MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2902469397 · doi:10.1093/mnras/stz1049

Atmospheric mass-loss from high-velocity giant impacts

2019· article· en· W2902469397 on OpenAlexaff
Almog Yalinewich, Hilke E. Schlichting

Bibliographic record

VenueMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAstro and Planetary Science
Canadian institutionsCanadian Institute for Theoretical Astrophysics
FundersNational Aeronautics and Space Administration
KeywordsPhysicsShock waveShock (circulatory)AstrophysicsPlanetRelative velocityRange (aeronautics)Bow shock (aerodynamics)MechanicsClassical mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Using moving mesh hydrodynamic simulations, we determine the shock propagation and resulting ground velocities for a planet hit by a high-velocity impactor. We use our results to determine the atmospheric mass-loss caused by the resulting ground motion due to the impact shock wave. We find that there are two distinct shock propagation regimes. In the limit in which the impactor is significantly smaller than the target (Ri << Rt), the solutions are self-similar and the shock velocity at a fixed point on the target scale as $m_{\rm i}^{2/3}$, where mi is the mass of the impactor. In addition, the ground velocities follow a universal profile given by vg/vi = (14.2x2 − 25.3x + 11.3)/(x2 − 2.5x + 1.9) + 2ln Ri/Rt, where x = sin (θ/2), θ is the latitude on the target measured from the impact site, and vg and vi are the ground velocity and impact velocity, respectively. In contrast, in the limit in which the impactor is comparable to the size of the target (Ri ∼ Rt), we find that shock velocities decline with the mass of the impactor significantly more weakly than $m_{\rm i}^{2/3}$. We use the resulting surface velocity profiles to calculate the atmospheric mass-loss for a large range of impactor masses and impact velocities and apply them to the Kepler-36 system and the Moon forming impact. Finally, we present and generalize our results in terms of the vg/vi and the impactor to target size ratio (Ri/Rt) such that they can easily be applied to other collision scenarios.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.089
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.176
Teacher spread0.172 · 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.

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

Citations13
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical SocietySame topicAstro and Planetary ScienceFrench-language works237,207