MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2229155883 · doi:10.1093/mnras/stv2086

The dynamics of multiple populations in the globular cluster NGC 6362

2015· article· en· W2229155883 on OpenAlexaff
Meghan Miholics, Jeremy J. Webb, Alison Sills

Bibliographic record

VenueMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicStellar, planetary, and galactic studies
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGlobular clusterPhysicsMilky WayAstrophysicsPopulationAstronomyCluster (spacecraft)Star clusterBlue stragglerStarsDemography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We investigate how the Milky Way tidal field can affect the spatial mixing of multiple stellar populations in the globular cluster NGC 6362. We use N-body simulations of multiple-population clusters on the orbit of this cluster around the Milky Way. Models of the formation of multiple populations in globular clusters predict that the second population should initially be more centrally concentrated than the first. However, NGC 6362 is comprised of two chemically distinct stellar populations having the same radial distribution. We show that the high mass-loss rate experienced on this cluster's orbit significantly accelerates the spatial mixing of the two populations expected from two-body relaxation. We also find that for a range of initial second-population concentrations, cluster masses, tidal filling factors and fraction of first-population stars, a cluster with two populations should be mixed when it has lost 70–80 per cent of its initial mass. These results fully account for the complete spatial mixing of NGC 6362, since, based on its shallow present-day mass function, independent studies estimate that the cluster has lost 85 per cent of its initial mass.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.079
Threshold uncertainty score0.156

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.212 · 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

Citations31
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society→Same topicStellar, planetary, and galactic studies→French-language works237,207→