MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3104669462

The formation of Uranus and Neptune among Jupiter and Saturn

2001· article· en· W3104669462 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueCERN Document Server (European Organization for Nuclear Research) · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAstro and Planetary Science
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUranusNeptuneNice modelJupiter (rocket family)PhysicsSaturnSolar SystemPlanetAstronomyAstrobiologyGas giantGiant planetPlanetary migrationAstrophysicsPlanetary systemExoplanetSpace exploration
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The outer giant planets, Uranus and Neptune, pose a challenge to theories of planet formation. They exist in a region of the Solar System where long dynamical timescales and a low primordial density of material would have conspired to make the formation of such large bodies ($\\sim$ 15 and 17 times as massive as the Earth, respectively) very difficult. Previously, we proposed a model which addresses this problem: Instead of forming in the trans-Saturnian region, Uranus and Neptune underwent most of their growth among proto-Jupiter and -Saturn, were scattered outward when Jupiter acquired its massive gas envelope, and subsequently evolved toward their present orbits. We present the results of additional numerical simulations, which further demonstrate that the model readily produces analogues to our Solar System for a wide range of initial conditions. We also find that this mechanism may partly account for the high orbital inclinations observed in the Kuiper belt.

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.

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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.408
Threshold uncertainty score0.514

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 studies0.0010.000
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.226
Teacher spread0.213 · 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