MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2797405913 · doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aac5f3

ALMA Resolves C i Emission from the β Pictoris Debris Disk

2018· article· en· W2797405913 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAstrophysics and Star Formation Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPlanetesimalDebris diskPlanetDebrisAccretion (finance)ProtoplanetPlanetary systemAccretion discMass ratio

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The debris disk around β Pictoris is known to contain gas. Previous ALMA observations revealed a CO belt at ∼85 au with a distinct clump, interpreted as a location of enhanced gas production. Photodissociation converts CO into C and O within ∼50 a. We resolve C i emission at 492 GHz using ALMA and study its spatial distribution. C i shows the same clump as seen for CO. This is surprising, as C is expected to quickly spread in azimuth. We derive a low C mass (between 5 × 10−4 and 3.1 × 10−3 ), indicating that gas production started only recently (within ∼5000 a). No evidence is seen for an atomic accretion disk inward of the CO belt, perhaps because the gas did not yet have time to spread radially. The fact that C and CO share the same asymmetry argues against a previously proposed scenario where the clump is due to an outward-migrating planet trapping planetesimals in a resonance, nor can the observations be explained by an eccentric planetesimal belt secularly forced by a planet. Instead, we suggest that the dust and gas disks should be eccentric. Such a configuration, we further speculate, might be produced by a recent tidal disruption event. Assuming that the disrupted body has had a CO mass fraction of 10%, its total mass would be ≳3 M Moon.

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)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.234 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations45
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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