MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406191079 · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2501.03506

Assessing the Impact of Binary Systems on Microlensing Using SPISEA and PopSyCLE Population Simulations

2025· preprint· en· W4406191079 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Natasha S. Abrams, Jessica R. Lu, Casey Y. Lam, Michael S. Medford, Jr. Hosek, Sam Rose

Bibliographic record

VenuearXiv (Cornell University) · 2025
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSpaceflight effects on biology
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersLawrence Berkeley National LaboratoryNuclear Safety and Security CommissionNational Energy Research Scientific Computing CenterU.S. Department of EnergyMcGill UniversityOffice of ScienceNational Aeronautics and Space AdministrationNational Science Foundation
KeywordsGravitational microlensingBinary numberPopulationAstrophysicsComputer sciencePhysicsMathematicsSociologyDemographyArithmetic

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Gravitational microlensing provides a unique opportunity to probe the mass distribution of stars, black holes, and other objects in the Milky Way. Population simulations are necessary to interpret results from microlensing surveys. The contribution from binary objects is often neglected or minimized in analysis of observations and simulations despite the high percentage of binary systems and microlensing's ability to probe binaries. To simulate the population effects we added multiple systems to Stellar Population Interface for Stellar Evolution and Atmospheres (SPISEA), which simulates stellar clusters. We then inject these multiples into Population Synthesis for Compact-object Lensing Events (PopSyCLE), which simulates Milky Way microlensing surveys. When making OGLE observational selection criteria, we find that 55% of observed microlensing events involve a binary system. Specifically, 14.5% of events have a multiple-lens and a single source, 31.7% have a single lens and a multiple-source, and 8.8% have a multiple-lens and a multiple-source. The majority of these events have photometric lightcurves that appear single and are fit well by a single-lens, single-source model. This suggests that binary source and binary lens-binary source models should be included more frequently in event analysis. The mean Einstein crossing time shifts from 19.1 days for single events only to 21.3 days for singles and multiple events, after cutting binary events with multiple peaks. The Einstein crossing time distribution of singles and single-peaked multiple events is better aligned with observed distributions from OGLE (arXiv:1707.07634) than singles alone, indicating that multiple systems are a significant missing piece between simulations and reality.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.045

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.110
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.195 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuearXiv (Cornell University)Same topicSpaceflight effects on biologyFrench-language works237,207