<tt>ChronoFlow:</tt> A Data-driven Model for Gyrochronology
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Gyrochronology is a technique for constraining stellar ages using rotation periods, which change over a star’s main-sequence (MS) lifetime due to magnetic braking. This technique shows promise for MS FGKM stars, where other methods are imprecise. However, the observed dispersion in rotation rates for similar coeval stars has historically been difficult to characterize. To properly understand this complexity, we have assembled the largest standardized data catalog of rotators in open clusters to date, consisting of ≈ 7600 stars across 30 open clusters/associations spanning ages of 1.5 Myr to 4 Gyr. We have also developed ChronoFlow: a flexible data-driven model that accurately captures observed rotational dispersion. We show that ChronoFlow can be used to accurately forward-model rotational evolution, and to infer both cluster and individual stellar ages. We recover cluster ages with a statistical uncertainty of 0.06 dex (≈15%), and individual stellar ages with a statistical uncertainty of 0.7 dex. Additionally, we conducted robust systematic tests to analyze the impact of extinction models, cluster membership, and calibration ages. These contribute an additional 0.06 dex of uncertainty in cluster age estimates, resulting in a total error budget of 0.08 dex. We apply ChronoFlow to estimate ages for M34, NGC 2516, NGC 6709, and the Theia 456 stellar stream. Our results show that ChronoFlow can precisely estimate the ages of coeval stellar populations, and constrain ages for individual stars. Furthermore, its predictions may be used to inform physical spin-down models. ChronoFlow is publicly available online ( https://github.com/philvanlane/chronoflow ).
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 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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".