MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2798726971 · doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aabf94

Homogeneous Analysis of the Dust Morphology of Transition Disks Observed with ALMA: Investigating Dust Trapping and the Origin of the Cavities

2018· article· en· W2798726971 on OpenAlexaff
Paola Pinilla, Marco Tazzari, Ilaria Pascucci, Andrew N. Youdin, A. Garufi, C. F. Manara, L. Testi, G. van der Plas, Scott A. Barenfeld, H. Cánovas, Erin G. Cox, Nathanial P. Hendler, Laura M. Pérez, Nienke van der Marel

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAstrophysics and Star Formation Studies
Canadian institutionsHerzberg Institute of Astrophysics
FundersAgence Nationale de la Recherche
KeywordsPhysicsMillimeterPhotoevaporationAstrophysicsSubmillimeter ArrayPlanetContext (archaeology)Star formationStars

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We analyze the dust morphology of 29 transition disks (TDs) observed with Atacama Large (sub-)Millimeter Array (ALMA) at (sub-)millimeter emission. We perform the analysis in the visibility plane to characterize the total flux, cavity size, and shape of the ring-like structure. First, we found that the M dust – M ⋆ relation is much flatter for TDs than the observed trends from samples of class II sources in different star-forming regions. This relation demonstrates that cavities open in high (dust) mass disks, independent of the stellar mass. The flatness of this relation contradicts the idea that TDs are a more evolved set of disks. Two potential reasons (not mutually exclusive) may explain this flat relation: the emission is optically thick or/and millimeter-sized particles are trapped in a pressure bump. Second, we discuss our results of the cavity size and ring width in the context of different physical processes for cavity formation. Photoevaporation is an unlikely leading mechanism for the origin of the cavity of any of the targets in the sample. Embedded giant planets or dead zones remain as potential explanations. Although both models predict correlations between the cavity size and the ring shape for different stellar and disk properties, we demonstrate that with the current resolution of the observations, it is difficult to obtain these correlations. Future observations with higher angular resolution observations of TDs with ALMA will help discern between different potential origins of cavities in TDs.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.689
Threshold uncertainty score0.784

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.210 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations107
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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