MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2064417845 · doi:10.1086/507830

Ejection of High‐Velocity Stars from the Galactic Center by an Inspiraling Intermediate‐Mass Black Hole

2006· article· en· W2064417845 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAstrophysical Phenomena and Observations
Canadian institutionsCanadian Institute for Theoretical Astrophysics
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStarsGalactic CenterBlack hole (networking)Stellar dynamicsGalaxyNeutron starCusp (singularity)Stellar collisionOrbit (dynamics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The presence of young stars near Sgr A* remains unexplained. One idea for their origin posits that the stars were brought in by an intermediate-mass black hole (IMBH) that inspiraled into the Galactic center a few million years ago. Yu & Tremaine have argued that in this case some old stars in the Sgr A* cusp would be ejected by hard gravitational collisions with the IMBH. We derive a general expression for the phase-space distribution of the ejected high-velocity stars, given the distribution function of the stars in the cusp. We compute it explicitly for the Peebles-Young distribution function of the cusp and model the time-dependent ejection of stars during the IMBH inspiral. We find that (1) the stars are ejected in a burst lasting a few dynamical friction timescales; if Gaia detects the ejected stars, they are likely to be produced by a single inspiral event. (2) If the inspiral is circular, then in the beginning of the burst the velocity vectors of the ejected stars cluster around the inspiral plane but rapidly isotropize as the burst proceeds. (3) If the inspiral is eccentric, then the stars are ejected in a broad jet roughly perpendicular to the IMBH orbit's Runge-Lenz vector. In a typical cusp the orbit will precess with a period of ~10 5 yr, and the rate of ejection into our part of the Galaxy (as defined by Gaia visibility) will be modulated periodically. Gaia , together with ground-based follow-up observations, will be able to clock many high-velocity stars back to their ejection, thus measuring some of the above phenomena. This would provide a clear signature of the IMBH inspiral in the past 10-20 Myr.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.219
Teacher spread0.209 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations67
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Astrophysical JournalSame topicAstrophysical Phenomena and ObservationsFrench-language works237,207