MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3104960978

CARMA Large Area Star Formation Survey: Structure and Kinematics of Dense Gas in Serpens Main

2016· article· en· W3104960978 on OpenAlexaff
Katherine I. Lee, Shaye Storm, Leslie W. Looney, Lee G. Mundy, Dominique Segura-Cox, Peter Teuben, Erik Rosolowsky, Héctor G. Arce, Eve C. Ostriker, Yancy L. Shirley, Woojin Kwon, Jens Kauffmann, John Tobin, Adele Plunkett, D. M. Salter, N. H. Volgenau, Che-Yu Chen, Konstantinos Tassis, Andrea Isella, R. M. Crutcher, Charles F. Gammie, L. Testi

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAstrophysics and Star Formation Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of AlbertaOkanagan University CollegeUniversity of British Columbia, Okanagan CampusUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSerpensAstrophysicsDendrogramPhysicsVelocity dispersionStar formationCluster (spacecraft)Line (geometry)Molecular cloudGalaxyGeometryStars
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present observations of N2H + (J = 1 → 0), HCO+ (J = 1 → 0), and HCN (J = 1 → 0) toward the Serpens Main molecular cloud from the CARMA Large Area Star Formation Survey (CLASSy). We mapped 150 square arcminutes of Serpens Main with an angular resolution of ∼ 7′′. The gas emission is concentrated in two subclusters (the NW and SE subclusters). The SE subcluster has more prominent filamentary struc-tures and more complicated kinematics compared to the NW subcluster. The majority of gas in the two subclusters has subsonic to sonic velocity dispersions. We applied a dendrogram technique with N2H +(1-0) to study the gas structures; the SE subcluster

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 score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.026

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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.229
Teacher spread0.217 · 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

Citations33
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAstrophysics and Star Formation StudiesFrench-language works237,207