 This percentage rises to 80 if core growth is very rapid. These results indicate that if pebble accretion driven core growth is vigourous, it may be able to destroy many of these otherwise bound protoplanets within their first few thousand years of life.

In the bottom panel of Figure \[fig:Cass\] we plot a histogram of core masses that are able to unbind H17 protoplanets in less than 1500 years. Using Equation \[eq:feedback\] we compared the total energy of the protoplanet with the total energy released due to core formation for the three different rates of core growth. The core masses are distributed between 1-25 $M_{\oplus}$ as expected from the analysis in Section \[sec:analytic\_fb\], the sub $10 M_{\oplus}$ cores are formed since many of the H17 protoplanets initially have lower binding energies than our 5 $M_J$ protoplanet. It is likely that in a self-consistent calculation more of the H17 protoplanets would be at risk of disruption since core feedback slows the rate of protoplanet collapse and therefore allows more time for the growth of larger cores. Further analysis of this process will require self-consistent simulations of protoplanet evolution coupled with core feedback models, we direct the reader to [@Nayakshin16a] and (Nayakshin submitted) for 1D examples of this.

These results have major implications for the final predicted population of GI protoplanets, provided massive rocky cores form before the protoplanets undergo H$_2$ dissociative collapse. The release of energy has the potential to destroy many GI protoplanets, leaving behind massive solid cores in their place. Further studies are needed to quantify the subsequent fate of these planets.

Super-Earth cores and other by-products of protoplanet disruption
-----------------------------------------------------------------

For the range of parameters considered in this paper, it seems that the critical core mass needed to trigger protoplanet disruption is roughly 5-30 $M_{\oplus}$. This is supported by the analytic estimates of core feedback in Section \[sec:analytic\_fb\]. There are two mechanisms that limit core growth. First, if the feedback luminosity is high, protoplanet disruption happens early and pebble accretion onto the core ends. In this case the subsequent core growth will be limited by the pebble isolation mass of $\sim 10-20{{\,{\rm M}_{\oplus}}}$, studied extensively in the CA field[^7] [@Morbid
This percentage rises to 80 if core growth is very rapid. These results bespeak that if pebble accretion drive core growth is vigourous, it may be able to destroy many of these differently bound protoplanets within their first few thousand years of animation. 

 In the bottom panel of Figure \[fig: Cass\ ] we plot a histogram of core mass that are able to unbind H17 protoplanets in less than 1500 years. Using Equation \[eq: feedback\ ] we compare the total energy of the protoplanet with the full department of energy released due to core constitution for the three different rates of kernel growth. The core masses are distributed between 1 - 25 $ M_{\oplus}$ as expect from the analysis in Section \[sec: analytic\_fb\ ], the sub $ 10 M_{\oplus}$ cores are formed since many of the H17 protoplanets initially experience lower binding energies than our 5 $ M_J$ protoplanet. It is likely that in a self - consistent calculation more of the H17 protoplanets would be at hazard of disruption since core feedback slows the rate of protoplanet collapse and therefore admit more time for the growth of larger cores. Further analysis of this process will require self - consistent simulations of protoplanet evolution match with core feedback models, we address the proofreader to [ @Nayakshin16a ] and (Nayakshin submitted) for 1D examples of this. 

 These results accept major implications for the final predicted population of GI protoplanets, provided massive rough cores form before the protoplanets undergo H$_2 $ dissociative collapse. The release of energy has the potential to destroy many GI protoplanets, leaving behind massive solid cores in their plaza. Further studies are necessitate to quantify the subsequent fate of these planets. 

 Super - Earth cores and other by - products of protoplanet dislocation 
 ----------------------------------------------------------------- 

 For the range of parameters considered in this newspaper, it seems that the critical core mass needed to trip protoplanet disruption is roughly 5 - 30 $ M_{\oplus}$. This is supported by the analytic estimates of core feedback in Section \[sec: analytic\_fb\ ]. There embody two mechanisms that restrict core increase. First, if the feedback luminosity is gamey, protoplanet disruption happens early and pebble accretion onto the core ends. In this case the subsequent kernel growth will be limit by the pebble isolation mass of $ \sim 10 - 20{{\,{\rm M}_{\oplus}}}$, studied extensively in the CA field[^7 ] [ @Morbid
 Thls percentage rises to 80 lf core growth is very capid. Tgese resjlts indicate that if pebble axcretuon driven core growth is vigougous, it mqy bt able to destroy many of these lthexwmse bound protoklanets withhn their first fdw thousand years of life.

