MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1994987973 · doi:10.1088/0004-637x/754/1/21

ROSSBY WAVE INSTABILITY IN LOCALLY ISOTHERMAL AND POLYTROPIC DISKS: THREE-DIMENSIONAL LINEAR CALCULATIONS

2012· article· en· W1994987973 on OpenAlexaff
Min-Kai Lin

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicSolar and Space Plasma Dynamics
Canadian institutionsCanadian Institute for Theoretical Astrophysics
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolytropic processPhysicsInstabilityHydrostatic equilibriumRossby numberRossby waveVortexMechanicsIsothermal processClassical mechanicsTurbulenceThermodynamicsQuantum mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Numerical calculations of the linear Rossby wave instability (RWI) in global three-dimensional (3D) disks are presented. The linearized fluid equations are solved for vertically stratified, radially structured disks with either a locally isothermal or polytropic equation of state, by decomposing the vertical dependence of the perturbed hydrodynamic quantities into Hermite and Gegenbauer polynomials, respectively. It is confirmed that the RWI operates in 3D. For perturbations with vertical dependence assumed above, there is little difference in growth rates between 3D and two-dimensional (2D) calculations. Comparison between 2D and 3D solutions of this type suggests the RWI is predominantly a 2D instability and that 3D effects, such as vertical motion, can be interpreted as a perturbative consequence of the dominant 2D flow. The vertical flow around corotation, where vortex formation is expected, is examined. In locally isothermal disks, the expected vortex center remains in approximate vertical hydrostatic equilibrium. For polytropic disks, the vortex center has positive vertical velocity, whose magnitude increases with decreasing polytropic index n .

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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread0.225 · 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

Citations70
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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