MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The spin of accreting stars: dependence on magnetic coupling to the disc

2004· article· en· W2153626498 on OpenAlexaff
Sean P. Matt, Ralph E. Pudritz

Bibliographic record

VenueMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAstrophysics and Star Formation Studies
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsAstrophysicsStarsSpin (aerodynamics)AstronomyCoupling (piping)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We formulate a general, steady-state model for the torque on a magnetized star from a surrounding accretion disc. For the first time, we include the opening of dipolar magnetic field lines due to the differential rotation between the star and disc, so the magnetic topology then depends on the strength of the magnetic coupling to the disc. This coupling is determined by the effective slip rate of magnetic field lines that penetrate the diffusive disc. Stronger coupling (i.e., lower slip rate) leads to a more open topology and thus to a weaker magnetic torque on the star from the disc. In the expected strong coupling regime, we find that the spin-down torque on the star is more than an order of magnitude smaller than calculated by previous models. We also use our general approach to examine the equilibrium (`disc-locked') state, in which the net torque on the star is zero. In this state, we show that the stellar spin rate is roughly an order of magnitude faster than predicted by previous models. This challenges the idea that slowly-rotating, accreting protostars are disc locked. Furthermore, when the field is sufficiently open (e.g., for mass accretion rates > 5 x 10^{-9} M_sun / yr, for typical accreting protostars), the star will receive no magnetic spin-down torque from the disc at all. We therefore conclude that protostars must experience a spin-down torque from a source that has not yet been considered in the star-disc torque models--possibly from a stellar wind along the open field lines.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.310
Threshold uncertainty score0.394

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.222
Teacher spread0.214 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations140
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical SocietySame topicAstrophysics and Star Formation StudiesFrench-language works237,207