MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3007402826 · doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ab612c

Water in the Star-forming Region NGC 7129 FIRS 2

2020· article· en· W3007402826 on OpenAlexaff
Mollie E. Conrad, Michel Fich

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAstrophysics and Star Formation Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsAstrophysicsEnvelope (radar)Circumstellar envelopeStarsStar formationRADIUSAstronomySpectral lineRadiative transferLine (geometry)Space observatoryInfraredOpticsGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Observations of intermediate mass (IM) star formation are expected to highlight the transition between the formation processes of its low and high-mass (HM) counterparts. <?CDATA ${{\rm{H}}}_{2}^{18}{\rm{O}}$?> and <?CDATA ${{\rm{H}}}_{2}^{16}{\rm{O}}$?> observations of the IM star formation region NGC 7129 FIRS 2 were obtained with the Heterodyne Instrument for the Far-Infrared aboard the Herschel Space Observatory; most as part of the WISH key-program. The radiative transfer program RATRAN was used to model water emission from the envelope of this star-forming region. We consider the envelope in two regions, inner and outer envelope, which are separated by the water freeze-out radius. An outer envelope ortho-H <?CDATA ${}_{2}^{18}$?> O/H2 abundance was determined to be 3.5 ± 0.3 × 10−11, and an outer turbulent velocity was determined to be 2.25 ± 0.25 km s−1. The outer envelope ortho-H2 16O/H2 and para-H2 16O/H2 abundances were determined to be 1.5 ± 0.5 × 10−8 and 4.5 ± 0.5 × 10−9, respectively. The inner envelope abundances and turbulent velocity could not be constrained due to increased optical depth. The derived values are consistent with those found by low-mass (LM) and HM young stellar object studies of water. While the line shapes and intensities of these lines are more similar to the spectral lines found for LM objects, the turbulent velocity is closer to that seen in HM objects. Lastly, we present a simple visualization tool that we created to show that these abundance results, particularly the limited extent probed by these lines, should not have been a surprise. This tool can be very useful in planning future molecular line observations.

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 score0.033
Threshold uncertainty score0.066

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.212 · 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

Citations2
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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