MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2062318548 · doi:10.1088/0004-6256/137/1/207

A<i>SPITZER</i>SEARCH FOR COLD DUST WITHIN GLOBULAR CLUSTERS

2008· article· en· W2062318548 on OpenAlexaff
P. Barmby, Martha L. Boyer, C. E. Woodward, R. D. Gehrz, Jacco Th. van Loon, G. G. Fazio, M. Marengo, Elisha Polomski

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astronomical Journal · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicStellar, planetary, and galactic studies
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersScience and Technology Facilities Council
KeywordsPhysicsGlobular clusterAstrophysicsAstronomySpitzer Space TelescopeGalaxyStarsCluster (spacecraft)Intracluster mediumStar clusterGalaxy cluster

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Globular cluster stars evolving off the main sequence are known to lose mass, and it is expected that some of the lost material should remain within the cluster as an intracluster medium (ICM). Most attempts to detect such an ICM have been unsuccessful. The Multiband Imaging Photometer for Spitzer on the Spitzer Space Telescope was used to observe eight Galactic globular clusters in an attempt to detect the thermal emission from ICM dust. Most clusters do not have significant detections at 70 microns; one cluster, NGC 6341, has tentative evidence for the presence of dust, but 90 micron observations do not confirm the detection. Individual 70 micron point sources which appear in several of the cluster images are likely to be background galaxies. The inferred dust mass and upper limits are < 4e-4 solar masses, well below expectations for cluster dust production from mass loss in red and asymptotic giant branch stars. This implies that either globular cluster dust production is less efficient, or that ICM removal or dust destruction is more efficient, than previously believed. We explore several possibilities for ICM removal and conclude that present data do not yet permit us to distinguish between them.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.035
Threshold uncertainty score0.592

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.217 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations29
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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