MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2110155166 · doi:10.1088/0004-637x/790/1/78

IRRADIATION INSTABILITY AT THE INNER EDGES OF ACCRETION DISKS

2014· article· en· W2110155166 on OpenAlexaff
Jeffrey Fung, Pawel Artymowicz

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAstrophysics and Star Formation Studies
Canadian institutionsThe Scarborough HospitalCanadian Institute for Theoretical AstrophysicsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInstabilityPhysicsOpacityAstrophysicsIrradiationAccretion (finance)BETA (programming language)MechanicsOpticsNuclear physics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An instability can potentially operate in highly irradiated disks where the disk sharply transitions from being radially transparent to opaque (the "transition region"). Such conditions may exist at the inner edges of transitional disks around T Tauri stars and accretion disks around active galactic nuclei. We derive the criterion for this instability, which we term the "irradiation instability," or IRI. We also present the linear growth rate as a function of β, the ratio between radiation force and gravity, and c s , the sound speed of the disk, obtained using two methods: a semi-analytic analysis of the linearized equations and a numerical simulation using the GPU-accelerated hydrodynamical code PEnGUIn . In particular, we find that IRI occurs at β ∼ 0.1 if the transition region extends as wide as ∼0.05 r , and at higher β values if it is wider. This threshold value applies to c s ranging from 3% of the Keplerian orbital speed to 5%, and becomes higher if c s is lower. Furthermore, in the nonlinear evolution of the instability, disks with a large β and small c s exhibit "clumping," extreme local surface density enhancements that can reach over 10 times the initial disk surface density.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.226 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations13
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Astrophysical Journal→Same topicAstrophysics and Star Formation Studies→French-language works237,207→