MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2779391643 · doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aaa290

A Model for the Onset of Self-gravitation and Star Formation in Molecular Gas Governed by Galactic Forces. I. Cloud-scale Gas Motions

2018· article· en· W2779391643 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAstrophysics and Star Formation Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStar formationGalaxyMolecular cloudSpiral galaxyGalactic planeVirial theoremGravitational potentialGravitational collapseStars

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Modern extragalactic molecular gas surveys now reach the scales of star-forming giant molecular clouds (GMCs; 20–50 pc). Systematic variations in GMC properties with galaxy environment imply that clouds are not universally self-gravitating objects, decoupled from their surroundings. Here we re-examine the coupling of clouds to their environment and develop a model for 3D gas motions generated by forces arising with the galaxy gravitational potential defined by the background disk of stars and dark matter. We show that these motions can resemble or even exceed the motions needed to support gas against its own self-gravity throughout typical galactic disks. The importance of the galactic potential in spiral arms and galactic centers suggests that the response to self-gravity does not always dominate the motions of gas at GMC scales, with implications for observed gas kinematics, virial equilibrium, and cloud morphology. We describe how a uniform treatment of gas motions in the plane and in the vertical direction synthesizes the two main mechanisms proposed to regulate star formation: vertical pressure equilibrium and shear/Coriolis forces as parameterized by ToomreQ ≈ 1. As the modeled motions are coherent and continually driven by the external potential, they represent support for the gas that is distinct from that conventionally attributed to turbulence, which decays rapidly and thus requires maintenance, e.g., via feedback from star formation. Thus, our model suggests that the galaxy itself can impose an important limit on star formation, as we explore in a second paper in this series.

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)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.231 · 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

Citations101
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Astrophysical JournalSame topicAstrophysics and Star Formation StudiesFrench-language works237,207