A comparative high-resolution spectroscopic analysis of in situ and accreted globular clusters
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Globular clusters (GCs) are extremely intriguing systems that help in reconstructing the assembly of the Milky Way via the characterisation of their chemo-chrono-dynamical properties. In this study, we use high-resolution spectroscopic archival data from UVES and UVES-FLAMES at the VLT to compare the chemistry of GCs dynamically tagged as either Galactic (NGC 6218, NGC 6522, and NGC 6626) or accreted from distinct merger events (NGC 362 and NGC 1261 from Gaia -Sausage-Enceladus, and Ruprecht 106 from the Helmi Streams) in the metallicity regime where abundance patterns of field stars with different origin effectively separate (−1.3 ≤ [Fe/H] ≤ −1.0 dex). We find remarkable similarities in the abundances of the two Gaia -Sausage-Enceladus GCs across all chemical elements. They both display depletion in the α -elements (Mg, Si and Ca) and statistically significant differences in Zn and Eu compared to in situ GCs. Additionally, we confirm that Ruprecht 106 exhibits a completely different chemical makeup from the other target clusters, being underabundant in all chemical elements. This demonstrates that when high precision is achieved, the abundances of certain chemical elements can not only efficiently separate in situ from accreted GCs, but can also distinguish among GCs born in different progenitor galaxies. In the end, we investigate the possible origin of the chemical peculiarity of Ruprecht 106. Given that its abundances do not match the chemical patterns of the field stars associated with its most likely parent galaxy (i.e. the Helmi Streams), being depleted in the abundances of α -elements in particular, we believe Ruprecht 106 to originate from a less massive galaxy compared to the progenitor of the Helmi Streams.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".