Measuring the Mass of the Large Magellanic Cloud with Stellar Streams Observed by S <sup>5</sup>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Stellar streams are excellent probes of the underlying gravitational potential in which they evolve. In this work, we fit dynamical models to five streams in the Southern Galactic hemisphere, combining observations from the Southern Stellar Stream Spectroscopic Survey ( S 5 ), Gaia EDR3, and the Dark Energy Survey, to measure the mass of the Large Magellanic Cloud (LMC). With an ensemble of streams, we find a mass of the LMC ranging from ∼14–19 × 10 10 M ⊙ , probed over a range of closest approach times and distances. With the most constraining stream (Orphan–Chenab), we measure an LMC mass of 18.8 − 4.0 + 3.5 × 10 10 M ⊙ , probed at a closest approach time of 310 Myr and a closest approach distance of 25.4 kpc. This mass is compatible with previous measurements, showing that a consistent picture is emerging of the LMC’s influence on structures in the Milky Way. Using this sample of streams, we find that the LMC’s effect depends on the relative orientation of the stream and LMC at their point of closest approach. To better understand this, we present a simple model based on the impulse approximation and we show that the LMC’s effect depends both on the magnitude of the velocity kick imparted to the stream and the direction of this kick.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".