MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2950338157 · doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ab253d

The Ultracool SpeXtroscopic Survey. I. Volume-limited Spectroscopic Sample and Luminosity Function of M7−L5 Ultracool Dwarfs

2019· article· en· W2950338157 on OpenAlexaff
Daniella C. Bardalez Gagliuffi, Adam J. Burgasser, Sarah J. Schmidt, Christopher A. Theissen, Jonathan Gagné, M. Gillon, J. Sahlmann, Jacqueline K. Faherty, Christopher R. Gelino, Kelle L. Cruz, N. Skrzypek, Dagny L. Looper

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicStellar, planetary, and galactic studies
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSample (material)Luminosity functionVolume (thermodynamics)Function (biology)Brown dwarfPhysicsLuminosityAstrophysicsStarsBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We present a volume-limited, spectroscopically verified sample of M7−L5 ultracool dwarfs (UCDs) within 25 pc. The sample contains 410 sources, of which 93% have trigonometric distance measurements (80% from Gaia DR2) and 81% have low-resolution (R ∼ 120), near-infrared (NIR) spectroscopy. We also present an additional list of 60 sources that may be M7−L5 dwarfs within 25 pc when distance or spectral-type uncertainties are taken into account. The spectra provide NIR spectral and gravity classifications, and we use these to identify young sources, red and blue J − K S color outliers, and spectral binaries. We measure very low gravity and intermediate-gravity fractions of and , respectively; fractions of red and blue color outliers of and , respectively; and a spectral binary fraction of . We present an updated luminosity function for M7−L5 dwarfs continuous across the hydrogen-burning limit that agrees with previous studies. We estimate our completeness to range between 69% and 80% when compared to an isotropic model. However, we find that the literature late-M sample is severely incomplete compared to L dwarfs, with completeness of and , respectively. This incompleteness can be addressed with astrometric-based searches of UCDs with Gaia to identify objects previously missed by color- and magnitude-limited surveys.

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 score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

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 studies0.0000.000
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.218
Teacher spread0.209 · 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

Citations55
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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