In the bottoi panel ov Figure \[fig:Cafs\] wt pjot z histogram of core masses that ars able uo unbind H17 protopkanets in less than 1500 years. Usijg Equation \[eq:feedhack\] we comkzreq the total evergy of the protoplangt with the total energy releasea due to core firnatlmn for the vhree qifferent rabvs of cmre groeth. The core msssxs aee distributed betweei 1-25 $M_{\oplus}$ as expecteq from tha cnalysis in Section \[swc:qnalyjic\_fb\], the wub $10 M_{\kpkua}$ cored ace formed sjnce many od the H17 protoplanetx ybitially have lower bynding energies than our 5 $M_J$ protoplaneu. It js likely that in a seld-consistent calculatiln more os the H17 protoplanets would be at risk of disruptimn siicd circ fedebwck slows the rate of protoplanet collapse anq tnegefore allows morc time for the groetj ps larger corer. Furtksr analysis of this orocess will require felf-vonsistent simulations of peotoplanet enolurion coupled with eore feedbacy mocels, ee direct the reader to [@Nayzkshin16a] and (Nayakshih submitted) for 1D exsm[les of ufis.

These results rave majoc impkicatiovs fpr the final preficted population of GI orotoklanetv, provided massive rocky cores form beforx the protoplsnats undergo H$_2$ dixsociative cojlapse. The relgase of euergy fas the ponential tm destroy mwny GI protopnwnets, leavinj behind iassuve wolid cufes in their pkace. Furtktr studies are needed to quaktify fhe subsequent yctt if these planeys.

Sjpew-Ewrvh cowas and other by-pfodjvts ow protokjaket distuption
-----------------------------------------------------------------

For the range of larameters consideteq in thiw paper, yt seems that the critical core mass nexded tp ttigger protoplanet disruption ia roughly 5-30 $M_{\jplus}$. This if suiporjed by the cnalytic estimates of core feedback in Sxction \[sec:analytic\_fb\]. Thwre are two mechanixks that limmt corq growth. Xirst, if the feedbacj luminosity is hlgh, protoplanet disrupfion hdppend early and pebble accretion onto the core ends. In this case the subsequebt corx drowth will be kimitvd yy che pebfle msulation mass of $\xim 10-20{{\,{\rm M}_{\oplus}}}$, studied extensiveuy in tha EA field[^7] [@Morbid
This percentage rises to 80 if core very These results that if pebble vigourous, may be able destroy many of otherwise bound protoplanets within their first thousand years of life. In the bottom panel of Figure \[fig:Cass\] we plot histogram of core masses that are able to unbind H17 protoplanets in less 1500 Using \[eq:feedback\] compared the total energy of the protoplanet with the total energy released due to core formation the three different rates of core growth. The masses are distributed between $M_{\oplus}$ as expected from the in \[sec:analytic\_fb\], the $10 cores formed since many the H17 protoplanets initially have lower binding energies than our 5 $M_J$ protoplanet. It is likely that a self-consistent of the protoplanets be risk of disruption feedback slows the rate of protoplanet allows more time for the growth of larger Further analysis this process will require self-consistent simulations protoplanet evolution coupled with core feedback models, we the reader to [@Nayakshin16a] and (Nayakshin submitted) for 1D examples of this. These results have for the final predicted of GI protoplanets, massive cores before protoplanets undergo dissociative collapse. The release of energy has the potential to destroy GI protoplanets, leaving behind massive solid cores in their place. are to quantify the fate of these planets. cores other by-products of protoplanet For range in paper, seems that the critical mass needed to trigger protoplanet is roughly 5-30 $M_{\oplus}$. analytic estimates of core feedback in Section \[sec:analytic\_fb\]. are two mechanisms that limit core growth. if the feedback luminosity is high, protoplanet disruption happens early and pebble onto the In this case the subsequent core growth will limited by the pebble mass of $\sim 10-20{{\,{\rm M}_{\oplus}}}$, studied extensively in the field[^7]
 This percentage rises to 80 if coRe growth is Very rApiD. ThEsE resUlts Indicate that if PEbblE accretion driven core grOwth iS vIGourOUs, It may Be able tO DeSTRoy MaNy Of tHeSE oTherwIse Bound prOtoplanets WitHiN their first fEW tHousand yeaRs oF life.

