Protoplanetary Disk Rings and Gaps across Ages and Luminosities
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Since the discovery of the multiring structure of the HL Tau disk, ALMA data suggest that the dust continuum emission of many, if not all, protoplanetary disks consists of rings and gaps, no matter their spectral type or age. The origin of these gaps so far remains unclear. We present a sample study of 16 disks with multiple ring-like structures in the continuum, using published ALMA archival data, to compare their morphologies and gap locations in a systematic way. The 16 targets range from early- to late-type stars, from <0.5 Myr to >10 Myr and from ∼0.2 to 40 L ⊙, and include both full and transitional disks with cleared inner dust cavities. Stellar ages are revised using new Gaia distances. Gap locations are derived using a simple radial fit to the intensity profiles. Using a radiative transfer model, the temperature profiles are computed. The gap radii generally do not correspond to the orbital radii of snow lines of the most common molecules. A snow line model can likely be discarded as a common origin of multiring systems. In addition, there are no systematic trends in the gap locations that could be related to resonances of planets. Finally, the outer radius of the disks decreases for the oldest disks in the sample, indicating that if multiring disks evolve in a similar way, outer dust rings either dissipate with the gas or grow into planetesimal belts.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".