MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3104015126

VLBI for Gravity Probe B. I. Overview

2012· article· en· W3104015126 on OpenAlexaff
N. Bartel, M. F. Bietenholz, D. E. Lebach, J. F. Lestrade, R. R. Ransom, M. I. Ratner

Bibliographic record

VenueDigital Access to Scholarship at Harvard (DASH) (Harvard University) · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeophysics and Gravity Measurements
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVery-long-baseline interferometryAstrometryDeclinationRight ascensionPhysicsGeodesyReference frameParallaxProper motionCartesian coordinate systemAstronomyAstrophysicsFrame (networking)GeologyGeometryComputer scienceStarsMathematics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We describe the NASA/Stanford gyroscope relativity mission, Gravity Probe B (GP-B), and provide an overview of the following series of six astrometric and astrophysical papers that report on our radio observations and analyses made in support of this mission. The main goal of this 8.5 year program of differential very long baseline interferometry astrometry was to determine the proper motion of the guide star of the GP-B mission, the RS CVn binary IM Pegasi (IM Peg; HR 8703). This proper motion is determined with respect to compact, extragalactic reference sources. The results are −20.833 ± 0.090 mas yr−1 and −27.267 ± 0.095 mas yr−1 for, respectively, the right ascension and declination, in local Cartesian coordinates, of IM Peg’s proper motion, and 10.370 ± 0.074 mas (i.e., 96.43 ± 0.69 pc) for its parallax (and distance). Each quoted uncertainty is meant to represent an ∼70% confidence interval that includes the estimated contribution from systematic error. These results are accurate enough not to discernibly degrade the GP-B estimates of its gyroscopes’ relativistic precessions: the frame-dragging and geodetic effects.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.164
Threshold uncertainty score0.547

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0060.006
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1640.175

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 head0.066
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.191 · 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

Citations7
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDigital Access to Scholarship at Harvard (DASH) (Harvard University)Same topicGeophysics and Gravity MeasurementsFrench-language works237,207