MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2103857805 · doi:10.1017/s1743921311000275

Magnetic Diffusion in Star Formation

2010· article· en· W2103857805 on OpenAlexaff
Shantanu Basu, Wolf B. Dapp

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the International Astronomical Union · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAstrophysics and Star Formation Studies
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAmbipolar diffusionProtostarPhysicsMagnetic fieldAstrophysicsMolecular cloudDiffusionMagnetic fluxStar formationFlux (metallurgy)Magnetic cloudStarsMaterials sciencePlasmaCoronal mass ejection

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Magnetic diffusion plays a vital role in star formation. We trace its influence from interstellar cloud scales down to star-disk scales. On both scales, we find that magnetic diffusion can be significantly enhanced by the buildup of strong gradients in magnetic field structure. Large scale nonlinear flows can create compressed cloud layers within which ambipolar diffusion occurs rapidly. However, in the flux-freezing limit that may be applicable to photoionized molecular cloud envelopes, supersonic motions can persist for long times if driven by an externally generated magnetic field that corresponds to a subcritical mass-to-flux ratio. In the case of protostellar accretion, rapid magnetic diffusion (through Ohmic dissipation with additional support from ambipolar diffusion) near the protostar causes dramatic magnetic flux loss. By doing so, it also allows the formation of a centrifugal disk, thereby avoiding the magnetic braking catastrophe.

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: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

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 studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.203
Teacher spread0.198 · 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

Citations1
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the International Astronomical Union→Same topicAstrophysics and Star Formation Studies→French-language works237,207→