MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3167755127 · doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ac5d4f

A Study of 90 GHz Dust Emissivity on Molecular Cloud and Filament Scales

2022· article· en· W3167755127 on OpenAlexaff
Ian Lowe, Brian Mason, Tanay Bhandarkar, Susan E. Clark, Mark J. Devlin, Simon Dicker, Shannon M. Duff, Rachel Friesen, A. Hacar, Brandon S. Hensley, Tony Mroczkowski, Sigurd Næss, C. Romero, Sarah Sadavoy, Maria Salatino, Craig L. Sarazin, John Orlowski-Scherer, A. Schillaci, Jonathan Sievers, Thomas Stanke, Amelia M. Stutz, Zhilei Xu

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAstrophysics and Star Formation Studies
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityQueen's UniversityUniversity of Toronto
FundersEuropean Research Council
KeywordsPhysicsAstrophysicsPhotometry (optics)Black-body radiationProtein filamentMolecular cloudEmissivitySpectral energy distributionPlanckAstronomyStar formationStarsGalaxyOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Recent observations from the MUSTANG2 instrument on the Green Bank Telescope have revealed evidence of enhanced long-wavelength emission in the dust spectral energy distribution (SED) in the Orion Molecular Cloud (OMC) 2/3 filament on 25″ (0.1 pc) scales. Here we present a measurement of the SED on larger spatial scales (map size 0.°5–3° or 3–20 pc), at somewhat lower resolution (120″, corresponding to 0.25 pc at 400 pc) using data from the Herschel satellite and Atacama Cosmology Telescope (ACT). We then extend the 120″-scale investigation to other regions covered in the Herschel Gould Belt Survey (HGBS), specifically the dense filaments in the southerly regions of Orion A, Orion B, and Serpens-S. Our data set in aggregate covers approximately 10 deg2, with continuum photometry spanning from 160 μm to 3 mm. These OMC 2/3 data display excess emission at 3 mm, though less (10.9% excess) than what is seen at higher resolution. Strikingly, we find that the enhancement is present even more strongly in the other filaments we targeted, with an average excess of 42.4% and 30/46 slices showing an inconsistency with the modified blackbody to at least 4σ. Applying this analysis to the other targeted regions, we lay the groundwork for future high-resolution analyses. Additionally, we also consider a two-component dust model motivated by Planck results and an amorphous grain dust model. While both of these have been proposed to explain deviations in emission from a generic modified blackbody, we find that they have significant drawbacks, requiring many spectral points or lacking experimental data coverage.

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.235 · 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

Citations5
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Astrophysical Journal→Same topicAstrophysics and Star Formation Studies→French-language works237,207→