MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2165916108 · doi:10.1088/0004-6256/144/6/180

DISCOVERY OF TWO VERY WIDE BINARIES WITH ULTRACOOL COMPANIONS AND A NEW BROWN DWARF AT THE L/T TRANSITION

2012· article· en· W2165916108 on OpenAlexaff
K. Mužić, Jacqueline Radigan, Ray Jayawardhana, V. D. Ivanov, Jacqueline K. Faherty, R. Kurtev, Alejandro Núñez, H. M. J. Boffin, O. Hainaut, Kelle L. Cruz, David Jones, Stanimir Metchev, A. A. Tyndall, J. Borissova

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astronomical Journal · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicStellar, planetary, and galactic studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNational Institute of General Medical Sciences
KeywordsBrown dwarfProper motionPhysicsAstrophysicsSkyStellar classificationInfraredBinary numberAstronomyStarsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present the discovery and spectroscopic follow-up of a nearby late-type L dwarf (2M0614+3950), and two extremely wide very-low-mass binary systems (2M0525-7425AB and 2M1348-1344AB), resulting from our search for common proper motion pairs containing ultracool components in the Two Micron All Sky Survey (2MASS) and the Wide-field Infrared Survey Explorer (WISE) catalogs. The near-infrared spectrum of 2M0614+3950 indicates a spectral type L9 ± 1 object residing at a distance of 26.0 ± 1.8 pc. The optical spectrum of 2M0525-7425A reveals an M3.0 ± 0.5 dwarf primary, accompanied by a secondary previously classified as L2. The system has an angular separation of ~ 44″, equivalent to ~ 2000 AU at distance of 46.0 ± 3.0 pc. Using optical and infrared spectra, respectively, we classify the components of 2M1348-1344AB as M4.5 ± 0.5 and T5.5 ± 1. The angular separation of ~ 68″ is equivalent to ~ 1400 AU at a distance of 20.7 ± 1.4 pc. 2M1348-1344AB is one of only six very wide (separation > 1000 AU) systems containing late T dwarfs known to date.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.267

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.222
Teacher spread0.208 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations23
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Astronomical JournalSame topicStellar, planetary, and galactic studiesFrench-language works237,207