The evolution of gravitationally unstable protoplanetary disks: fragmentation and possible giant planet formation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We carry out a large set of very high resolution, three dimensional smoothed particle hydrodynamics (SPH) simulations describing the evolution of gravitationally unstable gaseous protoplanetary disks. We consider a broad range of initial disk parameters. Disk masses out to 20 AU range from 0.075 to 0.125 $M_{\odot}$, roughly consistent with the high-end of the mass distribution inferred for disks around T Tauri stars. The initial disks span minimum $Q$ parameters between 0.8 and 2, with most models being around $\sim 1.4$. The disks are evolved assuming either a locally isothermal equation of state or an adiabatic equation of state with varying $γ$. When overdensities above a specific threshold appear as a result of gravitational instability in a locally isothermal calculation, the equation of state is switched to adiabatic to account for the increased optical depth. We show that when a disk has a minimum $Q$ parameter less than 1.4 strong trailing spiral instabilities, typically three or four armed modes, form and grow until fragmentation occurs along the arms after about 5 mean disk orbital times. The resulting clumps contract quickly to densities several orders of magnitude higher than the initial disk density, and the densest of them survive even under adiabatic conditions. These clumps are stable to tidal disruption and merge quickly, leaving 2-3 protoplanets on fairly eccentric orbits (the mean eccentricity being around 0.2) with masses between 0.7 and more than $7 M_{Jup}$, well in agreement with those of detected extrasolar planets.after $\sim 10^3$ years. Fragmentation is not strongly dependent on whether the disk starts from a marginally unstable state or gradually achieves it, as shown by a test where the disk gradually achieves the critical $Q$ by growing in mass.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".