MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3001478714 · doi:10.1093/mnrasl/slaa014

13C17O suggests gravitational instability in the HL Tau disc

2020· article· en· W3001478714 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Alice S. Booth, John D. Ilee

Bibliographic record

VenueMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society Letters · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAstrophysics and Star Formation Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Institutes of Natural SciencesScience and Technology Facilities CouncilNational Astronomical Observatory of JapanKorea Astronomy and Space Science InstituteMinistry of Science and TechnologyNational Research Council CanadaNational Sleep Foundation
KeywordsPhysicsGravitational instabilityAstrophysicsInstabilityPlanetFragmentation (computing)GravitationSpiral galaxyGiant planetAccretion discAccretion (finance)AstronomyPlanetary systemStarsMechanicsGalaxy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT We present the first detection of the $^{13}\text{C}^{17}\text{O}$ J = 3–2 transition toward the HL Tau protoplanetary disc. We find significantly more gas mass (at least a factor of 10 higher) than has been previously reported using $\text{C}^{18}\text{O}$ emission. This brings the observed total disc mass to 0.2 M⊙, which we consider to be a conservative lower limit. Our analysis of the Toomre Q profile suggests that this brings the disc into the regime of gravitational instability. The radial region of instability (50–110 au) coincides with the location of a proposed planet-carved gap in the dust disc, and a spiral in the gas. We therefore propose that if the origin of the gap is confirmed to be due to a forming giant planet, then it is likely to have formed via the gravitational fragmentation of the protoplanetary disc.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.491
Threshold uncertainty score0.401

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.213
Teacher spread0.203 · 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

Citations48
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society LettersSame topicAstrophysics and Star Formation StudiesFrench-language works237,207