SHEDDING LIGHT ON THE ECCENTRICITY VALLEY: GAP HEATING AND ECCENTRICITY EXCITATION OF GIANT PLANETS IN PROTOPLANETARY DISKS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We show that the first order (non-co-orbital) corotation torques are significantly modified by entropy gradients in a non-barotropic protoplanetary disk. Such non-barotropic torques can dramatically alter the balance that, for barotropic cases, results in the net eccentricity damping for giant gap-clearing planets embedded in the disk. We demonstrate that stellar illumination can heat the gap enough for the planet's orbital eccentricity to instead be excited. We also discuss the "Eccentricity Valley" noted in the known exoplanet population, where low-metallicity stars have a deficit of eccentric planets between ∼0.1 and ∼1 AU compared to metal-rich systems. We show that this feature in the planet distribution may be due to the self-shadowing of the disk by a rim located at the dust sublimation radius ∼0.1 AU, which is known to exist for several T Tauri systems. In the shadowed region between ∼0.1 and ∼1 AU, lack of gap insolation allows disk interactions to damp eccentricity. Outside such shadowed regions stellar illumination can heat the planetary gaps and drive eccentricity growth for giant planets. We suggest that the self-shadowing does not arise at higher metallicity due to the increased optical depth of the gas interior to the dust sublimation radius.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".