MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2034466692 · doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201423647

On the probability distribution function of the mass surface density of molecular clouds. II.

2014· article· en· W2034466692 on OpenAlexafffund
J. Fischera

Bibliographic record

VenueAstronomy and Astrophysics · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAstrophysics and Star Formation Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoCanadian Institute for Theoretical Astrophysics
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanadian Space Agency
KeywordsProbability density functionMolecular cloudSPHERESRADIUSPhysicsOverpressureTurbulenceMass distributionFunction (biology)Isothermal processSurface (topology)Distribution (mathematics)Probability distributionDistribution functionGeometryMechanicsClassical mechanicsThermodynamicsAstrophysicsStarsMathematicsMathematical analysisStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The probability distribution function (PDF) of the mass surface density of molecular clouds provides essential information about the structure of molecular cloud gas and condensed structures out of which stars may form. In general, the PDF shows two basic components: a broad distribution around the maximum with resemblance to a log-normal function, and a tail at high mass surface densities attributed to turbulence and self-gravity. In a previous paper, the PDF of condensed structures has been analyzed and an analytical formula presented based on a truncated radial density profile, ρ(r) = ρc/ (1 + (r/r0)2)n/ 2 with central density ρc and inner radius r0, widely used in astrophysics as a generalization of physical density profiles. In this paper, the results are applied to analyze the PDF of self-gravitating, isothermal, pressurized, spherical (Bonnor-Ebert spheres) and cylindrical condensed structures with emphasis on the dependence of the PDF on the external pressure pext and on the overpressure q-1 = pc/pext, where pc is the central pressure. Apart from individual clouds, we also consider ensembles of spheres or cylinders, where effects caused by a variation of pressure ratio, a distribution of condensed cores within a turbulent gas, and (in case of cylinders) a distribution of inclination angles on the mean PDF are analyzed. The probability distribution of pressure ratios q-1 is assumed to be given by P(q-1) ∝ q−k1/ (1 + (q0/q)γ)(k1 + k2) /γ, where k1, γ, k2, and q0 are fixed parameters. The PDF of individual spheres with overpressures below ~100 is well represented by the PDF of a sphere with an analytical density profile with n = 3. At higher pressure ratios, the PDF at mass surface densities Σ ≪ Σ(0), where Σ(0) is the central mass surface density, asymptotically approaches the PDF of a sphere with n = 2. Consequently, the power-law asymptote at mass surface densities above the peak steepens from Psph(Σ) ∝ Σ-2 to Psph(Σ) ∝ Σ-3. The corresponding asymptote of the PDF of cylinders for the large q-1 is approximately given by Pcyl(Σ) ∝ Σ−4/3(1 − (Σ/Σ(0))2/3)−1/2. The distribution of overpressures q-1 produces a power-law asymptote at high mass surface densities given by ∝ Σ−2k2 − 1 (spheres) or ∝ Σ−2k2 (cylinders).

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.021
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.021
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.002

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.179
Teacher spread0.174 · 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

Citations9
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAstronomy and Astrophysics→Same topicAstrophysics and Star Formation Studies→French-language works237,207→