MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2124489922 · doi:10.1086/323618

The Far-Infrared Spectrum of Hydrogenated Amorphous Carbon and the 21, 27, and 33 Micron Features in Carbon-rich Proto–Planetary Nebulae

2001· article· en· W2124489922 on OpenAlexaff
Victor I. Grishko, K. Tereszchuk, W. W. Duley, P. F. Bernath

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicStellar, planetary, and galactic studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPlanetary nebulaPhysicsAstrophysicsSpectral lineAmorphous carbonCarbon fibersInfraredStarsAstronomyCarbon starNebulaInfrared spectroscopyWavelengthEmission spectrumAmorphous solidChemistryMaterials scienceOpticsRaman spectroscopyCrystallography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We report laboratory emission spectra of hydrogenated amorphous carbon (HAC) in the wavelength range 19 μm < λ < 120 μm (525-83 cm -1 ) at temperatures between 300°C and 500°C. These spectra show emission features at 21, 27, and ≈33 μm (475, 370, and 303 cm -1 ) that can be identified with similar bands in the far-infrared spectra of extreme carbon stars, proto-planetary nebulae, and planetary nebulae. It is suggested that HAC is present in these objects but that the chemical composition of this material depends on the evolutionary state. We also detect a number of broad features at wavelengths longer than 40 μm, attributable to chemical groups in HAC. A strong feature is observed at ≈60 μm (165 cm -1 ) in laboratory spectra and may be present in spectra of the carbon-rich planetary nebula CPD -56°8032. We briefly discuss the nature of the chemical groups responsible for the appearance of these features.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.192
Teacher spread0.187 · 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

Citations41
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Astrophysical Journal→Same topicStellar, planetary, and galactic studies→French-language works237,207→