MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2618801388 · doi:10.1002/asna.201713368

The <i>Pristine</i> survey II: A sample of bright stars observed with FEROS

2017· article· en· W2618801388 on OpenAlexaffabout

Bibliographic record

VenueAstronomische Nachrichten · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicStellar, planetary, and galactic studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
FundersCentre National de la Recherche ScientifiqueMinisterio de Economía y CompetitividadDeutsche ForschungsgemeinschaftNational Science Foundation
KeywordsPhotometry (optics)StarsSkyMetallicityTelescopeApparent magnitudeNight sky

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Extremely metal‐poor (EMP) stars are old objects formed in the first Gyr of the Universe. They are rare and, to select them the most successful strategy has been to build on large and low‐resolution spectroscopic surveys. The combination of narrow‐ and broad‐band photometry provides a powerful and cheaper alternative to select metal‐poor stars. The ongoing Pristine Survey is adopting this strategy, conducting photometry with the Canada France Hawaii Telescope MegaCam wide‐field imager and a narrow‐band filter centered at 395.2 nm on the Ca II‐H and ‐K lines. In this paper, we present the results of the spectroscopic follow‐up conducted on a sample of 26 stars at the bright end of the magnitude range of the Survey (g⩽15), using FEROS at the MPG/ESO 2.2‐m telescope (manufactured by Zeiss, Oberkochen, Germany). From our chemical investigation on the sample, we conclude that this magnitude range is too bright to use the Sloan Digital Sky Survey (SDSS) gri bands, which are typically saturated. Instead, the Pristine photometry can be usefully combined with the AAVSO Photometric All Sky Survey (APASS) griphotometry to provide reliable metallicity estimates.

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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.235
Teacher spread0.204 · 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

Citations20
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAstronomische NachrichtenSame topicStellar, planetary, and galactic studiesFrench-language works237,207