pith. sign in

arxiv: 2503.17828 · v2 · submitted 2025-03-22 · 🌌 astro-ph.EP

Influence of penetration depth on jets on giant planets: equatorial jet direction, jet numbers, and jet energy fraction

Yaoxuan Zeng , Wanying Kang , Glenn R. Flierl , Geoffrey K. Vallis This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-22 22:59 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.EP
keywords jet penetration depthequatorial jet directiongiant planetsquasi-geostrophic modelbeta gradientRhines scaleOhmic dissipationzonal jets
0
0 comments X

The pith

Deeper jet penetration into a giant planet's interior produces a prograde equatorial jet by altering the effective beta gradient.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper seeks to explain the contrasting equatorial jet directions among the giant planets: prograde on Jupiter and Saturn, retrograde on Uranus and Neptune. Using a two-dimensional quasi-geostrophic model, it demonstrates that when jets penetrate deeply, spherical geometry makes the effective vorticity gradient beta negative near the equator and decreasing equatorward. This specific beta profile selects dynamical modes that carry eastward momentum equatorward. Shallower penetration instead produces a retrograde equatorial jet. The model also shows that jet spacing follows the Rhines scale and that a larger share of total energy resides in the jets under stronger forcing or faster rotation.

Core claim

When jets penetrate deeply, the effective planetary vorticity gradient β becomes negative near the equator and decreases equatorward due to spherical geometry. This β profile favors dynamical modes that transport eastward momentum toward the equator, producing a prograde equatorial jet. The equatorial jet direction is primarily controlled by the gradient of β rather than by its sign. At mid-latitudes jet widths are set by the Rhines scale, and stronger energy input, faster rotation, smaller radius, or weaker damping increases the fraction of energy residing in zonal jets.

What carries the argument

The effective planetary vorticity gradient β, whose sign and equatorward decrease are set by how deeply the jets penetrate before Ohmic dissipation halts them.

If this is right

  • Deep penetration produces a prograde equatorial jet as seen on Jupiter and Saturn.
  • Shallow penetration produces a retrograde equatorial jet as seen on Uranus and Neptune.
  • Jet number per hemisphere is fixed by the Rhines scale, yielding many jets on Jupiter and Saturn but one per hemisphere on Uranus and Neptune.
  • The fraction of energy in zonal jets rises with stronger energy input, faster rotation, smaller planetary radius, or weaker large-scale damping.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • If the mechanism is correct, the observed jet patterns imply that Uranus and Neptune possess a shallow jet layer or a near-surface stratified region.
  • Changes in interior conductivity or Ohmic dissipation over time could reverse equatorial jet direction on a given planet.
  • The same beta-gradient control may apply to zonal flows on other rapidly rotating fluid bodies once their effective penetration depths are known.

Load-bearing premise

A two-dimensional quasi-geostrophic model with penetration depth fixed by Ohmic dissipation captures the three-dimensional momentum transport that determines equatorial jet direction on real giant planets.

What would settle it

Direct measurement of zonal-jet depth on Uranus or Neptune that fails to match the jet direction predicted by the sign and gradient of beta for that depth.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2503.17828 by Geoffrey K. Vallis, Glenn R. Flierl, Wanying Kang, Yaoxuan Zeng.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Observed surface zonal wind profile on giant planets. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Geometry of the atmosphere on giant planets and the corresponding [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: The direction of the equatorial jet. a, Non-dimensionalized equatorial zonal jet speed (ueq/(2ΩR)) as a function of the ratio of the Rhines wavenumber nRh to the domain wavenumber ndomain = π/Ldomain. b and c, Zonal-mean zonal velocity profiles, normalized by the equatorial jet speed magnitude (u/|ueq|), with a deep (b) or shallow (c) β profile. Parameters for Jupiter (J), Saturn (S), Uranus (U), and Neptu… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: PV homogenization and staircases. a-d, non-dimensionalized zonal-mean PV profile (qR/(2Ω)) in the northern hemisphere, where red line denotes planetary PV (qp = R βdy = −2Ω ln H), blue line denotes jet-induced relative PV (qr = −∂u/∂y − ψ/L2 d ), and black line denotes total PV (q = qp + qr), where overline denotes zonal average. Simulation results for ε = 1.7 × 10−12 and µ = 10−7 are shown in a-d, and res… view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Jet width and number. a, Diagnosed jet width (Ljet) compared to the diagnosed modified Rhines scale (LRh,diagnose), both normalized by the domain length scale Ldomain. b, Number of jets (Njet) diagnosed in the simulations compared to the theoretical prediction, nRh/ndomain. Detailed jet diagnostic information is provided in Fig. S1. In a, jets with widths of 1/2 the domain size in the shallow scenario and … view at source ↗
read the original abstract

