MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1987199236 · doi:10.1086/308293

Consistency of Ambipolar Diffusion Models with Infall in the L1544 Protostellar Core

2000· article· en· W1987199236 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAstrophysics and Star Formation Studies
Canadian institutionsCanadian Institute for Theoretical AstrophysicsUniversity of TorontoWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAmbipolar diffusionCore (optical fiber)DiffusionConsistency (knowledge bases)Magnetic fieldKinematicsInner core

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recent high-resolution studies of the L1544 protostellar core by Tafalla et al. and Williams et al. reveal the structure and the kinematics of the gas. The observations of this prestellar core provide a natural test for theoretical models of core formation and evolution. Based on their results, the above authors claim a discrepancy with the implied infall motions from ambipolar diffusion models. In this paper, we reexamine the earlier ambipolar diffusion models and conclude that the L1544 core can be understood to be a magnetically supercritical core undergoing magnetically diluted collapse. We also present a new ambipolar diffusion model specifically designed to simulate the formation and evolution of the L1544 core. This model, which uses reasonable input parameters, yields mass and radial density distributions, as well as neutral and ion infall speed profiles, that are in very good agreement with physical values deduced by observations. The lifetime of the core is also in good agreement with mean prestellar core lifetimes estimated from statistics of an ensemble of cores. The observational input can act to constrain other currently unobserved quantities, such as the degree of ionization and the background magnetic field strength and orientation near the L1544 core.

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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.040

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.226
Teacher spread0.212 · 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

Citations119
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Astrophysical JournalSame topicAstrophysics and Star Formation StudiesFrench-language works237,207