MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2199337832 · doi:10.1093/mnras/stw2796

Collapse in self-gravitating turbulent fluids

2016· article· en· W2199337832 on OpenAlexaff
D. Murray, Philip Chang, Norman Murray, J. F. T. Pittman

Bibliographic record

VenueMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAstrophysics and Star Formation Studies
Canadian institutionsCanadian Institute for Theoretical AstrophysicsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNational Aeronautics and Space Administration
KeywordsPhysicsAstrophysicsRADIUSStar formationStar (game theory)TurbulenceAccretion (finance)Gravitational collapseStellar massLine (geometry)AttractorGalaxyMechanicsGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Motivated by the non-linear star formation efficiency found in recent numerical simulations by a number of workers, we perform high-resolution adaptive mesh refinement simulations of star formation in self-gravitating turbulently driven gas. As we follow the collapse of this gas, we find that the character of the flow changes at two radii, the disc radius rd and the radius r*, where the enclosed gas mass exceeds the stellar mass. Accretion starts at large scales and works inwards. In line with recent analytical work, we find that the density evolves to a fixed attractor, ρ(r, t) → ρ(r), for rd < r < r*; mass flows through this structure on to a sporadically gravitationally unstable disc and from thence on to the star. In the bulk of the simulation box, we find that the random motions vT ∼ rp with p ∼ 0.5 are in agreement with Larson's size–linewidth relation. In the vicinity of massive star-forming regions, we find p ∼ 0.2–0.3, as seen in observations. For r < r*, vT increases inwards, with p = −1/2. Finally, we find that the total stellar mass M*(t) ∼ t2 is in line with previous numerical and analytic work that suggests a non-linear rate of star formation.

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 score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.045

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.208
Teacher spread0.202 · 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

Citations52
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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