MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4409464552 · doi:10.3847/1538-4357/adbf12

An Equilibrium Model of the Galaxy Determined by Element Abundance Gradients

2025· article· en· W4409464552 on OpenAlexafffund
Lawrence M. Widrow, David W. Hogg, Danny Horta, Haochuan Li, Adrian M. Price-Whelan

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicStellar, planetary, and galactic studies
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaFlatiron HealthEuropean Space Agency
KeywordsPhysicsAbundance (ecology)AstrophysicsGalaxyAbundance of the chemical elementsGalaxy formation and evolutionAstronomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We present a method to determine the gravitational potential of the Milky Way from measurements of the locations, velocities, and element abundances of stars in the Galactic disk. The method relies on the assumption that the Galaxy is axisymmetric and stationary and that element abundance ratios such as [Fe/H] and [Mg/Fe] are smooth functions of three isolating integrals of motion. We use Fisher Information theory to predict the efficacy of individual abundance ratios to constrain the potential. We also use N-body simulations to test the extent by which secular evolution in the disk introduces statistical and systematic errors into the analysis. We apply our method to a sample of stars from Gaia Data Release 3 and the APOGEE survey and infer the vertical force profile at the position of the Sun and the rotation curve in the midplane and find good agreement with previously published results. The residuals of the model show corrugations in [Fe/H] as a function of L z , the angular momentum component along the spin axis of the Galaxy. Using the correspondence between L z and Galactocentric cylindrical radius, we show that these features line up with the four spiral arms closest to the Sun.

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: 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
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.009
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread0.227 · 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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Astrophysical Journal→Same topicStellar, planetary, and galactic studies→French-language works237,207→