Planetary evaporation by UV and X-ray radiation: basic hydrodynamics
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We consider the evaporation of close-in planets by the star's intrinsic extreme-ultraviolet (EUV) and X-ray radiation. We calculate evaporation rates by solving the hydrodynamical problem for planetary evaporation including heating from both X-ray and EUV radiation. We show that most close-in planets (a < 0.1 au) are evaporating hydrodynamically, with the evaporation occurring in two distinct regimes: X-ray driven, in which the X-ray heated flow contains a sonic point, and EUV driven, in which the X-ray region is entirely sub-sonic. The mass-loss rates scale as LX/a2 for X-ray driven evaporation, and as for EUV driven evaporation at early times, with mass-loss rates of the order of 1010–1014 g s−1. No exact scaling exists for the mass-loss rate with planet mass and planet radius; however, in general evaporation proceeds more rapidly for planets with lower densities and higher masses. Furthermore, we find that in general the transition from X-ray driven to EUV driven evaporation occurs at lower X-ray luminosities for planets closer to their parent stars and for planets with lower densities. Coupling our evaporation models to the evolution of the high-energy radiation – which falls with time – we are able to follow the evolution of evaporating planets. We find that most planets start off evaporating in the X-ray driven regime, but switch to EUV driven once the X-ray luminosity falls below a critical value. The evolution models suggest that while ‘hot Jupiters’ are evaporating, they are not evaporating at a rate sufficient to remove the entire gaseous envelope on Gyr time-scales. However, we do find that close in Neptune mass planets are more susceptible to complete evaporation of their envelopes. Thus we conclude that planetary evaporation is more important for lower mass planets, particularly those in the ‘hot Neptune’/‘super Earth’ regime.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".