MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Atmospheric circulation of tidally locked exoplanets: a suite of benchmark tests for dynamical solvers

2011· article· en· W2949203445 on OpenAlexaff
Kevin Heng, Kristen Menou, Peter J. Phillipps

Bibliographic record

VenueMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicStellar, planetary, and galactic studies
Canadian institutionsPerimeter Institute
Fundersnot available
KeywordsExoplanetPhysicsBenchmark (surveying)Radiative transferHot JupiterJupiter (rocket family)Atmospheric modelPlanetAstrophysicsMeteorologyAstronomyGeologyGeodesySpace exploration

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The rapid pace of extrasolar planet discovery and characterization is legitimizing the study of their atmospheres via three-dimensional numerical simulations. The complexity of atmospheric modelling and its inherent non-linearity, together with the limited amount of data available, motivate model intercomparisons and benchmark tests. In the geophysical community, the Held-Suarez test is a standard benchmark for comparing dynamical core simulations of the Earth's atmosphere with different solvers, based on statistically averaged flow quantities. In the present study, we perform analogues of the Held-Suarez test for tidally locked exoplanets with the Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory (GFDL) Princeton Flexible Modelling System (fms) by subjecting both the spectral and finite difference dynamical cores to a suite of tests, including the standard benchmark for the Earth, a hypothetical tidally locked Earth, a 'shallow' hot Jupiter model and a 'deep' model of HD 209458b. We find qualitative and quantitative agreement between the solvers for the Earth, tidally locked Earth and shallow hot Jupiter benchmarks, but the agreement is less than satisfactory for the deep model of HD 209458b. Further investigation reveals that closer agreement may be attained by arbitrarily adjusting the values of the horizontal dissipation parameters in the two solvers, but it remains the case that the magnitude of the horizontal dissipation is not easily specified from first principles. Irrespective of radiative transfer or chemical composition considerations, our study points to limitations in our ability to accurately model hot Jupiter atmospheres with meteorological solvers at the level of 10 per cent for the temperature field and several tens of per cent for the velocity field. Direct wind measurements should thus be particularly constraining for the models. Our suite of benchmark tests also provides a reference point for researchers wishing to adapt their codes to study the atmospheric circulation regimes of tidally locked Earths/Neptunes/Jupiters. © 2011 The Authors Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society © 2011 RAS.

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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.084
Threshold uncertainty score0.567

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 science0.0000.000
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.203
Teacher spread0.191 · 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

Citations222
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical SocietySame topicStellar, planetary, and galactic studiesFrench-language works237,207