MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1989928576 · doi:10.1086/301574

A Kinematic Model for the Narrow-Line Region in NGC 4151

2000· article· en· W1989928576 on OpenAlexaff
D. M. Crenshaw, S. B. Kraemer, J. B. Hutchings, Larry Bradley, T. R. Gull, M. E. Kaiser, C. H. Nelson, José Rafael Ruiz, D. Weistrop

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astronomical Journal · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena
Canadian institutionsDominion Astrophysical Observatory
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsAstrophysicsSpace Telescope Imaging SpectrographOutflowGalaxyKinematicsLine (geometry)AstronomyEmission spectrumRadial velocitySpectral lineGeometryStarsHubble space telescopeClassical mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present a simple kinematic model for the narrow-line region (NLR) of the Seyfert 1 galaxy NGC 4151, based on our previous observations of extended [O III] emission with the Space Telescope Imaging Spectrograph (STIS). The model is similar to a biconical radial outflow model developed for the Seyfert 2 galaxy NGC 1068, except that the bicone axis is tilted much more into our line of sight (40 degrees out of the plane of the sky instead of 5 degrees), and the maximum space velocities are lower (750 km/s instead of 1300 km/s. We find evidence for radial acceleration of the emission-line knots to a distance of 160 pc, followed by deceleration that approaches the systemic velocity at a distance of 290 pc (for a distance to NGC 4151 of 13.3 Mpc). Other similarities to the kinematics of NGC 1068 are: 1) there are a number of high-velocity clouds that are not decelerated, suggesting that the medium responsible for the deceleration is patchy, and 2) the bicone in NGC 4151 is at least partially evacuated along its axis. Together, these two Seyfert galaxies provide strong evidence for radial outflow (e.g., due to radiation and/or wind pressure) and against gravitational motion or expansion away from the radio jets as the principal kinematic component in the NLR.

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 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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.040
Threshold uncertainty score0.532

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.230
Teacher spread0.213 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations119
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Astronomical JournalSame topicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, PhenomenaFrench-language works237,207