MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2278684583 · doi:10.3847/0067-0049/224/1/7

AN OUTER ARM IN THE SECOND GALACTIC QUADRANT: STRUCTURE

2016· article· en· W2278684583 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAstrophysics and Star Formation Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMilky WayGalactic planeSpiral galaxyMolecular cloudLogarithmic spiralGalactic tidePlane (geometry)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT The lack of arm tracers, especially remote tracers, is one of the most difficult problems preventing us from studying the structure of the Milky Way. Fortunately, with its high-sensitivity CO survey, the Milky Way Imaging Scroll Painting (MWISP) project offers such an opportunity. Since completing about one-third of its mission, an area of l = [100, 150]°, b = [−3, 5]° has nearly been covered. The Outer arm of the Milky Way first clearly revealed its shape in the second galactic quadrant in the form of molecular gas—this is the first time that the Outer arm has been reported in such a large-scale mapping of molecular gas. Using the 115 GHz 12CO(1–0) data of MWISP at the LSR velocity ≃[−100, −60] km s−1 and in the area mentioned above, we have detected 481 molecular clouds in total, and among them 332 (about 69%) are newly detected and 457 probably belong to the Outer arm. The total mass of the detected Outer arm clouds is ∼3.1 × 106 M ⊙. Assuming that the spiral arm is a logarithmic spiral, the pitch angle is fitted as ∼13.°1. Besides combining both the CO data from MWISP and the 21 cm H i data from the Canadian Galactic Plane Survey (CGPS), the gas distribution, warp, and thickness of the Outer arm are also studied.

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)0.000
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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.245
Teacher spread0.237 · 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

Citations25
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Astrophysical Journal Supplement SeriesSame topicAstrophysics and Star Formation StudiesFrench-language works237,207