THE EVOLUTION OF CLOUD CORES AND THE FORMATION OF STARS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
For a number of starless cores, self-absorbed molecular line and column density observations have implied the presence of large-amplitude oscillations. We examine the consequences of these oscillations on the evolution of the cores and the interpretation of their observations. We find that the pulsation energy helps support the cores and that the dissipation of this energy can lead toward instability and star formation. In this picture, the core lifetimes are limited by the pulsation-decay timescales, dominated by non-linear mode–mode coupling, and on the order of ≃ few × 10 5 –10 6 yr. Notably, this is similar to what is required to explain the relatively low rate of conversion of cores into stars. For cores with large-amplitude oscillations, dust continuum observations may appear asymmetric or irregular. As a consequence, some of the cores that would be classified as super-critical may be dynamically stable when oscillations are taken into account. Thus, our investigation motivates a simple hydrodynamic picture, capable of reproducing many of the features of the progenitors of stars without the inclusion of additional physical processes, such as large-scale magnetic fields.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 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".