MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W6891859695 · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1110.5640

Radiation-Hydrodynamic Simulations of Protostellar Outflows: Synthetic Observations and Data Comparisons

2011· preprint· en· W6891859695 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenuearXiv (Cornell University) · 2011
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAstrophysics and Star Formation Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOutflowExcitationProtostarAsymmetryLuminosityEnvelope (radar)CutoffTurbulence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present results from three-dimensional, self-gravitating, radiation-hydrodynamic simulations of low-mass protostellar outflows. We construct synthetic observations in 12CO in order to compare with observed outflows and evaluate the effects of beam resolution and outflow orientation on inferred outflow properties. To facilitate the comparison, we develop a quantitative prescription for measuring outflow opening angles. Using this prescription, we demonstrate that, in both simulations and synthetic observations, outflow opening angles broaden with time similarly to observed outflows. However, the interaction between the outflowing gas and the turbulent core envelope produces significant asymmetry between the red and blue shifted outflow lobes. We find that applying a velocity cutoff may result in outflow masses that are underestimated by a factor 5 or more, and masses derived from optically thick CO emission further underpredict the mass of the high-velocity gas by a factor of 5-10. Derived excitation temperatures indicate that outflowing gas is hotter than the ambient gas with temperature rising over time, which is in agreement with the simulation gas temperatures. However, excitation temperatures are otherwise not well correlated with the actual gas temperature.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.134
GPT teacher head0.223
Teacher spread0.090 · 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

Citations0
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuearXiv (Cornell University)→Same topicAstrophysics and Star Formation Studies→French-language works237,207→