MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2949803767 · doi:10.1086/345574

Addendum: [ITAL]Hubble Space Telescope[/ITAL] Evidence for an Intermediate-Mass Black Hole in the Globular Cluster M15. II. Kinematic Analysis and Dynamical Modeling [[URL ADDRESS="/cgi-bin/resolve?2002AJ....124.3270G" STATUS="OKAY"]Astron. J. [BF]124[/BF], 3270 (2002)[/URL]]

2002· article· en· W2949803767 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astronomical Journal · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicPulsars and Gravitational Waves Research
Canadian institutionsHerzberg Institute of Astrophysics
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGlobular clusterSolar massBlack hole (networking)Parameter spaceCluster (spacecraft)Neutron starMass segregationInterpretation (philosophy)Dark matter

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

It has been reported that there is an error in the figure in Dull et al. (1997, D97) that shows the radial M/L profile in Fokker-Planck models of M15. We discuss how this modifies the interpretation of our kinematical data. These imply the existence of a dark and compact mass component near the center of M15, either a single black hole (BH) or a collection of dark remnants that have sunk to the cluster center due to mass segregation. We previously showed that the latter interpretation is in conflict with the D97 M/L profile, which supported the BH interpretation. We repeat our analysis here with the corrected D97 profile. Models without a BH are now found to be statistically acceptable (within 1-sigma), although inclusion of a BH still provides a marginally better fit. It does not necessarily follow that dark remnants are now the preferred interpretation of the data. The D97 models, as well as N-body models by Baumgardt et al. (2002), assume that all neutron stars are retained during cluster evolution. This conflicts with predictions of the neutron-star retention rate (typically below 10 per cent) based on pulsar kick velocities. The presence of a single BH therefore continues to be a viable interpretation of the data. The best fit BH mass with the corrected D97 M/L profile is M_BH = 1.7^{+2.7}_{-1.7} x 10^3 solar masses, and with a constant M/L it is M_BH = 3.2^{+2.2}_{-2.2} x 10^3 solar masses. A model that includes both neutron star escape and mass segregation would probably yield a value between these numbers. This agrees with the correlation between velocity dispersion and BH mass inferred for galaxies. However, with the presently available models and data it is neither uniquely implied nor ruled out that M15 has an intermediate-mass BH.

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)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.636
Threshold uncertainty score0.519

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0060.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0040.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.6360.462

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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.337
Teacher spread0.294 · 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.

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

Citations100
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Astronomical JournalSame topicPulsars and Gravitational Waves ResearchFrench-language works237,207