MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1973820299 · doi:10.1086/317785

Efficiencies of Low‐Mass Star and Star Cluster Formation

2000· article· en· W1973820299 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAstrophysics and Star Formation Studies
Canadian institutionsCanadian Institute for Theoretical AstrophysicsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAstrophysicsStarsPhysicsStar formationFlatteningStar (game theory)Cluster (spacecraft)Initial mass functionStar clusterAstronomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Using a quantitative model for bipolar outflows driven by hydromagnetic protostellar winds, we calculate the efficiency of star formation assuming that available gas is either converted into stars or ejected in outflows. We estimate the efficiency of a single star formation event in a protostellar core, finding 25%-70% for cores with various possible degrees of flattening. The core mass function and the stellar initial mass function have similar slopes, because the efficiency is not sensitive to its parameters. We then consider the disruption of gas from a dense molecular clump in which a cluster of young stars is being born. In both cases, we present analytical formulae for the efficiencies that compare favorably against observations and, for clusters, against numerical simulations. We predict efficiencies in the range 30%-50% for the regions that form clusters of low-mass stars. In our model, star formation and gas dispersal happen concurrently. We neglect the destructive effects of massive stars: our results are therefore upper limits to the efficiency in regions more massive than about 3000 Msun.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.714
Threshold uncertainty score0.325

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.214
Teacher spread0.207 · 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