MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2140201894 · doi:10.1093/mnras/stt1857

Feedback-regulated star formation – II. Dual constraints on the SFE and the age spread of stars in massive clusters

2013· article· en· W2140201894 on OpenAlexaff
Sami Dib, Julia Gutkin, W. Brandner, Shantanu Basu

Bibliographic record

VenueMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAstrophysics and Star Formation Studies
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsAstrophysicsStar formationStarsStar clusterMetallicityStellar densityCluster (spacecraft)Orion NebulaMolecular cloudProtostarStellar evolutionYoung stellar objectAstronomyGalaxy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We show that the termination of the star formation process by winds from massive stars in protocluster-forming clumps imposes dual constraints on the star formation efficiencies (SFEs) and stellar age spreads (Δτ*) in stellar clusters. We have considered two main classes of clump models. One class of models is one in which the core formation efficiency (CFE) per unit time and as a consequence the star formation rate (SFR) is constant in time and another class of models in which the CFE per unit time, and as a consequence the SFR, increases with time. Models with an increasing mode of star formation yield shorter age spreads (a few 0.1 Myr) and typically higher SFEs than models in which star formation is uniform in time. We find that the former models reproduce remarkably well the SFE−Δτ* values of starburst clusters such as NGC 3603 YC and Westerlund 1, while the latter describe better the star formation process in lower density environments such as in the Orion nebula cluster. We also show that the SFE and Δτ* of massive clusters are expected to be higher in low metallicity environments. This could be tested with future large extragalactic surveys of stellar clusters. We advocate that placing a stellar cluster on the SFE-Δτ* diagram is a powerful method to distinguish between different stellar clusters formation scenarios such as between generic gravitational instability of a gas cloud/clump or as the result of cloud–cloud collisions. It is also a very useful tool for testing star formation theories and numerical models versus the observations.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.192
Teacher spread0.185 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical SocietySame topicAstrophysics and Star Formation StudiesFrench-language works237,207