MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

IC 10: More evidence that it is a blue compact dwarf

2001· article· en· W3101315572 on OpenAlexafffund
M. G. Richer, A. Bullejos, J. Borissova, M. L. McCall, H. Lee, R. Kurtev, Л. Георгиев, R. L. Kingsburgh, R. W. Ross, M. Rosado

Bibliographic record

VenueCERN Document Server (European Organization for Nuclear Research) · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena
Canadian institutionsYork University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaConsejo Nacional de Ciencia y TecnologíaDirección General de Asuntos del Personal Académico, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de MéxicoNational Science Foundation
KeywordsPhysicsDwarf galaxyMilky WayPhotometry (optics)AstrophysicsGalaxyStarsLocal GroupAstronomyIrregular galaxyStar formationInteracting galaxy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present optical spectroscopy of Hii regions in the Local Group galaxy IC 10 and UBVR photometry of foreground stars in three fields towards this galaxy. From these data, we find that the foreground reddening due to the Milky Way is $E(B-V)=0.77\pm 0.07 \mathrm{mag}$. We find that IC 10 contains considerable internal dust, which qualitatively explains the variety of reddening values found by studies of its different stellar populations. Based upon our foreground reddening, IC 10 has intrinsic photometric properties like those of a blue compact dwarf galaxy, and not those of a dwarf irregular. This result is consistent with much evidence that IC 10 is in the throes of a starburst that began at least $10 \mathrm{Myr}$ ago. We also report the discovery of a new WR star in the Hii region HL111c.

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)0.000
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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.241 · 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

Citations55
Published2001
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCERN Document Server (European Organization for Nuclear Research)Same topicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, PhenomenaFrench-language works237,207