MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3102433569

The JCMT Gould Belt Survey: Dense Core Clusters in Orion B

2016· article· en· W3102433569 on OpenAlexaff
Helen Kirk, Doug Johnstone, James Lane, J. Buckle, David Berry, H. Broekhoven-Fiene, M. J. Currie, Michel Fich, J. Hatchell, Tim Jenness, J. C. Mottram, D. Nutter, Kate Pattle, J. E. Pineda, C. Quinn, C. Salji, S. Tisi, M. R. Hogerheijde, D. Ward–Thompson

Bibliographic record

VenueMax Planck Digital Library · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAstrophysics and Star Formation Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of VictoriaUniversity of WaterlooHerzberg Institute of Astrophysics
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsJames Clerk Maxwell TelescopeAstrophysicsCluster (spacecraft)Core (optical fiber)StarsStar formationOptics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

© 2016. The American Astronomical Society. All rights reserved.The James Clerk Maxwell Telescope Gould Belt Legacy Survey obtained SCUBA-2 observations of dense cores within three sub-regions of Orion B: LDN 1622, NGC 2023/2024, and NGC 2068/2071, all of which contain clusters of cores. We present an analysis of the clustering properties of these cores, including the two-point correlation function and Cartwright's Q parameter. We identify individual clusters of dense cores across all three regions using a minimal spanning tree technique, and find that in each cluster, the most massive cores tend to be centrally located. We also apply the independent M- technique and find a strong correlation between core mass and the local surface density of cores. These two lines of evidence jointly suggest that some amount of mass segregation in clusters has happened already at the dense core stage.

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)0.001
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 score0.091
Threshold uncertainty score0.181

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.207
Teacher spread0.193 · 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

Citations18
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMax Planck Digital LibrarySame topicAstrophysics and Star Formation StudiesFrench-language works237,207