MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2113557795 · doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20053812

MACHOs in M 31? Absence of evidence but notevidence of absence

2006· article· en· W2113557795 on OpenAlexaff
J. T. A. de Jong, Lawrence M. Widrow, P. Cseresnjes, Konrad Kuijken, Arlin Crotts, Alex Bergier, Edward A. Baltz, G. Gyuk, Penny D. Sackett, R. Uglesich, William J. Sutherland

Bibliographic record

VenueAstronomy and Astrophysics · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicStellar, planetary, and galactic studies
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
FundersLeids Kerkhoven-Bosscha FondsSpace Telescope Science InstituteNational Science Foundation
KeywordsGravitational microlensingPhysicsAndromeda GalaxyAstrophysicsBulgeAndromedaHaloGalaxyAstronomyAsymmetryMilky Way

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present results of a microlensing survey toward the Andromeda Galaxy (M 31) carried out during four observing seasons at the Isaac Newton Telescope (INT). This survey is part of the larger microlensing survey toward M 31 performed by the Microlensing Exploration of the Galaxy and Andromeda (MEGA) collaboration. Using a fully automated search algorithm, we identify 14 candidate microlensing events, three of which are reported here for the first time. Observations obtained at the Mayall telescope are combined with the INT data to produce composite lightcurves for these candidates. The results from the survey are compared with theoretical predictions for the number and distribution of events. These predictions are based on a Monte Carlo calculation of the detection efficiency and disk-bulge-halo models for M 31. The models provide the full phase-space distribution functions (DFs) for the lens and source populations and are motivated by dynamical and observational considerations. They include differential extinction and span a wide range of parameter space characterised primarily by the mass-to-light ratios for the disk and bulge. For most models, the observed event rate is consistent with the rate predicted for self-lensing – a MACHO halo fraction of 30% or higher can be ruled at the 95% confidence level. The event distribution does show a large near-far asymmetry hinting at a halo contribution to the microlensing signal. Two candidate events are located at particularly large projected radii on the far side of the disk. These events are difficult to explain by self lensing and only somewhat easier to explain by MACHO lensing. A possibility is that one of these is due to a lens in a giant stellar stream.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.237
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

Citations51
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAstronomy and AstrophysicsSame topicStellar, planetary, and galactic studiesFrench-language works237,207