MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2081696965 · doi:10.1088/0004-6256/147/3/53

COLD DUST IN HOT REGIONS

2014· article· en· W2081696965 on OpenAlexaffabout

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astronomical Journal · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAstrophysics and Star Formation Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaUniversity of Waterloo
FundersScience and Technology Facilities Council
KeywordsJames Clerk Maxwell TelescopeStarsMolecular cloudTelescopeStar formationInternal heatingRange (aeronautics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We mapped five massive star-forming regions with the SCUBA-2 camera on the James Clerk Maxwell Telescope. Temperature and column density maps are obtained from the SCUBA-2 450 and 850 μm images. Most of the dense clumps we find have central temperatures below 20 K, with some as cold as 8 K, suggesting that they have no internal heating due to the presence of embedded protostars. This is surprising, because at the high densities inferred from these images and at these low temperatures such clumps should be unstable, collapsing to form stars and generating internal heating. The column densities at the clump centers exceed 10 23 cm −2 , and the derived peak visual extinction values are from 25 to 500 mag for β = 1.5–2.5, indicating highly opaque centers. The observed cloud gas masses range from ∼10 to 10 3 M ☉ . The outer regions of the clumps follow an r −2.36 ± 0.35 density distribution, and this power-law structure is observed outside of typically 10 4 AU. All these findings suggest that these clumps are high-mass starless clumps and most likely contain high-mass starless cores.

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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.227
Teacher spread0.216 · 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

Citations9
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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