Evolution of the stellar mass function in multiple-population globular clusters
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We present the results of a survey of N-body simulations aimed at studying the effects of the long-term dynamical evolution on the stellar mass function (MF) of multiple stellar populations in globular clusters. Our simulations show that if first-(1G) and second-generation (2G) stars have the same initial MF (IMF), the global MFs of the two populations are affected similarly by dynamical evolution and no significant differences between the 1G and 2G MFs arise during the cluster's evolution. If the two populations have different IMFs, dynamical effects do not completely erase memory of the initial differences. Should observations find differences between the global 1G and 2G MFs, these would reveal the fingerprints of differences in their IMFs. Irrespective of whether the 1G and 2G populations have the same global IMF or not, dynamical effects can produce differences between the local (measured at various distances from the cluster centre) 1G and 2G MFs; these differences are a manifestation of the process of mass segregation in populations with different initial structural properties. In dynamically old and spatially mixed clusters, however, differences between the local 1G and 2G MFs can reveal differences between the 1G and 2G global MFs. In general, for clusters with any dynamical age, large differences between the local 1G and 2G MFs are more likely to be associated with differences in the global MF. Our study also reveals a dependence of the spatial mixing rate on the stellar mass, another dynamical consequence of the multiscale nature of multiple-population clusters.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".