TADPOL: A 1.3 mm SURVEY OF DUST POLARIZATION IN STAR-FORMING CORES AND REGIONS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We present λ 1.3 mm Combined Array for Research in Millimeter-wave Astronomy observations of dust polarization toward 30 star-forming cores and eight star-forming regions from the TADPOL survey. We show maps of all sources, and compare the ∼2 5 resolution TADPOL maps with ∼20'' resolution polarization maps from single-dish submillimeter telescopes. Here we do not attempt to interpret the detailed B -field morphology of each object. Rather, we use average B -field orientations to derive conclusions in a statistical sense from the ensemble of sources, bearing in mind that these average orientations can be quite uncertain. We discuss three main findings. (1) A subset of the sources have consistent magnetic field ( B -field) orientations between large (∼20'') and small (∼2 5) scales. Those same sources also tend to have higher fractional polarizations than the sources with inconsistent large-to-small-scale fields. We interpret this to mean that in at least some cases B -fields play a role in regulating the infall of material all the way down to the ∼1000 AU scales of protostellar envelopes. (2) Outflows appear to be randomly aligned with B -fields; although, in sources with low polarization fractions there is a hint that outflows are preferentially perpendicular to small-scale B -fields, which suggests that in these sources the fields have been wrapped up by envelope rotation. (3) Finally, even at ∼2 5 resolution we see the so-called polarization hole effect, where the fractional polarization drops significantly near the total intensity peak. All data are publicly available in the electronic edition of this article.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".