MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2990377646 · doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ab9749

Spitzer + VLTI-GRAVITY Measure the Lens Mass of a Nearby Microlensing Event

2020· article· en· W2990377646 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
FundersNational Key Research and Development Program of ChinaNatural Science Foundation of Shandong ProvinceNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsGravitational microlensingEinstein radiusParallaxLens (geology)Measure (data warehouse)InterferometryMicrolensLight curveEvent (particle physics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We report the lens mass and distance measurements of the nearby microlensing event TCP J05074264+2447555 (Kojima-1). We measure the microlens parallax vector using Spitzer and ground-based light curves with constraints on the direction of lens-source relative proper motion derived from Very Large Telescope Interferometer (VLTI) GRAVITY observations. Combining this determination with the angular Einstein radius measured by VLTI-GRAVITY observations, we find that the lens is a star with mass at a distance D L = 429 ± 21 pc. We find that the blended light basically all comes from the lens. The lens-source proper motion is , so with currently available adaptive-optics instruments, the lens and source can be resolved in 2021. This is the first microlensing event whose lens mass is unambiguously measured by interferometry + satellite-parallax observations, which opens a new window for mass measurements of isolated objects such as stellar-mass black holes.

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 score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.222
Teacher spread0.204 · 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

Citations26
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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