MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2997081985 · doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ab80bf

Dynamical Simulations of the First Globular Clusters

2020· article· en· W2997081985 on OpenAlexaff
R. G. Carlberg

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicStellar, planetary, and galactic studies
Canadian institutionsCanadian Institute for Theoretical AstrophysicsUniversity of TorontoHerzberg Institute of Astrophysics
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsAstrophysicsGlobular clusterMilky WayDark matter haloDark matterAstronomyHaloGalaxyDwarf galaxyStar clusterPopulationVelocity dispersionRedshiftStars

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract A Milky Way–like halo is simulated with tidally limited star clusters inserted in the dark matter halos present at high redshift. An n-body code augmented with velocity relaxation in the star clusters evolves the system. The stripped stars and remnant clusters that began in the lower mass subhalos have a distribution somewhat more extended than the dark matter halo, with a mean galactic radius of about 60 kpc inside 150 kpc, whereas the distribution of all stripped stars and clusters is more centrally concentrated than the dark matter. The clusters from low mass subhalos, those with a peak circular velocity of 12–18 <?CDATA $\,\mathrm{km}\,{{\rm{s}}}^{-1}$?> , also produce most of the population’s thin stellar streams. Together these suggest a search strategy for extremely metal-poor cluster stars and their remnants. The dependence of the stellar population distribution on subhalo mass is not seen in simulations that start clusters at lower redshift. The half mass radii of the clusters are set by the tidal fields of the initial subhalo, “dwarf galaxy” location, which causes the average half mass–radius to decrease with increasing redshift of formation. Starting clusters at greater than redshift 4 leads to cluster half mass radii approximately as seen in the Milky Way.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.052
Threshold uncertainty score0.103

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.216
Teacher spread0.205 · 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 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

Citations4
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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