Revisiting the evolution of non-radiative supernova remnants: a hydrodynamical-informed parametrization of the shock positions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Understanding the evolution of a supernova remnant shell in time is fundamental. Such understanding is critical to build reliable models of the dynamics of the supernova remnant shell interaction with any pulsar wind nebula it might contain. Here, we perform a large study of the parameter space for the 1D spherically symmetric evolution of a supernova remnant, accompanying it by analytical analysis. Assuming, as is usual, an ejecta density profile with a power-law core and an envelope, and a uniform ambient medium, we provide a set of highly accurate approximations for the evolution of the main structural features of supernova remnants, such as the reverse and forward shocks and the contact discontinuity. We compare our results with previously adopted approximations, showing that existing simplified prescriptions can easily lead to large errors. In particular, in the context of pulsar wind nebulae modelling, an accurate description for the supernova remnant reverse shock is required. We also study in depth the self-similar solutions for the initial phase of evolution, when the reverse shock propagates through the envelope of the ejecta. Since these self-similar solutions are exact, but not fully analytical, we here provide highly accurate approximations as well.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".