Revision of “Cumulative effect of the filamentation and Weibel instabilities in counterstreaming thermal plasmas” [Phys. Plasmas 13, 102107 (2006)]
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Dispersion formalism reported in Lazar et al. [Phys. Plasmas 13, 102107 (2006)] is affected by errors due to the misfitting of the distribution function (1) used to interpret the counterstreaming plasmas, with the general dispersion relations (4) and (5), where distribution function (1) has been inserted to find the unstable solutions. The analytical approach is reviewed here, providing a correct analytical and numerical description for the cumulative effect of filamentation and Weibel instabilities arising in initially counterstreaming plasmas with temperature anisotropies. The growth rates are plotted again, and for the cumulative mode, they are orders of magnitude larger than those obtained in Lazar et al. [Phys. Plasmas 13, 102107 (2006)]. Physically, this can be understood as an increasing of the efficiency of magnetic field generation, and rather enhances the potential role of magnetic instabilities for the fast magnetization scenario in astrophysical 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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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 | 0.000 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".