MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3100345724

Dynamics of Dense Cores in the Perseus Molecular Cloud

2012· article· en· W3100345724 on OpenAlexaff
Helen Kirk, Doug Johnstone, M. Tafalla

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAstrophysics and Star Formation Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of VictoriaHerzberg Institute of Astrophysics
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsAstrophysicsTurbulenceFlux (metallurgy)Molecular cloudLuminosityExtinction (optical mineralogy)Star formationGravitational energyThermalGravitationGalaxyAstronomyMechanicsStarsGravitational waveMeteorology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We survey the kinematics of over one hundred and fifty candidate (and potentially starforming) dense cores in the Perseus molecular cloud with pointed N2H + (1-0) and simultaneous C 18 O(2-1) observations. Our detection rate of N2H + is 62%, rising to 84 % for JCMT SCUBAselected targets. In agreement with previous observations, we find that the dense N2H + targets tend to display nearly thermal linewidths, particularly those which appear to be starless (using Spitzer data), indicating turbulent support on the small scales of molecular clouds is minimal. For those N2H + targets which have an associated SCUBA dense core, we find their internal motions are more than sufficient to provide support against the gravitational force on the cores. Comparison of the N2H + integrated intensity and SCUBA flux reveals fractional N2H + abundances between 10 −10 and 10 −9. We demonstrate that the relative motion of the dense N2H + gas and the surrounding C 18 O gas is less than the sound speed in the vast majority of cases (∼90%). The point-to-point motions we observe within larger extinction regions appear to be insufficient to provide support against gravity, although we sparsely sample these regions.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.760
Threshold uncertainty score0.130

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.235
Teacher spread0.227 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations97
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAstrophysics and Star Formation StudiesFrench-language works237,207