MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4390051172 · doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad05c9

Orbital Decay of Hot Jupiters due to Weakly Nonlinear Tidal Dissipation

2023· article· en· W4390051172 on OpenAlexaff
Nevin N. Weinberg, Niyousha Davachi, R. C. Essick, Hang Yu, Phil Arras, Brent Belland

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicStellar, planetary, and galactic studies
Canadian institutionsCanadian Institute for Theoretical AstrophysicsUniversity of Toronto
FundersCalifornia Institute of TechnologyNational Aeronautics and Space AdministrationNational Science Foundation
KeywordsPhysicsHot JupiterSubgiantAstrophysicsOrbital decayStarsDissipationTidal accelerationPlanetary systemPlanetJupiter (rocket family)AstronomyExoplanetQuantum mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We study tidal dissipation in hot Jupiter host stars due to the nonlinear damping of tidally driven g-modes, extending the calculations of Essick & Weinberg to a wide variety of stellar host types. This process causes the planet’s orbit to decay and has potentially important consequences for the evolution and fate of hot Jupiters. Previous studies either only accounted for linear dissipation processes or assumed that the resonantly excited primary mode becomes strongly nonlinear and breaks as it approaches the stellar center. However, the great majority of hot Jupiter systems are in the weakly nonlinear regime in which the primary mode does not break but instead excites a sea of secondary modes via three-mode interactions. We simulate these nonlinear interactions and calculate the net mode dissipation for stars that range in mass from 0.5M ⊙ ≤ M ⋆ ≤ 2.0M ⊙ and in age from the early main sequence to the subgiant phase. We find that the nonlinearly excited secondary modes can enhance the tidal dissipation by orders of magnitude compared to linear dissipation processes. For the stars with M ⋆ ≲ 1.0M ⊙ of nearly any age, we find that the orbital decay time is ≲100 Myr for orbital periods P orb ≲ 1 day. For M ⋆ ≳ 1.2M ⊙, the orbital decay time only becomes short on the subgiant branch, where it can be ≲10 Myr for P orb ≲ 2 days and result in significant transit time shifts. We discuss these results in the context of known hot Jupiter systems and examine the prospects for detecting their orbital decay with transit timing measurements.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.233 · 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

Citations32
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Astrophysical Journal→Same topicStellar, planetary, and galactic studies→French-language works237,207→