Structural and compositional properties of brown dwarf disks : the case of 2MASS J04442713+2512164
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Aims. To improve our understanding of substellar formation, we have performed a compositional and structural study of a brown dwarf disk. \n \nMethods: We present the results of photometric, spectroscopic, and imaging observations of 2MASS J04442713+2512164, a young brown dwarf (M 7.25) member of the Taurus association. Our dataset, combined with results from the literature, provides a complete coverage of the spectral energy distribution from the optical range to the millimeter, including the first photometric measurement of a brown dwarf disk at 3.7 mm, and allows us to perform a detailed analysis of the disk properties. \n \nResults: The target was known to have a disk. High-resolution optical spectroscopy shows that it is accreting intensely, and powers both a jet and an outflow. The disk structure is similar to what is observed for more massive TTauri stars. Spectral decomposition models of Spitzer/IRS spectra suggest that the mid-infrared emission from the optically thin disk layers is dominated by grains with intermediate sizes (1.5 μm). Crystalline silicates are significantly more abundant in the outer part and/or deeper layers of the disk, implying very efficient mixing and/or additional annealing processes. Submillimeter and millimeter data indicate that most of the disk mass is in large grains (>1 mm).
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".