MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2025367319 · doi:10.1088/0004-637x/756/2/145

ASPECT RATIO DEPENDENCE OF THE FREE-FALL TIME FOR NON-SPHERICAL SYMMETRIES

2012· article· en· W2025367319 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAstrophysics and Star Formation Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of VictoriaHerzberg Institute of Astrophysics
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAspect ratio (aeronautics)Enhanced Data Rates for GSM EvolutionHomogeneous spaceAccelerationSquare rootSPHERESSquare (algebra)Mode (computer interface)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We investigate the collapse of non-spherical substructures, such as sheets and filaments, which are ubiquitous in molecular clouds. Such non-spherical substructures collapse homologously in their interiors but are influenced by an edge effect that causes their edges to be preferentially accelerated. We analytically compute the homologous collapse timescales of the interiors of uniform-density, self-gravitating filaments and find that the homologous collapse timescale scales linearly with the aspect ratio. The characteristic timescale for an edge-driven collapse mode in a filament, however, is shown to have a square-root dependence on the aspect ratio. For both filaments and circular sheets, we find that selective edge acceleration becomes more important with increasing aspect ratio. In general, we find that lower dimensional objects and objects with larger aspect ratios have longer collapse timescales. We show that estimates for star formation rates, based upon gas densities, can be overestimated by an order of magnitude if the geometry of a cloud is not taken into account. © 2012. The American Astronomical Society. All rights reserved.

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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.460
Threshold uncertainty score0.415

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 studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.234
Teacher spread0.224 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations91
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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