MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4388891624 · doi:10.1093/mnras/stad3565

First asteroseismic analysis of the globular cluster M80: multiple populations and stellar mass-loss

2023· article· en· W4388891624 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Madeline Howell, S. W. Campbell, Dennis Stello, Gayandhi M De Silva

Bibliographic record

VenueMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicStellar, planetary, and galactic studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersAustralian Research CouncilCanadian Space AgencyScience Mission DirectorateMonash UniversityEuropean Space AgencyCalifornia Institute of TechnologyNational Aeronautics and Space AdministrationDiabetes Patient Advocacy CoalitionNational Science Foundation
KeywordsPhysicsGlobular clusterMetallicityAstrophysicsRed-giant branchStarsBimodalityPopulationAsteroseismologyStellar populationHorizontal branchStellar massAstronomyGalaxyStar formationDemography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Asteroseismology provides a new avenue for accurately measuring the masses of evolved globular cluster (GC) stars. We present the first detections of solar-like oscillations in 47 red giant branch (RGB) and early asymptotic giant branch (EAGB) stars in the metal-poor GC M80; only the second with measured seismic masses. We investigate two areas of stellar evolution and GC science: multiple populations and stellar mass-loss. We detect a distinct bimodality in the EAGB mass distribution. We suggest that this could be due to sub-population membership. If confirmed in future work with spectroscopy, it would be the first direct measurement of a mass difference between sub-populations. A mass difference was not detected between the sub-populations in our RGB sample. We instead measured an average RGB mass of $0.782\pm 0.009~\mathrm{M}_{\odot }$, which we interpret as the average of the sub-populations. Differing mass-loss rates on the RGB have been proposed as the second parameter that could explain the horizontal branch morphology variations between GCs. We calculated an integrated RGB mass-loss separately for each sub-population: $0.12\pm 0.02~\mathrm{M}_{\odot }$ (SP1) and $0.25\pm 0.02~\mathrm{M}_{\odot }$ (SP2). Thus, SP2 stars appear to have enhanced mass-loss on the RGB. Mass-loss is thought to scale with metallicity, which we confirm by comparing our results to a higher metallicity GC, M4. Finally, our study shows the robustness of the Δν-independent mass scaling relation in the low-metallicity (and low surface gravity) regime.

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)0.001
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.215
Teacher spread0.202 · 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

Citations21
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society→Same topicStellar, planetary, and galactic studies→French-language works237,207→