Paper detail

Chaos detection tools: application to a self-consistent triaxial model

Together with the variational indicators of chaos, the spectral analysis methods have also achieved great popularity in the field of chaos detection. The former are based on the concept of local exponential divergence. The latter are based on the numerical analysis of some particular quantities of a single orbit, e.g. its frequency. In spite of having totally different conceptual bases, they are used for the very same goals such as, for instance, separating the chaotic and the regular component. In fact, we show herein that the variational indicators serve to distinguish both components of a Hamiltonian system in a more reliable fashion than a spectral analysis method does. We study two start spaces for different energy levels of a self-consistent triaxial stellar dynamical model by means of some selected variational indicators and a spectral analysis method. In order to select the appropriate tools for this paper, we extend previous studies where we make a comparison of several variational indicators on different scenarios. Herein, we compare the Average Power Law Exponent (APLE) and an alternative quantity given by the Mean Exponential Growth factor of Neary Orbits (MEGNO): the MEGNO's Slope Estimation of the largest Lyapunov Characteristic Exponent (SElLCE). The spectral analysis method selected for the investigation is the Frequency Modified Fourier Transform (FMFT). Besides a comparative study of the APLE, the Fast Lyapunov Indicator (FLI), the Orthogonal Fast Lyapunov Indicator (OFLI) and the MEGNO/SElLCE, we show that the SElLCE could be an appropriate alternative to the MEGNO when studying large samples of initial conditions. The SElLCE separates the chaotic and the regular components reliably and identifies the different levels of chaoticity. We show that the FMFT is not as reliable as the SElLCE to describe clearly the chaotic domains in the experiments.

preprint2012arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access4 authors1 topic

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 map preview

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.