In the boTtoM panel Of figURe \[fig:casS\] we plOt a hisTOgram oF core massEs THat are ABle to unBINd h17 proToplanets in less thAN 1500 yEArs. Using EquatiOn \[eq:feEdBAcK\] WE coMpaRed the totaL eNergy OF the proTOpLANEt wITh the total eneRgy released DUe tO core fOrMatIOn for tHe thrEe DIffErent rates oF corE growth. ThE core mASses are DIstribuTed betWeeN 1-25 $M_{\oPlus}$ AS eXpEctEd FRom THe AnaLYsiS in SectiOn \[SeC:analYtic\_FB\], THE sub $10 m_{\opLus}$ cOres aRe formed since ManY of tHE H17 pRotopLanetS iniTiAlly hAve lowEr binDiNg energies than oUr 5 $M_J$ ProtoplanEt. IT iS liKeLy thaT In a selF-coNsiStent caLculatiON moRe OF THe h17 protoplanets would Be AT RiSk of disrUption SInCe COre feedbAcK slOws tHE Rate oF proTOpLanet colLapse aND tHeRefore aLlOws morE tIme For The grOWth oF largeR cores. FuRther ANalysis of this pROcess will requIRe SELf-COnsiSteNt simulatioNs of PRotoPlanET eVolUTion cOupleD wITh COre feedback models, we DiRect thE readEr to [@Nayakshin16A] and (NayaksHIN SubmitteD) for 1d ExAMples of this.

TheSe resUlts have maJOr implicAtionS for the fInal prediCTEd populaTioN of gI pRotOPLaNets, provided mASSive RoCky coreS foRm beforE thE prOtoPlaNeTs undergo h$_2$ dissociAtIvE cOlLapSe. The RElease of EnErgY hAs tHe potENtial tO destRoy mAnY Gi ProToplaneTS, lEAVing BeHiNd maSsiVe Solid CoreS In tHeir plaCe. Further StuDIes aRe NeEded to qUantify the subSeQuent fate oF tHesE planeTS.

super-EarTh cores and other by-producTS of protOplAnet dIsruPtion
-----------------------------------------------------------------

For tHe rAnge of ParAMeters ConsidEred iN tHis PAPer, it SEEmS thAt The criticaL COre Mass nEeDed tO triggeR protoplanet disrupTIon Is roughly 5-30 $M_{\oplUs}$. THis iS SUpPorTEd BY thE aNAlyTIC estimates of corE feedback iN SECtIon \[sec:analYTic\_Fb\]. there arE two mecHanisMS that liMit core grOwth. First, If The fEEDbaCk luminosiTy is high, ProtoplanET disrUPtIon haPpeNs earlY aNd pEbble AccretIOn oNto thE core eNdS. In thiS case ThE subsequEnt core growth will be limiTed by tHe pebBle Isolation MasS Of $\sIm 10-20{{\,{\rm M}_{\opluS}}}$, stuDied extensIveLy iN the Ca fiELd[^7] [@MorBid
 This percentage rises to80 if core  grow thisve ry r apid . These result s  ind icate that if pebble a ccret io n  dri v en  core  growth is v igo ur ou s,it ma y beabl e to de stroy many  of  t hese otherwi s ebound prot opl anets within  th eir fi rs t f e w tho usa nd ye ars of life.
In the b ot t om pan e l of Fi g u re  \[f ig:Cass\] we plot ah istogram of co re mas se s  t h a t a reable to un bi nd H1 7  protop l an e t s  in less than 150 0 years. Us i ngEquati on  \[ e q:feed back\ ]w e c ompared the  tot al energy  of th e  protop l anet wi th the  to tal  ene r gy  r ele as e d d u etoc ore  formati on  f or th e th r e e diff ere nt r atesof core growt h.Thec ore  mass es ar e di st ribut ed bet ween1- 25 $M_{\oplus}$  asexpectedfro mthe  a nalys i s in S ect ion  \[sec: analyti c \_f b\ ] , th e sub $10 M_{\oplu s} $ co res areformed si nc e  many of  t heH17p r otopl anet s  i nitially  havel ow er  bindin genergi es  th anour 5 $M_J $ prot oplanet.  It i s  likely that i n  a self-consi s te n t  c a lcul ati on more oftheH 17 p roto p la net s  woul d beat ri s k of disruption sin ce  corefeedb ack slows the  rate of p r o t oplanetcoll a ps e  and therefore  allo ws more ti m e for th e gro wth of l arger cor e s . Furthe r a nal ysi s o f th is process wi l l  req ui re self -co nsisten t s imu lat ion sof protop lanet ev ol ut io ncou pledw ith core  f eed ba ckmodel s , we d irect  the  r ea d erto [@Na y ak s h in16 a]  a nd ( Nay ak shinsubm i tte d) for1D exampl eso f th is .
Theseresults havema jor implic at ion s fort h e finalpredicted population of GI prot opl anets , pr ovided ma ssi ve roc kyc ores f orm be foreth e p r o topla n e ts  un de rgo H$_2$d i sso ciati ve  col lapse.The release of ene r gyhas the poten tia l to d es tro y  m a nyGI pro t o planets, leavin g behind m as s iv e solid co r esin  theirplace.Furth e r studi es are ne eded to q ua ntif y the  subsequen t fate o f these p l anets . 
Super -Ea rth co re s a nd ot her by - pro ducts  of pr ot oplane t dis ru ption
-- ----------------------- ------ ----- --- --------- --- - --- --------- -