It remains puzzling why, despite their similar nature, Jupiter and Saturn possess a prograde equatorial jet, whereas Uranus and Neptune have a retrograde one. To understand this discrepancy, we use a two-dimensional quasi-geostrophic model to explore how the jet penetration depth, regulated by Ohmic dissipation, influences the structure and organization of jet patterns. When jets penetrate deeply into the planetary interior, the effective planetary vorticity gradient $\beta$ becomes negative near the equator and decreases equatorward due to spherical geometry. This $\beta$ profile favors dynamical modes that transport eastward momentum toward the equator, producing a prograde equatorial jet, as observed on Jupiter and Saturn. In contrast, relatively shallow systems favor a retrograde equatorial jet. In our simulations, the equatorial jet direction is primarily controlled by the gradient of $\beta$, as predicted by Stochastic Structural Stability Theory, rather than by its sign, as suggested by Potential Vorticity mixing. If this mechanism applies to Uranus and Neptune, the observed jet structure may suggest the presence of a stratified or Ohmic dissipation layer near their surfaces. At mid-latitudes, jet widths are constrained by the Rhines scale, yielding a scaling that explains the presence of multiple jets on Jupiter and Saturn and a single jet per hemisphere on Uranus and Neptune. Lastly, we examine how planetary parameters influence the partitioning of energy between jets and eddies. Stronger energy input, faster rotation, smaller planetary radius, or weaker large-scale damping lead to a larger fraction of the total energy in zonal jets, resulting in smoother jet structures.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 1 minor

Summary. The manuscript uses two-dimensional quasi-geostrophic simulations to study how jet penetration depth, regulated by Ohmic dissipation, controls equatorial jet direction on giant planets. Deep penetration produces an effective β that is negative near the equator and decreases equatorward due to spherical geometry; this profile is argued to favor SST modes that transport eastward momentum equatorward, yielding prograde equatorial jets as on Jupiter and Saturn. Shallow penetration instead favors retrograde jets. Jet widths follow the Rhines scale, explaining multiple jets on gas giants versus one per hemisphere on ice giants, and a parameter study examines the fraction of energy residing in zonal jets versus eddies.

Significance. If the central mechanism holds, the work supplies a dynamical link between interior Ohmic-dissipation layers and the observed contrast in equatorial jet direction between gas and ice giants, together with Rhines-scale predictions for jet multiplicity and scalings for jet-eddy energy partitioning. The explicit use of SST to interpret the β-gradient effect and the systematic parameter exploration are positive features. Significance is limited by the absence of any 3D validation of the reported momentum-transport outcome.

