MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2010452695 · doi:10.1086/301422

Departures From Axisymmetric Morphology and Dynamics in Spiral Galaxies

2000· article· en· W2010452695 on OpenAlexaff
David A. Kornreich, Martha P. Haynes, R. V. E. Lovelace, Liese van Zee

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astronomical Journal · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena
Canadian institutionsHerzberg Institute of Astrophysics
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAsymmetryMorphology (biology)GalaxySpiral galaxyPhysicsAstrophysicsDynamics (music)Sample (material)Symmetry (geometry)Rotational symmetryPosition (finance)GeometryMathematicsGeologyMechanicsPaleontology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

New H I synthesis data have been obtained for six face-on galaxies with the Very Large Array. These data and reanalyses of three additional data sets make up a sample of nine face-on galaxies analyzed for deviations from axisymmetry in morphology and dynamics. This sample represents a subsample of galaxies already analyzed for morphological symmetry properties in the R band. Four quantitative measures of dynamical nonaxisymmetry are compared with one another and to the quantitative measures of morphological asymmetry in H I and the R band to investigate the relationships between nonaxisymmetric morphology and dynamics. We find no significant relationship between asymmetric morphology and most of the dynamical measures in our sample. A possible relationship is found, however, between morphology and dynamical position angle differences between approaching and receding sides of the galaxy.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.204
Teacher spread0.198 · 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

Citations51
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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