The Star Formation History of the Starburst Region NGC 2363 and its Surroundings
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We present Hubble Space Telescope optical images and UV spectra, as well as ground-based near-infrared images of the high surface-brightness giant H II region NGC 2363 (NGC 2366-I) and its surroundings. The massive star content of the southern end of the dwarf irregular galaxy NGC 2366 is investigated, with an emphasis on Wolf-Rayet and red supergiant stars, and we attempt the reconstruction of the time sequence of the most recent episode of massive star formation at the southwestern tip of the galaxy. The ages of the clusters are, respectively, 10 Myr for NGC 2366-II, 2.5–5 Myr for NGC 2363-B, and less than 1 Myr for NGC 2363-A. In particular, we show that the most massive supercluster A of NGC 2363 is still embedded in dust; from the photoevaporative erosion or "cleaning" timescale of the associated cloud, we infer its age to be ∼10 6 yr or less. We conclude that the star-forming complex NGC 2366-I and 2366-II is a good example of a multiple stage starburst with a characteristic age decreasing from 10 Myr to less than 1 Myr over a linear scale of 400 pc. The age sequence of the stars and the gas kinematics suggest that these powerful star formation episodes are being triggered by a small passing-by satellite.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".