Revisiting turbulent properties of solar convection with 3D radiative hydrodynamic modeling

Alan A. Wray; Irina N. Kitiashvili

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 2 cited by

Revisiting turbulent properties of solar convection with 3D radiative hydrodynamic modeling

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-09 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read Convection scales keep rising past 7 Mm deep in the Sun, spectra show

desk verdict Short proceedings paper with a plausible but not yet fully isolated result: convective scales track visually to about 7 Mm, while deeper growth is a spectra-only effect that still needs an SGS sensitivity check. read the letter →

arxiv 2502.00974 v1 pith:UC3GWIV4 submitted 2025-02-03 astro-ph.SR physics.space-ph

Irina N. Kitiashvili , Alan A. Wray This is my paper · ORCID

classification astro-ph.SRphysics.space-ph

keywords solarconvectionturbulence3Dradiativehydrodynamicsleptoclineturbulentspectrasubgrid-scaleclosuredifferentialrotationmeridionalflows

verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

This paper tries to establish that the turbulent structure of the upper solar convection zone is more depth-dependent than previously thought. Using a 3D radiative hydrodynamic simulation of a 20-Mm-deep layer at 45 degrees latitude, the authors show that the characteristic convective scale grows with depth down to about 7 Mm in individual snapshots and continues growing below that depth, but only in the time-averaged turbulent spectra, because the flows there become weaker and more homogeneous. The paper ties the qualitative change near 7–8 Mm to the leptocline, a shallow layer associated with hydrogen and helium ionization, and argues that the varying diffusivity and energy exchange among scales shape the mean flows, including differential rotation and meridional flows. If this is right, models of the near-surface shear layer and turbulent transport must account for a depth-dependent cascade rather than a single mixing length.

What carries the argument

The argument is carried by a 3D radiative hydrodynamic simulation of a 20-Mm-deep patch of the upper convection zone at a rotation rate corresponding to 45 degrees latitude, analyzed through horizontal turbulent kinetic energy spectra of the vertical and horizontal velocity components. The model uses a modified subgrid-scale eddy-viscosity turbulence closure for compressible flows to represent unresolved transport, and the paper contrasts its behavior with earlier simulations without such a closure. The relevant diagnostic objects are the depth-dependent spectra $E(k)$ with wavenumber $k$, the spectral power-law slopes ($k^{-5/3}$ and $k^{-7/3}$), the diagonal Reynolds stresses $R_{xx}$, $R_{yy}$, $R_{zz}$, and the kinetic energy flux $F_k$; together these locate the leptocline, a shallow shear-layer substructure tied to the H and He ionization zones, and connect the turbulent cascade to the ionization structure.

What would settle it

A direct confrontation would be to run the same 3D radiative hydrodynamic setup with a substantially different treatment of unresolved turbulence (for example, an implicit large-eddy approach or a higher-order dynamic closure) and check whether the spectral bump below 7 Mm still shifts to larger scales, or to compare the predicted depth-dependent spectra with helioseismic inversions of subsurface flow amplitudes in the upper 20 Mm.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central discovery is that the characteristic scale of solar convection keeps increasing with depth below the 7 Mm mark, but the signature moves from visible granulation-like patterns into the shape of the turbulent energy spectra. In the model, snapshots at 0, 2, 5, 7, 10, 15, and 20 Mm show that above 7 Mm downdrafts remain identifiable and scale grows; deeper, the amplitude of vertical flows drops and the velocity distribution becomes close to Gaussian, so the continuing scale increase is only detectable as a shift of the spectral bump from roughly 1.5 Mm at the photosphere to 3–9 Mm at 15 Mm. The vertical velocity spectra show a $k^{-5/3}$ power-law segment in a narrow wavenumber range, while the horizontal components steepen from approximately $k^{-7/3}$ near the photosphere toward $k^{-5/3}$ with depth. The authors interpret the depth dependence as evidence of changing diffusivity and energy exchange among scales, co-located with the leptocline and the ionization zones of hydrogen and helium.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the subgrid-scale turbulence model faithfully represents the unresolved turbulent transport in the upper convection zone, so the deepening and homogenization of flows below 7 Mm is a real physical result rather than an artifact of the turbulence closure.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