major comments (2)
  1. [Abstract and model-setup paragraph] Abstract and model-setup paragraph: the claim that the 2D QG model with penetration depth set by Ohmic dissipation produces the observed prograde equatorial jet via the reported β-gradient mechanism is load-bearing, yet the manuscript supplies no direct comparisons to 3D MHD or primitive-equation benchmarks to test whether the effective β profile and associated equatorial momentum fluxes survive in more complete dynamics.
  2. [Results on equatorial-jet direction] Results on equatorial-jet direction: the assertion that direction is controlled by the gradient of β (per SST) rather than its sign (per PV mixing) is stated without accompanying quantitative diagnostics such as explicit mode amplitudes or decomposed momentum fluxes that would demonstrate the dominance of the SST-predicted modes.
minor comments (1)
  1. [Abstract] The abstract does not report the specific nondimensional values or ranges of penetration depth and large-scale damping strength used in the simulations, making it difficult to assess how broadly the reported outcomes apply.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their constructive comments, which have helped us improve the manuscript. We address each major comment below and have revised the text to strengthen the presentation of our results while acknowledging the inherent limitations of the 2D model.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract and model-setup paragraph] Abstract and model-setup paragraph: the claim that the 2D QG model with penetration depth set by Ohmic dissipation produces the observed prograde equatorial jet via the reported β-gradient mechanism is load-bearing, yet the manuscript supplies no direct comparisons to 3D MHD or primitive-equation benchmarks to test whether the effective β profile and associated equatorial momentum fluxes survive in more complete dynamics.

    Authors: We agree that direct 3D validation would provide additional support. The 2D QG framework is adopted specifically to enable broad parameter exploration of the penetration-depth effect, which remains computationally intensive in 3D. The effective β profile is a direct geometric consequence of spherical coordinates combined with depth-dependent damping and is therefore expected to persist; we have added a new paragraph in the Discussion section that explicitly discusses this modeling choice, its assumptions, and the desirability of future 3D MHD or primitive-equation tests. revision: partial

  2. Referee: [Results on equatorial-jet direction] Results on equatorial-jet direction: the assertion that direction is controlled by the gradient of β (per SST) rather than its sign (per PV mixing) is stated without accompanying quantitative diagnostics such as explicit mode amplitudes or decomposed momentum fluxes that would demonstrate the dominance of the SST-predicted modes.

    Authors: We have incorporated the requested quantitative diagnostics. The revised manuscript now includes decomposed meridional momentum-flux profiles and estimates of the dominant mode amplitudes, which show that the SST-predicted modes associated with the negative β gradient account for the majority of the equatorward eastward momentum transport, thereby supporting the gradient-based interpretation over a pure sign-based PV-mixing argument. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; results from independent model simulations

full rationale

The paper's claims originate from numerical integrations of a 2D quasi-geostrophic model in which the effective β profile is computed directly from the chosen penetration depth and spherical geometry. Jet direction, number, and energy partitioning are reported as simulation outcomes, with the β-gradient interpretation attributed to an external theory (SST) rather than derived internally. No steps reduce by construction to fitted parameters, self-citations, or ansatzes imported from the authors' prior work; the Rhines-scale scaling is a standard application to model outputs. The derivation chain remains self-contained against external benchmarks.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

2 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on the quasi-geostrophic approximation, the assumption that Ohmic dissipation sets a controllable penetration depth, and the applicability of Stochastic Structural Stability Theory to the simulated beta profiles. No new entities are postulated.

free parameters (2)
  • jet penetration depth
    Varied as the primary control parameter; its value is chosen to represent different Ohmic-dissipation regimes.
  • large-scale damping strength
    Appears in the energy-partitioning experiments and is adjusted to explore jet versus eddy energy fractions.
axioms (2)
  • domain assumption Quasi-geostrophic dynamics on a sphere with depth-dependent effective beta
    Invoked throughout the model description to justify the 2D reduction and the sign change in beta near the equator.
  • domain assumption Stochastic Structural Stability Theory correctly predicts the preferred momentum transport direction from the beta gradient
    Used to interpret why the gradient, rather than the sign, of beta controls equatorial jet direction.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5827 in / 1469 out tokens · 44915 ms · 2026-05-22T22:59:04.979353+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

  1. Superrotation and Jet Migration in Simulations of Jupiter's Convective Zone and Weather Layer

    astro-ph.EP 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 5.0

    3D anelastic simulations find that both convective zone Busse columns and weather-layer PV homogenization produce Jupiter-like jets, with the weather layer causing deviations in thermal wind balance and long-term high...

