MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2909168123 · doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ab09ec

Weak Shock Propagation with Accretion. II. Stability of Self-similar Solutions to Radial Perturbations

2019· article· en· W2909168123 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicGamma-ray bursts and supernovae
Canadian institutionsEagle Ridge Hospital
FundersGordon and Betty Moore Foundation
KeywordsShock waveFormalism (music)Perturbation (astronomy)Shock (circulatory)Stability (learning theory)Radial velocityGravitationGravitational field

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Coughlin et al. derived and analyzed a new regime of self-similarity that describes weak shocks (Mach number of order unity) in the gravitational field of a point mass. These solutions are relevant to low-energy explosions, including failed supernovae. In this paper, we develop a formalism for analyzing the stability of shocks to radial perturbations, and we demonstrate that the self-similar solutions of Paper I are extremely weakly unstable to such radial perturbations. Specifically, we show that perturbations to the shock velocity and post-shock fluid quantities (the velocity, density, and pressure) grow with time as t α ; interestingly, we find that α ≲ 0.12, implying that the 10-folding timescale of such perturbations is roughly 10 orders of magnitude in time. We confirm these predictions by performing high-resolution, time-dependent numerical simulations. Using the same formalism, we also show that the Sedov–Taylor blast wave is trivially stable to radial perturbations provided that the self-similar, Sedov–Taylor solutions extend to the origin, and we derive simple expressions for the perturbations to the post-shock velocity, density, and pressure. Finally, we show that there is a third, self-similar solution (in addition to the solutions in Paper I and the Sedov–Taylor solution) to the fluid equations that describes a rarefaction wave, i.e., an outward-propagating sound wave. We interpret the stability of shock propagation in light of these three distinct self-similar solutions.

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)0.002
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.215
Teacher spread0.204 · 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

Citations15
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Astrophysical JournalSame topicGamma-ray bursts and supernovaeFrench-language works237,207