The Influence of Tight Binaries on Protoplanetary Disk Masses
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Binary systems are a common site of planet formation, despite the destructive effects of the binary on the disk. While surveys of planet-forming material have found diminished disk masses around binaries with medium separation (∼10–100 au), less is known about tight (<10 au) binaries, where a significant circumbinary disk may escape the disruptive dynamical effects of the binary. We survey over 100 spectroscopic binaries in the Orion A region with the Atacama Large Millimeter/submillimeter Array (ALMA), detecting significant continuum emission among 21 of them with disk masses ranging from 1 to 100 M ⊕ . We find evidence of systematically lower disk masses among the binary sample when compared to single-star surveys, which may reflect a diminished planet-forming potential around tight binaries. The infrared excess fraction among the binary sample is comparable to that of single stars, although the tight binaries without significant ALMA emission display tentative evidence of weaker 3–5 μ m excesses. The depletion of cold dust is difficult to explain by clearing alone, and the role of additional mechanisms needs to be explored. It may be the result of the formation pathway for these objects, systematic differences in intrinsic properties (e.g., opacity) or a bias in how the sample was constructed.
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 | 0.004 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".