Convective heat transfer and the pattern of thermal emission on the gas giants
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Jupiter and Saturn emit nearly twice the thermal energy they receive from the Sun. Although insolation decreases toward the poles, the large-scale outward heat flux is nearly uniform, with smaller-scale latitudinal undulations that correlate with the zonal jet streams. Here we present numerical models of rapidly rotating, turbulent 3-D convection in geometrically thin, uniformly forced layers of Boussinesq fluid that approximate the deep convection zones of Jupiter and Saturn. In previous studies we have demonstrated that such models generate zonal flows comparable to those observed on the gas giants. By analysing the simulated patterns of convective heat transfer, we show here that deep convection in the gas giants can explain the anomalously uniform large-scale thermal emissions as well as the jet-scale variations. In particular, we find that convective heat transfer by quasi-geostrophic thermal plumes in relatively thin spherical shell geometry generates an outward heat flow pattern with a broad equatorial minimum and peaks at the poles. The results suggest an alternative to the hypothesis that insolation controls the large-scale patterns of heat flux and zonal flow on the gas giants. Instead, we propose that the large-scale thermal and zonal flow fields originate deep within the planets' molecular envelopes.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".