MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2017025447 · doi:10.1086/340500

Globular Clusters at High Redshift

2002· article· en· W2017025447 on OpenAlexaff
R. G. Carlberg

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAstrophysicsPhysicsGlobular clusterRedshiftAstronomyGalaxyPopulationSkyElliptical galaxy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Globular clusters will be present at high redshifts near the very beginning of the galaxy formation process. Stellar evolution ensures that they will be much more luminous than today. We show that the redshift distribution at nanojansky levels should be very broad, extending up to the redshift of formation. A bracketing range of choices for the redshift of formation, spectral energy evolution models, and population density evolution leads to the conclusion that the sky densities should be around 10 7 per square degree at 1 nJy ( m AB = 31.4 mag) in bands around 4 μm. Such high sky densities begin to present a confusion problem at these wavelengths to diffraction-limited 6 m class telescopes. These starlike, low metallicity clusters will be a significant foreground population for "first light" object searches. On the other hand, they are an exceptionally interesting "second light" population in their own right. Depending on the details of galaxy assembly, the clusters will have a noticeable cross-correlation with galaxies on scales of about 20'' or less, depending on the details of the buildup of galaxy assembly after globular cluster formation. High-redshift globular clusters will be an accessible, direct probe of the earliest stages of the formation of galaxies and the buildup of metals in the universe.

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)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.036

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.003

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.193
Teacher spread0.185 · 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

Citations17
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Astrophysical Journal→Same topicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena→French-language works237,207→