MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2940392166 · doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ab14e5

Confirming Interstellar C<sub>60</sub> <sup>+</sup> Using the Hubble Space Telescope

2019· article· en· W2940392166 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal Letters · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicFullerene Chemistry and Applications
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSpectral lineInterstellar mediumAbsorption spectroscopyAbsorption (acoustics)SpectroscopyHubble space telescopeWavelengthInterstellar cloud

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Recent advances in laboratory spectroscopy lead to the claim of ionized Buckminsterfullerene (C ) as the carrier of two diffuse interstellar bands (DIBs) in the near-infrared. However, irrefutable identification of interstellar C requires a match between the wavelengths and the expected strengths of all absorption features detectable in the laboratory and in space. Here we present Hubble Space Telescope (HST) spectra of the region covering the C 9348, 9365, 9428, and 9577 Å absorption bands toward seven heavily reddened stars. We focus in particular on searching for the weaker laboratory C bands, the very presence of which has been a matter for recent debate. Using the novel STIS-scanning technique to obtain ultra-high signal-to-noise spectra without contamination from telluric absorption that afflicted previous ground-based observations, we obtained reliable detections of the (weak) 9365, 9428 Å and (strong) 9577 Å C bands. The band wavelengths and strength ratios are sufficiently similar to those determined in the latest laboratory experiments that we consider this the first robust identification of the 9428 Å band, and a conclusive confirmation of interstellar .

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.029

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 studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.222
Teacher spread0.211 · 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

Citations125
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Astrophysical Journal LettersSame topicFullerene Chemistry and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207