The EDIBLES survey II. The detectability of C<sub>60</sub><sup>+</sup> bands
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Gas phase spectroscopic laboratory experiments for the buckminsterfullerene cation C60+ have resulted in accurate rest wavelengths for five C60+ transitions that have been compared with diffuse interstellar bands (DIBs) in the near infra-red. Detecting these in astronomical spectra is difficult because of the strong contamination of ground-based spectra by atmospheric water vapor, to the presence of weak and shallow stellar lines and/or blending with other weak DIBs. The detection of the two strong bands has been claimed by several teams, and the three additional and weaker bands have been detected in a few sources. Certain recent papers have argued against the identification of C60+ based on spectral analyses claiming (i) a large variation in the ratio of the equivalent widths of the 9632 and 9577 Å bands, (ii) a large redshift of the 9632 Å band for the Orion star HD 37022, and (iii) the non-detection of the weaker 9428 Å DIB. Here we address these three points: (i) We show that the model stellar line correction for the 9632 Å DIB overestimates the difference between the strengths of the lines in giant and dwarf star spectra, casting doubts on the conclusions about the ratio variability. (ii) Using high quality stellar spectra from the ESO Diffuse Interstellar Bands Large Exploration Survey (EDIBLES), recorded with the ESO/Paranal Ultraviolet Echelle Spectrograph (UVES) in about the same atmospheric conditions, we find no wavelength shift in the 9632 Å band toward HD 37022. (iii) Using EDIBLES spectra and data from the Echelle SpectroPolarimetric Device for the Observation of Stars (ESPaDOnS) at CFHT we show that the presence of a weak 9428 Å band cannot be ruled out, even in the same observations that a previous study claimed it was not present.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
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".