MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2784601188 · doi:10.1093/mnrasl/sly013

Kinematic fingerprint of core-collapsed globular clusters

2018· article· en· W2784601188 on OpenAlexaff
Paolo Bianchini, Jeremy J. Webb, Alison Sills, Enrico Vesperini

Bibliographic record

VenueMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society Letters · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicStellar, planetary, and galactic studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGlobular clusterKinematicsPhotometry (optics)PhysicsAstrophysicsEquipartition theoremCore (optical fiber)Mass segregationCluster (spacecraft)IsotropyStatistical physicsClassical mechanicsStarsComputer scienceOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Dynamical evolution drives globular clusters towards core collapse, which strongly shapes their internal properties. Diagnostics of core collapse have so far been based on photometry only, namely on the study of the concentration of the density profiles. Here, we present a new method to robustly identify core-collapsed clusters based on the study of their stellar kinematics. We introduce the kinematic concentration parameter, ck, the ratio between the global and local degree of energy equipartition reached by a cluster, and show through extensive direct N-body simulations that clusters approaching core collapse and in the post-core collapse phase are strictly characterized by ck > 1. The kinematic concentration provides a suitable diagnostic to identify core-collapsed clusters, independent from any other previous methods based on photometry. We also explore the effects of incomplete radial and stellar mass coverage on the calculation of ck and find that our method can be applied to state-of-art kinematic data sets.

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)0.002
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
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 science0.0000.001
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.206
Teacher spread0.197 · 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

Citations25
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society LettersSame topicStellar, planetary, and galactic studiesFrench-language works237,207