Finding Substructures in Protostellar Disks in Ophiuchus
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract High-resolution, millimeter observations of disks at the protoplanetary stage reveal substructures such as gaps, rings, arcs, spirals, and cavities. While many protoplanetary disks host such substructures, only a few at the younger protostellar stage have shown similar features. We present a detailed search for early disk substructures in Atacama Large Millimeter/submillimeter Array 1.3 and 0.87 mm observations of ten protostellar disks in the Ophiuchus star-forming region. Of this sample, four disks have identified substructure, two appear to be smooth disks, and four are considered ambiguous. The structured disks have wide Gaussian-like rings (σ R /R disk ∼ 0.26) with low contrasts (C < 0.2) above a smooth disk profile, in comparison to protoplanetary disks where rings tend to be narrow and have a wide variety of contrasts (σ R /R disk ∼ 0.08 and C ranges from 0 to 1). The four protostellar disks with the identified substructures are among the brightest sources in the Ophiuchus sample, in agreement with trends observed for protoplanetary disks. These observations indicate that substructures in protostellar disks may be common in brighter disks. The presence of substructures at the earliest stages suggests an early start for dust grain growth and, subsequently, planet formation. The evolution of these protostellar substructures is hypothesized in two potential pathways: (1) the rings are the sites of early planet formation, and the later observed protoplanetary disk ring–gap pairs are secondary features, or (2) the rings evolve over the disk lifetime to become those observed at the protoplanetary disk stage.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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".