MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3009699307 · doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20066948

Galactic kinematics with RAVE data

2008· article· en· W3009699307 on OpenAlexafffund
L. Veltz, O. Bienaymé, K. C. Freeman, James Binney, Joss Bland‐Hawthorn, B. K. Gibson, G. Gilmore, E. K. Grebel, A. Helmi, U. Munari, Julio F. Navarro, Q. A. Parker, G. M. Seabroke, A. Siebert, M. Steinmetz, F. G. Watson, M. Williams, Rosemary F. Ġ. Wyse, T. Zwitter

Bibliographic record

VenueAstronomy and Astrophysics · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicStellar, planetary, and galactic studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
FundersAustralian Research CouncilCentre National de la Recherche ScientifiqueJavna Agencija za Raziskovalno Dejavnost RSNederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk OnderzoekDeutsche ForschungsgemeinschaftScience and Technology Facilities CouncilNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaJohns Hopkins UniversityNational Aeronautics and Space AdministrationSchweizerischer Nationalfonds zur Förderung der Wissenschaftlichen ForschungIstituto Nazionale di AstrofisicaNational Science Foundation
KeywordsPhysicsThin diskAstrophysicsThick diskKinematicsStarsSpiral galaxyDiscAstronomyStellar kinematicsScale heightGalaxyGalaxy formation and evolutionMilky WayClassical mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We analyze the distribution of G and K type stars towards the Galactic poles using RAVE and ELODIE radial velocities, 2MASS photometric star counts, and UCAC2 proper motions. The combination of photometric and 3D kinematic data allows us to disentangle and describe the vertical distribution of dwarfs, sub-giants and giants and their kinematics. We identify discontinuities within the kinematics and magnitude counts that separate the thin disk, thick disk and a hotter component. The respective scale heights of the thin disk and thick disk are 225 ± 10 pc and 1048 ± 36 pc. We also constrain the luminosity function and the kinematic distribution function. The existence of a kinematic gap between the thin and thick disks is incompatible with the thick disk having formed from the thin disk by a continuous process, such as scattering of stars by spiral arms or molecular clouds. Other mechanisms of formation of the thick disk such as “created on the spot” or smoothly “accreted” remain compatible with our findings.

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)0.001
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.026

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0050.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.009

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.215
Teacher spread0.195 · 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

Citations78
Published2008
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAstronomy and AstrophysicsSame topicStellar, planetary, and galactic studiesFrench-language works237,207