Erratum: “Identification of Faint Chandra X-Ray Sources in the Core-collapsed Globular Cluster NGC 6397: Evidence for a Bimodal Cataclysmic Variable Population” (2010, ApJ, 722, 20)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We report and correct a zero-point error in the HST ACS/WFC F658N (Hα) magnitudes for stars in the globular cluster NGC 6397 presented in the published article (hereafter C10).The Hα magnitudes reported in Table 1 of C10 are too faint by 3 mag and consequently the horizontal axes of Figures 3 and 4 (right panels) and Figure 7 in C10 are shifted by this amount.This error does not affect any of the conclusions of C10, which are based on relative values of the Hα magnitudes.However, the correct calibration of the Hα magnitudes is necessary for other applications, such as for comparison of the Hα photometry of other clusters with that reported for NGC 6397 by C10 and for scaling the exposure times for other clusters from those of HST program GO-10257 (PI: Anderson) using the Hα magnitudes given by Table 1 of C10.We have therefore rectified the zero-point error and present here a revised Table 1 with corrected Hα magnitudes and revised Figures 3, 4, and 7 that incorporate this correction by recalibrating the horizontal axes.We first noted the zero-point error in C10 in 2013.We recently came to appreciate its significance, for computing exposure times by scaling from NGC 6397 to other clusters, while writing an HST proposal.We used a correct Hα calibration procedure in our studies of NGC 6752 reported in Lugger et al. (2017) and Cohn et al. (2021).We apologize for any confusion the error in C10 may have caused.
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 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.031 | 0.029 |
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".