MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2063408211 · doi:10.1088/0004-6256/140/6/1830

THE ACS SURVEY OF GALACTIC GLOBULAR CLUSTERS. X. NEW DETERMINATIONS OF CENTERS FOR 65 CLUSTERS

2010· article· en· W2063408211 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astronomical Journal · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAstronomy and Astrophysical Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGlobular clusterMilky WayCluster (spacecraft)Symmetry (geometry)Galaxy groups and clustersCircular symmetryRange (aeronautics)Star cluster

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present new measurements of the centers for 65 Milky Way globular clusters. Centers were determined by fitting ellipses to the density distribution within the inner 2' of the cluster center, and averaging the centers of these ellipses. The symmetry of clusters was also analyzed by comparing cumulative radial distributions on opposite sides of the cluster across a grid of trial centers. All of the determinations were done with stellar positions derived from a combination of two single-orbit Advanced Camera for Surveys images of the core of the cluster in F 606 W and F814W . We find that the ellipse-fitting method provides remarkable accuracy over a wide range of core sizes and density distributions, while the symmetry method is difficult to use on clusters with very large cores or low density. The symmetry method requires a larger field or a very sharply peaked density distribution.

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)0.001
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 score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.027

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.298
Teacher spread0.279 · 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

Citations125
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Astronomical JournalSame topicAstronomy and Astrophysical ResearchFrench-language works237,207