MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2942461650 · doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ab6ff8

Spitzer Microlensing Parallax Reveals Two Isolated Stars in the Galactic Bulge

2020· article· en· W2942461650 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicStellar, planetary, and galactic studies
Canadian institutionsCanadian Institute for Theoretical AstrophysicsUniversity of Toronto
FundersFundação para a Ciência e a TecnologiaNational Research Foundation of KoreaNational Natural Science Foundation of ChinaEuropean Regional Development FundNational Research FoundationDeutsche ForschungsgemeinschaftMinistero dell’Istruzione, dell’Università e della RicercaNational Science Foundation
KeywordsGravitational microlensingParallaxBulgeStarsMicrolensLens (geology)Star (game theory)Proper motion

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We report the mass and distance measurements of two single-lens events from the 2017 Spitzer microlensing campaign. The ground-based observations yield the detection of finite-source effects, and the microlens parallaxes are derived from the joint analysis of ground-based observations and Spitzer observations. We find that the lens of OGLE-2017-BLG-1254 is a 0.60 ± 0.03 M ⊙ star with D LS = 0.53 ± 0.11 kpc, where D LS is the distance between the lens and the source. The second event, OGLE-2017-BLG-1161, is subject to the known satellite parallax degeneracy, and thus is either a star with D LS = 0.40 ± 0.12 kpc or a star with D LS = 0.53 ± 0.19 kpc. Both of the lenses are therefore isolated stars in the Galactic bulge. By comparing the mass and distance distributions of the eight published Spitzer finite-source events with the expectations from a Galactic model, we find that the Spitzer sample is in agreement with the probability of finite-source effects occurring in single-lens events.

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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.223 · 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

Citations15
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Astrophysical Journal→Same topicStellar, planetary, and galactic studies→French-language works237,207→