MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2901913846 · doi:10.3847/1538-3881/aae9e8

ASTROSAT/UVIT Survey of M31, First Results: UV-bright Stars in the Bulge

2018· article· en· W2901913846 on OpenAlexaff
D. A. Leahy, L. Bianchi, J. Postma

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astronomical Journal · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAstrophysics and Star Formation Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsBulgeAstrophysicsStarsAstronomyObservatoryTelescopeUltravioletAndromeda GalaxyAndromedaSpiral galaxyMilky WayOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract A survey of M31 is being carried out with the ASTROSAT Observatory in ultraviolet (UV), soft X-rays, and hard X-rays using the UltraViolet Imaging Telescope (UVIT), soft X-ray telescope, LAXPC, and CZT instruments. Here we analyze UVIT observations of the first field covering the central (7′) part of the bulge of M31. The UV bands observed cover the range 120–280 nm with four filters with a spatial resolution of 1″. They are sensitive to the UV emission from hot stars (T eff > 10000 K), so can be used to detect the hottest stars in the bulge of M31. We cross-match the UVIT sources with sources from Panchromatic Hubble Andromeda Treasury to obtain multi-band spectral energy distributions (SEDs) for 26 sources. Fits of the SEDs with stellar models show that these are likely main-sequence stars with masses in the range 5–20 M ⊙. This provides evidence for a low, but significant (∼10−5 M ⊙ yr−1), rate of star formation in the bulge of M31, which has occurred in the very recent past (∼10–100 million years).

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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.020
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.233 · 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

Citations11
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Astronomical JournalSame topicAstrophysics and Star Formation StudiesFrench-language works237,207