MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4392768625 · doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad21e3

Multiple Jets in the Bursting Protostar HOPS 373SW

2024· article· en· W4392768625 on OpenAlexaff
Seokho Lee, Jeong‐Eun Lee, Doug Johnstone, Gregory J. Herczeg, Yuri Aikawa

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAstrophysics and Star Formation Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of VictoriaHerzberg Institute of Astrophysics
FundersKorea Astronomy and Space Science Institute
KeywordsPhysicsAstrophysicsOutflowProtostarSubmillimeter ArrayMillimeterSkyAstronomyJet (fluid)BrightnessAccretion (finance)Bow shock (aerodynamics)Star formationShock waveStars

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We present the outflows detected in HOPS 373SW, a protostar undergoing a modest 30% brightness increase at 850 μm. Atacama Large Millimeter/submillimeter Array observations of shock tracers, including SiO 8–7, CH3OH 7k–6k, and 12CO 3–2 emission, reveal several outflow features around HOPS 373SW. The knots in the extremely high-velocity SiO emission reveal the wiggle of the jet, for which a simple model derives a 37° inclination angle of the jet to the plane of the sky, a jet velocity of 90 km s−1, and a period of 50 yr. The slow SiO and CH3OH emission traces U-shaped bow shocks surrounding the two CO outflows. One outflow is associated with the high-velocity jets, while the other is observed to be close to the plane of the sky. The misaligned outflows imply that previous episodic accretion events have either reoriented HOPS 373SW or that it is an unresolved protostellar binary system with misaligned outflows.

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)0.000
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 score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.243 · 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

Citations8
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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