The chemistry of protoplanetary fragments formed via gravitational instabilities
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper, we model the chemical evolution of a 0.25 M⊙ protoplanetary disc surrounding a 1 M⊙ star that undergoes fragmentation due to self-gravity. We use smoothed particle hydrodynamics including a radiative transfer scheme, along with a time-dependent chemical evolution code to follow the composition of the disc and resulting fragments over approximately 4000 yr. Initially, four quasi-stable fragments are formed, of which two are eventually disrupted by tidal torques in the disc. From the results of our chemical modelling, we identify species that are abundant in the fragments (e.g. H2O, H2S, HNO, N2, NH3, OCS, SO), species that are abundant in the spiral shocks within the disc (e.g. CO, CH4, CN, CS, H2CO) and species that are abundant in the circumfragmentary material (e.g. HCO+). Our models suggest that in some fragments it is plausible for grains to sediment to the core before releasing their volatiles into the planetary envelope, leading to changes in, e.g., the C/O ratio of the gas and ice components. We would therefore predict that the atmospheric composition of planets generated by gravitational instability should not necessarily follow the bulk chemical composition of the local disc material.
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) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".