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

55 extracted references · 55 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    Icarus 65, 335–352 (1986)

    SS Limaye, Jupiter: New estimates of the mean zonal flow at the cloud level. Icarus 65, 335–352 (1986)

    work page 1986

  2. [2]

    LA Sromovsky, SS Limaye, PM Fry, Dynamics of neptune’s major cloud features.Icarus 105, 110–141 (1993)

    work page 1993

  3. [3]

    Icarus 147, 405–420 (2000)

    A Sanchez-Lavega, JF Rojas, PV Sada, Saturn’s zonal winds at cloud level. Icarus 147, 405–420 (2000)

    work page 2000

  4. [4]

    Icarus 152, 316–330 (2001)

    E Garcıa-Melendo, A S´anchez-Lavega, A study of the stability of jovian zonal winds from hst images: 1995–2000. Icarus 152, 316–330 (2001)

    work page 1995

  5. [5]

    Icarus 215, 62–74 (2011)

    E Garc ´ıa-Melendo, S P´erez-Hoyos, A S´anchez-Lavega, R Hueso, Saturn’s zonal wind profile in 2004–2009 from cassini iss images and its long-term variability. Icarus 215, 62–74 (2011)

    work page 2004

  6. [6]

    Icarus 258, 192–223 (2015)

    L Sromovsky, I de Pater, P Fry, H Hammel, P Marcus, High s/n keck and gemini ao imaging of uranus during 2012–2014: new cloud patterns, increasing activity, and improved wind measurements. Icarus 258, 192–223 (2015)

    work page 2012

  7. [7]

    Icarus 296, 163–178 (2017)

    J Tollefson, et al., Changes in jupiter’s zonal wind profile preceding and during the juno mission. Icarus 296, 163–178 (2017)

    work page 2017

  8. [8]

    Zonal jets pp

    A S ´anchez-Lavega, et al., Zonal jets in gas giants. Zonal jets pp. 9–45 (2019)

    work page 2019

  9. [9]

    FH Busse, Thermal instabilities in rapidly rotating systems. J. Fluid Mech . 44, 441–460 (1970)

    work page 1970

  10. [10]

    Icarus 29, 255–260 (1976)

    FH Busse, A simple model of convection in the jovian atmosphere. Icarus 29, 255–260 (1976)

    work page 1976

  11. [11]

    UR Christensen, Zonal flow driven by deep convection in the major planets. Geophys. research letters 28, 2553–2556 (2001)

    work page 2001

  12. [12]

    UR Christensen, Zonal flow driven by strongly supercritical convection in rotating spherical shells. J. Fluid Mech . 470, 115–133 (2002)

    work page 2002

  13. [13]

    Nature 438, 193–196 (2005)

    M Heimpel, J Aurnou, J Wicht, Simulation of equatorial and high-latitude jets on jupiter in a deep convection model. Nature 438, 193–196 (2005)

    work page 2005

  14. [14]

    Icarus 187, 540–557 (2007)

    M Heimpel, J Aurnou, Turbulent convection in rapidly rotating spherical shells: A model for equatorial and high latitude jets on jupiter and saturn. Icarus 187, 540–557 (2007)

    work page 2007

  15. [15]

    Icarus 190, 110–126 (2007)

    J Aurnou, M Heimpel, J Wicht, The effects of vigorous mixing in a convective model of zonal flow on the ice giants. Icarus 190, 110–126 (2007)

    work page 2007

  16. [16]

    Icarus 202, 525–542 (2009)

    Y Kaspi, GR Flierl, AP Showman, The deep wind structure of the giant planets: Results from an anelastic general circulation model. Icarus 202, 525–542 (2009)

    work page 2009

  17. [17]

    Icarus 204, 227–238 (2009)

    CA Jones, KM Kuzanyan, Compressible convection in the deep atmospheres of giant planets. Icarus 204, 227–238 (2009)

    work page 2009

  18. [18]

    Icarus 224, 97–113 (2013)

    K Soderlund, M Heimpel, E King, J Aurnou, Turbulent models of ice giant internal dynamics: Dynamos, heat transfer, and zonal flows. Icarus 224, 97–113 (2013)

    work page 2013

  19. [19]

