A Multiplicity Census of Young Stars in Chamaeleon I
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We present the results of a multiplicity survey of 126 stars spanning ~0.1-3 M ☉ in the ~2 Myr old Chamaeleon I star-forming region, based on adaptive optics imaging with the ESO Very Large Telescope. Our observations have revealed 30 binaries and six triples, of which 19 and four, respectively, are new discoveries. The overall multiplicity fraction we find for Cha I (~30%) is similar to those reported for other dispersed young associations, but significantly higher than seen in denser clusters and the field, for comparable samples. Both the frequency and the maximum separation of Cha I binaries decline with decreasing mass, while the mass ratios approach unity; conversely, tighter pairs are more likely to be equal mass. We confirm that brown dwarf companions to stars are rare, even at young ages at wide separations. Based on follow-up spectroscopy of two low-mass substellar companion candidates, we conclude that both are likely background stars. The overall multiplicity fraction in Cha I is in rough agreement with numerical simulations of cloud collapse and fragmentation, but its observed mass dependence is less steep than predicted. The paucity of higher order multiples, in particular, provides a stringent constraint on the simulations, and seems to indicate a low level of turbulence in the prestellar cores in Cha I.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".