MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4225331299 · doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ac5cc0

Observing Planet-driven Dust Spirals with ALMA

2022· article· en· W4225331299 on OpenAlexafffund
Jessica Speedie, Richard A Booth, Ruobing Dong

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAstrophysics and Star Formation Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
FundersEuropean Research CouncilScience and Technology Facilities CouncilNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaEuropean CommissionMcMaster UniversityUniversity of VictoriaCompute CanadaAlfred P. Sloan Foundation
KeywordsPlanetPhysicsAstrophysicsSpiral galaxyRadiative transferSubmillimeter ArrayAstronomyThermalStar formationStars

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Atacama Large Millimeter/submillimeter Array (ALMA) continuum observations of thermal emission from the dust component of protoplanetary disks have revealed an abundance of substructures that may be interpreted as evidence for embedded planets, but planet-driven spiral arms—perhaps one of the most compelling lines of evidence—have proven comparatively elusive. In this work, we test the capabilities of ALMA to detect the planet-driven spiral signal in continuum emission. Carrying out hydrodynamic simulations and radiative transfer calculations, we present synthetic Band 7 continuum images for a wide range of disk and observing conditions. We show that thermal mass planets at tens of astronomical units typically drive spirals detectable within a few hours of integration time, and the detectable planet mass may be as low as ∼Neptune mass (0.3 M th). The grains probed by ALMA form spirals morphologically identical to the underlying gas spiral. The temperature of the dust spiral is crucial in determining its contrast, and spirals are easier to detect in disks with an adiabatic equation of state and longer cooling times. Resolving the spiral is not necessary for its detection; with the help of residual maps, the optimal beam size is a few times the spiral width at a constant noise level. Finally, we show how the presence of gaps and rings can impair our ability to recognize colocated spirals. Our work demonstrates the planet-finding potential of the current design specification of ALMA, and suggests that observing capability is not the bottleneck in searching for spirals induced by thermal mass planets.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.016
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.210 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations21
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Astrophysical Journal→Same topicAstrophysics and Star Formation Studies→French-language works237,207→