MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Helical fields and filamentary molecular clouds -- I

2000· article· en· W2064412245 on OpenAlexafffund
Jason Fiege, Ralph E. Pudritz

Bibliographic record

VenueMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAstrophysics and Star Formation Studies
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaMcMaster University
KeywordsPhysicsMolecular cloudVirial theoremAstrophysicsToroidMagnetic fieldThermalTurbulenceClassical mechanicsMechanicsGalaxyPlasmaStarsThermodynamicsNuclear physicsQuantum mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We study the equilibrium of pressure truncated, filamentary molecular clouds that are threaded by rather general helical magnetic fields. We first apply the virial theorem to filamentary molecular clouds, including the effects of non-thermal motions and the turbulent pressure of the surrounding ISM. When compared with the data, we find that many filamentary clouds have a mass per unit length that is significantly reduced by the effects of external pressure, and that toroidal fields play a significant role in squeezing such clouds. We also develop exact numerical MHD models of filamentary molecular clouds with more general helical field configurations than have previously been considered. We examine the effects of the equation of state by comparing ‘isothermal’ filaments, with constant total (thermal plus turbulent) velocity dispersion, with equilibria constructed using a logatropic equation of state. Our theoretical models involve three parameters: two to describe the mass loading of the toroidal and poloidal fields, and a third that describes the radial concentration of the filament. We thoroughly explore our parameter space to determine which choices of parameters result in models that agree with the available observational constraints. We find that both equations of state result in equilibria that agree with the observational results. Moreover, we find that models with helical fields have more realistic density profiles than either unmagnetized models or those with purely poloidal fields; we find that most isothermal models have density distributions that fall off as r−1.8 to r−2, while logatropes have density profiles that range from r−1 to r−1.8. We find that purely poloidal fields produce filaments with steep radial density gradients that are not allowed by the observations.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.198
Teacher spread0.194 · 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 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

Citations327
Published2000
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical SocietySame topicAstrophysics and Star Formation StudiesFrench-language works237,207