MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2050683067 · doi:10.1086/590552

Outside-In Disk Evolution in the Large Magellanic Cloud

2008· article· en· W2050683067 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena
Canadian institutionsHerzberg Institute of Astrophysics
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLarge Magellanic CloudStar formationRADIUSStellar populationPopulationStellar evolutionStellar densitySpiral galaxy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

From the analysis of the color-magnitude diagrams and color functions of four wide LMC fields located from ≃2 to 6 kpc from the kinematic center of the LMC we present evidence that, while the oldest population is coeval in all fields, the age of the youngest component of the dominant stellar population gradually increases with galactocentric distance, from currently active star formation in a field at 2.3°, to 100 Myr, 0.8 Gyr, and 1.5 Gyr in fields at 4.0°, 5.5°, and 7.1°, respectively. This outside-in quenching of the star formation in the LMC disk is correlated with the decreasing H I column density (which is ≤2 × 10 20 cm −2 in the two outermost fields with little or no current star formation). Other work in the literature hints at similar behavior in the stellar populations of irregular galaxies and in M33. This is observational evidence against the inside-out disk formation scenario in low-mass spirals and irregular galaxies. Alternatively, it could be that the age distribution with radius results from interplay between the evolution with time of the star-forming area of the LMC and the subsequent outward migration of the stars.

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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.035

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.008
GPT teacher head0.211
Teacher spread0.204 · 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

Citations58
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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