AN ASTEROSEISMIC MEMBERSHIP STUDY OF THE RED GIANTS IN THREE OPEN CLUSTERS OBSERVED BY<i>KEPLER</i>: NGC 6791, NGC 6819, AND NGC 6811
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Studying star clusters offers significant advances in stellar astrophysics due to the combined power of having many stars with essentially the same distance, age, and initial composition. This makes clusters excellent test benches for verification of stellar evolution theory. To fully exploit this potential, it is vital that the star sample is uncontaminated by stars that are not members of the cluster. Techniques for determining cluster membership therefore play a key role in the investigation of clusters. We present results on three clusters in the Kepler field of view based on a newly established technique that uses asteroseismology to identify fore- or background stars in the field, which demonstrates advantages over classical methods such as kinematic and photometry measurements. Four previously identified seismic non-members in NGC 6819 are confirmed in this study, and three additional non-members are found—two in NGC 6819 and one in NGC 6791. We further highlight which stars are, or might be, affected by blending, which needs to be taken into account when analyzing these Kepler data.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 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".