MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2120115896 · doi:10.1086/321475

The Structure and Evolution of Magnetized Cloud Cores in a Zero‐Density Background

2001· article· en· W2120115896 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAstrophysics and Star Formation Studies
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAmbipolar diffusionMagnetic fieldCore (optical fiber)Oblate spheroidMagnetic cloudPolarGravitational collapseMagnetohydrodynamics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Molecular-line observations of star-forming cloud cores indicate that they are not the flattened structures traditionally considered by theory. Rather, they are elongated, perhaps in the direction of their internal magnetic field. We are thus motivated to consider the structure and evolution of axisymmetric, magnetized clouds that start from a variety of initial states, both flattened (oblate) and elongated (prolate). In this first contribution, the clouds are of fixed mass, and are surrounded by a fictitious medium of zero density and finite pressure. We devise a new technique, dubbed the q -method, that allows us to construct magnetostatic equilibria of any specified shape. The mass loading of the field lines then follows from the self-consistent model solution, just the reverse of the standard procedure. We find, in agreement with previous authors, that the field lines in oblate clouds bend inward. However, those in prolate clouds bow outward, confining the structures through magnetic tension. We next follow the quasi-static evolution of these clouds via ambipolar diffusion. An oblate cloud either relaxes to a magnetically force-free sphere or, if sufficiently massive, flattens along its polar axis as its central density runs away. A prolate cloud always relaxes to a sphere of modest central density. We finally consider the evolution of an initially spherical cloud subject to the tidal gravity of neighboring bodies. Although the structure constricts equatorially, it also shortens along the pole, so that it ultimately flattens on the way to collapse. In summary, none of our initial states can evolve to the point of collapse while maintaining an elongated shape. We speculate that this situation will change once we allow the cloud to gain mass from its environment.

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)0.000
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 score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.032

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.220 · 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

Citations26
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Astrophysical JournalSame topicAstrophysics and Star Formation StudiesFrench-language works237,207