Below the 7 Mm depth, convective scale growth must be inferred from turbulent spectra rather than from visual snapshots, so time-averaging becomes necessary for studying deep convection.
The leptocline, located near 8 Mm, acts as an interface between stronger and weaker convective layers, with signatures in density and temperature fluctuations and in the kinetic energy flux.
The spectral slopes indicate that the plasma is approximately homogeneous on small scales, but the presence of a $k^{-5/3}$ segment alone does not prove a Kolmogorov inertial range in a stratified, radiating medium.
Rotation at 45 degrees latitude produces a photospheric differential rotation slower by about 35 m/s and northward meridional flows of order 10–20 m/s in the upper layers.
Changes in diffusivity and energy exchange among scales below the leptocline may affect how turbulent stresses couple to the mean flows.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

If the depth-dependent cascade is real, mixing-length style stellar models should treat turbulent diffusivity as a function of depth and of the local ionization structure rather than as a single global parameter.
The result suggests that helioseismic inversions may be able to test the transition near 7–8 Mm by looking for a change in the depth dependence of subsurface flow spectra or in the amplitude of velocity fluctuations.
The 24-hour averaging window may underestimate the coupling between the turbulent cascade and the slowly varying meridional flows, so longer runs or ensemble averages would clarify whether the leptocline boundary itself moves.
A natural extension is to add magnetic fields and see whether the depth-dependent turbulence and the leptocline interface channel flux emergence or alter the near-surface shear layer's magnetic response.

Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Desk Editor's Note

read the letter

Read Kitiashvili & Wray. This is a short IAU proceedings paper, six pages, based on a StellarBox run with the rotation rate taken from helioseismology at 45 degrees latitude. The new bit is the depth-dependent behavior: individual snapshots show granulation to 2-3 Mm, then a scale increase you can follow to about 7 Mm, and below that the visual pattern becomes homogeneous and you need spectra to see scales keep growing. That distinction, visual tracking to 7 Mm versus spectral tracking below, is a useful refinement of the older Nordlund picture and worth keeping.

What the paper does well: the simulation is long (1254 hours), the analysis uses the last 24 hours, and they show spectra, histograms, Reynolds stresses, and connect the leptocline to thermodynamic and flux profiles. They are also honest that the deep-layer structure differs from Nordlund et al. and explicitly credit the Smagorinsky SGS model for that difference. They note that the large-scale flows vary on timescales longer than 24 hours. That candor is genuine.

The soft spot is the SGS model. The paper's distinguishing claim, continued scale increase below 7 Mm visible only in spectra, lives exactly in the depth range where the paper itself says the Smagorinsky closure changes the answer. Smagorinsky eddy viscosity damps small scales in a way that can shift spectral peaks to larger scales, so the deep spectral growth could be partly a closure artifact. There is no sensitivity test of the Smagorinsky coefficient, no comparison with another closure, and no resolved-versus-subgrid dissipation budget. For a proceedings paper this is a recognized limitation rather than a fatal flaw, but it means the deep-scale result should be labeled model-dependent until tested.

Minor issues: the spectra have no error bars; 24 snapshots at one-hour cadence is okay for spectra but thin for mean-flow statistics, as the authors admit. Code and parameter details are missing, so the result is not independently reproducible yet.

Overall, this is a solid preliminary report. The central claim likely holds in broad strokes, especially the 7 Mm visual limit. The deeper spectral growth is plausible but not separated from the SGS closure. I would send an expanded version to peer review if the authors add a resolution or SGS sensitivity test; as is, it is appropriate for a meeting proceedings. The self-citations are not a problem, since the leptocline was defined in Kitiashvili et al. 2023.

Recommendation: engage with it, but treat the below-7-Mm part as provisional. I would accept it for peer review only with that sensitivity check explicitly requested.

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper analyzes the last 24 hours of a 1254-hour StellarBox 3D radiative hydrodynamic simulation of the upper 20 Mm of the solar convection zone at 45 degrees latitude, with the rotation rate imposed from helioseismic inversions. It presents vertical-velocity snapshots and histograms, horizontal wavenumber spectra of Vz and Vx at several depths, and mean profiles of differential rotation, meridional flow, Reynolds stresses, rms density/temperature fluctuations, and kinetic energy flux. The central claim is that convective scale growth with depth is visible in individual snapshots down to about 7 Mm and continues below that depth, but only in turbulent spectra, accompanied by increasing flow homogeneity and spectral shape changes that the authors connect to the leptocline and ionization zones.

