High-resolution near-infrared observations of Herbig-Haro flows -- I. H2 imaging and proper motions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We present results of an H2 proper motion study of three Herbig-Haro flows: HH 7–11, 25–26 and 33/40. These are the first proper motion measurements for these objects in the near-infrared, and are complementary to a velocity-resolved, echelle spectroscopy study of the H2 line profile from these objects, presented in a companion paper (Paper II, this issue). The results presented here cover a 4–5 year time-span. The HH 7–11 outflow components have high proper motions, ranging between ∼200 and 450 km s−1. The directions of their propagation are remarkably uniform, leading directly away from the outflow source. This proper motion pattern is in accordance with recent numerical simulations by Völker et al., and leads us to suggest that the HH 7–11 chain is produced by a (pulsed) heavy jet, of which HH 7 is the working surface, driving into a low-density but clumpy medium. The HH 25–26 system is quite intriguing: the shock components furthest from the source have high proper motions (∼200 km s−1), while those closest to the source have negligibly small proper motions (70 km s−1). This system is interpreted in terms of working surface bow shocks internal to the jet, and a turbulent mixing layer between the flow and the ambient medium. Indeed, HH 26A and 25C may represent the jet being deflected off nearby dense material. The HH 33/40 flow does not show any significant amount of proper motion, with an upper limit of ∼40–70 km s−1. Situated at the terminus of the giant ‘parsec-scale’ HH 34 outflow, HH 33 is probably the working surface of the outflow while HH 40 must be material caught up in the general flow of the system. Finally, we show that the limb-brightened leading edges of the bow shocks in HH 7 and 33 are resolved. If the widths of these leading edges represent cooling lengths, then the shocks are probably C-type, as opposed to J-type, bow shocks driving through pre-shock material with <1-mG magnetic fields.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".