Who is who in the accretion model research, which scientific journals are publishing these scientific papers, what are the key conferences, what are the key arguments used, etc…..

Summary: Discussion dominated by the pebble accretion theory

Method of Research: Arxiv Papers by Google Rank United States (12.06.2023)

Search Term: arxiv.org planet accretion

List of papers as data source:

1. Anatomy of rocky planets formed by rapid pebble accretion III. Partitioning of volatiles between planetary core, mantle, and atmosphere
2. Efficient planet formation by pebble accretion in ALMA rings
3. How planets grow by pebble accretion. III. Emergence of an interior composition gradient
4. Anatomy of rocky planets formed by rapid pebble accretion II. Differentiation by accretion energy and thermal blanketing
5. Planetary Accretion Shocks with a Realistic Equation of State
6. Gas accretion onto Jupiter mass planets in discs with laminar accretion flows
7. A pebble accretion model for the formation of the terrestrial planets in the Solar System
8. ACCRETION PROCESSES
9. Simultaneous gas accretion onto a pair of giant planets: Impact on their final mass and on the protoplanetary disk structure
10. Giant planet formation via pebble accretion
11. An Analytical Theory for the Growth from Planetesimals to Planets by Polydisperse Pebble Accretion
12. Close-in giant-planet formation via in-situ gas accretion and their natal disk properties
13. Making the Solar System
14. RV-detected planets around M dwarfs: Challenges for core accretion models
15. The effect of a strong pressure bump in the Sun’s natal disk: Terrestrial planet formation via planetesimal accretion rather than pebble accretion
16. Work in Progress – more to follow

Pebble Accretion:

There are two theories for how Earth formed: the classical model of gathering asteroids over 100 million years and the pebble accretion model where Earth formed within a few million years by accreting mainly millimetre-sized pebbles. Our results strongly favour pebble accretion.

— Anders Johansen 🇺🇦🪨 🌏 (@AstroAndersJ) June 15, 2023

Challenges with pebble accretion:

But what about other elements? In a number of trace elements, such as Molybdenum Mo, Earth appears to be an isotopic endmember and hence does not lie on a mixing line between any known meteorite components. This seems at odds with pebble accretion.