Significance. If the depth-dependent spectral evolution survives closer scrutiny, it would provide useful constraints for subgrid-scale modeling and for interpreting the leptocline as a dynamical interface. The use of a helioseismically inferred rotation rate is a strength, as is the multi-depth comparison of spectra, histograms, Reynolds stresses, and thermodynamic fluctuations. The paper is also candid about its limitations: it explicitly attributes the deeper-layer difference from Nordlund et al. (2009) to the Smagorinsky subgrid-scale closure and admits that large-scale flows vary on time scales exceeding 24 hours. However, the distinctive below-7 Mm claim is not yet robust against SGS closure choices or sampling uncertainty, so the paper is of interest but needs additional support before the central claim can be accepted as a solar-physics result.

major comments (3)

[Section 3, Fig. 3] The claim that convective scales continue to increase below 7 Mm rests almost entirely on the spectral peaks in Fig. 3 at depths where the snapshots are visually homogeneous. The same section states that the disagreement with Nordlund et al. (2009) 'can be attributed' to the modified Smagorinsky subgrid-scale model; because Smagorinsky eddy viscosity damps small resolved scales preferentially where strain and grid-scale fluctuations are large, the spectral shift to larger scales below 7 Mm could be a closure artifact rather than a property of solar convection. The paper gives no depth-dependent ratio of subgrid to resolved dissipation and no sensitivity test of the Smagorinsky coefficient or grid resolution. I request a quantification of the SGS dissipation profile and at least one alternative-closure or resolution comparison before the deep scale increase is claimed as a solar result.
[Section 4, Figs. 3-5] All statistical quantities are derived from 24 hourly snapshots, yet Section 4 states that large-scale meridional flows vary on time scales significantly longer than 24 hours. The spectra in Fig. 3 carry no error bars, and the vertical bars in Fig. 4 are only standard deviations from the mean. This leaves the claimed depth dependence and its association with the leptocline statistically unsupported. Please add uncertainty estimates or a convergence check, for example by recomputing spectra from independent 24-hour blocks or half-sample splits, and report whether the spectral changes below 7 Mm persist.
[Section 4 and Abstract] The abstract's concluding phrase 'suggesting changes in the diffusivity properties and energy exchange among different scales' is not supported by a direct measurement. The paper presents spectra and the co-location of kinetic energy flux with Gamma_1 variations, but it does not compute spectral energy transfer, effective eddy diffusivity, or any quantitative property of energy exchange among scales. Either add such a diagnostic or weaken the wording so that it is clearly a qualitative suggestion.

minor comments (5)

[Section 2] The model setup should state the numerical resolution, grid spacing, horizontal and vertical domain extents, boundary conditions, and the value of the Smagorinsky coefficient, without relying solely on references to code papers.
[Figure 3] Please describe how the spectra are computed and normalized, and specify the wavenumber ranges over which the Kolmogorov and k^{-7/3} slopes are identified; the visual sloping lines in Fig. 3 are not a quantitative fit.
[Section 4] The definition of F_kin should explain the density-weighted mean explicitly, and the axis labels in Fig. 5b ('F_kin/g42', 'F_kin/g85') appear corrupted and should be corrected.
[References] Several reference entries are formatted inconsistently, including 'Kitiashvili et al. 2013a, 2013b' whose volume fields contain '155a' and '770b', and the Wray et al. 2015/2018 entries lack complete publication details. Please update the reference list.
[Abstract and Section 5] The abstract's 'Unlike previous studies' is overstated because Section 3 states agreement with Nordlund et al. (2009) down to about 7 Mm; the novelty is the behavior below that depth, so the abstract should be phrased to match.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 2.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the reported turbulent scales, spectra, and leptocline are simulation diagnostics, and the self-citations are corroborated by independent reproduction and observational references.

