MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2971432742 · doi:10.1093/mnras/stz2499

Characteristic radii of the Milky Way globular clusters

2019· article· en· W2971432742 on OpenAlexaff
Andrés E. Piatti, Jeremy J. Webb, R. G. Carlberg

Bibliographic record

VenueMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicStellar, planetary, and galactic studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGlobular clusterPhysicsMilky WayAstrophysicsStar clusterBulgeGravitational potentialPopulationCluster (spacecraft)GravitationAstronomyGalaxy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT We report on the extent of the effects of the Milky Way gravitational field in shaping the structural parameters and internal dynamics of its globular cluster population. We make use of a homogeneous, up-to-date data set with kinematics, structural properties, current and initial masses of 156 globular clusters. In general, cluster radii increase as the Milky Way potential weakens; with the core and Jacobi radii being those which increase at the slowest and fastest rate, respectively. We interpret this result as the innermost regions of globular clusters being less sensitive to changes in the tidal forces with the Galactocentric distance. The Milky Way gravitational field also seems to have differentially accelerated the internal dynamical evolution of individual clusters, with those toward the bulge appearing dynamically older. Finally, we find a subpopulation consisting of both compact and extended globular clusters (as defined by their rh/rJ ratio) beyond 8 kpc that appear to have lost a large fraction of their initial mass lost via disruption. Moreover, we identify a third group with rh/rJ > 0.4, which have lost an even larger fraction of their initial mass by disruption. In both cases the high fraction of mass lost is likely due to their large orbital eccentricities and inclination angles, which lead to them experiencing more tidal shocks at perigalacticon and during disc crossings. Comparing the structural and orbital parameters of individual clusters allows for constraints to be placed on whether or not their evolution was relaxation or tidally dominated.

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)0.003
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.187
Teacher spread0.181 · 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

Citations42
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society→Same topicStellar, planetary, and galactic studies→French-language works237,207→