MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1981747069 · doi:10.1086/319428

The Nature of the Radiative Hydrodynamic Instabilities in Radiatively Supported Thomson Atmospheres

2001· article· en· W1981747069 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicThermal Radiation and Cooling Technologies
Canadian institutionsCanadian Institute for Theoretical AstrophysicsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRadiative transferEddington luminosityBoundary value problemInstabilityScatteringElectronPlane (geometry)Boundary (topology)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Atmospheres having a significant radiative support are shown to be intrinsically unstable at luminosities above a critical fraction Γ crit ≈ 0.5-0.85 of the Eddington limit, with the exact value depending on the boundary conditions. Two different types of absolute radiation-hydrodynamic instabilities of acoustic waves are found to take place even in the electron scattering-dominated limit. Both instabilities grow over dynamical timescales and both operate on nonradial modes. One is stationary and arises only after the effects of the boundary conditions are taken into account, while the second is a propagating wave and is insensitive to the boundary conditions. Although a significant wind can be generated by these instabilities even below the classical Eddington luminosity limit, quasi-stable configurations can exist beyond the Eddington limit due to the generally reduced effective opacity. The study is done using a rigorous numerical linear analysis of a gray plane-parallel atmosphere under the Eddington approximation. We also present more simplified analytical explanations.

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)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.201
Teacher spread0.197 · 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

Citations68
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Astrophysical JournalSame topicThermal Radiation and Cooling TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207