full rationale

The paper is a diagnostic analysis of a 3D radiative hydrodynamic simulation; its central claims are obtained by post-processing simulation output (velocity snapshots, spectra, Reynolds stresses, rms fluctuations) rather than by fitting parameters to the quantities they are said to predict. No equation in the paper defines a target quantity in terms of itself or uses a fitted parameter as a prediction. The Smagorinsky subgrid-scale closure is an explicit modeling assumption; the paper attributes the deeper-layer difference from Nordlund et al. (2009) to this closure, which is a validity risk requiring sensitivity tests, but it is not a circular reduction because the simulation output is not constructed from the closure's parameters to match the reported spectral trends. The leptocline discussion cites Kitiashvili et al. (2023), but the present simulation independently reproduces the leptocline in a different rotation-rate setup, and the paper also cites independent observational sources (Deubner et al. 1979; Rozelot et al. 2009). The StellarBox code references are methodological citations, not uniqueness theorems or ansatze smuggled in by self-citation. The admitted 24-hour averaging limitation affects statistical robustness but is not circularity. No load-bearing claim reduces by construction to its inputs.

Assumptions & free parameters 2 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The simulation relies on standard MHD/radiative transfer machinery plus a chosen SGS turbulence closure and a 20 Mm deep domain with periodic boundaries. The only arguably novel concept, the leptocline, is carried over from the authors' prior paper. No new physical entities are introduced.

free parameters (2)

Smagorinsky coefficient in the subgrid-scale model = Not given
The SGS closure constant controls the amount of turbulent diffusion in the simulation. The paper attributes the different flow structure at depth (compared to Nordlund et al. 2009) to this SGS model, so the central claim about deep flow scales depends on this chosen coefficient.
Imposed rotation rate at 45 degrees latitude = Mean solar rotation from SDO/HMI helioseismology, value not printed in text
The rotation rate is taken from observations, not fitted to the target results, but it is a physical input that determines the Coriolis force and affects the mean flows and the comparison with the faster Carrington-rotation case.

assumptions (4)

standard math Compressible Navier-Stokes equations with radiative transfer accurately model solar convection in the upper 20 Mm.
The StellarBox code solves these equations; this is the standard foundation of 3D convection simulations and not unique to this paper.
domain assumption Periodic horizontal boundary conditions and a uniform rotation rate corresponding to 45 degrees latitude approximate the local solar environment.
These are standard for local Cartesian domain simulations, but they ignore spherical geometry and latitudinal gradients, which could affect the large-scale flows and turbulent spectra.
domain assumption A 20 Mm deep domain is sufficient to capture the turbulent scale change below 7 Mm.
The paper draws conclusions about scales down to 15 Mm, but the bottom boundary at 20 Mm may influence the deeper layers; the authors themselves call for deeper domains in future work.
ad hoc to paper The Smagorinsky subgrid-scale model, modified for compressible flows, captures the unresolved turbulent transport.
The paper explicitly credits the SGS model for the difference in deep flow structure compared to earlier simulations, so the central claim about homogenization below 7 Mm rests on this closure being adequate.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Revisiting turbulent properties of solar convection with 3D radiative hydrodynamic modeling." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/UC3GWIV4

@misc{pith2026250200974,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Revisiting turbulent properties of solar convection with 3D radiative hydrodynamic modeling},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/UC3GWIV4}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2502.00974}
}

read the original abstract

We discuss the turbulent structure and dynamics of the upper solar convection zone using a 3D radiative hydrodynamic simulation model at 45 degrees latitude. The model reveals the self-formation of meridional flows, the leptocline, and the radial differential rotation. Unlike previous studies, the model shows a complex variation of the characteristic scales of turbulent flows with depth. In particular, an increase in the characteristic convective scale is trackable within an individual snapshot up to a depth of 7 Mm, near the bottom of the hydrogen ionization zone, where turbulent flows become weaker and more homogeneous. However, the turbulent spectra show an increase in scale with depth and a qualitative change in convective patterns below 7 Mm (near the bottom of the leptocline), suggesting changes in the diffusivity properties and energy exchange among different scales.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2502.00974 by the authors.

