MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2061646233 · doi:10.1086/430189

Radial Velocities of Newly Discovered Globular Clusters in NGC 5128

2005· article· en· W2061646233 on OpenAlexaff
Kristin A. Woodley, William E. Harris, G. L. H. Harris

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astronomical Journal · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicStellar, planetary, and galactic studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of WaterlooMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGlobular clusterAstrophysicsPhysicsMetallicityGalaxyCluster (spacecraft)Star clusterElliptical galaxyGalaxy clusterHorizontal branchAstronomyStarsOpen cluster

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present radial velocity measurements for 74 globular clusters (GCs) in the nearby giant elliptical galaxy NGC 5128, of which 31 are newly discovered. All the GC candidates were taken from the list of possible new clusters given in the photometric survey of Harris and coworkers. In addition to the newly confirmed clusters, we identified 24 definite foreground stars and 31 probable background galaxies. From a combined list of 299 known GCs in NGC 5128 with measured radial velocities and metallicity-sensitive ( C - T 1 ) photometric indices, we construct a new metallicity distribution function (MDF) for the cluster system. The MDF shows an approximately bimodal form, with centroids at [Fe/H] = -1.46 and -0.53 and with nearly equal numbers of metal-poor and metal-rich clusters in the two modes. However, there are many intermediate-color clusters in the distribution, and the fainter clusters tend to have a higher proportion of redness. These features of the MDF may indicate a widespread age range within the cluster system, as well as an intrinsically broad metallicity spread.

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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.216
Teacher spread0.207 · 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

Citations35
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Astronomical JournalSame topicStellar, planetary, and galactic studiesFrench-language works237,207