— Anders Johansen 🇺🇦🪨 🌏 (@AstroAndersJ) June 15, 2023

Researcher and Institution

Name	Institution	Google Rank
Anders Johansen	Center for Star and Planet Formation, GLOBE Institute, University of Copenhagen, Lund Observatory, Department of Astronomy and Theoretical Physics, Lund University	1
Thomas Ronnet	Lund Observatory, Department of Astronomy and Theoretical Physics, Lund University	1
Martin Schiller	Center for Star and Planet Formation, GLOBE Institute, University of Copenhagen	1
Zhengbin Deng	Center for Star and Planet Formation, GLOBE Institute, University of Copenhagen	1
Martin Bizzarro	Center for Star and Planet Formation, GLOBE Institute, University of Copenhagen	1
Haochang Jiang	Department of Astronomy, Tsinghua University, Beijing	2
Chris W. Ormel	European Southern Observatory, Garching	2
Chris W. Ormel	Department of Astronomy, Tsinghua University, Beijing	3
Allona Vazan	Department of Natural Sciences, The Open University of Israel, Astrophysics Research Center of the Open University (ARCO), The Open University of Israel	3
Marc Brouwers	Institute of Astronomy, University of Cambridge	3
Anders Johansen	Center for Star and Planet Formation, GLOBE Institute, University of Copenhagen, Lund Observatory, Department of Astronomy and Theoretical Physics, Lund University	4
Thomas Ronnet	Lund Observatory, Department of Astronomy and Theoretical Physics, Lund University	4
Martin Schiller	Center for Star and Planet Formation, GLOBE Institute, University of Copenhagen	4
Zhengbin Deng	Center for Star and Planet Formation, GLOBE Institute, University of Copenhagen	4
Martin Bizzarro	Center for Star and Planet Formation, GLOBE Institute, University of Copenhagen	4
Zhuo Chen	Department of Astronomy, Tsinghua University Beijing	5
Xue-Ning Bai	Institute for Advanced Study, Tsinghua University Beijing	5
Richard P. Nelson	Astronomy Unit, Queen Mary University of London	6
Elena Lega	Université Côte d’Azur, Observatoire de la Côte d’Azur, CNRS	6
Alessandro Morbidelli	Université Côte d’Azur, Observatoire de la Côte d’Azur, CNRS	6
Anders Johansen	Center for Star and Planet Formation, GLOBE Institute, University of Copenhagen, Lund Observatory, Department of Astronomy and Theoretical Physics, Lund University	7
Thomas Ronnet	Lund Observatory, Department of Astronomy and Theoretical Physics, Lund University	7
Martin Bizzarro	Center for Star and Planet Formation, GLOBE Institute, University of Copenhagen	7
Martin Schiller	Center for Star and Planet Formation, GLOBE Institute, University of Copenhagen	7
Michiel Lambrechts	Lund Observatory, Department of Astronomy and Theoretical Physics, Lund University	7
Åke Nordlund	Niels Bohr Institute, University of Copenhagen	7
Helmut Lammer	Space Research Institute, Austrian Academy of Sciences	7
Alessandro Morbidelli	Université Côte d’Azur, Observatoire de la Côte d’Azur, CNRS	8
Camille Bergez-Casalou	Max-Planck-Institut für Astronomie, Heidelberg	9
Bertram Bitsch	Max-Planck-Institut für Astronomie, Heidelberg	9
Sean N. Raymond	Laboratoire d’Astrophysique de Bordeaux, CNRS and Université de Bordeaux	9
Octavio Miguel Guilera	Grupo de Ciencias Planetarias, Instituto de Astrof´ısica de La Plata, Grupo de Ciencias Planetarias, Facultad de Ciencias Astron´omicas y Geof´ısicas	10
Wladimir Lyra	New Mexico State University, Department of Astronomy, Las Cruces	11
Anders Johansen	Center for Star and Planet Formation, GLOBE Institute, University of Copenhagen, Lund Observatory, Department of Astronomy and Theoretical Physics, Lund University	11
MANUEL H. CAÑAS	New Mexico State University, Department of Astronomy, Las Cruces	11
CHAO-CHIN YANG	Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Alabama	11
Yasuhiro Hasegawa	Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology, Pasadena	12
Tze Yeung Mathew Yu	Department of Physics & Astronomy, University of California Los Angeles	12
Bradley M. S. Hansen	Department of Physics & Astronomy, University of California Los Angeles	12
John Chambers	Earth and Planets Laboratory Carnegie Institution for Science, Washington	13
Martin Schlecker	Max-Planck-Institut für Astronomie, Heidelberg; Department of Astronomy/Steward Observatory, The University of Arizona	14
Remo Burn	Physikalisches Institut, University of Bern; Max-Planck-Institut für Astronomie, Heidelberg	14
Silvia Sabotta	Landessternwarte, Zentrum für Astronomie der Universität Heidelberg	14
Antonia Seifert		14
Thomas Henning	Max-Planck-Institut für Astronomie, Heidelberg	14
Alexandre Emsenhuber	Universitäts-Sternwarte München, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München;Lunar and Planetary Laboratory, University of Arizona; Physikalisches Institut, University of Bern	14
Christoph Mordasini	Physikalisches Institut, University of Bern	14
Sabine Reffert	Landessternwarte, Zentrum für Astronomie der Universität Heidelberg	14
Yutong Shan	Centre for Earth Evolution and Dynamics, Department of Geosciences, University of Oslo; Institut für Astrophysik, Georg-August-Universität, Göttingen	14
Hubert Klahr	Max-Planck-Institut für Astronomie, Heidelberg	14
Andre Izidoro	Department of Earth, Environmental and Planetary Sciences, Houston	15
Bertram Bitsch	Max-Planck-Institut für Astronomie, Heidelberg	15
Rajdeep Dasgupta	Department of Earth, Environmental and Planetary Sciences, Houston	15

Citations

Number of Citations	Date	Google Rank
0	07 / 2022	1
6		2
29		3
2		4
2		5
1		6
84	02 / 2021	7
3		8
0		9
6		10
2		11
7		12
1		13
14		14
19	05 / 2021	15

Scientific Journal or other Publications

Publication	Google Rank
Astronomy & Astrophysics	1
MNRAS	2
Astronomy & Astrophysics	3
Astronomy & Astrophysics	4
ApJL – The Astrophysical Journal Letters	5
Astronomy & Astrophysics	6
Science Advances	7
Astronomy & Astrophysics	9
Asociaci´on Argentina de Astronom´ıa, BAAA, Vol. 58, 2015	10
ApJ – The Astrophysical Journal	11
Astronomy & Astrophysics	12
ApJ – The Astrophysical Journal	13
Astronomy & Astrophysics	14
ApJ – The Astrophysical Journal	15

Latest Discussion

After analysing the community and understanding their channels is next to have a look at the latest discussion within the community and where the research is heading.

Research Method: Arxiv Papers Google Rank (14.06.2023)

Past Year

1. Anatomy of rocky planets formed by rapid pebble accretion II. Differentiation by accretion energy and thermal blanketing
2. On the evolution of pebble-accreting planets in evolving protoplanetary discs
3. Efficient planet formation by pebble accretion in ALMA rings
4. Global N-body simulations of circumbinary planet formation around Kepler-16 and -34 analogues I: Exploring the pebble accretion scenario
5. An Analytical Theory for the Growth from Planetesimals to Planets by Polydisperse Pebble Accretion

Most popular disucssion:

There are two theories for how Earth formed: the classical model of gathering asteroids over 100 million years and the pebble accretion model where Earth formed within a few million years by accreting mainly millimetre-sized pebbles. Our results strongly favour pebble accretion.

— Anders Johansen 🇺🇦🪨 🌏 (@AstroAndersJ) June 15, 2023

Google Rank overall match with latest Discussion in the last year – papers in both list with Google Rank overall highest define the most popular discussion based on Google Rank.

Author Guidelines Scientific Journals

Astronomy & Astrophysics

MNRAS – Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society

ApJL – The Astrophysical Journal Letters

Science Advances

Further Databases:

astrophysics data system https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/