Dust traps and the formation of cavities in transition discs: a millimetre to sub-millimetre comparison survey
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT The origin of the inner dust cavities observed in transition discs remains unknown. The segregation of dust and size of the cavity is expected to vary depending on which clearing mechanism dominates grain evolution. We present the results from the Discs Down Under program, an 8.8-mm continuum Australia Telescope Compact Array (ATCA) survey targeting 15 transition discs with large (≳20 au) cavities and compare the resulting dust emission to Atacama Large millimetre/sub-millimetre Array (ALMA) observations. Our ATCA observations resolve the inner cavity for 8 of the 14 detected discs. We fit the visibilities and reconstruct 1D radial brightness models for 10 sources with a S/N > 5σ. We find that, for sources with a resolved cavity in both wavebands, the 8.8 mm and sub-mm brightness distributions peak at the same radius from the star. We suggest that a similar cavity size for 8.8 mm and sub-mm dust grains is due to a dust trap induced by the presence of a companion.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 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".