Bridging the Gap between Protoplanetary and Debris Disks: Separate Evolution of Millimeter and Micrometer-sized Dust
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The connection between the nature of a protoplanetary disk and that of a debris disk is not well understood. Dust evolution, planet formation, and disk dissipation likely play a role in the processes involved. We aim to reconcile both manifestations of dusty circumstellar disks through a study of optically thin Class III disks and how they correlate to younger and older disks. In this work, we collect literature and Atacama Large Millimeter/submillimeter Array archival millimeter fluxes for 85 disks (8%) of all Class III disks across nearby star-forming regions. We derive millimeter-dust masses M dust and compare these with Class II and debris disk samples in the context of excess infrared luminosity, accretion rate, and age. The mean M dust of Class III disks is 0.29 ± 0.19 M ⊕ . We propose a new evolutionary scenario wherein radial drift is very efficient for nonstructured disks during the Class II phase resulting in a rapid M dust decrease. In addition, we find possible evidence for long infrared protoplanetary disk timescales, ∼8 Myr, consistent with overall slow disk evolution. In structured disks, the presence of dust traps allows for the formation of planetesimal belts at large radii, such as those observed in debris disks. We propose therefore that the planetesimal belts in debris disks are the result of dust traps in structured disks, whereas protoplanetary disks without dust traps decrease in dust mass through radial drift and are therefore undetectable as debris disks after the gas dissipation. These results provide a hypothesis for a novel view of disk evolution.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".