Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Global circulation models (GCMs) of atmospheric flows are now routinely used to interpret observational data on hot Jupiters. Localized ‘equatorial β-plane’ simulations have revealed that a barotropic (horizontal shear) instability of the equatorial jet appears at horizontal resolutions beyond those typically achieved in global models; this instability could limit wind speeds and lead to increased atmospheric variability. To address this possibility, we adapt the computationally efficient, pseudo-spectral PlaSim GCM, originally designed for Earth studies, to model hot Jupiter atmospheric flows and validate it on a reference benchmark. We then present high-resolution global models of HD209458b, with horizontal resolutions of T85 (128×256) and T127 (192×384). The barotropic instability phenomenology found in β-plane simulations is not reproduced in these global models, despite comparably high meridional resolutions. Nevertheless, high-resolution models do exhibit additional flow variability on long time-scales (of the order of 100 planet days or more), which is absent from the lower resolution models. It manifests as a breakdown of the north–south symmetry of the equatorial wind. By post-processing the atmospheric flows at various resolutions (assuming a cloud-free situation), we show that the stronger flow variability achieved at high resolution does not translate into noticeably stronger dayside infrared flux variability. More generally, our results suggest that high horizontal resolutions are not required to capture the key features of hot Jupiter atmospheric flows.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".