Multistructured Accretion Flow of Sgr A*. II. Signatures of a Cool Accretion Disk in Hydrodynamic Simulations of Stellar Winds
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Hydrodynamic simulations of the stellar winds from Wolf–Rayet stars within the Galactic center can provide predictions for the X-ray spectrum of the supermassive black hole Sgr A*. Herein, we present results from updated smooth particle hydrodynamics simulations, building on the architecture of Cuadra et al. and Russell et al., and find that a “cold” (104 K) gas disk forms around Sgr A* with a simulation runtime of 3500 yr. This result is consistent with previous grid-based simulations, demonstrating that a cold disk can form regardless of numerical method. We examine the plasma scenarios arising from an environment with and without this cold disk, by generating synthetic spectra for comparison to the quiescent Fe Kα Sgr A* spectrum from Chandra HETGS, taken through the Chandra X-ray Visionary Program. We find that current and future X-ray missions are unlikely to distinguish between the kinematic signatures in the plasma in these two scenarios. Nonetheless, the stellar wind plasma model presents a good fit to the dispersed Chandra spectra within 1.″5 of Sgr A*. We compare our results to the radiatively inefficient accretion flow (RIAF) model fit to the HETGS spectrum presented in Paper I and find that the Bayesian model evidence does not strongly favor either model. With 9″ angular resolution and high spectral resolution of the X-IFU, NewAthena will offer a clearer differentiation between the RIAF plasma model and hydrodynamic simulations, but only a future X-ray mission with arcsecond resolution will significantly advance our understanding of Sgr A*’s accretion flow in X-rays.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".