MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2993527744 · doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ab5957

No Snowball Cycles at the Outer Edge of the Habitable Zone for Habitable Tidally Locked Planets

2019· article· en· W2993527744 on OpenAlexaff
J. Checlair, Andrea M. Salazar, Adiv Paradise, Kristen Menou, Dorian S. Abbot

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal Letters · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAstro and Planetary Science
Canadian institutionsThe Scarborough HospitalUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCircumstellar habitable zonePlanetary habitabilityPhysicsPlanetAstrobiologyHabitability of orange dwarf systemsExoplanetTidal lockingTerrestrial planetAstronomySnowball EarthOutgassingPlanetary systemAstrophysicsGeologyGlacial periodPaleontologyRadiative transfer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Planets orbiting within the habitable zones of M stars are prime targets for future observations, which motivates a greater understanding of how tidal locking can affect planetary habitability. In this Letter we will consider the effect of tidal locking on limit cycling between snowball and warm climate states, which has been suggested could occur for rapidly rotating planets in the outer regions of the habitable zone with low CO 2 outgassing rates. Here, we use a 3D Global Climate Model that calculates silicate-weathering to show that tidally locked planets with an active carbon cycle will not experience limit cycling between warm and snowball states. Instead, they smoothly settle into “Eyeball” states with a small unglaciated substellar region. The size of this unglaciated region depends on the stellar irradiation, the CO 2 outgassing rate, and the continental configuration. Furthermore, we argue that a tidally locked habitable zone planet cannot stay in a snowball state for a geologically significant time. This may be beneficial to the survival of complex life on tidally locked planets orbiting the outer edge of their stars, but might also make it less likely for complex life to arise.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.795
Threshold uncertainty score0.453

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.189
Teacher spread0.184 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations11
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Astrophysical Journal LettersSame topicAstro and Planetary ScienceFrench-language works237,207