MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2593926091 · doi:10.3847/1538-3881/aa5be4

Characterization of the VVV Survey RR Lyrae Population across the Southern Galactic Plane

2017· article· en· W2593926091 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astronomical Journal · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicStellar, planetary, and galactic studies
Canadian institutionsSaint Mary's UniversityMount Saint Vincent University
FundersConselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e TecnológicoCentro de Astrofísica y Tecnologías AfinesAspen Center for PhysicsScience and Technology Facilities CouncilNational Science Foundation
KeywordsRR Lyrae variableBulgeRed clumpGalactic planePopulationStarsGalactic halo

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Deep near-IR images from the VISTA Variables in the Vía Láctea (VVV) Survey were used to search for RR Lyrae stars in the Southern Galactic plane. A sizable sample of 404 RR Lyrae of type ab stars was identified across a thin slice of the fourth Galactic quadrant (295° < ℓ < 350°, −2.°24 < b < −1.°05). The sample’s distance distribution exhibits a maximum density that occurs at the bulge tangent point, which implies that this primarily Oosterhoff type I population of RRab stars does not trace the bar delineated by their red clump counterparts. The bulge RR Lyrae population does not extend beyond ℓ ∼ 340°, and the sample’s spatial distribution presents evidence of density enhancements and substructure that warrants further investigation. Indeed, the sample may be employed to evaluate Galactic evolution models, and is particularly lucrative since half of the discovered RR Lyrae are within reach of Gaia astrometric observations.

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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.233 · 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

Citations37
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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