Erratum: The Cluster Ages Experiment (CASE) -- VIII. Age and distance of the Globular Cluster 47 Tuc from the analysis of two detached eclipsing binaries
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The paper ‘The Cluster AgeS Experiment (CASE) - VIII. Age and distance of the Globular Cluster 47 Tuc from the analysis of two detached eclipsing binaries’ was published in MNRAS 492, 4254–4267 (2020) with inappropriate versions of Figs 7–9, prepared for a true distance modulus of 13.224 mag given in the caption to Fig. 7. The correct value of the distance modulus is 13.288 mag. The conclusions of the paper remain unchanged. Comparison in the mass-radius plane (left) and the CMD (right) of Dartmouth isochrones for a range of ages. The upper and lower limits in age are given on the mass-radius plots and the difference in age between successive isochrones is 0.5 Gyr. The same isochrones are shown again in the B − V CMD on the right, plotted over the photometry from Thompson et al. (2010). For the CMD analysis, we use the adopted true distance modulus (13.288) and adopted reddening value E(B − V) = 0.03 as in section 6.1. [Fe/H] increases from top to bottom at fixed [α/Fe]. The isochrones that bracket the DEBs on the left are compared to the CMD on the right. Error bars of the radii are only slightly larger than the dots marking component locations in the M − R plane. Similar to Fig. 7 except that now [α/Fe] varies at fixed [Fe/H]. Similar to Figs 7 and 8 except that now Y varies at fixed [Fe/H] and [α/Fe].
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.016 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.042 | 0.034 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".