MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2074107843 · doi:10.1086/424560

A New Classical T Tauri Object at the Substellar Boundary in Chamaeleon II

2004· article· en· W2074107843 on OpenAlexaff
D. Barrado, Ray Jayawardhana

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAstrophysics and Star Formation Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsAstrophysicsT Tauri starBrown dwarfStarsProtostarStellar classificationPhotometry (optics)Spectral lineAstronomyAccretion (finance)Molecular cloudSkyStar formation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We have obtained low- and medium-resolution optical spectra of 20 candidate young low-mass stars and brown dwarfs in the nearby Chamaeleon II dark cloud using the Magellan Baade telescope. We analyze these data in conjunction with near-infrared photometry from the Two Micron All Sky Survey. We find that one target, [VCE2001] C41, exhibits broad Hα emission as well as a variety of forbidden emission lines. These signatures are usually associated with accretion and outflow in young stars and brown dwarfs. Our spectra of C41 also reveal Li I in absorption and allow us to derive a spectral type of M5.5 for it. Therefore, we propose that C41 is a classical T Tauri object near the substellar boundary. Thirteen other targets in our sample have continuum spectra without intrinsic absorption or emission features and are difficult to characterize. They may be background giants or foreground field stars not associated with the cloud or embedded protostars and need further investigation. The six remaining candidates, with moderate reddening, are likely to be older field dwarfs, given their spectral types, lack of lithium, and Hα emission.

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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

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 studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.228
Teacher spread0.220 · 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

Citations29
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Astrophysical JournalSame topicAstrophysics and Star Formation StudiesFrench-language works237,207