Multiple populations along the asymptotic giant branch of the globular cluster M4
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Nearly all Galactic globular clusters host stars that display characteristic abundance anticorrelations, like the O-rich/Na-poor pattern typical of field halo stars, together with O-poor/Na-rich additional components. A recent spectroscopic investigation questioned the presence of O-poor/Na-rich stars amongst a sample of asymptotic giant branch (AGB) stars in the cluster M4, at variance with the spectroscopic detection of a O-poor/Na-rich component along both the cluster red giant branch (RGB) and horizontal branch. This is contrary to what is expected from the cluster horizontal branch morphology and horizontal branch stellar evolution models. Here, we have investigated this issue by employing the CUBI = (U − B) − (B − I) index, that previous studies have demonstrated to be very effective in separating multiple populations along both the RGB and AGB sequences. We confirm previous results that the RGB is intrinsically broad in the V–CUBI diagram, with the presence of two components that nicely correspond to the two populations identified by high-resolution spectroscopy. We find that AGB stars are distributed over a wide range of CUBI values, in close analogy with what is observed for the RGB, demonstrating that the AGB of M4 also hosts multiple stellar populations.
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) | 0.002 | 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".