MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3108628714 · doi:10.1093/mnras/stab1846

Self-sustaining vortices in protoplanetary discs: Setting the stage for planetary system formation

2021· article· en· W3108628714 on OpenAlexaff
Zsolt Regály, Kundan Kadam, C. P. Dullemond

Bibliographic record

VenueMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAstrophysics and Star Formation Studies
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersH2020 European Research CouncilHungarian Scientific Research FundEuropean Commission
KeywordsPhysicsPlanetary systemProtoplanetary diskAstrobiologyAstronomyVortexAstrophysicsPlanetesimalPlanetAccretion (finance)Meteorology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT The core accretion scenario of planet formation assumes that planetesimals and planetary embryos are formed during the primordial, gaseous phases of the protoplanetary disc. However, how the dust particles overcome the traditional growth barriers is not well understood. The recently proposed viscous ring-instability may explain the concentric rings observed in protoplanetary discs by assuming that the dust grains can reduce the gas conductivity, which can weaken the magnetorotational instability. We present an analysis of this model with the help of GPU-based numerical hydrodynamic simulations of coupled gas and dust in the thin-disc limit. During the evolution of the disc the dusty rings become Rossby unstable and breakup into a cascade of small-scale vortices. The vortices form secularly stable dusty structures, which could be sites of planetesimal formation by the streaming instability as well as direct gravitational collapse. The phenomenon of self-sustaining vortices is consistent with observational constraints of exoplanets and sets a favourable environment for planetary system formation.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.205
Teacher spread0.198 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations9
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society→Same topicAstrophysics and Star Formation Studies→French-language works237,207→