MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2627966377 · doi:10.1093/mnras/stx1592

The peculiar globular cluster Palomar 1 and persistence in the SDSS-APOGEE data base

2017· article· en· W2627966377 on OpenAlexaff
Farbod Jahandar, Kim A. Venn, Matthew Shetrone, Jo Bovy, Charli M. Sakari, Collin Kielty, Ruth A. R. Digby, Peter M. Frinchaboy

Bibliographic record

VenueMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicStellar, planetary, and galactic studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoUniversity of Victoria
FundersScience and Technology Facilities Council
KeywordsPhysicsAstrophysicsGlobular clusterStarsStar clusterAstronomyHaloMetallicityCluster (spacecraft)Spectral lineGalaxy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The SDSS-III APOGEE DR12 is a unique resource to search for stars beyond the tidal radii of star clusters. We have examined the APOGEE DR12 database for new candidates of the young star cluster Palomar 1, a system with previously reported tidal tails (Niederste-Ostholt et al. 2010). The APOGEE ASPCAP database includes spectra and stellar parameters for two known members of Pal 1 (Stars I and II), however these do not agree with the stellar parameters determined from optical spectra by Sakari et al. (2011). We find that the APOGEE analysis of these two stars is strongly affected by the known persistence problem (Majewski et al. 2015; Nidever et al. 2015). By re-examining the individual visits, and removing the blue (and sometimes green) APOGEE detector spectra affected by persistence, then we find excellent agreement in a re-analysis of the combined spectra. These methods are applied to another five stars in the APOGEE field with similar radial velocities and metallicities as those of Pal 1. Only one of these new candidates, Star F, may be a member located in the tidal tail based on its heliocentric radial velocity, metallicity, and chemistry. The other four candidates are not well aligned with the tidal tails, and comparison to the Besancon model (Robin et al. 2003) suggests that they are more likely to be non-members, i.e. part of the Galactic halo. This APOGEE field could be re-examined for other new candidates if the persistence problem can be removed from the APOGEE spectral database.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.035

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.005
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.003

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.231
Teacher spread0.208 · 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

Citations9
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society→Same topicStellar, planetary, and galactic studies→French-language works237,207→