MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4409687499 · doi:10.3847/1538-4357/adc30b

Characterizing Magnetic Properties of Young Protostars in Orion

2025· article· en· W4409687499 on OpenAlexaff
Bo Huang, J. M. Girart, Ian Stephens, Philip C. Myers, Qizhou Zhang, Paulo C. Cortés, Á. Sánchez-Monge, Manuel Fernández-López, Valentin J. M. Le Gouellec, S. T. Megeath, Nadia M. Murillo, John M. Carpenter, Zhi‐Yun Li, Junhao Liu, Leslie W. Looney, Sarah Sadavoy, Nicole Karnath, Woojin Kwon

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAstrophysics and Star Formation Studies
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsProtostarAstronomyAstrophysicsOrion NebulaStarsMolecular cloudStar formation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The B-field Orion Protostellar Survey (BOPS) recently obtained polarimetric observations at 870 μm toward 61 protostars in the Orion molecular clouds with ∼1″ spatial resolution using the Atacama Large Millimeter/submillimeter Array. From the BOPS sample, we selected the 26 protostars with extended polarized emission within a radius of ∼6″ (2400 au) around the protostar. This allows us to have sufficient statistical polarization data to infer the magnetic field strength. The magnetic field strength is derived using the Davis–Chandrasekhar–Fermi method. The underlying magnetic field strengths are approximately 2.0 mG for protostars with a standard hourglass magnetic field morphology, which is higher than the values derived for protostars with rotated hourglass, spiral, and complex magnetic field configurations (≲1.0 mG). This suggests that the magnetic field plays a more significant role in envelopes exhibiting a standard hourglass field morphology, and a value of ≳2.0 mG would be required to maintain such a structure at these scales. Furthermore, most protostars in the sample are slightly supercritical, with mass-to-flux ratios ≲3.0. In particular, the mass-to-flux ratios for all protostars with a standard hourglass magnetic field morphology are lower than 3.0. However, these ratios do not account for the contribution of the protostellar mass, which means they are likely significantly underestimated.

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)0.000
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.215 · 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

Citations5
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Astrophysical Journal→Same topicAstrophysics and Star Formation Studies→French-language works237,207→