Dissecting the colour-magnitude diagram: a homogeneous catalogue of stellar populations in globular clusters
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We present a homogeneous catalogue for blue straggler, red giant branch, horizontal branch and main-sequence turn-off stars in a sample of 35 clusters taken from the Advanced Camera for Surveys (ACS) Survey for Globular Clusters. As a result of the superior photometry and relatively large field of view offered by the ACS data, this new catalogue is a significant improvement upon the one presented in our 2007 catalogue. Using our catalogue, we study and compare the radial distributions of the different stellar populations. We have confirmed our previous result that there is a clear, but sublinear, correlation between the number of blue stragglers found in the cluster core and the total stellar mass contained within it. By considering a larger spatial extent than just the core, our results suggest that mass segregation is not the dominant effect contributing to the observed sublinearity. We also investigate the radial distributions of the different stellar populations in our sample of clusters. Our results are consistent with a linear relationship between the number of stars in these populations and the total mass enclosed within the same radius. Therefore, we conclude that the cluster dynamics does not significantly affect the relative distributions of these populations in our sample.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".