MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2147904130 · doi:10.1086/381424

M31’s Undisturbed Thin Disk of Globular Clusters

2004· article· en· W2147904130 on OpenAlexaff
Heather Morrison, Paul Harding, Kathy Perrett, Denise Hurley‐Keller

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicStellar, planetary, and galactic studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGlobular clusterAstrophysicsThick diskPhysicsThin diskMilky WayAstronomyGalaxyStar clusterHalo

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We show that there is a subsystem of the M31 globular clusters with thin-disk kinematics. These clusters span the entire metallicity range of the M31 globular cluster system, in contrast to the (thick) disk globular clusters in the Milky Way, which are predominantly metal-rich. Disk globular clusters are found across the entire disk of M31 and form ~40% of the clusters projected on its disk. The existence of such a disk system suggests that there was a relatively large thin disk in place very early in M31's history. Accurate measures of the ages of these clusters will constrain the epoch of disk formation in M31. There is currently no strong evidence for differences in age between Milky Way and M31 globular clusters. While age differences are subtle for old populations, it is unlikely that disk clusters with [Fe/H] around -2.0 were formed after significant star formation began in the galaxy, as the protocluster gas would be enriched by supernova ejecta. Thus it is likely that M31 had a rather large disk in place at early epochs. The very existence of such a cold disk means that M31 has suffered no mergers with an object of 10% or more of the disk mass since the clusters were formed. This makes the suggestion of Brown et al. that M31 could have suffered an equal-mass merger 6-8 Gyr ago less viable.

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)0.001
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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.219
Teacher spread0.211 · 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

Citations59
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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