MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3107680888 · doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202039419

ALMA observations of the early stages of substellar formation in the Lupus 1 and 3 molecular clouds

2020· article· en· W3107680888 on OpenAlexaff
Alejandro Santamaría-Miranda, I. de Gregorio‐Monsalvo, Adele Plunkett, N. Huélamo, C. López, Álvaro Ribas, M. R. Schreiber, K. Mužić, Aina Palau, L. B. G. Knee, A. Bayo, F. Comerón, Antonio Hales

Bibliographic record

VenueAstronomy and Astrophysics · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAstrophysics and Star Formation Studies
Canadian institutionsHerzberg Institute of Astrophysics
FundersNational Astronomical Observatory of JapanFundação para a Ciência e a TecnologiaAssociated UniversitiesAgencia Estatal de InvestigaciónNational Institutes of Natural SciencesMinisterio de Ciencia, Innovación y UniversidadesNational Science FoundationKorea Astronomy and Space Science InstituteNational Radio Astronomy Observatory
KeywordsPhysicsAstrophysicsBrown dwarfSystemic lupus erythematosusMolecular cloudSpectral energy distributionAstronomyStarsGalaxy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Context. The dominant mechanism leading to the formation of brown dwarfs (BDs) remains uncertain. While the census of Class II analogs in the substellar domain continues to grow, the most direct keys to formation, which are obtained from younger objects (pre-BD cores and proto-BDs), are limited by the very low number statistics available. Aims. We aim to identify and characterize a set of pre- and proto-BDs as well as Class II BDs in the Lupus 1 and 3 molecular clouds to test their formation mechanism. Methods. We performed ALMA band 6 (1.3 mm) continuum observations of a selection of 64 cores previously identified from AzTEC/ASTE data (1.1 mm), along with previously known Class II BDs in the Lupus 1 and 3 molecular clouds. Surveyed archival data in the optical and infrared were used to complement these observations. We expect these ALMA observations prove efficient in detecting the youngest sources in these regions, since they probe the frequency domain at which these sources emit most of their radiation. Results. We detected 19 sources from 15 ALMA fields. Considering all the pointings in our observing setup, the ALMA detection rate was ∼23% and the derived masses of the detected sources were between ∼0.18 and 124 MJup. We classified these sources according to their spectral energy distribution as 5 Class II sources, 2 new Class I/0 candidates, and 12 new possible pre-BD or deeply embedded protostellar candidates. We detected a promising candidate for a Class 0/I proto-BD source (ALMA J154229.778−334241.86) and inferred the disk dust mass of a bona fide Class II BD. The pre-BD cores might be the byproduct of an ongoing process of large-scale collapse. The Class II BD disks follow the correlation between disk mass and the mass of the central object that is observed at the low-mass stellar regime. Conclusions. We conclude that it is highly probable that the sources in the sample are formed as a scaled-down version of low-mass star formation, although disk fragmentation may be responsible for a considerable fraction of BDs.

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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.207
Teacher spread0.192 · 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

Citations10
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAstronomy and Astrophysics→Same topicAstrophysics and Star Formation Studies→French-language works237,207→