Stopping Super-Earths from growing into Jupiters
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Super-Earths are by far the most dominant type of exoplanet, yet their formation isstill not well understood. In particular, planet formation models predict that manyof them should have accreted enough gas to become gas giants. Here we examine therole of the protoplanetary disk in the cooling and contraction of the protoplanetaryenvelope. In particular, we investigate the effects of 1) the thermal state of the disk asset by the relative size of heating by accretion or irradiation, and whether its energy istransported by radiation or convection, and 2) advection of entropy into the outer envelope by disk flows that penetrate the Hill sphere, as found in 3D global simulations.We find that, at 0.1 AU, the envelope quickly becomes fully radiative, nearly isothermal, and thus cannot cool down, stalling gas accretion. Thiseffect is significantly more pronounced in convective disks, leading to envelope mass or-ders of magnitude lower. Entropy advection at 0.1 AU in either radiative or convectivedisks could therefore explain why super-Earths failed to undergo runaway accretion.Ali-Dib, Cumming, & Lin (MNRAS 2020)
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".