MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2065014314 · doi:10.1088/0067-0049/199/1/14

A GODUNOV METHOD FOR MULTIDIMENSIONAL RADIATION MAGNETOHYDRODYNAMICS BASED ON A VARIABLE EDDINGTON TENSOR

2012· article· en· W2065014314 on OpenAlexaff
Yan-Fei Jiang, James M. Stone, Shane W. Davis

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAstrophysics and Star Formation Studies
Canadian institutionsCanadian Institute for Theoretical Astrophysics
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsMoment (physics)Tensor (intrinsic definition)Numerical diffusionOpacityRadiative transferMagnetohydrodynamicsComputational physicsConservation lawRadiation pressureClassical mechanicsMechanicsMathematicsMagnetic fieldOpticsGeometryQuantum mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We describe a numerical algorithm to integrate the equations of radiation magnetohydrodynamics in multidimensions using Godunov methods. This algorithm solves the radiation moment equations in the mixed frame, without invoking any diffusion-like approximations. The moment equations are closed using a variable Eddington tensor whose components are calculated from a formal solution of the transfer equation at a large number of angles using the method of short characteristics. We use a comprehensive test suite to verify the algorithm, including convergence tests of radiation-modified linear acoustic and magnetosonic waves, the structure of radiation modified shocks, and two-dimensional tests of photon bubble instability and the ablation of dense clouds by an intense radiation field. These tests cover a very wide range of regimes, including both optically thick and thin flows, and ratios of the radiation to gas pressure of at least 10^{-4} to 10^{4}. Across most of the parameter space, we find the method is accurate. However, the tests also reveal there are regimes where the method needs improvement, for example when both the radiation pressure and absorption opacity are very large. We suggest modifications to the algorithm that will improve accuracy in this case. We discuss the advantages of this method over those based on flux-limited diffusion. In particular, we find the method is not only substantially more accurate, but often no more expensive than the diffusion approximation for our intended applications.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.845
Threshold uncertainty score0.689

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.258 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations123
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Astrophysical Journal Supplement SeriesSame topicAstrophysics and Star Formation StudiesFrench-language works237,207