Paper detail

Benchmarking the ab initio hydrogen equations of state for the interior structure of Jupiter

As Juno is presently measuring Jupiter's gravitational moments to unprecedented accuracy, models for the interior structure of the planet are putted to the test. While equations of state based on first principles or ab initio simulations have been available and used for the two most abundant elements constituting the envelope, hydrogen and helium, significant discrepancies remain regarding the predictions of the inner structure of Jupiter. The differences are severe enough to clutter the analysis of Juno's data and even cast doubts on the usefulness of these computationally expensive EOSs for the modeling of the interior of Jupiter and exoplanets at large. Using our newly developed equations of state for hydrogen and helium, we asses the ab initio equations of state currently available and establish their efficiency at predicting the interior structure of Jupiter in a two-layers model. By adjusting our free energy parameterization to reproduce previous ab initio EOS behavior, we identify the source of the disagreement previously reported for the interior structure of Jupiter. We further point to area where care should be taken when building EOS for the modeling of giant planets. This concerns the interpolation between the ab initio results and the physical models used to cover the low density range as well as the interpolation of the {\sl ab initio} simulation results at high densities. This sensitivity falls well within the uncertainties of the ab initio simulations. This suggests that hydrogen EOS should be carefully benchmarked using a simple planetary model before being used in the more advanced planetary models needed to interpret the Juno data. We finally provide an updated version of our ab initio hydrogen EOS recently published.

preprint2020arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.