On the Scarcity of Dense Cores (n > 10<sup>5</sup> cm<sup>−3</sup>) in High-latitude Planck Galactic Cold Clumps
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract High-latitude (∣b∣ > 30°) molecular clouds have virial parameters that exceed 1, but whether these clouds can form stars has not been studied systematically. Using JCMT SCUBA-2 archival data, we surveyed 70 fields that target high-latitude Planck Galactic cold clumps (HLPCs) to find dense cores with density of 105–106 cm−3 and size of <0.1 pc. The sample benefits from both the representativeness of the parent sample and its coverage of the densest clumps at the high column density end (>1 × 1021 cm−2). At an average rms of 15 mJy beam−1, we detected Galactic dense cores in only one field, G6.04+36.77 (L183) while also identifying 12 extragalactic objects and two young stellar objects. Compared to the low-latitude clumps, dense cores are scarce in HLPCs. With synthetic observations, the densities of cores are constrained to be n c ≲ 105 cm−3 should they exist in HLPCs. Low-latitude clumps, Taurus clumps, and HLPCs form a sequence where a higher virial parameter corresponds to a lower dense-core detection rate. If HLPCs were affected by the Local Bubble, the scarcity should favor turbulence-inhibited rather than supernova-driven star formation. Studies of the formation mechanism of the L183 molecular cloud are warranted.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".