions for Stellar Wind Torques

2008· article· en· W1975260087 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicSolar and Space Plasma Dynamics
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStellar windTorqueStellar atmosphereComputational astrophysicsStellar structureStellar evolutionStellar rotation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In order to explain the slow rotation observed in a large fraction of accreting pre-main-sequence stars (CTTSs), we explore the role of stellar winds in torquing down the stars. For this mechanism to be effective, the stellar winds need to have relatively high outflow rates, and thus would likely be powered by the accretion process itself. Here, we use numerical magnetohydrodynamical simulations to compute detailed two-dimensional (axisymmetric) stellar wind solutions, in order to determine the spin-down torque on the star. We discuss wind driving mechanisms and then adopt a Parker-like (thermal pressure driven) wind, modified by rotation, magnetic fields, and enhanced mass-loss rate (relative to the Sun). We explore a range of parameters relevant for CTTSs, including variations in the stellar mass, radius, spin rate, surface magnetic field strength, mass-loss rate, and wind acceleration rate. We also consider both dipole and quadrupole magnetic field geometries. Our simulations indicate that the stellar wind torque is of sufficient magnitude to be important for spinning down a "typical" CTTS, for a mass-loss rate of ~10 −9 M ☉ yr −1 . The winds are wide-angle, self-collimated flows, as expected of magnetic rotator winds with moderately fast rotation. The cases with quadrupolar field produce a much weaker torque than for a dipole with the same surface field strength, demonstrating that magnetic geometry plays a fundamental role in determining the torque. Cases with varying wind acceleration rate show much smaller variations in the torque, suggesting that the details of the wind driving are less important. We use our computed results to fit a semianalytic formula for the effective Alfvén radius in the wind, as well as the torque. This allows for considerable predictive power, and is an improvement over existing approximations.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.002

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.238
Teacher spread0.222 · 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

Citations185
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Astrophysical JournalSame topicSolar and Space Plasma DynamicsFrench-language works237,207