MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4403776482 · doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad7a6a

Magnetic Field Evolution for Crystallization-driven Dynamos in C/O White Dwarfs

2024· article· en· W4403776482 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Matias Castro-Tapia, Shuang‐Nan Zhang, A. Cumming

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicStellar, planetary, and galactic studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersEngineering and Physical Sciences Research CouncilNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsWhite dwarfPhysicsDynamoAstrophysicsMagnetic fieldAstronomyCrystallizationField (mathematics)Dynamo theoryStars

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We investigate the evolution of magnetic fields generated by the crystallization-driven dynamo in carbon–oxygen white dwarfs (WDs) with masses ≲1.05 M ⊙ . We use scalings for the dynamo to demonstrate that the initial magnetic field strength ( B 0 ) has an upper limit that depends on the initial convection zone size ( R out,0 ) and the WD mass. We solve the induction equation to follow the magnetic field evolution after the dynamo phase ends. We show that the predicted surface magnetic field strength ( B surf ) differs from B 0 by at least a factor of ∼0.3. This reduction depends on R out,0 , where values smaller than half of the star radius give B surf ≲ 0.01 B 0 . We implement electrical conductivities that account for the solid phase effect on the ohmic diffusion. We observe that the conductivity increases as the solid core grows, freezing in the magnetic field at a certain point of the evolution and slowing its outward transport. We study the effect of turbulent magnetic diffusivity induced by the convection and find that for a small R out,0 , B surf is stronger than the nonturbulent diffusion cases because of the more rapid transport, but still orders of magnitude smaller than B 0 . Given these limitations, the crystallization-driven dynamo theory could explain only magnetic C/O WDs with field strengths less than a few megagauss for the mass range 0.45–1.05 M ⊙ . Our results also suggest that a buried fossil field must be at least 100 times stronger than observed surface fields if crystallization-driven convection is responsible for its transport to the surface.

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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.226
Teacher spread0.219 · 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

Citations15
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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