The Open Cluster Chemical Abundances and Mapping Survey. VII. APOGEE DR17 [C/N]–Age Calibration
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Large-scale surveys open the possibility to investigate Galactic evolution both chemically and kinematically; however, reliable stellar ages remain a major challenge. Detailed chemical information provided by high-resolution spectroscopic surveys of the stars in clusters can be used as a means to calibrate recently developed chemical tools for age-dating field stars. Using data from the Open Cluster Abundances and Mapping survey, based on the Sloan Digital Sky Survey/Apache Point Observatory Galactic Evolution Experiment 2 survey, we derive a new empirical relationship between open cluster stellar ages and the carbon-to-nitrogen ([C/N]) abundance ratios for evolved stars, primarily those on the red giant branch. With this calibration, [C/N] can be used as a chemical clock for evolved field stars to investigate the formation and evolution of different parts of our Galaxy. We explore how mixing effects at different stellar evolutionary phases, like the red clump, affect the derived calibration. We have established the [C/N]–age calibration for APOGEE Data Release 17 (DR17) giant star abundances to be log [ Age ( yr ) ] DR 17 = 10.14 ( ± 0.08 ) + 2.23 ( ± 0.19 ) [ C / N ] , usable for 8.62 ≤ log ( Age [ yr ] ) ≤ 9.82 , derived from a uniform sample of 49 clusters observed as part of APOGEE DR17 applicable primarily to metal-rich, thin- and thick-disk giant stars. This measured [C/N]–age APOGEE DR17 calibration is also shown to be consistent with asteroseismic ages derived from Kepler photometry.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.003 |
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".