Pith. sign in

REVIEW

Giant planets and brown dwarfs on wide orbits: a code comparison project

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 1901.08089 v1 pith:XB6UB6LJ submitted 2019-01-23 astro-ph.EP

Giant planets and brown dwarfs on wide orbits: a code comparison project

classification astro-ph.EP
keywords codesmigrationsimulationsaccretionagreementbrownclumpcode
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved
0 comments
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN
read the original abstract

Gas clumps formed within massive gravitationally unstable circumstellar discs are potential seeds of gas giant planets, brown dwarfs and companion stars. Simulations show that competition between three processes -- migration, gas accretion and tidal disruption -- establishes what grows from a given seed. Here we investigate the robustness of numerical modelling of clump migration and accretion with the codes PHANTOM, GADGET, SPHINX, SEREN, GIZMO-MFM, SPHNG and FARGO. The test problem comprises a clump embedded in a massive disc at an initial separation of 120 AU. There is a general qualitative agreement between the codes, but the quantitative agreement in the planet migration rate ranges from $\sim 10$% to $\sim 50$%, depending on the numerical setup. We find that the artificial viscosity treatment and the sink particle prescription may account for much of the differences between the codes. In order to understand the wider implications of our work, we also attempt to reproduce the planet evolution tracks from our hydrodynamical simulations with prescriptions from three previous population synthesis studies. We find that the disagreement amongst the population synthesis models is far greater than that between our hydrodynamical simulations. The results of our code comparison project are therefore encouraging in that uncertainties in the given problem are probably dominated by the physics not yet included in the codes rather than by how hydrodynamics is modelled in them.

discussion (0)

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