MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2152064438 · doi:10.1088/0004-637x/693/2/1449

GROWTH OF MAGNETIC FIELDS INDUCED BY TURBULENT MOTIONS

2009· article· en· W2152064438 on OpenAlexaff
Jungyeon Cho, Ethan T. Vishniac, Andrey Beresnyak, A. Lazarian, Dongsu Ryu

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicSolar and Space Plasma Dynamics
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsMagnetohydrodynamicsMagnetic fieldMagnetohydrodynamic turbulenceTurbulenceMagnetic energyMagnetic pressureIsotropyMagnetohydrodynamic driveKinetic energyField (mathematics)Computational physicsClassical mechanicsMechanicsMagnetizationQuantum mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present numerical simulations of driven magnetohydrodynamic (MHD) turbulence with weak/moderate imposed magnetic fields. The main goal is to clarify dynamics of magnetic field growth. We also investigate the effects of the imposed magnetic fields on the MHD turbulence, including, as a limit, the case of zero external field. Our findings are as follows. First, when we start off simulations with weak mean magnetic field only (or with small scale random field with zero imposed field), we observe that there is a stage at which magnetic energy density grows linearly with time. Runs with different numerical resolutions and/or different simulation parameters show consistent results for the growth rate at the linear stage. Second, we find that, when the strength of the external field increases, the equilibrium kinetic energy density drops by roughly the product of the rms velocity and the strength of the external field. The equilibrium magnetic energy density rises by roughly the same amount. Third, when the external magnetic field is not very strong (say, less than ∼0.2 times the rms velocity when measured in the units of Alfvén speed), the turbulence at large scales remains statistically isotropic, i.e., there is no apparent global anisotropy of order B 0 / v . We discuss implications of our results on astrophysical fluids.

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)0.002
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.215
Teacher spread0.209 · 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

Citations132
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Astrophysical JournalSame topicSolar and Space Plasma DynamicsFrench-language works237,207