MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2968122134 · doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ab3798

The Distribution of Dense Cores near H ii Regions

2019· article· en· W2968122134 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAstrophysics and Star Formation Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStarsCluster (spacecraft)Mass distributionCore (optical fiber)Star clusterVolume (thermodynamics)Distribution (mathematics)Boundary (topology)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract An investigation of dust emission associated with a large sample of H ii regions has been carried out. Stacked results from this sample suggest that each H ii region is at or near the center of a cluster of dense cores that extends far beyond the H ii region, and has a volume density that decreases as r −3. The data also show evidence for enhanced numbers of cores near the boundary of the H ii regions. At the same time, a significant decrease in the number of cores, consistent with no cores, is observed in the interior of these H ii regions. Neither these H ii regions nor their associated massive OB stars were found to have a significant heating effect on their associated dusty clumps. “Clouds,” or the outermost layers of the clumps in which the cores are embedded, are found to exert a strong shielding effect against external heating sources. Despite this, a large portion of the identified cores were found to be warmer than their surrounding clouds and consequently may be in the initial stages of star formation. The star-formation efficiency of the 7 H ii region systems with the most reliable mass budgets ranged between 1% and 9%.

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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.229
Teacher spread0.221 · 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

Citations3
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Astrophysical Journal→Same topicAstrophysics and Star Formation Studies→French-language works237,207→