On the Color–Metallicity Relation of the Red Clump and the Reddening toward the Magellanic Clouds
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The zero point of the reddening toward the Large Magellanic Cloud (LMC) has been the subject of some dispute. Its uncertainty propagates as a systematic error for methods that measure the extragalactic distance scale through knowledge of the absolute extinction of LMC stars. In an effort to resolve this issue, we used three different methods to calibrate the most widely used metric to predict LMC extinction, the intrinsic color of the red clump, (V − I) RC,0, for the inner ∼3° of that galaxy. The first approach was to empirically calibrate the color zero points of the BaSTI isochrones over a wide metallicity range of Δ[Fe/H] ≈ 1.10 using measurements of red clump stars in 47 Tuc, the solar neighborhood, and NGC 6791. From these efforts, we also measure these properties of the solar neighborhood red clump, (V − I, G BP − K s , G − K s , G RP − K s , J − K s , H − K s , M I , M Ks ) RC,0 = (1.02, 2.75, 2.18, 1.52, 0.64, 0.15, −0.23, −1.63). The second and third methods were to compare the observed colors of the red clump to those of Cepheids and RR Lyrae in the LMC. With these three methods, we estimated the intrinsic color of the red clump of the LMC to be (V − I) RC,0,LMC = {≈0.93, 0.91 ± 0.02, 0.89 ± 0.02}, respectively, and similarly, using the first and third methods, we estimated (V − I) RC,0,SMC = {≈0.85, 0.84 ± 0.02}, respectively, for the Small Magellanic Cloud. We estimate the luminosities to be M I,RC,LMC = −0.26 and M I,RC,SMC = −0.37. We show that this has important implications for recent calibrations of the tip of the red giant branch in the Magellanic Clouds used to measure H 0.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".