MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4200405782 · doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ac41d5

Predicting the Water Content of Interstellar Objects from Galactic Star Formation Histories

2021· article· en· W4200405782 on OpenAlexaff
Chris Lintott, Michele T. Bannister, J. Ted Mackereth

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal Letters · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAstrophysics and Star Formation Studies
Canadian institutionsCanadian Institute for Theoretical AstrophysicsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPlanetesimalAstrophysicsPhysicsMetallicityPopulationStar formationAstronomyGalaxyProtoplanetary diskAstrobiologyPlanet

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Planetesimals inevitably bear the signatures of their natal environment, preserving in their composition a record of the metallicity of their system’s original gas and dust, albeit one altered by the formation processes. When planetesimals are dispersed from their system of origin, this record is carried with them. As each star is likely to contribute at least 1012 interstellar objects (ISOs), the Galaxy’s drifting population of ISOs provides an overview of the properties of its stellar population through time. Using the EAGLE cosmological simulations and models of protoplanetary formation, our modeling predicts an ISO population with a bimodal distribution in their water mass fraction: objects formed in low-metallicity, typically older, systems have a higher water fraction than their counterparts formed in high-metallicity protoplanetary disks, and these water-rich objects comprise the majority of the population. Both detected ISOs seem to belong to the lower water fraction population; these results suggest they come from recently formed systems. We show that the population of ISOs in galaxies with different star formation histories will have different proportions of objects with high and low water fractions. This work suggests that it is possible that the upcoming Vera C. Rubin Observatory Legacy Survey of Space and Time will detect a large enough population of ISOs to place useful constraints on models of protoplanetary disks, as well as galactic structure and evolution.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.015
GPT teacher head0.205
Teacher spread0.190 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations13
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Astrophysical Journal LettersSame topicAstrophysics and Star Formation StudiesFrench-language works237,207