The evolution of the Milky Way’s thin disc radial metallicity gradient with K2 asteroseismic ages
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT The radial metallicity distribution of the Milky Way’s disc is an important observational constraint for models of the formation and evolution of our Galaxy. It informs our understanding of the chemical enrichment of the Galactic disc and the dynamical processes therein, particularly radial migration. We investigate how the metallicity changes with guiding radius in the thin disc using a sample of red giant stars with robust astrometric, spectroscopic, and asteroseismic parameters. Our sample contains 668 stars with guiding radii 4 < Rg < 11 kpc and asteroseismic ages covering the whole history of the thin disc with precision ${\approx} 25 {{\, \rm per\ cent}}$. We use MCMC analysis to measure the gradient and its intrinsic spread in bins of age and construct a hierarchical Bayesian model to investigate the evolution of these parameters independently of the bins. We find a smooth evolution of the gradient from ≈−0.07 dex kpc−1 in the youngest stars to ≈−0.04 dex kpc−1 in stars older than 10 Gyr, with no break at intermediate ages. Our results are consistent with those based on asteroseismic ages from CoRoT, with that found in Cepheid variables for stars younger than 1 Gyr, and with open clusters for stars younger than 6 Gyr. For older stars we find a significantly lower metallicity in our sample than in the clusters, suggesting a survival bias favouring more metal-rich clusters. We also find that the chemical evolution model of Chiappini '09 is too metal poor in the early stages of disc formation. Our results provide strong new constraints for the growth and enrichment of the thin disc and radial migration, which will facilitate new tests of model conditions and physics.
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 | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".