MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2082782158 · doi:10.1086/424691

Andromeda IX: A New Dwarf Spheroidal Satellite of M31

2004· article· en· W2082782158 on OpenAlexaff
D. B. Zucker, A. Y. Kniazev, Eric F. Bell, David Martínez‐Delgado, E. K. Grebel, Hans‐Walter Rix, Constance M. Rockosi, Jon A. Holtzman, R. A. M. Walterbos, J. Annis, Donald G. York, Željko Ivezić, J. Brinkmann, H. Brewington, Michael Harvanek, G. S. Hennessy, S. J. Kleinman, J. Krzesiński, Dan Long, Peter R. Newman, A. Nitta, Stephanie A. Snedden

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena
Canadian institutionsApache (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAndromedaPhysicsAstrophysicsPhotometry (optics)Dwarf spheroidal galaxyAndromeda GalaxyAstronomySkyLocal GroupGalaxyDwarf galaxySurface brightnessRed-giant branchMilky WayGlobular clusterInteracting galaxyStars

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We report the discovery of a new dwarf spheroidal satellite of M31, Andromeda IX, based on resolved stellar photometry from the Sloan Digital Sky Survey (SDSS). Using both SDSS and public archival data, we have estimated its distance and other physical properties, and compared these to the properties of a previously known dwarf spheroidal companion, Andromeda V, also observed by SDSS. Andromeda IX is the lowest surface brightness galaxy found to date (μ V , 0 ~ 26.8 mag arcsec -2 ), and at the distance we estimate from the position of the tip of Andromeda IX's red giant branch, ( m - M ) 0 ~ 24.5 (805 kpc), Andromeda IX would also be the faintest galaxy known ( M V ~ -8.3).

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)0.000
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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.211
Teacher spread0.203 · 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

Citations163
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Astrophysical JournalSame topicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, PhenomenaFrench-language works237,207