Taxonomy of protoplanetary discs observed with ALMA
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Many observations of protoplanetary discs studied with ALMA have revealed the complex substructure present in the discs. Rings and gaps in the dust continuum are now a common sight in many discs; however, their origins still remain unknown. We look at all protoplanetary disc images taken with ALMA from cycles 0 to 5 and find that 56 discs show clear substructure. We further study the 56 discs and classify the morphology seen according to four categories: Rim, Ring, Horseshoe, and Spiral. We calculate the ages of the host stars using stellar isochrones and investigate the relation between the morphology of the substructure seen in the protoplanetary discs and the age of the host stars. We find that there is no clear evolutionary sequence in the protoplanetary discs as the stars increase in age, although there is a slight tendency for spirals to appear in younger systems and horseshoes to be seen in more evolved systems. We also show that majority of the images of protoplanetary discs made by ALMA may not have had a sufficiently high resolution or sensitivity to resolve substructure in the disc. We show that angular resolution is important in detecting substructure within protoplanetary discs, with sensitivity distinguishing between the different types of substructure. We compare the substructure seen in protoplanetary discs at sub-mm to those seen in scattered light. We find that cavities are a common substructure seen in discs at both sub-mm wavelengths and in scattered light.
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 | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".