MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2761451935 · doi:10.1080/21672857.2017.1379459

A guided map to the spiral arms in the galactic disk of the Milky Way

2017· article· en· W2761451935 on OpenAlexaff
J. P. Vallée

Bibliographic record

VenueAstronomical Review · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicStellar, planetary, and galactic studies
Canadian institutionsNational Research Council CanadaHerzberg Institute of Astrophysics
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMilky WaySpiral galaxyPhysicsSpiral (railway)AstrophysicsDiscAstronomyGalactic astronomyBarred spiral galaxyGalaxyInteracting galaxyGalaxy formation and evolutionEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An up-to-date overview of the recent history is given, aiming is to present a helpful working guide to the literature and at the same time introduce key systems and observational results, starting from the Sun and going toward the Galactic Center and parts of the Zona Galactica Incognita, and beyond. We start by presenting an observational view of the Milky Way’s disk plane (cartographic, dynamical, chemical cross-cut, magnetic). This included the four long spiral arms in the disk of the Milky Way galaxy, their geometry, components, velocity, their widths and internal layers as well as onion-like ordered offsets, the central galactic bars, arm tangents, arm pitch and arm shape, arm origins near the Galactic Center, and other possible players in the spiral arm, such as the magnetic field and the dark matter content. After, we present a basic analysis of some theoretical predictions from galactic arm formation: numerical simulations or analytical theories, and observations are checked against predictions from various numerical simulations and analytical (theoretical) models.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.003

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.258 · 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

Citations61
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAstronomical ReviewSame topicStellar, planetary, and galactic studiesFrench-language works237,207