MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The FORS1 catalogue of stellar magnetic field measurements?

2015· article· en· W3100637858 on OpenAlexafffund
S. Bagnulo, L. Fossati, J. D. Landstreet

Bibliographic record

VenueSpringer Link (Chiba Institute of Technology) · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicStellar, planetary, and galactic studies
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaAlexander von Humboldt-Stiftung
KeywordsCassegrain reflectorMagnetic fieldVery Large TelescopePhysicsTelescopeAstrophysicsField (mathematics)StarsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Context. The FORS1 instrument on the ESO Very Large Telescope was used to obtain low-resolution circular polarised spectra of nearly a thousand different stars, with the aim of measuring their mean longitudinal magnetic fields. Magnetic fields were measured by different authors, and using different methods and software tools. Aims. A catalogue of FORS1 magnetic measurements would provide a valuable resource with which to better understand the strengths and limitations of this instrument and of similar low-dispersion, Cassegrain spectropolarimeters. However, FORS1 data reduction has been carried out by a number of different groups using a variety of reduction and analysis techniques. Our understanding of the instrument and our data reduction techniques have both improved over time. A full re-analysis of FORS1 archive data using a consistent and fully documented algorithm would optimise the accuracy and usefulness of a catalogue of field measurements. Methods. Based on the ESO FORS pipeline, we have developed a semi-automatic procedure for magnetic field determinations, which includes self-consistent checks for field detection reliability. We have applied our procedure to the full content of circular spectropolarimetric measurements of the FORS1 archive. Results. We have produced a catalogue of spectro-polarimetric observations and magnetic field measurements for ~1400 observations of ~850 different objects. The spectral type of each object has been approximately classified. We have also been able to test different methods for data reduction is a systematic way. The resulting catalogue has been used to produce an estimator for an upper limit to the uncertainty in a field strength measurement of an early type star as a function of the signal-to-noise ratio of the observation. Conclusions. While FORS1 is not necessarily an optimal instrument for the discovery of weak magnetic fields, it is very useful for the systematic study of larger fields, such as those found in Ap/Bp stars and in white dwarfs.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Dataset · Consensus signal: Dataset
Teacher disagreement score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.075

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0070.007
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0220.049

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.235
Teacher spread0.209 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreDataset

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

Citations59
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSpringer Link (Chiba Institute of Technology)Same topicStellar, planetary, and galactic studiesFrench-language works237,207