MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2081977449 · doi:10.1086/521395

Dynamics of Dense Cores in the Perseus Molecular Cloud

2007· article· en· W2081977449 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAstrophysics and Star Formation Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of VictoriaHerzberg Institute of Astrophysics
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMolecular cloudDynamics (music)Cloud computingAtmospheric dynamicsGas dynamicsComputational astrophysicsOrbital mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We survey the kinematics of over 150 candidate (and potentially star-forming) dense cores in the Perseus molecular cloud with pointed N 2 H + (1-0) and simultaneous C 18 O(2-1) observations. Our detection rate of N 2 H + is 62%, rising to 84% for SCUBA-selected targets. In agreement with previous observations, we find that the dense N 2 H + targets tend to display nearly thermal line widths, particularly those that appear to be starless (using Spitzer data), indicating that turbulent support on the small scales of molecular clouds is minimal. For those N 2 H + targets that have an associated SCUBA dense core, we find that their internal motions are more than sufficient to provide support against the gravitational force on the cores. Comparison of the N 2 H + integrated intensity and SCUBA flux reveals fractional N 2 H + abundances between 10 -10 and 10 -9 . We demonstrate that the relative motion of the dense N 2 H + gas and the surrounding C 18 O gas is less than the sound speed in the vast majority of cases (~90%). The point-to-point motions we observe within larger extinction regions appear to be insufficient to provide support against gravity, although we sparsely sample these regions.

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 score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

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 communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.242
Teacher spread0.235 · 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

Citations154
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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