MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2790696811 · doi:10.3847/1538-3881/aab8ff

OSSOS. VIII. The Transition between Two Size Distribution Slopes in the Scattering Disk

2018· article· en· W2790696811 on OpenAlexafffund
Samantha Lawler, Cory Shankman, J. J. Kavelaars, Mike Alexandersen, Michele T. Bannister, Ying-Tung Chen, Brett Gladman, Wesley C. Fraser, Stephen Gwyn, Nathan A. Kaib, Jean-Marc Petit, Kathryn Volk

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astronomical Journal · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAstro and Planetary Science
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaUniversity of VictoriaToronto Public HealthHerzberg Institute of Astrophysics
FundersScience and Technology Facilities CouncilAcademia SinicaCentre National de la Recherche ScientifiqueCanadian Foundation for AIDS Research
KeywordsPhysicsTrans-Neptunian objectScatteringAbsolute magnitudeAstrophysicsDistribution (mathematics)PopulationLuminosityCentaurContrast (vision)Solar SystemStarsOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The scattering trans-Neptunian Objects (TNOs) can be measured to smaller sizes than any other distant small-body population. We use the largest sample yet obtained, 68 discoveries, primarily by the Outer Solar System Origins Survey (OSSOS), to constrain the slope of its luminosity distribution, with sensitivity to much fainter absolute H-magnitudes than previous work. Using the analysis technique in Shankman et al., we confirm that a single slope for the H-distribution is not an accurate representation of the scattering TNOs and Centaurs, and that a break in the distribution is required, in support of previous conclusions. A bright-end slope of α b = 0.9 transitioning to a faint-end slope α f of 0.4–0.5 with a differential number contrast c from 1 (a knee) to 10 (a divot) provides an acceptable match to our data. We find that break magnitudes H b of 7.7 and 8.3, values both previously suggested for dynamically hot Kuiper Belt populations, are equally non-rejectable for a range of α f and c in our statistical analysis. Our preferred divot H-distribution transitions to α f = 0.5 with a divot of contrast c = 3 at H b = 8.3, while our preferred knee H-distribution transitions to α f = 0.4 at H b = 7.7. The intrinsic population of scattering TNOs required to match the OSSOS detections is 3 × 106 for H r < 12, and 9 × 104 for H r < 8.66 (D ≳ 100 km), with Centaurs having an intrinsic population two orders of magnitude smaller.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.227 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations67
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Astronomical JournalSame topicAstro and Planetary ScienceFrench-language works237,207