MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4392588094 · doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad151d

The Disk Orientations of Perseus Protostellar Multiples at ∼8 au Resolution

2024· article· en· W4392588094 on OpenAlexaff
Nickalas K. Reynolds, John Tobin, Patrick Sheehan, Sarah Sadavoy, Leslie W. Looney, Kaitlin M. Kratter, Zhi‐Yun Li, Dominique Segura-Cox, Nathan A. Kaib

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAstrophysics and Star Formation Studies
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
FundersNational Science Foundation
KeywordsPhysicsAstrophysicsAstronomyAngular resolution (graph drawing)Interstellar mediumAstronomical spectroscopyStarsGalaxy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We present a statistical characterization of circumstellar disk orientations toward 12 protostellar multiple systems in the Perseus molecular cloud using the Atacama Large Millimeter/submillimeter Array at Band 6 (1.3 mm) with a resolution of ∼25 mas (∼8 au). This exquisite resolution enabled us to resolve the compact inner-disk structures surrounding the components of each multiple system and to determine the projected 3D orientation of the disks (position angle and inclination) to high precision. We performed a statistical analysis on the relative alignment of disk pairs to determine whether the disks are preferentially aligned or randomly distributed. We considered three subsamples of the observations selected by the companion separations a < 100 au, a > 500 au, and a < 10,000 au. We found for the compact (<100 au) subsample, the distribution of orientation angles is best described by an underlying distribution of preferentially aligned sources (within 30°) but does not rule out distributions with 40% misaligned sources. The wide companion (>500 au) subsample appears to be consistent with a distribution of 40%–80% preferentially aligned sources. Similarly, the full sample of systems with companions ( a < 10,000 au) is most consistent with a fractional ratio of at most 80% preferentially aligned sources and rules out purely randomly aligned distributions. Thus, our results imply the compact sources (<100 au) and the wide companions (>500 au) are statistically different.

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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.247 · 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

Citations10
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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