Back to the future: estimating initial globular cluster masses from their present-day stellar mass functions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We use N-body simulations to model the 12 Gyr evolution of a suite of star clusters with identical initial stellar mass functions over a range of initial cluster masses, sizes, and orbits. Our models reproduce the distribution of present-day global stellar mass functions that is observed in the Milky Way globular cluster population. We find that the slope of a star cluster's stellar mass function is strongly correlated with the fraction of mass that the cluster has lost, independent of the cluster's initial mass, and nearly independent of its orbit and initial size. Thus, the mass function–initial mass relation can be used to determine a Galactic cluster's initial total stellar mass, if the initial stellarmass function is known. We apply the mass function–initial mass relation presented here to determine the initial stellar masses of 33 Galactic globular clusters, assuming an universal Kroupa initial mass function. Our study suggests that globular clusters had initial masses that were on average a factor of 4.5 times larger than their present-day mass, with three clusters showing evidence for being 10 times more massive at birth.
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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".