Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The temperature in most parts of a protoplanetary disk is determined by irradiation from the central star. Numerical experiments of Watanabe and Lin suggested that such disks, also called “passive disks,” suffer from a thermal instability. Here we use analytical and numerical tools to elucidate the nature of this instability. We find that it is related to the flaring of the optical surface, the layer at which starlight is intercepted by the disk. Whenever a disk annulus is perturbed thermally and acquires a larger scale height, disk flaring becomes steeper in the inner part and flatter in the outer part. Starlight now shines more overhead for the inner part and so can penetrate into deeper layers; conversely, it is absorbed more shallowly in the outer part. These geometric changes allow the annulus to intercept more starlight, and the perturbation grows. We call this the irradiation instability. It requires only ingredients known to exist in realistic disks and operates best in parts that are both optically thick and geometrically thin (inside 30 au, but can extend to further reaches when, e.g., dust settling is considered). An unstable disk develops traveling thermal waves that reach order unity in amplitude. In thermal radiation, such a disk should appear as a series of bright rings interleaved with dark shadowed gaps, while in scattered light it resembles a moving staircase. Depending on the gas and dust responses, this instability could lead to a wide range of consequences, such as ALMA rings and gaps, dust traps, vertical circulation, vortices, and turbulence.
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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".