MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2086667163 · doi:10.1086/308366

Further Evidence for Carbon Isotopic Structure in the λλ5797 and 6614 Diffuse Interstellar Bands

2000· article· en· W2086667163 on OpenAlexaff
G. A. H. Walker, D. Bohlender, J. Krełowski

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAstrophysics and Star Formation Studies
Canadian institutionsHerzberg Institute of AstrophysicsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsAstrophysicsStarsInterstellar mediumSpectral lineWavelengthAstronomyOpticsGalaxy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Profiles of the λλ5797 and 6614 diffuse interstellar bands (DIBs) in our high-resolution spectra ( R = 120,000-60,000) of five stars provide strong support for the model proposed by Webster, in which 13 C atoms are randomly substituted for 12 C in highly symmetric molecules. These stars have narrow interstellar Na D lines, and the DIB profiles can be reproduced, as predicted, by a band of equally spaced, equally wide Gaussians with a Poisson intensity distribution. Other good fits are possible with components of unequal FWHM, but the widths, positions, and relative amplitudes of the components then differ from star to star, which is less credible for a common absorber. The average numbers of 13 C atoms per molecule derived from the model are about 0.95 and 1.41 for the λλ5797 and 6614 DIBs, respectively, which correspond to between 40 and 100 carbon atoms per molecule. Sharp features in the cores of the λ5797 DIB are not exactly matched by the Gaussians, which implies a more complex intrinsic structure. For HD 37061 in Orion, both DIBs are weak and have a component on the short-wavelength side of the normal profile, possibly indicating higher rotational temperatures.

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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.241 · 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

Citations23
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Astrophysical Journal→Same topicAstrophysics and Star Formation Studies→French-language works237,207→