MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2296659026 · doi:10.3847/2041-8205/820/2/l27

WHAT A TANGLED WEB WE WEAVE: HERMUS AS THE NORTHERN EXTENSION OF THE PHOENIX STREAM

2016· article· en· W2296659026 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal Letters · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAstronomy and Astrophysical Research
Canadian institutionsCanadian Institute for Theoretical AstrophysicsHerzberg Institute of Astrophysics
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMilky WaySTREAMSHaloGalaxyPrecessionGalactic haloExtension (predicate logic)Dark matter

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT We investigate whether the recently discovered Phoenix stream may be part of a much longer stream that includes the previously discovered Hermus stream. Using a simple model of the Galaxy with a disk, bulge, and a spherical dark matter halo, we show that a nearly circular orbit, highly inclined with respect to the disk, can be found that fits the positions, orientations, and distances of both streams. While the two streams are somewhat misaligned in the sense that they do not occupy the same plane, nodal precession due to the Milky Way disk potential naturally brings the orbit into line with each stream in the course of half an orbit. We consequently consider a common origin for the two streams as plausible. Based on our best-fitting orbit, we make predictions for the positions, distances, radial velocities, and proper motions along each stream. If our hypothesis is borne out by measurements, then at ≈183° (≈235° with respect to the Galactic center) and ≈76 kpc in length, Phoenix–Hermus would become the longest cold stream yet found. This would make it a particularly valuable new probe of the shape and mass of the Galactic halo out to ≈20 kpc.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.315
Threshold uncertainty score0.506

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.232 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations8
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Astrophysical Journal LettersSame topicAstronomy and Astrophysical ResearchFrench-language works237,207