A Number of nearby Moving Groups May Be Fragments of Dissolving Open Clusters
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract We propose that 14 co-moving groups of stars uncovered by Kounkel & Covey may be related to known nearby moving groups and bridge those and nearby open clusters with similar ages and space velocities. This indicates that known nearby moving groups may be spatially much more extended than previously thought, and some of them might be parts of tidal tails around the cores of known open clusters, reminiscent of those recently found around the Hyades and a handful of other nearby clusters. For example, we find that both the nearby Carina and Columba associations may be linked to Theia 208 from Kounkel & Covey and together form parts of a large tidal tail around the Platais 8 open cluster. The AB Doradus moving group and Theia 301 may form a trailing tidal tail behind the Pleiades open cluster, with hints of a possible leading tidal tail in Theia 369. Similarly, we find that IC 2391 and its tidal tails identified by Meingast et al. may be extended by the nearby Argus association and are possibly further extended by Theia 115. The nearby Octans and Octans-Near associations, as well as Theia 94 and 95, may form a large tidal tail leading the poorly studied Platais 5 open cluster candidate. While a preliminary analysis of Gaia color–magnitude sequences hint that these structures are plausibly related, more observational evidence is still required to corroborate their consistent ages and space velocities. These observations may change our current understanding of nearby moving groups and the different pathways through which they can form. While some moving groups may have formed loosely in extended star formation events with rich spatial structure, others may in fact correspond to the tidal tails of nearby open clusters.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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".