MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4312037525 · doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aca27d

The Star Formation Rate of the Milky Way as Seen by Herschel

2022· article· en· W4312037525 on OpenAlexaff
D. Elia, S. Molinari, E. Schisano, J. D. Soler, Manuel Merello, D. Russeil, M. Veneziani, A. Zavagno, A. Noriega‐Crespo, L. Olmi, M. Benedettini, P. Hennebelle, Ralf S. Klessen, S. Leurini, R. Paladini, S. Pezzuto, A. Traficante, David Eden, P. G. Martin, Mattia C. Sormani, Alessandro Coletta, Tine Colman, R. Plume, Y. Maruccia, C. Mininni, S. J. Liu

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAstrophysics and Star Formation Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of CalgaryCanadian Institute for Theoretical AstrophysicsUniversity of Toronto
FundersScience and Technology Facilities CouncilHorizon 2020 Framework ProgrammeIstituto Nazionale di Astrofisica
KeywordsPhysicsMilky WayGalactic planeAstrophysicsStar formationRADIUSGalaxyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We present a new derivation of the Milky Way’s current star formation rate (SFR) based on the data of the Herschel InfraRed Galactic Plane Survey (Hi-GAL). We estimate the distribution of the SFR across the Galactic plane from the star-forming clumps identified in the Hi-GAL survey and calculate the total SFR from the sum of their contributions. The estimate of the global SFR amounts to 2.0 ± 0.7 M ⊙ yr −1 , of which 1.7 ± 0.6 M ⊙ yr −1 coming from clumps with reliable heliocentric distance assignment. This value is in general agreement with estimates found in the literature of last decades. The profile of SFR density averaged in Galactocentric rings is found to be qualitatively similar to others previously computed, with a peak corresponding to the Central Molecular Zone and another one around Galactocentric radius R gal ∼ 5 kpc, followed by an exponential decrease as <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" overflow="scroll"> <mml:mi>log</mml:mi> <mml:mo stretchy="false">(</mml:mo> <mml:msub> <mml:mrow> <mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Σ</mml:mi> </mml:mrow> <mml:mrow> <mml:mi>SFR</mml:mi> </mml:mrow> </mml:msub> <mml:mrow> <mml:mo stretchy="true">/</mml:mo> </mml:mrow> <mml:mo stretchy="false">[</mml:mo> <mml:msub> <mml:mrow> <mml:mi>M</mml:mi> </mml:mrow> <mml:mrow> <mml:mo>⊙</mml:mo> </mml:mrow> </mml:msub> <mml:mspace width="0.25em"/> <mml:msup> <mml:mrow> <mml:mi>yr</mml:mi> </mml:mrow> <mml:mrow> <mml:mo>−</mml:mo> <mml:mn>1</mml:mn> </mml:mrow> </mml:msup> <mml:mspace width="0.25em"/> <mml:msup> <mml:mrow> <mml:mi>kpc</mml:mi> </mml:mrow> <mml:mrow> <mml:mo>−</mml:mo> <mml:mn>2</mml:mn> </mml:mrow> </mml:msup> <mml:mo stretchy="false">]</mml:mo> <mml:mo stretchy="false">)</mml:mo> <mml:mo>=</mml:mo> <mml:mi>a</mml:mi> <mml:mspace width="0.25em"/> <mml:msub> <mml:mrow> <mml:mi>R</mml:mi> </mml:mrow> <mml:mrow> <mml:mi>gal</mml:mi> </mml:mrow> </mml:msub> <mml:mrow> <mml:mo stretchy="true">/</mml:mo> </mml:mrow> <mml:mo stretchy="false">[</mml:mo> <mml:mi>kpc</mml:mi> <mml:mo stretchy="false">]</mml:mo> <mml:mo>+</mml:mo> <mml:mi>b</mml:mi> </mml:math> , with a = −0.28 ± 0.01. In this regard, the fraction of SFR produced within and outside the solar circle is 84% and 16%, respectively; the fraction corresponding to the far outer Galaxy ( R gal &gt; 13.5 kpc) is only 1%. We also find that, for R gal &gt; 3 kpc, our data follow a power law as a function of density, similarly to the Kennicutt–Schmidt relation. Finally, we compare the distribution of the SFR density across the face-on Galactic plane and those of median parameters, such as temperature, luminosity/mass ratio, and bolometric temperature, describing the evolutionary stage of Hi-GAL clumps. We found no clear correlation between the SFR and the clump evolutionary stage.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.200
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0030.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.007
GPT teacher head0.222
Teacher spread0.215 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations73
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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