MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4241191374 · doi:10.1093/mnras/staa900

Simulation of a compact object with outflows moving through a gaseous background

2020· article· en· W4241191374 on OpenAlexafffund
Xinyu Li, Philip Chang, Y. Levin, Christopher D. Matzner, Philip J. Armitage

Bibliographic record

VenueMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAstrophysics and Star Formation Studies
Canadian institutionsCanadian Institute for Theoretical AstrophysicsUniversity of TorontoPerimeter Institute
FundersGovernment of CanadaSimons FoundationNational Aeronautics and Space Administration
KeywordsPhysicsOutflowAccretion (finance)Compact starDynamical frictionWakeAstrophysicsDragPerturbation (astronomy)Active galactic nucleusStarsMechanicsAstronomyGalaxy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT A compact object moving relative to surrounding gas accretes material and perturbs the density of gas in its vicinity. In the classical picture of Bondi–Hoyle–Lyttleton accretion, the perturbation takes the form of an overdense wake behind the object, which exerts a dynamical friction drag. We use hydrodynamic simulations to investigate how the accretion rate and strength of dynamical friction are modified by the presence of outflow from the compact object. We show that the destruction of the wake by an outflow reduces dynamical friction, and reverses its sign when the outflow is strong enough, in good quantitative agreement with analytic calculations. For a strong isotropic outflow, the outcome on scales that we have simulated is a negative dynamical friction, i.e. net acceleration. For jet-like outflows driven by reprocessed accretion, both the rate of accretion and the magnitude of dynamical friction drop for more powerful jets. The accretion rate is strongly intermittent when the jet points to the same direction as the motion of the compact object. The dynamical effects of outflows may be important for the evolution of compact objects during the common envelope phase of binary systems, and for accreting compact objects and massive stars encountering active galactic nucleus discs.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.032
Threshold uncertainty score0.065

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread0.218 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations37
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical SocietySame topicAstrophysics and Star Formation StudiesFrench-language works237,207