MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2017303581 · doi:10.1088/0004-6256/144/4/119

A LAGRANGIAN INTEGRATOR FOR PLANETARY ACCRETION AND DYNAMICS (LIPAD)

2012· article· en· W2017303581 on OpenAlexaff
Harold F. Levison, Martin J. Duncan, Edward W. Thommes

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astronomical Journal · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAstro and Planetary Science
Canadian institutionsUniversity of GuelphQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPlanetesimalDynamical frictionPhysicsPlanetAccretion (finance)ProtoplanetSmoothed-particle hydrodynamicsGravitationLagrangianClassical mechanicsRADIUSStellar dynamicsCircular orbitSymplectic integratorAstrophysicsIntegratorProtoplanetary diskGalaxyComputer scienceTheoretical physics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We presented the first particle based, Lagrangian code that can follow the collisional/accretional/dynamical evolution of a large number of km-sized planetesimals through the entire growth process to become planets. We refer to it as the 'Lagrangian Integrator for Planetary Accretion and Dynamics' or LIPAD. LIPAD is built on top of SyMBA, which is a symplectic $N$-body integrator. In order to handle the very large number of planetesimals required by planet formation simulations, we introduce the concept of a `tracer' particle. Each tracer is intended to represent a large number of disk particles on roughly the same orbit and size as one another, and is characterized by three numbers: the physical radius, the bulk density, and the total mass of the disk particles represented by the tracer. We developed statistical algorithms that follow the dynamical and collisional evolution of the tracers due to the presence of one another. The tracers mainly dynamically interact with the larger objects (`planetary embryos') in the normal N-body way. LIPAD's greatest strength is that it can accurately model the wholesale redistribution of planetesimals due to gravitational interaction with the embryos, which has recently been shown to significantly affect the growth rate of planetary embryos . We verify the code via a comprehensive set of tests which compare our results with those of Eulerian and/or direct N-body codes.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.056
Threshold uncertainty score0.268

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.214
Teacher spread0.206 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations59
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Astronomical JournalSame topicAstro and Planetary ScienceFrench-language works237,207