MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2900589768 · doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aaf38e

Observational Signatures of Planets in Protoplanetary Disks: Planet-induced Line Broadening in Gaps

2019· article· en· W2900589768 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAstrophysics and Star Formation Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPlanetRadiative transferLine (geometry)ProtoplanetThermalAccretion (finance)KinematicsGravitationOpacityTransonic

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Protoplanets can produce structures in protoplanetary disks via gravitational disk–planet interactions. Once detected, such structures serve as signposts of planet formation. Here we investigate the kinematic signatures in disks produced by multi-Jupiter mass (M J) planets using 3D hydrodynamics and radiative transfer simulations. Such a planet opens a deep gap, and drives transonic vertical motions inside. Such motions include both a bulk motion of the entire half-disk column, and turbulence on scales comparable to and smaller than the scale height. They significantly broaden molecular lines from the gap, producing double-peaked line profiles at certain locations, and a kinematic velocity dispersion comparable to thermal after azimuthal averaging. The same planet does not drive fast vertical motions outside the gap, except at the inner spiral arms and the disk surface. Searching for line broadening induced by multi-M J planets inside gaps requires an angular resolution comparable to the gap width, an assessment of the gap gas temperature to within a factor of 2, and a high sensitivity needed to detect line emission from the gap.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.002

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.232 · 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

Citations32
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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