APOCENTER GLOW IN ECCENTRIC DEBRIS DISKS: IMPLICATIONS FOR FOMALHAUT AND
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Debris disks often take the form of eccentric rings with azimuthal asymmetries in surface brightness. Such disks are often described as showing "pericenter glow," an enhancement of the disk brightness in regions nearest the central star. At long wavelengths, however, the disk apocenters should appear brighter than their pericenters: in the long-wavelength limit, we find that the apocenter/pericenter flux ratio scales as 1+e for disk eccentricity e. We produce new models of this "apocenter glow" to explore its causes and wavelength dependence and study its potential as a probe of dust grain properties. Based on our models, we argue that several far-infrared and (sub)millimeter images of the Fomalhaut and epsilon Eridani debris rings obtained with Herschel, JCMT, SHARC II, ALMA, and ATCA should be reinterpreted as suggestions or examples of apocenter glow. This reinterpretation yields new constraints on the disks' dust grain properties and size distributions.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".