MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2495596338 · doi:10.1017/s0074180900195919

Multidimensional Hydrodynamic and Hydrostatic Stellar Models

2004· article· en· W2495596338 on OpenAlexaff
R. G. Deupree

Bibliographic record

VenueSymposium - International Astronomical Union · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicSolar and Space Plasma Dynamics
Canadian institutionsSt. Mary's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConvectionPhysicsRotation (mathematics)EddyStellar rotationStellar evolutionHydrostatic equilibriumMechanicsStellar structureFlow (mathematics)TurbulenceAstrophysicsClassical mechanicsStarsAstronomyGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Results for multidimensional stellar model simulations of both 2D and 3D hydrodynamic models and 2D stellar evolution sequences are presented. Simulations of the highly superadiabatic region of the solar convective region provide a good example of the current status and limitations of explicit 3D finite difference methods in stellar problems. Such simulations cannot be used for stellar cores, where the motion is expected to be well subsonic. The results of some 2D fully implcit hydrodynamic simulations of convective cores and shells are given for models with and without rotation, and their effects examined through fully 2D stellar evolution sequences. One effect of moderate to rapid rotation in convective cores is to alter the convective flow pattern so that convective eddies tend to line up parallel to the rotation axis. Rotation also appears to modestly reduce the amount of convective core overshooting, at least for intermediate mass models.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.206
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

Citations0
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSymposium - International Astronomical UnionSame topicSolar and Space Plasma DynamicsFrench-language works237,207