MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W6930556470 · doi:10.5281/zenodo.13649281

Improving Gyrochronology: a new benchmark data set and age inference model

2024· article· en· W6930556470 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research) · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenomics and Phylogenetic Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInferenceBenchmark (surveying)Variance (accounting)Sequence (biology)Sample (material)Probabilistic logicArtificial neural networkSeries (stratigraphy)Data set

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Gyrochronology uses a star’s rotation period and location on the main sequence (MS) to predict stellar age. It is particularly useful for low mass main sequence stars, the regime in which other stellar dating methods (e.g. isochrone fitting) tend to struggle. Gyrochronology has gained popularity in recent years due to the increasing availability of photometric data, but analytical models have struggled to coherently summarize the uncertainty and intrinsic variance in the photometric time series data. Thus, we have developed a generalized machine learning-based Bayesian inference framework that captures the uncertainty and variance through a probabilistic solution. Our framework implements a normalizing flow -- a neural network-based model that optimizes the transformation of parameter distributions -- to predict rotation period distributions for stars based on their age and colour. We have successfully trained and tested the model on data from eight open clusters with promising results, indicating that a data-driven approach to gyrochronology could improve upon existing models. We have now expanded and standardized our data sample to 30 open clusters; in this talk we will present the results of cluster age recovery testing using this new model.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.019
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: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.034
Threshold uncertainty score0.067

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.019
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0040.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.058
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.221 · 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
GenreMethods

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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)→Same topicGenomics and Phylogenetic Studies→French-language works237,207→