    Icarus 225, 156–172 (2013)

    T Gastine, J Wicht, J Aurnou, Zonal flow regimes in rotating anelastic spherical shells: An application to giant planets. Icarus 225, 156–172 (2013)

    work page 2013

  20. [20]

    T Gastine, M Heimpel, J Wicht, Zonal flow scaling in rapidly-rotating compressible convection. Phys. Earth Planet. Interiors 232, 36–50 (2014)

    work page 2014

  21. [21]

    barotropic representation of jovian and terrestrial turbulence

    GP Williams, Planetary circulations: 1. barotropic representation of jovian and terrestrial turbulence. J. Atmospheric Sci . 35, 1399–1426 (1978)

    work page 1978

  22. [22]

    Science 273, 335–337 (1996)

    JY Cho, LM Polvani, The morphogenesis of bands and zonal winds in the atmospheres on the giant outer planets. Science 273, 335–337 (1996)

    work page 1996

  23. [23]

    AP Showman, Numerical simulations of forced shallow-water turbulence: Effects of moist convection on the large-scale circulation of jupiter and saturn. J. Atmospheric Sci . 64, 3132–3157 (2007)

    work page 2007

  24. [24]

    R Scott, LM Polvani, Equatorial superrotation in shallow atmospheres. Geophys. Res. Lett. 35 (2008)

    work page 2008

  25. [25]

    T Schneider, J Liu, Formation of jets and equatorial superrotation on jupiter. J. Atmospheric Sci. 66, 579–601 (2009)

    work page 2009

  26. [26]

    J Liu, T Schneider, Mechanisms of jet formation on the giant planets. J. Atmospheric Sci . 67, 3652–3672 (2010)

    work page 2010

  27. [27]

    Icarus 207, 373–393 (2010)

    Y Lian, AP Showman, Generation of equatorial jets by large-scale latent heating on the giant planets. Icarus 207, 373–393 (2010)

    work page 2010

  28. [28]

    (Massachusetts Institute of Technology), (2008)

    Y Kaspi, T urbulent convection in an anelastic rotating sphere: A model for the circulation on the giant planets . (Massachusetts Institute of Technology), (2008)

    work page 2008

  29. [29]

    (Cambridge university press), (2019)

    GK Vallis, Essentials of atmospheric and oceanic dynamics . (Cambridge university press), (2019)

    work page 2019

  30. [30]

    PB Rhines, Waves and turbulence on a beta-plane. J. Fluid Mech . 69, 417–443 (1975)

    work page 1975

  31. [31]

    GK Vallis, ME Maltrud, Generation of mean flows and jets on a beta plane and over topography. J. physical oceanography 23, 1346–1362 (1993)

    work page 1993

  32. [32]

    Nature 331, 693–696 (1988)

    P Marcus, A numerical simulation of the great red spot of jupiter. Nature 331, 693–696 (1988)

    work page 1988

  33. [33]

    Nature 428, 828–831 (2004)

    PS Marcus, Prediction of a global climate change on jupiter. Nature 428, 828–831 (2004)

    work page 2004

  34. [34]

    icarus 196, 653–664 (2008)

    J Liu, PM Goldreich, DJ Stevenson, Constraints on deep-seated zonal winds inside jupiter and saturn. icarus 196, 653–664 (2008)

    work page 2008

  35. [35]

    The Astrophys

    M French, et al., Ab initio simulations for material properties along the jupiter adiabat. The Astrophys. J. Suppl. Ser . 202, 5 (2012)

    work page 2012

  36. [36]

    D Soyuer, F Soubiran, R Helled, Constraining the depth of the winds on uranus and neptune via ohmic dissipation. Mon. Notices Royal Astron. Soc . 498, 621–638 (2020)

    work page 2020

  37. [37]

    B Galperin, S Sukoriansky, N Dikovskaya, Zonostrophic turbulence. Phys. Scripta 2008, 014034 (2008)

    work page 2008

  38. [38]

    Nature 497, 344–347 (2013)

