MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404335060 · doi:10.1093/mnras/stae2546

Deciphering the Milky Way disc formation time encrypted in the bar chrono-kinematics

2024· article· en· W4404335060 on OpenAlexaff
Hanyuan Zhang, Vasily Belokurov, N. W. Evans, Zhao‐Yu Li, Jason L. Sanders, Anke Arentsen

Bibliographic record

VenueMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAstronomy and Astrophysical Research
Canadian institutionsInstitute of Particle Physics
FundersUniversity of CambridgeRoyal SocietyFitzwilliam College, University of CambridgeIsaac Newton TrustLeverhulme TrustEuropean Space AgencyScience and Technology Facilities CouncilDiabetes Patient Advocacy Coalition
KeywordsPhysicsMilky WayKinematicsBar (unit)Stellar kinematicsAstrophysicsAstronomyGalaxyClassical mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT We present a novel method to constrain the formation time of the Milky Way disc using the chrono-kinematic signatures of the inner Galaxy. We construct an O-rich Mira variable sample from the Gaia long-period variable catalogue to study the kinematic behaviour of stars with different ages in the inner Galaxy. From the Auriga suite of cosmological zoom-in simulations, we find that the age of the oldest stellar population with imprints of the bar in density and kinematics matches the disc spin-up epoch. This is because stars born before the spin-up show insufficient rotation and are not kinematically cold enough to be efficiently trapped by the bar. We find that the bar kinematic signature disappears for Mira variables with a period shorter than 190 d. Using the period–age relation of Mira variables, we constrain the spin-up epoch of the Milky Way to be younger than $\sim 11{-}12$ Gyr (redshift $\sim 3$). We also discuss and compare our method and result to other evidence of the Milky Way spin-up epoch under the context of a realistic age uncertainty. Age uncertainty leads to an overestimation of the disc formation time when performing backward modelling. Our constrain of the spin-up epoch is independent from previous studies because it relies on the kinematics of the inner Galaxy instead of the solar vicinity.

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)0.002
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
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.225 · 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

Citations7
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical SocietySame topicAstronomy and Astrophysical ResearchFrench-language works237,207