Pith.

High Energy Astrophysical Phenomena · arXiv:1402.0010 v2 · submitted 31 Jan 2014

Firehose and Mirror Instabilities in a Collisionless Shearing Plasma

Matthew W. Kunz, Alexander A. Schekochihin, James M. Stone

The paper says

“Our results impact theories of momentum and heat transport in astrophysical and space plasmas, in which the stretching of a magnetic field by shear is a generic process.”

from the abstract · picked out as the main claim by a classifier

Pith says

Pith has not reviewed this paper.

Get a Pith Review, $5

Reviews

Reviews by people

No person has reviewed this paper on Pith yet. A scientist listed on Pith can review it for a fee, and their review is published here whatever it concludes.

Request a human review

How Pith checks papers · The full audit of this paper

The paper

Abstract

Hybrid-kinetic numerical simulations of firehose and mirror instabilities in a collisionless plasma are performed in which pressure anisotropy is driven as the magnetic field is changed by a persistent linear shear S. For a decreasing field, it is found that mostly oblique firehose fluctuations grow at ion Larmor scales and saturate with energies ∼S1/2; the pressure anisotropy is pinned at the stability threshold by particle scattering off microscale fluctuations. In contrast, nonlinear mirror fluctuations are large compared to the ion Larmor scale and grow secularly in time; marginality is maintained by an increasing population of resonant particles trapped in magnetic mirrors. After one shear time, saturated order-unity magnetic mirrors are formed and particles scatter off their sharp edges. Both instabilities drive sub-ion-Larmor–scale fluctuations, which appear to be kinetic-Alfvén-wave turbulence. Our results impact theories of momentum and heat transport in astrophysical and space plasmas, in which the stretching of a magnetic field by shear is a generic process.

The paper's own sentences, arranged. Each label is drawn from a closed vocabulary; the number beside it is the probability the classifier gave that label. No sentence in this record was written by a model.

abstract compiled · 2026-09-23 · no language-model review

How the main claim is stated: asserted 0.89

What the abstract itself states, as probabilities: claims first 0.03 · states limitation 0.09 · human participants 0.01 · controlled comparison 0.05 · randomized assignment 0.01 · states quantitative result 0.89 · compares with prior results 0.11 · mentions code or data availability 0.02

The abstract, sentence by sentence

This table labels the abstract only (arXiv listing abstract v2). The number is the probability the classifier gave the label.

SentenceRoleThe authors' own workStates the main conclusionStrength
Hybrid-kinetic numerical simulations of firehose and mirror instabilities in a collisionless plasma are performed in which pressure anisotropy is driven as the magnetic field is changed by a persistent linear shear $S$. method 0.57 0.95 0.05 asserted 0.97
For a decreasing field, it is found that mostly oblique firehose fluctuations grow at ion Larmor scales and saturate with energies $\sim$$S^{1/2}$; the pressure anisotropy is pinned at the stability threshold by particle scattering off microscale fluctuations. result 1.00 0.95 0.21 asserted 1.00
In contrast, nonlinear mirror fluctuations are large compared to the ion Larmor scale and grow secularly in time; marginality is maintained by an increasing population of resonant particles trapped in magnetic mirrors. result 1.00 0.91 0.20 asserted 1.00
After one shear time, saturated order-unity magnetic mirrors are formed and particles scatter off their sharp edges. result 1.00 0.91 0.10 asserted 1.00
Both instabilities drive sub-ion-Larmor--scale fluctuations, which appear to be kinetic-Alfv\'{e}n-wave turbulence. result 0.96 0.89 0.16 hedged possibility 0.88
Our results impact theories of momentum and heat transport in astrophysical and space plasmas, in which the stretching of a magnetic field by shear is a generic process. interpretation 1.00 0.26 0.17 asserted 0.89

What kind of paper the classifier reports this is: simulation study 1.00 · evidence from simulation or computation 1.00

What was examined, and what was not

Sources read

  • arXiv listing abstract v2

Not examined

  • full text
  • figures and tables
  • references and citing sentences
  • relations to other papers

Levels run

  • P abstract

Not run

  • S sections
  • T body sentences
  • C citations
  • R cross-paper relations

How the labels were made

Compiled by classifier-1.13-20260917 via OpenRouter, question bank abstract-p1-20260923, 2026-09-23: 1 request, 5,074 input tokens, $0.0002 reported.

Every quoted sentence on this record is the authors'. Every label is from Pith's closed vocabulary, with the probability shown beside it. This record as JSON

Cited by 6 Pith papers
How later papers used it

77 later papers cite it

Evidence: substantial. 70 of the citing papers share no author with it, and 13 of those carry a confident label from Pith's citation classifier.

Pith read 16 of the 131 citing sentences, choosing only those whose citation markers point at this paper alone, and wrote the paraphrases from them. The summary, the counts, the evidence level, the links and the quotes come from code; the summary counts the papers listed below. A later paper is listed under a label when Pith's citation classifier gives one of its sentences that label at probability 0.8 or more (0.95 for support), Pith's reading finds that the citing paper itself did it, and a second check confirms the paraphrase against the sentence. This section lists uses only. It does not list criticism or disagreement, so their absence here says nothing about how the paper has been received. Papers that share an author with this one are listed apart, under "By the same authors". A quote is the citing authors' own sentence, shown when their paper's licence is CC BY, CC BY-SA or CC0. JSON

Uses its method or tool 1 of 2 papers with this label
Cites it as support 1 of 9 papers with this label
How the literature uses it

12 arXiv papers cite this in 19 sentences

Each citing sentence is taken from the citing paper's LaTeX source and typed by Pith's classifier. A label appears at probability 0.8 or more (0.95 for support), a contest at 0.7 or more; the quoted words are the citing authors'. How each label was checked · JSON

Papers citing it · 17 sentences without a confident label

Cites it as background 2 papers

Challenges and discussion

Know something about this paper? Leave a comment.

No comments yet.

Sign in to comment