MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3046694779 · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1511.04122

The Dynamical Evolution of Accreted Star Clusters in the Milky Way

2015· article· en· W3046694779 on OpenAlexaff
Meghan Miholics, Jeremy J. Webb, Alison Sills

Bibliographic record

VenueMacSphere (McMaster University) · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicStellar, planetary, and galactic studies
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMilky WayGlobular clusterDwarf galaxyPhysicsAstrophysicsAstronomyStar clusterGalactic tideGalaxyGalactic halo

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We perform $N$-body simulations of star clusters in time-dependant galactic potentials. Since the Milky Way was built-up through mergers with dwarf galaxies, its globular cluster population is made up of clusters formed both during the initial collapse of the Galaxy and in dwarf galaxies that were later accreted. Throughout a dwarf-Milky Way merger, dwarf galaxy clusters are subject to a changing galactic potential. Building on our previous work, we investigate how this changing galactic potential affects the evolution of a cluster's half mass radius. In particular, we simulate clusters on circular orbits around a dwarf galaxy that either falls into the Milky Way or evaporates as it orbits the Milky Way. We find that the dynamical evolution of a star cluster is determined by whichever galaxy has the strongest tidal field at the position of the cluster. Thus, clusters entering the Milky Way undergo changes in size as the Milky Way tidal field becomes stronger and that of the dwarf diminishes. We find that ultimately accreted clusters quickly become the same size as a cluster born in the Milky Way on the same orbit. Assuming their initial sizes are similar, clusters born in the Galaxy and those that are accreted cannot be separated based on their current size alone.

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)0.003
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 score0.092
Threshold uncertainty score0.184

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
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 science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.193
Teacher spread0.181 · 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

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMacSphere (McMaster University)→Same topicStellar, planetary, and galactic studies→French-language works237,207→