The JCMT BISTRO Survey: Alignment between Outflows and Magnetic Fields in Dense Cores/Clumps
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract We compare the directions of molecular outflows of 62 low-mass Class 0 and I protostars in nearby (<450 pc) star-forming regions with the mean orientations of the magnetic fields on 0.05–0.5 pc scales in the dense cores/clumps where they are embedded. The magnetic field orientations were measured using the JCMT POL-2 data taken by the BISTRO-1 survey and from the archive. The outflow directions were observed with interferometers in the literature. The observed distribution of the angles between the outflows and the magnetic fields peaks between 15° and 35°. After considering projection effects, our results could suggest that the outflows tend to be misaligned with the magnetic fields by 50° ± 15° in three-dimensional space and are less likely (but not ruled out) randomly oriented with respect to the magnetic fields. There is no correlation between the misalignment and the bolometric temperatures in our sample. In several sources, the small-scale (1000–3000 au) magnetic field is more misaligned with the outflow than the large-scale magnetic field, suggesting that the small-scale magnetic field has been twisted by the dynamics. In comparison with turbulent MHD simulations of core formation, our observational results are more consistent with models in which the energy densities in the magnetic field and the turbulence of the gas are comparable. Our results also suggest that the misalignment alone cannot sufficiently reduce the efficiency of magnetic braking to enable formation of the observed number of large Keplerian disks with sizes larger than 30–50 au.
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 | 0.002 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".