Feeling the Pull: A Study of Natural Galactic Accelerometers. II. Kinematics and Mass of the Delicate Stellar Stream of the Palomar 5 Globular Cluster<sup>*</sup>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract We present two spectroscopic surveys of the tidal stellar stream of the Palomar 5 globular cluster undertaken with the VLT/FLAMES and AAT/AAOmega instruments. We use these data in conjunction with photometric data presented in the previous contribution in this series to classify the survey stars in terms of their probability of belonging to the Palomar 5 stellar stream. We find that high-probability candidates are only found in a very narrow spatial interval surrounding the locus of the stream on the sky. PanSTARRS RR Lyrae stars in this region of the sky are also distributed in a similar manner. The absence of significant “fanning” of this stellar stream confirms that Palomar 5 does not follow a chaotic orbit. Previous studies have found that Palomar 5 is largely devoid of low-mass stars, and we show that this is true also of the stellar populations along the trailing arm out to 6 ° . Within this region, which contains 73% of the detected stars, the population is statistically identical to the core, implying that the ejection of the low-mass stars occurred before the formation of the stream. We also present an updated structural model fit to the bound remnant, which yields a total mass of 4297 ± 98 M ⊙ and a tidal radius 0.145 ± 0.009 kpc . We estimate the mass of the observed system including the stream to be 12,200 ± 400 M ⊙, and the initial mass to have been ~47,000 ± 1500 M ⊙. These observational constraints will be employed in our next study to model the dynamics of the system in detail.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".