F or the ran geofparam ete r s con side r ed  in thispape r , it seem s  t hat t he  critical c o r e  ma ss ne ede d  to tr igge r protoplanet dis r uption is roug hly5 - 30$M_ { \opl us }$. This is su ppo rt e d  by thean alytic esti mates of  c o re fe edback  in Se ction \ [ s ec : analyt ic\_ fb\ ]. Thereare  t w o mecha ni sm s  thatlimi tcore g rowth. Firs t ,  if the feedback  lumi n o sityi s h igh,pr otoplan e t di sruption h appens earl y andpebb le ac cretion  o nto th e c or e ends. In this case  thesubsequ en t co regrowth  wil l be li mite dbythe pebbl e is o la ti o n m assof $\ si m 10 -20{{\,{\ r m M}_{\o plu s }}}$, s tu die d extens i ve l y  in the CA  fi eld[^ 7 ]  [@Morbid
 This_percentage rises_to 80 if core_growth is_very_rapid. These_results_indicate that if_pebble accretion driven_core growth is vigourous,_it may be_able_to destroy many of these otherwise bound protoplanets within their first few thousand years_of_life.

In the_bottom_panel_of Figure \[fig:Cass\] we plot_a histogram of core masses_that are_able to unbind H17 protoplanets in less than_1500_years. Using Equation_\[eq:feedback\] we compared the total energy of the protoplanet_with the total energy released due_to core formation_for_the_three different rates of_core growth. The core masses are_distributed between 1-25 $M_{\oplus}$ as expected_from the analysis in Section \[sec:analytic\_fb\], the_sub $10 M_{\oplus}$ cores are formed_since many of the H17_protoplanets initially_have lower binding energies than_our 5 $M_J$_protoplanet. It_is likely that_in a self-consistent calculation more of_the H17 protoplanets_would be at risk of disruption_since_core feedback slows_the_rate_of protoplanet_collapse and therefore_allows_more time_for_the growth of larger cores. Further_analysis_of this process will require self-consistent simulations_of protoplanet evolution coupled_with_core feedback models, we_direct the reader to [@Nayakshin16a]_and (Nayakshin submitted) for 1D examples_of this.

These_results have_major implications for the final predicted population of GI protoplanets, provided_massive rocky cores form before the_protoplanets undergo H$_2$ dissociative_collapse. The_release_of energy has_the_potential to_destroy many GI protoplanets, leaving behind massive_solid cores_in their place. Further studies are_needed to quantify the_subsequent_fate of these planets.

Super-Earth cores and_other by-products of protoplanet disruption
-----------------------------------------------------------------

For the_range of parameters considered in_this_paper,_it seems that the critical_core mass needed to trigger protoplanet_disruption is roughly_5-30 $M_{\oplus}$. This is supported by the_analytic_estimates of core feedback in Section_\[sec:analytic\_fb\]._There are two mechanisms that limit_core_growth._First, if the feedback luminosity_is high, protoplanet disruption happens early_and pebble accretion onto the core ends. In this_case the subsequent_core growth will be limited_by_the_pebble isolation mass of $\sim 10-20{{\,{\rm M}_{\oplus}}}$, studied extensively in_the CA_field[^7] [@Morbid