The state of globular clusters at birth: emergence from the gas-embedded phase
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper, we discuss the origin of the observed correlation between the cluster concentration c and present-day mass function slope α reported by De Marchi, Paresce & Pulone. This relation can either be reproduced from universal initial conditions combined with some dynamical mechanism(s) that alter(s) the cluster structure and mass function over time, or it must arise early on in the cluster lifetime, such as during the gas-embedded phase of cluster formation. Using a combination of Monte Carlo and N-body models for globular cluster evolution performed with the mocca and nbody6 codes, respectively, we explore a number of dynamical mechanisms that could affect the observed relation. For the range of initial conditions considered here, our results are consistent with a universal initial binary fraction ≈10 per cent (which does not, however, preclude 100 per cent) and a universal initial stellar mass function resembling the standard Kroupa distribution. Most of the dispersion observed in the c–α relation can be attributed to two-body relaxation and Galactic tides. However, dynamical processes alone could not have reproduced the dispersion in concentration, and we require at least some correlation between the initial concentration and the total cluster mass. We argue that the origin of this trend could be connected to the gas-embedded phase of cluster evolution.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".