MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

A maximum stellar surface density in dense stellar systems

2009· article· en· W2139385556 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society Letters · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicStellar, planetary, and galactic studies
Canadian institutionsCanadian Institute for Theoretical AstrophysicsUniversity of Toronto
FundersAspen Center for PhysicsAdolph C. and Mary Sprague Miller Institute for Basic Research in Science, University of California BerkeleyNational Aeronautics and Space AdministrationDavid and Lucile Packard Foundation
KeywordsPhysicsAstrophysicsStellar physicsSurface (topology)Stellar collisionStellar atmosphereAstronomyStellar mass lossStellar evolutionStars

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We compile observations of the surface mass density profiles of dense stellar systems, including globular clusters in the Milky Way and nearby galaxies, massive star clusters in nearby starbursts, nuclear star clusters in dwarf spheroidals and late-type discs, ultra-compact dwarfs, and galaxy spheroids spanning the range from low-mass ‘cusp’ bulges and ellipticals to massive ‘core’ ellipticals. We show that in all cases the maximum stellar surface density attained in the central regions of these systems is similar, Σmax ∼ 1011 M⊙ kpc−2 (∼20 g cm−2), despite the fact that the systems span ∼7 orders of magnitude in total stellar mass M* and ∼5 in effective radius Re, and have a wide range in effective surface density M*/R2e. The surface density limit is reached on a wide variety of physical scales in different systems and is thus not a limit on three-dimensional stellar density. Given the very different formation mechanisms involved in these different classes of objects, we argue that a single piece of physics likely determines Σmax. The radiation fields and winds produced by massive stars can have a significant influence on the formation of both star clusters and galaxies, while neither supernovae nor black hole accretion is important in star cluster formation. We thus conclude that feedback from massive stars likely accounts for the observed Σmax, plausibly because star formation reaches an Eddington-like flux that regulates the growth of these diverse systems. This suggests that current models of galaxy formation, which focus on feedback from supernovae and active galactic nuclei, are missing a crucial ingredient.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.342
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.192
Teacher spread0.184 · 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