MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4285489874 · doi:10.1117/12.2627506

The Crescent Nebula and its hundreds of line-of sight stars as seen with the imaging FTS SITELLE

2022· article· en· W4285489874 on OpenAlexaffabout
Marianne Ruest, Camille Poitras, Laurent Drissen, Nicole St‐Louis

Bibliographic record

VenueGround-based and Airborne Instrumentation for Astronomy IX · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicStellar, planetary, and galactic studies
Canadian institutionsUniversité LavalUniversité de MontréalCentre for Research in Astrophysics of Québec
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNebulaStarsAstronomyLine-of-sightPhysicsLine (geometry)Astrophysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Crescent Nebula, NGC 6888, has long been the muse of many scientific and amateur research. However, the recent data provided by SITELLE, a wide-field imaging Fourier transform spectrometer at the Canada-France-Hawaii telescope call for new analysis and conclusions. The spectral cubes offer a field of view of 11 × 11 arcminutes2 and have been acquired trough 5 different filter-selected bands covering the optical waveband (from 350 to 680 nm), allowing 23 characteristic emission optical lines to be described with a spectral resolution reaching up to 2500. Doppler shifting allow two-components velocity fits, describing the multi-layered bubble’s kinematics. The sulfur doublet describes electronic densities. Other faint lines (including [NII] 5755, [OIII] 4363 and NeIII 3868) are essential to determine accurate temperatures and abundances. Emission lines are key to this nebular research, but absorption lines in the spectrum of hundreds of field stars are also studied. All this leads to a more complete physical description of NGC 6888, its central star WR136 and the stars present in the field of view.

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)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.139
Threshold uncertainty score0.277

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.002

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.220
Teacher spread0.212 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations1
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGround-based and Airborne Instrumentation for Astronomy IXSame topicStellar, planetary, and galactic studiesFrench-language works237,207