Dynamics of the Open Cluster NGC 188: A Comparison to an <i>N</i>-body Simulation of M67
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract We present a detailed dynamical study of the old (7 Gyr) open cluster NGC 188. Our combined radial-velocity data set spans a baseline of 35 years, a magnitude range of 12 ≤ V ≤ 16.5, and a 1° diameter region on the sky. Our magnitude limits include solar-mass main-sequence stars, subgiants, giants, and blue stragglers, and our spatial coverage extends radially to 11.5 core radii. We have measured radial velocities for 1014 stars in the direction of NGC 188 with a precision of 0.4 km s−1, and have calculated radial-velocity membership probabilities for stars with ≥ 3 measurements. We find 420 stars to be high-probability cluster members, including 137 spectroscopic binaries. These detectable binaries all have orbital periods of less than 104 days, and thus are hard. We have derived orbit solutions for 67 member binary stars, and use our 35 main-sequence binaries with orbit solutions to compare the eccentricity and period distributions with simulated observations of the Hurley et al. (2005) model of M67 (4.5 Gyr). We also compare the spatial distributions of cluster member populations.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
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".