**Figure 1.** Snapshots of the radial (vertical) velocity from the 3D radiative hydrodynamic model for 8 layers in the solar convection zone at 0 Mm (photosphere), –2 Mm, –3 Mm, –5 Mm, –7 Mm, –10 Mm, –15 Mm, and –20 Mm below the surface, showing qualitative changes of turbulent convection. Brighter colors correspond to the downflows [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 2.** The histograms show a distribution of the vertical velocity, Vz, in the six layers shown in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 3.** Turbulent spectra of the radial (Vz, thick curves) and azimuthal (Vx, thin curves) components of velocity at different depths. In the plot, ‘k’ is the horizontal wavenumber, and L=2 π/k. The spectra were obtained from 24 snapshots separated by 1 hour. The gray arrow indicates the direction of change in the spectra at depths from the surface to the interior. indices (the sloping lines in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/ful… view at source ↗

Figures from the paper (2 more)

**Figure 4.** Figure 4: Panel a: Radial profiles of the rotational velocity (red curve) and meridional flow velocity (blue). The vertical bars show the standard deviation from the mean. Panel b: The mean radial profiles of diagonal Reynolds stresses. The radial profiles are obtained from 24 h…

**Figure 5.** Figure 5: Panel a: Radial profiles of rms fluctuations of temperature (red curve) and density (blue). The solid curves correspond to the realistic rotation, and the dotted curves correspond to the Carrington rotation rate. Panel b: Variation of the kinetic energy flux associated…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 2 Pith papers

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

Properties of Turbulent Convection and Large-Scale Flows in a Rotating F-type Star Revealed by 3D Realistic Radiative Hydrodynamic Simulations
astro-ph.SR 2025-02 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

3D radiative hydrodynamic simulations of a 1.47-solar-mass F star show rotation-induced radius decrease, differential rotation, meridional flows, and latitude-dependent roll-like convection.
Cluster-Weighted Training of Deep Surrogate Models for Subgrid Turbulent Transport
astro-ph.SR 2026-07 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

K-Means cluster-weighted training cuts average MSE 34% and lifts R² from 0.54 to 0.80 for a 3D CNN predicting Reynolds stresses on StellarBox quiet-Sun data.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

22 extracted references · 21 canonical work pages · cited by 2 Pith papers

[1]

2018, Diﬀere ntial Rotation in Solar-like Con- vective Envelopes: Inﬂuence of Overshoot and Magnetism

Beaudoin, P., Strugarek, A., & Charbonneau, P. 2018, Diﬀere ntial Rotation in Solar-like Con- vective Envelopes: Inﬂuence of Overshoot and Magnetism. Ap J, 859(1),

work page 2018
[2]

Kitiashvili, Alan A

10 Irina N. Kitiashvili, Alan A. Wray Penev, K., Sasselov, D., Robinson, F., & Demarque, P. 2007, O n Dissipation inside Turbulent Convection Zones from Three-dimensional Simulations of So lar Convection. ApJ, 655(2), 1166–1171. Rabello Soares, M. C., Basu, S., & Bogart, R. S. 2024, Explori ng the Substructure of the Near- surface Shear Layer of the Sun. ...

work page 2007
[3]

I., Hindman, B

Matilsky, L. I., Hindman, B. W., & Toomre, J. 2019, The Role of Downﬂows in Establishing Solar Near-surface Shear. ApJ, 871(2),

work page 2019
[5]

K¨ apyl¨ a, P. J. 2019, Magnetic and rotational quenching of the Λ eﬀect. A&A, 622, A195. Karak, B. B., Miesch, M., & Bekki, Y. 2018, Consequences of hi gh eﬀective Prandtl number on solar diﬀerential rotation and convective velocity. Physics of Fluids , 30(4), 046602. Kitiashvili, I. N., Abramenko, V. I., Goode, P. R., Kosovich ev, A. G., Lele, S. K., Ma...

work page 2019
[8]

2022, Generation of Sola r-like Diﬀerential Rotation

Hotta, H., Kusano, K., & Shimada, R. 2022, Generation of Sola r-like Diﬀerential Rotation. ApJ, 933(2),

work page 2022
[16]

2021, Divergence and Vorticity of Subsurface Flows During Solar Cycles 23 and

Komm, R., Howe, R., & Hill, F. 2021, Divergence and Vorticity of Subsurface Flows During Solar Cycles 23 and

work page 2021
[21]

Stein, R. F. & Nordlund, ˚ A. 2001, Solar Oscillations and Convection. II. Excitation of Radial Oscillations. ApJ, 546(1), 585–603. ˇSvanda, M., Roudier, T., Rieutord, M., Burston, R., & Gizon, L. 2013, Comparison of Solar Sur- face Flows Inferred from Time-Distance Helioseismology an d Coherent Structure Tracking Using HMI/SDO Observations. ApJ, 771(1),

work page 2001
[24]

