Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Existing photometry for NGC 2264 tied to the Johnson & Morgan (1953) UBV system is reexamined and, in the case of the original observations by Walker (1956), reanalyzed in order to generate a homogeneous data set for cluster stars. Color terms and a Balmer discontinuity effect in Walker's observations were detected and corrected, and the homogenized data were used in a new assessment of the cluster reddening, distance, and age. Average values of EB – V = 0.075 ± 0.003 s.e. and V0 –MV = 9.45 ± 0.03 s.e. (d = 777 ± 12 pc) are obtained, in conjunction with an inferred cluster age of ∼5.5 × 106 yr from pre‐main‐sequence members and the location of the evolved, luminous, O7 V((f)) dwarf S Mon relative to the ZAMS. The cluster main sequence also contains gaps that may have a dynamical origin. The dust responsible for the initial reddening towards NGC 2264 is no more than 465 pc distant, and there are numerous, reddened and unreddened, late‐type stars along the line of sight that are difficult to separate from cluster members by standard techniques, except for a small subset of stars on the far side of the cluster embedded in its gas and dust and background B‐type ZAMS members of Mon OB2. A compilation of likely NGC 2264 members is presented. Only 3 of the 4 stars recently examined by asteroseismology appear to be likely cluster members. NGC 2264 is also noted to be a double cluster, which has not been mentioned previously in the literature (© 2011 WILEY‐VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim)
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 | 0.002 | 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) | 0.024 | 0.004 |
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".