Membership and Multiplicity among Very Low Mass Stars and Brown Dwarfs in the Pleiades Cluster
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We present near-infrared photometry and optical spectroscopy of very low mass stars and brown dwarf candidates in the Pleiades open cluster. The membership status of these objects is assessed using color-magnitude diagrams, lithium and spectral types. Eight objects out of 45 appear to be nonmembers. A search for companions among 34 very low mass Pleiades members ( M ≤ 0.09 M ☉ ) in high spatial resolution images obtained with the Hubble Space Telescope ( HST ) and the adaptive optics system of the Canada-France-Hawaii telescope produced no resolved binaries with separations larger than 0 2 ( a ~ 27 AU; P ~ 444 yr). Nevertheless, we find evidence for a binary sequence in the color-magnitude diagrams, in agreement with the results of Steele & Jameson for higher mass stars. We apply the lithium test to two objects: CFHT-Pl-16, which lies in the cluster binary sequence but is unresolved in images obtained with the Hubble Space Telescope ; and CFHT-Pl-18, which is binary with 0 33 separation. The first object passes the test, but the second object does not. We conclude that CFHT-Pl-16 is an Pleiades brown dwarf binary with separation less than 11 AU and that CFHT-Pl-18 is a foreground system. We compare the multiplicity statistics of the Pleiades very low mass stars and brown dwarfs with that of G- and K-type main-sequence stars in the solar neighborhood. We find that there is some evidence for a deficiency of wide binary systems (separation >27 AU) among the Pleiades very low mass members. We briefly discuss how this result can fit with current scenarios of brown dwarf formation. We correct the Pleiades substellar mass function for the contamination of cluster nonmembers found in this work. We find a contamination level of 33% among the brown dwarf candidates identified by Bouvier et al. Assuming a power-law IMF across the substellar boundary, we find a slope dN / dM ~ M -0.53 , implying that the number of objects per mass bin is still rising but the contribution to the total mass of the cluster is declining in the brown dwarf regime.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".