MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2921467636 · doi:10.1093/mnras/stz767

Periodic variability of the mainline hydroxyl masers in G9.62+0.20E

2019· article· en· W2921467636 on OpenAlexaff
S. Goedhart, Ruby van Rooyen, D. J. van der Walt, J. P. Maswanganye, A. Sanna, Gordon MacLeod, S. P. van den Heever

Bibliographic record

VenueMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAstrophysics and Star Formation Studies
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMaserPhysicsAstrophysicsFlareFlux (metallurgy)MethanolAstronomyChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present the results of a monitoring campaign using the KAT-7 and HartRAO 26 m telescopes, of hydroxyl, methanol, and water vapour masers associated with the high-mass star-forming region G9.62+0.20E. Periodic flaring of the mainline hydroxyl masers was found, similar to that seen in the 6.7 and 12.2 GHz methanol masers. The 1667 MHz flares are characterized by a rapid decrease in flux density, which is coincident with the start of the 12.2 GHz methanol maser flare. The decrease in the OH maser flux density is followed by a slow increase till a maximum is reached after which the maser decays to its pre-flare level. A possible interpretation of the rapid decrease in the maser flux density is presented. Considering the projected separation between the periodic methanol and OH masers, we conclude that the periodic 12.2 methanol masing region is located about 1600 au deeper into the molecular envelope compared to the location of the periodic OH masers. A single water maser flare was also detected, which seems not to be associated with the same event that gives rise to the periodic methanol and OH maser flares.

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)0.000
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.193
Teacher spread0.188 · 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

Citations10
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society→Same topicAstrophysics and Star Formation Studies→French-language works237,207→