    Y Kaspi, AP Showman, WB Hubbard, O Aharonson, R Helled, Atmospheric confinement of jet streams on uranus and neptune. Nature 497, 344–347 (2013)

    work page 2013

  39. [39]

    A S ´anchez-Lavega, M Heimpel, Atmospheric dynamics of giants and icy planets. Handb. exoplanets p. 51 (2018)

    work page 2018

  40. [40]

    Nature 555, 223–226 (2018)

    Y e Kaspi, et al., Jupiter’s atmospheric jet streams extend thousands of kilometres deep. Nature 555, 223–226 (2018)

    work page 2018

  41. [41]

    E Galanti, et al., Saturn’s deep atmospheric flows revealed by the cassini grand finale gravity measurements. Geophys. Res. Lett. 46, 616–624 (2019)

    work page 2019

  42. [42]

    J Theiss, A generalized rhines effect and storms on jupiter. Geophys. research letters 33 (2006)

    work page 2006

  43. [43]

    S Sukoriansky, N Dikovskaya, B Galperin, On the arrest of inverse energy cascade and the rhines scale. J. Atmospheric Sci . 64, 3312–3327 (2007)

    work page 2007

  44. [44]

    TJ Dunkerton, RK Scott, A barotropic model of the angular momentum–conserving potential vorticity staircase in spherical geometry. J. Atmospheric Sci . 65, 1105–1136 (2008)

    work page 2008

  45. [45]

    Icarus 390, 115292 (2023)

    D Lemasquerier, B Favier, M Le Bars, Zonal jets experiments in the gas giants’ zonostrophic regime. Icarus 390, 115292 (2023)

    work page 2023

  46. [46]

    M Maltrud, G Vallis, Energy spectra and coherent structures in forced two-dimensional and beta-plane turbulence. J. Fluid Mech . 228, 321–342 (1991)

    work page 1991

  47. [47]

    RK Scott, DG Dritschel, The structure of zonal jets in geostrophic turbulence. J. Fluid Mech . 711, 576–598 (2012)

    work page 2012

  48. [48]

    The Astrophys

    H Cao, et al., Strong resemblance between surface and deep zonal winds inside jupiter revealed by high-degree gravity moments. The Astrophys. J. 959, 78 (2023)

    work page 2023

  49. [49]

    PN Wulff, W Dietrich, UR Christensen, J Wicht, Zonal winds in the gas planets driven by convection above a stably stratified layer. Mon. Notices Royal Astron. Soc . 517, 5584–5593 Zeng et al. PNAS — March 25, 2025 — vol. XXX — no. XX — 7 (2022)

    work page 2025

  50. [50]

    P Wulff, UR Christensen, W Dietrich, J Wicht, The effects of a stably stratified region with radially varying electrical conductivity on the formation of zonal winds on gas planets. J. Geophys. Res. Planets 129, e2023JE008042 (2024)

    work page 2024

  51. [51]

    UR Christensen, PN Wulff, Quenching of zonal winds in jupiter’s interior. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 121, e2402859121 (2024)

    work page 2024

  52. [52]

    Y Kaspi, GR Flierl, Formation of jets by baroclinic instability on gas planet atmospheres. J. Atmospheric Sci. 64, 3177–3194 (2007)

    work page 2007

  53. [53]

    Nature 354, 380–382 (1991)

    CB Leovy, AJ Friedson, GS Orton, The quasiquadrennial oscillation of jupiter’s equatorial stratosphere. Nature 354, 380–382 (1991)

    work page 1991

  54. [54]

    Nature 453, 200–202 (2008)

    T Fouchet, et al., An equatorial oscillation in saturn’s middle atmosphere. Nature 453, 200–202 (2008)

    work page 2008

  55. [55]

    The Astrophys

    AP Showman, X Tan, X Zhang, Atmospheric circulation of brown dwarfs and jupiter-and saturn-like planets: zonal jets, long-term variability, and qbo-type oscillations. The Astrophys. J. 883, 4 (2019). 8 — Zeng et al

    work page 2019