MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W1968584055 · doi:10.1086/431964

On the Relevance of the Tremaine‐Weinberg Method Applied to an Hα Velocity Field: Pattern Speed Determination in M100 (NGC 4321)

2005· article· en· W1968584055 on OpenAlexaff
Olivier Hernandez, H. Wozniak, C. Carignan, P. Amram, L. Chemin, Olivier Daigle

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsAstrophysicsSpiral galaxyGalaxyBar (unit)HaloVector fieldField (mathematics)Virgo ClusterSpiral (railway)Galaxy clusterMechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The relevance of the Tremaine-Weinberg (TW) method is tested for measuring bar, spiral, and inner structure pattern speeds using a gaseous velocity field. The TW method is applied to various simulated barred galaxies in order to demonstrate its validity in seven different configurations, including star formation and/or dark matter halo. The reliability of the different physical processes involved and of the various observational parameters is also tested. The simulations show that the TW method could be applied to gaseous velocity fields to get a good estimate of the bar pattern speed, under the condition that regions of shocks are avoided and measurements are confined to regions where the gaseous bar is well formed. We successfully apply the TW method to the Hα velocity field of the Virgo Cluster galaxy M100 (NGC 4321) and derive pattern speeds of 55 ± 5 km s -1 kpc -1 for the nuclear structure, 30 ± 2 km s -1 kpc -1 for the bar, and 20 ± 1 km s -1 kpc -1 for the spiral pattern, in full agreement with published determinations using the same method or alternative ones.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.016
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.016
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.009
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.238 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations63
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Astrophysical Journal→Same topicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena→French-language works237,207→