Jain, K., Tripathy, S

MNRAS, 470(2), 1935–1942. Jain, K., Tripathy, S. C., Ravindra, B., Komm, R., & Hill, F. 2 016, Horizontal Flows in Active Regions from Ring-diagram and Local Correlation Tracking M ethods. ApJ, 816(1),

work page 1935

Show all 22 references

[32]

& K¨ apyl¨ a, M

Warnecke, J. & K¨ apyl¨ a, M. J. 2020, Rotational dependence o f turbulent transport coeﬃcients in global convective dynamo simulations of solar-like star s. A&A, 642, A66. Wray, A. A., Bensassi, K., Kitiashvili, I. N., Mansour, N. N. , & Kosovichev, A. G. 2015, Sim- ulations ...

2020 arXiv
[34]

N., Kosovichev, A

Kitiashvili, I. N., Kosovichev, A. G., Wray, A. A., & Mansour , N. N. 2010, Mechanism of Spontaneous Formation of Stable Magnetic Structures on the Sun. ApJ, 719(1), 307–312. Kitiashvili, I. N., Kosovichev, A. G., Wray, A. A., Sadykov, V. M., & Guerrero, G. 2023, Lep- tocline ...

2010
[35]

A dynamic subgrid- scale eddy viscosity model

Germano, M., Piomelli, U., Moin, P., & Cabot, W. H. 1991, Erra tum: “A dynamic subgrid- scale eddy viscosity model” [Phys. Fluids A 3, 1760 (1991)]. Physics of Fluids A , 3(12), 3128–3128. Getling, A. V., Kosovichev, A. G., & Zhao, J. 2021, Evolution of Subsurface Zonal and Me...

1991
[37]

N., Kosovichev, A

Kitiashvili, I. N., Kosovichev, A. G., Mansour, N. N., Wray, A. A., & Sandstrom, T. A. 2019, The Origin of Deep Acoustic Sources Associated with Solar Ma gnetic Structures. ApJ, 872(1),

2019
[61]

P., Leenaarts, J., Rempel, M., Cheung, M

Bjørgen, J. P., Leenaarts, J., Rempel, M., Cheung, M. C. M., D anilovic, S., de la Cruz Rodr ´ ıguez, J., & Sukhorukov, A. V. 2019, Three-dimensional modeling of chromospheric spectral lines in a simulated active region. A&A, 631, A33. B¨ ohm-Vitense, E. 1958, ¨Uber die Wasser...

2019
[73]

Kosovichev, A. G. Advances in Global and Local Helioseismol ogy: An Introductory Review. In Rozelot, J.-P. & Neiner, C., editors, Lecture Notes in Physics, Berlin Springer Verlag 2011,, volume 832,

2011
[99]

Stefan, J. T. & Kosovichev, A. G. 2023, Exploring the Connect ion between Helioseismic Travel Time Anomalies and the Emergence of Large Active Regions dur ing Solar Cycle

2023
[108]

Braun, D. C. 2024, The Contribution of Solar Magnetic Region s to the Residual Meridional and Zonal Flows. ApJ, 972(2),

2024
[143]

2009, Radiative M agnetohydrodynamic Simulation of Sunspot Structure

Rempel, M., Sch¨ ussler, M., & Kn¨ olker, M. 2009, Radiative M agnetohydrodynamic Simulation of Sunspot Structure. ApJ, 691(1), 640–649. Rozelot, J. P., Damiani, C., & Pireaux, S. 2009, Probing The S olar Surface: The Oblateness and Astrophysical Consequences. ApJ, 703(2), 179...

2009
[160]

2023, Eruption of a Magnetic Fl ux Rope in a Comprehensive Radiative Magnetohydrodynamic Simulation of Flare-produ ctive Active Regions

Chen, F., Rempel, M., & Fan, Y. 2023, Eruption of a Magnetic Fl ux Rope in a Comprehensive Radiative Magnetohydrodynamic Simulation of Flare-produ ctive Active Regions. ApJ, 950(1), L3. Cheung, M. C. M., Rempel, M., Chintzoglou, G., Chen, F., Test a, P., Mart ´ ınez-Sykora, J....

