Linking high- and low-mass star formation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Context. Astronomers have yet to establish whether high-mass protostars form from high-mass prestellar cores, similar to their lower-mass counterparts, or from lower-mass fragments at the heart of a pre-protostellar cluster undergoing large-scale collapse. Part of the uncertainty is due to a shortage of envelope structure data on protostars of a few tens of solar masses, where we expect to see a transition from intermediate-mass star formation to the high-mass process. Aims. We sought to derive the masses, luminosities, and envelope density profiles for eight sources in Cygnus-X, whose mass estimates in the literature placed them in the sampling gap. Combining these sources with similarly evolved sources in the literature enabled us to perform a meta-analysis of protostellar envelope parameters over six decades in source luminosity. Methods. We performed spectral energy distribution fitting on archival broadband photometric continuum data from 1.2 to 850 μm to derive bolometric luminosities for our eight sources plus initial mass and radius estimates for modelling density and temperature profiles with the radiative-transfer package Transphere. Results. The envelope masses, densities at 1000 AU, outer envelope radii, and density power law indices as functions of bolometric luminosity all follow established trends in the literature spanning six decades in luminosity. Most of our sources occupy an intermediate to moderately high range of masses and luminosities, which helps to more firmly establish the continuity between low- and high-mass star formation mechanisms. Our density power law indices are consistent with observed values in the literature, which show no discernible trends with luminosity, and have a mean p = −1.4 ± 0.4. However, our sub-sample, with a mean power law index of −1.1 ± 0.3, is slightly flatter than would be expected for spherical envelopes in free fall (p = −1.5). Conclusions. We attribute flattened density profiles for our eight sources to one or more of the following: ongoing accretion from their natal filaments, convolution of sources with neighbours or the larger filament, spherical averaging of asymmetric features (for example fragments), or inflation of the envelope by a moderate far-ultraviolet field. Finally, we show that the trends in all of the envelope parameters for high-mass protostars are statistically indistinguishable from trends in the same variables for low-mass protostars.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".