MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3112506082 · doi:10.3847/2041-8213/abeaa9

Orbital Clustering Identifies the Origins of Galactic Stellar Streams

2021· article· en· W3112506082 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal Letters · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAstronomy and Astrophysical Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMilky WayGlobular clusterGalaxySTREAMSDwarf galaxyDark matterStar clusterCluster (spacecraft)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The origins of most stellar streams in the Milky Way are unknown. With improved proper motions provided by Gaia EDR3, we show that the orbits of 23 Galactic stellar streams are highly clustered in orbital phase space. Based on their energies and angular momenta, most streams in our sample can plausibly be associated with a specific (disrupted) dwarf galaxy host that brought them into the Milky Way. For eight streams we also identify likely globular cluster progenitors (four of these associations are reported here for the first time). Some of these stream progenitors are surprisingly far apart, displaced from their tidal debris by a few to tens of degrees. We identify stellar streams that appear spatially distinct, but whose similar orbits indicate they likely originate from the same progenitor. If confirmed as physical discontinuities, they will provide strong constraints on the mass loss from the progenitor. The nearly universal ex situ origin of existing stellar streams makes them valuable tracers of galaxy mergers and dynamical friction within the Galactic halo. Their phase-space clustering can be leveraged to construct a precise global map of dark matter in the Milky Way, while their internal structure may hold clues to the small-scale structure of dark matter in their original host galaxies.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.134
Threshold uncertainty score0.520

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.258
Teacher spread0.246 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations83
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Astrophysical Journal LettersSame topicAstronomy and Astrophysical ResearchFrench-language works237,207