2023
[176]

Gupta, P., MacTaggart, D., & Simitev, R. D. 2023, Diﬀerentia l Rotation in Convecting Spherical Shells with Non-Uniform Viscosity and Entropy Diﬀusivity. Fluidika, 8(11),

2023
[199]

R., Chaplin, W

Howe, R., Davies, G. R., Chaplin, W. J., Elsworth, Y., Basu, S ., Hale, S. J., Ball, W. H., & Komm, R. W. 2017, The Sun in transition? Persistence of near- surface structural changes through Cycle

2017
[217]

1991, A dynamic sub grid-scale model for compressible turbulence and scalar transport

Moin, P., Squires, K., Cabot, W., & Lee, S. 1991, A dynamic sub grid-scale model for compressible turbulence and scalar transport. Physics of Fluids A , 3(11), 2746–2757. Nordlund, ˚ A. & Stein, R. F. 2001, Solar Oscillations and Convection. I. Formalism for Radial Oscillation...

1991
[288]

Hathaway, D. H. & Upton, L. A. 2021, Hydrodynamic Properties of the Sun’s Giant Cellular Flows. ApJ, 908(2),

2021

Pith tools

Reviewed August 9, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[1] [1]

2018, Diﬀere ntial Rotation in Solar-like Con- vective Envelopes: Inﬂuence of Overshoot and Magnetism

Beaudoin, P., Strugarek, A., & Charbonneau, P. 2018, Diﬀere ntial Rotation in Solar-like Con- vective Envelopes: Inﬂuence of Overshoot and Magnetism. Ap J, 859(1),

work page 2018

[2] [2]

Kitiashvili, Alan A

10 Irina N. Kitiashvili, Alan A. Wray Penev, K., Sasselov, D., Robinson, F., & Demarque, P. 2007, O n Dissipation inside Turbulent Convection Zones from Three-dimensional Simulations of So lar Convection. ApJ, 655(2), 1166–1171. Rabello Soares, M. C., Basu, S., & Bogart, R. S. 2024, Explori ng the Substructure of the Near- surface Shear Layer of the Sun. ...

work page 2007

[3] [3]

I., Hindman, B

Matilsky, L. I., Hindman, B. W., & Toomre, J. 2019, The Role of Downﬂows in Establishing Solar Near-surface Shear. ApJ, 871(2),

work page 2019

[4] [5]

K¨ apyl¨ a, P. J. 2019, Magnetic and rotational quenching of the Λ eﬀect. A&A, 622, A195. Karak, B. B., Miesch, M., & Bekki, Y. 2018, Consequences of hi gh eﬀective Prandtl number on solar diﬀerential rotation and convective velocity. Physics of Fluids , 30(4), 046602. Kitiashvili, I. N., Abramenko, V. I., Goode, P. R., Kosovich ev, A. G., Lele, S. K., Ma...

work page 2019

[5] [8]

2022, Generation of Sola r-like Diﬀerential Rotation

Hotta, H., Kusano, K., & Shimada, R. 2022, Generation of Sola r-like Diﬀerential Rotation. ApJ, 933(2),

work page 2022

[6] [16]

2021, Divergence and Vorticity of Subsurface Flows During Solar Cycles 23 and

Komm, R., Howe, R., & Hill, F. 2021, Divergence and Vorticity of Subsurface Flows During Solar Cycles 23 and

work page 2021

[7] [21]

Stein, R. F. & Nordlund, ˚ A. 2001, Solar Oscillations and Convection. II. Excitation of Radial Oscillations. ApJ, 546(1), 585–603. ˇSvanda, M., Roudier, T., Rieutord, M., Burston, R., & Gizon, L. 2013, Comparison of Solar Sur- face Flows Inferred from Time-Distance Helioseismology an d Coherent Structure Tracking Using HMI/SDO Observations. ApJ, 771(1),

work page 2001

[8] [24]

Jain, K., Tripathy, S

MNRAS, 470(2), 1935–1942. Jain, K., Tripathy, S. C., Ravindra, B., Komm, R., & Hill, F. 2 016, Horizontal Flows in Active Regions from Ring-diagram and Local Correlation Tracking M ethods. ApJ, 816(1),

work page 1935