Forming Planetesimals in Solar and Extrasolar Nebulae
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Planets are built from planetesimals: solids larger than a kilometer that grow by colliding in pairs. Planetesimals themselves are unlikely to form by two-body collisions alone; subkilometer objects have gravitational fields individually too weak, and electrostatic attraction is too feeble for growth beyond a few centimeters. We review the possibility that planetesimals form when self-gravity brings together vast ensembles of small particles. Even when self-gravity is weak, aerodynamic processes can accumulate solids relative to gas, paving the way for gravitational collapse. Particles pile up as they drift radially inward. Gas turbulence stirs particles but can also seed collapse by clumping them. Whereas the feedback of solids on gas triggers vertical-shear instabilities that obstruct self-gravity, this same feedback triggers streaming instabilities that strongly concentrate particles. Numerical simulations find that solids ∼10–100 cm in size gravitationally collapse in turbulent disks. We outline areas for progress, including the possibility that still smaller objects self-gravitate.
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.
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 | 0.001 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 it