MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406408708 · doi:10.1093/mnras/staf078

Rossby wave instability in magnetized protoplanetary discs – I. Azimuthal or vertical B-fields

2025· article· en· W4406408708 on OpenAlexafffund
Can Cui, Ashutosh Tripathi, Cong Yu, Min-Kai Lin, Andrew N. Youdin

Bibliographic record

VenueMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAstro and Planetary Science
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersScience and Technology Facilities CouncilNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversity of TorontoNational Science and Technology CouncilAcademia SinicaNational Natural Science Foundation of ChinaDivision of Mathematical SciencesUniversity of Cambridge
KeywordsPhysicsRossby waveInstabilityAzimuthAstrophysicsProtoplanetary diskAstronomyMagnetic fieldMechanicsPlanetAtmospheric sciences

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Rossby wave instability (RWI) is considered the underlying mechanism to crescent-shaped azimuthal asymmetries, discovered in (sub-)millimeter dust continuum of many protoplanetary discs. Previous works on linear theory were conducted in the hydrodynamic limit. Nevertheless, protoplanetary discs are likely magnetized and weakly ionized. We examine the influence of magnetic fields and non-ideal magnetohydrodynamic (MHD) effects – namely, Ohmic resistivity, Hall drift, and ambipolar diffusion – on the RWI unstable modes. We perform radially global linear analyses, employing constant azimuthal ($B_\phi$) or vertical ($B_z$) background magnetic fields. It is found that, in the ideal MHD regime, magnetism can either enhance or diminish RWI growth. Strong non-ideal MHD effects cause RWI growth rates to recover hydrodynamic results. The sign of Hall Elsässer number slightly complicates the results. Vertical wavenumbers can diminish growth rates.

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)0.000
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.002

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.213
Teacher spread0.204 · 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

Citations4
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical SocietySame topicAstro and Planetary ScienceFrench-language works237,207