MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4389337235 · doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad0971

Diagnostics from Polarization of Scattered Optical Light from Galactic Infrared Cirrus

2023· article· en· W4389337235 on OpenAlexaff
Shannon K. Bowes, P. G. Martin

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAstrophysics and Star Formation Studies
Canadian institutionsCanadian Institute for Theoretical AstrophysicsUniversity of TorontoMount Allison University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsPolarization (electrochemistry)Cosmic dustNebulaScatteringCirrusAstrophysicsRayleigh scatteringMie scatteringAnisotropySkyOpticsInfraredLight scatteringStars

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We propose polarization of scattered optical light from intermediate Galactic latitude infrared cirrus as a new diagnostic to constrain models of interstellar dust and the anisotropic interstellar radiation field (aISRF). For single scattering by a sphere, with Mie scattering phase functions for intensity and polarized intensity for a dust model at a given wavelength (Sloan r and g bands), and with models of anisotropic illumination from the entire sky (represented in HEALPix), we develop the formalism for calculating useful summary parameters for an integrated flux nebula (IFN): the average of the phase function weighted by the illumination, polarization angle (ψ), and polarization fraction (p). To demonstrate the diagnostic discrimination of polarization from scattered light, we report on the effects of different anisotropic illumination models and different dust models on the summary parameters for the Spider IFN. The summary parameters are also sensitive to the IFN location, as we illustrate using FRaNKIE illumination models. For assessing the viability of dust and aISRF models, we find that observations of ψ and p of scattered light are indeed powerful new diagnostics to complement joint modeling of the intensity of scattered light (related to the average phase function) and the intensity of thermal dust emission. However, optically thin IFNs that can be modeled using single scattering are faint and p is not large, as it could be with Rayleigh scattering, and so these observations need to be carried out with care and precision. Results for the Draco nebula compared to the Spider illustrate the challenge.

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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

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 communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.222 · 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

Citations2
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Astrophysical Journal→Same topicAstrophysics and Star Formation Studies→French-language works237,207→