SURFACE GEOMETRY OF PROTOPLANETARY DISKS INFERRED FROM NEAR-INFRARED IMAGING POLARIMETRY
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We present a new method of analysis for determining the surface geometry of five protoplanetary disks observed with near-infrared imaging polarimetry using Subaru-HiCIAO. Using as inputs the observed distribution of polarized intensity (PI), disk inclination, assumed properties for dust scattering, and other reasonable approximations, we calculate a differential equation to derive the surface geometry. This equation is numerically integrated along the distance from the star at a given position angle. We show that, using these approximations, the local maxima in the PI distribution of spiral arms (SAO 206462, MWC 758) and rings (2MASS J16042165–2130284, PDS 70) are associated with local concave-up structures on the disk surface. We also show that the observed presence of an inner gap in scattered light still allows the possibility of a disk surface that is parallel to the light path from the star, or a disk that is shadowed by structures in the inner radii. Our analysis for rings does not show the presence of a vertical inner wall as often assumed in studies of disks with an inner gap. Finally, we summarize the implications of spiral and ring structures as potential signatures of ongoing planet formation.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".